[Senate Hearing 113-]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013
----------
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
NONDEPARTMENTAL WITNESSES
[Clerk's note.--The subcommittee was unable to hold
hearings on nondepartmental witnesses. The statements and
letters of those submitting written testimony are as follows:]
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE--CIVIL
Department of the Army
Corps of Engineers--Civil
Prepared Statement of the American Society of Civil Engineers
Madam Chair and members of the subcommittee: The American Society
of Civil Engineers (ASCE) is pleased to provide this statement for the
record on the proposed budgets of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) and the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) for fiscal year 2013.
u.s. army corps of engineers
The fiscal year 2013 budget provides $4.7 billion, a decrease of
more than 5 percent from the fiscal year 2012 enacted level of $5
billion. The President's budget for fiscal year 2013 is inadequate to
meet the needs of an aging waterways infrastructure and must be
increased. The Congress must expand funding for fiscal year 2013.
The fiscal year 2013 budget plan released by the House Budget
Committee last week would further erode the Nation's ability to rebuild
its aging water resources infrastructure by reducing total outlays in
fiscal year 2013 by $94 billion.
Under the Budget Control Act of 2011, the Congress has $1.047
trillion in new discretionary budget authority for fiscal year 2013,
with $686 billion set aside for security programs (defense,
intelligence, and homeland security) and $361 billion for all domestic
discretionary spending.
ASCE recommends a minimum appropriation of $5.2 billion for USACE
in fiscal year 2013 to account for inflation and to halt the decline in
budget authority to ensure safe infrastructure and a sound economy.
The administration proposal for fiscal year 2013 would reduce
construction funding from $1.694 billion to $1.471 billion, a reduction
of 13 percent. Operations and maintenance funding would be down
slightly from $2.412 billion to $2.398 billion. The Mississippi River
and Tributaries account would decline from $252 million to $234 million
or 7 percent. Investigations--the money used to complete project
feasibility studies--would go from $125 million to $102 million, a
decline of 18 percent. In all, the Civil Works program budget for
fiscal year 2013 would be cut from $5.002 billion in fiscal year 2012
to $4.731 billion in fiscal year 2013, an overall reduction of 5.4
percent.
In 2005, Hurricane Katrina vividly demonstrated the perils of
relying upon poorly funded infrastructure to protect lives and
property. An ASCE investigation (conducted on behalf of USACE) reported
in 2007 that chronic under funding was one of the principal causes of
the levee failures after Katrina.
``Because of the congressional budgeting process, the stream of
funding for the New Orleans hurricane protection system was irregular
at best. If a project was not sufficiently funded, the USACE was often
required to delay implementation or to scale back the project.
This push-pull mechanism for the funding of critical life-safety
structures such as the New Orleans hurricane protection system is
essentially flawed. The process creates a disconnect between those
responsible for design and construction decisions and those responsible
for managing the purse-strings. Inevitably, the pressure for tradeoffs
and low-cost solutions compromised quality, safety, and reliability.
The project-by-project approach--in which projects are built over
time based on the availability of funding--resulted in the hurricane
protection system being constructed piecemeal with an overall lack of
attention to `system' issues. The project-by-project approach appears
to be associated with congressional limitations. The USACE was forced
into a `reductionist's' way of thinking: reduce the problem into one
that can be solved within the given authority and budget. Focus only on
the primary problem to be solved, inevitably making the issues of risk,
redundancy, and resilience a lower priority.''
American Society of Civil Engineers, The New Orleans Hurricane
Protection System 71-72 (2007).
With this proposed budget, USACE would continue to suffer from
under investment in essential infrastructure systems. If allowed to
continue, this trend likely will result in ever greater system failures
and the consequent expenditure of tens of billions of dollars to
rebuild what could have been built more economically in the first
instance.
In the face of USACE's aging infrastructure needs, the President's
budget for the Civil Works program in fiscal year 2013 reduces Federal
investments in vital national civil works systems. Moreover, the
negative budgeting trend is not likely to improve in future years.
USACE estimates that its budget proposals will continue to decline
through fiscal year 2015. USACE expects that inflation will reduce
actual spending on key infrastructure programs by a further $3 billion
over the next 5 years. ASCE believes that these levels of spending are
inadequate to meet the Nation's security, economic, and environmental
demands in the 21st century.
the harbor maintenance trust fund
The Harbor Maintenance Revenue Act authorizes expenditures from the
Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund (HMTF) to finance up to 100 percent of
eligible USACE harbor operation and maintenance costs, including the
operation and maintenance of Great Lakes navigation projects.
The fund fully finances eligible operation and maintenance costs of
the Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation. The Water Resources
Development Act of 1996 authorizes the fund to pay the Federal share of
the costs for the construction of dredged material disposal facilities
that are necessary for the operation and maintenance of coastal or
inland harbors, the dredging and disposal of contaminated sediments
that are in or affect the operation and maintenance of Federal
navigation channels, the mitigation of impacts resulting from Federal
navigation operation and maintenance activities, and the operation and
maintenance of dredged material disposal facilities.
The dredging of the Nation's ports and harbors has suffered from
years of under investment in a system that is critical to America's
ability to compete in the global marketplace. For fiscal year 2013 the
administration has requested $839 million be appropriated from the
HMTF--only 50 percent of total estimated revenues. Total revenues are
now estimated at $1.659 billion for fiscal year 2013. The busiest U.S.
harbors are presently under maintained. USACE estimates that full
channel dimensions at the Nation's busiest 59 ports are available less
than 35 percent of the time. This situation can increase the cost of
shipping as vessels carry less cargo in order to reduce their draft or
wait for high tide before transiting a harbor. It could also increase
the risk of a ship grounding or collision.
The fiscal year 2013 budget request does not come close to meeting
the requirements of the Nation's ports and harbors, which have an
annual need for maintenance dredging of between $1.3 and $1.6 billion,
according to USACE.
This trend toward reduced investments in our ports and harbors has
led to ever greater balances in the HMTF, and the unexpended balance in
the Trust Fund is growing with a bookkeeping balance of more than $8
billion by September 30, 2013, according to the Office of Management
and Budget.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ We recognize that none of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers'
funding for ports and harbors is appropriated directly from the HMTF.
The money is appropriated from the General Fund of the Treasury. The
HMTF then reimburses the General Treasury for the actual dollars
expended on projects that are eligible to receive funding through the
HMTF.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As a result, the great majority of our Nation's harbors--including
8 of the top 10 largest ports--are not being maintained to their fully
authorized width and depth. Ships carrying U.S. goods must ``light-
load'', thus increasing the costs of the goods and decreasing American
competitiveness in the global economy.
This subcommittee should appropriate $1.6 billion from the HMTF in
fiscal year 2013.
bureau of reclamation
The fiscal year 2013 budget request for BOR is $994 million. The
Water and Related Resources, BOR's principal operating account, is
budgeted at $818.6 million, a decrease of 8 percent.
The request includes a total of for water and energy, land, and
fish and wildlife resource management and development activities.
Funding in these activities provides for planning, construction, water
conservation activities, management of BOR lands, including recreation,
and actions to address the impacts of BOR projects on fish and
wildlife.
The Congress needs to maintain appropriate and vital levels of
funding for the BOR's Water and Related Resources account to support
construction and rehabilitation of critical western water projects.
Population growth, climate change, drought, under financing and
environmental protection needs have tightened water supplies in the
West, and made BOR's infrastructure more important than ever for
providing essential water supplies to rural and urban communities as
well as agriculture economies throughout the West.
While we recognize the urgent need to address the national deficit,
we ask for your support for maintaining at least $1 billion in fiscal
year 2013 for BOR. In particular, maintaining this level of funding
will help address BOR's unfunded project backlog and create beneficial
construction jobs throughout the West. Most significantly, the back log
for congressionally authorized BOR water projects now stands at several
billion dollars.
We strongly encourage you to recognize through the appropriations
process that the infrastructure built and maintained by the Bureau and
local governments help power the economic productivity--and tax
revenue--on which the U.S. Government depends. Job creation, efficient
agricultural production, and reliable drinking water supplies are just
a few of the benefits of these investments to the national economy.
ASCE recommends an appropriation of $1 billion for BOR in fiscal
year 2013.
______
Prepared Statement of the Board of Levee Commissioners for the Yazoo-
Mississippi Delta
There are investments, and then there are investments, just as
there are priorities, and then there are priorities.
Since its inception, the United States Congress has allocated
approximately $14 billion to the Mississippi River and Tributaries
(MR&T) project. According to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE),
last year alone, throughout the Great Flood of 2011, the largest this
Nation has ever known, the MR&T prevented $110 billion in flood damages
to the Nation's heartland.
That's a good investment.
But such Acts of God as was that flood invariably produce
consequences for man. More water than any living human being has ever
witnessed was contained--in some instances, barely contained--by one of
the greatest engineering and construction feats ever, the mainline
Mississippi levee system. But that much water inflicts damages; that
much water takes a toll.
COE says that it will take approximately $2 billion to repair and
strengthen the levee system that just saved the country $110 billion
worth of damage. That's a benefit to cost ratio of 54-1. While less
than one-half of an emergency allocation did go to the MR&T, not only
is that inadequate, it is a dangerous gamble. Surely, we can adequately
restore the levees that just saved us.
That should be a high priority.
We ask that the Congress provide $375 million in fiscal 2013
funding for the MR&T--so that we might at least begin the process of
getting ready for the next great flood that as always is a matter of
when, not if.
All of us, of course, are aware of the Congress's self-imposed
moratorium on earmarks. And we can certainly understand such from a
fiscal responsibility standpoint. But that said, we also think there is
a fundamental flaw in that reasoning, a serious misunderstanding
inherent in the very definition of the word, ``earmark''.
When the men and women of this country think of earmarks, they
think of pork-laden legislation which specifically benefits large
political campaign contributors. They think of unnecessary public works
projects that never seem to end or stay within budgets. They think of
bridges that lead to nowhere.
And ladies and gentlemen, that is not what we are talking about
here today. Flood control is not a boondoggle. Flood control is a
necessity for life as we know it within the greater Mississippi Valley.
Public dollars for flood control projects are investments in the
national infrastructure. Tax dollars for flood control can literally be
thought of as premiums for flood insurance--not for flood damage, but
for flood prevention.
Beneath the umbrella of the MR&T, of course, are many component
projects, and we would be remiss in our obligation to the citizens of
our levee district not to point out the injustice related to one of
them. The Upper Yazoo Projects (UYP) represents the virtual ideal of
what any flood control project should be. It works--where it has been
completed, that is--and absolutely no one, including the environmental
community, in any way opposes it.
The UYP has provided documented localized flooding relief to
thousands at its southern stretches, while thousands more at the
projects' northern end still suffer due only to a lack of funding. In
last year's event, the town of Sledge and a heavily traveled State
highway were under water, while those to the south of the same
tributary were dry. And that is simply wrong.
COE says it has the capability to do $16.5 million toward
completion of the projects in 2013. Please give them at least some of
the funding needed to continue.
As always, we ask that the Congress also provide needed maintenance
funding for Mississippi's four flood control reservoirs and also for
the Delta Headwater Project which helps alleviate the stress on those
structures and our interior steams by slowing runoffs from the hills to
our east. COE's capabilities for those needed efforts are attached.
But most critically, we feel, is that the Congress rejects the
demonstrably false and potentially disastrous notion that flood control
is optional or some luxury that can be discarded when money gets tight.
Not only would lives and livelihoods be lost, but the Nation's economy
would be wrecked should America's heartland be inundated by
floodwaters.
Flood control is literally a pay me now or pay me later
proposition. We can pay to prevent the kind of disasters that last
year's epic flood very nearly represented, or we can pay much, much
more to try to restore that which is left in the wake of such an event.
Thank you very much for allowing us the opportunity to testify on
this matter that is so critical to the future of our Nation.
______
Prepared Statement of the Board of Mississippi Levee Commissioners
Madam Chair and members of the subcommittee: This statement is
prepared by Peter Nimrod, Chief Engineer for the Board of Mississippi
Levee Commissioners, Greenville, Mississippi, and submitted on behalf
of the Board and the citizens of the Mississippi Levee District. The
Board of Mississippi Levee Commissioners is comprised of seven elected
commissioners representing the counties of Bolivar, Issaquena, Sharkey,
Washington, and parts of Humphreys and Warren counties in the Lower
Yazoo Basin in Mississippi. The Board of Mississippi Levee
Commissioners is charged with the responsibility of providing
protection to the Mississippi Delta from flooding of the Mississippi
River and maintaining major drainage outlets for removing the flood
waters from the area. These responsibilities are carried out by
providing the local sponsor requirements for the congressionally
authorized projects in the Mississippi Levee District. The Mississippi
Levee Board and the Mississippi Valley Flood Control Association
support an appropriation of $375 million for fiscal year 2013 for the
Mississippi River and Tributaries (MR&T) project. This is the minimum
amount that we consider necessary to allow for an orderly completion of
the remaining work in the Valley and to provide for the operation and
maintenance, as required, to prevent further deterioration of the
completed flood control and navigation work.
It is apparent that the administration loses sight of the fact that
the MR&T project provides protection to the Lower Mississippi Valley
from waters generated across 41 percent of the continental United
States. These waters flow from 31 States and 2 provinces of Canada and
must pass through the Lower Mississippi Valley on its way to the Gulf
of Mexico. We will remind you that the MR&T project is one of, if not
the most cost-effective project ever undertaken by the United States
Government. The foresight of the Congress in their authorization of the
many features of this project is exemplary.
The many projects that are part of the MR&T project not only
provide protection from flooding in the area, but the award of
construction contracts throughout the Valley provides assistance to the
overall economy of this area. The employment of the local workforce and
purchases from local vendors by the contractors help stabilize the
economy in one of the most impoverished areas of our country.
In 2011, the MR&T project successfully passed the greatest flood on
the Mississippi River. Every feature of the MR&T project including
levees, floodways, and reservoirs were utilized. Not one acre of land
was flooded that was not designed to flood. Not one life was lost. The
MR&T system prevented $108 billion in damages in 2011 alone. All
together since 1928, the Congress has invested $13.9 billion in the
MR&T project, and it has prevented $478.3 billion in damages. This is a
34:1 benefit to cost ratio. The flow carried by the Mississippi River
in 1927 was 66 percent of a Project Design Flood. The flow carried by
the Mississippi River in 2011 was 85 percent of a Project Design Flood.
There is a larger flood on the horizon. In fact, stages will be 8-foot
higher when we have the Project Design Flood than we just experienced
in 2011. The MR&T project is only 89-percent complete. The Congress
must be proactive and fully fund the MR&T project until it is
completed. If not, the MR&T project will not pass the Project Design
Flood.
Even though the MR&T project worked, it suffered a lot of damage
and many weaknesses were discovered during the 2011 Epic Flood. The
Mississippi Levee Board would like to commend the Congress for
appropriating $802 million for repairing the MR&T system following the
historic 2011 Flood. This money will help reset and rebuild the MR&T
system so that we can pass the next major flood event. Money spent on
the MR&T project is money well spent that returns much more money in
prevented damages.
We are concerned about the ``earmark moratorium'' that the Congress
has adopted. The Congress has essentially given up their right to
appropriate money. They have relinquished this right to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB). OMB always provides a budget that
undercuts our projects in the MR&T project because they know that the
Congress will provide ``congressional adds''. Unfortunately people
think that the ``congressional adds'' for the MR&T project are
``earmarks''. ``Earmarks'' account for less than 1 percent of the
entire Federal budget, but it is these ``earmarks'' that provide money
for much needed and essential projects and provide jobs for the
economy. The stimulus money spent the past few years created jobs,
built projects, and stimulated the economy. This ban on ``earmarks''
will cause many projects to be stopped and jobs will be lost. The
Congress needs to define what an ``earmark'' is and they need to be
able to do ``congressional adds'' for our projects.
Thanks to the additional funding provided by the Congress over the
last several years over and above the administration's budget, work on
the Mainline Mississippi River Levee Enlargement Project is continuing.
Of the original 69 miles of deficient levees in the Mississippi Levee
District, 32 miles of work have been completed and 8.1 miles are
currently under contract. We are requesting $58.687 million for
construction on the Mainline Mississippi River Levees in the Lower
Mississippi Valley Division which will allow the Vicksburg and Memphis
districts to keep existing contracts on schedule and award contracts to
avoid any future unnecessary delays in completing this vital project.
The President's fiscal year 2013 budget did not include funding for
any construction projects within the Yazoo Basin. This action is
especially difficult to understand during a time when our Nation needs
an economic boost. These are all projects authorized and funded so
wisely by the Congress. All of these projects are encompassed in the
footprint of the Delta Regional Authority, an area recognized by the
Congress as requiring special economic assistance to keep pace with the
rest of our great Nation. We can not lose sight of the fact that all of
these projects are required to return more than a $1 in benefits for
each $1 spent.
The recommended plan for the Yazoo Backwater Project included a
pump that will lower the 100-year flood event by 4.5 feet thereby
reducing urban and rural structural damages, providing benefits to the
remaining agricultural lands, and reducing the frequency and duration
of floods. The plan also includes reforestation easements to be
purchased on up to 55,600 of existing agricultural land which will
provide benefits in every environmental category--wetlands,
terrestrial, aquatics, and waterfowl resources as well as vastly
improving water quality. This was a model project that should be the
standard for future public works projects in the United States. However
on August 31, 2008, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) used it's
authority under section 404(c) of the Clean Water Act (CWA) to veto the
Yazoo Backwater Project even though it is exempt by section 404(r) of
the CWA. The Mississippi Levee Board sued EPA in a lawsuit against EPA
asking the Federal Court to determine if this project is indeed exempt
from an EPA 404(c) veto by the exemption in section 404(r) of the CWA.
The Federal court has ruled in favor of EPA. Unfortunately this model
project is now completely stopped. If the Yazoo Backwater Project were
in place in 2008, 2009, and 2011, the $220 million project would have
prevented $257.5 million in damages. The Congress promised flood
protection for the Mississippi South Delta back in 1941 when the Eudora
Floodway was removed from the MR&T project. Arkansas and Louisiana have
both benefitted from this floodway removal while Mississippi continues
to be flooded. We urge the Congress to take up this backwater flooding
problem again and find a solution for the Mississippi South Delta.
We are requesting $4.575 million for the Yazoo Backwater less Rocky
Bayou Project. This money will be used to start the Environmental
Impact Statement for the Yazoo Backwater Levee Enlargement Project.
This levee is designed to overtop during a project design flood, but it
needs to be raised 5.8 feet to get to the required elevation. This
backwater levee is supposed to overtop when we are within 2 feet of a
Project Design Flood. In 2011 the Mississippi River was 8 feet below a
Project Design Flood and the Yazoo Backwater Levee came within 4 inches
of overtopping. We need this backwater levee raised immediately.
Work on the Big Sunflower (Upper Steele Bayou) project has proved
to be very beneficial. The Steele Bayou Sedimentation Reduction project
has installed drop-pipe structures at headcut locations all along
Steele Bayou. These control structures stop the movement of sediment
into Steele Bayou. Sediment is bad for flood control and water quality.
We are requesting $1.7 million to keep this project moving forward.
Work on the Delta Headwaters project has proven effective in
reducing sediments to downstream channels. To discontinue this project
will only diminish water quality by increasing sediment, reducing the
level of flood protection to the citizens of the Delta and increasing
required maintenance. We are requesting $13 million to continue this
project.
Maintenance of completed works can not be overlooked. The four
flood control reservoirs overlooking the Delta have been in place for
50 years and have functioned as designed. Required maintenance must be
performed to avoid any possibility of failure during a flood event. We
are asking for $7.7 million for Arkabutla Lake, $7.245 million for Enid
Lake, $7.346 million for Grenada Lake, and $11.397 million for Sardis
Lake.
We are requesting $12.754 million for Maintenance of the Mainline
Mississippi River Levees in the Lower Mississippi Valley Division which
will provide for repair of levee slides, slope repair, and repair of
the gravel maintenance roadway which is so vital to access during high
water.
The Mississippi River and our Ports and Harbors need money for
maintenance dredging. The Mississippi River carries tons of sediment
every second. This sediment falls out in slack water areas such as
entrances to our ports and harbors. The Greenville Port needs $1
million and the Vicksburg Port needs $750,000 to perform annual
maintenance dredging. This dredging is vital to keep these ports open
during the low-water season when much of the farm harvest is ready to
be transported.
We are requesting $2.58 million for the Lower Mississippi Valley
Division for Collection of Basic Data under General Investigations.
This money is used to monitor and collect water-quality samples at
gaging stations located throughout the Mississippi Delta. With the
emphasis on water quality, water quantity, and total maximum daily
loads (TMDLs), we must be able to continue to collect good data on
water quality so we can get a baseline established to be able to
monitor and improve water quality in the Mississippi Delta.
Improvements in water quality in the Mississippi Delta will translate
into improved water quality in the Gulf of Mexico and help the Gulf
Hypoxia issue.
EPA has been given too much power under section 404(c) of CWA which
allows EPA to veto congressionally authorized projects. During the
early 1990s, due to abuse of the 404(c) power by EPA, the Congress
considered removing this authority from EPA. EPA has again invoked this
veto power on the Yazoo Backwater Project. EPA is saying that you can't
lower the water level with a flood control project. By killing this
project with 404(c) veto authority, EPA is drawing a line in the sand
over the future of flood control in our great Nation. EPA has vetoed
the Yazoo Backwater Project even though it was approved, authorized,
and funded by the Congress and exempt from a 404(c) veto by 404(r). It
is now time to again take up this issue and remove the 404(c) veto
power from EPA before they kill another flood control project that has
been authorized by the Congress.
The Council of Environmental Quality (CEQ) draft proposal of
changes to the Principals and Guidelines (P&G) for Federal agencies
fails to establish a clear, concise, and workable framework to guide
development of water resources projects. It elevates environment
considerations over economic benefits, social well-being, and public
safety. Because of these critical and extensive failings, we recommend
that this effort be put aside and restarted from the beginning.
As Members of the Congress representing the citizens of our Nation
who live with the Mississippi River everyday, you clearly understand
both the benefits provided by this resource and the destructive force
that must be controlled during a flood. On behalf of the Mississippi
Levee Board, I can not express enough our appreciation for your efforts
in providing adequate funding over the last several years that has
allowed construction to continue on our much needed projects and thank
you in advance for your kind consideration of our requests for fiscal
year 2013.
______
Prepared Statement of the Fifth Louisiana Levee District
The Board of Commissioners for the Fifth Louisiana Levee District
respectfully requests that construction funding for Mississippi River
levees be increased from the $45,187,000 contained in the proposed
budget for fiscal year 2013, to the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers' (COE)
capability of $58,687,000.
Reduced funding, combined with the inability to let construction
contracts under a continuing contract clause, has left thousands of
people in Louisiana vulnerable to the adverse effects of a deficient
levee system. Construction of levee enlargements is essential if the
levee is to contain the ``Project Flood'' which is estimated to be 20
percent greater than the record Flood of 1927.
The effect of fully funded contracts for levee construction, now
required under Public Law 109-103, (sections 106 and 108), adopted by
the 109th Congress in 2005, as opposed to the previous system of
continuing contract clauses, has virtually halted enlargement of the
Mississippi River levee system in Louisiana. Year after year, as the
cost of projects and maintenance has increased, funding for levee
systems and flood control has been reduced. The current proposed budget
is no exception, with only $234 million allocated for the entire
Mississippi River and Tributaries (MR&T) project. We request that be
increased to COE's capabilities of $375 million.
Since the MR&T project was established, $13 billion has been
invested and more than 475 billion of flood damages have been
prevented. This investment provides benefits far beyond their actual
cost to the taxpayer by offering protection to more than 4 million
citizens and allows people to live and work throughout a 35,000 square
mile area in seven States.
With the help of the Congress, great progress has been made in the
Mississippi River Valley over the years, but there is still much to be
done, and because of that, we urge the Congress to increase funding to
COE in fiscal year 2013, to insure that COE is not forced to halt or
delay contracts for levee construction essential to the well-being of
this Nation. It is vital that the MR&T project(s) be completed at the
earliest possible date.
______
Prepared Statement of the Izaak Walton League of America
I am Scott Kovarovics and the Conservation Director of the Izaak
Walton League of America. The Izaak Walton League of America
appreciates the opportunity to submit testimony concerning
appropriations for fiscal year 2013 for programs under the jurisdiction
of the subcommittee. The League is a national, nonprofit organization
founded in 1922 with more than 39,000 members and 250 local chapters
nationwide. Our members are committed to advancing common sense
policies that safeguard wildlife and habitat, support community-based
conservation, and address pressing environmental issues. The following
pertains to programs administered by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(COE).
corps of engineers, operations and maintenance, missouri river
The League joins other groups in urging the subcommittee to
appropriate $90 million in fiscal year 2013, as requested by the
President, for the Missouri River Recovery Program. With this funding,
COE, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), States, and other partners
can continue important ecosystem restoration efforts that are producing
long-term ecological and economic benefits.
The Missouri River basin encompasses land in 10 States covering
one-sixth of the continental United States. The Missouri is one of the
most altered ecosystems on Earth. Although recovery and restoration
efforts are on-going, they need to continue and expand.
COE, FWS, and many State agencies have been restoring habitat for
fish and wildlife along the river. This work is critical for the
Interior Least Tern and Pallid Sturgeon, listed as endangered, and the
Piping Plover, listed as threatened, under the Endangered Species Act.
The restoration efforts also benefit many other species of fish and
wildlife throughout the region. These habitat restoration projects are
working with the river--not against it.
These projects also generate additional economic activity in
communities along the river. Anglers, hunters, boaters, birdwatchers,
and others have been using these areas proving the old adage ``if you
build it, they will come.'' The Missouri Department of Conservation and
the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission found recreational spending
provides $68 million in annual economic impact to communities along the
Missouri River from Yankton, South Dakota to St. Louis, Missouri. A
South Dakota Game, Fish, and Parks study shows that recreational
benefits from angling on the Missouri River account for more than $107
million in annual economic activity in the Dakotas and Montana. These
projects are bringing more people to the river throughout the Missouri
basin.
In addition to the economic boost from tourism, restoration
projects support job creation throughout the entire region. COE
contracts with local construction companies, creating jobs, and
injecting dollars into local economies through purchases of materials,
fuel, food, and lodging. With the funding requested, COE could readily
implement more of these important economic and river restoration
projects.
Missouri River Ecosystem Restoration Plan.--The League urges the
subcommittee not to include any provision in its fiscal year 2013 bill
limiting funding for the Missouri River Ecosystem Restoration Plan
(MRERP). This long-term ecosystem study will lead to a comprehensive
plan that Federal agencies, States, tribes, and communities along the
river will be able to implement for a healthier Missouri River. A great
deal of time and effort has already gone into development of MRERP.
Funding must be allowed for this important effort to get back on track
before the information already gathered loses relevance and will cost
U.S. taxpayers more to gather again.
Missouri River Authorized Purposes Study.--The League urges the
subcommittee to provide funds to complete the Missouri River Authorized
Purposes Study (MRAPS). The League strongly opposes the funding
prohibition contained in the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2012.
It does not provide taxpayers with meaningful savings in the near-term
and jeopardizes real-future savings. Delaying this analysis deprives
the country of Missouri River management geared toward future needs
rather than those identified during World War II.
MRAPS for the first time will review the eight authorized Missouri
River purposes established by the Flood Control Act of 1944. This
thorough analysis of the purposes will determine the best management
for the American taxpayer, all the residents of the basin, and fish and
wildlife, taking in account today's economic values and priorities,
rather than those imagined nearly 70 years ago.
Full funding of MRAPS is a wise investment. A comprehensive review
and accompanying changes will streamline future COE operational
expenses saving tax dollars and bringing Missouri River management into
the 21st century. MRAPS needs to be re-started in fiscal year 2013.
corps of engineers, operations and maintenance, upper mississippi river
The League is an active and long-time proponent of restoring the
Upper Mississippi River (UMR) ecosystem. We have supported the Upper
Mississippi River Restoration (UMRR) program (also known as the
Environmental Management Program) since its inception and continue to
support this vital restoration initiative. We urge the subcommittee to
provide $33.2 million for UMRR in fiscal year 2013 as authorized by the
Water Resources Development Act (WRDA). Although we are encouraged by
the President's request for fiscal year 2013, pressing restoration
needs on-the-ground require the full amount authorized for UMRR.
The League has also strongly expressed its opinion that the large-
scale navigation modifications included in the Recommended Plan for the
Upper Mississippi Navigation and Ecosystem Sustainability Program
(NESP), as authorized by the Water Resources Development Act of 2007,
have not been justified by COE and should not be pursued. Previous
reviews by the National Academy of Sciences and the Assistant Secretary
of the Army, Civil Works found that the navigation construction
component of NESP was not economically justifiable. A report released
in 2010 by the Nicollet Island Coalition, of which the League is a
member, provides additional evidence that proposed locks and dams in
this region are not a good investment for American taxpayers. With this
in mind, the League supports the administration's decision not to
request funding for NESP in fiscal year 2013.
While the lock and dam expansion authorized by NESP is not a good
investment, the League recognizes the need for the Congress to invest
in inland navigation to maintain the transportation infrastructure on
the rivers. The Inland Waterway Trust Fund (IWTF) provides 50-percent
cost-share for construction and rehabilitation on navigation
infrastructure. The League agrees with the administration that the IWTF
needs to be reformed because not enough revenue is generated by the
$0.20 per gallon fuel tax on navigation to fund the multibillion dollar
backlog of projects. The League supports the President's proposal to
implement a user fee at the locks, while maintaining the 50-percent
cost-share model on all inland waterway construction and navigation
projects. The League strongly opposes including any provision in the
subcommittee's fiscal year 2013 bill that increases the cost-share
portion from the taxpayer funded general appropriation, as proposed by
the Inland Marine Transportation System Capital Investment Strategy
Team. Such a proposal will increase the national deficit and allow
environmentally damaging and economically questionable projects to move
forward.
The UMR is one of the most complex ecosystems on Earth. It provides
habitat for 50 species of mammals, 45 species of reptiles and
amphibians, 37 species of mussels, and 241 species of fish. The need
for ecosystem restoration is unquestionable. As COE correctly stated in
its study of navigation expansion, this ecosystem is ``significantly
altered, is currently degraded, and is expected to get worse.''
Researchers from the National Academy of Sciences have determined that
river habitat is disappearing faster than it can be replaced through
existing programs such as UMRR, which was authorized at $33.2 million
annually by the Congress in 1999, but has never received full
appropriations. As habitat vanishes, scientists warn that many species
will decline and some will disappear.
Our Nation relies on a healthy Mississippi River for commerce,
recreation, drinking water, food, and power. More than 12 million
people annually recreate on and along the UMR spending $1.2 billion and
supporting 18,000 jobs. More people recreate on the Upper Mississippi
than visit Yellowstone National Park while barge traffic has remained
static on the river for more than 2 decades.
In assembling the UMR-IWW navigation study, COE recognized the
critical need for ecosystem restoration and encouraged the Congress to
invest approximately $130 million annually in UMR habitat restoration
efforts. With this need in mind, the League strongly encourages the
subcommittee to prioritize investment in ecosystem restoration by
appropriating $33.2 million for the UMRR in fiscal year 2013.
Additional funding for restoration will support economic development
and job creation in communities along the UMR and provide long-term
conservation and economic benefits for the region and the Nation.
clean water act guidance and rulemaking
This year, the American people will be celebrating the 40th
anniversary of passage of the Clean Water Act. With this in mind, the
League strongly urges the subcommittee not to include or accept any
provision in its fiscal year 2013 bill barring COE from finalizing and
implementing Clean Water Act guidance or proceeding with the formal
rulemaking process to revise its clean water regulations. We appreciate
the subcommittee's leadership last year on this critical issue.
Since proposing draft guidance last spring, COE has conducted a
nearly unprecedented public engagement process for agency guidance.
During this process, COE and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
held a 90-day public comment period. The agencies received nearly
230,000 comments and have publicly described the overwhelming majority
as supporting the proposal. In mid-February 2012, COE and EPA submitted
revised guidance to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for
another round of inter-agency review. This process also allows
nongovernmental organizations to meet with OMB to share their
perspectives on the policy.
Guidance proposed by COE is based on sound science and clearly
complies with the Supreme Court decisions in SWANCC and Rapanos.
Allowing COE to proceed with guidance will partially restore
protections for streams flowing to public drinking water supplies for
117 million Americans. It will also begin--but only begin--to restore
protections for some wetlands. Healthy wetlands are essential to
waterfowl, fish, and other wildlife, provide cost-effective flood
protection, and improve water quality. They also support hunting,
angling, and wildlife watching, which together inject $122 billion
annually into our economy. Finalizing the guidance will also provide
more clarity and certainty about Clean Water Act implementation to
landowners, developers, agency personnel, and State and local
governments.
Once again, we urge the subcommittee not to include or accept any
provision in its fiscal year 2013 bill limiting COE's ability to
finalize and implement Clean Water Act guidance or initiate formal
rulemaking concerning clean water regulations.
We appreciate the opportunity to submit this testimony.
______
Prepared Statement of The Little River Drainage District
My name is Sam M. Hunter, DVM. I am a veterinarian, landowner, and
farmer, and I reside in Sikeston, in southeast Missouri.
I am the president of the Board of Supervisors of The Little River
Drainage District, the largest such entity in the Nation. Our district
serves as a drainage outlet and provides flood control to parts of
seven counties in southeast Missouri. We also provide flood protection
to a sizable portion of northeast Arkansas. Our district is funded
solely by the annual assessment of benefits of more than 3,500
landowners.
My remarks will address the Mississippi River and Tributaries
(MR&T) project and specifically the St. Francis River Basin line item
of the MR&T. These funds are investments yielding a return of
substantial benefit to the Nation. They provide funding for flood
control that protects numerous cities, farms, and industries. Funding
through the MR&T also provides needed repairs and upgrades to locks and
dams, modernization of hydroelectric plants, and environmental
restoration. This project was authorized by the Congress in 1928 and
remains incomplete, yet yields a return of $34 in damage reduction for
every $1 spent. I know of no better investment of taxpayer dollars.
We fully understand the financial constraints on our Government and
the need to do more with less in order to reduce the national debt,
balance the budget, and create jobs. Programs and projects have been
eliminated or downsized; however, the MR&T is so critical to the Nation
that it cannot withstand deep cuts without jeopardizing the safety of
our citizens and our economy. The Mississippi River flood of 2011 would
have been catastrophic without the MR&T. It is estimated that more than
$112 billion in flood damages were prevented by the project. The system
did suffer damage as a result of the flooding and the Congress did
respond to that and appropriated additional emergency funds to restore
and repair the system, and for that we are grateful. But the work to
maintain and complete the project must continue.
In the fiscal year 2013 budget submitted by the President the MR&T
appropriation was $210 million. That amount is identical to the fiscal
year 2012 request. It appears that the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) has again chosen to ignore the infrastructure needs of the
Mississippi Valley. That amount will possibly keep the lights on, but
does not allow for much needed maintenance. To allow the project to
crumble away is inexcusable. The navigation element alone, which
includes the necessary maintenance of locks, dams, and harbors, is
vital to this Nation's economy. Moving products on the Mississippi
River is the most economical and environmentally friendly method of
transportation. It is dramatically more fuel efficient than truck or
rail. It allows our commodity producers to compete in a global market.
Continued underfunding of the MR&T is a dangerous course of action. The
failure of just one lock and/or dam could have an impact on the entire
Nation's economy, yet this fact appears to have been left to chance by
OMB.
Fortunately the power of the purse remains with the Congress. Even
with an earmark moratorium, the Congress still retains the power to
increase the President's budget request, as it has done annually since
the administration of President Jimmy Carter. We believe that a minimum
of $375 million is necessary to continue to keep the MR&T viable. The
Corps of Engineers' (COE) stated capability for the MR&T is $375
million due to the supplemental appropriations for flood repairs.
Within the MR&T budget request is a line item for the St. Francis
River and Tributaries that directly impacts our District. The
President's budget request for fiscal year 2013 is slightly more than
$5.9 million for maintenance, but COE's stated capabilities for the St.
Francis Basin is $18.4 million. We maintain that a minimum of $15
million is necessary for maintenance of the St. Francis Basin. This is
not for new project construction but for maintenance at a minimum level
of functionality.
I can tell you that the 2012 Disaster Relief Act will assist our
District by funding the cleanout of our floodway ditches, for which COE
is responsible, at a cost of $7.9 million, and the Diversion Channel
Stabilization at a cost of $3.5 million. We appreciate this help in
recovering from the infamous Flood of 2011.
Another program providing help for flood recovery is the Emergency
Watershed Protection Program which is administered through the Natural
Resource Conservation Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
This program is designed to assist districts such as ours restore
drainage facilities that are non-Federal through a local cost share
agreement, of which we provide 25 percent. Past experience with this
program has been impressive. It allows local control of the project,
offers quick approval of projects, and addresses our needs immediately.
This year's program is laid out on a very short-completion deadline for
the extraordinary amount of recovery work that needs to be done. We
intend to request that the completion dates be extended past the
current deadline of end of fiscal year 2012 and ask this committee to
join in that request.
In closing, I would like to thank each member of the subcommittee,
their staff, and the Committee staff for taking the time to review the
above-written testimony. We are appreciative of anything the Energy and
Water Development Subcommittee can do to improve our environment and
our livelihoods, and to ensure the safety of our communities. Your work
is very important to our country and we feel it is important for us to
thank you for your service, and for giving us the opportunity to share
our viewpoints.
______
Prepared Statement of the Mississippi Valley Flood Control Association
The Mississippi Valley Flood Control Association respectfully
requests that the sum of $375,000,000 be appropriated in fiscal year
2013 for the Mississippi River and Tributaries (MR&T) project.
The Flood Control Association was first organized in 1922 by a
group of interested citizens from the States of Arkansas, Mississippi,
and Louisiana. From that first meeting, held in Memphis, Tennessee, a
delegation was selected to come to Washington in an attempt to convince
both the Congress and the executive branch that the prevention of
catastrophic floods in the lower Mississippi River Valley was beyond
the capabilities of the local people and was in fact too large for any
group other than the Federal Government. This group of dedicated
citizens was without success until the record flood of 1927 swept
through the Mississippi River Valley with the fury of devastation not
seen before. An unknown number of people perished along with thousands
of head of livestock and large numbers of many species of wildlife.
Some 7 percent of all the productive land on this planet was under
water for a period of almost one-half a year. The Congress, after
extensive hearings, passed the Flood Control Act of May 15, 1928, that
was signed into law by then President Calvin Coolidge.
The Flood Control Association then disbanded, acting under the
erroneous assumption that the United States Government would provide
whatever was needed to prevent flooding in the valley. In 1935, it
became apparent that additional legislation was required and the
Association, under the leadership of Senator John Overton from
Louisiana, was re-organized. It has been in continuous and active
existence since for some 77 years.
We have been fortunate since 1935 to have as our president and two
vice presidents Members of the United States Congress with Senator
Roger Wicker from the State of Mississippi serving as our president,
Congressman Blaine Luetkemeyer from Missouri and Congressman Rodney
Alexander from Louisiana serving as our vice presidents.
We are a nonprofit agency made up of levee boards, drainage
districts, harbor and port commissions, States, cities, and towns,
including many other agencies and individuals that have an interest in
the protection and betterment of the people and property in the
Mississippi River Watershed, the third largest in the world. But we
feel it is the greatest, because of its size coupled with its essential
usefulness to the Nation. In a few words we are an agency through which
the local people may speak and act jointly on all flood control, bank
stabilization, navigation, and major drainage problems.
Never before have we seen our Nation faced with such huge public
debts and budget deficits as we do today. In our daily life we are made
aware of the gut-wrenching sadness of seeing homes foreclosed and jobs
disappear. We know all those things, but we also know that the country
that is and has been for generations the bright light of freedom and
prosperity, must not and cannot let its infrastructure deteriorate and
fall into ruin; neither can we allow one of our vital forms of
transportation become underutilized or useless due to the lack of
proper and necessary maintenance.
Unfortunately, today as usual you are considering a budget request
from the executive department that has insufficient funding to prevent
either of the cases just outlined. The only recourse we have is to
request the Congress do, as you have always done, add the necessary
supplemental funds to protect the lives, property, and livelihoods of
the citizens of the river basin.
Earlier in this statement, it was said that the Mississippi River
Watershed that provides drainage for 41 percent of the Nation, moves
almost 1 billion tons of commodities--60 percent of our grain, 25
percent of our petroleum products, 20 percent of the coal to fire our
power plants--was the greatest watershed on the planet because of size
coupled with its usefulness. Useful because the river has been
controlled and improved beginning with the first levee for flood
protection built in New Orleans, Louisiana in 1717. Levees came early
because ``without flood control, nothing else matters''. Over the
years, the Congress, the Corps of Engineers (COE), and the local people
have worked together to make the Mississippi River Watershed,
stretching from New York on the east to Montana on the west and from
the Canadian border to the Gulf of Mexico, the greatest and the envy of
the developed world.
Our great country has always been a maritime Nation, almost totally
dependent during the earliest years on the oceans and unimproved
waterways to move our commerce including, at that time in history, our
people. Westward expansion used the rivers whenever possible and many
of the earliest construction projects in the new country were the
building of canals connecting commercial waterways. Our national
security and economic well-being has always, now more than ever,
depended on the seas, lakes, and inland waterways that give us
accessibility to every corner of our great Nation.
All improvements, great or small, sooner or later, require
maintenance. We have been too lax in this great country with
maintaining and improving our basic forms of transportation. We have
not built new airports to keep up with the demand of a growing
population nor have we improved and properly maintained those that we
have. Our system of railroads is in such bad shape that we no longer
even attempt to move human cargo by train except for a very few small,
densely populated areas of the country. The interstate highway system
that we constructed more than 50 years ago was a great source of pride,
but we failed again to properly maintain it. Now we are paying a
tremendous price to keep it functioning. A great majority of our
waterway improvements, including our locks and dams and our flood
control facilities, are well past their design life. Soon we will find
ourselves in emergency mode of repairing and replacing failures. This
will be very expensive, an economic disaster. Farmers will be
especially hard hit with no efficient and economical way to transport
their crops to the international market.
Our principal, but certainly not our only concern, is with the
funding of the MR&T project. This is a very unique project that was
conceived and developed with consideration for the functional relation
between all its parts and the whole. It is a project that covers all
the aspects of development in the Mississippi River Valley below the
vicinity of Cape Girardeau, Missouri, from flood control to navigation
to environmental protection and enhancement. The MR&T project is well-
planned, well-organized, well-engineered, well-constructed and until
recently, well-maintained. Unfortunately, it is not yet completed and
adequate funding from the Congress is imperative if it is to be
completed and properly maintained. If, because of inadequate funding
and uncalled for delays due to countless and repetitive studies and
misguided lawsuits by the misnamed and misled environmentalists, the
lower reaches of the Mississippi River are not usable by commercial
boats and barges and sea-going ships, then no amount of improvement on
the upper reaches of the Mississippi River can have any favorable
effect. ``Without flood control nothing else matters.''
One of the major opportunities that we have to increase the wealth
of our Nation is to continue the improvement and development of our
major river systems. As noted the major system is the Mississippi River
Watershed. For that reason, we request that the Congress do what it has
done since 1928. That is, to appropriate sufficient supplemental funds,
allowing COE to continue what the Congress has directed them to do. We
are not talking about ``earmarks'' or pork barrel politics. We are
talking about funds to keep our navigation channels open and to provide
necessary dredging in order that our smaller but no less critical ports
may continue to function; funds to continue the on-going work to bring
some miles of levee sections that are deficient in either grade or
section up to the design required to protect our citizens against the
``greatest possible flood''; funds to bring our bank stabilization
program to completion in the most efficient manner, both economically
and environmentally.
The Executive Committee of the Mississippi Valley Flood Control
Association has carefully examined the President's budget request for
fiscal year 2013. We have arrived at the unanimous conclusion that the
required appropriation for the MR&T project is $375 million, just to be
reasonably assured that the goals of navigation, flood control, levee
improvement and bank stabilization are met; nothing more, nothing less.
In a special message to the Congress on flood control in the
Mississippi Basin, dated July 16, 1947, President Harry S Truman began
with the following in his opening sentence: ``the major opportunity of
our generation to increase the wealth of the nation lies in the
development of our great river systems''. Later on in his message
President Truman used these words: ``we must never forget that the
conservation of our natural resources and their wise use are essential
to our very existence as a nation. The choice is ours. We can sit idly
by, or almost as bad, resort to the false economy of feeble and
inadequate measures, while these precious assets waste away. On the
other hand, we can, if we act in time put into effect a realistic and
practical plan which will preserve these basic essentials of our
national economy and make this a better and a richer land''. Mr. Truman
was speaking about the MR&T project in this last quote. These words are
still true today. On July 31, 1947, President Truman approved
appropriations bills, including supplemental provisions for flood
control on the MR&T project in fiscal year 1948 of $250 million. And
that was in 1948 dollars.
We have attached a breakdown of the requested funds of $375 million
for the Mississippi River and Tributaries Project for fiscal year 2013.
MISSISSIPPI VALLEY FLOOD CONTROL ASSOCIATION
FISCAL YEAR 2013 CIVIL WORKS REQUESTED BUDGET
MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES APPROPRIATIONS
[In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Project/Study
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2013 request................................... 375,000
============
MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES INVESTIGATIONS
Collection and study of basic data......................... 500
Memphis Metro Storm Water Management, Tennessee (FEAS)..... 100
------------
Total investigations................................. 600
============
MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES CONSTRUCTION
Atchafalaya Basin, Louisiana............................... 9,000
Atchafalaya Basin Floodway System, Louisiana............... 4,000
Channel Improvement, Arkansas, Illinois, Kentucky, 71,000
Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, and Tennessee...........
Mississippi River Levees, Arkansas, Illinois, Kentucky, 69,490
Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, and Tennessee...........
Yazoo Basin, Upper Yazoo Projects.......................... 5,000
------------
Total construction................................... 158,490
============
MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES MAINTENANCE
Atchafalaya Basin, Louisiana............................... 12,865
Atchafalaya Basin Floodway System, Louisiana............... 2,295
Baton Rouge Harbor, Devils Swamp, Louisiana................ 80
Bayou Cocodrie and Tributaries, Louisiana.................. 50
Bonnet Carre, Louisiana.................................... 55,029
Channel improvement, Arkansas, Illinois, Kentucky, 62,615
Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, and Tennessee--TOT......
Channel improvement--dredging.............................. 18,785
Channel improvement--revetments and dikes.................. 43,830
Greenville Harbor, Mississippi............................. 30
Helena Harbor, Arkansas.................................... 210
Inspection of completed works.............................. 1,918
Lower Arkansas River, North Bank, Arkansas................. 375
Lower Arkansas River, South Bank, Arkansas................. 255
Lower Red River--South Bank Levees......................... 565
Mapping.................................................... 1,063
Memphis Harbor McKellar Lake, Tennessee.................... 1,935
Mississippi Delta Region--Caernarvon, Louisiana............ 625
Mississippi River Levees, Arkansas, Illinois, Kentucky, 8,645
Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, and Tennessee...........
Old River Control Structure, Louisiana..................... 10,625
St. Francis River and Tributaries, Arkansas and Missouri... 7,800
Tensas Basin, Boeuf and Tensas Rivers, Arkansas and 2,450
Louisiana.................................................
Tensas Basin, Red River Backwater, Louisiana............... 3,185
Vicksburg Harbor, Mississippi.............................. 55
Wappapello Lake, Missouri.................................. 5,360
White River Backwater, Arkansas............................ 1,510
Yazoo Basin, Arkabutla Lake, Mississippi................... 7,200
Yazoo Basin, Big Sunflower (Bogue Phalia), Mississippi..... 300
Yazoo Basin, Enid Lake, Mississippi........................ 6,795
Yazoo Basin, Greenwood, Mississippi........................ 1,000
Yazoo Basin, Grenada Lake, Mississippi..................... 7,200
Yazoo Basin, Main Stem, Missouri........................... 2,275
Yazoo Basin, Sardis Lake, Mississippi...................... 8,500
Yazoo Basin, Tributaries, Mississippi...................... 1,000
Yazoo Basin, Will M. Whittington Auxiliary Channel, 575
Mississippi...............................................
Yazoo Basin, Yazoo Backwater, Mississippi.................. 700
Yazoo Basin, Yazoo City, Mississippi....................... 1,000
------------
Total maintenance.................................... 215,910
------------
Total Mississippi River and Tributaries.............. 375,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
______
Prepared Statement of The Nature Conservancy
Madam Chair and members of the subcommittee: Thank you for the
opportunity to present The Nature Conservancy's testimony on the fiscal
year 2013 appropriations for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) and
Bureau of Reclamation. The Nature Conservancy is dedicated to saving
the lands and waters on which all life depends. Our on-the-ground
conservation work is carried out in all 50 States and more than 30
foreign countries and is supported by approximately 1 million members.
We recognize the challenges of working in a constrained fiscal
environment. But we also recognize the critical importance of our water
resources and the benefits these resources provide to virtually every
sector of the economy, the quality of life in our communities, and the
health of our people. Our focus is on supporting the programs and
investments needed to ensure these benefits are enhanced today and made
sustainable for tomorrow.
The Nature Conservancy supports building sustainability into the
management of our Nation's water infrastructure, including the
ecosystem restoration projects essential to ensuring that
sustainability. These ecosystem restoration projects pay dividends
through natural flood control, higher quality water, sustaining
commercial fisheries, and supporting recreation and tourism. With
impacts stretching out for decades to come, the projects and proposals
that follow reap high returns on investment.
sustainable rivers project
The Sustainable Rivers Project (SRP) is an initiative launched by
COE in partnership with the Conservancy to update decades-old water
management practices to meet society's needs today and in the coming
decades. By managing dams in coordination with downstream flood-prone
lands, the SRP is developing and demonstrating innovative approaches to
maintain and enhance water supply, flood protection, hydropower
generation, and recreation while restoring critical ecosystems and the
economically valuable services they provide.
This approach was recently studied by COE, The Nature Conservancy,
and University of California--Davis in two river basins--Georgia's and
South Carolina's Savannah and California's Mokelumne. The Savannah
River study found that small changes in floodplain management enable
the use of up to 50 percent of the existing flood storage capacity for
hydropower and recreation, producing a net benefit of more than $12
million per year, without increasing flood risk and with additional
benefits for water supply and the environment. The Mokelumne River
study found similarly modest shifts in floodplain management frees up
25 percent to 50 percent of flood storage for public water supply--
enough additional water for nearly 450,000 people--while maintaining
flood protection and increasing hydropower generation and improving
habitat for declining salmon. COE's budget includes three specific
initiatives that support SRP efforts; the Conservancy supports all
three at the levels provided by COE:
Reducing Civil Works Vulnerability.--The Conservancy supports $8
million.
Response to Climate Change.--The Conservancy supports $5 million.
National Portfolio Assessment for Reallocations.--The Conservancy
supports $571,000.
u.s. army corps of engineers construction priorities
Hamilton City Flood Damage Reduction and Ecosystem Restoration.--
The fact that COE again selected Hamilton City for its construction
budget in fiscal year 2013 is a testament to the innovative dual nature
of the project: increasing flood protection for Hamilton City while
restoring approximately 1,500 acres of riparian habitat. Appropriations
for the first phase will initiate construction of approximately 2 miles
of levee, removal of one-half of the existing levee, and completion of
roughly one-third of the habitat restoration. The Conservancy strongly
supports the $7.5 million proposed in fiscal year 2013 to complete the
first phase of construction.
Chesapeake Bay Oyster Recovery.--This project will build on recent
progress and continue to increase the scale of oyster restoration in
the Chesapeake Bay. Scientists in Maryland have estimated that oysters
in just one Chesapeake tributary--the Choptank River--remove pollution
that would otherwise cost waste water treatment systems $300,000/year
to remove. The $5 million proposed for the fiscal year 2013 budget and
supported by the Conservancy will allow COE to conduct additional
habitat restoration in the Choptank River, as well as new restoration/
enhancement work in the Great Wicomico, Lynnhaven and Piankatank Rivers
in Virginia.
South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Program.--In recent years, the
Federal Government has made substantial progress on Everglades
projects, and we encourage continued funding for the three authorized
Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP) projects. We also
support inclusion of language to allow COE to carry over credit between
studies and projects for which cost-share agreements have been executed
with the South Florida Water Management District; such language would
enable COE to more efficiently manage projects like the Kissimmee River
Restoration Project (KRRP), a high priority for the restoration of the
Everglades. The project is currently projected to be complete by 2015.
The Conservancy supports the $153,324,000 proposed for the South
Florida Ecosystem Restoration Program in fiscal year 2013.
Upper Mississippi River Environmental Management Program.--
Authorized in 1986, this program supports coordinated habitat
rehabilitation and enhancement projects in the Upper Mississippi River
system. Over the 25 years of the program, COE has completed more than
54 projects, benefiting more than 100,000 acres of aquatic and
floodplain habitat. Currently, 35 projects in the program are in
planning, design, or under construction. Completion of these projects
will benefit an additional 75,000 acres of aquatic and floodplain
habitat. The Conservancy supports the $17,880,000 proposed for
Environmental Management Program in fiscal year 2013.
Missouri River Fish and Wildlife Recovery Program.--Record upper
basin precipitation in 2011 brought historic flooding to the Missouri
River. The Recovery Program is expending funds to compile information
on the impacts of the floods to native species and various Recovery
projects while conducting a study on how Recovery Program actions could
reduce impacts from future floods. The Conservancy supports restoration
of funding for the Missouri River Ecosystem Restoration Plan (MRERP) as
part of the $90 million proposed for Missouri River Recovery Program
(MRRP) in fiscal year 2013.
Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal Dispersal Barrier.--Invasive
plants, invertebrates, and fish pose serious threats to the
biodiversity and fisheries of the Great Lakes and Mississippi River
basins, which are home to nearly 50 percent of our Nation's freshwater
fish species and support sport and commercial fisheries worth billions
of dollars. This project seeks to prevent the immediate invasion of the
Great Lakes by Asian carp by completing three electronic barriers in
the Construction phase. The Nature Conservancy supports the budget
request of $24.5 million.
general investigation priorities
Puget Sound Nearshore Marine Habitat Restoration.--This study, when
completed, will identify restoration and protection needs and
opportunities in the nearshore regions of Puget Sound. The Sound
supports the second largest U.S. port (combined Ports of Seattle and
Tacoma) for container traffic that has accounted for more than $70
billion in foreign trade; it is an economic priority to ensure that
Puget Sound maintains the ecological resiliency to sustain vital
services for both people and nature. The Conservancy supports the
proposed $850,000 in fiscal year 2013 to carry out this investigation.
Great Lakes and Mississippi River Interbasin Study.--The
Conservancy encourages the Congress to instruct COE to deliver
recommendations in a much shorter timeframe--2 years--to address the
urgent problem of invasive species in the Chicago Area Waterway System
(CAWS), and to focus their attention and resources on the CAWS alone,
as it is the most urgent and significant invasion threat, the only
continuous connection, and only pathway with a proven invasion history.
The Conservancy requests no less than $3 million for Great Lakes and
Mississippi River Interbasin Study.
Illinois River Basin Restoration Program.--This Federal-State
partnership sustains the health of the entire Illinois River Basin
through projects that restore habitats, species, and the natural
processes that sustain them. It complements other Federal programs such
as the Illinois Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program and
Environmental Management Program of the Upper Mississippi, yet is
unique in its basin-wide approach to restoration. The Conservancy
supports the $400,000 funding proposed for this program in fiscal year
2013.
Lower Mississippi River Resource Assessment.--Flood control and
drainage systems have accelerated erosion and habitat loss along the
Lower Mississippi River and its tributaries. Working with the
Department of the Interior, COE will evaluate river management,
habitat, and public access to recommend actions for addressing current
and future needs. The Conservancy supports the $571,000 included for
this program in fiscal year 2013.
Willamette River Floodplain Restoration Study.--COE and the
Conservancy are working together to identify ecological flow
requirements downstream of Corps dams on the Willamette River and
incorporate those flows into dam operations to improve fish and
wildlife habitat and community flood protection. Additionally, this
study will assess the potential for floodplain restoration in the
Middle Fork and Coast Fork tributaries of the Willamette River to
reduce flood damage while restoring natural wetlands and promoting
ecosystem restoration. The Conservancy supports the $380,000 proposed
in fiscal year 2013 to continue this study.
Yellowstone River Corridor Comprehensive Study.--Funding these
ongoing economic, fisheries, and wetlands studies will help ensure that
the longest free-flowing river in the lower 48 States maintains its
natural functions while supporting irrigation and other uses of its
waters. The study will help determine the significance of the
cumulative effects of water use on aquatic species and riparian
hardwood forests, while guiding the establishment of beneficial
management practices. The Conservancy supports the proposed $200,000
for fiscal year 2013.
continuing authorities program
Section 1135, Project Modifications for Improvement of the
Environment and Section 206, Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration.--Adequate
funding for the Continuing Authorities Programs (CAPs) will ensure
support for a section 1135 project at Spunky Bottoms and a section 206
project at Emiquon East, both located in Illinois and both serving as
model floodplain restoration and reconnection projects. Demand for
these valuable programs continues to outstrip funding, which is why the
Conservancy urges the subcommittee to match the fiscal year 2012
funding level of $7,909,000 each for the 1135 and 206 CAPs in fiscal
year 2013.
bureau of reclamation
Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery and San Juan River
Basin Recovery Programs.--These programs take a balanced approach to
restore four endangered fish species by implementing a range of basin-
wide strategies, including improved management of Federal dams, river
and floodplain habitat improvement, stocking of endangered fish, and
management of non-native fish species. The Conservancy supports the
proposed $8,387,000 in fiscal year 2013 for the two programs and the
extension of their full base funding through 2019.
Platte River Recovery Implementation Program.--The program helps
restore the four endangered or threatened species in the basin--
whooping crane, interior least tern, piping plover, and pallid
sturgeon--while enabling existing water projects in the basin to
continue operations. Specifically, the program is working to increase
stream flows in the central Platte River at ecologically and
economically important times; enhance, restore and protect lands for
target bird species; and offset post-1997 depletions. The Conservancy
supports the proposed $8 million for this recovery effort in fiscal
year 2013.
Basin Studies and WaterSMART.--We support the request for the basin
study programs and WaterSMART grant programs. These programs support
sustainable water use and management by focusing on water conservation,
reuse and recycling, and on environmental protection and restoration.
We also support the proposed funding for the Bureau's environmental
restoration work, including the programs in the California Bay Delta
and Colorado River.
discretionary funds
We support the approach that the Congress took in the fiscal year
2012 budget to provide additional funds so that many important on-going
projects could continue toward completion. Our Connecticut River
Planning Study will be finalized in fiscal year 2013 and would benefit
from such flexibility.
Connecticut River Watershed Study.--This project will restore 410
miles of river flow and thousands of acres of natural habitat in the
Connecticut River Basin. The study identifies dam management
modifications for environmental benefits while maintaining beneficial
human uses. After more than $1 million in investments by the Federal
Government, this study is entering its final year, ahead of schedule
and under budget. We respectfully request $300,000 to complete the
critical final phase of this study, enabling the use of study products
in a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission relicensing of five dams what
influence flow on a 175-mile reach of the river.
The Conservancy would like to thank the subcommittee for supporting
the restoration of large scale restoration programs over the last
decade. These programs have been essential to restoring and maintaining
some of America's most precious and imperiled ecosystems. We are also
appreciative of past support for smaller-scale projects that provide
cumulative benefits and serve as powerful demonstrations of effective
restoration.
______
Prepared Statement of The Red River Valley Association
Madam Chair and members of the subcommittee: I am Dan York, Red
River Valley Association (RRVA) President, and pleased to represent the
Red River Valley Association, 629 Spring Street, Shreveport, Louisiana.
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 87th Annual Meeting in Shreveport, Louisiana, on February
23, 2012, and represent the combined concerns of the citizens of the
Red River Basin area as they pertain to the goals of the Association. A
summary of the Civil Works projects and requested funding is included
in this testimony.
The President's fiscal year 2013 budget included $4.731 billion for
the Civil Works programs. This is $269 million less than what the
Congress appropriated in fiscal year 2012. The administration fails to
recognize Corps of Engineers' (COE) critical role as stewards of our
Nation's water resources, and the vital importance of our water
resources infrastructure to our economic and environmental well-being.
The problem is also how the administration distributes funds. A few
projects received the full ``Corps Capability'' to the detriment of
many projects that receive no funding. The $4.731 billion level does
not come close to the real needs of our Nation. A more realistic
funding level to meet the existing needs of the Civil Works program is
$6 billion for fiscal year 2013. 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
prevention, water supply, recreation, and ecosystem restoration. We
remind you that Civil Works projects are a true ``jobs program'' in
that up to 85 percent of project construction 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.
We want to point out that we appreciate the funding the Congress
enacted in the fiscal year 2012 Consolidated Appropriation Act and
fiscal year 2012 supplemental. We encourage the Congress to increase
the ``water'' share of the total Energy and Water Bill closer to the $6
billion Corps capability.
We have great concerns over the issue of ``earmarks''. Civil Works
projects are not earmarks. Civil Works projects go through a process;
reconnaissance study, feasibility study, benefit to cost ratio test,
EIS, peer review, review by agencies, public review and comment, final
Chief of Engineer approval, authorization by all of the Congress in a
Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) bill and signed by the
President. WRDA 2007 added an independent review of major projects. No
other Federal program goes through such a rigorous approval process.
Each justified project ``stands alone'', are proven to be of national
interest and should be funded by project. For most projects there is
local sponsor cost sharing during the feasibility study, construction,
and for operations and maintenance (O&M). Those who have contributed,
in most cases--millions of dollars--to the process, must have the
ability to have a say for their projects to get funded. That voice is
through their congressional delegation. We believe that earmarks are
not in the national interest, but it does not pertain to the Civil
Works program. For civil works it is an issue of priority of projects
to be funded and who will determine that, Office of Management and
Budget or the Congress. We hope the Congress takes back their
responsibility to set civil works priorities and to determine how its
citizens' tax dollars are spent.
The Inland Waterways Trust Fund (IWTF) is inadequately funded by
the existing fuel tax rate. There is no doubt that something must be
done to increase the revenue in the fund. The needs of the IWTF should
be analyzed and determine what increase to the existing fuel tax would
maintain the necessary income flow to keep projects funded from the
IWTF. The final proposal must be fair to tributary waterways and be
applied equally to all industries using the waterways.
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. A major power company, CLECO, has invested $1
billion in its Rodemacher Plant near Boyce, Louisiana, on the lower Red
River and has started moving more than 2.5 million tons of ``petroleum
coke'' and limestone, by barge. This project is a reality and there are
many more industries considering using our waterway and locating at the
ports.
We have a serious issue for the J. Bennett Johnston Waterway O&M in
the President's budget. The administration allocated $8,434,000 for
fiscal year 2013, $2,566,000 less than what is required for 24/7 lock
operations and dredging. This drastic reduction will directly impact
the ability to conduct maintenance dredging and the authorized 9-foot
channel will not be maintained. It is difficult to understand why the
administration would fund O&M at the $11 million range for 5 years and
suddenly make a drastic reduction that will have such a negative impact
on a waterway that has yearly increased its tonnage. If the required
funding level of at least $11 million is not appropriated the waterway
may actually shut down to all traffic and industry will see the
waterway as unreliable and choose alternative modes of transportation,
impacting ports, and jobs.
The administration is introducing a new metric to determine lock
operations. The hours of operations for each lock would be determined
by the number of commercial lockages per year. Reducing the hours of
operations will discourage industry from using the Waterway; therefore,
further reducing the number of lockages sending the Waterway into a
lower-use status. Instead of finding ways to close down waterways the
administration should be promoting initiatives to increase waterborne
transportation. The Congress must stop these destructive actions.
Red River Navigation Into Southwest Arkansas Feasibility Study.--
This region of Southwest Arkansas and Northeast Texas continues to
suffer major unemployment and this navigation project, although not the
total solution will help revitalize the economy. Due to the time lapsed
in the study the ``freight rates'' calculated a number of years ago
they must be re-evaluated. To date the local sponsor, Arkansas Red
River Commission, has invested more than $4 million to cost share in
this study. Since no funding has been appropriated for this study the
Commission will fully fund a private company to conduct a full
investigation to insure all benefits have been identified. This
feasibility study has been ongoing for more than 10 years and the
Commission is making every effort to bring it to a successful
conclusion. The administration and the Congress needs to make the
Federal contribution and the same commitment the local sponsor and
State of Arkansas has made.
Flood Prevention.--What will happen when we ignore our levee
systems? We know the Red River levees in Arkansas do not meet Federal
standards, which is why we have the authorized project line item, ``Red
River Below Denison Dam, TX, AR & LA''. Now is the time to bring these
levees up to standards, before a major flood event.
We continue to consider flood control a major objective and request
you continue funding the levee rehabilitation projects ongoing in
Arkansas. Out of 11 levee sections, 5 have been completed and brought
to Federal standards. The Red River Levee District (AR) is prepared to
provide lands, easements, and rights of way for the next major
rehabilitation of the Lafayette County levees.
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.
Bank Stabilization.--One of the most important, continuing
programs, on the Red River is bank stabilization in Southwest Arkansas
and North Louisiana under the authorized project; Red River Emergency
Bank Protection. 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
levees, 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 COE to be the areas of highest priority.
Water Quality.--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 Chloride Control 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. Then 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. The 2007 WRDA bill included language that
clarified that all aspects of this project will be at full Federal
expense, to include O&M. Over the past years, 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 the Oklahoma Governor in support of a re-evaluation report.
The western areas of Texas and Oklahoma are water deprived and sorely
need the Chloride Control Project. The need for water quality and
quantity will increase over time and this project will address those
needs, as long as Federal funding is appropriated to keep the project
moving ahead.
Project Funding Requests.--Included in this testimony are tables
displaying the Civil Works projects in the Red River Valley and the
appropriation needs for fiscal year 2013.
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 over seas. 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.
Grant Disclosure.--The Red River Valley Association has not
received any Federal grant, sub-grant or contract during the current
fiscal year or either of the 2 previous fiscal years.
RED RIVER VALLEY ASSOCIATION OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE PROJECTS
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Red River
Valley President's
Project Fiscal year 2012 Association fiscal year
appropriations fiscal year 2013 budget
2013 request
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DE Queen Lake, Arkansas..................................... 1,654 3,393 1,870
Dierks Lake, Arkansas....................................... 1,393 2,213 1,567
Gillham Lake, Arkansas...................................... 1,319 1,437 1,463
Millwood Lake, Arkansas..................................... 2,507 6,690 2,680
Bayou Bodcau Reservoir, Louisiana........................... 2,016 1,891 1,041
Bayou Pierre, Louisiana..................................... 23 36 24
Caddo Lake, Louisiana....................................... 215 522 216
Wallace Lake, Louisiana..................................... 234 997 232
J. Bennett Johnston Waterway, Louisiana..................... 11,165 25,633 8,434
Basic Annual Operation and Maintenance.................. 7,565 12,230 ...............
(w/Suppl 3,600)
Backlog Maintenance..................................... ................ 13,403 ...............
Old River, Louisiana (MR&T)................................. ................ 21,647 8,050
Broken Bow Lake, Oklahoma................................... 2,017 7,025 2,425
Hugo Lake, Oklahoma......................................... 1,519 1,716 1,716
Pine Creek Lake, Oklahoma................................... 1,229 1,053 1,053
Sardis Lake, Oklahoma....................................... 982 3,801 3,801
Waurika Lake, Oklahoma...................................... 1,507 1,616 1,616
Chloride Control, Area VIII, Texas.......................... 1,562 1,529 1,529
Denison Dam and Lake Texoma, Texas.......................... 6,803 13,837 7,137
Basic Annual Operation and Maintenance.................. ................ 6,393 ...............
Backlog Maintenance..................................... ................ 7,444 ...............
Estelline Springs, Texas.................................... 43 42 42
Lake Kemp, Texas--Total Need................................ 179 241 241
Basic Annual Operation and Maintenance.................. ................ 214 ...............
Reallocation Study...................................... ................ 27 ...............
Pat Mayse Lake, Texas....................................... 1,187 2,421 1,148
Jim Chapman Lake, Texas..................................... 1,555 4,553 1,736
Lake of the Pines, Texas.................................... 3,393 8,848 3,529
Wright Patman Dam and Lake, Texas........................... 3,771 12,888 3,513
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RED RIVER GENERAL INVESTIGATION AND CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PROJECTS
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Red River
Valley President's
Fiscal year 2012 Association fiscal year
appropriations fiscal year 2013 budget
2013 request
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Studies (GI)Navigation into Southwest Arkansas: Feasibility............. ................ 302 ...............
Red River Waterway, Louisiana--12' Channel, Recon........... ................ 100 ...............
Bossier Parish, Louisiana................................... ................ 270 ...............
Cross Lake, Louisiana Water Supply Supplement............... ................ ............... ...............
Southeast Oklahoma Water Resource Study: Feasibility........ ................ 500 ...............
Washita River Basin, Oklahoma............................... ................ 500 ...............
Southwest Arkansas Ecosystem Restoration: Recon Study....... ................ 47 ...............
Cypress Valley Watershed, Texas............................. ................ 175 ...............
Sulphur River Basin, Texas.................................. ................ 1,000 ...............
Wichita River Basin above Lake Kemp, Texas: Recon........... ................ 100 ...............
Red River Above Denison Dam, Texas and Oklahoma: Recon...... ................ 100 ...............
Red River Waterway, Index, Arkansas to Denison Dam.......... ................ 100 ...............
Mountain Fork River Watershed, Oklahoma and Arkansas, Recon ................ ............... ...............
Walnut Bayou, Little River, Arkansas....................... ................ 100 ...............
Little River County/Ogden Levee, Arkansas, Recon............ ................ 100 ...............
Red River Waterway, Index to Denison, Bendway............... ................ ............... ............... Construction General (CG)Red River Waterway: J.B. Johnston Waterway, Louisiana....... 1,000 22,000 2,000
Chloride Control Project, Texas and Oklahoma................ ................ 8,500 ...............
Texas--7,500/Oklahoma--800.............................. \1\ 7,200 \2\ 1,300 ...............
Red River Below Denison Dam; Arkansas and Louisiana......... 90 18,000 ...............
Bowie County Levee, Texas............................... ................ ............... ...............
Red River Emergency Bank Protection......................... ................ 20,000 ...............
McKinney Bayou, Arkansas, PED............................... ................ ............... ............... Continuing Authority Program (CAP)Big Cypress Valley Watershed, Texas: Section 1135........... ................ ............... ...............
Palo Duro Creek, Canyon, Texas: Section 205................. ................ 100 ...............
Millwood, Grassy Lake, Arkansas: Section 1135............... ................ 100 ...............
Miller County Levee, Arkansas: Section 1135................. ................ ............... ...............
Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Planning: Section 22........... ................ 500 ...............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Texas
\2\ Oklahoma
______
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Reclamation
Prepared Statement of the Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck
Reservation and Dry Prairie Rural Water
fiscal year 2013 budget request
The Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck Reservation and
Dry Prairie Rural Water greatly appreciate $7.5 million that is
included in the Bureau of Reclamation's (BOR) fiscal year 2013 budget
request to continue construction of the Fort Peck Reservation Rural
Water System. However, this level of funding is far below the need and
project capacity for fiscal year 2013. Thus, we respectfully request
$29 million within BOR fiscal year 2013 rural water program for this
project, which will enable us to complete this project within the
authorization time.
Fiscal year 2013 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
complete transmission pipelines across the Fort Peck Indian Reservation
and deliver regional water to the Reservation and Dry Prairie. The
request is within capability to spend funds in fiscal year 2013 as set
out in Table 1.
Good construction progress has been made on the Reservation and
will continue into 2013. By the end of fiscal year 2012, the project
will:
--complete the main transmission pipelines from the water treatment
plant (WTP) to Wolf Point;
--complete the main transmission system from Wolf Point to Frazer;
--complete the main transmission system from Poplar to Brockton;
--nearly complete the main transmission system from Brockton to the
Big Muddy River, the first interconnection point with Dry
Prairie;
--serve rural homes of tribal members and others between Brockton and
Frazer, that, when complete, will serve 75 percent of the
Reservation design population with safe and adequate water; and
--complete the Fort Kipp interim water project, poorest water quality
in the region.
Dry Prairie has continued to extend distributions projects in
Valley County on the west side of the project and in Roosevelt and
Sheridan Counties on the east side and has added several hundred new
users.
TABLE 1.--FISCAL YEAR 2013 FUNDING REQUEST,
FORT PECK RESERVATION RURAL WATER SYSTEM (PUBLIC LAW 106-382)
[In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sponsor/Project Feature Federal Non-Federal Total
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FORT PECK TRIBES (MAIN
TRANSMISSION PIPELINES)Brockton to Big Muddy Mainline... 725 ........... 725
Brockton to Big Muddy Zone 1 750 ........... 750
Branches....................
Wolf Point to Poplar Zone 1 1,425 ........... 1,425
Branches....................
Wolf Point to Frazer Zone 1 3,905 ........... 3,905
Branches....................
Frazer to Porcupine Creek........ 8,346 ........... 8,346
FP Electrical, Meters, SCADA..... 2,114 ........... 2,114
--------------------------------------
Subtotal................... 17,265 ........... 17,265 DRY PRAIRIE (MAIN TRANSMISSION
PIPELINES AND BRANCHES)E Medicine Lake.................. 1,883 595 2,478
ML to Plentywood................. 2,333 737 3,070
Big Muddy to Culbertson.......... 108 34 142
FP Boundary to Scobey............ 7,499 2,368 9,867
DP Electrical, Meters, Easements. 752 238 990
--------------------------------------
Subtotal................... 11,823 3,734 15,557
--------------------------------------
Total...................... 29,088 3,734 32,822
------------------------------------------------------------------------
funding status and needs
As shown in Table 2, the project will be 44-percent complete at the
end of fiscal year 2012 this includes the completion of the regional
WTP. The construction contract for the final phase will be completed in
mid-year 2012. The Project has also completed:
--the extension of the raw water pipeline from the regional intake to
the new WTP;
--the pipeline between the new WTP and the tribal headquarter
community of Poplar;
--the pipeline between the WTP and the community of Wolf Point; and
--part of the project from Wolf Point to Frazer.
TABLE 2.--FUNDING STATUS AND NEEDS
[Dollars in thousands]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Federal funding authority (October 2011).......... $295,719
===============Federal funds appropriated through fiscal year 2012:
Energy and Water Appropriations..................... $83,532
ARRA Allocation..................................... $46,249
---------------
Total............................................. $129,781
===============
Percent complete........................................ 43.89
===============
Amount remaining after fiscal year 2012:
Total authorized (October 2010)..................... $165,938
Overhead adjustment for extension to fiscal year $215,579
2020...............................................
Adjusted for inflation to fiscal year 2020 at 4.54% $261,903
annually...........................................Years to complete....................................... 8Average annual required to end in fiscal year 2020, $32,738
requires amendment to extend...........................
Fiscal year 2013 amount requested....................... $29,088
------------------------------------------------------------------------
While the project has made great strides and efficiently used every
$1 made available to get to where we are, we are still less than 50-
percent complete, which translates into approximately $166 million (in
2010 dollars) of construction that must be completed. Currently, the
project is $13 million underbudget and can be completed within the
authorized construction ceiling if appropriations are adequate to
complete on the statutory schedule of 2015, which we recognize as not
realistic. However, the cost of extending the project construction to
fiscal year 2020, for example, 5 years beyond the authorized ceiling,
is an additional $50 million. We urge the Congress to address the
problem of inadequate budgeting of projects that are well advanced in
construction.
proposed activities
The fiscal year 2013 request ($29.088 million) is needed to
properly utilize the WTP and distribute water to all communities along
the main transmission line within the Fort Peck Indian Reservation and
is within the capability of the project. The fiscal year 2013 funds
will:
Fort Peck Indian Reservation
--complete the main transmission pipelines along the southern
boundary of the project;
--serve the Reservation communities and all rural homes within the
first pressure zone along the main transmission throughout the
Reservation; and
--permit delivery of water outside the Reservation to improve water
quality and operation within the reservation by:
--reducing flushing needs and costs;
--reducing disinfection needs and costs; and
--reducing potential for formation of disinfectant by-products.
Dry Prairie
--initiate construction of pipeline from northern boundary of
Reservation to Scobey; and
--complete the main transmission pipeline and branches from Medicine
Lake to Plentywood.
Jobs
--create an estimated 233 full-time equivalent (FTE) construction
jobs in an area of Montana with low per capita income, high
unemployment, and high underemployment (based on 8 FTEs per $1
million).
administration's support
The project has reached 44-percent completion over a period of 12
years and needs greater funding support to complete the project between
2015 and 2020. Congressional support is needed for the authorized BOR
rural program to complete projects in a more timely manner.
The tribes and Dry Prairie have worked extremely well and closely
with BOR since the authorization of the project in fiscal year 2000.
The Commissioner, Regional and Area Office of BOR 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 or implementation of the project. As stated above, the
project is under budget currently by more than $13 million.
Cooperative agreements have been developed and executed between BOR
and the tribes and between BOR 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 review by BOR pursuant to the cooperative
agreements. The sponsors collaborate to undertake activities that
assure proper oversight and approval by BOR. 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 BOR. The Congress authorized the project based on the
Final Engineering Report that was formulated in full cooperation and
collaboration with BOR, and major project features are successfully
under construction with excellent oversight by the Agency.
______
Prepared Statement of Aurora Water
Dear Chairwoman Feinstein and Senator Alexander: I request your
support for an appropriation for fiscal year 2013 of $8,387,000 to the
Bureau of Reclamation within the budget line item entitled ``Endangered
Species Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado
Region, consistent with the President's recommended budget. Substantial
non-Federal cost-sharing funding is occurring pursuant to Public Law
106-392, as amended. This appropriation will allow continued funding in
fiscal year 2013 for the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery
Program and the San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program as
authorized by Public Law 106-392. 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.
The requested Federal appropriations are critically important to
these efforts moving forward. The past support of your subcommittee has
greatly facilitated the success of these multistate, multiagency
programs. I thank you for the subcommittee's past support and request
the subcommittee's assistance for fiscal year 2013 funding to ensure
the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial participation in these
vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of Board of Water Works of Pueblo, Colorado
Dear Chairwoman Feinstein and Senator Alexander: I request your
support for an appropriation for fiscal year 2013 of $8,387,000 to the
Bureau of Reclamation within the budget line item entitled ``Endangered
Species Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado
Region, consistent with the President's recommended budget. Substantial
non-Federal cost-sharing funding is occurring pursuant to Public Law
106-392, as amended. This appropriation will allow continued funding in
fiscal year 2013 for the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery
Program and the San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program as
authorized by Public Law 106-392. 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.
The requested Federal appropriations are critically important to
these efforts moving forward. The past support of your subcommittee has
greatly facilitated the success of these multistate, multiagency
programs. I thank you for the subcommittee's past support and request
the subcommittee's assistance for fiscal year 2013 funding to ensure
the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial participation in these
vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of Central Utah Water Conservancy District
Dear Chairwoman Feinstein and Senator Alexander: I request your
support for an appropriation for fiscal year 2013 of $8,387,000 to the
Bureau of Reclamation within the budget line item entitled ``Endangered
Species Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado
Region, consistent with the President's recommended budget. Substantial
non-Federal cost-sharing funding is occurring pursuant to Public Law
106-392, as amended. This appropriation will allow continued funding in
fiscal year 2013 for the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery
Program and the San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program as
authorized by Public Law 106-392. 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.
The requested Federal appropriations are critically important to
these efforts moving forward. The past support of your subcommittee has
greatly facilitated the success of these multistate, multiagency
programs. I thank you for the subcommittee's past support and request
the subcommittee's assistance for fiscal year 2013 funding to ensure
the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial participation in these
vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of City of Farmington
Dear Chairwoman Feinstein and Senator Alexander: I request your
support for an appropriation for fiscal year 2013 of $8,387,000 to the
Bureau of Reclamation within the budget line item entitled ``Endangered
Species Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado
Region, consistent with the President's recommended budget. Substantial
non-Federal cost-sharing funding is occurring pursuant to Public Law
106-392, as amended. This appropriation will allow continued funding in
fiscal year 2013 for the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery
Program and the San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program as
authorized by Public Law 106-392. 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.
The requested Federal appropriations are critically important to
these efforts moving forward. The past support of your subcommittee has
greatly facilitated the success of these multistate, multiagency
programs. I thank you for the subcommittee's past support and request
the subcommittee's assistance for fiscal year 2013 funding to ensure
the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial participation in these
vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum
Waters from the Colorado River are used by approximately 35 million
people for municipal and industrial purposes and used to irrigate
approximately 4 million acres in the United States. Natural and man-
induced salt loading to the Colorado River creates environmental and
economic damages. The Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) has estimated the
current quantifiable damages at about $300 million per year. The
Congress authorized the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program
(Program) in 1974 to offset increased damages caused by continued
development and use of the waters of the Colorado River. Modeling by
BOR indicates that the quantifiable damages would rise to more than
$500 million by the year 2030 without continuation of the Program. The
Congress has directed the Secretary of the Interior to implement a
comprehensive program for minimizing salt contributions to the Colorado
River. BOR serves as the lead Federal agency in implementing the
program. BOR primarily institutes salinity control through its
Basinwide Program. Funding levels have fallen behind in recent years,
and a funding level of $14.5 million is required in fiscal year 2013 to
prevent further degradation of the quality of the Colorado River and
increased downstream economic damages.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has identified that more than
60 percent of the salt load of the Colorado River comes from natural
sources. The majority of land within the Colorado River Basin is
administered by Bureau of Land Management (BLM). In implementing the
Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act (Act) in 1974, the Congress
recognized that most of the salts in the Colorado River originate from
federally owned lands. Title I of the Salinity Control Act deals with
the United States commitment to the quality of waters being delivered
to Mexico. Title II of the Act deals with improving the quality of the
water delivered to U.S. users. This testimony deals specific with title
II efforts. In the early years of the program, BOR implemented salinity
control in large projects which were funded with specific line item
amounts. In 1995, the Congress amended the act and created BOR's
Basinwide Program. Under this program, BOR funds proposals which will
decrease the salt load to the Colorado River. Most of the received
proposals target off-farm irrigation distribution systems such as
canals and laterals. It is generally more efficient for BOR to perform
the off-farm distribution system improvements prior to Natural
Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) treating the on-farm acres with
salinity control practices (i.e., BOR pipe a canal or lateral prior to
NRCS putting a pressurized sprinkler system on farm). Shortfalls in
recent basinwide funding have led to inefficiencies in the
implementation of the overall program. The funding amount identified
above and in the graph below are required to get the Basinwide Program
back on pace with the overall program implementation.
Concentrations of salt in the Colorado River cause approximately
$300 million in quantified damages and significantly more in
unquantified damages in the United States and result in poor water
quality for United States users. 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 cost of cooling operations 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; and
--increased use of imported water for leaching and cost of
desalination and brine disposal for recycled water.
The Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum (Forum) is composed
of gubernatorial appointees from Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada,
New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming. The Forum is charged with reviewing the
Colorado River's water quality standards for salinity every 3 years. In
so doing, it adopts a Plan of Implementation consistent with these
standards. The Plan of Implementation, as adopted by the States and
approved by EPA, calls for 368,000 tons of additional salinity control
measures to be implemented by BOR by 2030, or approximately 20,000 tons
of new control each year. Based on current cost levels, BOR's funding
under its Basinwide Program needs to be $14.5 million. The level of
appropriation requested in this testimony is in keeping with the
adopted Plan of Implementation. 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.
basinwide program: funding based on controlling 19,763 t/yr beginning
in fiscal year 2013
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
In summary, implementation of salinity control practices through
BOR's Basinwide Program has proven to be a very cost-effective method
of controlling the salinity of the Colorado River and is an essential
component to the overall Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program.
Continuation of adequate funding levels for salinity within this
program will prevent the water quality of the Colorado River from
further degradation and significant increases in economic damages to
municipal, industrial, and irrigation users.
______
Prepared Statement of the Colorado River Board of California
This testimony is in support of fiscal year 2013 funding for the
Department of the Interior for the title II Colorado River Basin
Salinity Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-320). In the Act, the
Congress designated the Department of the Interior, Bureau of
Reclamation (BOR) to be the lead agency for salinity control in the
Colorado River Basin. For nearly 28 years this very successful and
cost-effective program has been carried out pursuant to the Colorado
River Basin Salinity Control Act and the Clean Water Act (Public Law
92-500). California's Colorado River water users are presently
suffering economic damages in the hundreds of millions of dollars per
year due to the River's salinity.
The Colorado River Board of California (Board) is the State agency
charged with protecting California's interests and rights in the water
and power resources of the Colorado River system. In this capacity,
California participates along with the other six Colorado River Basin
states through the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum (Forum),
the interstate organization responsible for coordinating the Basin
States' salinity control efforts. In close cooperation with the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and pursuant to requirements of
the Clean Water Act, the Forum is charged with reviewing the Colorado
River's water quality standards every 3 years. The Forum adopts a Plan
of Implementation consistent with these water-quality standards. The
level of appropriation being supported by this testimony is consistent
with the Forum's ``2011 Plan of Implementation'' for continued salinity
control efforts within the Colorado River Basin. If adequate funds are
not appropriated to BOR's Basinwide Program, significant damages
associated with increasing salinity concentrations of Colorado River
water will become more widespread in the United States and Mexico.
The Plan of Implementation, as adopted by the States and approved
by EPA, calls for 368,000 tons of additional salinity control measures
to be implemented by BOR by 2030, or approximately 20,000 tons of
additional salinity control measures each year. Based on current
program cost levels, BOR's funding under its Basinwide Program needs to
be at least $14.5 million. This level of appropriation requested in
this testimony is in keeping with the adopted ``2011 Plan of
Implementation''.
Waters from the Colorado River are used by approximately 35 million
people for municipal and industrial purposes and used to irrigate
approximately 4 million acres of agricultural lands in the United
States. Currently, the salinity concentration of Colorado River water
causes about $300 million in quantifiable damages in the United States
annually. Economic and hydrologic modeling by BOR indicates that the
quantifiable damages could rise to more than $500 million by the year
2030 without the continuation of Basinwide salinity control measures as
identified in the ``2011 Plan of Implementation''. Significant
unquantified damages also occur. For example, 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, an increase in desalination and brine
disposal costs due to accumulation of salts in groundwater
basins, and fewer opportunities for recycling and reuse of the
water due to groundwater quality deterioration; and
--increased use of imported water for leaching and the cost of
desalination and brine disposal for recycled water.
Some of the most cost-effective salinity control opportunities
occur when BOR can improve irrigation delivery systems in a coordinated
fashion with the activities of the U.S. Department of Agriculture's
(USDA) programs working with landowners to improve on-farm irrigation
systems. With the USDA's Environmental Quality Incentive Program, more
on-farm funds are available and it continues to be important to ensure
that there are adequate BOR funds available to maximize BOR's
effectiveness in addressing water delivery system improvements.
Shortfalls in recent Basinwide Program funding have led to
inefficiencies in the implementation of the overall salinity control
program. The funding amount identified above, and in the following
graph, are required to get the Basinwide Program back on pace with the
implementation schedule identified in the ``2011 Plan of
Implementation''.
basinwide program: funding based on controlling 19,763 t/yr beginning
in fiscal year 2013
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
In addition, the Colorado River Board recognizes that the Federal
Government has made significant commitments to the Republic of Mexico
and to the seven Colorado River Basin States with regard to the
delivery of quality water pursuant to the 1944 Water Treaty with
Mexico. In order for those commitments to be honored, it is essential
that in fiscal year 2013, and in future fiscal years, that the Congress
provide funds to the BOR for the continued operation of current
projects.
The Colorado River is, and will continue to be, a major and vital
water resource to the nearly 20 million residents of southern
California, including municipal, industrial, and agricultural water
users in Ventura, Los Angeles, San Bernardino, Orange, Riverside, San
Diego, and Imperial counties. The protection and improvement of
Colorado River water quality through an effective salinity control
program will avoid the additional economic damages to users in
California and the other States that rely on the Colorado River.
______
Prepared Statement of the Colorado River Energy Distributors
Association
Dear Chairwoman Feinstein and Senator Alexander: We request your
support for an appropriation for fiscal year 2013 of $8,387,000 to the
Bureau of Reclamation within the budget line item entitled ``Endangered
Species Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado
Region, consistent with the President's recommended budget. Substantial
non-Federal cost-sharing funding is occurring pursuant to Public Law
106-392, as amended. This appropriation will allow continued funding in
fiscal year 2013 for the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery
Program and the San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program as
authorized by Public Law 106-392. 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.
The requested Federal appropriations are critically important to
these efforts moving forward. The past support of your subcommittee has
greatly facilitated the success of these multistate, multiagency
programs. We thank you for the subcommittee's past support and request
the subcommittee's assistance for fiscal year 2013 funding to ensure
the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial participation in these
vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Colorado River Energy Distributors
Association
Dear Chairwoman Feinstein and Ranking Member Alexander: On behalf
of the Colorado River Energy Distributors Association (CREDA), I
respectfully request that the subcommittee appropriate $11,387,000 to
maintain capital projects and base funding activities for the Upper
Colorado River and San Juan River Recovery Implementation Programs
(RIP).
CREDA is a nonprofit organization representing consumer-owned
utilities, political subdivisions, State agencies, tribes and rural
electric cooperative utilities in Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, New
Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming, serving more than 4 million electric
consumers. CREDA's member utilities purchase more than 85 percent of
the power produced by the Glen Canyon, Flaming Gorge, Aspinall Unit
Dams, and other features of the Colorado River Storage Project (CRSP).
As purchasers of the power generated at CRSP facilities, CREDA's
members pay more than 95 percent of the costs of these multipurpose
projects. Changes in the operation of these facilities to provide for
the recovery of the endangered fish have resulted in significant costs
to the power users.
CREDA members are willing participants in the recovery programs,
which have been a model of Federal/non-Federal collaboration and
participation. However, the most recent authorization (Public Law 106-
392) to use CRSP power revenues to provide annual base funding for the
RIP expired at the end of fiscal year 2011. There is currently no
legislative authorization to use CRSP power revenues for other than
those activities authorized by Public Law 106-392. However,
stakeholders continue to seek legislation to extend the use of CRSP
power revenues for base funding from fiscal year 2012-2019.
CREDA is extremely troubled by the administration's fiscal year
2013 Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) budget which says, ``In the absence of
legislation to extend this specific authority, BOR may rely on existing
authority to continue the use of CRSP power revenues or use
appropriated funds to ensure full base funding.'' It is inappropriate
for the administration to continue use of power revenues without a
specific authorization, and despite repeated inquiries CREDA has not
been informed by BOR what ``existing authority'' is being referred to
in the budget request language.
To maintain uninterrupted annual/base funding for the RIP, CREDA
supports Federal appropriations in the amount of $11,387,000 to fund
not only the administration's request for capital projects, but an
additional nonreimbursable $3 million for base funding activities.
CREDA requests that, in the absence of a specific authorization, the
subcommittee expressly prohibit the use of CRSP power revenues for
activities beyond those authorized by Public Law 106-392.
We request your support for an appropriation for fiscal year 2013
of $8,387,000 to the BOR within the budget line item entitled
``Endangered Species Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper
Colorado Region, consistent with the President's recommended budget.
Substantial non-Federal cost-sharing funding is occurring pursuant to
Public Law 106-392, as amended. This appropriation will allow continued
funding in fiscal year 2013 for the Upper Colorado River Endangered
Fish Recovery Program and the San Juan River Basin Recovery
Implementation Program as authorized by Public Law 106-392. 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.
The requested Federal appropriations are critically important to
these efforts moving forward. The past support of your subcommittee has
greatly facilitated the success of these multistate, multiagency
programs. We thank you for the subcommittee's past support and request
the subcommittee's assistance for fiscal year 2013 funding to ensure
the BOR's continuing financial participation in these vitally important
programs.
______
Prepared Statement of Colorado Springs Utilities
Dear Chairwoman Feinstein and Senator Alexander: I request your
support for an appropriation for fiscal year 2013 of $8,387,000 to the
Bureau of Reclamation within the budget line item entitled ``Endangered
Species Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado
Region, consistent with the President's recommended budget. Substantial
non-Federal cost-sharing funding is occurring pursuant to Public Law
106-392, as amended. This appropriation will allow continued funding in
fiscal year 2013 for the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery
Program and the San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program as
authorized by Public Law 106-392. 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.
The requested Federal appropriations are critically important to
these efforts moving forward. The past support of your subcommittee has
greatly facilitated the success of these multistate, multiagency
programs. I thank you for the subcommittee's past support and request
the subcommittee's assistance for fiscal year 2013 funding to ensure
the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial participation in these
vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Colorado Water Congress
Dear Chairwoman Feinstein and Senator Alexander: I request your
support for an appropriation for fiscal year 2013 of $8,387,000 to the
Bureau of Reclamation within the budget line item entitled ``Endangered
Species Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado
Region, consistent with the President's recommended budget. Substantial
non-Federal cost-sharing funding is occurring pursuant to Public Law
106-392, as amended. This appropriation will allow continued funding in
fiscal year 2013 for the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery
Program and the San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program as
authorized by Public Law 106-392. 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.
The requested Federal appropriations are critically important to
these efforts moving forward. The past support of your subcommittee has
greatly facilitated the success of these multistate, multiagency
programs. I thank you for the subcommittee's past support and request
the subcommittee's assistance for fiscal year 2013 funding to ensure
the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial participation in these
vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of Denver Water
Dear Chairwoman Feinstein and Senator Alexander: On behalf of
Denver Water, I request your support for an appropriation for fiscal
year 2013 of $8,387,000 to the Bureau of Reclamation within the budget
line item entitled ``Endangered Species Recovery Implementation
Program'' for the Upper Colorado Region, consistent with the
President's recommended budget. Substantial non-Federal cost-sharing
funding is occurring pursuant to Public Law 106-392, as amended. This
appropriation will allow continued funding in fiscal year 2013 for the
Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program and the San Juan
River Basin Recovery Implementation Program as authorized by Public Law
106-392. 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.
The requested Federal appropriations are critically important to
these efforts moving forward. The past support of your subcommittee has
greatly facilitated the success of these multistate, multiagency
programs. I thank you for the subcommittee's past support and request
the subcommittee's assistance for fiscal year 2013 funding to ensure
the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial participation in these
vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of Grand Valley Water Users' Association
Dear Chairwoman Feinstein and Senator Alexander: I request your
support for an appropriation for fiscal year 2013 of $8,387,000 to the
Bureau of Reclamation within the budget line item entitled ``Endangered
Species Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado
Region, consistent with the President's recommended budget. Substantial
non-Federal cost-sharing funding is occurring pursuant to Public Law
106-392, as amended. This appropriation will allow continued funding in
fiscal year 2013 for the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery
Program and the San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program as
authorized by Public Law 106-392. 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.
The requested Federal appropriations are critically important to
these efforts moving forward. The past support of your subcommittee has
greatly facilitated the success of these multistate, multiagency
programs. I thank you for the subcommittee's past support and request
the subcommittee's assistance for fiscal year 2013 funding to ensure
the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial participation in these
vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of Irrigation and Electrical Districts Association
of Arizona
The Irrigation and Electrical Districts Association of Arizona
(IEDA) is pleased to present written testimony regarding the fiscal
year 2013 proposed budgets for the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) and the
Western Area Power Administration (WAPA).
IEDA is an Arizona nonprofit association whose 25 members and
associate members receive water from the Colorado River directly or
through the facilities of the Central Arizona Project (CAP) and
purchase hydropower from Federal facilities on the Colorado River
either directly from WAPA or, in the case of the Boulder Canyon
Project, from the Arizona Power Authority, the State agency that
markets Arizona's share of power from Hoover Dam. IEDA was founded in
1962 and continues in its 50th year to represent water and power
interests of Arizona political subdivisions and other public power
providers and their consumers.
bureau of reclamation
IEDA has reviewed the BOR budget and found, not unexpectedly, that
it does not address the enormous backlog of needs of the agency's aging
infrastructure. We support the important projects and programs that are
included in the proposed budget. We are especially mindful that the
Yuma Desalting Plant is an essential element of the problem solving
mechanisms being put in place for the Colorado River and especially the
Lower Colorado River. Problem solving on the Lower Colorado River will
be substantially improved by using the plant as a management element.
We also wish to call to the subcommittee's attention to several
other issues of concern to us and Arizona water and power customers.
First, we are concerned that the Congress has not extended the
Upper Colorado River Recovery Implementation Plan. That Plan focuses on
recovering three endangered fish in the Colorado River and its
tributaries above Lake Powell. It is a three-party agreement:
--Federal agencies with appropriations;
--monies from the four Upper Colorado River Basin States (Colorado,
New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming); and
--power revenues from our members and other Colorado River Storage
Project customers.
Without the extension there are no Federal appropriation dollars to
continue the program. This breaks the ``deal'' that we cut to keep the
Endangered Species Act (ESA) from being used to attack our water and
hydropower. No money, no plan. BOR appropriations should be provided
but, if not, the subcommittee should recognize that the Plan is
suspended and neither the power users nor the States have any
obligation to continue it. BOR shouldn't try to backdoor money for this
use. The subcommittee should hold them accountable.
Second, we continue to be concerned about BOR's spending on post-9/
11 security costs. The Congress gave BOR specific directions on this
subject several years ago. That included adjustments for declines in
the Consumer Price Index and non-reimbursability of certain costs.
However, the Congress did not instruct BOR with regard to how this
program should be implemented. Like many reaction programs, this
program experienced some overreaction. We believe a close review of the
ongoing levels of staffing and other expenses is in order.
western area power administration
IEDA has reviewed the proposed budget for the WAPA. We wish to call
the subcommittee's attention to the limited appropriation for
construction funding proposed for fiscal year 2013. We believe this
shortfall is irresponsible. WAPA has more than 17,000 miles of
transmission line for which it is responsible. It has on the order of
14,000 megawatts of generation being considered for construction that
would depend on that Federal network. The existing transmission
facilities cannot handle all of these proposals. Moreover, the region
is projected, by all utilities operating in the region, to be short of
available generation in the 10-year planning window that utilities and
Western use.
The appropriation proposed in this category cannot come even close
to keeping existing transmission construction going. Repairs and
replacements will have to be postponed and considerable hardships to
local utilities that depend on the Federal network are bound to occur.
In WAPA's Desert Southwest Region, our region, work necessary just to
maintain system reliability will have to be postponed.
The President's budget, once again, assumes that unmet capital
formation needs will be made up by WAPA's customers. We would be the
first to support additional customer financing of Federal facilities
and expenses through the Contributed Funds Act authority under BOR law
that is available to WAPA. However, programs utilizing non-Federal
capital formation require years to develop. One such program that was
proposed by the Arizona Power Authority in a partnership with Western
died because it was enmeshed in bureaucratic red tape at the Department
of Energy. There is no way that WAPA customers can develop contracts,
have them reviewed, gain approval of these contracts from WAPA and
their own governing bodies, find financing on Wall Street and have
monies available for the next fiscal year. It is just impossible,
especially in this economy. Moreover, scoring and ``cut/go'' rules are
providing major disincentives for WAPA's customers and others in this
regard.
There also are impediments to using existing Federal laws in
facilitating non-Federal financing of Federal facilities and repairs to
Federal facilities and the Congress should examine them. Artificially
designating customer funding for construction, in lieu of real
solutions, is bad public policy and should not be countenanced. We urge
the subcommittee to restore a reasonable amount of additional
construction funding to WAPA so it can continue to do its job in
keeping its transmission systems functioning and completing the tasks
that it has in the pipeline that are critical to its customers
throughout the West.
However, there is one subject about which we urge you not to
provide funding. On March 16, 2012, Secretary of Energy Steven Chu
announced that WAPA would be participating in a gigantic Energy
Imbalance Market (EIM) in the Western United States. This is an
untested, unanalyzed, unproven boondoggle being promoted to force
utilities in the West to add layer upon layer of bureaucracy over their
existing operations, when doing so elsewhere has only escalated
electricity costs and hampered economic recovery. We urge you to
expressly prohibit WAPA from funding this attack on the West's economy
and require peer-reviewed scientific and economic analysis before any
money is spent to facilitate WAPA's participation in an EIM.
conclusion
Thank you for the opportunity to submit this written testimony. If
we can provide any additional information or be of any other service to
the subcommittee, please do not hesitate to get in touch with us.
______
Prepared Statement of The Jicarilla Apache Nation
Dear Chairwoman Feinstein and Senator Alexander: On behalf of the
Jicarilla Apache Nation, I request your support for an appropriation
for fiscal year 2013 of $8,387,000 to the Bureau of Reclamation within
the budget line item entitled ``Endangered Species Recovery
Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado Region, consistent with
the President's recommended budget. Substantial non-Federal cost-
sharing funding is occurring pursuant to Public Law 106-392, as
amended. This appropriation will allow continued funding in fiscal year
2013 for the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program and
the San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program as authorized
by Public Law 106-392. 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.
Jicarilla has been an active participant in these programs since
1992 and the requested Federal appropriations are critically important
to these efforts moving forward. The past support of your subcommittee
has greatly facilitated the success of these multistate, multiagency
programs. I thank you for the subcommittee's past support and request
the subcommittee's assistance for fiscal year 2013 funding to ensure
the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial participation in these
vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Oglala Sioux Rural Water Supply System; West
River/Lyman Jones Rural Water System; Rosebud Rural Water System; and
the Lower Brule Rural Water System
fiscal year 2013 request
The Mni Wiconi Project beneficiaries respectfully request $23.137
million in appropriations for construction and $12.224 million for
operation, maintenance, and replacement (OMR) activities for fiscal
year 2012, a total request of $35.361 million:
FISCAL YEAR 2013 TOTAL REQUEST
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Construction............................................ $23,137,000
OMR..................................................... 12,224,000
---------------
Total............................................. 35,361,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The construction request includes $0.960 million for Bureau of
Reclamation oversight, and the OMR request includes $1.447 million for
oversight.
construction funds
Construction funds would be utilized as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Construction
Project area request fiscal
year 2013
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oglala Sioux Rural Water Supply System:
Core................................................ ( \1\ )
Distribution........................................ $13,838,000
West River/Lyman-Jones RWS.............................. 2,231,000
Rosebud RWS............................................. 7,068,000
---------------
Total............................................. 23,137,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Complete.
As shown in the table below, the project will be 95-percent
complete at the end of fiscal year 2012. Construction funds remaining
after fiscal year 2012 will total $23.137 million within the current
authorization (in October 2010 dollars). The funds will not be adequate
to complete the project as originally planned.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Federal Construction Funding (October 2011 $471,300,000
dollars)...............................................
Estimated Federal spent through fiscal year 2012........ $448,163,000
Percent spent through fiscal year 2012.................. 95.09%
Amount remaining after 2012 (estimated 2013 dollars).... $23,137,000
Completion fiscal year (Statutory Fiscal Year 2013; 2013
Public Law 110-161)....................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost indexing over the last 5 years has averaged 4.72 percent for
pipelines and last year was 7.83 percent. Pipelines are the principal
components yet to be completed (see following chart).
rate of construction cost increase for annual and 5-year running
averages since 1992, bureau of reclamation
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The extension of the project from 2008 to 2013 did not provide for
budgeting of Reclamation oversight, administration and other
``overhead'' costs, which will total $22.472 million by the end of
2013. These costs have been and will continue to be incurred at the
expense of construction elements. The slow pace of budgeting and
appropriations has caused the diminishment of construction elements to
cover non-construction overhead costs.
The support of the administration to allocate adequate
discretionary funds in fiscal year 2012 and budget adequately for
fiscal year 2013 to enable the allocation of remaining authorized funds
is recognized and greatly appreciated.
The request will create an estimated 210 full-time equivalent (FTE)
construction jobs and 94 OMR jobs in an area of the nation with the
lowest per capita income and deepest poverty.
Poverty is the harbinger of the severe healthcare crisis facing the
Indian people in the Northern Great Plains. The present value of extra
costs of healthcare during the lifetime of each 24,000 members of the
Indian population in the Mni Wiconi Project is estimated at $1.12 to
$2.25 billion (in 2010 dollars). The costs are based on extraordinarily
high rates of mortality due to heart disease, cancer and diabetes. The
Mni Wiconi Project has the direct effect of employing part of our
unemployed and underemployed Indian population and creates the
necessary infrastructure for more employment in indirect commercial and
industrial development. This will reduce poverty, mortality, and the
national cost burden of Indian healthcare.
oglala sioux rural water supply system
Core System
The Oglala Sioux Tribe has completed the core system that serves
all distribution systems of West River/Lyman-Jones, the Rosebud Sioux
Tribe, the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe, and the Oglala Sioux Tribe.
Distribution System
The Pine Ridge Indian Reservation will continue to receive more
water from the Oglala Sioux Rural Water Supply System (OSRWSS) core
system in fiscal year 2012. Major segments of the main transmission
system will be completed across the Reservation and connect many of the
larger communities with safe and adequate drinking water. OSRWSS
pipelines now deliver water from the Missouri River to the communities
of Georgetown, Wanblee, Crazy Horse School, Lakota Fund Housing, and
Potato Creek Community and the large number of rural homes between the
communities. The communities of Hisle, Kyle, Manderson, Red Shirt,
Porcupine, and Wounded Knee can be served with Missouri River water by
the end of 2012.
Fiscal year 2013 will be another historic year, but considerable
work remains to distribute the water supply throughout the Reservation.
More than 40 percent of the project's population resides on the Pine
Ridge Indian Reservation, and only 85 percent of the distribution
system will be complete at the end of 2012. The Reservation public
received its first Missouri River supply in 2009 after waiting 15 years
for construction of core facilities to the Reservation.
Project funds in fiscal year 2013 will continue building the on-
Reservation transmission system. Funding will be used for transmission
and service line development east of Pine Ridge Village between
Wakpamni, Batesland, and Allen and south toward the Nebraska State
line. This area has been deferred in the past due to funding
constraints. The supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA)
facilities will be installed with state-of-the-art electronic
equipment.
As set forth above, activity on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation
in fiscal year 2013 continues to focus on constructing the transmission
system that serves as the ``backbone'' of the Project on the
Reservation from the White River in the northeast corner of the
Reservation to Pine Ridge Village. The Tribe will continue focus on the
disinfection requirements to blend Missouri River water and high-
quality groundwater without creating harmful contaminants. State-of-
the-art designs are being implemented for water quality control.
The Oglala Sioux Tribe is supportive of the funding request of
other sponsors.
west river/lyman-jones rural water system
West River/Lyman-Jones (WR/LJ) RWS projects for fiscal year 2013
include standby generation facilities, storage reservoirs, SCADA, and
cold storage additions.
The upper Midwest and specifically the Mni Wiconi project area
regularly experience power outages as the result of winter weather
conditions. Regulatory authorities in South Dakota have recommended
standby generation as the result of statewide power outages experienced
during the winters of 2005-2006 and 2009-2010. The Bureau of
Reclamation has concurred in the addition of standby generation to the
Mni Wiconi plan of work. WR/LJ has outlined a 3-year standby generation
project schedule.
Water storage needs include an elevated tower in the Reliance
service area, a ground storage reservoir in Mellette County, and
supplemental storage in the Elbon service area.
SCADA capability provides accurate and efficient transmission of
data and allows remote control of pumping and storage facilities. The
WR/LJ SCADA system will be completed using the requested funding.
Storage facilities at the Murdo and Philip operations centers will
complete the building components of the WR/LJ project.
Previous Federal appropriations to the Mni Wiconi project have made
possible the delivery of much needed quality water to members of the
West River/Lyman-Jones RWS and to the livestock industry in the project
area. This would not have been possible without State and Federal
assistance.
rosebud sioux rural water system
The Rosebud Sioux Tribe is faced with difficult decisions on how
best to use the remaining authorized construction ceiling for the
Rosebud Sioux Rural Water System or Sicangu Mni Wiconi. It has been
more than 20 years since the tribe completed its Needs Assessment and
engineering plan. There have been significant changes in the tribe's
development plans and their water resources since 1993. The use of the
remaining $7.068 million in construction funding strikes a balance
between recent developments and original plan developed 20 years ago.
The majority of funds will go toward completion of the Sicangu
Village Pipeline. This project extends the water system to the new
housing area being developed in the southern portion of the Reservation
near the Nebraska border. While potential demands for this area were
included in the original plan a pipeline from the north was not
envisioned because it was believed that the High Plains (also known as
``Ogallala'') aquifer was capable of providing a reliable source of
high-quality water. Development of local wells has proven otherwise and
the increased demands have required bringing surface water south to the
area.
While lack of sufficient yield from the aquifer is the primary
problem at Sicangu Village, the problem is exacerbated by high
concentrations of nitrates at two schools north of the housing area.
The tribe is attempting to leverage Mni Wiconi funding with Indian
Health Service and Environmental Protection Agency funds to address the
issue and provide water that meets primary safe drinking water
standards for the schools.
The last major project in fiscal year 2013 will be the replacement
of the treatment facility for the Rosebud well field. This facility was
constructed prior to Mni Wiconi and is ``showing its age''. While the
facility has been used since 1997 as a core component of the Sicangu
Mni Wiconi and even treated water that was exported to the WR/LJ
service area, the Bureau's current policy does not allow for
replacement under the replacement, additions, and extraordinary (RAX)
maintenance program. The project completion plan proposed by the
project sponsors would allow RAX funding under the OMR portion of the
appropriations to be used to upgrade existing system components such as
this and allow construction funds to be used for completion of the
distribution system.
The remainder of the authorized ceiling and fiscal year 2013
appropriations will be used for small additions to the distribution
system and service lines and connections, all of which are constructed
through the Tribe's force account program.
operation, maintenance, and replacement
The sponsors will continue to work with Reclamation to ensure that
their budgets are adequate to properly operate, maintain, and replace
respective portions of the core and distribution systems. The sponsors
will also continue to manage OMR expenses. The administration's budget
for fiscal year 2013 is virtually the same as requested by the
sponsors.
FISCAL YEAR 2013 OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, AND REPLACEMENT
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Project area Request
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oglala Sioux Rural Water Supply System:
Core................................................ $3,440,000
Distribution........................................ 3,400,000
Lower Brule............................................. 1,560,000
Rosebud RWS............................................. 2,377,000
Reclamation............................................. 1,447,000
---------------
Total............................................. 12,224,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The project has been treating and delivering more water each year
from the OSRWSS Water Treatment Plant near Fort Pierre as construction
has advanced in the Rosebud, WR/LJ, and Oglala service areas.
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
95-percent completion. The OMR budget must be adequate to keep pace
with the system that is placed in operation.
With completion of construction imminent in fiscal year 2013,
emphasis will shift to operation, maintenance, and replacement as the
primary budgeting need. Adherence to a proper level of operation,
maintenance, and replacement funding is manifest. Budgeting by the
United States to ensure that aging features of the constructed project
are protected is not only sensible but properly executes the
responsibilities of the United States as trustee to the Indian people.
While the budgeting by the administration was adequate this year,
budgeting has not been adequate in several of the past years. The
concern is that aging components of critical project facilities will
not be properly repaired and replaced due to budget limitations.
The Lower Brule Rural Water System (LBRWS) is essentially complete
with all major components such as the water treatment plant, booster
stations, and tanks/reservoirs in full operation. As a result, LBRWS's
operation and maintenance portion of the budget has reached a baseline
amount to which only slight adjustments along with inflation should be
made each year. The portion of the LBRWS OM&R budget that is somewhat
variable is the RAX maintenance items. LBRWS will continue to work with
the Bureau of Reclamation and the other sponsors to prioritize their
needs and ensure that their system is operating to the standards that
have been established over the past several years. With that in mind,
the LBRWS request for OM&R for fiscal year 2013 is $1,560,000.
The RSRWS expanded the areas served from surface water
significantly in 2011 and 2012. In 2012 the connections to provide
surface water to the town of Mission were completed. Early in fiscal
year 2013 the pipeline and pumping station delivering surface water to
Sicangu Village will be completed. The new pumping stations increase
operational costs for energy, maintenance, and personnel. In addition,
energy costs increases have significantly impacted Rosebud for
electrical costs and vehicle expenses. With the oldest parts of the
system in service for 15 years replacement costs covered under RAX are
also becoming more significant. RAX funds must be included in the Mni
Wiconi Project appropriations because they are not funded through the
Bureau's RAX program.
OSRWSS will incur costs of replacement and sludge removal at the
water treatment plant in fiscal year 2013. The Reclamation budget does
not provide for routine replacements, which threatens the capital
investment in the project. OSRWSS needs to replace 12 flocculation
drives, 8 effluent valves, 2 pump variable frequency drive pumps,
chemical feed pumps, and numerous other parts that Reclamation only
includes in its RAX account for extraordinary, not routine maintenance.
The replacement costs in our request are $958,000, which will ensure
that obsolete parts are traded out. The balance of the $3.440 million
request is for normal operation and maintenance. Further, OSRWSS staff
will anticipate a salary adjustment to accommodate competitive wages
for South Dakota.
The on-reservation OSRWSS OMR expenses will be substantially higher
with higher pumping rates, unanticipated costs with pump houses repair
and higher water consumption as new systems are built and communities
are connected. On-reservation staff will anticipate a salary adjustment
to accommodate competitive wages for South Dakota as their jobs have
become more technical, which requires a higher base wage. On-
reservation has not received RAX money since fiscal year 2009 so there
is a back log of items that fall in RAX maintenance.
The Mni Wiconi Project tribal beneficiaries respectfully request
appropriations for OMR in fiscal year 2013 in the amount of $12.224
million, which is virtually the same as the President's budget.
______
Prepared Statement of The Nature Conservancy
Dear Chairwoman Feinstein and Senator Alexander: I request your
support for an appropriation for fiscal year 2013 of $8,387,000 to the
U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) within the budget line item
entitled ``Endangered Species Recovery Implementation Program'' for the
Upper Colorado Region, consistent with the President's recommended
budget. Substantial non-Federal cost-sharing funding is occurring
pursuant to Public Law 106-392, as amended. This appropriation will
allow continued funding in fiscal year 2013 for the Upper Colorado
River Endangered Fish Recovery Program and the San Juan River Recovery
Implementation Program as authorized by Public Law 106-392. 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.
I thank you for the subcommittee's past support and request the
subcommittee's assistance for fiscal year 2013 funding to ensure
Reclamation's continuing financial participation in these vitally
important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District
Dear Chairwoman Feinstein and Senator Alexander: I request your
support for an appropriation for fiscal year 2013 of $8,387,000 to the
Bureau of Reclamation within the budget line item entitled ``Endangered
Species Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado
Region, consistent with the President's recommended budget. Substantial
non-Federal cost-share funding is occurring pursuant to Public Law 106-
392 as amended. This appropriation will allow continued funding in
fiscal year 2013 for the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery
Program and the San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program as
authorized by Public Law 106-392. 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.
The requested Federal appropriations are critically important to
these efforts moving forward. The past support of your subcommittee has
greatly facilitated the success of these multistate, multiagency
programs. I thank you for the subcommittee's past support and request
the subcommittee's assistance for fiscal year 2013 funding to ensure
the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial participation in these
vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the San Juan Water Commission
Dear Chairwoman Feinstein and Senator Alexander: I request your
support for an appropriation for fiscal year 2013 of $8,387,000 to the
Bureau of Reclamation within the budget line item entitled ``Endangered
Species Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado
Region, consistent with the President's recommended budget. Substantial
non-Federal cost-sharing funding is occurring pursuant to Public Law
106-392, as amended. This appropriation will allow continued funding in
fiscal year 2013 for the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery
Program and the San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program as
authorized by Public Law 106-392. 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.
The requested Federal appropriations are critically important to
these efforts moving forward. The past support of your subcommittee has
greatly facilitated the success of these multistate, multiagency
programs. I thank you for the subcommittee's past support and request
the subcommittee's assistance for fiscal year 2013 funding to ensure
the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial participation in these
vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Southern Ute Indian Tribe
Dear Chairwoman Feinstein and Senator Alexander: On behalf of the
Southern Ute Indian Tribe, I am writing to request your support for an
appropriation for fiscal year 2013 of $8,387,000 to the Bureau of
Reclamation within the budget line item entitled ``Endangered Species
Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado Region,
consistent with the President's recommended budget. Substantial non-
Federal cost-sharing funding is occurring pursuant to Public Law 106-
392, as amended. This appropriation will allow continued funding in
fiscal year 2013 for the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery
Program and the San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program as
authorized by Public Law 106-392. These two successful, ongoing,
cooperative partnership programs involve the States of Colorado, New
Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming; the Southern Ute Indian Tribe; the Ute
Mountain Ute Indian Tribe; the Navajo Nation; the Jicarilla Apache
Nation; Federal agencies; and water, power, and environmental
interests.
The requested Federal appropriations are critically important to
these efforts moving forward. The past support of your subcommittee has
greatly facilitated the success of these multistate, multiagency
programs. The Tribe thanks you for the subcommittee's past support and
requests the subcommittee's assistance for fiscal year 2013 funding to
ensure the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial participation
in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of The Southwestern Water Conservation District
Dear Chairwoman Feinstein and Senator Alexander: I request your
support for an appropriation for fiscal year 2013 of $8,387,000 to the
Bureau of Reclamation within the budget line item entitled ``Endangered
Species Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado
Region, consistent with the President's recommended budget. Substantial
non-Federal cost-sharing funding is occurring pursuant to Public Law
106-392, as amended. This appropriation will allow continued funding in
fiscal year 2013 for the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery
Program and the San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program as
authorized by Public Law 106-392. 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.
The requested Federal appropriations are critically important to
these efforts moving forward. The past support of your subcommittee has
greatly facilitated the success of these multistate, multiagency
programs. I thank you for the subcommittee's past support and request
the subcommittee's assistance for fiscal year 2013 funding to ensure
the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial participation in these
vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the State of Utah
Dear Chairwoman Feinstein and Senator Alexander: On behalf of the
State of Utah and Utah's Colorado River water users, I respectfully
request your support for the appropriation to the Bureau of Reclamation
for the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program and the
San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program. These two
programs are provided for in the budget line item entitled ``Endangered
Species Recovery Implementation Program''.
The Upper Colorado and San Juan recovery programs are highly
successful collaborative conservation partnerships working to recover
the four species of endemic Colorado River fish on the Federal
endangered species list; while at the same time water use and
development have been able to continue in our growing western
communities. These programs are unique efforts involving the States of
New Mexico, Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming; Indian tribes; Federal
agencies; and water, power, and environmental interests. They are
achieving Endangered Species Act (ESA) compliance for water projects
and fully complying the interstate river compacts and the participating
States' water law.
Since 1998, the two programs, collectively, have provided ESA
section 7 compliance (without litigation) for more than 2,100 Federal,
tribal, State, and privately managed water projects depleting more than
3.7 million acre-feet of water per year. Substantial non-Federal cost-
sharing funding exceeding 50 percent is embodied in both programs.
Each year in support of these two regionwide cooperative recovery
programs, the State of Utah requests the subcommittee's assistance. It
is absolutely essential that fiscal year 2013 funding be provided
within the Bureau of Reclamation's budget appropriation to assure that
agency's continued financial participation as directed by Public Law
106-392, as amended.
On behalf of the State of Utah, I thank you for the past support
and assistance of your subcommittee; it has greatly facilitated the
ongoing and continuing success of these multistate, multiagency
programs vital to providing water for Utah.
______
Prepared Statement of the State of Wyoming
Dear Chairwoman Feinstein and Senator Alexander: I am requesting
your support for fiscal year 2013 appropriations to the Bureau of
Reclamation for the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery
Program and the San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program.
These two programs are provided for in the budget line-item entitled
``Endangered Species Recovery Implementation Program''. The Upper
Colorado and San Juan recovery programs are highly successful
collaborative conservation partnerships working to recover the four
species of endemic Colorado River fish such that they can each be
removed from the Federal endangered species list. At the same time,
these programs have provided the means for water use and development to
continue in our growing western States.
These two programs are unique efforts involving the States of
Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming; Indian tribes; Federal
agencies; and water, power, and environmental interests. They continue
to achieve Endangered Species Act (ESA) compliance for Federal and non-
Federal water projects and are fully complying with interstate river
compacts and the participating States' water law. Recognizing the need
for fiscal responsibility, I must also point out that the participants
would all be spending much more in ESA-related costs in the absence of
these programs.
Since 1988, these programs, collectively, have provided ESA section
7 compliance (without litigation) for more than 2,300 Federal, tribal,
State, and privately managed water projects that use more than 3.72
million acre-feet of water per year. Substantial non-Federal cost-
sharing, which exceeds 50 percent, is embodied in both programs.
The State of Wyoming requests the subcommittee's assistance in
support of these two regionwide cooperative recovery programs each
year. It is essential that fiscal year 2013 funding be provided within
the Bureau of Reclamation's budget appropriation to assure that the
agency can continue to meet its financial participation requirements,
which were set forth in Public Law 106-392, as amended.
On behalf of the State of Wyoming, I thank you for your
consideration on my request. I also thank you for the past support and
assistance of your subcommittee, which have greatly facilitated the
ongoing and continuing success of these multistate, multiagency
programs that are vital to the recovery of the endangered fish and
providing necessary water supplies for the growing Intermountain West.
______
Prepared Statement of the Tri-County Water Conservancy District
Dear Chairwoman Feinstein and Senator Alexander: The Tri-County
Water Conservancy District Board requests your support for an
appropriation for fiscal year 2013 of $8,387,000 to the Bureau of
Reclamation within the budget line item entitled ``Endangered Species
Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado Region,
consistent with the President's recommended budget. Substantial non-
Federal cost-sharing funding is occurring pursuant to Public Law 106-
392, as amended. This appropriation will allow continued funding in
fiscal year 2013 for the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery
Program and the San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program as
authorized by Public Law 106-392. 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.
The requested Federal appropriations are critically important to
these efforts moving forward. The past support of your subcommittee has
greatly facilitated the success of these multistate, multiagency
programs. We thank you for the subcommittee's past support and request
the subcommittee's assistance for fiscal year 2013 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
Dear Chairwoman Feinstein and Senator Alexander: I request your
support for an appropriation for fiscal year 2013 of $8,387,000 to the
Bureau of Reclamation within the budget line item entitled ``Endangered
Species Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado
Region, consistent with the President's recommended budget. Substantial
non-Federal cost-sharing funding is occurring pursuant to Public Law
106-392, as amended. This appropriation will allow continued funding in
fiscal year 2013 for the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery
Program and the San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program as
authorized by Public Law 106-392. 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.
The requested Federal appropriations are critically important to
these efforts moving forward. The past support of your subcommittee has
greatly facilitated the success of these multistate, multiagency
programs. I thank you for the subcommittee's past support and request
the subcommittee's assistance for fiscal year 2013 funding to ensure
the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial participation in these
vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe
Dear Chairwoman Feinstein and Senator Alexander: I request your
support for an appropriation for fiscal year 2013 of $8,387,000 to the
Bureau of Reclamation within the budget line item entitled ``Endangered
Species Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado
Region, consistent with the President's recommended budget. Substantial
non-Federal cost-sharing funding is occurring pursuant to Public Law
106-392, as amended. This appropriation will allow continued funding in
fiscal year 2013 for the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery
Program and the San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program as
authorized by Public Law 106-392. 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.
The requested Federal appropriations are critically important to
these efforts moving forward. The past support of your subcommittee has
greatly facilitated the success of these multistate, multiagency
programs. I thank you for the subcommittee's past support and request
the subcommittee's assistance for fiscal year 2013 funding to ensure
the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial participation in these
vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Utah Water Users Association
Dear Chairwoman Feinstein and Senator Alexander: I request your
support for an appropriation for fiscal year 2013 of $8,387,000 to the
Bureau of Reclamation within the budget line item entitled ``Endangered
Species Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado
Region, consistent with the President's recommended budget. Substantial
non-Federal cost-sharing funding is occurring pursuant to Public Law
106-392, as amended. This appropriation will allow continued funding in
fiscal year 2013 for the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery
Program and the San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program as
authorized by Public Law 106-392. 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.
The requested Federal appropriations are critically important to
these efforts moving forward. The past support of your subcommittee has
greatly facilitated the success of these multistate, multiagency
programs. I thank you for the subcommittee's past support and request
the subcommittee's assistance for fiscal year 2013 funding to ensure
the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial participation in these
vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Wyoming State Engineer's Office
Dear Chairwoman Feinstein and Ranking Member Alexander: This letter
is sent in support of fiscal year 2013 funding for the Bureau of
Reclamation's (BOR) Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Project--
Title II Program. A total of $14,500,000 is requested for BOR's fiscal
year 2011 activities to implement BOR's Basinwide authorized Colorado
River Basin salinity control program. Failure to appropriate these
funds will directly result in significant economic damages being
accrued by United States and Mexican water users.
The State of Wyoming also supports funding for Salinity Control
Program general investigations as requested within BOR's Colorado River
Water Quality Improvement Program (CRWQIP) budget line-item. It is
important that BOR has properly-funded planning and administration
staff in place, so that the program's progress can be monitored,
necessary coordination among Federal and State agencies can be
accomplished, and future projects and opportunities to control salinity
can be properly planned. Maintaining the Colorado River water quality
standards for salinity is essential to allow users in the seven
Colorado River Basin States to continue to develop Compact-apportioned
waters.
In addition to the funding identified above for the implementation
of BOR's program, the State of Wyoming urges the Congress to
appropriate funds, as requested by the administration, to maintain and
operate completed salinity control facilities, including the Paradox
Valley Unit. At facilities located within the Paradox Valley of
Colorado subsurface saline brines are collected below the Delores River
and are injected into a deep aquifer through an injection well. The
continued operation of this project, and the Grand Valley Unit, are
funded primarily through the Facility Operations activity.
The Colorado River provides municipal and industrial water for
nearly 33 million people and irrigation water to approximately 4
million acres of land in the United States. The River is also the water
source for some 3 million people and 500,000 acres in Mexico. The high
concentration of total dissolved solids (e.g., the water's salinity
concentration) in the water limits users' abilities to make the
greatest use of this water supply. This remains a major issue and
continuing concern in both the United States and Mexico. The water's
salinity concentration especially affects agricultural, municipal, and
industrial water users. BOR presently estimates direct and computable
salinity-related damages in the United States amount to more than $300
million per year.
The Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) 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
BOR to conduct a basinwide 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 basinwide
program has demonstrated significantly improved cost-effectiveness, as
computed on $1 per ton of salt basis, as compared to the prior BOR-
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 38 years, the seven-State Colorado River Basin
Salinity Control Forum has actively assisted the Federal agencies,
including BOR, in implementing this unique and important program. At
its October 2012 meeting, the Forum recommended that BOR seek to have
appropriated and should expend $14,500,000 through its Basinwide
Program for Colorado River Basin salinity control in fiscal year 2013.
We strongly believe the combined efforts of the salinity control
efforts of BOR, 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 basinwide 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 2013 appropriations.
______
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Prepared Statement of the American Council for an Energy-Efficient
Economy
Dear Chairwoman Feinstein and Ranking Member Alexander: We write
today to encourage the subcommittee to continue funding for the
Department of Energy's (DOE) Combined Heat and Power (CHP) activities
within the Advanced Manufacturing Office of the Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy Office. CHP has been funded at the $25 million level
for several years, and we encourage that level of funding to continue
in fiscal year 2013 for development and deployment activities. This is
the only CHP funding in the entire Federal Government.
CHP--sometimes called cogeneration--is an integrated application of
technologies for the simultaneous, on-site production of electricity
and heat. It represents a cost-effective, near-term opportunity to
improve our Nation's energy, environmental, and economic future.
Currently, two-thirds of U.S. power generation fuel energy is simply
thrown away as waste heat. CHP can be deployed in all 50 States, is
fuel flexible, comes in many sizes, and for many applications;
therefore, some CHP technologies are ready-for-market transformation
activities while others are still in the development stages. In total,
according to an Oak Ridge National Laboratory Report, these
technologies can save 5.3 gigawatts of energy by the year 2030, the
equivalent of one-half of all residential energy use in the United
States today.
Secretary Chu described DOE as ``bullish on CHP'' in his February
16 testimony to the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. He
talked about his recent visit to the new CHP system at the Texas
Medical Center in Houston, which, like many medical centers,
universities, and cities is served by a district energy system. With
DOE's support, a highly efficient CHP system producing steam and
chilled water was recently installed at the medical center that saved
customers more than $9 million in the first year. In the fiscal year
2013 budget request, DOE has significantly changed both the focus and
the presentation of their budget. What was ``Industrial Technologies
Program'' has now become ``Advanced Manufacturing Office'' and the
structure provides maximum flexibility for funding. The budget
justifications, therefore, contain no mention of continued work on CHP.
We believe this is an oversight and urge continued funding for this
important program to address development, demonstration, and market
transformation activities in CHP. Given the efficiency, environmental
and grid reliability benefits of CHP and district energy, it is
important that DOE programs specifically address development,
deployment, and market barriers related to these systems.
Thank you for your attention to this request.
National Organizations
Alliance for Industrial Efficiency
American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy
American Gas Association
Energy Solutions Center
International District Energy Association
Mechanical Contractors Association of America (MCAA)
Sheet Metal and Air Conditioning Contractor's National Association
(SMACNA)
U.S. Clean Heat and Power Association
Alaska
University of Alaska, Fairbanks
Arizona
Affiliated Engineers, Inc.
NRG Energy Center Phoenix
NRG Energy Center Tucson
California
Affiliated Engineers, Inc.
Capstone Turbine Corporation
Chem-Aqua, Inc.
Goss Engineering, Inc.
Leva Energy
NRG Energy Center San Diego
NRG Energy Center San Francisco
Solar Turbines Incorporated
Syska Hennessy Group, Inc.
University of California, San Francisco
Vanderweil Engineers
Veolia Energy
Colorado
Colorado State University
Connecticut
COWI North America Energy
Fibrelite
The Hartford Steam Company
Delaware
ICETEC Energy Services
NRG Energy Center Dover
Florida
Affiliated Engineers, Inc.
Chem-Aqua, Inc.
ONICON Incorporated
Syska Hennessy Group, Inc.
TMEnergyLLC
Georgia
Chem-Aqua, Inc.
RMF Engineering, Inc.
Syska Hennessy Group, Inc.
Iowa
Statistics & Control, Inc.
Illinois
Affiliated Engineers, Inc.
Caterpillar
Eastern Illinois University
Energy Resources Center, University of Illinois at Chicago IL
Energy Solutions Center
Gas Technology Institute
Recycled Energy Development
Stoneham Consulting
Syska Hennessy Group, Inc.
Indiana
Applied Engineering Services
Chem-Aqua, Inc.
Citizens Energy Group
Massachusetts
Syska Hennessy Group, Inc.
UMass Medical School
Vanderweil Engineers
Veolia Energy
Maryland
Affiliated Engineers, Inc.
CPF Underground Utilities, Inc.
Evapco, Inc.
Piping & Corrosion Specialties, Inc.
RMF Engineering, Inc.
Veolia Energy
Michigan
Detroit Thermal
Veolia Energy
Minnesota
Cummins Power Generation
District Energy St. Paul
Ever-Green Energy
FVB Energy, Inc.
Kattner Associates LLC
NRG Energy Center Minneapolis
Uponor
Missouri
Burns & McDonnell Engineering Company, Inc.
Veolia Energy
North Carolina
Affiliated Engineers, Inc.
RMF Engineering, Inc.
SPX Flow Technology Systems
Syska Hennessy Group, Inc.
Nebraska
Energy Systems Company
New Hampshire
TVC Systems
Waldron Engineering & Construction, Inc.
New Jersey
Blue Sky Power
Chem-Aqua, Inc.
Concord Engineering
DCO Energy LLC
Energenic-US LLC
Integrated CHP Systems
Joseph Technology Corporation
Kessler Ellis Products
NRG Energy Center Princeton
Syska Hennessy Group, Inc.
Thermo Systems LLC
Veolia Energy
Nevada
Chem-Aqua, Inc.
Southwest Gas Corporation
Vanderweil Engineers
New York
Alstrom Energy Group
Cool Systems
GI Endurant LLC
Hudson Technologies
Tricon Piping Systems, Inc.
Vanderweil Engineers
Veolia Energy
Waldron Engineering of NY, P.C.
Ohio
Bahnfleth Group Advisors, LLC
The Medical Center Company
Youngstown Thermal
Oklahoma
Oklahoma Natural Gas Company
Veolia Energy
Oregon
Veolia Energy
Pennsylvania
Center for Building Performance & Diagnostics, Carnegie Mellon
University
Elliott Group
NRG Energy Center Harrisburg
NRG Energy Center Pittsburgh
Philadelphia Gas Works
The Pennsylvania State University
Vanderweil Engineers
Veolia Energy
South Carolina
RMF Engineering, Inc.
Texas
Affiliated Engineers, Inc.
Chem-Aqua, Inc.
Siemens Energy, Inc.
Syska Hennessy Group, Inc.
Thermal Energy Corporation
Utah
Aquatherm, Inc
Virginia
APPA: Leadership in Educational Facilities
Resource Dynamics Corporation
Syska Hennessy Group, Inc.
Vanderweil Engineers
Washington
Affiliated Engineers, Inc.
Cascade Power Group
Infinia Corporation
VA:W
Washington, DC
Environmental and Energy Study Institute
Syska Hennessy Group, Inc.
Wisconsin
Affiliated Engineers, Inc.
Syska Hennessy Group, Inc.
______
Prepared Statement of the American Geosciences Institute
To the Chairwoman and members of the subcommittee: Thank you for
this opportunity to provide the American Geosciences Institute's (AGI)
perspective on fiscal year 2013 appropriations for geoscience programs
within the subcommittee's jurisdiction. The President's budget request
for the Department of Energy (DOE) research programs provides important
and modest investments in research and development (R&D) that will help
sustain energy resources for economic growth of resilient communities.
AGI strongly supports the wise investments in the Office of Science ($5
billion) and Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy ($2.3 billion). AGI
requests at least $5 million in additional funding for the Science
Graduate Fellowship Program within the Office of Science's Workforce
Development for Teachers and Scientists ($14.5 million fiscal year 2013
request) which are zeroed out in the President's proposal.
AGI is concerned about the limited investments in oil and natural
gas R&D within the Office of Fossil Energy. Oil and natural gas supply
62 percent of our Nation's energy (2010 consumption from Energy
Information Administration) and will continue to play a major role in
the future. These investments will drive innovation to support and
improve safe and effective domestic development of cleaner fossil
fuels. The bulk of DOE's oil and gas R&D investments go to institutions
of higher education for training and research. The United States has a
substantial workforce and significant investments in oil and natural
gas research, development, exploration, and production. Steady, but
modest Federal investments in fossil energy R&D with a longer-term
strategic plan would benefit the academic, private, and public sectors.
The Office of Fossil Energy suffers from an unbalanced portfolio
that focuses primarily on coal, faces uncertainty about direction and
investments, and receives inconsistent funding. We ask for the
subcommittee's support for oil and gas, unconventional natural gas,
methane hydrates, and carbon sequestration R&D so the Nation can
develop a diverse portfolio of energy resources while enhancing carbon
mitigation strategies to secure clean, affordable, and secure energy
supplies for now and the future.
AGI is a nonprofit federation of 50 geoscientific and professional
societies representing more than 250,000 geologists, geophysicists, and
other Earth scientists. Founded in 1948, AGI provides information
services to geoscientists, 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
the geosciences play in society's use of resources, resilience to
hazards, and the health of the environment.
department of energy's 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 budget request, would receive $5
billion in fiscal year 2013. AGI asks that you support this funding
level.
The President's request would provide $14.5 million for Workforce
Development for Teachers and Scientists, a program to ensure that DOE
and the Nation have a sustained pipeline of highly skilled and diverse
science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) workers. AGI
strongly supports investments in geoscience education, training and
workforce development within DOE and other Federal agencies. We are
concerned that the request is $5 million less than fiscal year 2012
enacted and that DOE proposes no funding for the Science Graduate
Fellowship program. We would encourage support for graduate student
fellowships through DOE to allow students to complete advanced training
and to ensure a skilled workforce in energy-related sciences.
department of energy's energy efficiency and renewable energy
Within Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, the President's
fiscal year 2013 budget request would increase investments for R&D for
many renewable energy resources. AGI applauds the $65 million requested
for geothermal R&D and greatly appreciates previous support from the
Congress for this key alternative energy resource. The geothermal
research program within the Renewable Energy account, which funds
Earth-science research in materials, geofluids, geochemistry,
geophysics, rock properties, reservoir modeling, and seismic mapping,
will provide the Nation with the best research to build a successful
and competitive geothermal industry. AGI supports the Energy Innovation
Hub focused on critical materials and hope this hub will consider ways
to improve exploration, extraction and processing of necessary raw
materials as well as replacement materials.
department of energy's fossil energy research and development
AGI urges the subcommittee to provide more balanced support for the
Fossil Energy R&D portfolio in the fiscal year 2013 Energy and Water
Development appropriations bill. Many Members of Congress have strongly
emphasized the need for a responsible, diversified, and comprehensive
energy policy for the Nation. The growing global competition for fossil
fuels has led to a repeated and concerted request by the Congress to
ensure the Nation's energy security. The President's proposal, which
provides no funding for oil R&D or for unconventional fossil energy, is
short sighted and inconsistent with congressional and public concerns.
No funding for oil and unconventional fossil energy R&D will hinder our
ability to achieve energy stability and security.
The research dollars invested in petroleum R&D go primarily 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
subcommittee to ensure a balanced and diversified energy research
portfolio that does not ignore the Nation's primary sources of energy
for the near future, fossil fuels.
Thank you for the opportunity to present this testimony to the
subcommittee.
______
Prepared Statement of the American Public Power Association
The American Public Power Association (APPA) respectfully requests
funding for the Renewable Energy Production Incentive, Power Marketing
Administrations, storage for high-level nuclear waste, the Nuclear Loan
Guarantee Program, the Department of Energy Water Power Program, energy
conservation, weatherization, clean coal, fuel cells, fuel and powering
systems, the Navajo Electrification and Demonstration Program, and the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
APPA is the national service organization representing the
interests of more than 2,000 municipal and other State and locally
owned electric utilities in 49 States (all but Hawaii). Collectively,
public power utilities deliver electricity to 1 of every 7 electric
consumers (approximately 46 million people), serving some of the
Nation's largest cities. However, the vast majority of APPA's members
serve communities with populations of 10,000 people or less.
We understand that the Congress is operating in a tight fiscal
environment. APPA's priority is to support programmatic requests that
bring down costs, conserve resources, or benefit our public power
customers in other ways. We appreciate the opportunity to submit this
statement outlining our fiscal year 2013 funding priorities within the
jurisdiction of the Energy and Water Development, and Related Agencies
subcommittee.
Renewable Energy Production Incentive.--APPA is disappointed that
the administration and the Congress have decided to stop funding the
Renewable Energy Production Incentive (REPI). REPI was the first
attempt by the Congress to provide comparable renewable incentives to
the nonprofit electric utility industry, and we continue to seek
comparability to this day. The elimination of funding for the REPI
program was a step backward in this process. Defunding not only
decreases incentives for new production, but utilities who had been
receiving the funding are stranded mid-program. Five million dollars
would restore funding to the program for fiscal year 2013, but any
funding would help restore payments to those already approved for the
incentive.
power marketing administrations
Power Marketing Administration Proposals.--The President's National
Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform proposed a measure for
all four Power Marketing Administrations (PMAs) that would have had the
effect of raising the rates for PMA customers. We appreciate that the
fiscal year 2013 request did not include this type of 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 support an increase over the funding levels of the
administration's budget for fiscal year 2013, which are as follows:
--$243 million for Western Area Power Administration (WAPA);
--$88 million for Southeastern Power Administration (SEPA); and
--$41 million for Southwestern Power Administration (SWPA).
Construction.--We urge the subcommittee to authorize appropriate
levels of funding for the construction budgets of WAPA, SEPA, and SWPA.
These budgets have continued to decrease over the years; however, this
funding remains critical to the operation and maintenance of the PMAs.
Storage for High-Level Nuclear Waste.--APPA is disappointed that
the administration has provided little funding for nuclear waste
disposal or storage in the budget request. We support the work and the
findings of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future and
hope that the administration and the Congress start working to
implement the recommendations.
Nuclear Loan Guarantees.--APPA is disappointed with the
administration's cancellation of the Nuclear Loan Guarantee program and
requests that the Committee restore funding to this important program.
Department of Energy Waterpower Program.--APPA was extremely
disappointed that funding for water power was decreased to $20 million
(from $59 million in fiscal year 2012) while most other renewable
resources were increased in the administration's fiscal year 2013
request. APPA believes there should be parity among renewable resource
funding. APPA requests $100 million for fiscal year 2013 for the DOE's
Water Power Program. At a time when utilities around our country must
focus on finding carbon-free sources of energy because of pending State
and Environmental Protection Agency regulations, the importance of
hydropower research and development is more important than ever before.
Not only is hydropower a renewable resource, but it can be used as
baseload generation to back up more intermittent renewables such as
wind and solar power.
Energy Conservation.--APPA appreciates the funding increases for
energy efficiency programs provided in the President's budget. The
budget funding levels for fiscal year 2013 are as follows:
--Building technologies: $310 million;
--Advanced manufacturing: $290 million;
--Federal Energy Management Program: $32 million; and
--Vehicle technologies: $420 million.
We urge the subcommittee to maintain these funding levels. While
these requests are all lower than the President's fiscal year 2012
requests, they still represent increases over current funding levels.
Weatherization and Intergovernmental Activities.--We are pleased
that the administration has requested $139 million for the
Weatherization program in fiscal year 2013, a significant increase from
fiscal year 2012, and we encourage the subcommittee to maintain that
level of funding.
Clean Coal Power Initiative and FutureGen.--APPA is disappointed
that the budget did not include funding for large scale commercial
applications of carbon capture and sequestration technology. We
encourage the subcommittee to include funding for Clean Coal Power
Initiative (CCPI) and FutureGen. APPA strongly believes that, as the
need for clean energy increases, the FutureGen project, or something
similar, will be critical in nearing us to the goal of the world's
first near-zero-emissions coal fired plant. We urge the subcommittee
and the Congress to work with the administration on finding an
appropriate role and funding level for the FutureGen project and CCPI.
Fuel Cells.--APPA was disappointed that the administration
requested zero funding for fuel cell related research and development.
We urge the subcommittee to allocate additional funding for this
program for fiscal year 2013.
Fuels and Power Systems.--We recommend these funding levels for the
following programs:
--Innovations for existing plants: $84 million;
--Advanced integrated gasification combined cycle: $80 million;
--Turbines: $45 million;
--Carbon sequestration: $150 million;
--Fuels: $25 million; and
--Advanced research: $48 million.
Navajo Electrification Demonstration Program.--APPA supports full
funding for the Navajo Electrification Demonstration Program at its
full authorized funding level of $15 million. 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. This program
has been consistently underfunded.
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC).--The fiscal year 2013
budget requests $305 million for FERC, the same level as current
funding. APPA supports this funding level.
______
Prepared Statement of the American Society for Microbiology
The American Society for Microbiology (ASM) is pleased to submit
the following statement on the fiscal year 2013 appropriation for
science programs at the Department of Energy (DOE). ASM is the largest
single life science organization in the world with more than 38,000
members.
The administration's fiscal year 2013 budget request of $5 billion
for DOE's Office of Science (SC) is a minimal 2.4-percent increase more
than the fiscal year 2012 enacted level. We urge the Congress to
approve increased resources for the research and development (R&D)
managed by the SC, one of three Federal agencies identified as crucial
to the future of our Nation's global competitiveness in science and
technology. The SC sponsors research by multidisciplinary teams from
various government institutions, academia, and the private sector. It
leads the Nation in energy and environmental research and is the
largest Federal sponsor of basic research in the physical sciences. DOE
SC contributes to sectors of the U.S. economy, such as biotechnology,
alternative energy, and environmental sciences. DOE-funded researchers
and programs discover innovative technologies, methods, and commercial
products that serve national priorities like climate change,
environment cleanup, and renewable energy.
DOE research initiatives are producing results not possible in
other research settings. Two examples are the 46 Energy Frontier
Research Centers established by the SC in 2009 at universities,
national laboratories, and other U.S. institutions to advance basic
energy related research and the three Bioenergy Research Centers
created in 2007 to focus on next-generation biofuels. DOE facilities
also provide non-DOE researchers with invaluable tools that might
otherwise be inaccessible like the advanced xray beam sources currently
being used by industry to study the enzyme RNA polymerase II, a project
based on Nobel prize winning DOE research with potential for stopping
RNA viruses causing polio, hepatitis, and other infectious diseases.
SC oversees high-impact projects divided among R&D programs focused
on advancing physics, computing, biology, chemistry, environmental
sciences and other disciplines. It manages 10 DOE national laboratories
and promotes education programs to encourage future scientists and
engineers. Extramural SC funding supports about 25,000 researchers at
nearly 300 U.S. universities and colleges. In fiscal year 2013, an
estimated 26,500 researchers from industry, national laboratories,
universities, and other nations are expected to use SC lab facilities,
accessing one-of-a-kind instruments for their own research.
In addition, DOE technology transfer efforts yield exemplary
successes of commercial products arising from federally funded
inventions. DOE announced in February that eight of its national
laboratories will participate in a pilot program expediting the
transfer of DOE intellectual property rights to private companies. The
newly designed Agreements for Commercializing Technology will make it
easier for companies to partner with the laboratories and are expected
to help U.S. businesses create new products and jobs in the science and
technology sector.
department of energy funding stimulates novel approaches to biology
based research
The Biological and Environmental Research (BER) program within the
SC is a source of groundbreaking research in genomics, climate change,
greenhouse gas emissions, biofuels, contaminants in the environment and
the interfaces between physical and biological sciences. Under the
current DOE Strategic Plan, BER is tasked with delivering new renewable
energy technologies, utilizing basic biological research to create
efficient biofuels processes. BER also is expected to add significantly
to our understanding of the role of microbes in geochemical cycling of
carbon, nitrogen, sulfur and metals, processes that are critical to
understanding climate and environmental processes.
The BER program receives about $625 million in the fiscal year 2013
request, a small 2.6-percent increase over fiscal year 2012. We urge
the Congress to approve the administration's DOE budget that includes
the resources for essential BER research. The budget increase is marked
for developing synthetic biology tools and technologies, analyzing
experimental data sets, and conducting climate studies in the Arctic.
In fiscal year 2013, 65 percent of the BER budget will support research
projects, while the remaining 35 percent will fund scientific user
facilities that include the Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM)
Climate Research Facility, the William R. Wiley Environmental Molecular
Sciences Laboratory (EMSL), and the Joint Genome Institute (JGI).
The fiscal year 2013 budget would support the diverse R&D
portfolios of BER's two divisions: the Biological Systems Science
Division and the Climate and Environmental Sciences Division, allocated
about $310 million and $316 million, respectively. In fiscal year 2013,
resources will be increased for research on climate change in arctic
and tropical regions, as well as for a shift in emphasis from global
climate modeling to smaller, regional models. The funding on systems
sciences will increase investments in the development of synthetic
biology tools, computational analyses of genomic datasets and biodesign
technologies.
BER contributions include the Human Genome Project initiated in the
1980s and some of the Nation's earliest climate change models. BER has
significantly shaped our understanding of technical fields like
genomics and natural phenomena like microbial communities and their
interactions with the environment. BER-funded projects also have
elucidated the biogeochemical processes at work under the Earth's
surface that are critical to advances in both energy and environmental
research.
department of energy funding advances research in genome sciences,
biofuels, and biotechnology
The BER programs biological systems sciences have a diverse R&D
portfolio, focused on applying advances in systems biology research in
support of DOE strategies in energy, climate, and the environment. BER
supports the DOE Bioenergy Research Centers, which clearly are
succeeding as innovation incubators for genetics based R&D and
alternative energy development. The overarching goal of these research
programs is a complete scientific portrait from the molecular to the
community level of plants and microbes with potential to solve societal
challenges like clean energy and pollutant decontamination. Another
optimal outcome would be sufficiently detailed knowledge to develop
predictive, computational models of these living systems necessary to
enable synthetic biology approaches for biofuels production and
understand roles of microbes in environmental and climate processes.
Funding for BER research effectively combines interdisciplinary
science with powerful new tools like bioinformatics and imaging
technologies developed through past DOE appropriations. Microorganisms
are frequently integral components in BER-funded projects that have
implications for preserving healthy environments. One example is the
DOE Joint Genome Institute project that recently identified previously
unknown methane producing microbes in permafrost soils, which could
become a major problem through their release of greenhouse gases as
climate change thaws the Earth's arctic regions. Arctic permafrost,
where these microbes are abundant, sequesters an estimated 1.6 trillion
metric tons of carbon. BER-supported systems biology knowledgebase,
which is community driven cyberinfrastructure for sharing and
integrating data and analytical tools to accelerate predictive biology.
Ongoing DOE research is aggressively seeking new biomass sources
for biofuel production, to reduce demand on corn and other food plants
considered too valuable for non-food purposes.
In 2011, microbiology related results reported by DOE investigators
included the following examples supported by BER genome science
programs:
--BER-funded researchers sequenced many fungal genomes, which contain
enzymes that break down cellulose and lignin, the two most
abundant biopolymers on Earth, in order to harness these
capabilities for industrial applications such as biofuels
production. Another application is biopulping for the paper
industry, which requires that the lignin be degraded while
leaving the cellulose untouched. Forest products such as pulp
and paper account for 5 percent of the Nation's gross domestic
product.
--BER supported researchers have developed technologies that could be
used to rewrite the genetic code of a living cell. Such
technology could enable scientists to design cells that build
proteins not found in nature, or engineer bacteria that are
useful for bioenergy and environmental cleanups.
--Researchers completed an advanced metabolic model of the alga
Chlamydomonas reinhardtii that should expedite development of
algae as a viable source of renewable bioenergy.
--Genetically engineered E. coli have been manipulated to improve the
bacteria's synthesis of terpene, a precursor of several
biofuels, by 120 percent. Other scientists have modified E.
coli and yeasts to produce the terpene called bisabolane as a
promising biofuel precursor, one found to be relatively
nontoxic to the microbes; unlike other biofuels like ethanol
that can limit commercially viable biofuel production.
Alternatively, scientists also have inserted a novel fatty acid
synthesis enzyme into E. coli, a first step in biodiesel
production from fatty acids.
--BER-funded researchers, using integrated genomics technologies,
discovered that microorganisms play crucial roles in regulating
soil carbon dynamics through several microbially mediated
feedback mechanisms. This demonstrated the importance of
microbial communities in projecting future climate warming.
Such studies are fundamental to understanding ecosystem
responses to climate change and provides a mechanistic basis
for carbon climate modeling.
department of energy funding supports innovative studies of the
environment
BER also sponsors research that ranges widely from molecular to
field scale studies of various threats to our environment. BER manages
two scientific user facilities (ARM and EMSL) and supports three
strategic research areas in environmental sciences: atmospheric
systems, climate and earth system modeling, and environmental system
science. BER-funded researchers investigate environmental challenges
like increased levels of greenhouse gases and heavy metal soil
contaminants.
Several currently active CESD projects illustrate the division's
unique expertise using microbial systems to protect and improve our
environment:
--BER-funded researchers found that the films from some bacteria and
pilin nanofilaments from bacteria have electronic
conductivities, which are comparable to those of synthetic
metallic nanostructures. They can also conduct over distances
on the centimetre scale. The property of allowing electron
transport across long distances could revolutionize
nanotechnology and bioelectronics.
--Using EMSL equipment, a DOE university team was the first to
describe the molecular structure of proteins in Shewanella
oneidensis that allow the bacterium to transfer an electrical
charge. The proteins exist within small ``nanowires''
constructed by the bacteria that extend through their cell
walls and trap minerals. The discovery is a step toward
potentially using microbes as a source of electricity, perhaps
as microbial fuel cells. The results also have possible
relevance to microbial cleanup of environmental contaminants.
--BER supported researchers found that the dual role of dissolved
organic matter in mercury reduction and complexation in anoxic
environments where both bacterial methylation and DOM reduction
occur. Such studies, provide mechanistic insights into the
factors controlling mercury species transformation, geochemical
cycling and especially toxic methylmercury production, which
are critical to mercury remediation in groundwater.
conclusion
ASM recommends that the Congress approve the proposed fiscal year
2013 budget, in support of the DOE's SC. DOE science programs routinely
generate discoveries of economic and societal impact that serve the DOE
mission, often by collaborating with non-DOE partners or sponsoring
multidisciplinary research teams. SC also maintains unique lab
facilities and institutes with robust capabilities to solve difficult,
large scale problems. We ask the Congress to recognize these invaluable
contributors to the economy, environment and public health by
supporting increased funding for the fiscal year 2013 DOE budget.
______
Prepared Statement of the American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science
Society of America, and the Soil Science Society of America
Dear Chairwoman Feinstein, Ranking Member Alexander, and members of
the subcommittee: The American Society of Agronomy (ASA), Crop Science
Society of America (CSSA), and the Soil Science Society of America
(SSSA), are pleased to submit comments in strong support of enhanced
public investment in the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Science
for fiscal year 2013. Specifically, ASA, CSSA, and SSSA urge the
subcommittee to support DOE's Office of Science at a level of $5
billion for fiscal year 2013, as requested in the President's proposed
budget (a 2.6-percent increase over the fiscal year 2012 level). A
strong level of funding will enable the Office of Science to continue
to deliver the scientific discoveries and major scientific tools that
transform our understanding of nature and advance the energy, economic,
and national security of the United States.
ASA, CSSA, and SSSA represent more than 18,000 members in academia,
industry, and government, as well as 13,000 Certified Crop Advisers.
The largest coalition of professionals dedicated to the agronomic,
crop, and soil science disciplines in the United States, ASA, CSSA, and
SSSA are dedicated to utilizing science in order to meet our growing
food, feed, fiber, and fuel needs. With an ever-expanding global
population and increasing food demands, investment in food and
agriculture research is essential to maintaining our Nation's food,
economic and national security.
department of energy's office of science
ASA, CSSA, and SSSA understand the challenges the Senate Energy and
Water Development Appropriations Subcommittee faces with the tight
budget for fiscal year 2013. We also recognize that the Energy and
Water Development Appropriations bill has many valuable and necessary
components, and we applaud the subcommittee for the support provided to
the DOE Office of Science. For fiscal year 2013, ASA, CSSA, and SSSA
recommend a funding level of $5 billion.
The Congress approved the America Creating Opportunities to
Meaningfully Promote Excellence in Technology, Education, and Science
(America COMPETES) Reauthorization Act of 2010 (Public Law 111-358),
recognizing that an investment in basic (discovery) scientific research
is essential to providing America with the brainpower necessary to
maintain a competitive advantage in the global economy and keep U.S.
jobs from moving overseas. Such an investment is necessary to keep U.S.
science and engineering at the forefront of global research and
development in the biological sciences and geosciences, computing, and
many other critical scientific fields. The Office of Science supports
graduate students and postdoctoral researchers early in their careers.
Nearly one-third of the Office of Science's research funding goes to
more than 300 colleges and universities nationwide. The Office of
Science also reaches out to America's youth in grades K-12 to help
improve student's knowledge of science, mathematics, and understanding
of global energy and environmental challenges. The recommended funding
level of $5 billion is critical to ensuring our energy self-sufficiency
and addressing major environmental challenges. In addition, a funding
level of $5 billion will allow the Office of Science to:
--maintain and strengthen DOE's core research programs at both the
DOE national laboratories and universities;
--provide support for Ph.D.'s, postdoctoral associates, and graduate
students;
--ensure maximum utilization of DOE research facilities; and
--allow the Office of Science to develop and construct the next-
generation facilities necessary to maintain U.S. leadership in
scientific research.
basic energy sciences
Within the DOE Office of Science, the Basic Energy Sciences (BES)
program is a multipurpose, scientific research effort that fosters and
supports fundamental research to expand the scientific foundations for
new and improved energy technologies and for understanding and
mitigating the environmental impacts of energy use. The research
disciplines that the BES program supports include condensed matter and
materials physics, chemistry, soil, mineralogical, and geosciences.
These subjects influence virtually every aspect of energy production,
conversion, transmission, storage, efficiency, and waste mitigation.
ASA, CSSA, and ASSA support funding the subprogram of Chemical
Sciences, Geosciences, and Biosciences within the BES at a level of
$349.4 million in fiscal year 2013. The Geosciences Research program
supports research focused on developing an understanding of fundamental
Earth processes that are a foundation for improved advanced energy and
environmental technologies. Specifically, we support the Geosciences
program to expand geochemical research and computational analysis of
complex subsurface fluids and solids.
biological and environmental research
Also within the DOE Office of Science, the Biological and
Environmental Research (BER) program has advanced environmental and
biological knowledge that supports national security through improved
energy production, international scientific leadership, and research
that improves the quality-of-life for all Americans. BER supports these
vital missions through competitive and peer-reviewed research at
national laboratories, universities, and private institutions. ASA,
CSSA, and SSSA support the funding of BER at the President's requested
level of $625.3 million for fiscal year 2013. A variety of programs
within BER are essential to continued biological systems science
fundamental research, geochemical observations, and determining
environmental sustainability of our energy production systems. A few of
these programs are further highlighted below:
--ASA, CSSA, and SSSA support funding the Office of Climate and
Environmental Sciences within BER at a level of $315.6 million.
This funding will support essential subsurface biogeochemical
research and basic research on the fate and transport of
contaminants in the subsurface.
--ASA, CSSA, and SSSA support the increase included in the
President's budget for the Genomic Science Program at a level
of $188.1 million for fiscal year 2013. The Joint Genome
Institute (JGI) is an essential lab where synthetic molecular
toolkits are developed to predict, construct, and test new
biological systems for clean-energy solutions. It also uses
plant and microbial systems biology to pursue breakthroughs
needed to develop cellulosic biofuels.
Thank you for your consideration of our requests.
______
Prepared Statement of American Society of Plant Biologists
On behalf of the American Society of Plant Biologists (ASPB), we
submit this statement for the official record to support the requested
level of $4.992 billion for the Department of Energy (DOE) Office of
Science for fiscal year 2013. The testimony highlights the importance
of biology--particularly plant biology--as the Nation seeks to address
energy security and other vital issues.
ASPB recognizes the difficult fiscal environment our Nation faces
but believes investments in scientific research will be a critical step
toward economic recovery. We would also like to thank the subcommittee
for its consideration of this testimony and for its support for the
basic research mission of the DOE Office of Science.
ASPB is an organization of approximately 5,000 professional plant
biology researchers, educators, graduate students, and postdoctoral
scientists with members in all 50 States and throughout the world. A
strong voice for the global plant science community, our mission--
achieved through work in the realms of research, education, and public
policy--is to promote the growth and development of plant biology, to
encourage and communicate research in plant biology, and to promote the
interests and growth of plant scientists in general.
fuel, food, environment, and health--plant biology research and
america's future
Plants are vital to our very existence. They harvest sunlight,
converting it to chemical energy for food and feed; they take up carbon
dioxide and produce oxygen; and they are the primary producers on which
all life depends. Indeed, plant biology research is making many
fundamental contributions in the areas of domestic fuel security and
environmental stewardship; the continued and sustainable development of
better foods, fabrics, pharmaceuticals, and building materials; and in
the understanding of basic biological principles that underpin
improvements in the health and nutrition of all Americans.
In particular, plant biology is at the center of numerous
scientific breakthroughs in the increasingly interdisciplinary world of
alternative energy research. For example, interfaces among fundamental
and applied plant biology, engineering, chemistry, and physics
represent critical frontiers in both basic biofuels research and
bioenergy production. Similarly, with the increase in plant genome
sequencing and functional genomics, the interface of plant biology and
computer science has become essential to our understanding of complex
biological systems, ranging from single cells to entire ecosystems.
Despite the fact that foundational plant biology research--the kind
of research funded by agencies such as the DOE--underpins vital
advances in practical applications in energy, agriculture, health, and
the environment, the amount of money invested in understanding the
basic function and mechanisms of plants is relatively small. This is
especially true considering the significant positive impact crop plants
have on the Nation's economy and in addressing some of our most urgent
challenges like energy and food security.
Understanding the importance of these areas and to address future
challenges, ASPB organized the Plant Science Research Summit in
September 2011. With support and funding from the National Science
Foundation, U.S. Department of Agriculture, DOE, and the Howard Hughes
Medical Institute, the Summit brought together representatives from
across the full spectrum of plant science research to identify critical
gaps in our understanding of plant biology that must be filled over the
next 10 years or more to address the grand challenges facing our Nation
and our planet. The grand challenges identified at the Summit include:
--To fuel the Nation's future with clean energy, improvements are
needed in current biofuels technologies, including breeding,
crop-production methods, and processing.
--To feed everyone well, now and in the future, advances in plant
science research will be needed for higher yielding, more
nutritious varieties able to withstand a variable climate.
--Innovations leading to improvements in water use, nutrient use, and
disease and pest resistance that will reduce the burden on the
environment are needed to allow for increases in ecosystem
services such as clean air, clean water, fertile soil, and
biodiversity benefits like pest suppression and pollination.
--For all the benefits that advances in plant science bestow--in food
and fiber production, ecosystem and landscape health, and
energy subsistence--to have lasting, permanent benefit they
must be economically, socially, and environmentally
sustainable.
In spring 2012, a report from the Plant Science Research Summit
will be published. This report will further detail priorities and needs
to address the grand challenges.
recommendations
Because of our membership's extensive expertise and participation
in the academic, industry, and government sectors, ASPB is in an
excellent position to articulate the Nation's plant science priorities
as they relate to bioenergy and, specifically, with regard to
recommendations for bioenergy research funding through the DOE's Office
of Science.
Within the Office of Science, the programs in Biological and
Environmental Research (BER) and Basic Energy Sciences (BES) are
crucial to understanding how basic biological processes work. For this
reason ASPB is supportive of the fiscal year 2013 request to fund BER
at $625.3 million and BES at $1.8 billion. Sustained funding for these
programs is vital as the discoveries made in these areas will
ultimately be the foundation for the next fuels and technologies we use
in our daily lives.
In addition:
--We commend the DOE Office of Science, through their programs in BES
and BER for funding the Bioenergy Research Centers and the
Energy Frontier Research Centers. These centers provide a model
for collective science innovation that complements DOE's
essential investment in individual investigator and small group
science. ASPB strongly encourages funding for the DOE Office of
Science that would be specifically targeted to the funding of
individual or small group grants for bioenergy research.
--Photosynthetic research is one clear example of an interface
between the physical sciences and biology. The DOE Office of
Science has been the major source of funding for fundamental
studies of photosynthesis, which is the primary source of
chemical energy on the planet. However, the current funding
available for photosynthetic research is not commensurate with
the central role that photosynthesis plays in energy capture
and carbon sequestration. Hence, ASPB calls for the Office of
Science to expand its research portfolio in the area of
photosynthesis and carbon capture.
--Considerable research interest is now focused on the processing of
plant biomass for energy production. If biomass crops,
including woody plants, are to be used to their full potential,
extensive effort must be expended to improve our understanding
of their basic biology and development, as well as their
agronomic performance. Therefore, ASPB calls for DOE to support
research targeted at efforts to increase the utility and
agronomic performance of bioenergy feedstocks.
Thank you for your consideration of our testimony on behalf of the
American Society of Plant Biologists.
______
Prepared Statement of ASME
Madam Chairwoman, ranking member, and members of the subcommittee:
The Energy Committee (EnComm) of ASME's Technical Communities is
pleased to provide this testimony on the fiscal year 2013 budget
request for research and development (R&D) programs in the Department
of Energy (DOE).
introduction
ASME is a more than 120,000-member nonprofit, worldwide
educational, and technical society. It conducts one of the world's
largest technical publishing operations, holds more than 30 technical
conferences and 200 professional development courses each year, and
sets some 600 industrial and manufacturing standards, many of which
have become de facto global technical standards. The Energy Committee
of ASME's Technical Communities comprises 64 members from 10 ASME
Divisions, 2 Institutes and Codes & Standards, representing
approximately 40,000 of ASME's members.
ASME has long advocated a balanced portfolio of energy supplies to
meet the Nation's energy needs, including advanced clean coal,
petroleum, nuclear, natural gas, waste-to-energy, biomass, solar, wind,
and hydroelectric power. ASME also supports energy-efficient building
and transportation technologies, as well as transmission and
distribution infrastructure sufficient to satisfy demand under
reasonably foreseeable contingencies. Only such a portfolio will allow
the United States to maintain its quality of life while addressing
future environmental and security challenges. Sustained growth in the
energy systems on which the United States depends will also require
stability in licensing and permitting processes not only for power
generating stations but also for transmission and transportation
systems.
fossil energy
The fiscal year 2013 budget request of $650.7 million for fossil
energy represents a $86.3 million, or 15.3 percent, increase compared
to the fiscal year 2012 appropriation. Fossil Energy (FE) research and
development (R&D) would rise by 21.3 percent, or $73.8 million to
$420.6 million. After 3 years of substantial budget cuts for FE, the
EnComm is pleased to see that the administration is seeking to finally
build upon the $3.4 billion that was devoted to FE R&D as part of the
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA).
After proposing the elimination of funding for Natural Gas
Technologies in last year's budget request, this year the
administration has requested a $2 million, or 13.4 percent increase for
the program that would bring it to $17 million in fiscal year 2013.
Unconventional Fossil Energy Technologies would again be targeted for
elimination by the administration in fiscal year 2013, after receiving
less than $5 million in funding for fiscal year 2012, and no funding in
fiscal year 2011. The United States has access to significant
unconventional gas resources with the potential to provide abundant,
affordable, clean low-carbon energy source for years to come. Prior FE
R&D has contributed to making this possible. However, this potential
will not be realized unless this resource can be produced reliably,
economically, safely, and with minimal environmental impact.
Accomplishing this task and keeping the United States in the forefront
of unconventional fossil energy technology will require an investment
in basic research, technology development, and investments in advances
in low-impact environmental technologies that will not be undertaken by
industry in the current economic climate. The budget for these efforts
should be maintained at least at the fiscal year 2010 level.
The EnComm encourages a restoration of funding for coal research
programs to at least the levels appropriated for fiscal year 2010. The
EnComm is very disturbed by the lack of research in basic coal
combustion and in research that is needed to support the next
generation of coal-fired plants. The use of coal today and in the
future is vital to providing for a sustainable energy future. The
current funding levels significantly hinder the ability to keep the
United States in the forefront of coal technology. Coal is and will
remain a critical resource for our Nation and its economy; and we must
continue to invest in technological advancements that will reduce
environmental impacts for this energy. The use of more efficient
processes for coal combustion, such as advanced integrated gasification
combined cycle (IGCC) technology, combined with carbon sequestration
will allow the United States to utilize its coal resources in a more
environmentally sound and cost-effective manner. We encourage strong
and consistent funding for these programs now and in future years.
advanced research projects agency-energy
The EnComm supports the $325 million budget request for the
Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E), a $50 million or
27.5 percent increase over the fiscal year 2012 appropriated amount.
ARPA-E received its first funding as part of ARRA, but has stood out
quickly among its fellow DOE programs. ARPA-E represents a significant
opportunity for the United States to cultivate technological
breakthroughs related to energy sources, and uses. A steady commitment
to ARPA-E has begun to encourage new energy technology innovation, and
the EnComm believes that this is a worthwhile endeavor for the DOE as
we seek to accomplish technological breakthroughs in energy technology
research.
nuclear energy
The EnComm is discouraged to see a 10.3 percent, or $88.2 million
reduction in the fiscal year 2013 DOE Office of Nuclear Energy budget
request. Total funding for fiscal year 2013 would fall to $770 million.
The EnComm remains convinced that nuclear energy will hold an important
role in the Nation's energy future, and that programs like Reactor
Concepts, and Fuel Cycle R&D need sustained funding to aid the Nation's
transition to a low-carbon energy future. The current proposed lack of
funding may adversely impact the ability of the current U.S. fleet to
continue to operate past its 60-year life. The loss of funding may also
contribute to the loss of the U.S. nuclear technology competitive edge
to overseas concerns. The Energy Committee remains interested in how
the proposed Reactor Concepts RD&D program distinguishes itself from
the traditional R&D program under the Office of Nuclear Energy. The
administration's invocation of an ``all-of-the-above'' energy strategy
at this year's State of the Union Address should be reflected in this
budget request. President Obama has again proposed the creation of a
national ``clean energy standard'' of 80 percent by 2035 the EnComm
believes very strongly that sustained increases in nuclear power
research are justified in light of this goal.
energy efficiency and renewable energy
The Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) manages
America's investments in research, development, and deployment of DOE's
diverse energy efficiency and renewable energy applied science
portfolio. The fiscal year 2013 request of $2.37 billion, which is a
$527 million, or 29.1 percent increase over the fiscal year 2012
appropriated amount of $1.81 billion, demonstrates that the
administration would like to restore EERE to pre-Budget Act levels
(Public Law 112-25). Most of the key EERE programs, including Biomass,
Solar, Wind, Geothermal, Building Technologies, Vehicle Technologies,
and Advanced Manufacturing technologies, would receive substantial
increases in funding to support the growth of renewable energy and
energy efficiency. The EnComm is particularly pleased to see large
increases for both the Advanced Manufacturing program ($290 million, or
a 150.9 percent increase), formerly known as the Industrial
Technologies Program (ITP), as well as the Building Technologies
Program ($310 million, or a 41.4 percent increase).
The EnComm believes that the development of transportation fuel
systems that are not petroleum-based is a critical part of our future
national energy policy. The fiscal year 2013 budget for biomass and
bio-refinery systems R&D is slated to receive a $70.7 million increase
to $270 million for fiscal year 2013, 35.5 percent above the fiscal
year 2012 appropriated amount. We are also pleased to see the $91
million, or 27.7 percent increase in the effort related to vehicle
technologies emphasizing plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. However, the
EnComm is concerned about the current level of mandated use of ethanol-
based fuels.
The integration of all cost-effective electric generating
technologies into the operation of the electricity distribution system
is critical to economic operation of the national electric grid. The
EnComm believes that R&D related to the integration of the electric
grid and its control as a truly national system is imperative for the
growth of effective and economic energy generation technologies, and we
encourage full funding for such research.
science
The mission of the Office of Science (SC) is the delivery of
scientific discoveries and major scientific user facilities and tools
to transform our understanding of nature and to advance the energy,
economic, and national security of the United States.
During these difficult budget times, the EnComm is pleased with the
request for the Office of Science. The fiscal year 2013 budget proposal
of $5 billion is an increase of $118 million, or 2.4 percent, from the
fiscal year 2012 appropriation. As successive budget cycles come and
go, the Nation seems to be getting further away from the funding
trajectory mandated in the ``America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of
2007'' (Public Law 111-358). Science programs in high-energy physics,
fusion energy sciences, biological and environmental research, basic
energy sciences, and advanced scientific computing, serve, in some
small way, every student in the country. These funds support not only
research at the DOE laboratories, but also the work at a large number
of universities and colleges. We believe that basic energy research
will also improve U.S. energy security over the long term, through its
support for R&D on cellulosic ethanol and other next-generation
biofuels, advanced battery and energy storage systems, and fusion.
Fusion Energy Sciences, High Energy Physics, and Nuclear Physics would
receive decreases under this budget, with specific cuts to domestic
fusion in favor of honoring the Nation's commitments to International
Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER). The EnComm respects the
Office of Science's goals related to microbiological sciences, computer
science, and basic energy sciences but urges a restoration of funding
for these reduced programs at fiscal year 2011 levels. The Energy
Committee supports the budget request for the Office of Science in the
amount of $5 billion.
other department of energy programs
DOE is also very active in areas outside of R&D. The environmental
remediation program that funds the decommissioning and decontamination
of old DOE facilities is one such research area. The EnComm questions
the advisability of flat funding for the Environmental Management
program. The Yucca Mountain (YM) Waste Repository is a critical part of
the future of nuclear energy and the use of uranium as a resource for
energy usage in the present and foreseeable future. The EnComm is
concerned that the cancellation of the YM repository program will
result in a difficult, and more costly, search for a new repository
that will likely encounter similar obstacles. DOE and the Congress
should honor their commitments with regard to disposal of Spent Nuclear
Fuel. The EnComm has read the Blue Ribbon Commission (BRC) on America's
Nuclear Future report and will be closely monitoring any efforts in the
Congress toward implementing the BRC's recommendations. The coming
resurgence in the commercial nuclear arena is likely to deplete the
trained professionals available for this program as engineers choose to
move to the more stable commercial environment. The Congress should
appropriate the funds to ensure that this work is accomplished in an
expeditious manner.
conclusion
Members of the EnComm consider the issues related to energy to be
one of the most important issues facing our Nation. There is an urgent
need for a strong and coherent energy policy. The EnComm is concerned
that without a National Energy Policy the proposed and ongoing research
will not be utilized to its full potential. We applaud the
administration and the Congress for their understanding of the
important role that scientific and engineering breakthroughs will play
in meeting our energy challenges. In order to promote such innovation,
strong support for energy research will be necessary across a broad
range of technology options. DOE research can play a critical role in
allowing the United States to use our current resources more
effectively and to create more advanced energy technologies.
Thank you for the opportunity to offer testimony regarding both the
R&D and other parts of the proposed budget for the DOE. The EnComm is
pleased to respond to requests for additional information or
perspectives on other aspects of our Nation's energy programs.
______
Prepared Statement of APS Technology, Inc.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 9 Laser Lane, Wallingford, Connecticut 06492. http://aps-
tech.com/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Madam Chairwoman and honorable Senators: Seven years ago, I
submitted testimony \2\ regarding proposed cuts to the Department of
Energy (DOE) budget for oil and gas exploration research. Much has
happened since 2005, all of which reinforces the need for such funding.
I wish to address, in particular, the cuts to the National Energy
Technology Laboratories (NETL).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Testimony to the House Committee on Appropriations Subcommittee
on Energy and Water Development, submitted March 6, 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I wish to make perfectly clear that my company, APS Technology,
Inc., has benefited from these programs. We have completed two cost-
sharing research contracts \3 4\ from the NETL, one Small Business
Innovation Research (SBIR) \5\ and one Small Business Technology
Transfer (STTR) \6\ grant. This support has been critical to the growth
of APS and its introduction of new products for the industry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ DE-FC26-02NT41664, ``Drilling Vibration Monitoring and Control
System''.
\4\ DE-FC26-04NT15501, ``Novel High-Speed Drilling Motor for Oil
Exploration & Production''.
\5\ DE-FG02-02ER83368, ``Rotary Steerable Motor System for Deep Gas
Drilling''.
\6\ DE-AC26-98FT40481, ``Downhole Fluid Analyzer''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I will not repeat the general justifications that you know so
well--the necessity of our striving toward energy independence or near-
independence; the importance of new technologies to reaching this goal,
while protecting the environment, et cetera. While these are clearly
important considerations, I would rather focus on three particular
aspects from my personal experience:
--an outstanding success story;
--the changes in the business environment for oil and gas
exploration; and
--some reasons that DOE support for oil and gas research and
development is more important today than ever.
a success story--teleco oilfield services inc.
In his State of the Union Address,\7\ President Obama reminded us
that ``it was public research dollars, over the course of 30 years,
that helped develop the technologies to extract all this natural gas
out of shale rock--reminding us that government support is critical in
helping businesses get new energy ideas off the ground.'' One of these
key enabling technologies was measurements-while-drilling (MWD) and the
leader in MWD was my former company, Teleco Oilfield Services Inc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ http://www.whitehouse.gov/photos-and-video/video/2012/01/25/
2012-state-union-address-
enhanced-version#transcript.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 1972, I began this new venture with the support of my then
employer, Raymond Engineering \8\ and the European oil company,
SNPA.\9\ The sole purpose of this new company was to develop and
commercialize this new MWD technology. Even then, before there was a
commercial tool, the industry recognized MWD as a transformative
technology. By transmitting data to the surface in real time from the
bottom of a well as it was being drilled, it would open the door to
directional and horizontal drilling, real-time analysis of the oil and
gas content of a well, steering the well within a pay zone, things
unheard of then that are now standard operating procedure in oilfields
around the world.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Now a part of Kaman Corporation.
\9\ Societe Nationale des Petroles d'Aquitaine, now a part of
Total.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 1978, dozens of companies were trying to develop these
systems,\10\ including large corporations within the oil industry and
without. Most, however, were unsuccessfully trying to adapt existing
wireline technology to the much more severe environment within a well
during drilling. Teleco took the opposite approach;\11\ it adapted the
proven reliable military and space technology of Raymond Engineering
and applied it to the new environment in a effort to attain the
reliability needed for such service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ cf., ``MWD: State of the Art'', series of articles in the Oil
& Gas Journal, 1978.
\11\ R.F. Spinnler & F.A. Stone, ``MWD: State of the Art--4; MWD
Program nearing commerciality'', Oil & Gas Journal, May 1, 1978.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 1975, after several years of intense and expensive self-funded
development, Teleco was ready to build and field test its first
prototype tools. The combination of their complexity and the
requirement that they work in an extreme environment made this a
prohibitive task. The oil companies were unwilling to invest in this
technology without a successful field test. It was at this time that
the company applied for, and received, $2 million in development
funding from the DOE. With these funds, the field testing could proceed
and proved successful.
At this point, six major oil companies \12\ provided an additional
$0.9 million funding in return for future repayment through the
company's sales. These funds allowed the commercial launch of MWD in
1978.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Exxon, Shell, Chevron, Conoco, Amoco, and Placid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As anticipated, the commercial introduction of MWD by Teleco
revolutionized oil and gas exploration, first primarily offshore, but
now on land as well. What was the role of the DOE in this success? MWD
would have certainly been developed in time, but it took more than 2
years for other companies to enter the market. The Teleco system
remained the leader in reliability over its entire existence. The
support of the DOE was critical to making the leap from a laboratory
demonstration to fully commercial systems in use worldwide. Thus, the
small investment by the DOE led directly to the development of a
company and an industry that served to improve the efficiency and
safety of oil and gas exploration, led to many advances that help
restrain the price of oil including such innovations as horizontal
drilling, and created thousands of jobs in the United States.
changes in the oil and gas industry over the past four decades
In the past four decades, the oil and gas industry has undergone
dramatic changes. In the 1970s the major production companies were the
principal sources of new technology for the industry. Exxon, Mobil,
Texaco, and ARCO, to name a few, maintained research facilities staffed
by the most experienced experts in their fields. These companies
developed many of the key innovations in the drilling and well logging
industry despite their recognition that, as commodity producers, they
were neither equipped to market, nor particularly interested in,
technology per se. This was the province of the oil service companies,
to whom the producers licensed their use, often giving nonexclusive,
royalty-free licenses to any company that requested them.
In the ensuing decades, the industry has consolidated. For example,
all of the companies mentioned above have either merged or been
acquired since then, also consolidating their research programs. In the
volatile oil and gas industry, it difficult to justify to shareholders
investments in long-term programs that will not produce any direct
revenues or competitive advantage. Thus, companies have striven to
``right size'' their organizations, often at the expense of research.
A similar contraction has taken place in the oilfield services
business. New technologies were once transferred from the producers,
developed by the major service companies, or introduced by small,
specialized companies (such as Numar \13\ or Landmark Graphics \14\).
Many of the researchers laid off in the consolidation of the producers'
research labs found their way to service companies. The service
companies also acquired many of the smaller companies, such as those
listed above. Now, after significant consolidation and downsizing on
the part of the service companies, and under the continuous, short-term
scrutiny of the market, even they are cutting the costs associated with
long-term development.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Now a part of Halliburton Corp, see: http://
www.halliburton.com/news/archive/1997/corpnws_093097.jsp.
\14\ Now a subsidiary of Halliburton Corp, see: http://www.lgc.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To cite one example, Schlumberger has closed its world-renowned
Schlumberger-Doll Research Center in Ridgefield, Connecticut, and
relocated to Cambridge, Massachusetts. They have transferred much of
the work previously done by industry experts to university professors,
research associates, and students. The service companies are also
outsourcing many high-risk projects to small companies such as APS.
In this environment, the growth and success of a Teleco would be
impossible. The large companies have become more risk-averse and
oriented toward current revenues. Small companies lack the resources to
pursue high-risk, long-term developments. The government, through the
DOE, is the backer of last resort for these efforts.
current necessity for department of energy support
The U.S. oil and gas province is quite mature. Production of oil
peaked in the 1970s and gas production is nearly at its peak. To
produce additional reserves, technical progress is needed in two areas:
--drilling safely in deeper waters offshore requires new methods for
dealing with the increased temperatures and pressures in the
formations; and
--producing oil and gas from the prolific shale deposits we possess
requires sophisticated horizontal drilling \5\ and monitoring
\3\ equipment.
Some of the technology for these areas is being supported by the
Research Partnership to Secure Energy for America (RPSEA), of which we
are a member. These programs, however, tend to be on a larger scale and
less suited for small businesses.
DOE R&D support, through NETL, which requires cost-sharing by the
applicant and outside sources, is an ideal model for a stimulant to
small business and technological growth. To cite one example, consider
our Drilling Vibration Monitor and Control System,\3\ currently
entering commercial service. In 2002, NETL launched the Deep Trek
initiative, aimed at developing new technologies to reduce the cost of
deep gas drilling. After review by outside experts of both a pre-
application and application, APS was granted a Cooperative Agreement to
develop this new tool, with the DOE paying 75 percent of the first
phase.
During this period we designed and modeled this tool, which senses
the vibration of the bit and drillstring, and continually adjusts the
stiffness of an active vibration damper located above the bit. As a
result, the bit does not bounce off bottom, and applies the optimal
force to enhance the rate of drilling.
Phase II drilling tests have shown\15\ that use of this tool can
increase the drilling speed by 10-50 percent, and significantly extend
the life of drill bits and other downhole components. None of this
development would have been possible without DOE support. APS was not
in a position to fund it; the major service companies were not
interested until there was an indication of value to the end user and
the production companies needed something more concrete before
investing in the technology.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ M.E. Wassell et al. ``Active vibration damper improves
performance and reduces drilling costs'', World Oil, September 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now, with the help of these tests made possible by DOE support,
there is considerable customer interest. This product should lead to
major improvements in efficiency for the oil and gas drilling industry,
and growth for our company. For example, APS has been recognized as one
of the fastest-growing technology companies in Connecticut for the past
9 years. We are in the midst of a hiring boom and plan to increase our
U.S. employees by 60 during 2012.
In summary, DOE research initiatives are essential to ``prime the
pump'' of new technology development. This is even more important in
these times of high fuel prices, ``lean'' corporations and increased
dependence on foreign oil sources. I urge you, in the strongest
possible terms, to maintain or increase the funding for these programs.
Thank you.
______
Prepared Statement of Carnegie Mellon University
Madam Chairwoman, ranking member, and members of the subcommittee:
My name is Timothy McNulty, and I am the Associate Vice President for
Government Relations at Carnegie Mellon University. The great progress
being made in America's pursuit of energy independence is a product of
the synergy between the entrepreneurial strength of our energy sector
and strategic research investments that have fundamentally changed the
very nature of production. As our pursuit of energy independence gains
momentum, it is critical to continue funding the programs that best
foster this dynamic. A prime example of such a program is section 999,
the Ultra-Deepwater and Natural Gas Supply Research and Development
Program created by the Energy Policy Act (EPAct) of 2005.
The section 999 program supports the dynamic research of the
Strategic Center for Natural Gas and Oil at the National Energy
Technology Laboratory (NETL SCNGO), as well as a consortium of U.S.
energy research universities, industry, and independent research
organizations under the Research Partnership to Secure Energy for
America (RPSEA). This approach ensures that the program engages
partners from across the United States and fully utilizes the
capabilities of the Nation's fossil energy lab, which has a long
history of strong collaboration with industry and a proven track record
of moving technology from discovery to commercialization. The RPSEA
partnership brings the best of highly competitive research to bear on
the fundamental industry challenges that the United States must address
in order to realize the full potential of new energy sources safely and
effectively.
At NETL, research is underway to address the central technological
and basic scientific questions that will support continued expansion of
shale production. These include novel techniques for water quality and
treatment, research on well distribution and optimization, modeling to
predict induced seismicity, and pre-competitive research on new end-use
products and markets for natural gas.
This research program also benefits from a unique collaboration
between the National Lab and five universities--Carnegie Mellon
University, Penn State University, Virginia Tech University, the
University of Pittsburgh, and West Virginia University. Working with
the Lab, these institutions comprise the NETL Regional University
Alliance (NETL RUA), a ``virtual'' laboratory that taps leading
capabilities in hydrology, water systems, drilling technologies, and
risk assessment from across the region.
The NETL research builds upon recent breakthroughs such as the
development of potential new nanoparticles supporting enhanced oil
recovery and new ways to model and image multiphase, multifluid flow in
shale core. Other major research accomplishments include the
development of remote sensing techniques to monitor shallow groundwater
salinity, the effective utilization of airborne magnetic surveys to
detect the location of unknown wells in an active enhanced oil recovery
well in the western United States, and the assemblage of a 3-D geologic
framework for the Marcellus Shale using commercially available
software.
In addition to aiding the pursuit of energy independence, the
section 999 program is also vital to maintaining America's global
leadership in energy-related technologies. As the discovery of shale
sources continues across the world--on virtually every continent--one
aspect of the energy race for the future will clearly be to develop the
production-related technologies and expertise that will become a major
source of export-related business and job growth.
The question is whether American companies, workers and communities
will benefit from leading this development. By bringing together the
best of American industry, university and national lab research on
practical problem-solving and opportunity-seizing innovation, the
section 999 program funding is vital to laying the foundation for
American leadership in what will be a major export market of the next
two decades.
In essence, the research NETL is leading as part of the section 999
program spans breakthroughs that both extend the boundaries of
discovery and production and strive to ensure that this production is
undertaken in an environmentally safe manner. This program is critical
to advance productivity, to establish the foundation for scientifically
based, environmentally sound extraction, and to catalyze new industries
related to new energy extraction.
The Congress's support for restoring funding of section 999 in
fiscal year 2012 was greatly appreciated and needed. It is enabling
practical results that make a difference in both production and
scientifically based environmental protection. Continued support of the
section 999 program by restoring the full $50 million in funding for
fiscal year 2013 is respectfully urged as an investment in emerging
American energy innovation and continued progress toward
environmentally safe energy independence.
______
Prepared Statement of the Coal Utilization Research Council
introduction
This statement is submitted on behalf of the membership of the Coal
Utilization Research Council (CURC), an organization of coal-using
utilities, coal producers, equipment suppliers, universities and
institutions of higher learning, and several State government entities
interested and involved in the use of coal resources and the
development of coal-based technologies (see www.coal.org). Members of
CURC, together with the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), have
developed a Technology Roadmap (Roadmap) that defines the research,
development, and demonstration (RD&D) necessary to insure the enhanced
utilization of coal in the United States. The recommendations for
fiscal year 2013 appropriations discussed in this testimony are keyed
directly to the 2012 update of the Roadmap.
coal utilization research council fiscal year 2013 budget
recommendation
The President has requested $241 million for the coal RD&D program
in fiscal year 2013, which is $93 million below the fiscal year 2012
enacted level of $333 million. This fiscal year 2013 request is nearly
40 percent below the $389 million fiscal year 2011 appropriated levels.
The budget request being made for Fossil Energy represents the only
area in Department of Energy's (DOE) budget for which less funding is
being requested than the prior year. CURC recommends that the fiscal
year 2013 coal research and development (R&D) program be funded at $372
million (see chart below). Recommended increases in funding would be
targeted to specific areas as well as new programs, all of which are
keyed to the Roadmap (details below). This recommendation represents an
increase of $131 million over the President's fiscal year 2013 request
and $39 million above the funding level of $333 million (exclusive of
the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) in-house R&D program)
that the Congress provided in fiscal year 2012.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The CURC figures are exclusive of the NETL coal research and
development (in-house R&D) program budget of $35 million. While an
important program, this funding supports salaries for research
conducted by NETL in-house and is not a cost-shared program with
industry. The Roadmap identifies programs that are undertaken in
partnership between industry and government, and therefore, CURC's
recommendations are focused on the competitive programs funded in the
coal RD&D program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
importance of coal and the department of energy fossil energy research
and development program
Coal is essential to the U.S. energy economy. In 2010, coal
provided 21 percent of total U.S. energy consumption and 48 percent of
U.S. electric power.\2\ The U.S. Energy Information Administration
(EIA) projects that coal will continue to provide nearly 40 percent of
our Nation's electricity through 2035. Technology has enabled coal to
address environmental and economic challenges in the past. The proven
formula for success has been the collaborative, cost-sharing efforts of
the Government and the private sector. This public and private sector
partnership has provided great value to the taxpayer yielding a return
of $13 for every $1 of Federal funding spent for coal RD&D.\3\ The
National Academies of Science estimated that between 1986 and 2000, the
DOE Fossil Energy Program generated $7.4 billion in economic benefits
to this country.\4\ Today, 3 out of every 4 coal plants in United
States are equipped with technologies that trace their origins to DOE's
program, allowing coal use to increase by more than 63 percent in the
United States over the last 30 years while the emissions of
SO2 and NOX have decreased on the order of 70
percent.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Coal plays a similar role in the global energy economy. Between
2000 and 2010, coal accounted for nearly one-half the increase in
global energy use, OECD/IEA 2011.
\3\ Fossil Energy Research Benefits, Clean Coal Technology Program,
USDOE/NETL.
\4\ ``Energy Research at DOE, Was it Worth It?'', Energy Efficiency
and Fossil Energy Research 1978 to 2000, National Academy of Sciences,
2001 Report, pg. 6.
\5\ EIA Annual Energy Review 2010, EPA National Air Pollutant
Emissions Trends: 1900-1998.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
the roadmap
The Roadmap represents a plan for developing technologies that
convert coal to electricity and other useful forms of energy and
manufacturing feedstocks. The Roadmap describes coal technology
advancements that will achieve specific cost, performance, and
environmental goals and in doing so, will benefit the Nation's
environment, economy, and energy security. A significant conclusion of
the Roadmap is that, with the combination of technology development and
enhanced oil recovery (EOR), coal-based power plants designed and
constructed in 2025 can provide electricity at a price competitive with
natural gas and other fuels, and with 75 percent less CO2
than today's new natural gas-based power plant. Other additional
benefits of successfully implementing the Roadmap include aggressive
reduction of traditional air pollutants and water use/discharge; and
enhanced energy and economic security via production of low-cost power
using the largest U.S. domestic energy resource. The key to successful
technology development is:
--adequate public support;
--enhanced levels of funding targeted to specific technology areas;
and
--a regulatory and public policy framework that supports coal use.
funding needs to accomplish the roadmap
Below is a chart that outlines CURC's proposed funding
recommendations compared to the fiscal year 2013 proposed budget for
Fossil Energy R&D. These CURC recommendations are targeted to achieving
the Roadmap goals by directing funds to specific programmatic
activities, including new activities not currently funded by DOE.
Advanced Energy Systems
Advanced Combustion.--CURC recommends a total of $65 million for
the Advanced Combustion program in fiscal year 2013 to develop
technologies for advanced combustion platforms, including
focused work on waste heat recovery and integration, advanced
power cycles, and alternative process configurations. The
Roadmap envisions a pathway for the integration of these
advanced ultra supercritical (AUSC) materials technologies into
new, highly efficient advanced coal systems. CURC recommends
$10 million in fiscal year 2013 for DOE to build upon the
successes of the AUSC program and to develop a roadmap that
identifies a pathway for moving the AUSC materials work forward
and support industry efforts in commercializing AUSC
technologies. CURC also recommends $10 million for DOE to
initiate a mercury control technology program to develop
technologies to allow new combustion plants to meet the mercury
emissions standard imposed by Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) on new plants.
Gasification.--CURC recommends $55 million in fiscal year 2013 to
support dry feed system integration and scale up, advanced
sensors work, simulation of fast ramp improvements, and
refractory testing, as well as focus on the integration of ion
transport membrane (ITM) technologies into the power generation
process, which is important for overall cost reductions of
gasification technologies.
Turbines.--CURC recommends $24 million for the turbine program in
fiscal year 2013 to validate advanced hydrogen turbine
technology and components in full turbine test stand
demonstrations, and to expand the program to development of
components compatible with ITM integration.
Cross-Cutting Research.--In addition to supporting university
training and research and computational modeling through the National
Risk Assessment Partnership (NRAP) and the Carbon Capture Simulation
Initiative (CCSI), CURC recommends $12.4 million for DOE to initiate a
water management program. The Roadmap defines a program to survey the
industry's water management practices in order to model water use and
management for a variety of coals, process steps and emission limits,
and to develop technologies that reduce water withdrawal and
consumption. CURC also recommends $16 million to fund research on
breakthrough technologies. The Roadmap characterizes these technologies
as ``out-of-the-box'' thinking, or fundamentally new approaches to
solving coal's challenges.
Carbon Capture.--CURC believes that it is a wise public investment
to determine how to cost-effectively capture and use/store
CO2 so that we do not eliminate any options for coal in the
future, and sees a dual role for continued development of
CO2 capture technology. The first role is the benefit for
meeting current and future climate mitigation regulations. States have
adopted CO2 regulatory requirements and on March 27, the EPA
has proposed regulatory requirements for CO2 emissions from
new coal-fueled power plants which would require the application of
carbon controls. The second role is driven by energy security benefits.
If the price of captured CO2 can be reduced through RD&D,
the CO2 can be used to augment production of domestic crude
oil through EOR, thereby increasing the potential to domestically
produce trillions of dollars of oil over the next several decades,
which would reduce reliance on imported oil and improve the U.S.
balance of trade.
Post-Combustion.--For both new and existing power plants,
postcombustion capture technology must be made more efficient
and cost-effective by reducing parasitic power and capital cost
requirements. CURC recommends $60 million in fiscal year 2013
to develop novel capture process improvements that can support
coal power plant retrofits and natural gas combined cycle
(NGCC) retrofits equally.
Pre-Combustion.--CO2 capture for gasification is
focused on improved capture processes in order to reduce costs.
CURC recommends $17.4 million for pre-combustion capture work
in fiscal year 2013 specifically to pilot new shift catalysts
and reactor designs, accelerate hydrogen membrane pilot
projects, address CO2 slurry feed integration,
evaluate alternates to warm gas capture, and acquire data and
design guidance from current demonstrations.
Carbon Storage.--CURC supports the Regional Carbon Sequestration
Partnerships (RCSP), and recommends a follow-on program that builds
upon the success of the RCSPs. In our judgment this follow-on program
will support the development of a commercial industry necessary for
deployment of carbon storage. CURC recommends $40 million in fiscal
year 2013 to initiate a ``carbon storage site certification'' program
intended to characterize and qualify 5 regionally diverse sites that
can each accept 50 million tons of CO2 at a rate of 5
million tons per year.
loan guarantee program
Demonstration of first-generation technology, as reflected in the
projects currently supported by the DOE Clean Coal Power Initiative
(CCPI) program and the DOE Loan Guarantee program, are critically
important in proving the integration of these technologies. The success
of these projects is necessary to support the development of second-
generation technologies contemplated in the Roadmap. CURC supports the
$8 billion authorization for DOE to provide loan guarantees to selected
fossil energy projects.
department of energy practice of mortgaging
The practice of partial funding of multiyear projects contingent on
future appropriations has been a fundamental aspect of DOE's research
program for many years and is embodied in DOE's Financial Assistance
Regulations. Mortgaging provides DOE the flexibility to fund several
projects, to discontinue projects that are not meeting objectives and
redirect funds to other meritorious projects that are successfully
achieving development targets. Any restriction on the DOE practice of
mortgaging will reduce the portfolio of technologies emerging from the
program and create public and private investment risks. CURC recommends
that the current approach to funding projects be maintained at DOE.
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enacted Request CURC
---------------------------------------------------
Carbon Capture and Sequestration and Power Systems Fiscal year Fiscal year Fiscal year Fiscal year
2011 2012 2013 2013
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carbon capture:
Postcombustion.......................................... 41,299 55,495 49,035 60,000
Pre-combustion.......................................... 17,404 13,403 11,403 17,600Carbon storage:
Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnerships.............. 77,160 83,190 66,980 56,600
Geological storage...................................... 24,946 14,978 11,255 ...........
MVAA.................................................... 8,122 6,738 6,738 ...........
Carbon Use/Reuse........................................ 967 778 778 ...........
Sequestration Science focus area........................ 9,717 9,726 9,726 ...........
Carbon storage site certification \1\................... ........... ........... ........... 40,000
Advanced Compressor \1\................................. ........... ........... ........... 960Advanced Energy Systems:
Advanced Combustion Research, including:................ 30,724 15,942 10,699 65,000
--Advanced Ultra SuperCritical (High Temperature) ........... ........... ........... 10,000
materials \1\......................................
--Mercury capture for new plants \1\................ ........... ........... ........... 10,000
Gasification Research, including:....................... 47,614 39,000 31,905 55,200
--Air Separation and Oxygen Production.............. ........... ........... ........... 4,800
Hydrogen turbines....................................... 30,106 15,000 12,589 24,800
Hydrogen from coal...................................... 11,661 ........... ........... ...........
Coal and coal biomass to liquids........................ ........... 5,000 ........... ...........
Solid oxide fuel cell................................... 48,522 25,000 ........... ...........Cross-cutting research:
Plant optimization (sensors, controls, NC, materials)... 7,789 13,663 7,000 ...........
Coal utilization science:
--Computational system dynamics--National Risk 12,462 11,800 7,800 10,000
Assessment Partnership.............................
--Computational Energy science--Carbon Capture 11,844 13,371 9,400 10,000
Simulation Initiative..............................
Energy Analyses......................................... 4,837 4,950 950 ...........
University training and research........................ 3,164 4,000 3,250 4,000
International activities................................ 1,350 1,350 1,350 ...........
Water management \1\.................................... ........... ........... ........... 12,400
Breakthrough technology research \1\.................... ........... ........... ........... 16,000
---------------------------------------------------
Coal R&D subtotal without in-house R&D................ 389,688 333,384 240,858 371,960National Energy Technology Laboratory Coal Research and ........... 35,011 35,011 35,011
Development (in-house R&D).................................
---------------------------------------------------
Coal R&D subtotal with in-house R&D................... 389,688 368,395 275,869 406,971
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Program is CURC-EPRI Roadmap Program and does not have a comparable program in the DOE budget.
______
Prepared Statement of the Coalition of Northeastern Governors
The Coalition of Northeastern Governors (CONEG) is pleased to share
with the subcommittee on Energy and Water Development this testimony on
fiscal year 2013 appropriations for the Department of Energy's energy
efficiency programs, the Energy Information Administration, and the
Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve. The governors request fiscal year
2013 funding of no less than the fiscal year 2012 levels for the
following Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Programs: $50 million
for the State Energy Program and $220 million for the Building
Technologies Program. The governors also ask that you provide at least
historic funding levels for the Weatherization Assistance Program. In
addition, the governors request at least $105 million for the Energy
Information Administration, and sufficient funding for maintenance and
operation of the Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve.
We recognize that this year the subcommittee faces a very difficult
set of choices in this environment of severe fiscal constraints.
Continued, adequate Federal funding for these energy programs is a
vital step in helping businesses and households across the Nation
manage their energy costs, and moving the Nation toward increased
energy independence.
state energy program
The CONEG governors request at least $50 million for the State
Energy Program (SEP) in fiscal year 2013 with these funds provided as
base SEP formula funding. This level of base funding is critical for
the SEP to continue the successful State-Federal-private sector
partnerships for many energy efficiency and conservation programs. The
base SEP program is particularly important to smaller States since it
allows them to dramatically enhance program delivery and leverage non-
Federal resources with Federal funds.
The 56 State and territory energy offices use SEP funds, along with
leveraged State and private sector funds, to implement vital energy
efficiency, renewable energy, and alternative energy demonstration in
energy end-use sectors such as buildings, industry, agriculture,
transportation, and power generation. In addition, States use SEP funds
to prepare for natural disasters and increase the security of critical
energy infrastructure.
States use SEP funds to carry out a wide variety of activities most
appropriate for the energy profiles of a State. These may include
energy efficiency retrofits and installation of solar systems on State
buildings that save taxpayers thousands of dollars in energy costs and
reduce carbon emissions. These funds also support public outreach and
education to local residents, small businesses, farmers, and others to
make them aware of opportunities to reduce energy consumption and
energy bills. Using SEP funds, States also work with the private sector
to showcase new clean technologies and to invest in renewable energy
projects.
The SEP program yields proven energy and economic benefits. The
most recent Oak Ridge National Laboratory cost-benefit analysis of the
program found that every $1 in SEP funding yields $7.22 in annual
energy cost savings, $10.71 in leveraged funding, and annual energy
savings of 1.03 million source BTUs. The Department of Energy (DOE)
estimates that, based on recent appropriations levels, the SEP program
results in an annual energy cost savings of $300 million.
weatherization assistance program
The CONEG governors request at least historic funding levels in
fiscal year 2013 for the Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP).
Weatherization is an immediate and effective tool to alleviate the
energy burden of low-income households by making their homes more
energy efficient. The fiscal year 2010 funding level of $210 million is
the minimum level needed to ensure that States across the country can
continue the program's successful efforts to reduce the costs of home
energy and increase the safety of these vulnerable households.
Low-income households pay a disproportionate share of their income
on energy bills, often spending more than 19 percent of their annual
income on home energy compared to just 4 percent for all other
households. Through a State-managed network of more than 900 local
weatherization providers, WAP makes cost-effective improvements to
about 100,000 low-income households annually, permanently reducing
energy costs for these vulnerable families.
Cost-effective weatherization measures are tailored to specific
homes and climates. Many of these measures are inexpensive yet
effective services, such as installing insulation, sealing ducts, and
tuning and repairing heating and cooling systems. The program uses the
most advanced technologies and diagnostic equipment to develop a
comprehensive cost-effective strategy to reduce household energy use.
In fall 2011, DOE estimated that these measures save families an
average of $437 annually in heating and cooling costs alone.
In addition to the considerable energy benefits, weatherization
services increase the health and safety of low-income homes by
detecting carbon monoxide and gas leaks in tested equipment, replacing
unsafe equipment, and checking for moisture damage. The program also
fosters significant investments in local economies by creating jobs,
offering professional training, and making housing more affordable in
communities across the Nation. For every $1 invested, WAP returns $2.51
in benefits, including $1.80 in energy savings, according to DOE.
building technologies program
The CONEG governors request at least $220 million for the Building
Technologies Program (BTP) in fiscal year 2013. According to DOE, the
buildings sector consumes more energy than any other sector in the
United States including transportation and industry. The potential
energy savings are great. Through partnerships with State and local
governments, national laboratories and universities, BTP supports
research, demonstration and deployment of technologies and practices to
make new and existing buildings less energy intensive. These RD&D
partnership activities are a vital complement to other public policy
incentives that encourage private sector investments in smart energy
use.
In the millions of existing buildings, BTP works to decrease energy
consumption through retrofits or replacements that decrease energy use
and improve safety and comfort. In new construction, BTP works to make
improvements in technologies and techniques for the design,
construction and operation of more energy efficient, productive, and
affordable buildings.
energy information administration
The governors request at least $105 million in fiscal year 2013
funding for the Energy Information Administration (EIA). As the
independent statistical arm of the DOE, EIA is a leader is providing
reliable independent information, analyses and forecasts on U.S. energy
production, demand, consumption, imports and prices. The information
and analyses provided by EIA are vital to State and Federal
policymakers as they develop critical energy and environmental
strategies. Consumers rely on EIA's widely-available information and
forecasts to make a variety of energy and household-related decisions.
Increasingly complex global energy factors have greatly increased
EIA's workload. Continued adequate appropriations in fiscal year 2013
will ensure that EIA can provide the most accurate reliable information
at the level of detail needed by policymakers and consumers to make
informed decisions.
northeast home heating oil reserve
The CONEG governors request sufficient fiscal year 2013 funding for
maintenance and operation of the Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve.
The Northeast is uniquely dependent on home heating oil. More than 25
percent of northeast homes use fuel oil for heating. These homes
account for more than 80 percent of residential heating oil use
nationwide, making the region particularly vulnerable to the effects of
supply disruptions and price volatility.
In the event of a supply disruption, the Reserve provides a buffer
that allows additional time for supplies to reach the region. Reserve
locations are strategically placed throughout the region to respond
rapidly and efficiently to any emergency supply interruption.
summary
In summary, the CONEG governors request that the subcommittee
provide at least $50 million for the State Energy Program for the base
SEP formula program, $220 million for the Building Technologies
Program, at least historic funding levels for the Weatherization
Assistance Program, at least $105 million for the Energy Information
Administration, and sufficient funding for maintenance and operation of
the Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve.
______
Prepared Statement of Cummins Inc.
office of energy efficiency and renewable energy
Office of Vehicle Technologies
Advanced Combustion Engine Research and Development
Advanced Technology Powertrain--Light Duty.--Increase the
administration's request of $55.2 million by $5 million to bring the
program total to $60.2 million in fiscal year 2013. $58.02 million was
appropriated in fiscal year 2012. The Advanced Combustion Engine
research and development (R&D) program includes important research
areas for diesel and gasoline engines to develop more energy efficient
and environmentally friendly technologies. The Department of Energy
(DOE) has launched the ``Supertruck'' Initiative which includes the
Advanced Technology Powertrain--Light Duty (ATP-LD) program. The goals
of ATP-LD program are to deliver a standard light-duty pickup truck
which can achieve at least 40 percent improvement in fuel economy over
the state-of-the-art gasoline engines while meeting Tier 2 Bin 2
tailpipe emissions (the same emissions standard required for gasoline
powered vehicles). Diesel engine R&D is critically important to improve
energy-efficiency and environmentally friendly technologies. This is
accomplished through a better understanding of combustion processes
which enable the use of significantly less petroleum while meeting or
exceeding customer value. When this technology has fully penetrated the
market, 40-percent fuel economy enhancement in light-duty trucks and
SUVs would reduce U.S. petroleum consumption by more than 1.5 million
oil barrels/day and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by more than 0.5
million metric tons/day with energy security and trade balance
benefits. Innovative high-risk technologies, such as low-temperature
combustion, variable-valve actuation, closed-loop selective catalytic
reduction (SCR) controls, lightweight structural and advanced materials
are planned. The funding increase will help address significant
technology hurdles in the areas of on-board diagnostics, parasitic loss
reduction, aftertreatment requirements, minimizing fuel penalty due to
the aftertreatment, and the use of renewable fuels. Without the
increased funding, research activities would be significantly limited.
Advanced Manufacturing Office (Formerly Industrial Technologies
Program)
Next Generation Manufacturing Processes
Combined Heat and Power Generation--Advanced Reciprocating Engine
Systems.--Support administration's request of $198.7 million for fiscal
year 2013. $62.1 million was appropriated in fiscal year 2012. Next
Generation Manufacturing Processes are cross-cutting activities which
focus on energy efficient processes and reduce energy intensity of
manufactured products. The Combined Heat and Power Generation
initiative within the Advanced Manufacturing Office includes the
important Advanced Reciprocating Engine Systems (ARES) program, a
component of distributed generation. The objective of the ARES program
is to develop high efficiency, low emissions and cost-effective
technologies for stationary engine systems (500-6500 kW) that can use
natural gas or domestic renewable resources such as ``opportunity''
fuels. Natural gas-fueled reciprocating engine power plants are
preferred for reliability, low-operating costs, and point-of-use power
generation. Opportunity fuels can be renewable fuels (e.g., landfill
gases) which exhibit low BTU, lower methane number and varying gas
composition. Their use reduces the dependence on high-quality pipe-line
natural gas. The technologies goals sponsored by the ARES program are
being readied to demonstrate 47-percent engine efficiency (20-40-
percent increase from the baseline), higher power densities than
current products, with an expected reduction in life-cycle costs and
GHG emissions. The administration's fiscal year 2013 budget will
support advanced technological challenges including higher-base engine
efficiency, combustion enhancements with low BTU and methane gases,
nitrogen oxides (NOX) reduction, advanced sensors and
controls, hardware durability and lower life-cycle costs. The
development of distributed power generation supports lower life-cycle
energy consumption of manufactured products, national energy security
needs, improves protection of critical infrastructure and decreases
dependence on the national electrical grid system through point-of-use
energy production.
Combined Heat and Power Generation--330kw Packaged Combined Heat
and Power System.--Support administration's request of $198.7 million
for fiscal year 2013. $62.1 million was appropriated in fiscal year
2012. Next Generation Manufacturing Processes are cross-cutting
activities which focus on energy-efficient processes and reduce the
energy intensity of manufactured products. The 330kw Packaged CHP
System project entails the development of a flexible CHP system that
can be deployed to commercial and light industrial (100-500kw)
applications at a lower total cost of ownership than current CHP
solutions. This project will result in a CHP system that is easy to use
and inexpensive to install, offering world class customer support while
providing a high efficiency internal combustion engine for a CHP system
of this size. CHP systems offer higher system energy-efficiency, lower
emissions and overall economic benefits. Modern engine designs operate
at significantly lower regulated exhaust emissions. Combined heat and
power systems use internal combustion engines to produce electricity at
point of use and recover waste heat for heating or cooling purposes.
Energy intensity of the CHP customer can be reduced in excess of 35
percent due primarily to more efficient electrical generation and
recovered waste heat. The fiscal year 2013 budget will support
prototype CHP system development and field testing.
office of science
Basic Energy Sciences
Fundamental Interactions Research
Predictive Simulation for Internal Combustion Engines.--Support
administration's request of $71.5 million for fiscal year 2013. $67.5
million was appropriated in fiscal year 2012. Fundamental Interactions
Research builds the fundamental science basis essential for
technological advances in diverse range of energy processes. In support
of the clean energy agenda, Predictive Simulation for Internal
Combustion Engines (PreSICE) program is a simulation and diagnostics
study addressing the interplay between combustion chemistry and
turbulent flows in combustion systems. This will lead to the
development of robust engineering design tools for computational
analysis capability. This large-scale computational simulation
initiative is targeted at achieving cost-effective means for even
greater fuel efficiency. Models will be developed for advanced chemical
kinetics, computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and large eddy
simulations. These models will simulate advanced combustion regimes,
transient events and cycle-to-cycle variability. Development of better
solver algorithms will minimize cycle-to-cycle variations and more
rapid optimization of overall engine design. The administration's
fiscal year 2013 budget will accelerate the predictive simulation of
internal combustion engines.
______
Prepared Statement of the Diesel Technology Forum
The Diesel Technology Forum (DTF) is a not-for-profit organization
representing diesel engine and equipment makers, fuel suppliers, and
emissions control technology companies. We appreciate the opportunity
to submit outside witness testimony regarding certain aspects of the
fiscal year 2013 proposed budget of the Department of Energy (DOE),
particularly its Vehicle Technologies Program (VTP) and its various
budget activities for commercial vehicles such as Advanced Combustion
Engine R&D (ACE R&D), batteries and electric drive technologies,
vehicle and systems simulation, fuels technology, and materials
research.
Diesel engines play a key role in the global economy. A 2011
economic study commissioned by the DTF and completed by Aspen
Environmental Group reported that more than 80 percent of all freight
is moved throughout the United States by diesel trucks, ships, trains,
and intermodal systems. Worldwide, 94 percent of all global trade is
powered by diesel engines and equipment. In addition, the diesel
industry contributes more than $480 billion annually to the U.S.
economy and provides more than 1.25 million jobs.
Medium- and heavy-duty trucks--the majority of which are powered by
diesel engines--consume roughly one-fifth of transportation fuels in
the United States. Petroleum consumption for heavy-duty vehicles is
expected to increase 40 percent between 2010 and 2035. Increasing the
efficiency of these vehicles can lower the costs of land-based freight
and the industries that depend on it, while greatly reducing the
Nation's dependence on imported oil.
Last year, we expressed our concern with this subcommittee over the
Department's fiscal year 2012 budget request that would have terminated
or delayed commitments under the SuperTruck program, which focuses on
improving heavy-duty truck efficiency. Today, we commend the Department
for moving forward to meet commitments to prior awards within the
SuperTruck program. We are pleased that the fiscal year 2013 Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) budget request proposes to
retain the contracted investments in several key budget activity areas
that impact heavy-duty diesel engines, commercial vehicles, and truck
efficiency programs.
Because of Well-Established Future Need, Proven Past Performance, and
Extended Societal Benefits, Funding for VTPs Including ACE R&D,
Fuels, Vehicle and Systems Simulation, Batteries and Electric
Drive Technology, and Materials Technologies, and SuperTruck
Activities Should Be Retained
The subcommittee again faces a difficult task of setting priorities
among many competing programs with limited resources. The subcommittee
should seek to assure a proper balance between fully funding programs
that are known to improve efficiency of existing energy-intensive
sectors on a medium-term basis as well as more future-oriented, but
uncertain other technologies. The current fiscal year 2013 budget
request from DOE EERE properly funds those key heavy-duty vehicle
programs and projects that bring a proven track record of real-world
fuel savings, and we urge that it be retained.
The commercial vehicle research activities have been cross-cutting
in scope and shared risk and benefits between DOE, private industry,
the Department of Defense (DOD), Department of Transportation and
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This suite of programs to make
commercial vehicles more energy efficient--the 21st Century Truck
Partnership and diesel engine and fuel research--have been among DOE
EERE's most successful investments. They are proven to have helped meet
important societal goals of economic growth and small business
development (economics of more energy efficient commercial truck
acquisition and ownership); cleaner air (reducing diesel engine
emissions), reduced reliance on imported oil (increasing truck energy
efficiency).
They have also enhanced our national security, through contributing
to fuel savings of DOD military vehicles. Fuel accounts for 70 percent
of the bulk tonnage transported to the battlefield and reducing
consumption by 1 percent leads to 6,500 fewer soldier trips, which has
been identified with saving lives on the battlefield through reduced
risk in transporting fuel.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Bochenek, Grace. U.S. Army Tank Automotive Research Development
and Engineering Center, 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Need To Reduce Energy Consumption From Commercial Vehicles is
Significant
In August 2011, President Obama announced the finalization of the
first-ever fuel economy and greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction standards
for medium- and heavy-duty commercial vehicles. This new regulation
requires vehicle and engine manufacturers to improve efficiency by
anywhere from 7 to 25 percent for model years 2014-2017, with the
potential for further reductions beyond 2017.
Reaching these challenging goals will require substantial
manufacturer investment in the next several years at a time when
economic recovery and market potential for heavy-duty commercial trucks
has shown some recent positive signs but still remains tentative. More
than ever, the combined collaborative approach of the DOE program of
shared research toward common energy-saving objectives is needed and
necessary to assure continued progress and increase the speed of
development, deployment of technologies, and societal benefits.
While manufacturers are already well at work to meet these
aggressive and brand new regulatory requirements, continued
collaboration and partnership within truck research programs that are
funded at the committed levels will enable more rapid development and
deployment of these advanced technologies than could have been
accomplished without the collaborative government and industry
partnership. This translates into greater reductions in energy use and
savings to the economy and reduced emissions occuring earlier than
predicted as well.
The 21st Century Truck Partnership and Related Research Programs Have
Been Recently Reviewed and Found To Be of Significant Value and
High Performance
The prestigious National Research Council of the National Academy
of Sciences recently conducted an exhaustive review of the government
industry partnership program for commercial truck efficiency. In a 2011
pre-publication report,\2\ the independent NAS review panel noted that:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Review of the 21st Century Truck Partnership, Second Report,
2012. National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council Pre-
publication copy accessed from National Academies Web site March 22,
2012. http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=13288 ISBN-10: 0-309-
22247-8; ISBN-13: 978-0-309-22247-1.
``Given the Federal regulatory requirements to reduce emissions and
fuel consumption, it seems the sharing of research and development
(R&D) costs between the government and U.S. manufacturers of trucks and
buses or heavy-duty vehicle components are appropriate to develop new
technologies. Thus, the 21CTP is providing access to the extraordinary
expertise and equipment in Federal laboratories, in addition to seed
funding that draws financial commitment from the companies to push
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
forward in new technology areas.'' (Page S-3)
``The 21CTP should be continued to help meet the nation's goal of
reduced fuel consumption in the transportation sector.'' (Page S-3)
``The three (see note) SuperTruck projects will be the flagship
projects under the 21CTP for fiscal year 2011 through fiscal year 2014;
the goals are in concert with recommendations made in the 2008 NRC
Phase 1 report.'' (Page S-12)
(Note: After the NAS report was drafted, one additional project was
added (for a total of four) which falls into the same category as the
projects mentioned.)
The existing DOE EERE Commercial Vehicle and Engine Programs have
delivered substantial and proven economic, environmental and energy
saving benefits: For every $1 invested, advanced combustion research
delivered $53 in benefits. According to a May 2010 study \3\ previous
advanced combustion research for laser and optical diagnostics along
with combustion modeling undertaken by DOE and now in commercial
vehicles on the road today saved 17.6 billion gallons of diesel fuel
over a 12-year period (1995-2007); a 4.5-percent savings in fuel
consumption over what would have occurred without the program
investments. This translates into a monetized saving of $34.5 billion
in 2008 dollars, and reduction of more than 177 million tons of
CO2 prevented.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Link, Albert N. Retrospective Benefit-Cost Evaluation of U.S.
DOE Vehicle Combustion Engine R&D Investments, Department of Economics,
University of North Carolina at Greensboro; May 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The established goal of improving fuel economy by 20 percent for
commercial vehicles in the ACE R&D has the potential to save more
energy than the electrification of 1 million cars. Past investments
have contributed to diesel engine manufacturers being able to meet the
most stringent emissions standards on record, resulting in today's
clean diesel technology with near zero emissions of ozone forming
compounds (nitrogen oxides) and particulate matter. The total health
and environmental benefits in terms of savings in air pollution and
energy savings exceed $70 billion according to the previously
referenced May 2010 study.
Fully Funding Commercial Vehicle Research Budgets Assures Continued
Gains and That Will Help Expedite Fuel-Saving Technology
Development and Deployment
Given the substantial progress made in the 21st Century Truck
Program, a framework of continuous progress has been developed over
time that is a predictive indicator of potential future success.
Adequate DOE program funding can assure that the commercial vehicle,
engine, and SuperTruck program goals of 50 percent increase in freight
efficiency (ton-miles per gallon) will be more likely to be met. Truck
and engine manufacturers face the unique challenge of competing
societal demands of improved efficiency and near-zero emissions while
meeting customer demands for lowest cost of operation. Significant
investments in research are required but there are diminishing
opportunities to recoup the substantial investments needed to meet
these goals with only an average 200,000-250,000 heavy-duty trucks sold
annually. Federal research investment in high-risk research is vital to
the industry. DOE R&D programs are usually a 50-50 cost share between
government and industry and this Federal match encourages companies to
spend their R&D dollars in the United States. A fully funded SuperTruck
program can assure these goals are more likely to be accomplished
earlier than if companies alone shoulder larger research demands.
conclusions
There is an incontrovertible and established need to improve energy
efficiency of the Nation's commercial vehicles. Commercial diesel-
powered trucks are the backbone of the U.S. economy and the prime
movers of the Nation's goods movement system, and will be for the
foreseeable future. Fuel consumption in this sector is projected to
continue to grow with the economy. Past EERE engine and vehicle
efficiency programs have delivered substantial and well-documented
economic, energy and environmental benefits to society. To assure
uninterrupted progress of these efforts, we urge that the subcommittee
retain the proposed fiscal year 2013 budget request for the committed
levels of SuperTruck and related program funding.
An adequate Government funding stream for the suite of VTPs like
SuperTruck and the ACE R&D, Fuels Technologies, Batteries and Electric
Drive Technologies, Vehicle and Systems Simulation, and Materials must
be retained at DOE requested levels to assure continued progress and
accelerate development and deployment of energy saving technologies.
Any reductions to the fiscal year 2013 EERE proposed funding will
jeopardize continued progress at an especially critical time as the
industry moves to meet new GHG emissions and fuel efficiency goals,
near-zero emissions levels along with competing customer demands with
the backdrop of a weakened and recovering economy.
The diesel engine is the prime mover of America's transportation,
infrastructure, and goods movement today and for the foreseeable
future. The 21st CTP has made substantial contributions to the new
near-zero emissions performance of diesel engines in commercial trucks
and with the continued investments will assure further efficiency gains
to meet future societal goals.
We appreciate the opportunity to file these comments.
______
Prepared Statement of the Edison Electric Institute
The Edison Electric Institute (EEI) respectfully submits this
written testimony for the record to the Senate Appropriations
Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development. We appreciate this
opportunity to share our views on some of the Department of Energy's
(DOE) programs for the fiscal year 2013.
EEI is the association of U.S. shareholder-owned electric
companies. Our members serve 95 percent of ultimate electricity
customers in the shareholder-owned segment of the industry and
represent approximately 70 percent of the U.S. electric power industry.
EEI has long advocated for an ``all-of-the-above'' energy strategy.
Different regions of the country use different fuel mixes to generate
electricity. Embracing a diverse and balanced energy portfolio is
crucial to reliable, affordable electricity. Therefore, we respectfully
ask the subcommittee to direct sufficient resources toward these
critically important activities.
fossil energy
As the administration notes in its Office of Fossil Energy budget
request, ``the United States has 25 percent of the world's coal
resources, and fossil fuels currently supply over 90 percent of the
Nation's energy''. Accordingly, EEI urges the subcommittee to ensure
that fossil energy research, development, and demonstration (RD&D)
receive as much funding as possible under the tight budget constraints
of the subcommittee's allocation. We further urge the preservation and
funding of fossil fuel loan guarantee authorities pending completion of
the Section 1703 Program review by the U.S. Department of Treasury.
EEI urges strong support for carbon capture and storage (CCS) and
advanced coal technology programs. Just this week, the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) issued a proposal that effectively would
require CCS on new coal-fired power plants, even though the technology
is not commercially viable. CCS commercialization is still in the
future, but demonstration technologies hold great promise, and we are
working with the Congress and the administration to develop policies
that will accelerate commercial availability and deployment. Coal is an
important domestic energy resource; given this recent EPA rulemaking,
commercially available CCS technologies are essential for coal to be a
viable part of a diverse and balanced electric generation portfolio.
In addition to coal, EEI strongly advocates for adequate funding of
policies that allow the ready access to affordable natural gas for
electric generation, including environmentally responsible development
of shale resources by the gas industry throughout the United States.
Natural gas is an increasingly important source for electric
generation, especially given its availability and low prices. As a
result, our industry is a strong proponent of developing our natural
gas resources.
nuclear energy
Given that nuclear energy is the Nation's largest source of carbon-
free electricity production, and that construction of new plants will
create tens of thousands of jobs, EEI urges strong support for the
nuclear power loan guarantee program. Under DOE's implementation,
participating borrowers pay the entire credit subsidy costs, making
this program different from other loan programs administered by the
Department.
EEI respectfully requests the subcommittee to oppose DOE's
imposition of its decontamination and decommissioning tax on electric
utilities for the cleanup of uranium enrichment facilities. As in past
years, the administration is seeking this tax under a program in which
the industry has already met its financial obligations while the
Federal Government failed to pay its required share of the cleanup
funds.
EEI strongly supports nuclear R&D, including funding for the Energy
Innovation Hub on modeling and simulation of advanced nuclear reactor
operations. In addition to this essential investment, we urge funding
for the acceleration of technology development and commercialization of
small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs). EEI supports DOE's announced
cost-shared program with private industry to support SMR design and
licensing.
electric transportation
The need for fuel diversity carriers over into the transportation
sector, where plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs) give Americans the
choice to fill up at the pump or recharge their battery at home. Using
domestically produced electricity to fuel a range of both on-road and
off-road transportation uses has the potential to transform our
Nation's transportation fleet. Electric transportation funding will
help our country reduce its dependence on foreign oil, thereby
increasing our Nation's energy security.
EEI supports the DOE's Clean Cities program, which has brought
together thousands of stakeholders in States across the Nation to
support the deployment of alternative fuel vehicles and infrastructure.
We are also supportive of the recently announced EV-Everywhere program,
which will bring down the cost of batteries, charging infrastructure
and electric vehicles so they are affordable for more families.
In 2011, according to the Oil Price Information Service, Americans
spent more than $480 billion on gasoline, paying an average of more
than $3.50-per-gallon, both record amounts. Already this year, gas
prices are more than $4-per-gallon in many cities. Electrifying the
Nation's light-duty vehicle fleet, which accounts for roughly 45
percent of total U.S. oil consumption, would reduce oil imports by more
than 3 million barrels per day in 2030.
Another benefit of electric transportation is that real electricity
prices historically have been more stable than real prices for both
gasoline and natural gas. Electricity is produced domestically, using a
wide variety of energy resources, which contributes to its greater
price stability. Unlike oil and gas, electricity does not experience
price volatility due to political instability or changes in the global
markets.
smart grid
EEI urges robust funding of DOE's efforts to continue the
deployment and commercialization of smart grid technologies. Research
and development are also keys to accelerating America's shift to an
information-enabled electricity grid. Modernizing the grid will
increase operational efficiency, improve reliability, and provide more
control and situational awareness both for utilities and their
customers.
More than 90 percent of EEI's members are involved in grid
modernization activity. As of September 1, 2011, electric utilities in
more than 43 States have installed 27 million digital smart meters.
Sixty-five million smart meters--covering 54 percent of U.S.
households--are expected to be deployed by 2015.
DOE's smart grid program is a public-private partnership. To date,
DOE funding has been matched by contributions of more than $5.5 billion
from the private sector. In a time of large budget deficits, the
subcommittee must ensure that funds are used to the greatest effect. We
respectfully request that the subcommittee continue its support of
these investments to achieve substantial cost savings and security in
the Nation's grid.
energy innovation hubs
EEI supports essential funding for DOE's Energy Innovation Hubs.
Each of these Hubs will speed research and shorten the path from
technological development to commercial deployment of highly promising
energy-related technologies. Specifically, we support the Cyber
Security Energy Delivery Systems Hub that conducts R&D activities
addressing vulnerabilities within the Nation's electricity delivery
system to reduce risk of energy disruptions due to cyber attacks. In
addition, we support the Energy Efficient Building Systems Design Hub
and the Battery/Energy Storage Hub, which will develop utility-sited
energy storage as well as new batteries with improved lifetimes and
strong capacities for expanding the range of electric vehicles while
decreasing manufacturing cost.
For fiscal year 2013, in particular, we support funding for DOE's
proposed Electricity Systems Hub. This new Hub would bring together a
multidisciplinary team of researchers to address barriers to
modernization, both short-term and long-term, at critical points in the
various regions. Establishing this Energy Innovation Hub is important
to facilitating and accelerating the process of integrating power
flows, information flows, markets, and regulation in a way that
complements grid modernization and other ongoing efforts. More
importantly, the Hub approach will promote technological innovation
and, ultimately, lower electricity costs through better utilization of
utility assets.
transmission and renewable energy
New transmission lines are increasingly needed to maintain
reliability and relieve congestion. However, obtaining regulatory
approvals for new facilities is a complex process, and often leads to
costly delays, particularly when siting involves Federal lands.
EEI supports the administration's efforts to improve Federal
coordination and ensure timely review of proposed renewable energy
projects and transmission lines though the formation of two interagency
Rapid Respond Teams, one for transmission and one for renewables.
The Rapid Respond Team for Transmission would accelerate the
permitting review of seven proposed transmission lines that cut through
12 States. These projects will help increase electric reliability,
integrate renewable energy projects and create thousands of jobs. In
Pennsylvania and New Jersey, for example, PPL Electric Utilities (PPL)
and Public Service Electric and Gas Company (PSE&G) have proposed a
power line project which includes an approximately 145-mile long 500-kV
transmission line from the Susquehanna Substation in Pennsylvania to
the Roseland Substation in New Jersey, and several substations in both
Pennsylvania and New Jersey. The project is expected to be in service
in the spring of 2015, creating more than 2,000 new jobs in these two
States alone.
______
Prepared Statement of the Electric Drive Transportation Association
The Electric Drive Transportation Association (EDTA) is the cross-
industry trade association promoting the advancement of electric drive
technology and electrified transportation, and we are writing regarding
the fiscal year 2013 request for the Department of Energy's (DOE)
Vehicle Technologies and other electric drive programs.
Our members represent the entire value chain of electric drive,
including vehicle manufacturers, battery and component manufacturers,
utilities and energy companies, and smart grid and charging
infrastructure developers. Collectively, we are committed to realizing
the economic, national security, and environmental benefits of
displacing oil with hybrid, plug-in hybrid, battery, and fuel cell
electric vehicles.
Since we import nearly 50 percent of the oil used in the
transportation sector--at a cost of more than $1 billion per day--there
is a strategic and economic imperative to move toward domestically
generated electricity as an alternative to oil. The need is already
clear to families and businesses paying almost $4 gallon (and in some
places more) for gasoline and diesel fuel today. Energy Information
Administration (EIA) projects barrel prices more than $100 through
2013. Over the longer term, increasing global demand will put even
great upward pressure on prices. The implications for the economy are
also clear: every $10 per barrel increase costs the economy
approximately $75 billion.
Electric drive vehicles are being introduced into the market place
in numerous configurations, including passenger cars, commercial
trucks, buses, tractors, and ground support equipment. For instance,
more than a dozen plug-in electric drive vehicles will be on sale by
the end of 2012. These vehicles can provide substantial fuel savings
and reduced emissions while contributing to our energy and economic
security. Federal support for research, development and deployment can
accelerate achievement of those benefits.
The American Energy Innovation Council, a group of U.S. industry
leaders working to ``foster strong economic growth, create jobs in new
industries and re-establish America's energy leadership'' concluded in
their 2011 report that Federal participation in energy innovation was
imperative because ``ready access to reliable affordable forms of
energy is not only vital for the functioning of the larger economy, it
is vital to people's everyday lives and significantly impacts the
country's national security and environmental well-being''.
The Department's Vehicle Technologies program promotes innovation
in transportation through public/private partnerships and it leverages
private sector investments. Working with the diverse stakeholders of
the electric drive industry, DOE is helping to accelerate technology
breakthroughs, promoting investment in manufacturing capacity and
speeding deployment of electric drive vehicles and infrastructure.
We support the goals of the proposed EV Everywhere grand challenge
to bring down electric vehicle costs and increase electric range and
fast charging capability through expanded research in batteries and
power electronics, electric drive motors and components, and advanced
charging technologies. Specifically, we support the requested increase
for Batteries and Electric Drive Technology and Vehicle and Systems
Simulation and Testing activities that are advancing next generation
charging, systems integration, and codes and standards for vehicle to
grid communication.
The Vehicle Technologies program also conducts critical research
and development activities to advance electrification of the medium-
and heavy-duty fleet, including hybrid, plug-in hybrid, battery, and
fuel cell electric trucks and buses. Electric drive in the commercial
and transit fleet has great potential for fuel savings and emissions
reductions: putting just 10,000 hybrid electric trucks to work would
reduce diesel fuel use by 7.2 million gallons per year and reduce air
pollutants and carbon dioxide emissions by 83,000 tons. We ask that the
subcommittee direct meaningful resources toward program activities,
including work with industry partners, to reduce component costs and
further enhance performance.
Fuel cell vehicles are also critical assets in the advanced vehicle
portfolio. Fuel cell cars, trucks and nonroad vehicles will provide
``zero emission/zero petroleum'' options that are integral to meeting
national goals for energy security and reduced pollution. The budget
request points out that foreign industries are growing rapidly and that
``sustained support of the [Hydrogen and Fuel Cell] program and
continued progress toward its goals help enable the U.S. to maintain
leadership in fuel cell manufacturing and hydrogen production
technology. Success of the program will also support domestic
employment and economic growth as well as increase our options for
clean power''.
The industry is meeting aggressive cost, performance and deployment
milestones as it pushes toward commercialization in 2015. The ongoing
partnership with DOE has already yielded substantial component cost
reductions including reducing the cost of automotive fuel cells by more
than 30 percent and doubling their durability. The industry is pushing
vigorously toward commercialization in 2015. Specifically, we ask that
funding for fuel cell electric vehicles and infrastructure deployment
activities in Technology Validation and in early market development,
including education and other testing and enabling activities, be
provided at levels sufficient to enable the industry to build on
technology and market achievements to meet 2015 commercialization
targets.
Finally, we strongly support the Department's deployment programs,
including Clean Cities' work with local and regional coalitions to
expand deployment of electric drive vehicles (hybrid, plug-in hybrid,
battery, and fuel cell electric vehicles), other alternative fuel
vehicles, and recharging/fueling infrastructure as a path to increased
energy security. These efforts have a demonstrated record of success
and we support expansion of these partnerships and allocation of
additional resources for communities deploying electric drive vehicles
and recharging infrastructure.
Acknowledging the material budgetary constraints that the
subcommittee faces, we respectfully request that the Committee direct
the resources to the DOE's electric drive programs that are
proportionate to the cost of our foreign oil dependence and that will
enable the Department to build on its success, in partnership with the
private sector, in accelerating the achievement of a secure and
sustainable transportation sector.
We thank you for your consideration.
______
Prepared Statement of the Federation of American Societies for
Experimental Biology
The Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology
(FASEB) respectfully requests a fiscal year 2013 appropriation of $5.1
billion for the Department of Energy Office of Science (DOE SC). As you
know, DOE SC funding in recent years has failed to reach the levels
authorized in the America COMPETES Acts of 2007 and 2010. FASEB's
broader goal is to support sustainable growth and a return to a funding
trajectory reflective of the COMPETES reauthorization.
As a federation of 26 scientific societies, FASEB represents more
than 100,000 life scientists and engineers, making it the largest
coalition of biomedical research associations in the United States.
FASEB's mission is to advance health and welfare by promoting progress
and education in biological and biomedical sciences through service to
its member societies and collaborative advocacy. FASEB enhances the
ability of scientists and engineers to improve--through their
research--the health, well-being, and productivity of all people.
DOE SC is the lead Federal agency supporting fundamental energy
research and the Nation's largest supporter of basic research in the
physical sciences. In addition to supporting research at more than 300
universities and institutions in all 50 States, DOE SC funds and
manages 10 world-class national laboratories. Research and development
user facilities located at these national laboratories provide more
than 26,000 researchers with access to particle accelerators, advanced
light sources, supercomputers, and other state-of-the-art
instrumentation. The large-scale scientific tools at DOE SC facilities
serve as invaluable resources to academic and government scientists,
and they are also critical to the research and development capabilities
of more than 40 Fortune 500 companies, including Exxon Mobil, Ford
Motor, Boeing, and Pfizer.
A source of abundant, safe, and sustainable energy is essential for
the Nation's future, and fundamental research supported by DOE SC
provides the basis for discovering new energy technologies that can
replace fossil fuels and reduce U.S. dependency on foreign oil. DOE SC-
funded scientists and engineers are also making extraordinary
discoveries in other areas of energy research that improve health,
protect the environment, create economic opportunities, and strengthen
national security. For example, a team of DOE SC-funded scientists have
determined that certain bacteria can help facilitate the cleanup of
toxic uranium particles by converting them to forms easily collected
from the environment. Understanding the process by which these bacteria
interact with materials is important for increasing and improving their
use in contamination removal techniques. Other researchers supported by
DOE SC have identified the gene that controls ethanol production in a
well-studied microorganism, a breakthrough that could expand the
availability of biofuels and reduce reliance on imported energy
sources. Discovery of a single gene responsible for ethanol production
allows scientists to begin engineering more efficient biomass crops and
microorganisms capable of generating higher ethanol yields at reduced
costs.
In addition to its strong research programs, DOE SC supports user
facilities that benefit the entire research community by providing
unparalleled scientific and technological capabilities. For example,
powerful xray light sources at DOE SC-supported national laboratories
were used by the pharmaceutical company Plexxikon to develop a new drug
treatment for malignant melanoma, the deadliest form of skin cancer. In
this instance, scientists used the bright light sources to determine
the molecular structure of a mutated protein, enabling the design and
optimization of a drug to prevent the uncontrollable spread of cancer
cells. Researchers from the life sciences community account for almost
40 percent of all researchers using the DOE SC Basic Energy Sciences
light source facilities, many of which are studying proteins involved
in other diseases such as Alzheimer's disease, bird flu, and hepatitis.
The number of researchers using DOE SC facilities grew from 20,241 in
fiscal year 2007 to 25,876 in fiscal year 2010, an increase of 27.8
percent. In recent years, the agency's funding has failed to keep pace
with the growing demand for user facility access.
DOE SC instrumentation and technical expertise make efficient use
of precious research resources, bringing researchers across the Nation
access to cutting-edge technologies without duplication or prohibitive
cost to institutions. The agency's national lab system advances
strategic national goals and creates a research infrastructure unlike
any other in the world. With its crucial mission, national labs, and
unique scientific facilities, investment in DOE SC programs should be
one of our highest research priorities. Now is the time to provide
robust Federal funding for DOE SC to support the fundamental energy
research required to overcome the Nation's most pressing challenges.
Thank you for the opportunity to offer FASEB's support for DOE SC.
______
Prepared Statement of the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
We are the Executive Committee of the Users Organization of the
Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (Fermilab), located outside of
Chicago, Illinois. We represent the approximately 3,000 scientists who
perform research at Fermilab--our country's premier particle-physics
laboratory. Also known as high-energy physics (HEP), our field is the
study of the fundamental particles that are the building blocks of the
universe, as well as their role in astrophysics, and the accelerators
used in their study.
Eight U.S. national laboratories are actively engaged in HEP
research. They operate facilities used by scientists and students from
hundreds of U.S. universities, from other national laboratories, and
from dozens of foreign institutions. Of these laboratories, Fermilab is
the only one that is dedicated exclusively to HEP.
The Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Science supports HEP
research at U.S. national laboratories and universities. More than 160
U.S. institutions in 43 States host physicists, astrophysicists,
engineers, and accelerator scientists who work in HEP. More than one-
half of these institutions are funded through the DOE Office of
Science.
We urge the Senate to support sustained funding for fundamental
science within the DOE Office of Science. We request that the portfolio
of funding for fundamental research be balanced. HEP research is a key
part of these programs and yields valuable benefits to our Nation as
described below.
Our field is undergoing a transition, Fermilab's Tevatron
accelerator program having come to a conclusion in 2011 after an
extremely successful three decades. New programs are underway or just
beginning that will provide the basis for vibrant, world-class research
at Fermilab for the next several decades. This transition is a critical
time for our field in the United States and requires sustained funding
in order to maintain our role in world HEP research.
impact of budget cuts
Continued funding of science research is critical to our Nation.
Severe budgetary cuts will have devastating effects that will be felt
for decades. Science opportunities will be delayed or lost to other
nations. Our reputation as the place to be for the best and brightest
will be damaged.
We are therefore pleased that the administration's request for
fiscal year 2013 includes a modest increase for the DOE Office of
Science. However, we are concerned about the cuts for Fermilab included
in that request: $30 million, or approximately 8 percent. This will
require layoffs or furloughs. A large Fermilab project that will be key
to sustaining our field in the United States over the next decade, the
Long-Baseline Neutrino Experiment (LBNE), will be delayed. Such
projects are critical to the near- and medium-term future of the
laboratory and the U.S. HEP program.
The proposed cuts come at a time when Fermilab has closed the
Tevatron program, resulting in cuts in fiscal year 2012 as well. This
was done in order to consolidate resources so as to focus on new
projects, especially LBNE. The resulting savings ought to be reinvested
at Fermilab, in order to maintain the United States' preeminent HEP
facility at the forefront of world HEP.
The largest and longest-lasting impact will be in our training of
the next generation of scientists. Significant cuts will force us to
train fewer students. They will demoralize our current students and
post-docs, and some will quit. And we will no longer attract the best
students. It will take a long time to recover from even a short-term
cut to funding. These young people will be the foundation on which our
economic growth depends. Without the advanced training offered by
fields such as HEP, they will lack the skills to develop the next
technology or the next new industry. Or they will be trained in other
countries, and that innovation will occur overseas. It is critical that
we remain attractive to United States and foreign students now and in
the future.
value of high-energy physics research
In our modern economy, science and technology (S&T) drive growth,
as detailed in the National Academies' report, ``Rising Above the
Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter
Economic Future'', its 2010 update, Rising Above the Gathering Storm
Revisited, the recent book, Knowledge and the Wealth of Nations, and
many other publications. Continued leadership in S&T fields is critical
to our economic growth, national security, and position vis-a-vis the
rest of the world. Innovation by a highly trained workforce is key.
Without new technological developments within the United States,
our economy will not grow and other countries will surpass us. But the
most revolutionary technologies often require revolutions in our
fundamental knowledge and understanding, or are invented in the
research struggle of our most talented minds in pursuit of testing,
measuring, and understanding new ideas and concepts. As an example, no
one could have predicted the nature of our current society from the
first studies of the electron at the dawn of the 20th century; however,
we would not be communicating via email, fax, cellphone, or text
messages without them. It has also famously been said that the light
bulb could not have been invented by incremental improvements to the
candle! Revolutionary technologies arise from new ways of thinking
about society's problems--often derived from new experiments that ask
new questions that cannot be answered using existing technology.
HEP strives to understand the most fundamental aspects of nature.
While we can rarely predict the outcome, the quest for such knowledge
has always led to numerous technological advances, a few of which are
described below. What is predictable, is that we will educate and train
some of the best and brightest students, who will contribute to our
Nation in many different arenas.
value of technology development
While the primary purpose of HEP research is not the creation or
development of new technology, our work often requires it in order to
accomplish our goals. Many of our experiments require technology that
does not exist before the project is undertaken. Therefore, many of our
researchers spend a significant part of their careers advancing high-
tech particle detectors, developing complex computing algorithms,
inventing new kinds of particle accelerators, or pushing the limits of
high-speed electronics. Without continuous innovation, we would not be
able to complete our experiments. And once these advances are made,
they are often used in fields as diverse as medicine, materials
research, and manufacturing.
An example is the construction of the Fermilab Tevatron
accelerator, which reigned as the world's most powerful device of its
kind for nearly three decades. It required more than 1,000
superconducting magnets, placed around a 4-mile ring. Creating
superconducting magnets requires superconducting wire. At the start of
the project in the 1970s, it was known how to make such wire, but the
industry needed in order to make it on a large scale did not exist.
Fermilab researchers helped to build up that industry and advance its
production techniques through a very successful joint government/
business venture. Once the accelerator was complete in 1983, these
businesses looked around to see what other projects could use
superconducting wire. MRI machines that are now commonly used for
medical imaging are an example. Because of the work of Fermilab in
building the Tevatron, starting in the 1980s, commercial MRI scanners
have now become widespread.
A current experiment led by Fermilab scientists is the Dark Energy
Survey (DES). This requires a digital camera larger than any ever
built. Its technological developments will ultimately influence the
digital cameras available at your local electronics store as well as
devices no one has yet dreamed up. A current research and development
(R&D) effort by a university/national laboratory collaboration is
inventing new, cost-effective particle detectors with unique power to
resolve events on the picosecond (trillionth-of-a-second) time-scale.
These will also doubtless lead to new industrial, research, and medical
applications.
High-energy physicists have invented particle accelerators and
continue to steward their development. Our work requires the most
powerful particle accelerators that can be built. However, thousands of
smaller accelerators are now used in many areas of technology. Of more
than 30,000 particle accelerators throughout the world, only a small
fraction are dedicated to HEP. Most are used by industry or for medical
treatment and diagnosis. The tire industry, for example, now uses
particle accelerators to treat their tires, reducing both the amount of
rubber needed (by 3 pounds per tire) and the amounts of chemicals used
in the production process. This industry is both more efficient and
better for our environment because of the application of particle
accelerators. This success was unanticipated in the early days of
accelerator development. Industrial accelerator applications now range
from the manufacture of shrink-wrap plastic to the processing of
industrial coatings and automobile parts.
value of science education
The United States has long been the destination of choice for the
best science students from around the world. Our universities provide
an education that is second to none. Our national laboratories provide
research opportunities that are unavailable elsewhere. Fermilab is an
excellent example of this. Numerous students from foreign institutions
travel to Fermilab to complete their research. Many of these students
then choose to stay in the United States after completing their
degrees.
Our students learn a variety of skills that are applicable in
numerous fields. They learn to work on problems to which the answer is
unknown and to adapt to unforeseen challenges. They learn skills in
computer programming, data analysis, simulation of complex problems,
and electronics development, among others. They learn to work in teams
as members of international collaborations, finding innovative
solutions to challenging problems. They learn how to take a project
from start to finish, write a document detailing it, and present it to
an audience. The complex analytical thinking necessary to solve
problems in fundamental science can't be taught in a classroom, but is
nonetheless crucial for solving problems in business and industry in
the 21st century.
Many of our students choose to continue their immediate careers as
postdoctoral associates. This provides a postgraduate education that
further develops their skills. , docs generally take on more complex
projects and develop leadership and management skills. Most HEP
experiments involve 20 to 2,000 scientists and face challenges that are
similar to those in many businesses.
Scientists trained in HEP work in telecommunications, software
development, aerospace, education, medicine, government, and finance,
to name a few. About 90 percent of our Ph.D. students enter new fields.
Private businesses are the largest and most diverse employers of
scientists trained in high-energy physics. Several former HEP
researchers have founded or led small and large companies, including
Richard Wellner, chief scientist at Univa UD, a cloud management
software company; Francisco Vaca, CEO of Vaca Capital Management LLC;
George Coutrakon, former director of operations at Loma Linda
University Medical Center and now technical director of the Northern
Illinois Proton Treatment and Research Center; Homaira Akbair, CEO of
SkyBitz, a satellite-based tracking company; Rolland Johnson, founder
and president of Muons, Inc., an accelerator R&D company; and Nagesh
Kulkarni, CEO of Quarkonics Applied Research Corp., a business and
technology consulting company.
Our researchers are engaged in education at all levels and
understand the importance of scientific literacy in our society. For
example, hundreds to thousands of public lectures are given around the
country by high-energy physicists each year. Our scientists visit local
schools to share the excitement of science through physics
demonstrations or presentations of their work. The QuarkNet program,
funded through the National Science Foundation, trains K-12 teachers in
28 States in cutting-edge research that they can take into the
classroom. More than 38,000 students attend Fermilab education
activities each year.
summary
Scientific research in general, and HEP in particular, provides
value to our Nation that will be lost without sustained funding from
the U.S. Government. The knowledge that is gained will lead to future
innovation that will maintain our world-class scientific capabilities.
The path to that knowledge will lead to advances in technology that
will help sustain our economic recovery. And the education of students
from the United States and abroad will provide the knowledgeable
workforce that will carry us through the next half-century.
It is critically important to maintain our world-class position in
scientific research. The repercussions of severe cuts will be felt for
a long time. We urge the Senate Appropriations Committee to support the
President's request to maintain our scientific research program for the
long-term health of the Nation, and to restore funding to HEP and
priority projects at Fermilab in order to reinvest in this core
discovery scientific discipline.
______
Prepared Statement of the Gas Turbine Association
The Gas Turbine Association (GTA) appreciates the opportunity to
provide the United States Senate Committee on Appropriations
Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development with our industry's
statement recommending fiscal year 2013 funding levels for the
Department of Energy (DOE).
GTA respectfully recommends that the fiscal year 2013 appropriation
for DOE Office of Fossil Energy include $20 million for the Hydrogen
Turbines Program to meet critical national goals of job creation, fuel
conservation, greenhouse gas reduction, fuel flexibility (including
syngas and hydrogen), and criteria pollutant reduction. A spending
level of $20 million is more appropriate than the administration's
recommendation $12.6 million considering that the fiscal year 2012
spending level was $14.6 and years of under-funding for Gas Turbine
Technologies is resulting in our Nation's loss of leadership in this
important industry. A spending level of $12.6 million will result in
pushing out the timeline for the development and deployment of
environmentally advanced gas turbines by several years.
Federal investment in research and technology development for
advanced gas turbines that are more efficient, versatile, cleaner, and
have the ability to burn hydrogen-bearing reduced carbon synthetic
fuels and carbon-neutral alternative fuels is needed to ensure the
reliable supply of electricity in the next several decades. Japan and
China are quickly moving into leadership positions in this industry
which in the United States has been responsible for hundreds of
thousands of research and development (R&D), engineering, manufacturing
and field service jobs for the past 75 years. Japan is consistently
investing more than $80 million per year, and China has recently
announced an indigenous F class gas turbine (F class represents 50
percent of the gas turbine market). If our Nation continues to
underfund research and development efforts in gas turbine technology,
the resulting loss of jobs and U.S. technology will be long-term and
possibly permanent.
We believe that a modest Federal investment in future gas turbine
technologies will be repaid many times over in reduced electricity
costs, increased flexibility and increased reliability for our Nation's
consumers. In addition, we believe that additional funding should be
directed at encouraging university based research that will ``jump-
start'' the careers of future engineering graduates in the gas turbine
industry.
The gas turbine industry's R&D partnership with the Federal
Government has steadily increased powerplant efficiency to the point
where natural gas fired turbines can reach combined cycle efficiencies
of 60 percent, and quick-start simple cycle peaking units can reach 46
percent. The gas turbine's clean exhaust can be used to create hot
water, steam, or even chilled water. In such combined heat and power
applications, overall system efficiency levels can reach 60 to 85
percent lower heating value (LHV).
CO2 Emissions
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Gas turbines are both more efficient and typically burn lower
carbon fuels compared to other types of combustion-based power
generation and mechanical drive applications. The Nation needs to
reinvigorate the gas turbine industry/government partnership in order
to develop new, low-carbon powerplant solutions. This can be done by
funding research to make gas turbines both efficient and more capable
of utilizing hydrogen and synthetic fuels as well as increasing the
efficiency, durability and emissions capability of natural gas fired
turbines. If the Congress provides adequate funding to DOE's turbine
R&D efforts, we believe technology development and deployment will be
accelerated to a pace that will allow the United States to achieve its
emissions and energy security goals.
GTA respectfully requests $20 million in fiscal year 2013
appropriations for the Fossil Energy Hydrogen Turbines Program to meet
critical national goals of job growth, fuel conservation, fuel
flexibility (including natural gas, syngas and hydrogen), greenhouse
gas reduction, and criteria pollutant reduction.
______
Prepared Statement of GE Energy
overview
The following testimony is submitted on behalf of GE Energy (GE)
for the consideration of the subcommittee during its deliberations
regarding the fiscal year 2013 budget requests for the Department of
Energy (DOE). GE recognizes that particularly difficult choices must be
made in fiscal year 2013. These budget pressures make it essential that
the subcommittee prioritize those programs that will contribute to
economic growth and jobs creation and support core technology
development. GE recommends:
--in the Fossil Energy program, increased investment in pre-
combustion carbon capture and gasification systems;
--in Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, full funding of the
budget requests for solar and wind technologies;
--in Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, full funding of the
budget request for research and development; and
--in Nuclear Energy, full funding for the Small Modular Reactor
Licensing Technical Support program and additional amounts for
research and development (R&D) in Advanced Reactors Concepts
and Small Modular Reactor Advanced Concepts.
fossil energy
Coal Program: Carbon Capture, Pre-Combustion Capture
GE is concerned that the funding reductions proposed in
gasification systems and pre-combustion carbon capture will negatively
affect programs that are critically important to the future of power
generation from coal. These programs are on the path to improve the
cost and performance of Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC)
technology to enable IGCC to be a cost-competitive option for low-
carbon power generation.
IGCC is capable today of achieving the emissions standards of the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) mercury and air toxics standards
and new source performance standards for new coal plants without
additional R&D. Compared with conventional coal plants, IGCC consumes
less water, produces useful coal byproducts, and can co-produce
valuable transportation fuels and chemicals that reduce oil imports.
With its proven, pre-combustion carbon capture, IGCC also provides
CO2 useful for enhanced oil recovery (EOR) at lower cost
compared to combustion coal technology.
GE therefore recommends that fiscal year 2013 funding for Carbon
Capture: Pre-combustion Capture be increased by $6 million to $17.4
million. This increased funding is needed to:
--continue key programs that have met their early goals;
--develop alternative capture processes; and
--provide for new competitive solicitations.
GE also recommends that fiscal year 2013 funding for Advanced Energy
Systems: Gasification Systems be increased by $5.7 million to $37.6
million. This increased funding is needed to support the next phase of
R&D focused on reducing IGCC cost, increasing performance and improving
availability.
Clean Coal Power Initiative
The Clean Coal Power Initiative (CCPI) is the key vehicle for
commercial validation of technology emerging from the DOE R&D programs
and from industry. Current CCPI projects are supporting first
generation gasification and IGCC technology. DOE has not announced
plans for a future CCPI solicitation. GE recommends that DOE move
forward with the development of a CCPI-4 solicitation in preparation
for the commercial demonstration of second-generation technologies, and
that a modest level of funding for this solicitation be provided in
fiscal year 2013. A CCPI-4 solicitation should focus on demonstration
of technology that is specifically optimized for EOR so as to provide a
revenue stream that will reduce the operating cost impact that could be
a deterrent to cost-share participation by industry.
Advanced Energy Systems, Hydrogen Turbines
According to the DOE's 2011 performance report, the advanced
turbine program has made consistent progress toward fully mitigating
the cost and performance penalty associated with carbon capture. The
funding reductions proposed in the fiscal year 2013 budget request
will:
--delay completion of Phase II development;
--curtail Phase III implementation and prototype validation; and
--significantly scale back important university research.
GE, therefore, recommends that fiscal year 2013 funding for
Advanced Energy Systems: Hydrogen Turbines be increased to $20 million.
This amount would still represent a 33 percent reduction from the
fiscal year 2011 funding level, but would better balance program needs
and accomplishments.
Water Management
Large amounts of water are needed to produce or extract energy, and
large amounts of energy are needed to treat or transport water. EPA is
preparing to finalize its proposed rules for cooling water intake
structures under section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act, which
underscores the important linkage between water use and energy
generation. In addition, CO2 capture can increase raw water
usage by up to 125 percent, depending on the underlying technology. DOE
has set aggressive goals of reducing freshwater withdrawals and
consumption 50 percent by 2015 and 70 percent by 2020. Federal support
for water-related R&D is necessary if these goals are to be reached.
Unfortunately, the fiscal year 2013 budget does not contain any new
funding for Water Management activities within the fossil energy
program.
GE believes that Federal investment in R&D for innovative water
reuse technologies and demonstration projects is warranted. In addition
to R&D focused on cooling tower blowdown water reuse, Flue Gas
Desulphurization wastewater reuse and recovery, and ash pond solids
reduction, treatment and reuse of source water for and flowback/
produced water from unconventional oil and natural gas production would
further reduce environmental impacts and operational costs of upstream
energy processes. Advancement of reuse/treatment technologies for the
conversion of impaired wastewater streams into renewable water sources
in areas of water scarcity could reduce the need to use energy to
transport water over long distances and to support electricity
generation.
energy efficiency and renewable energy
Wind
GE supports full funding of the DOE's fiscal year 2013 request for
wind energy. The cost of wind energy has declined significantly in
recent years due to technological advances and manufacturing scale,
both of which have benefited from past DOE R&D support. However, the
decline in the price of natural gas generation accentuates the need for
continued technological advances to support wind affordability and
reliability. DOE funding support is critical for catalyzing next-
generation innovations in both onshore and offshore wind. Related work
in wind resource assessment and system integration will further enable
higher levels of wind deployment and penetration.
Solar
GE supports full funding of the DOE's fiscal year 2013 request for
solar energy. DOE research programs have been central to recent cost
declines in solar electricity, and the SunShot Initiative to achieve
cost-competitiveness with other electricity sources is both ambitious
and necessary. While solar cost-competitiveness will not be
accomplished through DOE funding support alone, the Government can play
an essential role in leveraging additional industry and university
research. GE also welcomes the PV Program's focus on lowering costs
through conversion efficiency and manufacturing process improvements,
as well as the overall program's investigation of balance-of-system
issues.
Fuel Cells
R&D is required to develop advanced fuel cell technologies to drive
efficiency to make this technology more commercially viable. Research
into combined cycle technologies using fuel cell and aero derivatives
or natural gas reciprocating engines is needed to achieve efficiency
goals of 90 percent or greater.
electricity delivery and energy reliability
Research and Development
GE supports the fiscal year 2013 budget request for OE Research and
Development. R&D on grid modernization technologies will advance
reliable, affordable, efficient, and secure delivery of electric power
to industrial, commercial, and residential customers, while at the same
time preparing the grid to support greater quantities of renewable
energy. Integration of traditional electric grid infrastructures with
modern IT computer and communications systems will be necessary, and GE
continues to work closely with national and international standards
development organizations in the development of grid interoperability
standards. Cybersecurity remains a fundamental design principle of this
effort.
In order to reduce risk and accelerate the adoption of new advanced
grid modernization technologies, R&D funding will be required for the
development of modeling, simulation, and visualization of both the
transmission and distribution networks. Advanced modeling capabilities
will serve as a critical tool in the modernization of the electric grid
by assisting grid operators in identifying the technical limits of
conventional grid technologies, and facilitating development of new
technologies and solutions to respond to a changing energy mix and an
increasingly responsive consumer base. In addition, advanced modeling
capabilities can enable grid operators and power systems planners to
aggregate, analyze, and act upon the vast quantities of data collected
by grid modernization technologies. DOE should expand industry
participation in programs to develop modeling and computational
capabilities for grid applications to fully leverage work already
underway.
In conjunction with modeling and simulation research, R&D is
required to develop advanced grid analytics software to optimize grid
efficiency and reliability, including ``Big Data'' storage and real
time analysis and exascale computing. Research into broadband wireless
technologies will be required to collect the field data required in
``real time.'' Research into low costs sensors will be needed to
monitor the status of a modern grid.
Energy Storage
GE endorses the requested funding for further research into energy
storage technologies. The fiscal year 2013 budget request appropriately
broadens the scope of interest to include innovations in new battery
chemistries. This could lead to radical improvements in energy storage
performance. Electricity storage is a critical technology to enable
both deployment of electric vehicles and improvements in grid stability
and efficiency through utility-scale storage.
Equal attention should be given to both electric vehicles and
storage. The requirements of utility-scale storage are quite different
from those of electric vehicles. GE recommends inclusion of research
into large-scale energy storage into this line item. This includes all
potential storage modalities such as compressed air, pumped hydro, and
flywheel technologies.
In addition, investment should be made in research into broader
applications of storage technologies such as ancillary services,
including frequency regulation service to balance supply and demand on
the transmission system as addressed in Order No. 755 issued by the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in October 2011, energy arbitrage,
and peak shaving.
nuclear energy
Next Generation of Nuclear
GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy (GEH) wholeheartedly supports the efforts
of DOE's Office of Nuclear Energy to research and develop the next
generation of nuclear technologies for carbon free electricity
generation and for the management of used nuclear fuel. In support of
both of these goals, the Congress should provide the requested $65
million for the cost-shared, industry partnership Small Modular Reactor
Licensing Technical Support program (``SMR program'') for fiscal year
2013. At the direction of the Congress, DOE opened the SMR program
competition to all advanced reactor technologies providing 300 MW or
less of power. GEH concurs with the Congress that a fleet of advanced
reactor SMRs will play a key role in meeting the country's energy
security, economic, and carbon-free, baseload generation goals.
Recognizing the high cost and extreme importance associated with the
design certification and licensing of first-of-a-kind SMR designs, GEH
recommends that the SMR program, in which industry is providing a
minimum 50-percent contribution, be funded at the requested amount.
Advanced reactors, like GEH's PRISM reactor, can provide secure and
clean baseload electricity while benefitting the back end of the fuel
cycle. For this reason, it is important that the Reactor Concepts
research, development, and demonstration program be provided sufficient
funding. In particular, the Advanced Reactors Concepts and Small
Modular Reactor Advanced Concepts R&D subprograms, which are facing 43-
percent and 34-percent funding cuts, respectively, should be expanded.
Both of these subprograms focus on high-value research to address near
term challenges such as demonstration, simulation and training
programs, and the application of advanced modularization and
construction techniques to help reduce new plant capital costs.
GEH further supports the funding of National Nuclear Security
Administration's Nonproliferation Policy and International Security
program. International civil nuclear cooperation is fundamental to
implement our nonproliferation policy goals and to keep viable our
domestic commercial nuclear capabilities. Recognizing the importance of
U.S. commercial nuclear exports in achieving our nonproliferation
objectives, GEH supports increasing the fiscal year 2013 budget for the
Nonproliferation Policy subprogram.
______
Prepared Statement of the National Association of State Energy
Officials
Chairperson Feinstein and members of the subcommittee: I am Malcolm
Woolf of Maryland and chair of the National Association of State Energy
Officials (NASEO). NASEO is submitting this testimony in support of
funding for a variety of Department of Energy (DOE) programs.
Specifically, we are testifying in support of no less than $50 million
for the base, formula State Energy Program (SEP). We urge the
subcommittee to strive for the $125 million figure, which is equal to
the fiscal year 2012 authorization. SEP is the most successful program
supported by the Congress and DOE in this area. This should be base
program funding, with no competitive portion, which focuses primarily
on DOE's internal priorities. SEP is focused on working with private
business to help facilitate direct energy project development, where
most of the resources are expended. SEP has set a standard for State-
Federal cooperation and matching funds to achieve critical Federal and
State energy goals. The base SEP funds are the critical linchpin to
help States in building on these activities and expanding energy-
related economic development, much as SEP has done for 30 years. We
also support the $210 million level for the Weatherization Assistance
Program (WAP). These programs are successful and have a strong record
of delivering savings to low-income Americans, homeowners, businesses,
and industry. We also support the budget request for the Energy
Information Administration (EIA) of $116.4 million. EIA's State-by-
State data is very helpful. EIA funding is a critical piece of energy
emergency preparedness and response, and there are significant EIA
responsibilities under the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA).
NASEO continues to support funding for a variety of critical buildings
programs, including Building Codes Training and Assistance, ENERGY
STAR, and residential energy efficiency at least at the fiscal year
2012 level, and Building Codes at a $15 million funding level. NASEO
also supports funding for the Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy
Reliability (OE) at the level of the fiscal year 2013 budget request.
Specific funding should be provided for the Division of Infrastructure
Security and Energy Restoration of no less than $18 million, which
funds critical energy assurance activities. We also strongly support
the research and development (R&D) function and Operations and Analysis
function within OE. The industries program (now renamed the Advanced
Manufacturing program) should be funded at least at the fiscal year
2012 level, to promote efficiency efforts and to maintain U.S.
manufacturing jobs.
Formula SEP funding provides a basis for States to share best
practices among themselves. These best practices (even without stimulus
funds) allow States to get a great deal accomplished. These types of
activities include energy financing programs, revolving loans, utility-
based programs, energy service performance contracts, et cetera. We
greatly appreciate the support of the subcommittee for SEP in the past.
In January 2003 (and updated in 2005), 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 found that $1 in SEP funding
yields:
--$7.22 in annual energy cost savings;
--$10.71 in leveraged funding from the States and private sector in
18 types of project areas;
--annual energy savings of 47,593,409 million source BTUs; and
--annual cost savings of $333,623,619.
Energy price volatility makes the program more essential as
businesses and States work together to maintain our competitive edge.
stimulus funding implementation
We have been working closely with DOE to implement the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) programs as quickly as possible.
We have had regular calls with all the State energy officials to
address implementation questions. We have also had a series of regional
conference calls among the States, and we have seven regional
coordinators helping to share best practices among the States. NASEO is
sharing best practices and providing information to officials at all
levels of government in order to more effectively coordinate this
effort. We are convinced that these funds are helping to assist the
private sector to implement major positive changes in the U.S. economy
that will improve all sectors of the economy. NASEO believes it is
important to maintain base levels of appropriations for critical
programs, such as SEP and Weatherization, in order to avoid a huge
decrease in funding after a rapid stimulus increase.
With respect to ARRA spending for SEP, of the $3.1 billion
appropriated, all the work is being implemented quickly. The deadlines
set forth in the statute will be satisfied. We and DOE have worked
through the barriers that slowed spending, including National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) compliance, Davis-Bacon wage rates,
Buy-American clauses, historic preservation, lead paint requirements,
and general procurement issues. It is important to stress that the key
figures are the ``commitment'' and ``contracted'' amounts, because that
is when people get hired and work commences. States generally do not
pay until projects are actually completed and milestones are met. We do
not pay-up front in most cases. In economics jargon, the Federal
spending figure is actually a lagging indicator. Of the ARRA funds
dedicated to SEP and Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant
(EECBG), approximately $1 billion has been dedicated to energy
financing programs in cooperation with the private sector. This has the
greatest long-term potential.
Examples of Successful State Energy Program Activities.--The States
have implemented thousands of projects. We have previously supplied to
subcommittee staff examples of programs and projects implemented. Here
are a few representative examples.
Alabama's SEP funds are being used to support the purchase and
installation of energy efficient equipment in 118 Alabama K-12 schools.
The energy improvements have generated cost-savings exceeding $1
million a year. The Talladega County Board of Education replaced 31
heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) units in 17 schools.
The new efficient units are saving the district more than $75,000
annually. Winston County Board of Education replaced 14 HVAC units in
two of its schools with new efficient units which are saving the school
more than 20 percent on electricity costs a year.
Alaska collected benchmarking data on 1,300 public facilities in
order to identify high-energy using buildings. A total of 351 public
buildings with a high Energy Use Index were identified and are
undergoing Investment Grade Audits, which will pinpoint specific energy
improvement projects. These energy measures will be funded through a
loan program where the project's debt service will be paid entirely
through the energy cost savings.
California is improving energy efficiency in State-owned buildings
through the State Property Revolving Loan Fund Program. This
sustainable loan program is supporting energy upgrades in more than 60
buildings located throughout the State--including energy retrofit
projects in 18 California Highway Patrol Offices. As a result, a field
office in Oakland now has energy efficient lights that are saving
nearly $21,000 a year in energy costs. The Oakland lighting project
will pay for itself in cost savings in just more than 2 years.
Illinois is promoting the development of renewable energy and
energy efficiency manufacturers and supply-chain businesses in the
State. Since 2010, the Green Business Development Grant Program has
awarded grants to 25 Illinois manufacturers that have expanded into the
green technology sector by retrofitting their manufacturing processes.
Ingersoll Machine Tools, Inc., a Rockford-based manufacturer of
aviation components, used a Green Business grant to purchase and
retrofit equipment so it can also produce wind turbine components. The
retooling effort created 87 new jobs at Ingersoll. Funk Linko has been
producing light poles at its Chicago Heights facility since 1925. With
a Green Business grant the company retooled its existing steel mill
equipment to produce components for wind power generation.
The Iowa State Energy Office provided a $1.7 million matching grant
funded by SEP to support the Sun Prairie Vista Court Apartments in
reducing energy use by implementing and documenting the performance of
new, energy-efficient technologies that include, for example, variable
speed pumps, thermal solar collectors for hot water, and induction
exterior lighting. To measure the benefits of the efficiency upgrades,
the apartment complex will monitor before and after results, including
real-life information on energy use. Tenants are benefiting from the
energy efficiency improvement. The demonstration project employed
approximately 21 individuals and produces projected annual energy
savings of $111,417.
In Kentucky $14 million has been dedicated to the Green Bank of
Kentucky for energy efficiency financing for public buildings. To date,
11 Green Bank loans have funded energy upgrades in 61 public buildings.
The Kentucky Department of Veterans Affairs used a Green Bank loan for
energy upgrades in three of its facilities--Thomas-Hood, and the East
and West Kentucky Veterans Centers. These facility improvements are
generating annual energy cost savings of $195,000, and $23,000 annually
in water savings. The savings will repay the Green Bank loan in less
than 12 years and after that all further savings will directly benefit
the taxpayers of Kentucky.
Louisiana's Transportation Efficiency and Alternative Fuels Program
awarded a grant to Bossier City for two publicly accessible Compressed
Natural Gas fueling stations and the purchase of 10 heavy duty
compressed natural gas (CNG) vehicles for the city's fleet. The Bossier
City project has resulted in the displacement of approximately 270,000
gallons of diesel or gasoline per year and created 10 new jobs.
Maine's Home Energy Savings Program, which launched in 2010, has to
date resulted in approximately 5,000 residential energy audits with
more than 3,000 of these homeowners receiving rebates for whole house
energy upgrades. More than 100 licensed construction companies have
been certified to participate in the program, which has resulted in
excess of $27 million worth of residential energy retrofit projects.
These energy improvements are saving homeowners an average of 40
percent in energy costs, or approximately $1,454 per year, amounting to
savings of approximately 405 gallons of heating oil per year.
Mississippi's public buildings program is helping to finance
energy-saving upgrades through performance contracting in 10 public
institutions. The participating public sector partners include the
Biloxi School District, Cleveland School District, Desoto County,
Jefferson County, Lawrence County School District, Mississippi State
Hospital, Monroe County School District, Claiborne County, Alcorn
County School District and Hollandale School District. Under the
program, 149 public buildings, representing more than 3 million square
feet of space, have been completed. The Biloxi Public Schools project
was completed in October 2011 and is expected to save more than
$275,000 a year in utility costs.
Montana improved its recycling infrastructure in communities
throughout the State with the purchase of equipment to collect, store,
and transport recyclables to market and assist local businesses use the
materials collected. A total of 19 recycling projects were funded
through the Montana Recycling Infrastructure Grants program, including
recycling collection bins in Libby, Troy, Colstrip, St. Ignatius,
Ronan, Polson, Bozeman, Havre, Shelby and at sporting events,
performances and tradeshows held on the campus of Montana State
University.
New Jersey supported the development of six combined heat and power
(CHP) projects at commercial and industrial customers. Results include
a 3.2 megawatt (MW) CHP project at the National Gypsum Company facility
in Burlington. Other projects include a 9.5 MW cogeneration unit at the
DSM Nutritional Products facility in Belvidere, a 1.1 MW gas engine
generator at Ocean City College, and a 4.6 MW cogeneration plant for
the new University Medical Center at Princeton. All totaled, nearly 35
MW of clean-energy production has resulted from this SEP-funded
program.
Rhode Island's Deliverable Fuels Program provides incentives and
rebates for energy retrofits to customers who heat their homes and
businesses with oil, propane, or other deliverable fuels. The program
launched in August 2010, and in the first 6 months 1,431 audits had
been conducted statewide. Of these audits, 546 customers implemented
recommended heating system replacements or other energy saving
measures. These initial retrofits will reduce heating oil consumption
by 2 million gallons over the next 20 years, saving these customers a
combined $7 million through lower heating bills.
South Carolina's public building energy retrofit program has
resulted in energy efficiency improvements in 579 buildings statewide.
The buildings represent nearly 21 million square feet of public
building space and include 32 2- and 4-year colleges, 22 State agencies
and 85 school districts. Williamsburg Technical College used a grant
from this program to upgrade lighting and replace outdated HVAC units.
These upgrades will pay for themselves in energy costs savings in less
than 2 years and will help the college save more than $30,000 annually
going forward.
South Dakota conducted energy audits of all State-owned buildings.
Based on the audit's data, grants, and loans were executed to implement
cost-effective projects in 55 public buildings. A boiler replacement in
the 100-year-old State capitol building complex is among the completed
projects. The boiler replacement is projected to save taxpayers more
than $2 million in energy costs over the life of the new equipment.
Tennessee's Volunteer State Solar Initiative's grant programs have
awarded a total of 236 grants to date and more than $40 million of
private funds have been leveraged. The grant-funded projects have added
approximately 6.5 MW of solar power to the grid.
Texas' Transportation Efficiency Program awarded 16 grants for the
synchronization of traffic signals and/or the replacement of traffic
signal lights with LEDs. A major traffic synchronization project in
Missouri City retimed and synchronized traffic signals at 44
intersections on 120 lane miles of six major roads. This one project is
saving an estimated 47,000 hours annually for people traveling those
roads during weekday rush hour.
The Washington Community Energy Efficiency Pilot Program has to-
date retrofitted 1,154 commercial buildings representing nearly 1.2
million square feet, and more than 8,000 residential structures
throughout the State. In addition, it created the foundation for a
sustainable residential and non-residential energy retrofit industry
and workforce in the State of Washington.
______
Prepared Statement of the National Association for State Community
Services Programs
The National Association for State Community Services Programs
(NASCSP), urges the U.S. Senate Committee on Appropriations
Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development to fund the Department of
Energy's (DOE) Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP) at $210 million.
In these difficult budgetary times, we understand that tough decisions
have to be made. However, WAP is proven, cost-effective, measurably
successful, and vital to the Nation's energy security and energy
efficiency movements, delivering savings to low-income Americans,
businesses, and industry. WAP faces an uphill battle in the immediate
future do to a reduction in funding and leading to the loss of jobs and
capacity to assist low-income Americans. It is necessary to fund WAP at
this level in order to sustain its historic infrastructure in and
widespread impact on all States and local communities as well as the
expanded training and technical assistance expertise and activities
enabled with the funding provided by the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). This funding level is essential to
continue and improve this outstanding program for our citizens. Due to
the close of ARRA funding in March 2012 and the severely limited 2012
funding, continued funding is even more critical to allow the WAP
Network to fulfill its mandate duties and ensure continued quality and
success at pre-Recovery Act levels.
Some examples of the program's accomplishments include:
--Creation and support of more than 13,000 full-time, highly skilled
jobs within the service delivery network due to ARRA funds, the
second highest in the Nation, with 8,000-10,000 additional jobs
from annual grant funding, and many more in related businesses,
such as materials suppliers;
--Weatherization of an additional 700,000 homes occupied by low-
income families, more than 100,000 homes above projected
numbers, due to the ARRA and tens of thousands of more homes
through annual appropriations, thereby reducing energy use and
associated energy bills;
--Served more than 7.1 million low-income homes since the program's
inception, with an additional 38.3 million eligible;
--Saves an estimated 35 percent of consumption for the typical home,
with savings continuing year-after-year and actual $1 savings
increasing as fuel prices increase;
--Saves $437 in first year energy savings for households weatherized;
--Returns $2.51 for every $1 spent in energy and nonenergy benefits
over the life of the weatherized home;
--Serves as a foundation for residential energy efficiency retrofit
standards, technical skills, and workforce training for the
emerging broader market;
--Supports communities through local purchasing and jobs created
nationwide;
--Reduces residential and power plant emissions of carbon dioxide by
2.65 metric tons/year per home; and
--Decreases national energy consumption by the equivalent of 24.1
million barrels of oil annually.
WAP is the largest residential energy conservation program in the
Nation and serves an essential function by helping low-income families
reduce their energy use. The program was developed in the late-1970s as
a response to rapidly rising energy costs associated with oil shortages
created by oil embargoes. The Congress acknowledged that low-income
families were particularly vulnerable to increased energy price
fluctuations and created the program to assist those families by
reducing the cost to heat their homes. WAP was institutionalized within
the Department of Energy in 1979 and today operates in all 50 States,
the District of Columbia, five U.S. territories, and several Native
American Tribes. Approximately 1,000 local agencies provide services in
every political jurisdiction of the country using direct hire crews and
local contractors to do the work, thus investing in local businesses
and communities. These network providers use program funds to improve
the energy efficiency of low-income dwellings, utilizing the most
advanced technologies and testing protocols available in the housing
industry. Since the Program's inception, more than 7.1 million homes
have been weatherized using Federal, State, utility, and other monies.
WAP is still as relevant now as it was when it was formed in
response to the energy crisis 30 years ago. The savings to America's
most vulnerable citizens are significant and make a huge, immediate
difference in their lives. These families have an average energy
burden--the percentage of their income needed to pay residential energy
bills--around 15 percent of their income as compared to around 3
percent for non-low income households, or five times greater. And the
poorest families have a much higher energy burden than that. For
example, in the State of California, Subcommittee Chair Dianne
Feinstein's home State, there are more than 718,000 households below 50
percent of the Federal poverty level, making less than $12,000 per year
for a family of four. Those families have an energy burden of 36.5
percent--more than one-third of their income. With lower energy bills,
these families can increase their usable income and buy other
essentials like food, shelter, clothing, medicine, and healthcare and
thus investing in local businesses and communities. WAP provides a
positive return on investment to meet its primary objectives of making
homes warmer in winter and cooler in summer and creating safer and
healthier indoor environments.
Because of the advanced diagnostics and technology developed in
WAP, the program is the foundation for the emerging green energy
efficiency retrofit workforce. There are approximately 25,000 jobs in
the Weatherization network, with many more supported in related
businesses, such as material suppliers. These jobs are good, living
wage jobs, which are more important than ever due to the economic
downturn in the housing and construction industries. Workers are highly
trained and receive on-going instruction to further develop their
skills. WAP is at the core of the larger energy-efficiency retrofit
market, and its training curricula, methods, and centers play an
integral role in developing tools and techniques and a workforce. WAP
managers, trainers, and technical experts figure prominently in the
Recovery through Retrofit initiative, contributing their expertise to
the Workforce Guidelines for Residential Energy Efficiency Workers and
playing a key role in the development of standardized training
curricula, worker certifications, and training facility accreditations.
In order to sustain the program, it is critical that the WAP
maintain adequate funding so the network can continue to provide jobs
and support local economies as well as promote energy efficiency
nationwide. The fiscal year 2012 level of $68 million is not enough to
continue nationwide coverage of the program and continued low funding
will result in the loss of jobs, investment of local business, and
energy efficiency services that ensure the health and safety of
families across the country.
NASCSP urges the subcommittee to fund WAP at $210 million for
fiscal year 2013. The WAP remains a crucial component of our Nation's
energy future. WAP is a clearly proven investment, has provided
significant energy savings, and has helped more than 7.1 million
families live in safer, more comfortable living conditions. This is a
program that has proved its worth and effectiveness for more than 30
years. NASCSP looks forward to working with subcommittee members in the
future as we attempt to create energy self-sufficiency and good jobs
for millions of American families through these invaluable national
programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the National Carbon Capture Center
Madam Chairwoman and members of the subcommittee: Southern Company
operates the Department of Energy's (DOE) National Carbon Capture
Center (NCCC) (http://nationalcarboncapturecenter.com) at the Power
Systems Development Facility (PSDF) in Wilsonville, Alabama for DOE's
National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL). The NCCC is the world's
premier research and development (R&D) facility for cost-effective
carbon dioxide (CO2) capture technologies for use at coal
and natural gas fired power generation and industrial facilities. With
the completion of its construction in 2011, research is now underway to
screen the more than 300 capture technologies already identified and to
ensure development of those concepts most likely to be commercially
successful. To accomplish this, the NCCC is collaborating with
technology developers world-wide as well as industrial, utility, and
fuel co-funding partners \1\ and is bringing to the Nation a proven
technology development business model at a scale that is more cost-
effective than large demonstrations of single technologies. As the NCCC
begins its first full year of operation in 2012, this partnership
respectfully requests the support of the Congress for the fiscal year
2013 DOE budget request at the fiscal year 2012 enacted levels for the
annual operating costs of its NCCC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Current NCCC participants include Southern Company; the
Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI); American Electric Power;
Luminant; NRG; Peabody Energy; Arch Coal, Inc.; and Rio Tinto.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would like to thank the Senate for its past support of the NCCC
and request the subcommittee's continued support of the DOE's Fossil
Energy R&D core budget. At a time when our country's economy is
recovering, we need to assure continued utilization of domestically
produced, low-cost, coal and natural gas based power generation. DOE's
Fossil Energy R&D efforts have already produced significant results to
advance coal-based power. DOE's core R&D budgets, combined with
investments by the private sector assure a sustainable technology base
on which to address the environmental and economic challenges facing
coal and natural gas use in the future. Operation of the NCCC in
partnership with DOE will benefit the Nation by developing cost-
effective CO2 capture technology for fossil-fueled power
generation by teaming with technology developers and accelerating
commercial deployment of viable technologies.
The NCCC's CO2 capture efforts address all three areas
of DOE's CO2 capture goals concerning postcombustion capture
for conventional plants, pre-combustion capture for coal gasification
power plants, and advanced oxy-combustion processes which produce a
more CO2-rich flue gas than conventional combustion for
easier CO2 capture. Southern Company also supports the goals
of the Clean Coal Technology Roadmaps developed by the Electric Power
Research Institute (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 25 years.
The NCCC offers a flexible applied R&D test facility which provides
commercially representative flue gas and syngas and the necessary
infrastructure in which developers' technologies are installed and
tested to generate data for performance verification under industrially
realistic operating conditions. This effort is a less costly way to
bridge the gaps between fundamental R&D and more costly large-scale
commercial demonstrations. By operating a unique, but central R&D test
facility, available to all CO2 technology developers,
redundancy in testing sites and equipment is minimized and cost-
effective use of R&D funds is achieved.
summary
The United States has historically been a leader in energy
research. Adequate funding for fossil energy R&D programs, including
environmental and climate change technologies, will provide our country
with secure and reliable energy from domestic resources while
protecting our environment. Current DOE Fossil Energy Research and
Development programs, if adequately funded, will assure that a wide
range of electric generation options are available for future needs.
The Congress faces difficult choices when examining near-term effects
on the Federal budget of funding energy research. However, EIA projects
that coal will continue to fuel our country well into the future, and
continued support for coal-based energy research will be 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 a 25-fold return in consumer benefits over research
costs. To realize potentially even greater consumer benefits, the
critically important R&D program in the CURC-EPRI Clean Coal Technology
Roadmap must be implemented.
One of the key national assets for achieving these benefits is the
NCCC. The fiscal year 2013 funding for the NCCC will provide
operations, maintenance, and modification of the facilities to test
technologies that are critical to the development of cost-effective
climate change technologies that will enable the continued use of
fossil fuels to supply a share of the Nation's energy needs. Any budget
cuts in the DOE Fossil Energy Core R&D budget from the fiscal year 2012
enacted levels could proportionately impact the necessary work that
will be conducted at the NCCC. A key NCCC feature is its flexibility to
test new carbon capture technologies for power generation systems in an
integrated fashion and under realistic industrial conditions. The NCCC
can evaluate CO2 capture technologies as they are integrated
into actual syngas (from gasification) or flue gas from actual power
plant operations. Integrated operation allows the effects of system
interactions, typically missed in un-integrated, laboratory-based,
component development programs, to be understood. This integration
provided by the NCCC is the key to ensuring component technologies are
validated before they can be designed into large scale industrial
applications. Furthermore, the NCCC is large enough to produce data to
support commercial scale designs, yet small enough to be cost-effective
(compared to typical large-scale demonstrations) and adaptable to a
variety of technology research needs. The major accomplishments at the
NCCC/PSDF to date and the current test program planned by DOE and the
NCCC's industrial participants are summarized below.
prior accomplishments
The PSDF test-bed has operated successfully for many years in
support of DOE's advanced coal program. The two significant
achievements are:
--a new gasifier design (Transport Integrated Gasification
(TRIGTM)) suitable for use with low-rank fuels,
which represent more than one-half of the total coal reserves
in the United States and the world; and
--hot gas filtration to improve energy efficiency.
These two technologies have progressed to commercialization with
integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) power plants being built
at Kemper County, Mississippi, and Dong Guan, China. Other highlights
of the test program included development of novel pressurized coal feed
and ash removal systems, and sensors and controls automation
improvements. In some instances, testing has eliminated technologies
from further consideration. Such screening is valuable in that it
concentrates R&D efforts on those technologies most likely to succeed
and is an essential part of managing the U.S. DOE's financial
resources.
national carbon capture center current test program
Building on success with TRIGTM, the NCCC/PSDF facility
has refocused its mission on supporting the development and scale-up of
cost-effective, commercially viable carbon capture technologies for
fossil-fueled power plants through collaboration with the DOE and
third-party technology developers. Most of the current CO2
capture technologies are being developed at laboratory- or bench-scale
under ideal conditions. Continued R&D under realistic field conditions
are needed to validate laboratory results and identify technical issues
that are not present under ideal conditions. In collaboration with
technology developers, the NCCC makes available coal-derived syngas gas
and flue gas to carry out applied R&D on components or small pilot-
scale systems to bridge gaps between fundamental R&D and large-scale
commercial demonstration. This provides for a cost effective, seamless
transition for promising technologies to migrate from laboratory into
commercial demonstrations. And importantly, NCCC postcombustion test
results are applicable to both coal and natural gas applications, new
and existing.
The NCCC is a unique applied R&D test facility containing two major
sets of infrastructure to support CO2 capture technology
development:
--an existing pilot-scale coal gasification facility that produces
syngas for pre-combustion CO2 capture technology
evaluation; and
--a Post-Combustion Carbon Capture Center (PC4) which enables testing
of capture technologies on flue gas from an adjacent fossil-
fueled power plant.
Both are readily adaptable to test a variety of technologies at
multiple scales and using different coals, providing data for scale-up
to commercial applications. This flexibility, in conjunction with real-
world operating conditions, allows the NCCC to support developers in
advancing the CO2 capture technologies that are critical to
continued use of fossil fuels for power generation. Jointly with the
DOE, NCCC has developed a Technology Screening Process which is a key
evaluation tool to assess and prioritize technologies for testing at
the facility. Currently more than 300 carbon capture technologies have
been identified as screening candidates.
Postcombustion.--Today's postcombustion capture technology has been
estimated to increase the cost of electricity (COE) by up to 80
percent.\2\ For both new and existing power plants, postcombustion
capture technology must be made more efficient and cost-effective by
reducing parasitic power and capital cost requirements. In
postcombustion capture, CO2 is separated from the flue gas
in a conventional powerplant downstream of the boiler. Many
postcombustion capture technologies need to be proven and integrated in
an industrial powerplant setting. The PC4 test facility (completed in
2011) was built to accommodate tests of a wide-range of capture
technologies from flue gas and includes three major test areas:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ ``Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants,
Volume 1: Bituminous Coal and Natural Gas to Electricity, Final
Report''; NETL, May 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
--a pilot solvent test unit (PSTU) to test developers' next
generation CO2 absorption solvents;
--a second test bay to support evaluation of fully integrated test
systems supplied by technology developers; and
--a bench-scale test area to accommodate small tests of emerging,
advanced technologies such as sorbents or membrane systems.
Initial testing at the PC4 began in 2011 when researchers conducted
trials with monoethanolamine (MEA) solvent to be used as a baseline to
evaluate the performance of advanced CO2 capture
technologies. Solvents being developed by Aker Clean Carbon and Babcock
& Wilcox, as well as Membrane Technology Research's membrane-based
technology, were also tested. Commitments are in place for the NCCC to
provide other advanced technologies a scaled-up testing platform as
development progress warrants.
Precombustion.--In precombustion capture, CO2 is
separated from the syngas produced by a coal gasification process,
prior to the combustion of the syngas in gas turbine for power
generation. CO2 capture is estimated to increase the COE
from an IGCC facility by more than 35 percent.\2\ Reductions in both
capital cost and power requirements of CO2 capture processes
are needed for development of efficient and cost-effective pre-
combustion technology, and the NCCC is focused on achieving those
goals. R&D activities at NCCC for pre-combustion capture include:
Advanced CO2 Capture Systems.--New solvents, sorbents,
and gas separation membrane technologies are being assessed on
syngas and are being scaled-up and tested based on fundamental
R&D progress by third-party developers.
Water Gas Shift Enhancements.--Water gas shift (WGS) catalyst
test results have been conducted which reveal that parasitic
steam consumption can be reduced, which in turn increases the
net power output of an IGCC plant and reduces COE with
CO2 capture. Results have been supplied to catalyst
suppliers and findings are being implemented at a commercial
IGCC plant currently under construction. Testing of various WGS
catalysts continues.
Advanced Syngas Cleanup.--New advanced syngas cleanup systems are
being tested for reducing hydrogen sulfide, hydrochloric acid,
ammonia, and mercury to near-zero levels.
Oxy-Combustion.--The NCCC is also evaluating the potential benefits
of oxy-combustion CO2 capture using the pressurized
transport reactor operating in oxygen combustion mode. Preliminary
screening studies have produced favorable results. Detailed system
studies, modeling and additional economic analysis are being conducted
to evaluate the commercial feasibility of this technology.
Gasification.--In developing a cost-effective advanced coal power
plant with CO2 capture, the NCCC also evaluates
opportunities to reduce cost for the entire plant in order to optimize
the plant processes with the integration of the CO2 capture
processes. Some of these cost reduction opportunities include
technology development for syngas cleanup, particulate control, fuel
cells, sensors and controls, materials, and feeders.
conclusion
The collaboration among DOE, technology developers, and private
industry is allowing the National Carbon Capture Center to make
significant strides toward the next generation of CO2
capture technologies. These technologies hold the promise of reducing
the costs of CO2 capture to levels necessary to assure that
affordable, reliable coal-based electric power can be produced for
America's economy, while also meeting all of the environmental
challenges associated with fossil fuel use. The Congress should sustain
the DOE Fossil Energy R&D budgets at the fiscal year 2012 enacted
levels.
______
Prepared Statement of the National Community Action Foundation
The National Community Action Foundation (NCAF) represents the 900
local Community Action Agencies and their partner organizations that
deliver the investments funded by the Department of Energy (DOE)
Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP) in low-income homes. We urge
the subcommittee to reject the President's fiscal year 2013 budget
request for WAP in the Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)
budget and, instead, provide $227.2 million for the fiscal year 2013
program. We also hope the regulation regarding the process for formula
allocations will not be set aside as requested.
This figure, $227.2 million, is equal to the 2008 level; 2008 was
the last program year before the massive, one-time expansion to create
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) jobs was implemented. Our
local members tell us that this is the minimum funding level for
delivering a responsible and effective low-income residential
efficiency program.
WAP should also continue to play its role as the ``incubator'' of
effective practices for the gradually developing conventional
residential efficiency upgrade market; although the administration and
many in the Congress have encouraged new demand for conventionally
financed home energy upgrades by those with credit and assets, that
market and the practices of the firms serving it has not yet matured.
To deliver a high-impact, well-managed, low-income program, and set
benchmarks for performance, energy savings, and transparent oversight,
Weatherization must maintain the worker training, cutting-edge
equipment and software, and the skilled managers and monitors. DOE
Weatherization remains a valuable national resource because it serves
as a model for quantifying investments, verifying performance, and
provides the benchmark energy audit tools, testing, and verification
protocols
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Budget Priorities.--First,
we would like to address the issue of priorities in the EERE budget
request. The request reflects a preponderance of research and
development (R&D), of incentives and of some commercialization
activities that, together, are intended to promote a ``market
transformation'' in the near future and a technological transformation
in the distant future. We believe the priorities demonstrated are
impractical in general and unfair to a large part of the population.
The lower priority which the budget gives to testing the results of
building efficiency research as well as other research is a mistake.
The results of the R&D that past years' appropriations have produced
should be verified and moved to general use through deployment by real
workers in real-world buildings. Further, offering taxpayer-financed
incentives for consumers who can afford to invest in new homes and
industry with credit to buy efficient equipment are only appropriate if
a robust program can be maintained for the most inefficient of the
millions of homes whose occupants lack the cash and credit to invest on
their own.
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Claims About Lower-Income
Consumers' Borrowing.--Secretary Chu's testimony before this
subcommittee on March 14 suggests that the DOE's request erroneously
assumes that large numbers of low-wage working families and retirees
will be served by the minimal program requested because new types of
lending will be available to such consumers so that they may buy their
own improvements. Madam Chairman, the Department analysts are poorly
informed about the financial situation of the WAP-eligible households,
all of whom have incomes far below the median income of their State.
The problem is not that they lack credit, which most do; the problem is
that they lack adequate resources and income flow to purchase even
immediate necessities.
Minimum Program Capacity.--There is size and capacity threshold
below which WAP can no longer function as an effective national
program. It takes funding at least the level size of the 2008 pre-ARRA
program to run a WAP that has trained, skilled, and well-equipped
workers, with even more experienced energy auditors and with local and
State inspectors checking and directing their work.
As the subcommittee is well aware, the 2008 funding level we are
requesting represented a drop from the program's resources a few years
earlier. For some States, it meant less than a full-time monitor for
the entire State and is still inadequate; however, our local members
want you to know that. Given a similar core program, they are committed
to finding enough additional partners with resources to serve every
county in the Nation; however, with less to build on, they will not be
able to offer utilities, building owners, and other investors the
certainty of a well-trained, well-equipped workforce whose work will be
backed by both local and State quality assurance. With the foundation
of funding at the pre-ARRA period level, $227.2 million, community
action will expand or develop partnerships with States; housing,
economic development and public health organizations; utilities; and
all manner of other local partners to create a robust and diversified
portfolio of resources delivered as single, customized packaged to the
dilapidated older homes on their waiting list.
Maintaining a Nationwide Program and Formula.--At the proposed
funding level, some States' formula allotments are particularly
inadequate. Moreover, the administration requested a renewal of the
one-time authority the subcommittee provided for 2012 which allows the
Secretary to establish a formula without benefit of public regulatory
process as required by law. We believe the subcommittee was wise to
allow it in 2012 when information about uncosted balances was relevant
and remained closely held by the Department. However, we believe it
would be a major mistake to set aside the statute a second year in a
row. It has turned out that the Department's information flow from
States about uncosted balances was flawed at both ends. High-performing
States now face imminent close-out of services, while other States are
still catching up to large balances but received 2012 funds. More
important, States must plan far ahead to match legislative and
budgetary requirements; more instability in the WAP system will not
contribute to good performance.
Significant Private Partnerships Depend on the Programs' Competence
and Transparency.--In 2008, the leveraged resources, including Low-
Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) dedicated funds and
nearly as much from private utility partnerships, amounted to almost
three times the Department of Energy Weatherization Assistance funding
the Congress provided. The reason partners turned funds over to
Weatherizers to deliver on low-income communities was the robust
Federal program foundation that gave local and private investors the
confidence to allow their resources to be combined with Weatherization
delivery. Federal standards, training, procedures, and oversight
requirements, including financial, assure our partners that their funds
go where they intend, that homes will not receive two or three
different kinds of evaluations and measures, that their jobs will be
inspected, and that there will be transparent accounting of each kind
of funding at the end.
Proven Capacity Should Not Be Wasted.--As Secretary Chu testified
to this subcommittee, the program delivered investments and ARRA jobs
at a dramatically higher scale than predicted, surpassing its total
production goal last year, coming in under budget and ahead of the
schedule planned. Weatherization ranked second in job creation last
quarter. Now our production is at about 100,000 more homes than planned
for delivery--700,000--and a number of States are still delivering
homes.
NCAF is certainly aware of the delivery problems that affected a
few of the recipients of the ARRA Weatherization expansion in a few of
the States represented on the subcommittee. Our organization worked
closely with DOE to raise quality and performance among our members. We
are confident these efforts worked, and we stand behind the Secretary
of Energy's testimony to several committees, including most recently
the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform (3/20/2012) that
serious problems existed in only 3 percent of the homes that have been
weatherized since 2010. All of these cases are being resolved, at no
further taxpayer expense, by the responsible parties.
Worker Skills and Standards.--Community Action is exceptionally
proud of the training it provided and the meaningful jobs organizations
filled with more than 20,000 construction industry workers, all of
which added up to between 14,000 and 16,000 full-time jobs per quarter
until major layoffs began this past winter as ARRA funds were
exhausted. There is still considerable work to do using prior year
funds or ARRA in many States for at least the next 6 months. After
that, fewer and fewer States will be able to sustain their workforce,
their quality control, and their State oversight through the end of the
2012 fiscal year.
The Weatherization Program leaders and field experts have worked
for 2 years with to develop definition of retrofit worker jobs skills,
the training required to achieve such DOE skills, and formal work
specifications for all key tasks involved in retrofitting residential
buildings of all types. Together with others in the emerging industry,
we have developed a yet-to-be implemented credentialing hierarchy which
could transform the sector of the building trades that has been
delivering energy retrofits in conjunction with housing upgrades
without benefit of common definitions and skill specifications.
Industry Training Capacity Is Built With Weatherization Assistance
Program Funds.--Weatherization has a network of tested of training
centers which serve not only the public sector program but also the
utility industry. Among the most distinguished is Montana State
University. NCAF was fortunate to be able to contribute funding (which
the Exxon-Mobil Corporation generously donated to us) to underwrite a
unique initiative in Montana that produced hours of video and other
online training built by these legacy centers and several partners in
higher education. These videos are now available nationwide to
introduce the industry to potential workers and to train those in the
field in a number of the required skills. It also resulted in models of
developing new small businesses to provide high-quality energy audits
in rural America in Oregon and in Virginia. Many of the others have
others have recently contributed to the intellectual capital and
training tools for the entire industry.
Worker and Contractor Access to Opportunity and Training.--It is a
great accomplishment that tens of thousands of newly unemployed workers
have left the program with skills and credentials they would never have
gained were it not for their experience with the ARRA Weatherization
program. The Weatherization program has served as an employment
``gateway'' to future opportunity for homebuilding industry workers who
came in with only conventional skills, including many workers who were
considered ``nontraditional'' in the construction field. The
administration's inadequate request means this door slams shut.
conclusion
We urge you not to accept the administration's request; it
represents the end-stage of access to Weatherization assistance for
lower-income families; within a very short period such low funding
would also spell the end of utility-community partnerships that assure
skillful delivery of coordinated investments.
We hope the subcommittee will take a different direction and
continue to build on the firm foundation that already exists for WAP by
allocating $227.2 million in fiscal year 2013. Thank you for
considering our concerns.
______
Prepared Statement of the National Consumer Law Center
The National Consumer Law Center (NCLC) is a nonprofit organization
which, during its 35 years of existence, has advocated for policies
that assist low-income families and seniors who struggle to pay their
energy bills. NCLC strongly recommends that the Senate approve a
funding level for the low-income Weatherization Assistance Program
(WAP) of $250 million for fiscal year 2013.
Because low-income families often live in older and poorly
weatherized homes,\1\ they tend to consume more energy than absolutely
necessary. Living in poorly weatherized houses leads to higher energy
bills and places these families at much greater risk of having their
utility services terminated for non-payment.\2\ Families can find
themselves without adequate heat in the winter, without lights, or
without the ability to prepare food, simply because their energy bills
are exorbitantly high.\3\ At the extreme, house fires can result when
families lose access to gas, electricity, or delivered heating fuels
and instead resort, out of desperation, to unsafe heating sources and
the use of candles.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ According to data from the U.S. Energy Information
Administration, 2005 Residential Energy Consumption Survey, 40 percent
of households at or below 100 percent of the Federal poverty level
lived in housing units constructed before 1960. Less than 30 percent of
households living above the poverty level lived in housing constructed
prior to 1960. Housing constructed before 1960 was not subject to the
stricter energy codes that apply to more recently constructed housing.
In addition, newer construction is more likely to use newer, more
energy-efficient heating, cooling, lighting, and refrigeration
equipment.
\2\ Electric and natural gas service disconnection rates are much
higher in low-income households than middle- or high-income households.
In California, for example, the low-income disconnection rate in 2010
was 5.5 percent, compared with 2.9 percent for non-low-income
households. (CA Division of Ratepayer Advocate, ``Status of Energy
Utility Service Disconnections in California'', March 2011, p. 2.)
\3\ 2011 National Energy Assistance Survey Summary Report, National
Energy Assistance Directors' Association, Nov. 2011. Available at
www.neada.org.
\4\ John R. Hall, Jr., Home Fires Involving Heating Equipment
(January 2010) at ix and 33. Also, 40 percent of home space heater
fires involve devices coded as stoves.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Over the past 3 years, WAP has helped 860,000 households to reduce
their energy bills,\5\ while also increasing the comfort and health of
those living in those homes.\6\ Weatherization generally decreases
energy usage--and energy bills--an average of 25 percent (with a wide
variation above and below that average).\7\ DOE estimates that the
average household's annual heating bill will be reduced by $437 as a
result of receiving weatherization.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Testimony of DOE Secretary Steven Chu Before the Committee on
Oversight and Government Reform, U.S. House of Representatives, March
20, 2012, p. 3.
\6\ Various studies have shown that weatherization can result in
reductions in a range of health problems, including asthma and
bronchitis. See, e.g. National Center for Healthy Housing/Enterprise
Community Partners, Inc., ``Case Study: Creating Green and Healthy
Affordable Homes for Families Living at Viking Terrace, Worthington,
Minn.'' (2010). That study showed significant declines in bronchitis,
sinusitis, and asthma (in adults) and respiratory allergies and ear
infections (in children) following renovations that employed ``green
and healthy'' principles.
\7\ L. Berry & M. Schweitzer, ``Metaevaluation of National
Weatherization Assistance Program Based on State Studies, 1993-2002''
(Oak Ridge National Lab, RNL/CON-488). Ex. Summ., p. x. The authors
found that WAP achieved energy savings in gas-heated households of 21.9
percent of the average pre-weatherization consumption of natural gas
for all end uses and 30.8 percent of pre-weatherization space heating
consumption.
\8\ U.S. Department of Energy, Weatherization Assistance Program,
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/wip/wap.html (last updated January 30,
2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Over those same 3 years, many States across the country have built
up the infrastructure to reach far more low-income homes each year than
before ARRA appropriated $5 billion for WAP.\9\ Under ARRA, States
received approximately $1.6 billion per year over a 3-year period.
Prior to that, annual funding for the program was between $224 million
and $243 million in all but 1 year since fiscal year 2002. States not
only increased the number of households served several fold, but also
had to bring on new contractors and make sure new employees were
properly trained.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ The American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA), Public Law
111-5, section 2, division A, title IV, 123 Stat. 138.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Choosing Massachusetts as one example, the State received
approximately $5 million annually in the years immediately prior to
ARRA. Under ARRA, the State will spend out its entire $125 million
grant from DOE. Spending has increased eight fold on an annual basis.
While the initial production goal was to weatherize approximately
17,000 units, the State will actually weatherize 20,000 units. The
quality of the weatherization work has been closely monitored by the
local nonprofits that retain the weatherization contractors and by the
State Department of Housing and Urban Development. In addition,
auditors from the Massachusetts Office of the Inspector General, from
the Federal Department of Energy, and from the Massachusetts Recovery
and Reinvestment Office have all monitored the program more closely
than in any year prior to ARRA, and found no instances of shoddy
workmanship or financial fraud or mismanagement.\10\ Massachusetts has
also helped develop a training pipeline for those interested in working
within WAP and, more broadly, in the green energy field.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ According to the Massachusetts Department of Housing and
Community Development (DHCD), the State grantee of the Federal WAP
funds, DHCD has met with the State Office of Inspector General (OIG)
twice for formal interviews and with DOE WAP monitors four times during
ARRA. The State OIG has also visited all of the State's WAP
subgrantees. Despite this close monitoring, no instance of fraud has
been identified nor have any ``significant findings'' been made.
Rather, the Massachusetts WAP network has been praised by its DOE
monitoring team for ``operat[ing] as a strong cohesive unit with good
internal and external support.'' DHCD has also been cited for taking a
``measured, prudent approach to preparing for the ARRA Weatherization
Program''.
\11\ The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) recently issued a report,
``Green Goods and Services Summary'' noting that in 2010, ``3.1 million
jobs in the United States were associated with the production of green
goods and services,'' comprising ``2.4 percent of total employment in
2010.'' Green jobs (including ``weatherizing and retrofitting projects
that reduce household energy'') now make up 6.8 percent of construction
jobs, according to the BLS report, available at: http://www.bls.gov/
news.release/ggqcew.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While no one expects that the Congress will fund WAP in fiscal year
2013 near the ARRA level of approximately $1.6 billion per year, NCLC
calls upon the Senate to recommend a funding level that will ensure
that the funding is adequate to maintain a network of agencies that can
deliver high-quality weatherization services and achieve substantial
energy savings in each home served. We believe that funding below $227
million, the level in fiscal year 2008, would completely fail to meet
that goal. We urge the Senate to appropriate no less than that amount,
and strongly recommend an appropriation of $250 million. Even at a $250
million level, virtually all States will have to substantially
dismantle the infrastructure that they successfully built up over the
past 3 years. State agencies across the country will be serving far
fewer households than in any of the past 3 years, leaving many needy
and eligible households literally and figuratively in the cold. The
network of contractors and workers who now possess the skills this
country needs to help us move towards a cleaner and greener energy
future will find itself without work.
The Congress must recognize that below the pre-ARRA funding level,
funding for WAP can be so low that States will not have the minimum
amount necessary to adequately oversee and deliver weatherization
services. There is a threshold below which States will not have the
resources to provide the financial oversight and training that is
needed to run a high-quality program, as well as actually providing the
funding local agencies need to carry out the weatherization work.
Moreover, as funding levels fall, States will likely reduce not only
the number of households served, but also the number or level of energy
efficiency measures delivered to each home, leaving the full
weatherization work that the house needs incomplete.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ This has been true historically: many homes weatherized pre-
ARRA were only partially weatherized due to lack of funding; most
States chose to reach more households rather than fully weatherize a
smaller number of homes. For this reason, the Congress allows homes
partially weatherized before 1994 to receive additional weatherization
services. 42 U.S.C. 6865(c)(2). Post-ARRA, it is likely that a large
percentage of households served by WAP will once again be only
partially weatherized.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This country is still in the grips of a serious economic downturn
that leaves fully 1 in 12 Americans unemployed.\13\ Moreover, the
nominal unemployment rate (8.3 percent) excludes the more than 1
million workers who the Bureau of Labor Statistics counts as having
given up looking because they are convinced the jobs just are not out
there,\14\ well more than double the number of discouraged workers in
2008. According to a Pew Fiscal Analysis Initiatives report, 4 million
workers (more than the entire population of Oregon) were unemployed for
1 year or longer, as of December 2011.\15\ Hard-working families who
have been trying their hardest but are still unable to get work need
the assistance of the Federal Government to get their energy bills down
to more affordable levels. This is precisely the wrong moment to cut
back too far on this much-needed program. Cutting back too deeply on
WAP will also lead to substantial layoffs among the weatherization
workforce at a moment when this country needs to build the green
workforce. In the last quarter of 2011, as reported in January 2012,
WAP ranked second among 200 Federal ARRA-funded programs in terms of
job creation.\16\ WAP not only reduces energy bills for low-income
households, but creates good jobs and helps build local economies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Bureau of Labor Statistics, ``Unemployment Rate'', available
at: http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/surveymost (accessed March 22, 2012).
\14\ Bureau of Labor Statistics, ``Not in Labor Force'', available
at: http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/surveymost (accessed March 22, 2012)
\15\ Pew Economic Policy Group Fiscal Analysis Initiative, ``Five
Long-Term Unemployment Questions'' (February 1, 2012), question 1.
\16\ Recovery.Gov, ``Track the Money'', available at: http://
www.recovery.gov/Pages/
TextView.aspx?data=jobSummaryProgram&topnumber=200&qtr=2011Q4 (accessed
March 22, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In summary, NCLC strongly recommends that the Senate approve a
funding level for WAP of $250 million for fiscal year 2013.
______
Prepared Statement of the National Hydropower Association
The National Hydropower Association (NHA) \1\ appreciates the
opportunity to submit this statement on the Association's priority
programs within the Energy and Water Development Appropriations bill.
The statement focuses on NHA's support of $59 million for the
Department of Energy's (DOE) Water Power Program and its research and
development (R&D) fiscal year 2013 initiatives. The Water Power Program
dedicates its efforts to research, test, and develop breakthrough
technologies and other sector innovations to increase generation of
renewable, reliable, and affordable electricity from water resources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ NHA is a nonprofit, national trade association dedicated to
promoting the Nation's largest renewable electricity resource and
advancing the interests of the hydropower, pumped storage and new
ocean, tidal, conduit and in-stream hydrokinetics industries.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This statement also provides support for two other areas:
--additional funding to increase hydropower generation on the Federal
system (Army Corps of Engineers and Bureau of Reclamation
facilities); and
--funding for the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct 2005) hydropower
incentives.
national hydropower association requests $59 million in fiscal year
2013 funding for the department of energy water power program
Funds should be directed with continued support of initiatives
across all hydropower technology sectors. The types of technologies
covered--conventional hydropower, pumped storage, marine and
hydrokinetic (MHK), and conduit technologies--unlock clean energy from
our country's rivers, oceans, tides, and water conveyances.
In recognition of the tremendous constraints on the Federal budget,
NHA's proposed fiscal year 2013 level of $59 million represents no
increase over the congressionally adopted fiscal year 2012 level and is
a significant reduction from recent NHA requests. The Association also
supports the fiscal year 2012 funding breakdown of $25 million directed
to hydropower and $34 million directed to MHK.
making the case for federal research and development support
Over the last 30 years, the Department of Energy's R&D budget for
all energy technologies (renewable, fossil, and nuclear) has declined
precipitously.\2\ For the Water Power Program, the numbers are even
more discouraging. Always one of the smallest of the Office of Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy programs, in 2007-2008 the Water Power
Program was zeroed out. The administration's fiscal year 2013 budget
request would now cut funding by 66 percent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 2006 GAO Report: ``Key Challenges Remain for Developing and
Deploying Advanced Energy Technologies to Meet Future Needs'' (GAO-07-
106).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Government R&D support is needed to promote hydropower
development nationwide. Conducting business as usual will not provide
the opportunity to fully realize the untapped potential available
throughout the country.
For MHK technologies, the R&D need is easy to demonstrate. The
United States lags far behind Europe in its investment to harness ocean
energy potential. While strides are being made, there are few actual
U.S. MHK projects, and those in existence are at early-stage
commercialization and deployment.
However, for conventional hydropower technologies, the R&D case is
no less strong and the need no less urgent. Some argue hydropower is a
``mature'' technology and not a candidate for R&D support particularly
in a constrained budgetary environment. This is a false choice.
Though a proven, reliable technology, hydropower owners, and
operators are always seeking ways to increase generating efficiencies,
improve water use, enhance environmental performance, and develop
better operating regimes. And now the industry looks to address new
issues resulting from the ever-changing electricity market and the
challenges posed by integration issues and grid reliability concerns.
Hydropower, like the automobile, is a technology that has
transformed over the course of a century. No one argues that the
government should stop investing in auto R&D--improving fuel efficiency
and economy, safety, incorporating new materials, et cetera. The same
holds true for continuing advancements in the hydropower sector. Since
the re-establishment of the Water Power Program in 2008, the Department
of Energy has begun several initiatives across the sector. These
include:
--Assessing resource potential (MHK, nonpowered dams, conduits);
--Reducing the cost of energy;
--Advancing technology readiness (new turbine designs for
conventional, MHK and conduit applications, as well as other
equipment and operational improvements);
--Ensuring environmental responsibility (technology advancement to
analyze and mitigate potential impacts);
--Quantifying hydropower's value to the grid (determining how to
increase the use of wind and solar through greater grid
flexibility and stability utilizing hydropower for
integration); and
--Advancing hydropower upgrades (analyze, assess and maximize
generation at existing facilities).
It is these types of initiatives and strategies that will propel
the hydropower and MHK industries forward, enhancing their contribution
to the Nation's electricity portfolio.
department of energy water power program goal: 15 percent of
electricity from water resources
NHA commends and supports the DOE Water Power Program's new vision
for water power technologies to provide 15 percent of the Nation's
energy by 2030.\3\ Like the goal established to support increased wind
generation, this is a fitting goal and one that recognizes hydropower's
role in achieving our country's push to substantially increase clean-
energy generation over the next 20 to 30 years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ DOE Wind and Water Power program brochure: ``Water Power for a
Clean Energy Future'' (p. 2) http://www1.eere.energy.gov/water/pdfs/
wp_accomplishments_brochure.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ultimately, for clean-energy policies to succeed, support for
increasing generation from all water power resources, conventional,
pumped storage, and MHK, is critical.
Not only does increasing hydropower generation provide more clean
energy megawatts to the grid, but it also increases the amount of grid
reliability, stability, and integrations services that hydropower
provides in order to enhance the penetration of variable energy
resources.
This is yet another area where Europe leads the United States.
Experience on the continent has clearly shown that increasing variable
energy generation requires access to energy storage. And that demand in
Europe is being met with storage from both conventional hydropower and
pumped storage projects.
NHA believes the hydropower industry is primed for growth to
provide these services; and this leads to an important R&D discussion.
While hydropower and pumped storage projects can provide regional and
grid-scale energy storage and other ancillary services, doing so will
require projects to operate in new ways and modes, and in some cases,
utilize new technologies.
As such, several R&D questions (ones that the DOE is positioned to
help answer) include:
--What is the impact of wear and tear on existing technologies due to
new operational regimes to provide the needed ramping rates and
other integration services?
--Does the United States have the technology in place to meet this
challenge?
--Is there new technology better suited for this purpose? If so,
where? If not, what innovations are needed in components,
equipment, facilities to improve performance?
As more is asked of the hydropower system to provide the ancillary
services needed to meet clean-energy goals, more questions and R&D
needs are sure to come into focus. The DOE Water Power Program will
fulfill a crucial role in collaborating with the industry to make this
transformation a reality.
other specific research and development needs
Over the last several years, NHA, the Electric Power Research
Institute (EPRI), and individual industry members have provided many
recommendations for needed data, analyses, research initiatives, and
other activities that would help to realize the full potential of the
water power sector.
While the following section briefly touches on some of those
recommendations, the larger point is that a robust DOE Water Power R&D
program is needed. With an industry consisting of facilities owned by:
Federal agencies; investor-owned utilities; municipalities and other
public power entities; independent power producers; along with new
technology developers; the DOE plays an important role in gathering
national baseline industry data and serving as a clearinghouse for this
information.
Past R&D recommendations included, but are not limited to:
--Advanced materials testing/science for turbines, generators, and
other components;
--Meteorological forecasting and optimal dispatch of energy/water
systems;
--New turbine designs (including distributed generation applications)
and operational regimes;
--Enhanced water quality mitigation technology; fish passage
bioengineering and mitigation;
--Study on potential effects of climate change on operations; and
--Updated resource assessments.
support for increased hydropower development at federal facilities
NHA also supports funding efforts within the Army Corps of
Engineers Civil Works Programs as well as at the Bureau of Reclamation
to operate, maintain, and upgrade their existing hydropower projects
and build on their existing non-powered infrastructure.
NHA specifically supports the work of the Corps on its Hydropower
Modernization Initiative (HMI) to develop a long-term capital
investment strategy. NHA also hopes that both Federal agencies will
continue to dedicate resources and staff time to standardize and
streamline their permitting responsibilities. Projects that can be
developed on Federal facilities are often too-longed delayed to realize
the significant energy potential due to the inconsistent support of
hydropower development and approaches to working with industry members
by agency staff at the local level.
support for the federal hydropower incentives of the energy policy act
of 2005
In EPAct 2005, the Congress established incentive payments--subject
to congressional appropriations--for the development of new hydropower
at existing dams or conduits as well as to increase efficiency of
existing hydropower facilities. To date these provisions have not
received funding.
NHA supports the provisions, and notes that at the time of passage,
new projects in the hydropower industry were rare. Since EPAct 2005,
the industry has seen a dramatic increase in interest and support for
new development. In 2011 alone, the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (FERC) issued 135 MW of project approvals and saw more than
1,600 MW of projects file for approval.\4\ These incentives could help
bring projects like these online in the coming years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ http://hydro.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/OEP-Energy-
Infrastructure-Update-Dec-2011.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
hydropower's role in america's energy portfolio and growth potential
Hydropower is America's leading source of domestic renewable
electricity, providing clean, affordable generation in every region of
the country. This reliable and underutilized resource accounted for
about 8 percent of total electricity generation and two-thirds of
renewable electricity generation in 2011.
Hydropower generation avoids approximately 200 million metric tons
of carbon emissions each year. In fact, regions that rely on hydropower
as a primary energy source reap the benefits of significantly cleaner
air as well as the lowest electricity prices.
While a proven renewable energy resource, hydropower is also an
energy resource for our future with tremendous growth potential. One of
the many myths about hydropower is that there are no new opportunities
for growth in our industry. In fact, the opposite is the case. In
addition to the numbers cited above, there are proposed projects
totaling more than 82,000 MW before FERC today across all technologies
in the waterpower sector.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ http://www.ferc.gov/industries/hydropower/gen-info/
licensing.asp.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
conclusion
Unlocking the vast hydropower potential of our rivers, oceans,
tides, and conduits requires Federal R&D initiatives that make
innovative ideas a reality. Continued investment in the DOE Water Power
Program will ensure that innovative new technologies and operational
advancements come to market, increasing America's clean-energy
portfolio and providing the economic benefits and jobs the country
needs. With the potential to develop new projects on hundreds of
potential sites, hundreds of thousands of jobs will be created through
the manufacturing and installation of these projects.
NHA appreciates and strongly supports the work of the Water Power
Program and opposes the proposed 66 percent reduction in funding in the
fiscal year 2013 budget request. NHA calls upon the Congress to
champion R&D investment in hydropower--the Nation's most widely used
renewable energy resource that, if properly supported, can provide the
foundation of America's clean-energy future.
______
Prepared Statement of National Insulation Association and International
Association of Heat and Frost Insulators and Allied Workers
federal funding for mechanical insulation will create immediate green
energy jobs while saving energy and protecting the environment
Chairwoman Feinstein, Ranking Member Alexander, and members of the
Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development: on behalf of the National
Insulation Association (NIA) and the International Association of Heat
and Frost Insulators and Allied Workers (International Union), we are
writing in support of a programmatic increase of $500,000 in fiscal
year 2013 for the Department of Energy's (DOE) Advanced Manufacturing
Program specifically to continue and expand their a national mechanical
insulation education and awareness program.
NIA represents 95 percent of the products utilized in the
mechanical insulation industry, with members across the country at 800
corporate locations, and the International Union represents more than
25,000 workers and families employed in the mechanical insulation
sector across the country. Together, our members, of which the vast
majority are small businesses, have more than a century-long track
record of providing large- and small-scale, long-term energy
efficiency, emissions reductions, cost savings, and safety benefits at
manufacturing facilities, power plants, refineries, hospitals,
universities, and government buildings across the country.
We have joined together to advocate for a national comprehensive
advocacy program for increased use, maintenance, and retrofits of
mechanical insulation in the commercial and industrial sectors because
of its potential to create tens of thousands of jobs now, reduce carbon
emissions, increase energy savings, and provide a safer working
environment.
Buildings are responsible for 40 percent of U.S. energy demand and
40 percent of all greenhouse gas emissions, making efficiency gains in
this area crucial if we are to markedly reduce America's energy
consumption and effectively combat climate change. The industrial
sector is similar in energy efficiency opportunities. At the
residential level, insulation is well publicized for its efficiency
benefits. However, the same cannot be said in the commercial and
industrial sectors, which together consume 2\1/2\ times more energy
than homes, according to the Energy Information Administration (EIA).
Commercial and industrial insulation--collectively known as mechanical
insulation--has the potential to slash the energy demand for the
building and industrial sector.
The Congress has already signaled its support for a mechanical
education and awareness program through both the appropriations and
authorization process. The Congress directed $500,000 be allocated in
DOE's budget for a mechanical insulation education and awareness
campaign in the fiscal year 2010 Energy and Water Development
Appropriations bill (Public Law 111-85). This funding was a critical
start, and we thank members of the Appropriations Committee for
recognizing the value of this program, but more is needed to carry out
a successful campaign. Further evidence of the Congress's support for
such a program is the inclusion of language to authorize a 5-year, $3.5
million a year national industrial energy efficiency education and
training initiative focused on mechanical insulation in H.R. 2454, the
American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (section 275, page 521).
By increasing awareness and use of this energy-saving technology,
the Congress will both create jobs now and reduce carbon emissions.
Creating jobs, particularly green jobs, is a top priority for the
Congress and the administration. Using government data, NIA
conservatively estimates that maintenance of insulation at
manufacturing facilities and going beyond minimum levels in new
construction can generate $4.8 billion in energy savings per year,
reduce 43 million metric tons of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse
gas emissions, and create 89,000 jobs annually.
Best of all, these jobs don't require additional research and
development. Mechanical insulation opportunities can be easily
identified, with potential energy savings and emissions reduction
determined with proven DOE-utilized software technology, and in many
applications implemented in weeks, making projects truly shovel-ready.
For facility owners and operators, the savings are swift and
sustainable; the return on investment from mechanical insulation is
typically less than 2 years (and sometimes as little as 6 months).
Mechanical insulation also improves infrastructure in the public,
educational, and healthcare sectors, among others.
Fiscal year 2013 funding for mechanical insulation education
programs is insufficient to make an economic impact in the industrial
and commercial sector through energy savings, emissions reduction, and
job creation. Increased funding from the Congress in fiscal year 2013
would enable Federal agencies and industry partners to gather more
data, work with engineering schools, and reach out to facility managers
and owners, engineering and design professionals, and others to educate
them about the benefits of increasing their focus on the benefits of
mechanical insulation technology. Congressional funding would also
ensure the promotion of the most energy-efficient uses of mechanical
insulation in new construction, increased education about the energy
savings that can be realized through proper maintenance and a renewed
focus on retrofitting mechanical insulation in older buildings and
manufacturing facilities that together will generate substantial carbon
emissions reductions and sustainable jobs.
NIA and the International Union have cumulatively contributed $3
million in developing and beginning the implementation of the campaign
and are full partners with the Energy Department in carrying out
meaningful elements to prove and encourage the greater use of
mechanical insulation made possible by $500,000 in fiscal year 2011
funding appropriated by this subcommittee and enacted into law. As
such, we have outlined proposed program elements to continue our
comprehensive, persuasive awareness campaign to engage and motivate
industrial and commercial decisionmakers to take action.
Elements of the program would include:
Education and Awareness
Mechanical Insulation Basics and Energy Assessment Process:
--DOE Industrial Assessment Centers.
--Engineering, HVAC, and Mechanical Design Schools.
--Inspection and Code Officials.
DOE and Other Tool Utilization (Facility Management and Design
Professionals):
--Simple Calculators.
--E-Learning Modules.
--3E Plus.
Tool Development
Mechanical Insulation and Energy Modeling Programs.
Building Simulation Programs--The Role of Mechanical Insulation.
Mechanical Insulation--HVAC Energy Calculator.
App development of simple calculators.
Data Development
Energy, Environment and Cost Reduction Impact Analysis of Mechanical
Insulation:
--Federal agency facilities.
--Armed force facilities.
--Manufacturing sectors.
--Healthcare facilities (hospitals and medical facilities).
--Education (schools and universities--colleges).
--Underground--District heating applications.
Energy and water conservation i.e., Energy--Water nexus.
Research
Materials--Systems:
--New technologies.
--Energy impact comparison on an equivalent basis (including aging)
Inclusive of All Mechanical Insulation Type Applications.
--Lifecycle analysis by product group.
--Impact of duct liners and exterior duct wrap on air leakage--Energy
efficiency.
NIA, its members, and the International Union are committed to
working with the Congress, DOE, other Federal agencies, and key
stakeholder groups on these and other initiatives that will lead to
greater energy efficiency nationwide. We have formed alliances with
engineering and other industry trade organizations and have offered to
work with DOE to bring together a coalition to help develop, implement,
and provide educational awareness programs established and funded by
the Congress.
Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony in support of a
program that is critical to job creation, economic growth, energy
savings, and emissions reductions.
______
Prepared Statement of the National Research Center for Coal and Energy
Dear Chairwoman Feinstein and Ranking Member Alexander: Thank you
for the opportunity to submit our testimony in support of the programs
of the Office of Fossil Energy, Department of Energy (DOE) for fiscal
year 2013.
introductory comments
The Office of Fossil Energy programs address two of our Nation's
key energy needs:
--Technologies for meeting our current demands for electricity; and
--Ensuring our supplies of petroleum and coal-derived fuels for our
transportation, industrial, and residential sectors.
Coal technologies provide more than 40 percent of our electricity
generation and are prominent in industrial applications for generating
process heat. The control of criteria pollutants and technologies for
the management of carbon emissions are important coal programs for
protecting our environment, a challenge that becomes increasing complex
as our Nation has legislated tighter limits on our energy-generating
processes. Electricity generation based on natural gas fuels, currently
providing 26 percent of our electricity generation, relies on
components such as gas turbines and fuel cells and on emissions control
technologies that were developed under the Fossil Energy program.
However, despite the prominence of fossil fuels in our national
energy mix for the present and for the foreseeable future, funding for
Fossil Energy programs has been reduced dramatically over the past
several years. Based on the fiscal year 2013 recommendations of the
administration, overall funding for civilian energy programs would
increase by 6 percent compared to fiscal year 2011 enacted funding.
However, Fossil Energy, which impacts the vast majority of our energy
extraction and utilization activities, would suffer a program reduction
of 31 percent. Given our national goal of being more efficient in using
our energy resources and being less dependent on imported energy, we
recommend that Fossil Energy should be funded at $634 million for
fiscal year 2013. Specific recommendations are provided in the Funding
Recommendations section.
benefits of investment in fossil energy research
Our Nation has benefitted from investments in fossil energy
research. In a study conducted by the National Research Council (NRC)
covering the period from 2000-2020, the NRC concluded that investments
in coal research, estimated to be around $9 billion in 2010 constant
dollars, would return around $14 billion in Federal tax revenues, a
ratio of 1.6:1. Related, but incomplete, studies for natural gas show
that our cumulative investment of $352 million from 1978-1999 in coal
bed methane, tight gas, and shale gas research have returned cumulative
benefits of $13.13 billion by 2010, a ratio of 37:1. We recommend that
the Congress conduct a more thorough study for natural gas as was done
by the NRC for clean coal technology programs.
In addition to the financial benefits to the U.S. Treasury, our
economy benefits from reduced costs for energy. Programmatic funding
supports jobs distributed over every State in our Nation. Research done
by our university sector provides workforce training for our current
and future fossil energy technology needs.
funding recommendations
Core Coal Research Programs
The core coal research program consists of a suite of projects in
carbon management, the development of advanced energy systems, and
cross-cutting research that provides new ideas for both making
meaningful evolutionary improvements to present technologies and for
developing new, revolutionary technologies that can be game-changers in
our energy portfolio. These programs cover the environmental, economic,
and efficiency aspects of energy.
We recommend that funding for the core coal research program be
maintained at or above $404 million, a level of funding that has been
supported in the past (fiscal year 2010) and is both achievable and
necessary for an effective fossil energy research program. Subprogram
elements would be distributed as follows:
Carbon Capture ($85 Million).--Most of the increase ($16 million)
should be directed to existing plants (postcombustion capture)
since existing plants will contribute the major portion of
electricity generated from coal-based units for the next 20
years. Funds should also be increased for developing advanced
(revolutionary) technologies to reduce the cost of capture and
for large pilot scale testing to validate the effectiveness of
proposed capture technologies.
Carbon Storage ($114 Million).--Most of the increase in this
subprogram should be directed to carbon reuse technologies to
use captured CO2 from power plants for enhanced oil
recovery (EOR), a cost-effective way of storing CO2
in depleted oil reservoirs while simultaneously increasing our
production of petroleum to reduce our imports of foreign oil.
Advanced Energy Systems ($145 Million).--Funding increases should
be directed toward advanced combustion systems (+$25 million),
advanced gasification systems (+$10 million), hydrogen turbines
(+$19 million), coal and biomass to fuels and chemicals (+$10
million), and fuel cells (+$25 million).
Cross-Cutting Research ($60 Million).--Increases are recommended
for plant optimization (+$16 million), computational modeling
(+$5 million), and technical and economic analyses of new
plants (+$7 million). Particular emphasis is recommended for
polygeneration applications and advanced design plants.
Natural Gas, Oil, and Unconventional Fossil Energy Technologies
We recommend an increase of $23 million for the natural gas program
and $10 million for the oil/unconventional fossil energy technologies
program. Funding would be allocated as follows:
Natural Gas Technologies ($25 Million).--Focal areas are shale
gas, including resource characterization, drilling technology,
and environmental protection.
Gas Hydrates ($15 Million).--Continue research on the development
of this major resource that exceeds our other reserves of
natural gas.
Unconventional Fossil Energy Technologies ($10 Million).--Focal
areas would include oil shale resources and enhanced
environmental safety, especially for off-shore operations.
In addition, we recommend retention of the Ultra Deepwater and
Unconventional Technologies program funded under section 999 of EPAct
2005, which the administration has recommended for rescission. This
program supports competitive, cost-shared research jointly conducted by
academic, nonprofit, State government (geological surveys) and industry
which serve the needs of small oil and natural gas producers.
Other Programs
Program direction funds support salaries of research and program
staff in the headquarters offices and the field offices of the Office
of Fossil Energy. We recommend that all program direction funds be
allocated under the Program Direction sub-element. The level of funding
for fiscal year 2013 should be in excess of $155 million.
Administration recommendations for Plant and Capital Equipment
should be increased to $17 million and Environmental Restoration should
be funded at $8 million.
closing comments
The funding requested by the administration for fiscal year 2013 is
only 59 percent of the value of the equivalent program in fiscal year
2010. This low level of funding is insufficient to support the fossil
energy R&D program the Nation needs to maintain our ability to generate
inexpensive electricity or to enhance our ability to produce
transportation fuels from our own resources. America's ability to sell
its energy technology abroad is also being severely restricted because
of insufficient funding to develop revolutionary new research ideas or
to successfully demonstrate viable technologies to reduce the financial
risk concerns of Wall Street and other financiers. The recommendations
for allocating $634 million in the program elements illustrated above
would return funding to 95 percent of fiscal year 2010 levels. We
strongly recommend restoration of a robust program of fossil energy
research.
We further recommend that the Congress also establish a mechanism
to allocate funding on annual basis for the support of demonstration
projects necessary to prove out promising fossil energy technologies
for commercial development. In the past, $100 million has been
allocated each year until a sufficiently large pool of funds was
accumulated to offer a request for proposals for demonstration
projects. We request congressional support for establishing a clean
coal power initiative account for demonstration programs.
Thank you for your support for fossil energy research and
development to maintain America's energy, economic, and environmental
strengths.
______
Prepared Statement of the Nuclear Energy Institute
The Nuclear Energy Institute \1\ (NEI) supports the
administration's request for fiscal year 2013 funding for the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC) ($1.053 billion), the Department of Energy
(DOE) National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) Fissile Materials
Disposition program ($921 million), and the DOE Office of Environmental
Management ($5.7 billion). NEI recommends $117 million more for the DOE
Office of Nuclear Energy ($792 million), and an increase of $1 million
to restore the NNSA Export Control Review and Compliance program to
$12.5 million.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Nuclear Energy Institute is the industry's policy
organization, whose broad mission is to foster the beneficial uses of
nuclear technology in its many commercial forms. Its membership, more
than 350 corporate members in 17 countries, includes every U.S. utility
that operates a nuclear power plant as well as international utilities,
plant designers, architect and engineering firms, uranium mining and
milling companies, nuclear service providers, universities,
manufacturers of radiopharmaceuticals, universities, labor unions, and
law firms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
adopting the recommendations of the blue ribbon commission on america's
nuclear future
NEI supports the general policy recommendations of the Blue Ribbon
Commission (BRC) on managing used nuclear fuel and high-level
radioactive waste. A DOE task force is scheduled to provide a plan on
implementing the recommendations to the Congress by the end of July,
and industry believes that report should provide a basis for the fiscal
year 2013 budget. The following programs deserve support and represent
the highest priorities for the nuclear energy industry:
--Fuel Cycle Research and Development--$191 million (an increase of
$16 million);
--Used Nuclear Fuel Disposition (the BRC recommendations)--$60
million; and
--Advanced Fuel Research and Development--$60 million (+$20
million).
NEI also supports the request of $10 million derived from the
Nuclear Waste Fund to use on used fuel storage and disposal programs at
DOE. NEI urges the subcommittee to support the following initiatives
using $10 million from the Nuclear Waste Fund in fiscal year 2013. DOE
should:
--Work closely with utilities, and based on work performed by the
Department in fiscal year 2012, develop timelines,
specifications and costs for the development, licensing,
construction, and operation of a consolidated storage facility
for spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste;
--Work closely with affected States, Indian tribes, and utilities to
develop detailed transportation plans for moving spent nuclear
fuel from the sites of nuclear power plants that have ceased
operation to a consolidated storage facility;
--Work closely with affected States, Indian tribes, and utilities, to
develop and implement a plan for training first responders in
preparation for transportation under section 180c of the
Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (42 U.S.C. 10101); and
--Identify communities potentially interested in hosting a
consolidated storage facility; and
--Forward to the appropriate committees of the Senate and House of
Representatives a budget and authorizing legislation for
recommendations from DOE.
Within the DOE Fuel Cycle R&D program, $5 million should be used in
fiscal year 2013 to collect data on the aging characteristics of used
nuclear fuel in dry cask storage systems, to support the extended use
of these systems, and ensure their transportability after periods of
extended storage. The Advanced Fuel R&D program includes the Accident
Tolerant Fuel Initiative which is important to long-term light water
reactor fuel development and should receive $60 million in fiscal year
2013.
The nuclear industry remains concerned about the termination of the
Yucca Mountain project. The project should proceed and be funded so the
technical review of the license application can be completed. Numerous
State and local governments and the National Association of Regulatory
Utility Commissioners are actively opposing DOE's withdrawal of the
application for the Yucca Mountain repository at the NRC and in the
courts. We urge the subcommittee to request a specific plan, including
the resources required for completing the Yucca Mountain licensing
process, assuming the courts rule the application cannot be withdrawn.
uranium enrichment decontamination and decommissioning fund tax undue
burden on electricity consumers
The administration's fiscal year 2013 budget proposes to reinstate
the uranium enrichment decontamination and decommissioning fund, with a
tax on electric consumers of $200 million a year until 2022. Electric
utilities have already paid twice for decontamination and
decommissioning at uranium enrichment plants that were originally
operated by DOE--first as part of the price for uranium enrichment
services from the facilities and again under the Energy Policy Act of
1992. Under the 1992 law, the tax on utilities was to end after 15
years or the collection of $2.25 billion, adjusted for inflation. The
utilities paid this amount in full. Because the industry has fully met
its obligation for the cleanup of the government facilities twice
already, NEI strongly opposes the administration's proposal. The
industry appreciates the support of the subcommittee in rejecting this
proposal in prior years and encourages you to continue to oppose this
proposal.
ensuring a strong nuclear regulatory commission
An independent, credible regulatory agency is required for public
confidence in commercial nuclear energy facilities. During the next
couple of years, the NRC must continue its inspection and licensing
activities at America's nuclear energy facilities while implementing
safety recommendations of the agency's task force based on lessons
learned from the Fukushima Daiichi accident. Effectiveness of the five-
member commission is essential to ensure NRC staff and licensees alike
have clear policy guidance. The commission functions most effectively
when it has a full complement of five commissioners, and the nuclear
energy industry believes the Congress's highest priority should be
ensuring that vacancies on the commission do not occur.
The industry supports fiscal year 2013 funding at the NRC's
requested level of $1.053 billion, an increase of $15 million above its
fiscal year 2012 funding levels. The industry remains concerned,
however, at the steep escalation in agency budgets and staffing levels
over the last decade, from 2,763 staff in fiscal year 2001 to 3,927
staff proposed in fiscal year 2013, and from $487 million in fiscal
year 2001 to more than $1 billion proposed in fiscal year 2013. The
industry is aware that the agency has $32 million in unobligated
balances from prior years' appropriations. The NRC chairman has
suggested that the additional Fukushima-related work would amount to
nearly $30 million in new spending. If the agency does not plan to
allocate these funds in this manner, the industry believes that the
unobligated balances should be used to reduce licensee fees in future
years.
The industry applauds the oversight of the NRC by the Congress to
ensure the agency effectively prioritizes its activities and achieves
closure on open issues in a timely and appropriate manner. The agency
should continue to achieve greater transparency in its budgeting to
reveal planned staffing and resource needs by individual divisions.
This is particularly true concerning the defense and national interest
programs funded by taxpayers in appropriated funds. In any 1 year, the
NRC should ensure that these programs are funded at the entire 10
percent of available funds. A firewall should exist between fee-based
sources of funds so the user fee is not used as an additional source of
funding for appropriated programs. This would demonstrate to the
Congress, the public and the industry (which pays 90 percent of the
NRC's budget) that the budget fairly reflects industry-specific
activities.
Once again, the administration has proposed terminating the
Integrated University Program, which supports the Nation's universities
and community colleges. This program supports important nuclear science
and engineering research and workforce training. Given that more than
one-half of America's green jobs in the electric sector are at nuclear
energy facilities, it is vital that the Congress provide financial
support for students and junior faculty. The NRC program is managed
jointly with DOE's Office of Nuclear Energy and DOE's National Nuclear
Security Administration and has been authorized by the Congress. NEI
supports $15 million for NRC to continue its participation in the
program in fiscal year 2013 and recommends that NRC fund the program at
that level.
development of advanced reactor and fuel technologies
The DOE Office of Nuclear Energy fiscal year 2013 budget is 12
percent lower than fiscal year 2012 while other DOE non-nuclear
programs are funded at much higher levels. Funding was reduced by 17
percent in R&D programs that are vital to the Nation's interest in
nuclear energy, science and technology. The cuts in DOE programs hinder
the Nation's ability to manage used nuclear fuel and promote key
research in innovative reactor concepts. The following programs deserve
support and represent the highest priorities for the nuclear energy
industry:
--Small Modular Reactor Licensing Technical Support--$95 million
(+$30 million);
--Light Water Reactor Sustainability Program--$25 million (+$4
million);
--Energy Innovation Hub for Modeling and Simulation--$25 million;
--Integrated University Program--$5 million (+$5 million); and
--Next Generation Nuclear Plant--$41.5 million (+$20 million).
The Secretary of Energy strongly supports the small modular reactor
licensing program and has proposed a 5-year, $452-million program.
Unfortunately, the DOE fiscal year 2013 request of $65 million falls
well short of that obligation, and the industry requests that funding
be increased to $95 million. DOE made a similar 5-year $250 million
commitment for the Modeling and Simulation Hub and it is vitally
important that this program receive the funding necessary to succeed.
In addition, the Light Water Reactor Sustainability program that is
cost-shared with industry should receive $4 million more than the DOE
fiscal year 2013 request to implement research to extend the licenses
of the Nation's operating reactors.
industry supports the department of energy innovative technologies loan
guarantee program
The nuclear industry appreciates the support provided by the
subcommittee for the DOE loan guarantee program for nuclear energy
plants and uranium fuel cycle facilities. NEI urges the subcommittee to
maintain the appropriated funds for projects under development for
fiscal year 2013.
There is no cost to taxpayers for nuclear energy project loan
guarantees, but there is significant benefit to consumers. The use of
loan guarantees will lower the overall cost of nuclear energy projects,
ultimately reducing the cost of electricity to consumers. Companies
granted loan guarantees by DOE for nuclear energy projects must pay a
premium for use of the program, plus cover all administrative costs.
However, the clean energy loan guarantee program, although essential,
is not yet a workable financing platform. NEI urges the subcommittee to
exercise its oversight responsibilities on implementation by the
executive branch, particularly on the issues of the credit subsidy cost
that project sponsors are expected to pay.
environmental cleanup and national security
DOE's budget for the Environmental Management Office should be kept
at level funding to ensure DOE meets its fiscal year 2013 enforceable
environmental compliance milestones. NEI remains concerned about NNSA's
part 810 export control rulemaking. The industry has identified several
issues that will impact the implementation of the program in fiscal
year 2013. The NEI urges the subcommittee to consider the impact to the
U.S. industry as a result of the inadequate funding of $11.4 million
proposed for fiscal year 2013 for review of export licenses, about $1
million less than last year. NEI supports the administration's request
of $921 million for the Fissile Materials Disposition program.
______
Prepared Statement of the Nuclear Engineering Department Heads
Organization
Chairwoman Feinstein, Ranking Member Alexander, and members of the
subcommittee: on behalf of the faculty and students comprising the
nuclear education system in the United States we wish to provide
testimony on fiscal year 2013 appropriations for the Department of
Energy (DOE) and other relevant agencies under the subcommittee's
jurisdiction.
As you begin to develop fiscal year 2013 appropriations
legislation, we strongly urge you to reject the administration's
request to enact a 10-percent reduction in the research and development
(R&D) budget of DOE's Office of Nuclear Energy, and maintain funding
for the Integrated University Program at fiscal year 2012 appropriated
levels.
The Nuclear Engineering Department Heads Organization (NEDHO) is an
alliance of heads and chairs of academic programs emphasizing nuclear
and radiological science, engineering, and technology across the United
States. NEDHO provides a forum for discussion, coordination, and
collaboration on issues such as academic accreditation, funding for
scholarships, fellowships, and research, and funding for training and
research reactors. NEDHO collaborates with the American Nuclear
Society, the Nuclear Energy Institute, the Test, Research, and Training
Reactors (TRTR) organization, ABET, and other similar societies and
organizations that have a stake in nuclear education. We also have
strong interactions with industry and government both of which hire our
students and utilize our research results. At present NEDHO's
membership includes 43 U.S. academic institutions in 29 States, plus 2
military academies.
NEDHO seeks to inform national decisionmakers on nuclear policy,
science and technology, and related education through Hill visits and
by providing testimony at various subcommittee hearings. NEDHO's
ultimate goal is to preserve our Nation's historic leadership in the
nuclear field, and to sharpen our competitive edge in the future by
maintaining a tradition of excellence in nuclear academia that is the
envy of the world. For decades we have sustained the nuclear enterprise
with a highly qualified human resource that led the development of
nuclear power as a viable, safe, and environmentally sound source of
energy. Our graduates have also contributed to advances in nuclear
medicine and a multitude of industrial applications, for example oil-
well logging, and have engaged in international activities in the
nuclear security and safeguards arena.
In recent years interest in the nuclear science and engineering
education enterprise has been on the rise in the United States driven
by three primary factors:
--U.S. economic and energy security;
--global competitiveness; and
--national nuclear security.
First, with regards to U.S. economic and energy security we note
that nuclear energy today accounts for 20 percent of the U.S. total
electricity supply and more than 70 percent of non-carbon-emitting
electricity sources. The U.S. nuclear power industry, under a rigorous
yet robust regulatory regime administered by the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC), has established itself as a safe,
environmentally responsible, economic, and highly reliable (about 90
percent capacity factors) provider of electric energy. Available
forecasts for uranium ore indicate ample, reliable, and inexpensive
supplies for the foreseeable future. The U.S. NRC's recent approval of
two new AP 1000 reactors at the Vogtle site in Georgia, and their
approval last week of two similar reactors in South Carolina, plus
rising interest in Small Modular Reactors (SMR), ushers a new nuclear
era in this country after a 30-year hiatus. The improving public
perception of the safety of America's nuclear fleet will be sustained
by the improved features in new designs and by incorporating lessons
learned from Fukushima. Also the prospect of closing the backend of the
fuel cycle that has been resuscitated by the Blue Ribbon Commission's
report will hopefully kick into high gear to resolve this urgent issue
once and for all.
Second, on the global scale many developing and underdeveloped
nations are ambitiously seeking to build up their nuclear power
capacity, most notably in the two most populated countries in the
world, China and India, whose economies are undergoing aggressive
growth. A recent presentation by DOE personnel reported on the
magnitude of the global market for nuclear power in the foreseeable
future as follows: there are more than 430 reactors operating in 30
countries, producing 370 GWe, or about 14 percent of the global
electricity supply. There are currently 65 reactors under construction
in 15 countries, with 26 of these in China alone. These operating and
soon-to-operate reactors comprise a substantial global market for
equipment (e.g., turbines, generators, instrumentation), fuel, and
services. DOE also notes 154 power reactors planned in 27 countries for
the next 8-10 years costing more than $740 billion, and a total of 331
reactors proposed in 37 countries over the next 15 years at a projected
cost of $1.6 trillion. Not only are the economic rewards of U.S.
engagement in this growing global market necessary for providing highly
paying jobs for Americans involved in the design, analysis, and
potentially construction of new reactors, it is an essential means of
spreading high U.S. technical standards in this sensitive industry
across the globe. A safety culture that transcends national boundaries
and that is based on a solid scientific foundation and supported by
decades of excellent American experience is the best guarantee that
nuclear power will remain an agent for improving the global
environment.
Third, the growing number of nuclear-hopeful nations and the
widening footprint of nuclear power raises concerns about nuclear
proliferation to historic highs and makes a strong case for developing
novel and better detectors and methods for verifying that nuclear
materials are only being employed for peaceful purposes. These concerns
cannot be addressed solely by controlling the flow of scientific
knowledge and underlying technologies and requires a revamped structure
that better integrates the technical and policy aspects of this issue.
In addition, the continued threat of nuclear terrorism is not likely to
abate any time soon and demands the continuous and untiring vigilance
of relevant agencies within the U.S. Government.
Common to all these factors is the need for a highly educated
nuclear workforce that is aware of national needs and that is well
equipped to tackle them. The magnitude of this immense challenge was
wisely recognized by the U.S. Congress and two administrations since
2009 when two programs designed to reinvigorate nuclear education in
the U.S. were inaugurated: The Integrated University Programs (IUP) and
the DOE Nuclear Energy University Programs (NEUP). The Blue Ribbon
Commission likewise recognized the importance of U.S. leadership in the
nuclear area, and highlighted continued innovation in nuclear
technology and workforce development as one of its eight major
recommendations.
A decade ago Federal investment in R&D and nuclear education
infrastructure was administered by DOE's Office of Nuclear Energy (DOE-
NE). Support through scholarships, fellowships, equipment grants,
research reactor upgrades, et cetera was crucial to stemming the
precipitous decline in the 1990s of nuclear academic programs and
university research reactors. In 2008, foreseeing an impending nuclear
human resource crisis fueled by an aging workforce and the rising
prospect of mass retirements DOE-NE created NEUP that directed
approximately 20 percent of NE's R&D funding towards universities in
support of DOE-NE's research mission. And in 2009 the IUP was instated
by the Congress to instill some degree of stability in the funding
stream of nuclear education by diversifying sponsorship across three
Federal agencies: DOE's NE, DOE's National Nuclear Security
Administration (NNSA), and the US NRC. The three arms of IUP were
directed to support broad educational objectives via programmatic and
non-programmatic awards, and to coordinate their support mechanisms in
order to minimize duplication.
In the ensuing years these support schemes have succeeded in
reviving nuclear academia, and expanded interest in nuclear research
topics into other disciplines, e.g., material science, mechanical
engineering, radiochemistry, leading to a fertile interdisciplinary
research environment in support of the Nation's research agenda. All
awards made via NEUP and IUP are competitive and have seen broad
participation from across the Nation. To be specific, the NRC invested
its share of IUP in curriculum development ($5 million), Junior Faculty
Development, scholarships and fellowships awarded to selected
universities, and support of community colleges (a total of $10
million). NNSA now dedicates $5 million in support of the Nuclear
Science and Security Consortium led by the University of California,
Berkeley, and awards $10 million in programmatic support of basic
research projects relevant to nuclear security.
DOE-NE administers IUP through NEUP in two separate funding
streams. First, NEUP spends $5 million in direct IUP funding on
scholarships and fellowships awarded directly to student applicants.
This program is distinct in its objectives from NRC's scholarship and
fellowship program in that it is designed to attract top talent to the
field without regard to the university where they seek their respective
degree. While this type of recruitment is likely to raise the overall
quality of students in the nuclear field, it is expected to concentrate
these students in highly ranked schools creating severe discrepancy
among the remaining nuclear academic programs. In contrast, NRC's
program empowers awarded departments to use the funds in recruitment of
high-quality students that will promote the reputation of the awarded
department and ensure a diverse educational foundation that improves
the chances of innovative breakthroughs. In addition, DOE-NE has
committed up to 20 percent of its R&D funds to support university
research via competitive awards of varying levels of programmatic
relevance. Some of these funds have been awarded in support of nuclear
infrastructure in U.S. universities.
To appreciate the importance of IUP for the revival of nuclear
engineering academia in the United States we note that the elements of
IUP cover the three primary missions of a research intensive
university:
--education (undergraduate and graduate);
--research; and
--service.
In the 3 years since its inception IUP has succeeded in reversing
enrollment decline that all but dominated the 1990s, with enrollments
continuing to climb even after the Fukushima event, and in revitalizing
existing academic programs with several universities starting new
nuclear engineering programs from scratch. Sustaining support of IUP
sends a clear and loud message to university administrators who need to
support nuclear programs and to prospective students that their career
investment in this field is desirable and will be rewarded. In
contrast, reducing DOE-NE's R&D budget, and eliminating support for IUP
sends a confusing message to the same administrators and target
students and steers them away from a field that we believe, and we hope
you agree, is of prime national interest.
In closing we hope that your subcommittee will reverse this
damaging development. Continued funding for NEUP and IUP will protect
the great progress achieved in nuclear academic programs in support of
our Nation's ability to compete in the global nuclear marketplace and
to enhance the safe and secure utilization of nuclear technology for
the benefit of humanity.
Thank you.
______
Prepared Statement of the Sacramento Municipal Utility District
Dear Chairwoman Feinstein: On behalf the Sacramento Municipal
Utility District (SMUD), I want to thank you again for supporting the
Department of Energy's (DOE) Water Power Program and your staff's
excellent work in securing $59 million for the program in fiscal year
2012. I am writing to respectfully request that the Senate
Appropriations Committee fund the Water Power Program at the same level
of $59 million for fiscal year 2013. This amount should be directed to
support hydropower research and development including projects
classified as ``conventional hydropower''.
Investments during the past few years in what is labeled
``conventional'' hydropower technologies have resulted in the
development of more efficient and environmentally friendly turbines,
reduced costs in state-of-the-art small hydropower technology, and
advances in technologies to integrate intermittent renewable energy
resources into the electric grid. These advances could be lost if the
administration's fiscal year 2013 budget request, which proposes
cutting the Water Power Program's funding level to $20 million, is
enacted and if no R&D funds are designated for conventional hydropower
projects.
Northern California electricity customers have benefitted directly
from investments made by the Water Power Program. In 2011, SMUD was
awarded two multiyear grants, including a $4.96 million award to assist
with initial geotechnical studies for the proposed 400 MW Iowa Hill
pumped storage project. While pumped storage technology has existed for
some time, SMUD is researching advanced plant control systems featuring
variable speed pump generators that have yet to be applied in the
United States. Use of this new technology would enhance SMUD's ability
to integrate high levels of intermittent renewable resources such as
wind and solar power into our electrical system while maintaining
electric reliability.
The DOE also awarded SMUD $1.49 million to help implement a new
low-head modular hydropower unit at the Slab Creek Powerhouse project
featuring inward flow reaction turbine technology allowing creative use
of existing tunnels to generate power from minimum releases of the
existing reservoir.
Each of these grants was awarded based on their ability to
contribute to the development of new technologies that produce
conventional hydropower more efficiently, reduce costs, and increase
sustainable hydropower generation. Both projects will advance
innovation in a traditional, carbon-free resource.
Because SMUD's grants depend on future appropriations, including
fiscal year 2013 funding, and to ensure continued Federal investment in
these valuable and innovative initiatives, SMUD believes the current
level of $59 million in funding for the Water Power program should be
maintained.
Thank you for your attention and support on these issues.
______
Prepared Statement of the Society for Industrial and Applied
Mathematics
summary
This written testimony is submitted on behalf of the Society for
Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM) to ask you to continue your
support of the Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Science by
providing $4.99 billion in fiscal year 2013. In particular, we urge you
to provide significant support for the Applied Mathematics Program
within the Office of Advanced Scientific Computing Research (ASCR)
within the Office of Science. We also emphasize the importance of
support for graduate students, postdoctoral fellows, and early career
researchers.
written testimony
We are Dr. Lloyd Nicholas Trefethen, President, and Dr. Reinhard
Laubenbacher, Vice President for Science Policy, of the Society for
Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM). On behalf of SIAM, we are
submitting this written testimony for the record to the Subcommittee on
Energy and Water Development of the Committee on Appropriations of the
U.S. Senate.
SIAM has approximately 13,000 members, including applied and
computational mathematicians, computer scientists, numerical analysts,
engineers, statisticians, and mathematics educators. They work in
industrial and service organizations, universities, colleges, and
government agencies and laboratories all over the world. In addition,
SIAM has more than 500 institutional members--colleges, universities,
corporations, and research organizations. SIAM members come from many
different disciplines, but have a common interest in applying
mathematics in partnership with computational science towards solving
real-world problems.
First, we would like to emphasize how much SIAM appreciates your
subcommittee's continued leadership on and recognition of the critical
role of the DOE Office of Science and its support for mathematics,
science, and engineering in enabling a strong U.S. economy, workforce,
and society. DOE was one of the first Federal agencies to champion
computational science as one of the three pillars of science, along
with theory and experiment, and SIAM deeply appreciates and values DOE
activities.
Today, we submit this testimony to ask you to continue your support
of the DOE Office of Science in fiscal year 2013 and beyond. In
particular, we request that you provide the Office of Science with
$4.99 billion, the level requested in the fiscal year 2013 budget
request. SIAM is aware of the significant fiscal constraints facing the
administration and the Congress this year, but we note that, in the
face of economic peril, Federal investments in mathematics, science,
and engineering remain crucial as they help to maintain U.S. pre-
eminence in innovation, upon which our economy and fiscal health
depend.
the role of mathematics in meeting energy challenges
The Nation faces critical challenges in energy, including in energy
efficiency, renewable energy, improved use of fossil fuels and nuclear
energy, future energy sources, and reduced environmental impacts of
energy production and use. As DOE and the research community design a
long-term strategy to tackle these issues, the tools of mathematics and
computational science (theory, modeling, and simulation) have emerged
as a central element in designing new materials, predicting the impact
of new systems and technologies, and better managing existing
resources. Already, mathematical and computing researchers in
universities, national laboratories, and industry are providing
insights that propel advances in such fields as nanotechnology,
biofuels, genomics, climate modeling, and materials fabrication.
To tackle many of these challenges, DOE must be able to understand
complex systems such as the U.S. power grid, the dispersion of nuclear
radiation after a disaster, and the Earth's climate system. These and
other complex systems have high levels of uncertainty, lack master
plans, and are susceptible to breakdowns that could have catastrophic
consequences. Understanding complex systems helps mitigate these risks
and facilitate the development of controls and strategies to make
systems more efficient.
department of energy office of science
Activities within ASCR play a key role in supporting research that
begins to fulfill the needs described above. Particularly critical
programs include:
--the Applied Mathematics program;
--the Scientific Discovery through Advanced Computing (SciDAC)
program; and
--programs to maintain the pipeline of the mathematical workforce.
SIAM supports the $455.6 million requested for ASCR for fiscal year
2013. SIAM appreciates that the requested increase for fiscal year 2013
would be directed to the Mathematical, Computational, and Computer
Sciences Research activity programs, helping to restore balance between
research activities and facility investments.
SIAM supports Office of Science plans to fund research to manage
ever-growing data volumes in science. The explosion in data available
to scientists from advances in experimental equipment, simulation
techniques, and computer power is well known, and applied mathematics
has an important role to play in developing the methods and tools to
translate this shower of numbers into new knowledge.
SIAM also supports funding for research to develop exascale
computing and notes that investments in algorithm research and software
development are essential to developing the next generation of high-
performance computers, realizing the full benefits of these new
machines, and transferring those capabilities to industry for broad
economic benefit.
supporting the pipeline of mathematicians and scientists
Investing in the education and development of young scientists and
engineers is a major step that the Federal Government can take to
ensure the future prosperity and welfare of the United States.
Currently, the economic situation is negatively affecting the job
opportunities for young mathematicians--at universities, companies, and
other research organizations. It is not only the young mathematicians
who are not being hired who will suffer from these cutbacks. The
research community at large will suffer from the loss of ideas and
energy that these graduate students, postdoctoral fellows, and early
career researchers bring to the field, and the country will suffer from
the lost innovation.
Maintaining the pipeline of the mathematical workforce with
programs that fund research and students is especially important
because of the foundational and cross-cutting role that mathematics and
computational science play in sustaining the Nation's economic
competitiveness and national security, and in making substantial
advances on societal challenges such as energy. DOE programs support
the educational and professional development of the researchers at
universities, companies, and the national laboratories who will tackle
the research problems needed to change energy usage in this country.
Within the Office of Advanced Scientific Computing Research, the
Computational Science Graduate Fellowship program is a highly
successful and model program that enables students to receive robust
training in mathematics and also learn to interface with a wide variety
of other fields. We request that strong support for this program
continue, as well as ongoing support for postdoctoral fellows at DOE
national laboratories and universities.
conclusion
The programs in the Office of Science, particularly those discussed
above, are important elements of DOE's efforts to fulfill its mission.
They contribute to the goals of dramatically transforming our current
capabilities to develop new sources for renewable and low-carbon energy
supplies and improve energy efficiency to ensure energy independence
and facilitate DOE's effort to increase U.S. competitiveness by
training and attracting the best scientific talent into DOE
headquarters and laboratories, the American research enterprise, and
the clean-energy economy.
We would like to conclude by thanking you again for your ongoing
support of the DOE Office of Science and the actions you have already
taken to enable DOE and the research and education communities it
supports, including thousands of SIAM members, to undertake the
activities that contribute to the health, security, and economic
strength of the United States. The DOE Office of Science needs
sustained annual funding to maintain our competitive edge in science
and technology, and therefore we respectfully ask that you continue
your support of these critical programs.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide testimony to the Committee
on behalf of SIAM and look forward to providing any additional
information or assistance you may ask of us during the fiscal year 2013
appropriations process.
______
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 to private industry 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.
In its fiscal year 2013 budget, the administration has requested
the appropriation of $15,579,815 for the final installment of Elk Hills
compensation to fulfill the Federal Government's obligations to the
State under the Settlement Agreement. The State respectfully requests
the appropriation by the Congress of $15,579,815 of the final Elk Hills
compensation payment due to the State.
background
Upon admission to the Union, States beginning with Ohio and those
westward were granted by the 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 the 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 one-half or
more of their original value to inflation.
state's claims settled, as the 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, the 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, the 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, section
3415). The Secretary was required by the 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 National 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 congress should appropriate $15,579,815 for fiscal year 2013 for
the final installment of elk hills compensation due to the state
The State's 9-percent share of the adjusted Elk Hills sales price
of $3.53 billion is $315,099,815 (after deducting the State's share of
the sales expenses). As the Congress had directed in the 1996 Act that
mandated the sale of Elk Hills, 9 percent of the net proceeds were
reserved in a contingent fund in the Treasury for payment to the State.
To date, the 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.
The administration's budget for fiscal year 2013 requests the
appropriation of $15,579,815 for the Elk Hills School Lands Fund to pay
the final installment of Elk Hills compensation due to the State.
(Budget of the United States Government, fiscal year 2013--Appendix, at
p. 446, Account No. 89-5428-0-2-271). Thus, the provision for Elk Hills
compensation is a line item in the Federal budget; it is not an
earmark.
The State respectfully requests the appropriation by the Congress
of $15,579,815 to fulfill the Federal Government's obligation to the
State under the Settlement Agreement.
______
Prepared Statement of the University Corporation for Atmospheric
Research
On behalf of the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research
(UCAR) and the university communities engaged in Earth systems research
and education, I submit this written testimony for the record of the
Senate Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Energy and Water
Development. UCAR is a consortium of 77 research universities that
manages and operates the National Center for Atmospheric Research
(NCAR) on behalf of the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the
university community. I urge the subcommittee to fund the fiscal year
2013 budget request of $4.992 billion for the Department of Energy
(DOE) Office of Science, including $625.3 million for Biological and
Environmental Research, and $2.337 billion for the DOE Office of Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE).
With the following, I highlight several science research and
development programs that represent DOE's critical contributions to
American leadership in science and technology:
department of energy office of science
The DOE Office of Science directly supports university and
laboratory research, increasing the Nation's capacity to understand and
advance numerous fields of science, including the atmospheric sciences.
More broadly, the DOE's world-class laboratories, the research
conducted at the labs, and the scientific facilities accessible to the
larger research community through the labs, are centerpieces of the
robust innovation ecosystem that keeps the United States an
international leader in science and technology and that stimulates the
economy through technology development.
Biological and Environmental Research.--The Biological and
Environmental Research (BER) program within DOE Science makes
fundamental contributions to the Nation's premier Earth system models
and data analysis infrastructure that provide the scientific foundation
for future decisionmaking on environmental change. Without BER-
supported work, we would not know the level of risk that cities,
states, and businesses face from long-term weather trends and what
societal preparation and adaptation might be needed.
In particular, the Climate and Environmental Sciences program
within BER provides indispensable support to the Community Earth System
Model (CESM), a comprehensive computer model supported by DOE and NSF
to analyze Earth's past, present, and project future climate. CESM is a
major contributor to national and international assessments of
environmental change. And while CESM is housed and managed at NCAR, it
is an open-source climate model, involving contributions and
improvements from scientists across the Nation and around the world.
Thanks in part to BER support, CESM is incorporating more complex
and realistic representations of the natural and human processes that
shape the global climate. For example, the model now has a dynamically
coupled carbon and nitrogen cycle component that allows representation
of realistic exchanges of CO2 between the atmosphere, the
oceans, and the land surface. This new capability will allow realistic
studies of the role of the ocean in absorbing and releasing
CO2 to the atmosphere, thereby obtaining more accurate
predictions of future CO2 concentrations that are
fundamental to understanding the nature and magnitude of future changes
in global climate. Carbon and nitrogen cycling in CESM provides the
means to study in detail the contributions of land use change and
vegetation disturbance to local, regional and global climate change.
These new capabilities will allow the climate science community to
address societally relevant questions in a way that has not been
possible in the past.
CESM performs exceptionally well on DOE's modern supercomputers,
having been run at high resolutions in one experiment on more than
100,000 processors of the Cray Jaguar-PE system at Oak Ridge National
Laboratory. CESM scenario runs are now underway on this and other
supercomputers to make projections for the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change's Fifth Assessment Report, expected to be released in
2014.
New in fiscal year 2013, climate and Earth system modeling research
at DOE will develop an enhanced validation and verification capability
to compare models and measurements against a unified framework using
sophisticated software tools. This initiative promises to improve the
efficiency of data management and analysis in the field. As in fiscal
year 2012, atmospheric scientists will continue to receive grant
funding for cutting-edge research on aerosols, clouds, and aerosol-
cloud interactions, in order to improve estimates of how these
feedbacks impact climate, an area of atmospheric research that can be
better understood.
In order to develop more accurate, increasingly realistic, and
higher resolution Earth system models, with better environmental
predictive capabilities for businesses, stakeholders such as water
resource managers, and communities, I urge you to fund the Office of
Biological and Environmental Research within the DOE Office of Science
at the requested $625.3 million for fiscal year 2013, including $315.6
million for Climate and Environmental Sciences within BER.
advanced scientific computing research
According to a 2011 National Research Council report The Future of
Computing Performance, Game Over or Next Level?, ``Virtually every
sector of society--manufacturing, financial services, education,
science government, the military, entertainment, and so on--has become
dependent on continued growth in computing performance to drive new
efficiencies and innovation.'' Within the atmospheric sciences, the
advancement of our science rests on the continued growth of computing
performance and capabilities. DOE Science's Advanced Scientific
Computing Research (ASCR) delivers needed leading edge computational
and networking capabilities to scientists nationwide, enabling the
Office of Science and the larger university community to address and
answer major scientific questions.
In particular, the atmospheric sciences community depends on the
ASCR Leadership Computing Facilities (LCFs), which are available to all
researchers for scientific discovery and to address critical
engineering challenges. The continued support of these programs is of
particular importance to Earth system model development. Representing
the complex processes and feedbacks of the Earth's systems, while
efficiently harnessing the enormous amount of computing power
necessary, requires very advanced software engineering, computer
science, and numerical techniques. Because the climate simulations
using the CESM (described above) are too computationally intensive to
be run at NCAR alone, many computational experiments are run at the
LCF's.
At the Oak Ridge National Laboratory Leadership Computing Facility
(OLCF), for example, a new 2.33-petaflop Cray XT5 system is already
available to the scientific community, and OLCF plans to upgrade it to
a 10-petaflop Cray XK6 system in upcoming years. The Argonne National
Laboratory Leadership Computing Facility (ALCF) plans to upgrade its
IBM Blue Gene/Q supercomputer to a 10-petaflop system this year.
Alongside the NCAR-Wyoming Supercomputing Center and its 1.6-petaflop
Yellowstone system soon to be delivered to this new facility, these DOE
supercomputers will empower atmospheric scientists to push the
boundaries of Earth systems modeling science.
In the same way that more powerful telescopes enable new
discoveries in astronomy, each major supercomputer upgrade enables new
numerical experiences that reveal more details regarding how the Earth
system works. This information is critical to efforts to understand and
predict regional climate, as well as to develop and assess mitigation
and adaptation strategies. A failure to maintain and continue to
upgrade these LCFs would seriously undermine the steady progress in
this and many other areas of science.
Another important cross-cutting computing program that operates in
partnership with ACSR and other programs within DOE Science is the
Scientific Discovery through Advanced Computing (SciDAC) program.
SciDAC accelerates scientific progress by breaking down the barriers
between disciplines and fostering more dynamic partnerships between
basic researchers and computational science applications. A SciDAC
effort in partnership with BER, for example, is quantifying the
uncertainty in next-generation integrated Earth system models in order
to dramatically improve our ability to characterize the drivers of
global climate and quantify the impact of energy production and use on
the environment and human health.
I urge you to fund the Advanced Scientific Computing Research
within the DOE Office of Science at the fiscal year 2013 requested
level of $455.6 million and to support SciDAC program throughout the
Office of Science budget.
energy efficiency and renewable energy research and development
Renewable energy research, development, and technology transfer are
among the most important investments we can make to ensure long run
economic and environmental sustainability. Renewable energy technology
contributes numerous cross-cutting benefits to society, including
reducing our dependence on foreign oil and providing energy security,
driving innovation and job creation in the energy economy,
decentralizing the energy market, providing new high-tech jobs,
reducing the human toll on the environment, and improving air quality
and public health outcomes. DOE's Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy (EERE) is at the heart of this transformation.
Our national research universities, in collaboration with DOE
laboratories and the private sector, are driving the country's
innovation in renewable energy and energy efficiency. One example of
such collaboration includes a partnership between NCAR, DOE's National
Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), and Xcel Energy, Colorado's largest
utility company, to develop sophisticated wind forecasts for
operational use. These forecasts provide critical information to
utilities to:
--help them predict how much wind power will be generated over the
next 24 to 72 hours;
--enhance their ability to better integrate wind-generated
electricity into the grid; and
--assist with decisionmaking processes regarding whether to power
down coal- and natural gas-fired plants when sufficient winds
are predicted. To reduce the costs of integrating wind and
solar energy into the electrical grid and make renewable energy
more cost effective, significant improvements in weather
forecasting technologies will be required, and additional
weather observations in the lower atmosphere will be needed.
Given the critical importance to the Nation of developing
economically and environmentally sustainable technologies for energy
production, I urge the subcommittee to fund the fiscal year 2013
request of $2.337 billion for the Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy.
I want to thank the members of the subcommittee in advance for
supporting, through DOE, basic and applied scientific research in the
environmental and other Earth sciences. By doing so, you advance the
Nation's economic recovery, help stakeholders manage irreplaceable
natural resources, and sustain the Nation's global scientific
leadership.
______
Prepared Statement of the URS Corporation
Mr. Chairwoman and members of the subcommittee: My name is Dr.
Douglas Everett Wyatt, Jr.,\1\ and in my capacity as Director of
Science Research for URS Corporation supporting the Department of
Energy (DOE), Office of Fossil Energy, National Energy Technology
Laboratory, I provide this testimony. Specifically, I will address the
essential support of the Strategic Center for Natural Gas and Oil, a
Program Office within the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL)
for the Office of Fossil Energy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Douglas E. Wyatt works for the URS Corporation, a global
Fortune 500 company and major support contractor to the U.S.
Government. URS employs 57,000 people working in program management,
engineering, design and construction, in site maintenance and
operations, and in decommissioning and decontamination. URS has been
named as the largest global environmental company and is consistently
in the top ten in engineering and architecture, power, design,
construction, transportation, and industrial processes. Wyatt holds a
Ph.D. in geological sciences from the University of South Carolina, an
MS in geology and geophysics from Vanderbilt University, a BA in
physical geography, and BA in zoology from the University of Tennessee.
He has more than 140 publications, papers, and presentations. Wyatt has
30 years of experience including oil and gas exploration and
production, nuclear energy, geothermal and renewable energy,
environmental characterization and in creating and managing large
multidisciplinary research programs. He lives in Aiken, South Carolina.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The abundant availability of energy, in all of its various forms,
has been a primary catalyst for the development of advanced
civilization. While this is somewhat a philosophical thought I believe
it to be as true today as it was for any time in the past. Simply put,
there is no conceivable advanced future for the Nation without
increasingly abundant energy. As a scientist for the past 30 years, I
am keenly aware that energy can be produced cleanly and utilized
efficiently as the following testimony will describe.
No scientist or engineer believes that a single energy source is a
viable solution for our national energy needs. We understand the energy
systems of the past and present, and can reasonably predict the energy
systems of the near future. However, because of the dynamics of
discovery and imagination, our ability to predict energy needs and
sources beyond six to eight decades is limited but the scientific
community can predict energy utilization and resources for the next 30
to 40 years. Oil and natural gas will continue to be a primary energy
resource during this time and the research initiatives of the Strategic
Center for Natural Gas and Oil strongly supports our Nation's ability
to efficiently and cleanly use this resource as part of our global
energy mix over the next several decades.
Oil and natural gas exploration, development and production is
well-understood by hundreds of oil and gas companies in the U.S.
market. Yet only a few of the largest companies, i.e., ExxonMobil,
ConocoPhillips, Chevron, have active self-funded research programs
addressing new technology and science associated with oil and natural
gas production, expansion, and efficiency. These companies, along with
the larger industry support companies, i.e., Schlumberger, Halliburton,
Weatherford, often support academic research in expanded and efficient
oil and gas development, but the vast majority of their research is to
develop a competitive advantage in the market; therefore, the knowledge
gained is proprietary. Only when partnered with a Federal agency will
the research become public. The Strategic Center for Natural Gas and
Oil is unique in that it leverages Federal funding to integrate
Federal, academic, and commercial research so that new science and
technology, supporting national policy and energy needs, is performed
with data available to the public. Therefore, I believe that it is
critically important for the programs of the Strategic Center for
Natural Gas and Oil to be more fully funded and expanded.
In my capacity as a scientist, with a finger on the pulse of the
state of the industry, I believe there are three critical areas in
fossil energy oil and gas where a Federal research presence, through
the Strategic Center for Natural Gas and Oil, is essential so that:
--technologies are investigated under a variety of conditions and
potential impacts are better understood;
--technologies or concepts that may not seem immediately useful or
marketable to industry in the short term are evaluated; and
--the broadest distribution of knowledge and data is guaranteed.
The three areas of Federal research with proposed budgets and
rationale are:
CO2 Enhanced Oil and Gas Recovery--The Use of
CO2 in Enhanced Oil Recovery and Residual Oil Zone
Production From Historic, Diminished and Depleted Oil Reservoirs.--
Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) is common practice in the oil industry and
CO2 is currently used for this purpose. However, there are
known limits to the capability of the existing technology and
utilization issues due to the limited availability of clean
CO2. Current research suggests that there are a variety of
high-technology options to improve the effectiveness of CO2
in the oil reservoir such as chemically altering nanoparticles and
enhanced geophysical monitoring of the CO2-oil interaction.
In addition, there is a probability that CO2 can be
beneficially reused as a replacement for water in the hydraulic
fracturing of shale and other gas producing geological formations. The
utilization of CO2 in ``fracking'' operations would
eliminate many of the current environmental concerns associated with
shale gas production. Other examples of CO2 use are
available. Many new enhanced oil recovery concepts using CO2
as the working fluid are subject to scientific analysis. I strongly
recommend you fund this research program at $150 million over a 5-year
period with $30 million annually. A $30 million annual budget would
allow for 10 to 20 university research efforts to be completed, a
robust extramural research competitive program to be completed,
continuation of NETL intramural research, and for a joint industry,
academic, Federal partnership to be formed to market and commercialize
technologies developed from this program. The U.S. produces
approximately 280,000 barrels of oil per day from 114 active fields
from CO2 EOR. Considering the current price of oil, if only
2 extra days' of oil production were generated from this research, then
the value of the new CO2 EOR oil added to the national daily
total would cover the cost of this critical research. However, new
research into CO2 EOR might be expected to produce new
efficiencies of 5 to 15 percent and more, above current production. I
strongly urge you to fund the Strategic Center for CO2
Enhanced Oil and Gas recovery research.
Environmentally Safe Development, Production and Utilization of
Natural Gas and Oil/Liquids From Unconventional Source Rocks.--The
production of massive quantities of natural gas from organic-rich shale
source rocks provides our Nation a path to energy independence. The
effective use of shale gas has the ability to shift global energy
markets to our Nation's substantial favor. In effect, a vision of our
Nation no longer coupled to the global oil market can be realized. The
oil and gas industry understands this possibility and is proceeding
with the development and production of abundant natural gas. Research
into best practices for shale gas reservoir development, new
technologies for reservoir stimulation, water disposal, near surface
environmental protection, and in the overall utilization of the gas are
but a few of the issues that demand attention. All of these research
missions are important but two deserve special attention.
Current shale gas reservoir development by hydraulic stimulation,
``fracking'', only stimulates a portion of the total shale volume
intersected by a horizontal well. It is probable that well bores might
be drilled on a closer spacing increasing the volume of rock penetrated
and the overall availability of gas. This possibility implies that the
current recoverable volumes of natural gas from shale, or other organic
rich gas-producing source rocks, might be doubled, or even tripled.
Additionally, if wells can be drilled on a denser spacing then it
becomes possible to strategically locate wells so that surface and
human impacts could be maximized or minimized, depending on the need.
Research to validate this concept and to develop best methodologies is
required.
New gas utilization concepts and technologies are also particularly
important. Natural gas is a very clean and versatile fuel that can be
used in fuel cells, chemical looping reactors, or directly burned in
internal combustion engines. There are other advanced concepts which
could be directly applied to the well-head and production area for
electricity and industrial heat generation, converted to useful goods
and merchandise such as plastics, among other probabilities. The wide-
spread distribution of shale gas reservoirs and the abundant gas
produced from a typical shale well implies that it might be possible to
use shale gas derived energy in the form of heat and electricity in
small-scale localized transmission grids and funneled into the overall
national SmartGrid technology program.
Possibly more important is the use of natural gas as a bridge fuel.
Natural gas is a clean burning and abundant fossil fuel that can be
used in a variety of existing and new applications, including
transportation, to form a bridge from our current fossil energy mix to
a future electrified energy mix that is projected over the next several
decades. Not only can the gas be burned for heat for internal
combustion engines or electrical generators it can be used directly in
fuel cell applications to generate electricity. Since natural gas can
be compressed, liquefied, and adsorbed it can be used in almost any
system requiring electrical or heat energy. It is a natural bridge fuel
for our Nation that requires your attention.
There are many recent research successes in the development of
environmentally safe natural gas. These include the recent DOE data and
support to the Environmental Protection Agency for ``fracking'' related
groundwater issues, the development of potential new nanoparticles
supporting gas and oil EOR, and the development of new approaches to
modeling and imaging multiphase, multifluid flow in shale and
sandstones. However, new research into the utilization of natural gas
for new and expanded markets is needed. I recommend that $300 million
funding allocation over a 5-year period be authorized to complete
research in this area. A $60 million annual allocation will allow for a
variety of university collaborations consisting of 20 to 40 university
research efforts covering a broad spectrum of research needs. A
competitive extramural research program of joint industry and joint
industry and academia can be completed to insure for the best market
and technology applications. Additionally, a small-business industry
program to develop, market, and deploy new technologies will insure
wide-spread use throughout the industry. Finally, ongoing intramural
research at the NETL will insure the brokering of environmental data
necessary to insure safe gas development.
Natural Gas Hydrates.--Gas hydrates are the largest source of
natural gas, methane, on Earth. Hydrates are ubiquitous on the
continental shelves of all major continents and are, therefore, a
globally distributed fuel resource. Hydrates are also abundant in
arctic sediments. Much research has been done for hydrates and their
character and distribution is well known. However, there is still
research necessary in hydrate stability, the environmental systems in
which they exist, and in the best, most efficient, most environmentally
safe method of production. The United States has led global hydrate
research, but the world is beginning to develop hydrates for energy. It
is important for our Nation to maintain a key role in overall hydrates
research. I recommend a $15 million 5-year program, $3 million
annually, to continue extramural university research and intramural
National Energy Technology Laboratory research programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Worcester Polytechnic Institute
We have been working with the Department of Energy (DOE) National
Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) for several years developing
technology which is efficient and economical for simultaneous hydrogen
production and carbon dioxide sequestration. The project has been very
successful and is in the final stage of development and
commercialization. The project has provided employment opportunity for
8-10 people. The most recent two projects are DE-FC26-07NT43058
(Project title: Composite Pd and Pd Alloy Porous Stainless Steel
Membranes for Hydrogen Production and Process Intensification) and
Phase I of DE-FE0004895 (Project title: Engineering Design of Advanced
H2-CO2 Pd and Pd/Alloy Composite Membrane
Separations and Process Intensification). We have achieved amazing
success for the Phase I project and is ready to move into Phase II to
construct pilot scale unit for the production of 100 pounds hydrogen
per day and eventually to Phase III to design a plant for the
production of 5 tons hydrogen per day. Unfortunately, the funding for
Phase II and Phase III was cut and the project will be terminated. This
untimely termination of the project not only causes people to lose
their employment but also the United States to miss the opportunity to
be a leader in simultaneous hydrogen production and carbon dioxide
sequestration technology. In addition, it is sad that the technology is
so successful due to the successful investment made by the DOE in the
past several years has to be discontinued and set us back for several
years. Therefore, I would like to urge the subcommittee to restore the
appropriation to allow the project to continue and to provide the much
needed employment. Moreover, the continuation of the project not only
make good use of the U.S. investment already made in the past but also
allow the technology to be commercialized to strengthen our prospect of
stabilizing the fuel cost and energy independence.
Thank you for your attention and please feel contact me for more
information.