[Senate Hearing 117-794]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 117-794
ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023
=======================================================================
HEARINGS
before a
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
ON
H.R. 8255
AN ACT MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT FOR THE
FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2023, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
__________
Department of Defense--Civil
Department of Energy
Department of the Interior
Nondepartmental Witnesses
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
_________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
46-653 PDF WASHINGTON : 2023
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
PATRICK LEAHY, Vermont, Chairman
PATTY MURRAY, Washington RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama, Vice
DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California Chairman
RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky
JACK REED, Rhode Island SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine
JON TESTER, Montana LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina
JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon ROY BLUNT, Missouri
CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware JERRY MORAN, Kansas
BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota
TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas
CHRISTOPHER MURPHY, Connecticut SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West
JOE MANCHIN, III, West Virginia Virginia
CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland JOHN KENNEDY, Louisiana
MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico CINDY HYDE-SMITH, Mississippi
MIKE BRAUN, Indiana
BILL HAGERTY, Tennessee
MARCO RUBIO, Florida
Charles E. Kieffer, Staff Director
Bill Duhnke, Minority Staff Director
------
Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development
DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California, Chairman
PATTY MURRAY, Washington JOHN KENNEDY, Louisiana, Ranking
JON TESTER, Montana MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky
RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama
JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine
JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina
TAMMY BALDWIN, JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota
MARTIN HEINRICH, CINDY HYDE-SMITH, Mississippi
PATRICK LEAHY, Vermont, (ex BILL HAGERTY, Tennessee
officio)
Professional Staff
Doug Clapp
Jen Becker-Pollet
Aaron Goldner
Laura Powell
Jen Armstrong (Minority)
Nora Khalil (Minority)
Anna Newton (Minority)
Kathleen Williams (Minority)
Administrative Support
Teri Curtin
Ann Tait Hall (Minority)
C O N T E N T S
----------
HEARINGS
Wednesday, April 6, 2022
Page
Department of Defense--Civil: Department of the Army; Corps of
Engineers--Civil............................................... 1
Department of the Interior: Bureau of Reclamation................ 12
Wednesday, May 4, 2022
Department of Energy: Office of the Secretary.................... 41
Wednesday, May 18, 2022
Department of Energy: National Nuclear Security Administration... 69
----------
BACK MATTER
List of Witnesses, Communications, and Prepared Statements....... 171
Nondepartmental Witnesses........................................ 101
Subject Index.................................................... 173
Department of Defense--Civil................................. 173
Department of the Army................................... 173
Corps of Engineers--Civil................................ 173
Department of Energy......................................... 173
National Nuclear Security Administration................. 173
Office of the Secretary.................................. 173
Department of the Interior................................... 174
Bureau of Reclamation.................................... 174
ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023
----------
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 6, 2022
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 10:01 a.m. in room SD-192, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Dianne Feinstein (chairwoman)
presiding.
Present: Senators Feinstein, Shaheen, Heinrich, Kennedy,
Murkowski, and Hyde-Smith.
DEPARTMENT DEFENSE--CIVIL
Department of the Army
Corps of Engineers--Civil
STATEMENT OF MR. MICHAEL CONNOR, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF
THE ARMY (CIVIL WORKS)
opening statement of senator dianne feinstein
Senator Feinstein. The Subcommittee on Energy and Water
Development will come to order.
Today's hearing will review the President's fiscal year
2023 Budget Request for the United States Corps of Engineering
and the Bureau of Reclamation.
Ranking Member Kennedy and I will each have an opening
statement. We will then turn to our witnesses to present
testimony on behalf of the Corps and the Bureau. Each witness
will be allowed 5 minutes for opening remarks, and of course if
you need more, I have never seen us not do that. At the
conclusion of the witnesses' testimony, I will recognize
Senators for 5 minutes of questions each.
And I would like to welcome our witnesses. Thank them for
being here today. They are: Mr. Michael Connor, the Assistant
Secretary of the Army for Civil Works; Lieutenant General Scott
Spellmon, the Chief of Engineers for the United States Army
Corps of Engineers; and Mr. David Palumbo, Deputy Commissioner
of Operations for the Bureau of Reclamation at the Department
of Interior.
I would like to speak for a moment about the Army Corps'
budget request which cuts more than $1.7 billion from the
enacted level for the Civil Works Program. That is a 21 percent
cut. I am particularly disappointed that $1 billion of that is
to the construction account.
Last year we passed a Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill. It
included $17 billion for the Corps of Engineers. The point of
the bill was to address the backlog in infrastructure funding,
not replace the regular funding program. The budget request
undercuts the value of that investment by dramatically cutting
the construction account.
So in order to make tangible progress on our infrastructure
backlog we have got to make some real investments this year.
And in that regard I really hope that we would have some
informal conversations among us on this subcommittee, and see
what we might be able to do because I believe we are really
going to set back our Nation if we can't have up-to-date
infrastructure.
So we will now begin with our witnesses, unless anyone else
has an opening statement, please go ahead.
statement of senator john kennedy
Senator Kennedy. First, welcome. Thank you for being here.
Thank you for your service to our country.
I do have a few remarks that I wanted to make, and bear
with me, I have got them written down here. I don't usually
like to do it that way, but I wanted to choose my words
carefully today.
At last year's Budget Justification Hearing with respect to
the Corps and the Bureau of Reclamation, I gave some opening
remarks as ranking member of the subcommittee, and I showed you
some images, they are behind me today. I wanted to emphasize
them again. These are images of what we call HSDRRS, which as
you know is an acronym for Hurricane and Storm Damage Risk
Reduction System.
HSDRRS was and is America's and Louisiana's response to
Hurricane Katrina which struck New Orleans in--well, struck all
of South Louisiana, and large parts of Mississippi in 2005. And
I want to thank you, and I want to thank the American taxpayer,
and the American people for HSDRRS.
Today, I just wanted to comment briefly on why I think our
country can take pride in what I think of as the ingenuity of
the United States Army Corps of Engineers working on all of its
projects, but especially with Louisiana's Coastal and
Restoration Authority which is very important to my State.
Hurricane Katrina, as we all know, was a cat (category) 5
hurricane. It hit New Orleans August 29, 2005, not just New
Orleans it hit all of South Louisiana, it hit all of my friends
in Mississippi, it caused unprecedented losses, we had 1,800
fatalities, $125 billion in damage, there was a 28-foot storm
surge, 85-foot waves. The surge and waves caused, in my State,
50 major levee breaches of our previous protection system,
compromised 169 of our systems, 350 miles of levee protection.
Thirty-four; we have 71 pumping stations in New Orleans,
which as you know is below sea level, without those pumping
stations we would flood with every rain except for the French
Quarter where our founders knew to build on high land; 34 of
the 71 of our pumping stations were damaged.
About 80 percent of the City of New Orleans was flooded to
depths as deep as 15 feet in some areas. I die a little bit
inside every time I remember the devastation. And I don't want
to minimize the devastation in the rest of Louisiana as well,
and in Mississippi.
Hurricane Katrina left--because the levees broke in New
Orleans, and it flooded 250 billion gallons of water. It took
us 53 days to pump it out. In response to hurricane Katrina
America sent numerous Federal agencies, thank you America, to
help Louisiana recovery and rebuild. I want to focus on the
essential role that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers played in
that, because we don't talk about it enough.
In repairing and rebuilding the levees and the flood walls
that encircle the New Orleans metropolitan area, not just New
Orleans, the area surrounding as well, because I don't want to
minimize the damage to anyone. The Corps incorporated lessons
learned and recommendations from international experts. You
talk to scientific organizations, you talk to other government
agencies, you talk to the private sector, and we all studied
the system failure.
From this collaborative knowledge base, and its work with
the Louisiana Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority in
my State, we are trying to do our part, these engineering
accomplishments include: The Corps strengthening the levees,
the flood walls, the gated structures, the pump stations that
form the 133-mile Greater New Orleans area perimeter system
that encircles this part of my State. And you can see some of
your good work here.
The Corps improved approximately hundreds--I am sorry--70
miles of interior risk reduction structures within the levee
that encircles the New Orleans Metropolitan region. Among the
Corps' technically advanced engineering solutions, HSDRRS now
includes a surge barrier wall that is 1.8 miles long. It is an
engineering marvel. It is the largest design, built Civil Works
project in your history one of the--maybe the largest in
America's history.
HSDRRS also includes the largest drainage pump station in
the world, HSDRRS works, and has already spared lives and
property, save taxpayers millions of dollars in my area from
expensive storm recovery.
Last year Hurricane Ida hit us, a category 4 storm. It hit
Southeast Louisiana, its surge would have overtopped our levees
before your good work, and additionally, there would have been
overtopping along the inner navigation--Inner Harbor Navigation
Canal Corridor if the HSDRRS surge barrier had not been in
place. This would have flooded, gutted St. Bernard Parish,
Orleans Parish, and I want, well, all of us to be mindful of
that.
I am almost done Madam Chair. I am sorry I talk slow.
On May 26, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will be
conducting an official ceremony at the surge barrier just
outside of New Orleans. I am going to try to be there. The
purpose will be turning over the HSDRRS system to Louisiana
authorities who will--we will now operate it with your
guidance. And I understand that Corps of Engineers' principals
will be leading and participating in these ceremonies. We will
have many State and local officials there. We will have many,
many, many grateful Louisianans.
And I intend to be present, and I would like to ask the
members of this committee to join me. I want you to all come to
New Orleans and see this engineering marvel that the Corps of
Engineers constructed, and the American people, who are the
most generous people in the history of the world, paid for.
So I will be in touch. If you are interested in coming to
Louisiana for May 26, we would love to have you. This project
will take your breath away. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Feinstein. And I thank you Senator. Are there any
other comments from the dais? If not, we will proceed with the
witnesses.
We will hear from Assistant Secretary Connor, followed by
Lieutenant General Scott Spellmon, then Deputy Commissioner
Palumbo.
So Mr. Secretary, we are ready for you.
summary statement of mr. michael l. connor
Mr. Connor. Thank you Madam Chairman. Chair Feinstein
Ranking Member Kennedy and distinguished members of the
committee, thank you for the opportunity to discuss the
President's Budget Request for the Army Civil Works Program.
The fiscal year 2023 budget request includes $6.6 billion
for the Civil Works program. It is focused on smart investments
that are focused on yielding high economic and environmental
returns, increasing resilience to climate change, and
decreasing climate risk for communities and aquatic ecosystems
based on the best available science, supporting a strong
economy by facilitating safe, reliable, and sustainable
commercial navigation, and promoting environmental justice, and
investing in disadvantaged communities that have been too often
left behind.
Sorry about that. There we go.
With this budget the Army will continue working with
community partners to develop, manage, restore, and protect our
Nation's precious water resources, particularly as it relates
to the three main missions of the Army Civil Works Program:
commercial navigation, flood protection and storm damage
reduction, and aquatic ecosystem restoration.
With respect to disadvantaged communities, the
administration has set a goal that 40 percent of the overall
benefits of Federal investments in climate and clean energy
investments flow to disadvantaged communities, the Justice40
Initiative. Actions in this area include an examination of the
activities of key programs to determine whether benefits have
accrued to disadvantaged communities.
There are also funds to one, improve access to Civil Works'
technical assistance programs, and to develop projects that
benefit disadvantaged communities. And two, ensure any updates
to Civil Works policies and guidance will not result in a
disproportionate negative impact on disadvantaged communities.
The fiscal year 2023 budget also continues the process of
addressing the climate crisis and evaluating the Civil Works
programs to identify appropriate actions to support the
administration's efforts to tackle the climate crisis at home
and abroad.
The budget includes well over $1 billion to support the
Corps of Engineers' climate resiliency efforts and reduce the
risk of damages from floods and storms, and restore the
Nation's aquatic ecosystems. These efforts include
incorporating natural and nature-based features--infrastructure
solutions wherever possible.
Investments include $974 million for construction of flood
and storm damage reduction in aquatic ecosystem restoration
projects, over $90 million to improve the resilience of Corps
infrastructure to climate change, and $37.4 million for
technical and planning assistance programs with an emphasis on
work to help local communities identify and address their flood
risks.
The budget also includes funding to continue studies to
investigate climate resilience in numerous areas such as the
Great Lakes coast, as well as Central and Southern Florida.
Let me highlight some specific allocations. In support of
this administration's commitment to our Nation's coastal ports
and inland waterways, critical links in the Nation's supply
chains, the fiscal year 2023 budget includes over $3 billion
for the study, construction, and operation, and maintenance of
inland and coastal navigation projects.
These funds will be used in conjunction with the $465
million provided in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Plan for the
maintenance and repair of existing navigation harbors,
channels, and navigation locks and dams on the Nation's ports
and waterways.
The budget proposes to drive over $1.7 billion from the
Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund for eligible projects with an
emphasis on O&M (operation and maintenance), including
dredging, of completed projects.
The budget also contains over $1.5 billion for flood and
storm damage reduction, including an increase in funding for
technical and planning assistance to local communities. The
budget proposes to assist these local efforts with emphasis on
non-structural approaches.
The budget includes $624 million for aquatic ecosystem
restoration, including $407 million for the South Florida
Ecosystem Restoration Program, in addition to the $1.1 billion
allocated to South Florida Ecosystem Restoration and the
Bipartisan Infrastructure Spend Plan. Together, these
investments will enable significant progress in restoring
America's everglades.
Significantly, the budget provides more than $1.2 billion
in the construction account, the construction program uses
objective, performance-based guidelines to allocate funding
toward the highest performing economic environmental, and
public safety investments.
The fiscal year 2023 budget provides nearly $2.6 billion in
O&M account. For O&M, the budget emphasizes maintaining and
improving the performance of existing projects. The allocation
of funding among projects for maintenance reflects a risk-
informed approach that considers both project conditions and
the potential consequences of a failure. Of note, the fiscal
year 2023 budget includes $106 million in the investigations
account which highlights the ongoing need in many communities
to develop new projects.
Finally, the fiscal year 2023 regulatory program is funded
at $210 million to protect the Nation's water and wetlands, and
provide efficiency in permit processing.
I am honored to implement the President's priorities
through the Army Civil Works programs. I look forward to your
questions. Thank you.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Mr. Michael L. Connor
Chairwoman Feinstein, Ranking Member Kennedy and distinguished
members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to be here
today to discuss the transformational investments of the President's
Budget request for the Army Civil Works program.
The fiscal year 2023 Budget request includes $6.6 billion for the
Army Civil Works program. These investments continue to focus on
yielding high economic and environmental returns; helping communities
to reduce their risks and adapt to climate change, and restoring
aquatic ecosystems in ways that will make them more sustainable and
more resilient to climate change, based on the best available science;
supporting a strong economy by facilitating safe, reliable and
sustainable commercial navigation; and promoting environmental justice
and investing in disadvantaged communities that have too often been
left behind. The Army will continue working with community partners to
develop, manage, restore, and protect our Nation's precious water
resources.
We believe in smart investments that improve the durability of our
water management resources; and moving to a more sustainable posture
for our water resources all across America.
The Administration has also set a goal that 40 percent of the
overall benefits of Federal investments in climate, flow to
disadvantaged communities--the Justice40 Initiative. The Justice40
Initiative is a critical part of the Administration's whole-of-
government approach to advancing environmental justice.
The Budget focuses on the highest performing work within the three
main missions of the Army Civil Works program:
--commercial navigation,
--flood and storm damage reduction, and
--aquatic ecosystem restoration.
In developing the Budget, we gave consideration to advancing two
key objectives including: (1) increasing infrastructure and ecosystem
resilience to climate change and decreasing climate risk for
communities based on the best available science; and (2) promoting
environmental justice in disadvantaged communities in line with
Justice40 and creating good paying jobs that provide the free and fair
chance to join a union and collectively bargain.
The fiscal year 2023 Budget continues the process of addressing the
climate crisis and evaluating the Civil Works program to identify
appropriate actions to support the Administration in tackling the
climate crisis at home and abroad. The Budget includes over $1 billion
to support U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) climate resiliency
efforts and reduce the risk of damages from floods and storms and
restore the Nation's aquatic ecosystems. Investments include $974
million for construction of flood and storm damage reduction and
aquatic ecosystem restoration projects, over $90 million to contribute
to climate resilience efforts such as improving the resilience of Corps
infrastructure to climate change, and $37.4 million for technical and
planning assistance programs with emphasis on work to help local
communities identify, understand, and address their flood risks
including work that would directly benefit disadvantaged communities by
improving their resilience to climate change. The Budget also includes
funding to continue studies intended to investigate climate resilience
along the Great Lakes coast as well as in Central and Southern Florida.
The Army is also committed to securing environmental justice and
spurring economic opportunity for disadvantaged communities that have
been historically marginalized and overburdened by pollution and
experience underinvestment in essential services. The Army is actively
working, along with other Federal agencies, towards ensuring 40 percent
of the benefits of climate and clean energy investments are directed to
disadvantaged communities. These actions include an examination of the
activities of key programs to determine whether those programs'
benefits have accrued to disadvantaged communities. The fiscal year
2023 Budget includes funds to--(1) improve outreach and access to Civil
Works information and resources; (2) improve access to Civil Works
technical assistance programs (e.g., Planning Assistance to States and
Floodplain Management Services) and maximize the reach of Civil Works
projects to benefit disadvantaged communities, in particular as it
relates to climate resiliency; and, (3) ensure any updates to Civil
Works policies and guidance will not result in a disproportionate
negative impact on disadvantaged communities.
The Administration's America the Beautiful initiative sets a goal
of conserving at least 30 percent of America's lands and waters by
2030. The fiscal year 2023 Budget includes funds to advance this goal
at Army Corps-owned projects by creating safe outdoor opportunities in
nature-deprived communities, supporting Tribally led conservation and
restoration priorities, expanding collaborative conservation of fish
and wildlife habitats and corridors, and increasing access for outdoor
recreation.
In support of this Administration's commitment to our Nation's
coastal ports and inland waterways, the fiscal year 2023 Budget
includes over $3 billion for the study, design, construction, operation
and maintenance (O&M) of inland and coastal navigation projects. These
funds will be used in conjunction with the $465 million provided in the
Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal Spend Plan for fiscal year 2023 for the
maintenance and repair of existing navigation harbors, channels, and
navigation locks and dams on the Nation's ports and waterways that
support commercial navigation.The Budget proposes to derive over $1.7
billion from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund for eligible projects
with an emphasis on operation and maintenance, including dredging, of
completed projects.
The Budget contains over $1.5 billion for flood and storm damage
reduction, including an increase in funding for technical and planning
assistance to local communities to enable them to understand and to
better manage their flood risks. The Budget proposes to assist these
local efforts, with emphasis on non-structural approaches.
The Budget includes $624 million for aquatic ecosystem restoration,
including $407 million for the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration
(SFER) program, in addition to the $1.1 billion allocated to the SFER
program in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal Spend Plan, which
together will enable significant progress in restoring this valuable
ecosystem.
The Budget supports a Civil Works program that has a diverse set of
tools and approaches to working with local communities, whether this
means funding projects with our cost-sharing partners, providing
planning assistance and technical expertise to help communities make
better risk-informed decisions, or participating in the national and
international conversations on how to best address our water resources
challenges.
The Budget also focuses on maintaining the vast water resources
infrastructure that the Corps owns and manages, and on finding
innovative ways to rehabilitate it or divest it to others.
The fiscal year 2023 Budget provides more than $1.2 billion in the
construction account. The construction program uses objective,
performance-based guidelines to allocate funding toward the highest
performing economic, environmental, and public safety investments.
The fiscal year 2023 Budget includes $50 million in Construction
funds for the Innovative Funding Partnership program, which supports
Corps efforts to accelerate and improve the delivery of water resources
projects through greater non-Federal participation, and by removing
barriers that prevent State, local, and private parties from moving
forward with investments that they deem priorities.
The fiscal year 2023 Budget provides nearly $2.6 billion in the O&M
account. For O&M, the Budget emphasizes maintaining and improving the
performance of existing projects. The allocation of funding among
projects for maintenance reflects a risk-informed approach that
considers both project and project component conditions and the
potential consequences of a failure. The Budget gives priority to the
maintenance of coastal ports and inland waterways with the highest
commercial traffic. The Budget also includes $60 million for operation
and maintenance work to mitigate for adverse impacts from the operation
of existing Army Corps-owned projects and $20 million to install the
necessary refueling infrastructure to support zero-emission vehicles at
existing Army Corps-owned projects.
The fiscal year 2023 Budget includes $106 million in the
Investigations account.
The fiscal year 2023 Regulatory Program is funded at $210 million
to protect the nation's waters and wetlands and provide efficiency in
permit processing.
I am very honored to implement the President's priorities for the
Army Civil Works program. I'm excited to be a part of a great team--
serving our Nation.
Thank you for inviting me here today. I look forward to your
questions.
STATEMENT OF LIEUTENANT GENERAL SCOTT A. SPELLMON,
CHIEF OF ENGINEERS AND COMMANDING GENERAL
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
General Spellmon. Chairwoman Feinstein, Ranking Member
Kennedy, and distinguished members of the subcommittee, I am
also honored to testify before you today. And thank you for the
opportunity to discuss the fiscal year 2023 budget of the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, another record investment in our Civil
Works Program.
And Senator Kennedy I should just thank you up front for
your very kind words about the Corps. I think we all know that
we did not do this alone, a lot of talented engineers and
scientists in the State of Louisiana helped us deliver that
system, and looking forward to 26 May, where we can finally cut
the ribbon.
But today I look forward to discussing the status of
important Corps projects and programs, as well as answering any
questions the committee may have regarding the 2023 budget.
Most importantly I look forward to continuing to work with this
committee, all of Congress, and the administration to address
the Nation's water resource infrastructure needs.
We greatly appreciate the committee's continued support of
the Corps' program. With recent supplemental appropriations,
including the Hurricane Ida Disaster Relief Supplemental, the
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, and continued record-
high annual appropriations, the Corps Civil Works Program has
experienced significant growth over the past several years.
This substantial level of investment enables critical water
resource infrastructure to be studied, and constructed, and
also helps with developing innovating approaches to address
some of our most pressing needs through a focused research and
development program.
The fiscal year 2023 budget reflects a targeted approach to
continue investing in our water resources programs to promote
climate resiliency, which will benefit the Nation's economy,
environment and public safety now and well into the future.
The budget also supports the Secretary's priorities for the
Corps by upgrading our Nation's waterways, protecting
communities and ecosystems, better serving disadvantaged
communities, investing in science and research and development,
and finally, sustaining and improving our communications and
our relationships with partners and communities.
The 2023 budget, taken with other recent funding, provides
the Corps with what the Secretary calls, a transformational
opportunity to deliver water resource infrastructure projects
that will positively impact communities across our great
Nation.
So we are also taking advantage of this opportunity to
transform our organization and our decisionmaking processes to
safely deliver quality projects on time, and within budget. We
are also taking deliberate steps to proactively identify risk
to the execution of our program, then developing measures to
reduce, resolve, or eliminate those risks.
By evolving our policies, programs, and operations, and
placing increased focus on research and development, we are
working to overcome impacts of sea level rise, changes to
precipitation patterns, and hydrology, and other effects of
climate change, including improvement to the resilience of our
own Corps operated infrastructure.
I will conclude by saying the Corps does not accomplish
anything on its own, we draw upon our engineering expertise,
and build upon our partnerships with our non-Federal partners,
project stakeholders, and Congress to enable us to succeed.
I look forward to continuing our great collaboration, as we
continue to take on the challenges that face us today, and
those of tomorrow.
And thank you again Chairwoman Feinstein, Ranking Member
Kennedy, and members of the subcommittee. I look forward to
answering any questions you may have.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Lieutenant General Scott A. Spellmon
Chairwoman Feinstein, Ranking Member Kennedy, and Members of the
Subcommittee, I am honored to testify before your committee today,
along with the Honorable Michael Connor, Assistant Secretary of the
Army for Civil Works, regarding the President's Fiscal Year 2023 (FY
2023) Budget (Budget) for the Army Civil Works Program.
Through the Civil Works program, the United States Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps) works with other Federal agencies, and with State,
Tribal, and local agencies, as well as others, to develop, manage,
restore, and protect water resources, primarily through the study,
construction, and operation and maintenance of water-related
infrastructure projects. The Corps focuses on work that provides the
highest economic, environmental, and public safety returns to the
Nation. The Corps also regulates development in waters of the United
States and works with other Federal agencies to help communities
respond to, and recover from, floods and other natural disasters. The
Fiscal Year 2023 Budget invests in improving the Nation's water
infrastructure, including at U.S. coastal ports, while incorporating
climate resilience efforts into the Corps' commercial navigation, flood
and storm damage reduction, and aquatic ecosystem restoration work.
The Corps uses its engineering expertise and its relationships with
project sponsors and stakeholders to develop innovative approaches to
address some of the most pressing water resources challenges facing the
Nation. I am committed to the Secretary's priorities for the Army Civil
Works program, including investing in the Nation's coastal ports and
inland waterways to facilitate waterborne transportation and strengthen
economic growth; helping communities to reduce their risks and adapt to
climate change; restoring aquatic ecosystems in ways that will make
them more sustainable and more resilient to climate change; modernizing
the Civil Works program to better serve the needs of disadvantaged
communities; investing in science, research, and development to deliver
enduring water-resource solutions; and strengthening communications and
relationships to solve water resource challenges. I am absolutely
focused on ensuring that we deliver studies and finish quality projects
safely, on time, and within budget. These priorities will ensure a
better return on taxpayer investment and improve the lives of all
Americans. Under my oversight and direction, and with the leadership of
Assistant Secretary Connor and his team, the Corps is committed to
efficiently and effectively executing the Civil Works program.
The Corps' Military program also continues our work across the
globe with a presence in more than 110 countries supporting national
security and our Combatant Commanders.
summary of fiscal year 2023 budget
The Civil Works program is performance-based. It uses a targeted
approach to invest in our water resources and promote climate
resiliency, which will benefit the Nation's economy, environment, and
public safety--now and in the future. With the requested funds, the
Corps will emphasize investments in high return projects; increasing
resiliency to climate change; facilitating safe, reliable, and
sustainable commercial navigation; and accelerating and improving
delivery of water resource projects.
The Corps focuses on high-performing projects and programs within
its three main water resources missions: commercial navigation, flood
and storm damage reduction, and aquatic ecosystem restoration. The
Budget includes $6.601 billion in discretionary funding for Civil Works
activities throughout the Nation.
investigations
For the Corps Investigations program, the Fiscal Year 2023 Budget
includes $105.9 million in the Investigations account and $9.75 million
in the Mississippi River and Tributaries account. The Corps uses these
funds to evaluate water resources problems and opportunities, design
projects within the three main Civil Works mission areas, and support
related work. The Budget also supports planning assistance and
technical assistance programs, where the Corps shares its expertise
with local communities to help them identify and understand their water
resources problems and helps them to develop options including ways
that they can increase their resilience to and preparedness for flood
risks.
construction
For the Corps Construction program, the Budget includes $1.221
billion in the Construction account and $66.7 million in the
Mississippi River and Tributaries account.
The goal of the Civil Works program is to produce as much value as
possible for the Nation from the available funds. Projects are
primarily funded based on their economic, environmental and safety
returns. The selection process includes giving priority to investments,
on a risk-informed basis, in dam safety assurance, seepage control, and
static instability correction work at dams that the Corps owns and
operates, and work to address significant risk to human safety, as well
as construction of dredged material disposal facilities for high and
moderate use segments of commercial deep-draft, shallow-draft, and
inland waterways projects. In developing the Fiscal Year 2023 Budget,
we also gave consideration to projects that provide climate change
benefits to disadvantaged communities.
The Budget provides $407 million for the South Florida Everglades
Restoration (SFER) program, which includes the Everglades. This amount,
as well as the $1.1 billion included in the Infrastructure Investment
and Jobs Act Spend Plan, will enable significant progress on
restoration of this unique ecosystem. The Budget funds four projects to
completion: (1) Chickamauga Lock, Tennessee River, TN; (2) Corpus
Christi Ship Channel, TX (Main Channel and Barge Lanes); (3) American
River Common Features, Natomas Basin, CA; and (4) Pipestem Lake, ND.
operation and maintenance (o&m)
All structures age and can deteriorate over time, causing a
potential decline in reliability. As stewards of a large portfolio of
water resources projects, the Corps is working to sustain the benefits
that the key features of this infrastructure provide.
The Corps continues to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of
the operation and maintenance of its large portfolio of water resources
projects. The Corps does so by targeting its investments in
infrastructure maintenance, repair, and rehabilitation on a risk-
informed basis. It invests in the highest priority needs with emphasis
on the key features of the infrastructure that the Corps owns and
operates, and in work that will reduce long-term O&M costs in real
terms.
Generally, the O&M program supports completed works owned or
operated by the Corps, including operation and maintenance of locks and
dams along the inland waterways; maintenance dredging of inland and
coastal Federal channels; operation and maintenance of multi-purpose
dams and reservoirs for flood risk reduction and related purposes such
as hydropower; monitoring of completed navigation and flood damage
reduction projects; and management of Corps facilities and associated
lands, including serving as a responsible steward of the natural
resources on Corps lands.
For the Corps O&M program, the Budget includes $2.599 billion in
the Operation and Maintenance account, $1.704 billion in the Harbor
Maintenance Trust Fund, and $148.5 million in the Mississippi River and
Tributaries account. These funds will be used in conjunction with the
$1 billion provided in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act for
fiscal year 2023 for operation and maintenance work, including $465
million for the maintenance and repair of existing navigation harbors,
channels, and navigation locks and dams on the Nation's ports and
waterways that support commercial navigation.
regulatory program
Through the Regulatory program, the Corps protects the Nation's
waters including wetlands, and regulates development that could impede
navigation, while allowing reasonable development to proceed. The
Budget proposes the necessary level of funding for the Regulatory
program to enable the Corps to protect and preserve these water
resources. The Fiscal Year 2023 Budget provides $210 million for this
program.
reimbursable program
Through the Interagency and International Services (IIS)
Reimbursable program, the Corps assists other Federal agencies, State,
local, Tribal governments, and those of other countries with timely,
cost-effective solutions where these partners do not have the
capability to act as their own design and construction agent. The work
is principally technical oversight and management of engineering,
environmental, and construction projects is financed by the partners we
service. We only accept agency requests that are consistent with our
core technical expertise, in the national interest, and that can be
executed without impacting our primary mission areas.
emergency management
The Fiscal Year 2023 Budget includes $35 million in funding for the
Flood Control and Coastal Emergencies account to enable the Corps to
prepare for emergency operations in response to natural disasters. The
Budget for the emergency management program also includes $5.5 million
for the National Emergency Preparedness Program.
conclusion
The Fiscal Year 2023 President's Budget for the Army Civil Works
Program represents a continuing, fiscally prudent investment in the
Nation's water resources infrastructure and restoration of aquatic
ecosystems. The Army is committed to a performance-based Civil Works
program, based on innovative, resilient, and sustainable risk-informed
solutions.
Thank you, Madam Chairwoman and Members of Subcommittee. This
concludes my statement. I look forward to answering any questions you
and other Members of the Subcommittee may have.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Reclamation
STATEMENT OF MR. DAVID PALUMBO, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
Mr. Palumbo. Thank you Chair Feinstein, Ranking Member
Kennedy, and members of the subcommittee, for the opportunity
to discuss the President's budget for the Bureau of
Reclamation. I am David Palumbo, Acting Commissioner.
The Bureau of Reclamation is the largest supplier and
manager of water in the Nation, and the second-largest producer
of hydropower. Reclamation's working relationship with the
subcommittee has helped us address both long-standing and
emerging challenges in the West. Addressing drought resilience,
water security, climate change adaptation, ecosystem health,
and issues of equity are essential, as are the continuing needs
of securing, maintaining, and modernizing our Nation's water
infrastructure.
We have a generational opportunity to couple our fiscal
year 2023 $1.4 billion budget with that of the Bipartisan
Infrastructure Law, to put money to work on the ground to
advance these vital needs for the American people.
At the outset I would like to acknowledge the significant,
expansive, and persistent drought. In most western watersheds
there have been successive and compounding years of drought,
exacerbating the dire conditions on the ground, increasing
temperatures, increased evapotranspiration which decreases soil
moisture, and ultimately decreases runoff which negatively
impacts available renewable, freshwater resources.
These hydrologic conditions have resulted in the need to
make difficult decisions. Many water users, power contractors,
Tribes, and related communities have had to make significant
sacrifices. In the Colorado River Basin we are in the 23rd year
of drought. Last month we dropped less than 35 feet above
minimum power pool at Glen Canyon Dam, with minimum power pool
being the lowest point where we can generate hydropower at this
critical facility, which provides carbon-free energy,
electrical grid stability, and support for other renewables,
like wind and solar.
We have not been at this elevation since Lake Powell was
being initially filled nearly 6 decades ago. In California's
Central Valley we are in our third consecutive, critically dry
year. We have had to issue a 0 percent allocation to irrigation
water service contractors, and last Friday we had to reduce
water allocations to municipal and industrial contractors from
25 percent to minimum health and safety levels.
These types of situations highlight the need for immediate
actions as well as thoughtful planning and on-the-ground work
to make both our infrastructure and operational decisions more
resilient to withstand future water resource scarcity and
variability.
Reclamation's budget priorities reflect a commitment to
drought planning and response activities to promote water
security. Appropriately, this budget request acknowledges the
need to continue to develop and deploy science-based drought
and climate change adaptation strategies. Reclamation's
WaterSMART and science and technology programs directly
contribute to these administration priorities.
Reclamation must also plan for the future of its
infrastructure. Reclamation's dams and reservoirs, water
conveyance systems, and power generating facilities serve as a
water and power infrastructure backbone of the American West.
However, as with all infrastructures, these features are aging
and are in need of critical maintenance.
For example, in California we are about to embark on our
largest dam safety construction project ever, at B.F. Sisk Dam.
Our fiscal year 2023 dam safety request of $210 million not
only addresses this project in California, but also projects in
Wyoming, Oregon, New Mexico, Washington and other locations.
We were able to leverage this funding to address more west-
wide needs in an accelerated manner due to the $500 million in
Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill (BIL) funding, and $100 million
of which was allocated for B.F. Sisk Dam in fiscal year 2022.
However, it is not sufficient to address infrastructure needs
without also considering economic inequities, the needs of
underserved communities, and environmental justice.
Reclamation is establishing and rebuilding water
infrastructure for underserved populations by ensuring that
clean drinking water is reliably provided to communities. Our
budget includes funding for Reclamation's Native American
Affairs Program to enhance our technical assistance to Tribes,
and includes funding for Reclamation's Rural Water Program.
As with our Dam Safety Program, our Rural Water Program
leverages $1 billion in BIL funding to accelerate completion of
these long-needed projects. The Bureau of Reclamation remains
committed to working with Congress, and our operating partners
and stakeholders in carrying out our mission and responsibly
planning for the future.
The challenge of drought and climate change demands such
action and the need for broader economic development and more
equitable outcomes do as well.
I again thank the subcommittee. And I am happy to answer
any questions.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of David Palumbo
Thank you, Chairwoman Feinstein, Ranking Member Kennedy, and
members of the Subcommittee for the opportunity to discuss with you the
President's Fiscal Year (FY) 2023 Budget for the Bureau of Reclamation.
I am David Palumbo, Acting Commissioner for the Bureau of Reclamation.
The Bureau of Reclamation is the largest supplier and manager of
water and the second largest producer of hydroelectric power in the
Nation. Reclamation manages water for agriculture, municipal and
industrial use, the environment, and provides flood control and
recreation for millions of people. Reclamation's activities, including
recreation benefits, support economic activity valued at $66.6 billion,
and support approximately 472,000 jobs. Reclamation delivers 10
trillion gallons of water to more than 31 million people each year and
provides water for irrigation of 10 million farmland acres, which
yields approximately 25 percent of the Nation's fruit and nut crops,
and 60 percent of the vegetable harvest.
Reclamation's fundamental mission and programs--modernizing and
maintaining infrastructure, conserving natural resources, using science
and research to inform decisionmaking, serving underserved populations,
and staying as nimble as possible in response to the requirements of
drought and a changing climate--position it as an exemplar for the
Biden-Harris Administration's core tenets. The Bureau of Reclamation's
fiscal year 2023 budget provides the foundation to meet our mission,
and to manage, develop, and protect water resources, consistent with
applicable State and Federal law, and in a cost-effective and
environmentally responsible manner in the interest of the American
public. Reclamation remains committed to working with a wide range of
stakeholders, including water and power customers, Tribes, State and
local officials, and non-governmental organizations, to meet its
mission.
Reclamation is requesting a total of $1,414,225,000 in Federal
gross discretionary appropriations. Of the discretionary total,
$1,270,376,000 is for the Water and Related Resources account, which is
Reclamation's largest account, $65,079,000 is for the Policy and
Administration account, and $33,000,000 is for the California Bay Delta
account. A total of $45,770,000 is budgeted for the Central Valley
Project Restoration Fund, to be offset by expected discretionary
receipts in the amounts collected during the fiscal year. These
appropriations will complement the funding Reclamation received from
the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, which is allocated pursuant to
statute in the amount of $1.66 billion in fiscal year 2023. Following
are some focus areas and highlights of Reclamation's Fiscal Year 2023
Budget request.
Racial and Economic Equity: Activities to Support Underserved
Communities, Tribal Programs & Tribal Water Rights Settlements:
Reclamation advances racial equity and assistance to underserved
communities through investments in Tribal water rights settlements,
continuation of the Native American Affairs technical assistance
program, rural water projects, and investments in specific projects for
underserved communities. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law also invests
very substantial portions of its funding to underserved populations and
Tribal communities as described later in my testimony.
The fiscal year 2023 discretionary request includes $20.0 million
for the Native American Affairs program to work with and support Tribes
in the resolution of their water rights claims and to develop
sustainable water sharing agreements and build Tribal technical
capacity. This funding will also strengthen Department-wide
capabilities to achieve an integrated and systematic approach to Indian
water rights negotiations to consider the full range of economic,
legal, and technical attributes of proposed settlements. Finally,
funding also supports Reclamation efforts for Tribal nations by
supporting many activities across the Bureau, including rural water
projects, the Yakima River Basin Water Enhancement Project, activities
of the Klamath Project, and the Lahontan Basin project, among others.
Conservation and Climate Resilience: Reclamation's projects address
the Administration's priorities for conservation and climate resilience
through funding for the WaterSMART program, funding to secure water
supplies to wildlife refuges, and funding for proactive efforts through
providing sound climate science, research and development, water
security, drought resilience, and clean energy.
The WaterSMART Program serves as the primary contributor to
Reclamation's/Interior's Water Conservation Priority Goal. Since 2010,
projects funded under the Water Conversation Program, including
WaterSMART Grants, Title XVI (Water Recycling and Reuse Program),
California Bay-Delta Program, Yakima River Basin Water Enhancement
Project, and the Desalination construction program are expected to
achieve more than 1.4 million acre-feet of water savings each year once
completed.
Through WaterSMART, Reclamation works cooperatively with States,
Tribes, and local entities as they plan for and implement actions to
address current and future water shortages, including drought; degraded
water quality; increased demands for water and energy from growing
populations; environmental water requirements; and the potential for
decreased water supply availability due to climate change, drought,
population growth, and necessary water requirements for environmental
values. This includes cost-shared grants for water management
improvement projects; watershed resilience projects; the Basin Study
Program; and drought planning and implementation actions to proactively
address water shortages. The fiscal year 2023 request includes $62.4
million for the WaterSMART Program.
Climate Science: Reclamation's fiscal year 2023 budget for Research
and Development (R&D) programs includes $25.3 million for both Science
and Technology, and Desalination and Water Purification Research--both
of which focus on Reclamation's mission of water and power deliveries.
Climate change adaptation is a focus of Reclamation's R&D programs,
which produce climate change science, information and tools that
benefit adaptation, and by yielding climate-resilient solutions to
benefit management of water infrastructure, hydropower, environmental
compliance, and water management.
The Desalination and Water Purification Research program addresses
drought and water scarcity impacts caused by climate change by
investing in desalination and water treatment technology development
and demonstrations for the purpose of more effectively converting
unusable waters to useable water supplies. The Science and Technology
program invests in innovation to address the full range of technical
issues confronting Reclamation water and hydropower managers, including
the Snow Water Supply Forecasting Program that aims to improve water
supply forecasts through enhanced snow monitoring and water management
to address the impacts of drought and a changing climate.
Modernizing and Maintaining Infrastructure: Reclamation's water and
power projects throughout the western United States provide water
supplies for agricultural, municipal, and industrial purposes.
Reclamation's projects also produce hydropower and maintain ecosystems
that support fish and wildlife, hunting, fishing, and other recreation,
and strengthen rural economies.
Dam Safety: Reclamation manages 487 dams throughout the 17 Western
States. Reclamation's Dam Safety Program has identified 360 high and
significant hazard dams. Through constant monitoring and assessment,
Reclamation strives to achieve the best use of its limited resources to
ensure dam safety and maintain our ability to store and divert water
and to generate hydropower. Although some pending infrastructure
priorities will be addressed through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law,
additional priorities exist and the fiscal year 2023 budget request
includes $210.2 million for the Dam Safety Program.
The Dam Safety Program helps ensure the safety and reliability of
Reclamation dams to protect the downstream public. Approximately 50
percent of Reclamation's dams were built between 1900 and 1950, and
approximately 90 percent of the dams were built before adoption of
currently used, state-of-the-art design and construction practices.
Reclamation continuously evaluates dams and monitors performance to
ensure that risks do not exceed the Federal Guidelines for Dam Safety
Risk Management and the Public Protection Guidelines. The Dam Safety
Program represents a major funding need over the next 10 years, driven
largely by necessary repairs at B.F. Sisk Dam in California. The B.F.
Sisk Dam is a key component of the Central Valley Project and
California's State Water Project, providing 2 million acre-feet of
State and Federal water storage south of the California Sacramento-San
Joaquin River Delta. Reclamation is modifying the dam to reduce the
risk of potential failure resulting from potential overtopping in
response to a seismic event, using the most current science and
technology to develop an adaptive and resilient infrastructure. In
addition to B.F. Sisk, Reclamation has identified 19 additional
projects with anticipated modification needs through 2030.
The budget also requests $96 million for specific Extraordinary
Maintenance (XM) activities across Reclamation in fiscal year 2023.
This request is central to mission objectives of operating and
maintaining projects to ensure delivery of water and power benefits.
Reclamation's XM request relies on condition assessments, condition/
performance metrics, technological research and deployment, and
strategic collaboration to better inform and improve the management of
its assets and deal with its infrastructure maintenance challenges.
Renewable Energy: Reclamation owns 78 hydroelectric power plants.
Reclamation operates 53 of those plants to generate approximately 15
percent of the hydroelectric power produced in the United States. Each
year on average, Reclamation generates about 40 million megawatt hours
of electricity and collects over $1.0 billion in gross power revenues
for the Federal Government.
Reclamation's fiscal year 2023 budget request includes $5 million
to increase Reclamation's hydropower capabilities and revenue from
existing public infrastructure and reduce project operating costs
(e.g., water and power delivery costs). Revenues derived from
hydropower production are invested in the underlying public
infrastructure to ensure continued, reliable operations and benefits.
Section 70101 of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law established the
Indian Water Rights Settlement Completion Fund (Completion Fund),
making $2.5 billion available to the Secretary of the Interior to
satisfy Tribal settlement obligations as authorized by Congress prior
to enactment of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. The Department
allocated $1.7 billion of those funds in fiscal year 2022, $355 million
of which supported Reclamation's Tribal settlement implementation
actions, and additional funding will be allocated in fiscal year 2023.
In addition to the Completion Fund, fiscal year 2023 represents the
fourth year of Reclamation Water Settlements Fund allocations, which
provide $120 million in annual mandatory authority for Reclamation
Indian water rights settlements. Funding made available by previous
mandatory authorities, such as that authorized in the Claims Resolution
Act, remain available for settlement implementation, while the ongoing
operations and maintenance requirements of the Arizona Water Settlement
Act are expected to continue to be supported within the Lower Colorado
River Basin Development Fund. In fiscal year 2023, the Department of
the Interior is requesting $34 million for ongoing operational
requirements for existing settlements to be added in the Completion
Fund and the Administration is interested in working with Congress on
an approach to provide a mandatory funding source for future
settlements. Additional information can be found in the Permanents
chapter of the Reclamation request.
The investments described in Reclamation's fiscal year 2023 budget,
in combination with the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law implementation
and prior year efforts, will ensure that Reclamation can continue to
provide reliable water and power to the American West.
Water management, improving and modernizing infrastructure, using
sound science to support critical decisionmaking, finding opportunities
to expand capacity, reducing conflict, and meeting environmental
responsibilities were all addressed in the formulation of the fiscal
year 2023 budget. Reclamation continues to look at ways to plan more
efficiently for future challenges faced in water resources management
and to improve the way it does business.
Thank you for the opportunity to summarize the President's Fiscal
Year 2023 Budget Request for the Bureau of Reclamation.
central utah project completion act (cupca)
The Department's fiscal year 2023 CUPCA Program budget of $20
million reflects the Administration's commitment to strengthening our
climate resiliency and supporting conservation partnerships, and
continues the progress of prior appropriations including $50 million
included for the CUPCA Program in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. As
authorized, the completion of the Central Utah Project Utah Lake System
pipelines will deliver 60,000 acre-feet of municipal and industrial
water to Salt Lake and Utah Counties. The completed project will
provide increased water security, helping communities adapt to and
increase their resiliency under changing climate conditions.
The request provides funding to continue construction of the
system; to support the recovery of endangered species; and implements
fish, wildlife, and recreation mitigation and water conservation
projects. One of the goals of the project is the recovery of the June
sucker fish, a critical element of listed species recovery efforts.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Feinstein. Thank you very much.
Deputy Commissioner Palumbo, 94 percent of California is
now in severe drought, or worse, as the most severe drought in
the West in recorded history deepens.
This is an emergency which many of us feel that really
requires our action, and I believe we have secured $210 million
in emergency funding last year. So here is the question. What
actions are being taken now to address these issues as the
drought continues to deepen?
Mr. Palumbo. Thank you very much Chair. The Bureau of
Reclamation is taking a variety of actions. In the State of
California we are using the funding of the $210 million
provided, which we very much appreciate from this subcommittee,
to deploy actions on the ground to address drought.
For example, we are installing salinity barriers to deal
with water inflow restrictions into the Delta. We are looking
at fish hatchery operations, looking at laboratories for Delta
Smelt, installing curtains at Shasta Dam to control
temperature. We are putting together a variety of drought
mitigation activities and programs to deal with impacted
farmers and communities throughout the West.
That funding, the $210 million, plus additional funding
from this subcommittee has come at the right time, and is being
deployed responsibly.
Senator Feinstein. Well, I am a bit confused. If I
understand it correctly, the Congress passed a Disaster
Supplemental in February of 2018 that included $15 billion in
construction funding for critical flood and storm damage
reduction projects. Four years later, as I understand it,
construction continues to stall due to Corps policy guidance
requiring full funding upfront.
So Assistant Secretary Connor, I appreciate your
willingness to discuss this issue with me in the past, but I
also appreciate the Corps' recent attention to fully resolving
the long-standing obstacles in the South San Francisco Bay
Shoreline Project.
As directed, in the fiscal year 2022 Energy and Water
report language, will you commit to revise the Corps policy
guidance so these projects can continue to move ahead?
Mr. Connor. Chair Feinstein, I commit to working with you
and your staff on exercising any and all discretion I have to
moving those projects, and work with General Spellmon to move
those projects forward as quickly as possible. We may have some
legal authority issues that we have to raise with you and your
team, and we are working through that right now.
We have had some good discussions lately. Our goal is to
ensure that all the projects in BBA 2018 are moving forward.
And we have got good construction on some activity, and we have
got some projects, particularly South San Francisco held up.
But I am committed to working with you and your team on moving
those projects forward.
Senator Feinstein. Thank you. Senator Kennedy.
Senator Kennedy. Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to take a
little different approach today, gentlemen. I am going to ask
you a few quick questions, feel free to give me a yes or no;
there is a method here to my madness.
Like everybody else in the Western Hemisphere, and a few in
the Eastern, I have some specific projects I would like to talk
to you about, but I am not going to talk to you about them
today. I want to talk about a larger issue. And that has to do
with the integrity of the Corps, and some of this loose talk
about earmarks.
So let me ask you a couple questions, with the exception of
a really small number of projects, less than 1 percent, is it
not true that Congress doesn't authorize construction of
proposed Corps projects without a comprehensive study that can
take up to years to complete to determine if the project is
economically justified? Is that accurate?
General Spellmon. Yes, sir.
Senator Kennedy. That study has also got to show that the
project is environmentally sound, right?
General Spellmon. Yes, sir, that is correct.
Senator Kennedy. Technically feasible; is that correct?
General Spellmon. Yes, Senator.
Senator Kennedy. So somebody just can't call you folks up
at the Corps and say, I have got a project, and I want it done
and you better get it done. It doesn't work that way; does it?
General Spellmon. That is correct, Senator, it does not.
Senator Kennedy. All right. And in your years at the Corps,
what percentage of all Corps projects have been authorized by
Congress for construction without meeting this three-part test?
General Spellmon. Sir, I have been with the Corps, six-and-
a-half years, I am not aware of any.
Senator Kennedy. Any? Every project has had to be
economically justified, environmentally sound, and technically
feasible based on an objective study.
General Spellmon. Sir, that is correct.
Senator Kennedy. Not by politicians.
General Spellmon. That is correct.
Senator Kennedy. All right. What does a favorable chief's
report mean?
General Spellmon. Sir, it means that the project, as you
said, is technically feasible, it is economically justified,
and it will achieve its desired effect in one of our Corps
mission areas.
Senator Kennedy. Okay. And in your years with the Corps,
what is your best estimate of all the construction
authorizations that have been enacted without a favorable
chief's report?
General Spellmon. Sir, I am not aware of any that have been
authorized without a favorable report.
Senator Kennedy. Okay. And not to put too fine a point on
it, but one of the things that the Corps looks at in this study
which can take years, is whether the taxpayers are getting a
return on their investment. In other words, the benefits have
to substantially outweigh the costs; is that right?
General Spellmon. Yes, sir, that is correct.
Senator Kennedy. Now, earlier I talked about HSDRRS, and
the levee protection system in Southeast Louisiana which
protects Louisiana from the South. But like a lot of States, we
are not only endangered by the South, water from the South, we
are endangered by water from the North.
Louisiana, you can see from the map, drains 41 percent of
the Continental United States, and parts of two Canadian
provinces, so we have a threat from the North, from water. The
Great Flood of 1927, we remember it. I don't remember how many
tens of thousands of acres flooded, millions dollars' worth of
damage, this is 1927 now. As usual America turned to the Corps
of Engineers, and we said help us fix it.
And you did. And you built levees from just South of the
Canadian border all the way down to the Gulf of Mexico, it
costs $13 billion. Man that was a lot of money then. It saved
this country trillions of dollars. And the point I am trying to
make, look, earmarks are now back, and I am not making a
critical or laudable statement about them, it is up to the
Senate whether they want to do earmarks, but I don't want there
to be any confusion.
I don't know the technical definition of an earmark, I
don't know how many lawyers can dance on the head of a pin
either, but I don't want these Corps projects to be considered
earmarks. This isn't politics, these projects have to be
studied, they have to we have a substantial return on
investment, and I want this country to know that, and be proud
of that, and I don't want, as we have this discussion about
earmarks, the sterling reputation of the Corps of Engineers to
be tarnished.
Thank you Madam Chair.
Senator Feinstein. Thank you, Senator. Senator Heinrich.
Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair,
first, I want to ask unanimous consent to enter an article into
the record. This is from E&E Daily, and the headline is, ``Army
Corps cuts would put boating camping sites at risk'', White
House fiscal 2023 budget would cut more than $50 million from
Army Corps recreation spending without--I just ask unanimous
consent to put that in the record.
Senator Feinstein. So ordered.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Heinrich. Assistant Secretary Connor, I bring this
up because in the last 2 years we have seen this incredible
surge in visitation to public lands, writ large, everything
from Army Corps, to Forest Service, to our National Parks. Army
Corps actually experienced an additional 20 million visits just
last year. So I just want to ask, are these cuts a good idea?
It seems to be a particularly unfortunate time to do that.
Mr. Connor. Senator Heinrich, thank you for raising the
issue. I think myself and General Spellmon, we have had
discussions about that. We certainly understand the value,
increasing value of recreation, as you point out. So we have
got some work to do with this budget, we are trying to fit in a
lot of priorities, but we need to go through and analyze the
full range of impacts, with respect to potential, you know,
reduction of services to the general public, and we don't want
that.
So with that budget we are going to try and manage it so
that we don't have those impacts. The good news is, through
IIJA (Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act), the Bipartisan
Infrastructure Law, and other mechanisms, we have made some
investments in the maintenance of facilities, but we need to
operate those facilities. And so we are going to look at the
2022 spend plan, we are going to look at other ways that we can
ensure we are not reducing services. But it is a concern, and I
appreciate you raising it.
Senator Heinrich. No. I look forward to working with you on
this, on this issue. I think if anything we have really seen,
this is a part of our economy that has grown dramatically as a
result of people's desire to be outside in the midst of COVID.
I think that is going to carry forward for a number of years,
and we certainly want to keep those facilities open.
Mr. Palumbo, historical and projected climate changes have
translated to pretty significant water supply, reductions, and
habitat degradation in the Rio Grande Basin, warmer conditions,
decreased runoff into the Rio Grande resulting, frankly, in a
drier river every single year.
The existing low flow conveyance channel that runs
alongside the Rio between San Acacia, New Mexico, and Elephant
Butte Reservoir has been identified as a key source of water
inefficiency in the Middle Rio Grande. What can we do about
addressing existing river inefficiencies such as the low flow
conveyance channel, so that we can keep more water in the main
stem, and protect the habitats that rely on that water?
Mr. Palumbo. Thank you very much, Senator, for bringing up
this issue. This is an important issue for the Bureau of
Reclamation. We are currently implementing several projects
with the low flow conveyance channel to remove sediment, remove
plugs, and improve connectivity to the Rio Grande at large. So,
we are focusing on this, it is important, and we have folks
doing work on the ground in this area.
Senator Heinrich. So it didn't take long for that entire
conveyance channel to sediment up. Should we be looking at
whether it was a good idea in the first place?
Mr. Palumbo. Yes, absolutely. The Bureau of Reclamation
prides itself on adaptive management. If something doesn't
work, let us not do it again, let us figure out a way to do it
better. That is also part of this program, to ensure that there
are other ways in which to provide the habitat, provide the
flows, and get them in the right areas at the right time.
Senator Heinrich. Assistant Secretary Connor, in the face
of continued aridification of the West, and I use that word
rather than drought because it is now a permanent dynamic. How
can we better manage the Rio Grande as an interconnected system
rather than a series of separate reservoirs each with separate
purposes?
Mr. Connor. It is a great question. It is the question, du
jour of the day, because we have got to holistically use all of
our infrastructure. The Bureau of Reclamations Facility,
particularly the Rio Grande Basin. The facilities that we have
under the Corps of Engineers to control Abiquiu, use that in
tandem with El Vado, and ensure that we can add to water
supply, and you help put that provision in place through the
last word that we can expand the use of Abiquiu, and that is a
necessary part of the process.
We have got to look also how we do flood risk reduction,
and how we make releases, and see if we can't coordinate with
the water suppliers, so that our releases aren't solely focused
on flood control, that we do our job, that we operate in a way
that we can help maximize water supply for other entities. And
that means not just coordinating with the Bureau, but the Rio
Grande Conservancy District, with Tribes. There is a lot to do,
there is a lot of capability, and it requires even better
coordination than in the past.
Senator Heinrich. I am out of time, but would the Corps and
BOR (Bureau of Reclamation) be willing to work with the
National Academy of Sciences to study the Upper Rio Grande as a
whole, and come up with some management practices to keep the
river wet.
Mr. Connor. Yes we had a discussion with NAS just this
week.
Senator Feinstein. Thank you very much. Senator
Hyde-Smith.
Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you, Chairwoman Feinstein,
Ranking Member Kennedy, and I certainly want to thank our
witnesses today. We truly appreciate you being here, and as we
discussed the 2023 budget for the Corps and the Bureau of
Reclamation.
Secretary Connor, I just really appreciate the time that
you spent in traveling to Vicksburg, Mississippi, in February
for a briefing on the Yazoo Area Pump Project. That is a really
important project to me, it is one of my very top priorities
because I have seen the suffering that has happened in
Mississippi. But today I would like to discuss environmental
justice, a topic this administration says is a top priority as
well.
As you know the comprehensive Yazoo Backwater Area Project
is a congressionally authorized Corps project designed to
provide flood protection to thousands of residents in the South
Mississippi Delta, most of whom are African-Americans. I have
visited this place many, many times, and I don't live far from
it.
The Yazoo Backwater Area comprises of 1,446 square miles,
six Mississippi counties, these are some of the most rural
underserved counties in the entire United States. This project
consists of three components designed to be used in tandem
including levees to keep Mississippi and Yazoo River flood
waters out, floodgates to let accumulated interior flood water
out, and pumping stations to remove flood waters trapped on the
protected side of the levee system when the floodgates have to
be closed because the Mississippi River is high, and excess
rainfall occurs.
All of these features have been completed except for the
pumps. Unfortunately, the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency)
in 2008 stopped the Corps from completing the pumps, the
project's last remaining feature. Since that EPA veto in 2008
the area has experienced catastrophic flooding nearly every
year, causing billions, with a B, in damages, and destroying
lives, home, property, wildlife habitat, and the environment.
In 2019 the Yazoo Backwater Area, which is more than 11
times the size of Washington, D.C., remained flooded for well
over 6 months it was underwater. It was disastrous on the
quality of life for the people who live and work there, many
who are already impoverished. Two people lost their lives.
During the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 there was
another terrible flood. It again displaced residents and forced
them into crowded shelters, or to move in with family, neither
option ideal during an unprecedented pandemic.
Recognizing that this perpetual flooding was simply not
sustainable for the people or the environment, and armed with
the new scientific information, the Corps issued a new proposed
plan for the pumps in December of 2020. Unfortunately, the EPA,
last November, put the brakes on the Corps from moving forward
yet again. It simply dismissed years of new Corps environmental
studies, and thousands of pages of scientific information that
fully justifies the pumps.
We often hear, we need to listen to the science. Well, what
does the science say? The science says the Corps' new proposed
plan would not convert any wetlands to non-wetlands. The
science says the project would benefit all sections of the
economy and contribute to the wellbeing of all area residents.
The science says the project would benefit wetlands, aquatic
species, wildlife, and wildlife life, habitat, and every
important resource that flooding has been destroying for
decades.
But here is the real irony, the current administration has
placed environmental justice at the top of its priority list,
the Yazoo Backwater Area population is nearly 70 percent
minority, with roughly 30 percent living in poverty.
The Corps Environmental Justice Appendix indicates that the
pumps would significantly benefit low-income and minority
populations, and it shows that more than 90 percent of the
homes would be devastated from a 100-year flood event, are
minority occupied.
Secretary Connor, please, there are two things, and I want
you to thoroughly answer both of these for me, if you would.
Please share your thoughts on the environmental justice
benefits associated with the Yazoo Backwater Project? And do
you consider the Corps' new proposed plan to be consistent with
this administration's emphasis on promoting environmental
justice?
Mr. Connor. Senator Hyde-Smith, I wish I would have started
with your statement when I got into Yazoo, because it took me a
while to get up to speed the way you just articulated it. It is
a very complex system. And I will get exactly to your points,
because I don't think it is ironic that this administration
focuses on environmental justice.
And how we have dealt with the Yazoo Basin, or how we are
going to deal--let me put it that way--because, yes, we cannot
move forward with the project that the Corps most recently
proposed, because of the reinstitution of the veto, that is
correct, and that is concerning, because we have got to get to
some project to address the uncompleted project as you
mentioned.
And we are getting the attention that we need at a very
high level to move forward in the interagency group, chaired by
CEQ (Council on Environmental Quality) Chair Brenda Mallory,
she has convened us together, and when I went down to Yazoo in
February, it was with Chair Mallory, to get a first-hand
account, and you cannot understand the system without that
first-hand account because of the complexity of it.
So we need to address the intended project as it was
originally conceived. And you are right, it is missing that
last phase of the project, so we have got to deal with that
backwater flooding, we have got to figure out the mix of
structural and non-structural. And when I say structural, I
think pumps are still in the mix for the discussion that we are
going to have in this interagency group.
There are questions about the science from some of the
other agencies, the Corps feels very strongly that it has got
peer-reviewed science, but we need to have that dialogue about
what exactly are the impacts to wetlands, are we reducing the
wetland function. Those are going to be some detailed
conversation.
But I can assure you this is part of the environmental
justice agenda to get to a project, to get to a solution,
because of the factors that you mentioned with respect to
minority residents in that area, as well as the poverty level
that exists in that area. So that is why it is getting this
attention, and I just wanted to note, I appreciate the fact,
being part of this group, that there is a sense of urgency that
we need to get to a reconfigured project.
So I share your views, the importance, and I will keep you
posted as that interagency group continues to work on that
reconfigured project.
Senator Hyde-Smith. Please do so. And General Spellmon,
give me your knowledge of civil engineering. Please share your
thoughts on how practical, if even possible, it would be to
provide meaningful flood protection in the Yazoo Backwater Area
without a pumping station? How would that be possible?
General Spellmon. So Senator, as you know this pump station
was part of the project since it was initially authorized in
the 1941 Flood Control Act. We have looked at 34 options to how
to evacuate water from that basin, and our recommendation--we
are certainly open to any other ideas that may be out there,
but we are confident in our science, we are confident in our
engineering that the pump station can be operated in a manner
that protects these communities that you mentioned, but also
protects the 38,000 acres of wetland that are in that area. So
we are confident of that.
The other 34 options, we looked at everything, from looking
at rain levees around every home, we just could not
economically justify that, we have looked at elevating homes,
we have looked at buyouts, we looked at elevating roads, and
again not all of that--after we got through that analysis was
consistent with our longstanding environmental operating
principles. And some of it, frankly, we just could not get to
economic justification. We stand by our recommendation but
again we are open to any other ideas that may be out there.
Senator Hyde-Smith. I appreciate your answer very much,
both of you. And I know I am over time. Thank you.
Senator Feinstein. Thank you. Senator Shaheen.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you Madam Chair, and thank you to
each of our panelists for the work that you do, and for being
here today. I want to especially thank the Army Corps. In the
last 6 years or so we have had two of our harbors dredged in
New Hampshire, and right now the turning basin in the
Piscataquis River is being dredged, and for a State with only
18 miles of coastline that is pretty good. And I really
appreciate that effort.
But because of the challenges we had trying to get in the
queue to get those projects done, I recognized just how
challenging the funding is for the work that you are doing, and
was very pleased to see that the Army Corps received $9 billion
from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, and of that the Corps
has already announced $4 million in projects in New Hampshire
for 2022 and 2023, fiscal years 2022 and 2023, which has been
really important.
But it raises a couple of questions that I hear from people
about how project selection is doing? How are those projects
determined? And so can you speak to the type of projects that
you are looking at, as you are looking at this funding?
General Spellmon. Yes ma'am, I will start. When I formulate
my recommendations when I take them to the Secretary, I look at
five criteria. To the top of that list is always life safety.
So for example, a dam safety project that we know that has a
population at risk downstream, those always go to the top of
the list. Second priority, I have legal mandates across the
country, some of that, Endangered Species Act, for example.
Some of our projects have a national security component to
them. I would use the example of the Soo Lock and the steel
industry; we have made that argument before. And then finally--
I am sorry--number four is economic and environmental returns,
I think there is a narrative, an incorrect narrative that the
Corps only looks at benefit-to-cost ratios, that is not the
case that is part of the justification.
And then finally, and maybe most importantly, we want to
finish what we start. If we have a project that is under
construction, we never want to demobilize a contractor because
of lack of funding. We want to make sure we can keep our
contractors at work and finish work that we have initiated.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you. I certainly share that, and I
think that is really helpful to know. One of the things both
you and Mr. Palumbo talked about in your opening testimony was
the importance of science and research and development in
determining how to respond to particular areas. And I was
really dismayed to see that the President's budget reduces the
Coastal Inlets Research Program from over $12 million in fiscal
year 2022 to only $100,000. And I wonder if you could speak to
why that is, and how can we do what we need to do if we are not
able to have the research to allow us to address climate
change, and the other critical projects we have.
General Spellmon. Senator I know, I know the Secretary
shares the same. We are absolutely committed to elevating our
investment in research and development. And I think folks like
me have to do a better job of communicating the importance of
research and development. Today, in the Civil Works Program we
invest about 0.02 of 1 percent of our overall program into R&D,
where folks like Apple are investing 4.5 percent, or my
counterparts in the Netherlands, the Rijkswaterstaat, are
investing 4 percent.
In fact, many of my senior leaders are down in Vicksburg,
Mississippi, this week going through our top ten research and
development priorities, and we are framing up the argument, and
what we would like to include in the 2024 budget, for these top
ten initiatives in the Civil Works Program. So we want to get
more aggressive on that front.
Senator Shaheen. Good, I really appreciate that.
Mr. Connor. Senator, can I?
Senator Shaheen. Yes, please.
Mr. Connor. Can I just add, real quick, that General
Spellmon will have a very strong partner in this effort. We are
completely in sync with the importance of R&D, and how we want
to put it out in the 2024 budget.
Senator Shaheen. That is great. And, you know, listening to
everybody raise the concerns about the projects that we have in
our home States, and the challenges that we face with climate
change, it seems to me that as we did in the '20s, and '30s,
and '40s, and we looked at projects like the Tennessee Valley
Authority, the effort to electrify the country, and all of the
projects the Army Corps was involved in, in doing that.
But this may be another time when we need to really relook
at the kind of regulations that you are talking about with
respect to your Yazoo River Project, the kind of things that
were done with respect to the project in New Orleans, where we
know we have got all this water draining in, we have got a
drought in the West, and yet this water is flowing into the
Gulf and we are not able to divert it to places that we need.
It seems to me that we are in a position where we need to
totally reexamine some of the assumptions that we have made for
the last three or four decades, and think about how we better
position ourselves to address the challenges of the 21st
century. And I think that requires the kind of overhaul you are
talking about, General, as you think about research, what else
do we need to do in terms of regulation, and other areas to
address the challenges that we face? Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Feinstein. Thank you, Senators. Senator Murkowski.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Madam Chairman. And Senator
Shaheen know that I agree with what you have just concluded
there. In many parts of Alaska, particularly on our coast, we
are seeing levels of erosion that are threatening communities.
Those communities don't have a lot of alternatives, there is no
road out, and they are kind of very, very isolated.
So we have got a list of those threatened communities,
communities that we know need to be relocated, we are in the
process of relocating one out of dozens, and yet we know that
every year there are more communities that are further
threatened. And now it is not just looking at the coastal
communities, it is the river communities where we are seeing
river erosion at pretty remarkable rates there. So know that I
would join you in that.
Secretary Connor, thank you for working with us. General
Spellmon, thank you as well for all that the Corps has done in
trying to address many of the backlogged projects that we have
seen in my State. I think we made some good progress with the
Infrastructure Bill. I had a chance yesterday to meet with
Colonel Delarosa to talk about the Alaska-specific projects.
I can tell you right now there is an urgency from the
communities, whether it be the community of Nome, up in the
Interior, the Moose Creek Project, specifically the lower
point. That is truly a safety issue for that community. And so
they are wondering how quickly they can expect to see the
funding move out.
We got a little bit of a top line on that yesterday, but I
guess what I would like to hear you say this morning is that
there is a level of priority with these projects, again that
have been on the list for a long, long time and we are finally
starting to see going? Secretary Connor.
Mr. Connor. The Corps very effectively got the guidance
document for the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, as well as the
Disaster Supplemental to my office this week, so we will
process and get it out by the end of next week.
Senator Murkowski. Okay, good. Well, we will be working
closely with you just so we can give good guidance to people on
the ground in terms of what to expect. I want to ask you about
the Port of Alaska, and Anchorage, as you know, a pretty
significant port there, handles one-half of all Alaska inbound
fuel and freight, it is distributed Statewide, consumed by 90
percent of Alaska's population, everything funnels in to this
port. It supports more than 14 billion in commercial activity
in our State, it is the main inbound, containerized freight and
fuel distribution center.
It additionally is the strategic seaport that supports DoD
(Department of Defense) missions in Alaska, the Pacific and the
Arctic. This port is absolutely critical to Alaska, to the
community--to the country really, and the problem that we are
facing is that it is in severe disrepair. So I know that this
has been brought to your attention, but I have had no fewer
than a half dozen meetings in the past couple weeks just on
this particular project.
So I would ask for a commitment to work with us to get the
New START funding in, in 2023 if we can, but just need to know
that this is on your radar here.
Mr. Connor. Senator, it is definitely on my radar. I know
as part of the modernization effort there is a range of
permitting as well as some infrastructure needs. So I think,
quite frankly, General Spellmon may have more knowledge, but I
am a little unclear about the infrastructure investments needed
to be made. So we need to get up to speed with respect to that,
and the authorizations presently available, but absolutely get
the need for coordinated permitting to take those actions, and
move them forward as quickly as possible. General?
General Spellmon. Senator, I have been to the port, I would
certainly acknowledge all of your comments. We recognize its
importance, and we are committed to do our regulatory work, or
other work, and we will continue to work to make our best
technical argument for the New START Authority.
Senator Murkowski. Good. Well, we know again that this is
not just a local priority, it is truly a State-wide priority.
Last question; and this relates to some of our small harbors.
And I appreciate what you have said in terms of your analysis,
and the review, General, in terms of how you determine
priorities for projects. But I have always been concerned that
our smaller ports, our smaller harbors, they are get kind of
overlooked. And we have had this conversation in the past, that
is why we have our small and subsistence harbors category,
But, you know, when you think about cost benefit any
economic analysis is going to show that large ports are
favored, because they have big, economic impacts, and so
everything that we can do to find a way to help the small
communities for these coastal communities, that port, that
harbor, that is their economy that will allow for them to
really exist. So I am looking at Craig, which I was really
disappointed didn't make the list, and I would like to
understand why, but also Dutch Harbor.
For communities like Craig, communities like Dutch, if the
barge doesn't make it in with the groceries, it is not like you
can just drive somewhere else to go get the materials that you
need. These communities need their harbors, there is no other
option.
So I guess I would like a quick understanding as to how and
why communities like Craig and Dutch Harbor didn't make that
list and whether--what we need to do to ensure that, for
instance, Craig gets the $30 million for preconstruction
engineering and design. How do we help these communities?
General Spellmon. So Senator, I will start. First, I would
tell you that I am responsible across the Nation for
maintaining 577 Federal navigation channels, and so we do, we
recognize there are many of those channels that don't get
touched on a routine basis.
I acknowledge your comments about Craig Harbor, and Dutch
Harbor. I hope I am wrong. The Jobs Act, we are seeing nearly a
billion-dollar investment in Alaska, and we are working down
the priorities we think that you have shared with us. And you
mentioned it is Nome, it is Barrow, it is Kenai, it is Moose
Creek, and it is Slough Creek.
Again, I hope I am wrong. I think we are really going to
stress our contracting partners in the State of Alaska. And
when I took these recommendations to the Secretary I have got
963 construction projects underway today in the Civil Works
Program, I did not want to put us in a position where we were
going to have money sitting in a bank where we couldn't get
after the work. So as I made these recommendations we wanted to
get--give the Secretary projects that we knew we could get
after right away.
We are not forgetting about the projects that you mentioned
Craig and Dutch, we are going to get after these, it might just
be in next year's appropriation that we can make that argument.
Senator Murkowski. I am hearing next year's appropriations.
Okay.
Mr. Connor. Can I just quickly add?
Senator Murkowski. Okay, Secretary Connor.
Mr. Connor. A lot of discussion about Craig, and Dutch
Harbor as part of the allocation process. And I think we have
got an issue that we need to discuss with you with respect to
the $250 million limit that was in the IIJA for small ports.
And of course we allocated that to Port of Nome, which is also
a very important port. So we get to work through that issue,
but they definitely are on the radar screen.
And I wanted to just get quickly because I absolutely agree
with your assessment that we need to look at a wider range of
benefits. And my predecessor, Mr. James, issued a comprehensive
benefits memo. I want to build upon that. I think that was a
very good piece of work, we want to give that guidance to the
Corps to look at a wider array of benefits, including regional
benefits which are very important.
And then we want to institutionalize not just looking at
those benefits, but being able to make decisions based on that
wider view of the benefits. And we have got a directive to move
forward to the rule making, on principle, requirements, and
guidelines, our agency specific procedures that will allow us
to make decisions on a broader basis that is a high priority as
part of our agenda.
Senator Murkowski. Great. That is really good to hear. I
appreciate that because I think we recognize. Again, it is not
just the number of individuals served, but truly a much wider
range of benefits that can accrue to your region.
Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I apologize for going over my
time.
Senator Feinstein. And thank, you Senator. I have a bit of
a beef, and so I am going to raise it now. Assistant Secretary
Connor, over the last 2 years we have provided $82 million for
the Army Corps WIFIA (Water Infrastructure Finance and
Innovation Act) Program, to provide low-interest loans for
local dam safety projects. The implementation for this program
has been stalled. We have been clear, and I think to ignore
congressional intent in this manner, regarding how taxpayer
dollars shall be spent is really not acceptable.
My State, California, has 89 dams which are in less than
satisfactory condition, and would cause loss of life or
significant economic damage if they were to fail. Damn safety
has been a priority of mine as an appropriator since I have
come to the Senate, and it is critical to millions of Americans
who live near these dams.
When will you finalize--apparently we have 14 million a-
year-and-a-half-ago there. So the question is, when will you
finalize the program rules and get out these funds so we can
start repairing dangerously deficient, non-Federal dams?
Mr. Connor. Madam Chair, thank you for your leadership in
this area. It is a legitimate beef that you have, absolutely.
So we have a proposed rulemaking that we are in the final
throes. I expect that within the next month or so, hopefully,
no more than 6 weeks, we will be in the Federal Register with
that proposed rulemaking, which is the first step to setting up
the program.
The WIFIA Program, and enlisting the ability for private
dam owners to repair and modify their dams, it is part of the
resilience agenda that we need in this era of climate change.
So it is another important tool we are moving forward. And
lastly, I would just note, we have lit a fire under ourselves,
because WIFIA is now in the President's budget for 2023, so we
acknowledge the importance of the program, we have got to move
forward and get it stood up to address all the reasons you just
mentioned.
Senator Feinstein. So I want to understand this. I have
your word here that it is going to move?
Mr. Connor. You have my word I am going to do everything
possible to move it through, and get it in the Federal Register
in the next one to 2 months.
Senator Feinstein. Well, I accept that with thanks. So
thank you.
Senator Kennedy, you are next.
Senator Kennedy. Madam Chair I just wanted to point out
that Senator Hoeven just called me, he is on his way. I would
like, you know, if we could indulge him for a few minutes
because I know John has some questions he wants to ask. I
wanted to ask one of my colleagues a question. Senator Hyde-
Smith, I listened with interest about your situation in
Mississippi. And I appreciate it. The Corps wants to go
forward, and the EPA won't?
Senator Hyde-Smith. Pretty much correct, that that is what
has happened. The EPA is one that put the brakes on, and we had
signed the MOUs, we had done everything, and the science was
very, very strong. And the amazing thing is the two different
sets of scientists with EPA, and with the Corps have not sat
down. And I think that is critical. Am I correct, Daniel?
They have not sat down together, and I don't know why that
has not happened. But I really, really would like to see that
happen. And thank you for the discussion because, literally, a
lady who was pregnant died because of this flooding. And, you
know, we talk about wetlands, we talk about everything else, 6
months these houses were under water--this property was under
water, 6 months. And you know, I talked to so many people who
were living in hotel rooms, who were living with relatives in
the back of businesses, that people allowed them to live, these
people cannot afford hotel rooms, and other areas like that.
Senator Kennedy. Well, can I ask? Why haven't the two sets
of scientists talked? Or they have these things called
telephones at a minimum?
General Spellmon. Sir, our team from Vicksburg and the
scientists have sat down and compared data. What may be
happening is----
Senator Hyde-Smith. With EPA and with the Corps, the two
sets.
General Spellmon. Yes. Yes, ma'am. What may be happening is
new staff that have come in within the past several months of
the past year, but we will pack up this afternoon to go meet
the----
Senator Feinstein. Could you speak directly in the mic?
Sorry to interrupt you.
General Spellmon. Yes, ma'am. So my parting comment is, we
will pack up this afternoon and meet with any scientist from
any Federal agency or State agency that would like to compare
notes on our data.
Senator Hyde-Smith. Yes. The Corps is very willing, EPA is
the one that we can't get--to seem to get as interested as----
Mr. Connor. Senator, can I just add very quickly?
Senator Kennedy. Yes. But let me put a finer point on. Here
is what I am missing. The Corps spent a lot of time and money
doing this project, on this project, did its studies, decided
there is no damage to wetlands. The leadership of the EPA
changed; one of the leadership's priorities is environmental
justice.
And the EPA is saying, in the name of environmental justice
we are going to hold up on this project, even though this
project will help people who happen to be 70 percent African-
Americans. Am I missing something here?
Mr. Connor. I would just add, I don't speak for EPA, but I
have spoken to Administrator Regan, and Assistant Administrator
Fox. They are strongly committed to getting their team with our
team as part of this interagency group, I think the
administrator was particularly moved by his visit down to the
Yazoo Basin. So frustrating, yes, but we are going to get
together----
Senator Kennedy. Sir, when is your administrator going to
make a decision?
Mr. Connor. Well, we have got to get the teams together,
and not just have a meet and explain the differences, we as
leaders have to reconcile those differences so we can make a
decision about the project that can move forward.
Senator Kennedy. Well, how about next week?
Mr. Connor. We are getting together our, interagency group
tomorrow at the leadership level, and having yet another
meeting. And the goal is to then focus the issues so that we
can get our teams to get into those details so we can----
Senator Kennedy. Right. Again, I am just trying to get a
timeline. The Corps spent a lot of time and money, and says, we
are ready to go. It has passed all the studies, the scientists
say go, you all have it--because of the change in leadership,
have said, no, we are holding up. And we have got to make a
decision. I am just asking a simple question. When are you
going to make a decision?
Mr. Connor. As soon as we can.
Senator Kennedy. Yes, when is that?
Mr. Connor. That is hopeful we are going to be working on
this all year.
Senator Kennedy. It is going to take a year?
Mr. Connor. Well, it is going to take some time to
reconcile the differences between the agencies.
Senator Kennedy. Why?
Mr. Connor. Because there are disagreements about the
science, we as leaders can convene folks, we can focus the
issues, but we have got to have that dialogue, and that is
going to take a little bit of a time,
Senator Kennedy. I don't understand why. I don't get it. I
don't understand why you can't put the two scientists together,
lock them in a room, give them some coffee, give them a few
honey buns, and say, okay, over the next 8 hours, work this
out. I don't get it. That is the way the real world works. Why
can't you do that?
Mr. Connor. Well, we are going to do that.
Senator Kennedy. When?
Mr. Connor. Whether the 8 hours is what it is going to
take.
Senator Kennedy. Or maybe it will take a couple of days.
Mr. Connor. Or whether it is going to take 24, or 48 of
intense dialogue, I don't know the answer to the question. I
just know that we are committed to forcing that process to
happen and coming up with the project.
Senator Kennedy. Do you understand why people get
frustrated about that?
Mr. Connor. Absolutely.
Senator Kennedy. Okay. I can't even--I mean, I am just
asking for a decision. I am not telling you what decision to
make. I just don't see why you can't do it within 6 weeks.
Mr. Connor. I understand the frustration. I am part of a
committed team that is going to get to a decision, Senator.
Senator Kennedy. Okay. Thank Okay. Thanks again, for all
your good work, gentlemen, and ladies.
Senator Hyde-Smith. Six weeks would be great.
Senator Feinstein. Senator Hyde-Smith, any questions?
Senator Hyde-Smith. Sure.
Senator Kennedy. I will let you go.
Senator Hyde-Smith. Hey, you are my honey bun.
Senator Kennedy. Okay. Good. I like that.
Senator Hyde-Smith. Shifting gears from flood control to
innovation, Congress is asking the Corps to do a lot of things
with the record high funding the Corps has received in recent
years. I want to make sure you have the tools you will need to
be successful. Part of what you will need is innovation, and to
be able to access the innovation taking place in the private
sector, sometimes the rigid structure of the Federal
acquisition process doesn't make that very easy for you.
To address that very problem Congress gave NASA (National
Aeronautics and Space Administration)-- I am sorry--NASA, DoD,
and a number of other agencies, Other Transaction Authority,
OTA, has been used to great effects by the Department of
Defense, including the Corps of Engineers to access
innovation--innovative solutions, and cutting-edge technologies
from entities that aren't traditional Federal contractors.
Unfortunately the Department of Defense reads the law as
providing OTA only for the Corps' Military Mission, and not the
Civil Works Mission. Given all that we are asking you to do,
you need these important tools would be what most people would
conclude. But Secretary Connor, and General Spellmon, don't you
think having the ability to use Other Transaction Authority in
your Civil Works Mission would be a useful tool for you to
have?
General Spellmon. Senator we do. As you suggested we have
used this on several projects in our Military Construction
Program, I would argue, to great effect. And we also think
there is value in bringing this over to the Civil Works
Program. I have just not had the opportunity yet to sit down
with Mr. Connor to talk about this particular tool, but you
have our commitment, we will have that conversation, ma'am.
Senator Hyde-Smith. And as Congress works on the next Water
Resources Development Act, will you work with me to help put
that tool in your hands?
General Spellmon. Yes, Senator.
Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you very much.
Senator Feinstein. I would like to bring up a subject that
is of real concern to me. The Bureau and several States have
already severely reduced water allocations in many cases to
zero. And I am a westerner, and I am from a big State, it is 40
million people, it is a huge commercial State, it is a big AG
State, but there is no way the West can survive extreme
droughts, plus climate change, without more investment in
infrastructure to move water from the wet years to the dry
ones.
WIIN (Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation) Act
funding, I think, and I wrote the bill, is key to developing
long-term solutions to these challenges, and last year we
provided an additional $155 million to WIIN Act funding for
water storage, desal, and water recycling and reuse projects.
So I have continued to work with my colleagues to appropriate
funding for good projects, but the President's budget
recommends no funding for any of these projects. And I am
curious as to why?
Mr. Palumbo. Senator, thank you very much for that
question. The way the Bureau of Reclamation is looking at the
WIIN Act projects, we were able to make a lot of progress on
getting projects determined feasible, getting projects started
with funding, and we are now utilizing the BIL funding, the
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law funding in large storage to put
towards some of those WIIN projects. We are going to be making
an announcement later this fiscal year, in 2022, using that BIL
funding to advance those WIIN-related projects.
And we also have queued up money for 2023 out of the BIL
funding for those WIIN Act projects. So, we absolutely thank
the subcommittee on supporting those projects, getting them
moving, and we are going to keep them moving, because the WIIN
Act authority expired, but we are going to keep them moving
with BIL funding.
Senator Feinstein. Well, thank you very much for that. We
will follow closely and see if it happens. Please know that
this is a big problem out West, and one of the things that I
have seen is how big this country is when you fly back and
forth over it. And I am really concerned. So this is a top
priority for me, and I believe for California.
So I thank you for that answer, and my expectation will be
that the administration will respond. So thank you very much.
Mr. Palumbo. Absolutely.
Senator Kennedy. Can I say one more thing, Madam Chair?
Senator Feinstein. Yes, okay.
Senator Kennedy. First, I am going to just repeat what I
have said before, what a delight it is to work with you Madam
Chair, and your very able staff. I am going to be calling you
gentlemen, I need to get updates on three projects that I know
you are working on, that are really important in my State, and
have become more important recently.
The Calcasieu River and Pass, you know, we need some
dredging done there, it is a major LNG (Liquefied natural gas)
export hub, and we need to get it to what 42 feet deep and
about 800 feet wide, our Atchafalaya--I know you know the
projects I am talking about--Atchafalaya river dredging, we
have got to maintain that the authorized depth of 20 feet deep,
and a bottom width of 400 feet.
And finally, last but certainly not least, I don't mention
these in any particular order, our New Orleans to Venice
Hurricane Protection Project. So I will just be calling you,
and to try to get an update. And again, I wanted to thank you
for giving so much to our country.
Senator Feinstein. That was nice, very nice, Senator. Thank
you very much.
Senator Kennedy. Thank you. You are welcome, Senator.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
[The following questions were submitted to the Department,
but the questions were not answered by press time.]
Questions Submitted to Mr. Michael Connor
Questions Submitted by Senator Dianne Feinstein
Recreation Program
Question. The Corps was the second leading provider of recreation
on public lands and waters in 2021, yet the President's budget
requested a significant cut to the Corps recreation budget. How can the
Corps continue to support increasing demand for recreation and sustain
the significant economic footprint of Corps managed lakes in local
communities across the country if they don't have enough funding for
basic operations and maintenance? Can you please explain the rationale
for this funding reduction at a time when the American public's
interest in outdoor recreation is surging?
______
Questions Submitted by Senator John Hoeven
Question. I have supported the development of a WIFIA program
within the Corps of Engineers that would match the WIFIA program
established at the Environmental Protection Agency. The Red River
Valley Flood Protection project received an EPA WIFIA loan, which
provides tremendous cost savings for the local share of that large
public-private partnership or P3 project. Last year, the Corps WIFIA
program supported loans for projects at non-Federal dams.
Would you support the expansion of the Corps WIFIA program to
include the construction of levees in cases where those levees would be
entirely constructed, owned, and operated by a non-Federal entity?
Question. The Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) is vital energy
infrastructure, transporting well over half a million barrels of oil
per day from North Dakota to energy consumers throughout the Midwest.
DAPL has additional delivery capacity, up to 1.1 million barrels
per day, which sits unused while the EIS process remains delayed, a
process which has now gone on for over 2 years.
Families are paying record high gasoline prices, and consumers need
long-term certainty.
Will you promptly complete and release the draft EIS?
Question. You said previously that your office would not reopen
standalone jurisdictional determinations (JDs) under the Navigable
Waters Protection Rule (NWPR). However, it is our understanding that
Army Corps offices around the country are calling into question the
validity of negative JDs issued under the NWPR, despite such JDs being
valid for 5 years.
Have you given a policy direction from headquarters questioning the
validity of JDs completed under the NWPR?
If permittees cannot rely on a lawful negative JD letter issued by
the Corps, what are they supposed to rely on?
Will you confirm that the Army Corps will not pursue enforcement
actions against permitted entities complying with a lawful negative JD?
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Bill Hagerty
Question. I was able to visit the Chickamauga Lock construction
project in May 2021 and see first- hand the size, scope, and importance
of this project to the region and our country. For fiscal year 22, the
project did not require any funding thanks to the years of support and
leadership of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water
Development. However, for this coming fiscal year, local leaders tell
me they will need about $39 million to finish construction of the
Chickamauga Lock projects.
Assistant Secretary Connor, does the President's budget request any
funding to finish the construction of Chickamauga Lock? If so, will
that funding be sufficient to complete construction of this project?
Assistant Secretary Connor, can you discuss the importance to the
region and our nation's broader inland waterway system of completing
this project on schedule?
Assistant Secretary Connor, will you be able to discuss delays or
contracting issues with the construction project? And can you provide
me with a detailed timeline of the project's completion?
Question. I was able to visit the Chickamauga Lock construction
project in May 2021 and see first- hand the size, scope, and importance
of this project to the region and our country. For fiscal year 22, the
project did not require any funding thanks to the years of support and
leadership of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water
Development. However, for this coming fiscal year, local leaders tell
me they will need about $39 million to finish construction of the
Chickamauga Lock projects.
Assistant Secretary Connor, does the President's budget request any
funding to finish the construction of Chickamauga Lock? If so, will
that funding be sufficient to complete construction of this project?
Assistant Secretary Connor, can you discuss the importance to the
region and our nation's broader inland waterway system of completing
this project on schedule?
Assistant Secretary Connor, will you be able to discuss delays or
contracting issues with the construction project? And can you provide
me with a detailed timeline of the project's completion?
Question. Outdoor recreation is a critical economic driver in my
State of Tennessee and it is estimated that it generates nearly $700
billion in gross economic output in the U.S. Now more than ever,
Americans are looking to get outdoors and spend time in our national
parks and lakes. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers plays an integral
role in maintaining and ensuring our Nation's waterways are safe and
navigable. To that effect, in fiscal year 2022, Congress provided $295
million for the Corps' recreation programs. However, industry tells me
your fiscal year 2023 budget request only includes $240 million for
these activities, which represents a $55 million reduction.
Assistant Secretary Connor, at a time when the USACE is need of
increased resources to manage a surge in outdoor recreation
participation by millions of Americans in the wake of a pandemic,
please explain the rationale for the Administration's proposal to cut
this funding.
Question. Constituents from construction materials producing
industries tell me that the USACE and EPA are not acting to approve
water permits that they rely on to supply materials to build
infrastructure projects and communities. The current permit criteria
should be based on longstanding practice, however, the recent spate of
rulemaking has caused the USACE and EPA to slow walk permit approvals.
These approvals are needed to deliver the infrastructure investments
Americans need.
Assistant Secretary Connor, how many 404B permits and JDs have been
approved in the last 6 months and how many are outstanding in your
backlog, applied for yet waiting approval?
Assistant Secretary Connor, what action are you taking to ensure
permits are being processed even as simultaneous rulemakings and
judicial reviews by the SCOTUS move forward?
Assistant Secretary Connor, further what is your plan to ensure
material producers and other key industries can receive approvals in
order to effectively supply building materials to markets that are
suffering significantly from shortages and operational disruptions in
their supply chain?
______
Questions Submitted to Lieutenant General Scott A. Spellmon
Questions Submitted by Senator Jon Tester
Question. I am pleased that the New York District of the Corps has
undertaken several projects under the authority of section 542 of the
Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-541) and
sections 3158, 3159, and 3160 of the Water Resources Development Act of
2007 (Public Law 110-114).
Among these projects is phase 1 of a feasibility study of
constructing an invasive species barrier in the Champlain canal. The
importance of this work has been driven home recently by evidence that
the round goby, a highly invasive fish, is now making its way to the
canal which will allow it to access Lake Champlain, where it is
expected to have devastating ecological impacts.
Progress on the Corps feasibility work has been painfully slow,
however, due in large part to the need, under section 542, for the
Corps to work with a local sponsor, requiring cost share contributions,
agreements and coordination that take months, even years, to get in
place. This feasibility work, as well as design and ultimately
construction of this much needed measure is specifically authorized
section 5146 of WRDA 2007 as a 100 percent Federal project. Working
under this authority the Corps could accelerate progress and provide a
solution to invasive species transfer at a much earlier date.
When will the Corps allocate the needed funds within its work plan
and undertake the Champlain Canal invasive species barrier project
under the authority of section 5146 of WRDA 2007 and thereby accelerate
this important and highly time sensitive project?
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Mitch McConnell
Question. Kentucky Lock and Dam is a gateway to more than 700 miles
of navigable waters, with $10 billion of products passing through it
annually. Its current average delay is one of the longest delay times
of any lock in the inland waterway system. Congress authorized the
Kentucky Lock and Dam addition project in 1996 and has appropriated
over $1 billion since then. Yet, this project is still ongoing and, as
we recently learned, is facing even more extension, pushing the
estimated completion timeline from 2025 to as late as 2030.
What are the reasons for such a major delay? Based on the latest
official assessment in 2020 which stated a 2025 completion, why has the
project doubled in remaining length to 2030?
Construction of the original lock began in 1935 and took just 6
years to complete. With vast advancements in modern technology, why has
this addition project taken over 26 years and counting?
What are concrete, hard and fast ways to accelerate the timeline
without compromising the integrity of the project?
What is an updated timeline for completion, and do you expect
additional funding needs?
______
Questions Submitted by Senator John Hoeven
Question. I recently wrote to you about how drought conditions in
the upper Missouri River basin create challenges around Lake Sakakawea.
Persistently low water levels create problems for lake access, on top
of a backlog of deferred maintenance at various recreation areas around
the lake. We have a history of State and local officials working with
the Corps to meet these challenges during drought conditions and I hope
we can do so again.
Will you support basic investments in things like boat ramps and
Corps-owned infrastructure at Lake Sakakawea as part of a coordinated
effort to preserve lake access during drought conditions in the upper
Missouri basin?
Question. Last fall, the Corps of Engineers announced that it would
conduct a special release of water from Fort Peck on the Missouri River
to support the spawning of the pallid sturgeon. The Corps eventually
cancelled this plan due to persistent drought conditions that made it
unworkable, but it raised concerns that conducting this release would
result in problems downstream. I have heard from many farmers in
northwest North Dakota who have concerns about negative impacts on
cropland and processing facilities. It is also my understanding that a
surge of water could hurt the operation of several municipal water
intakes.
Can you ensure that the Corps of Engineers will not conduct such a
pulse in the future if such a pulse would harm local interests along
the Missouri River?
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Bill Hagerty
Question. I recently became aware of a permit application under
consideration by the Corps of Engineers involving expansion of an
existing dock structure located in Port Allen, Louisiana. My
constituents and industry leaders have voice concerns that his project
could have long-lasting negative consequences for upstream users. Over
the last several weeks I have had conversations with the various USACE
Commanders and U.S. Coast Guard leadership. The permit application, if
approved would permit Panamax-sized vessels at this already dangerously
constrained point of the Mississippi River and would create a hazard to
navigation that would limit full utilization of the Mississippi and
could obstruct free navigation on that river. The U.S. Coast Guard,
which is responsible for ensuring the Mississippi River is safe an
navigable, has evaluated this location on prior occasions and found it
unfeasible because of the increased probability of major marine
incidents. As I understand it, the final decision whether to approve or
deny the permit will be made by the New Orleans District Commander.
Lt. Col. Spellmon, will the effects on the entire Mississippi River
system be considered as part of this decision?
Lt. Col. Spellmon, since this decision will have major impacts
across the entire length of the Mississippi River system, would it be
more appropriate for this decision to come from Division or Headquarter
leadership? If not, could you explain the rational?
Question. I recently became aware of a permit application under
consideration by the Corps of Engineers involving expansion of an
existing dock structure located in Port Allen, Louisiana. My
constituents and industry leaders have voice concerns that his project
could have long-lasting negative consequences for upstream users. Over
the last several weeks I have had conversations with the various USACE
Commanders and U.S. Coast Guard leadership. The permit application, if
approved would permit Panamax-sized vessels at this already dangerously
constrained point of the Mississippi River and would create a hazard to
navigation that would limit full utilization of the Mississippi and
could obstruct free navigation on that river. The U.S. Coast Guard,
which is responsible for ensuring the Mississippi River is safe an
navigable, has evaluated this location on prior occasions and found it
unfeasible because of the increased probability of major marine
incidents. As I understand it, the final decision whether to approve or
deny the permit will be made by the New Orleans District Commander.
Lt. Col. Spellmon, will the effects on the entire Mississippi River
system be considered as part of this decision?
Lt. Col. Spellmon, since this decision will have major impacts
across the entire length of the Mississippi River system, would it be
more appropriate for this decision to come from Division or Headquarter
leadership? If not, could you explain the rational?
______
Questions Submitted to Mr. David Palumbo
Questions Submitted by Senator Dianne Feinstein
Klamath Basin Drought Response Agency
Question. The Klamath Basin has suffered back to back drought years
which is causing considerable hardship to farmers and also harmed
endangered species and migratory birds. The fiscal year 2023 budget
request recommends $21 million for endangered species. How do you plan
to use these funds to meet the needs of fish, tribes and farmers in the
Basin?
Last year I worked to provide an additional $9.9 million under the
Disaster Response Program for the Klamath Drought Response Agency to
help farmers impacted by the significant lack of irrigation water
delivered from the Project. We hear from Klamath water users that there
is a shortfall in the $27 million in funding needed for the Klamath
drought response agency. What is Reclamation doing to address this
shortfall?
The Department has held a series of meetings with the stakeholders
in the Basin. Are there more meetings scheduled in the future? Will you
provide more information on these engagements, specifically what are
your long term goals for this effort?
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Jon Tester
Question. The Dry-Redwater Regional Water Authority System in
Montana has been in progress for nearly two decades, and while they've
made substantial progress, they still need Federal funding to build out
the project. In 2020, we passed, with bipartisan support, legislation
to authorize Bureau of Reclamation to conduct a $5 million feasibility
study for the project, to clear the way for a formal authorization. How
is Reclamation planning to fund that study, and what timeline can we
expect to see for completing it?
______
Questions Submitted by Senator John Hoeven
Question. The Garrison Diversion Unit was initially designed and
intended to serve irrigation purposes. Since the project was first
authorized in 1965, the focus and mission of the project has changed
multiple times, most recently under the Dakota Water Resources Act of
2000.
Garrison Diversion and the Bureau of Reclamation are currently
conducting a basis of negotiation for the cost of water to make good
use of the McClusky Canal for the Eastern North Dakota Alternate Water
Supply Project (ENDAWS), which will help secure an affordable and
reliable water supply for half of North Dakota's population. As part of
this process, Reclamation is determining repayment costs for use of
Federal facilities that currently remain under-utilized.
Do you think Reclamation should be able to share actual proof of
costs prior to claiming they are legitimate costs?
Will you work with my office and our state to approve a cost of
water for ENDAWS that is fair to water users, for what would otherwise
be a stranded Federal asset providing no benefit U.S. taxpayers?
______
SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS
Senator Feinstein. If there is no further business before
this committee, we will stand adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:21 a.m., Wednesday, April 6, the
subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene subject to the call of
the Chair.]
ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023
----------
WEDNESDAY, MAY 4, 2022
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 10:04 a.m. in room SD-192, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Dianne Feinstein (chairwoman)
presiding.
Present: Senators Feinstein, Murray, Tester, Shaheen,
Kennedy, Collins, Hoeven, and Hagerty.
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Office of the Secretary
STATEMENT OF HON. JENNIFER GRANHOLM, SECRETARY
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR DIANNE FEINSTEIN
Senator Feinstein. I think we will get started. Senator
Kennedy is on his way, but has sent signal that this is what we
should do. So we will do it.
And the Subcommittee on Energy and Water will please come
to order.
Today's hearing is going to review the fiscal year 2023
budget request for the Department of Energy.
Thank you, Secretary Granholm for joining us today. I am
particularly pleased to see you again and back this year. A lot
has happened since we last saw you, including historic funding
for the Department through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill,
and our recent fiscal year 2022 spending bill. I know that
implementing this funding has been keeping the Department busy.
The administration's fiscal year 2023 request for the
Department, totals $48.6 billion, representing more than $3.7
billion increase from last year, and that is billion, not
million. As I understand this, most of this proposal increase
is aimed at reducing our fossil fuel consumption, and
addressing climate change.
Your budget includes funding for research and development,
of renewable energy, batteries, electric vehicles, and also
demonstrates these technologies at a scale that would reduce
emissions. These investments, I believe, are important as we
continue to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels for heating
our homes and powering our cars.
Recent international conflicts have highlighted the need to
pursue domestic, cost-effective solutions for our energy
consumption, and energy independence is national security.
So I wanted to take a moment to applaud the
administration's continued resolve to act aggressively to
combat climate change.
Ranking Member Kennedy will be here shortly, and has asked
that we move ahead. So we will. And I might ask the Senator
that is here, if she would have any opening statements on
behalf of her side.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR SUSAN M. COLLINS
Senator Collins. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I have a
number of issues that I hope to bring up with the Secretary
today, they range from energy storage which we need to improve
in order to integrate renewables into the electric grid, and to
weatherization programs that will help us conserve, to the
exciting work on deepwater offshore wind energy that is being
performed at the University of Maine. So I look forward to
discussing all of those issues.
And I want to thank the Chairwoman for her leadership.
Thank you.
Senator Feinstein. Excellent. And thank you.
Madam Secretary, please proceed.
SUMMARY STATEMENT OF HON. JENNIFER GRANHOLM
Secretary Granholm. Thank you so much Chair Feinstein, and
to Senator Collins, and in absentia, all of the committee
members who I know are really interested in this topic
regarding the Department of Energy and our 2023 budget request.
I am so proud to lead this Department as the 16th Secretary
of Energy, and I am grateful for the support that you have
given to the Department of Energy, including through the 2022
Omnibus Legislation.
Under the Biden administration, as you have noted, Madam
Chair, the Department of Energy is interested--not just
interested--committed, deeply committed to increasing energy
security, affordability, and resilience. We are committed to
securing the clean energy supply chain that is necessary to
reduce our reliance on unabated fossil fuels, and to increase
our energy independence.
Like the $3 billion from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law
for battery manufacturing that we announced on Monday, we are
also committed to strengthening America's competitiveness by
accelerating scientific discovery and innovation. And these
commitments are reflected in this budget, and a look around the
world shows us that this is the right focus, with the right
priorities for this moment in history.
Right now we face a trio of crises. One is climate change
which costs the United States $148 billion last year alone in
damages from extreme weather. Then the second is COVID-19, and
of course now Russia's war, invasion of Ukraine which is
costing American families right now, too, as they see prices
rising from gas stations to grocery stores.
So let me be clear. First, that the Department of Energy is
using every tool available to increase oil and energy supply.
In late-March, for example, the President authorized the
release of 1 million barrels per day from our strategic
petroleum reserve over the next 6 months, 180 million barrels
total, coordinating with our international allies and partners
who also committed to releasing another 60 million barrels.
And I appreciate Congress' support of President Biden's ban
on Russian energy imports. We are also working to offer relief
to American families at home through the $3.5 billion
Weatherization Assistance Program that was provided in the
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. But ultimately, these crises
tell us that energy security, and energy independence, and
energy affordability, all depend on a shift toward American-
made clean energy.
And that is why we are working with our international
allies to advance alternative energy sources, and boost clean
energy manufacturing. It is why we are grateful that Congress,
through the Energy Act of 2020, and the Bipartisan
Infrastructure Law has invested in clean building technologies
here at home, with American parts, and American labor.
I am grateful that we are, with members of Congress, that
they have demonstrated the faith in our Department to oversee a
lot of these investments in the new offices, the clean energy
goals, the supply chain goals that come with them.
We are hard at work implementing this legislation here at
the Department of Energy. Most recently DOE (Department of
Energy) began accepting applications, for example, for the $6
billion in civilian nuclear credit for the existing fleet of
nuclear plants, a way to keep reliable and clean energy online.
The $62 billion from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law that
came to the Department of Energy, is an historic investment in
projects that will serve our Nation for decades. But on its
own, it is not sufficient to address the Nation's full energy
challenges, and that is why our request includes base year
funding for efforts to complement the Bipartisan Infrastructure
Law, in order to maximize its impact to lower costs, and
provide clean, reliable, secure American power.
This request also supports our Office of Energy Efficiency,
and Renewable Energy, our Office of Science, the 17 national
labs which sharpen our innovative capacity, and our competitive
edge, and of course our budget includes funding for DOE
missions that keep our country safe. Like Environmental
Management, and nuclear security.
I am proud of DOE's work to confront our Nation's most
pressing challenges. I reaffirm my commitment to leading this
extraordinary Department with its extraordinary employees, as
we implement congressional actions. From the Bipartisan
Infrastructure Law, the Energy Act, and to those still to come,
hopefully, the Bipartisan Innovation Act, and the President's
full agenda for building a better America.
So I thank you for the opportunity to be here today. And I
am happy to answer your questions.
ENERGY PRICES
Senator Feinstein. Thank you very much, Secretary. It is my
understanding that this administration has taken several steps
to try to address this issue, and has tapped the strategic
petroleum reserve three different times to try to get more gas
into the market. I support these actions and agree that we
should take as many steps as we can to address gasoline prices.
Madam Secretary, can you explain whether oil being released
from the strategic petroleum reserve is going to be able to
create any meaningful relief at the pump? And what else can be
done, if anything?
Secretary Granholm. Yes, great. Thank you so much for this
question. As we know, the invasion of Ukraine, Russia is a huge
exporter of oil on the global market, and the invasion of
Ukraine pulled, initially, 1.5 to 2 million barrels per day off
of that global market.
So for us in the United States, we are asking how can we
increase enough supply so that when supply like that is
crunched the prices don't go up, out of control. The biggest
tool we have in our arsenal is the strategic petroleum reserve,
and so the President has called, first of all, upon our oil and
gas industry to produce more with the permits that they have,
and the ability that they have to increase supply.
Second, he has called for this, the release of a million
barrels per day for the next 6 months, as the oil and gas
industry improves their production. The Energy Information
Agency has said that by the end of this year, that we will see
an additional million barrels per day from our domestic
suppliers, and so that is why the President has called for an
increase in a million barrels per day from the Strategic
Petroleum Reserve to balance out the markets.
Now, the U.S. has said we will not accept Russian oil,
which is great, so has Canada, and a number of other nations.
The EU (European Union) is on the verge of doing something
similar, if the EU pulls their supply their--if they say no
more Russian oil for us, that will be another, perhaps, 1.5
million barrels that are pulled off the market. So then we will
have about 3 million barrels off the market.
That will create additional volatility. We will see prices
likely to increase. So while we are doing all we can to make
sure that supply and demand meet itself to stabilize, I think
this war has only accelerated the urgency with which we must
move to electrify transportation, and to move toward clean
energy.
Clean energy, that is American-made, is energy that is not
going to be subject to the volatility of petro-dictators, to
the volatility of a fossil fuel market that is global in
nature. So that is why the President's goal is to try to
stabilize supply now, and try to move as well toward clean
energy.
And finally, I will say that the President is doing
everything he can within his power in this global market, to
make sure that we lessen our demand on oil. For example, by
increasing the E15, the ethanol blend in gasoline, taking that
to E15 so that we reduce, again, the amount of oil that is
necessary. This is a very, very difficult situation, but I
think, ultimately, it screams that we must accelerate toward
clean energy.
CLIMATE CHANGE'S IMPACT ON THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Senator Feinstein. I would just like to address one
California question to you. We discussed this previously but we
are experiencing a climate emergency, and California is bearing
the brunt of a lot of these changes. We find that temperatures
are causing more intense heat waves making western wildfires
more frequent, destructive, and deadly. These are straining our
power grids and forcing us to rethink their design.
Just last year in California 2.5 million acres burned. It
destroyed 3,600 structures. The recent infrastructure bill
would provide billions to help States upgrade their aging
infrastructure. And so we are pleased about that. But can you
help us understand how quickly this historic funding can be
implemented to help States upgrade their aging energy
infrastructure?
Secretary Granholm. Yes. Thank you for that too. The part I
think that is very hopeful for California in the Bipartisan
Infrastructure Law related to energy infrastructure is the $5
billion for resiliency, which could be used for the purposes of
undergrounding wires in strategic locations. And so we are in
the process, we will be putting out a funding opportunity
announcement shortly. We just called for a request for
information from stakeholders about how they would like to see
that portion funded.
I will also say, I know I am over time, but we are also
focused on the technology associated with the grid that will
allow us to enhance sensors, drones, modeling so that we know
that we can anticipate when wildfires are coming, so that both
the technology as well as undergrounding, are hopeful
improvements for California and States like it.
Senator Feinstein. Thank you. Senator Collins.
WEATHERIZATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
Senator Collins. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Welcome, Madam Secretary. I want to talk to you about the
importance of the Weatherization Assistance Program. In my
State two-thirds of the homes use heating oil to stay warm. And
just last week the cost of a gallon of heating oil exceeded $6.
That is a record high that I have never seen in our State, and
it is causing tremendous hardship.
We know that the Weatherization Assistance Program makes a
big difference in States like Maine where we have some of the
oldest housing stock in the Nation. That means a lot of
uninsulated attics, and leaky windows, which causes discomfort
but also wasted energy. And that is why I have been such a
long-time supporter of the Weatherization Assistance Program.
The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law which you have mentioned,
and which I was one of ten Senators who negotiated it, included
$3.5 billion for additional funding for the Weatherization
Program.
In light of this large infusion of new funding, Senator
Reed and I, along with several of our colleagues, sent you a
letter on January 13, urging you to update the program's
regulation and guidance to ensure that the money could be spent
more efficiently and reach more people.
I regret to say that we have not yet received a response to
that January letter. And I would ask you today what
improvements you see to help simplify and enhance the
effectiveness of the Weatherization Program?
Secretary Granholm. Thank you for that. Thank you for your
long-time support of weatherization. I agree with you about the
utter importance. There is 39 million homes that are eligible
for weatherization, and unfortunately we can only do in a given
year 35- to 40,000 of them.
And so we need--there is such a great need out there, that
big slug from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law will enable us
to do hundreds of thousands more. Here is the update, and it is
reflected in the budget. One is that as you know, many homes
aren't eligible even though their income levels of the owners
of the homes are eligible, because they may have a, you know,
un-structurally safe roof, or they may have mold.
And so part of the update reflected in this budget is
another $30 million to make homes pre-weatherization ready, so
that we can go in and do some of the structural changes on the
homes that most need it. I mean these are homes that need it
more than anything, but the regulations are such that they
haven't been eligible.
So we are doing this pre-weatherization pilot, and we want
to be able to see this expanded, we will come back and let you
all know how that works. But we are very excited about that.
Some local, and I don't know if in Maine they do, but many
States have their own pre-weatherization strategy, where they
get their own State funding for it. But it is clearly
necessary.
The second update is that, as you know, we spend a lot of
money every year on the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance
Program, or LIHEAP, and that money goes to people who are low-
income, and can't afford their bills, but often they are
probably living in homes that need weatherization, and that is
why their bills are so high.
So we are combining now that effort, so we have asked in
this budget for another $100 million to do a--focus on the
LIHEAP homes for weatherization so that we can end up as the
government saving money, but we can target the weatherization
efforts on the homes that clearly need it most.
ENERGY STORAGE TECHNOLOGIES
Senator Collins. Thank you for that update. A second issue
of great interest to me is energy storage. I was the lead
author of the Better Energy Storage Technologies Act, also
known as the BEST Act, which became law in December of 2020.
And it authorizes long-duration grid scale energy storage
demonstration projects with the goal of strengthening the
resiliency and reliability of the grid, and making it more
feasible to incorporate renewables like wind, and solar.
Again, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law included $500
million for these demonstrations. My office has been contacted
by several companies including some in Maine who are interested
in accessing this funding. And again I would point out it did
become law in December of 2020.
DOE has yet to issue any requests for information, or
otherwise provided details on how it plans to implement the
demonstration program. When can we expect to see energy storage
demonstration announcements from DOE?
Secretary Granholm. Yes.
Senator Collins. It really is the Holy Grail of
incorporating renewables, is improving storage.
Secretary Granholm. A thousand percent. Couldn't agree with
you more, and thank you again for your leadership on this. You
are absolutely correct. We had a roundtable with stakeholders
in April to be able to get feedback for how we should be
thinking about this.
There is three funded efforts that will be under that $500
million umbrella. One is demonstrations, two is an Energy
Storage Pilot Grant Program, and the third is long-duration
demonstrations. We will be issuing an RFI (Request for
Information) very soon. And I can have our team brief you on
that, or your team on it separately. We will make sure that
somebody does that, because I think it is within May we will be
issuing the first RFI.
Senator Collins. Great. Thank you.
CONSENT-BASED SITING FOR INTERIM NUCLEAR WASTE STORAGE
Senator Feinstein. Madam Secretary. Oh. Thank you made it
clear that you support safe and workable solutions dealing with
nuclear waste, and for several years we have included 20
million in appropriations for consent-based siting of the
interim nuclear waste storage. And the Department has also
requested additional information from stakeholders to develop a
plan going forward on interim waste. That is my understanding.
Can you bring us up to date and discuss how the
administration plans to break this stalemate on nuclear waste
disposal? I know there is a recent request for information, but
it has taken a long time, and I have watched literally nothing
happen.
Secretary Granholm. Well, the good news is, things are
moving. So the request for information that we issued at the
end of last year, we received over 200 responses. Now, I am not
saying that there are 200 communities that are saying, sign me
up. There may be some that were in opposition.
But we are assessing what we got back, and then we will
proceed with a funding opportunity, but here is the--we will
proceed; excuse me, with the next step which is to really get
honed in on who might be interested from the information we
glean.
You know, the communities that are interested in this are
going to want to know how they will be compensated for the
service to the Nation of being able to store this fuel safely.
And so the first step is to get this RFI, and understand what
they are doing, then we will do a next step on that to hone it
in, that will happen I think in the summer.
And so we will be proceeding, it is our determination to
have this issue resolved as well from an interim basis, which
is what the step is we are talking about. And so we are
enthused by the conversations that we have had with a number of
communities.
Senator Feinstein. Thank you. Senator, any other questions?
OFFSHORE WIND TECHNOLOGY
Senator Collins. I do. Thank you very much Madam Chair.
Madam Secretary, we have discussed previously a world-class
consortium led by the University of Maine in floating offshore
wind technology. I have worked with the university for many
years on this project. I am very excited about it.
The university is pioneering a new era of energy
independence by harnessing powerful, deepwater offshore winds
through one of the Energy Department's offshore wind
demonstration projects. The advantage of offshore wind is you
can place the turbines far enough offshore so you can't see
them from the shore. And we are working with--the university is
working with our fishing industry to make sure we are not
interfering there.
But once completed, this project, which is known as Aqua
Ventus, will deploy the Nation's first floating, deepwater
offshore wind turbines off the Coast of Maine. And in my State
alone the offshore wind industry has the potential to support
an annual average of more than 2,000 jobs which is very
exciting. I want to urge you to focus on this kind of
technology. The floating, deepwater, offshore wind technology
which is being developed at the University of Maine, in
addition to the work the Department is doing on conventional
fixed-bottom offshore wind projects.
How is the Department prioritizing the advancement of
domestic, innovative, clean energy technologies, particularly
in the floating offshore wind space?
Secretary Granholm. Yes. Thanks for this too. I share your
enthusiasm about offshore wind, and the University of Maine,
honestly, has been doing some amazing work, not just in
offshore wind, but in materials, and you know, it is--you have
got a great university there.
We are excited both about offshore and fixed-bottom.
Offshore I mean--Senator Feinstein knows this too--will be
particularly relevant for the Pacific Coast as well since we
have such--there is such a steep drop in the shoreline, it is
not graduated like it is on much of the Atlantic Coast.
So the technology that is being developed and that it will
be the first offshore wind platform everyone will be watching
and learning from. We just came from--and I just came from an
offshore wind conference on the Atlantic, in New Jersey, where
the offshore wind world was there looking at both these
technologies, and prioritizing both of them.
Obviously it is a little--we have a lot of European input,
because Europe has been much more advanced in deploying
offshore wind technology, both floating and fixed-bottom. And
so we are learning from them, and we are learning from what our
own great minds at the University of Maine are producing. We
look forward to the continued relationship with the University
of Maine on this, because you are at the forefront.
Senator Collins. Thank you. Madam Chair, would you mind if
I ask one more question?
Senator Feinstein. Go ahead.
ADVANCED MANUFACTURING
Senator Collins. Thank you. You actually anticipated, in
many ways, my next question. And it has to do with advanced
composite materials and manufacturing methods, including large-
scale additive manufacturing, and the manufacturing of bio-
based composites, because they really have the potential to
revolutionize our manufacturing sector.
And I appreciate the fact that there is more than $582
million for advanced manufacturing in the Department's budget
request. Starting in fiscal year 2019, DOE awarded $20 million
in funding to support a truly innovative collaboration between
the University of Maine, and Oak Ridge National Laboratory. And
through this partnership, the University of Maine has secured
the world's largest 3D printer, and recently printed the
world's largest 3D printed boat, at 25 feet and 5,000 pounds.
They also are working with the Department of Defense to
produce vessels that could be used to transport cargo for our
Armed Forces. And this is a very exciting collaboration between
one of our national labs and the University of Maine. And the
great thing about it, is not only does it produce innovation,
but it supports job growth in the forest products industry,
manufacturing composites, wind, and boat building.
Could you discuss how the Department plans to maintain and
foster these kinds of collaborations between our national labs
and universities that will help us maintain America's
leadership in advanced manufacturing?
Secretary Granholm. Yes. Thank you for that too. You know,
again pointing to the University of Maine as leading the way.
But the notion that you have a full spectrum, I mean the Oak
Ridge National Lab which has this great expertise in additive
manufacturing, and the fact that the University is supplying
also next-generation talent.
So it is really a full spectrum. And that Oak Ridge also
works--it is a facility that works with the private sector as
well, having a great manufacturing site there that allows for
them to be able to take advantage of their additive
manufacturing their 3D printing machines.
Just to link this conversation with the previous question--
--
Senator Feinstein. I am sorry. Let me interrupt you.
Secretary Granholm. We are way over.
Senator Feinstein. You are not using the microphone.
Secretary Granholm. Is that better, maybe?
Senator Feinstein. Yes.
Secretary Granholm. Just to link with the previous--because
the 3D printing of wind turbine blades, for example, using bio-
based materials, we will be able to make sure that the life
cycle of wind turbine blades means that it can be recycled
eventually. So the combination of all of these technologies is
where the DOE sweet spot is, and being able to ensure that
next-generation students, the STEM (Science, Technology,
Engineering, and Mathematics) students that we need for our
labs, and for our scientific endeavors see it in action. And so
we are excited about that too.
Senator Collins. Thank you very much. Thank you, Madam
Chairwoman.
Senator Feinstein. Thank you, Senator.
HANFORD SITE
Senator Murray, welcome.
Senator Murray. Thank you, Chair Feinstein.
Senator Granholm, welcome to you. You know, your Department
is responsible for so many critical programs across the
country, and in my home State of Washington, but I want to
focus my questions on one today, and that is the Hanford site.
As I have told you, and Director Young, and other members of
this administration repeatedly, the Federal Government has a
moral and legal obligation to clean up the Hanford site, and
failure to adequately fund the mission there really jeopardizes
that promise.
The fiscal year 2022 Omnibus provided $2.6 billion for the
site. Your Department's fiscal year 2023 request proposes
cutting funding for the site by $172 million. I know the
administration did not use the fiscal year 2022 enacted levels
in developing its request, but the fiscal year 2023 request
represents cuts from the fiscal year 2021 enacted levels as
well. And it also fails to meet the funding needs that the
Department itself, as identified at the site.
One area that really illustrates that disconnect is the
River Corridor, and other cleanup operations account. The
Department's 2022 Hanford Lifecycle Report projected that this
account needed $261.5 million to keep pace with the Tri-Party
Agreement's milestones. But your fiscal year 2023 Budget only
requests 135 million for that account. Do you believe that
request is adequate?
Secretary Granholm. I look forward to working with you on
this. I know that we need to fund the commitments.
Senator Murray. Well, how did you get to that request? It
is half of what the Department says is required.
Secretary Granholm. I understand. I understand. It is
just--honestly, it is a question of balancing out what our
numbers are across the whole environmental management
portfolio, it is a $7 billion----
Senator Murray. Well, I assure you at the site numbers--it
is not just numbers.
Secretary Granholm. And I totally understand that.
Senator Murray. This is about an incredibly important site
in this country.
Secretary Granholm. Yes.
Senator Murray. And we have a requirement to make sure we
clean that up.
Secretary Granholm. Yes. Yes, I know. And I so appreciate
your advocacy on this, and I look forward to visiting. I am
sorry that my hit----
Senator Murray. It is more than advocacy, it is an
obligation.
Secretary Granholm. It is. I hear you. I hear you, and I
agree with you.
Senator Murray. Okay. Well, let me ask you about Building
324, because cleanup of that site is extremely important to the
Hanford communities. Fiscal year 2023 was supposed to fund the
infrastructure needed to start cleanup beneath that building.
Your request would not support that work. Does fiscal year 2023
request just kick the can down the road on cleanup of Building
324?
Secretary Granholm. We will maintain Building 324, and that
should be included in the next budget. We are not at all blind
to how important it is to address it. It should be safe for
this year. It will be maintained and safeguarded but, again,
this was a question of balancing the funding priorities, and
so.
Senator Murray. Well, the High-Level Waste Facility is only
at the beginning of its significant lifecycle costs. In fiscal
year 2023 the Office of River Protection is slated to get ready
for the resumption of construction at that facility. Now,
according to the Department's estimates, the facility's funding
requirements are going to double between 2023 and 2024, and
continue to grow throughout the rest of this decade.
Does your fiscal year 2023 request adequately support the
facility's coming funding needs?
Secretary Granholm. We believe this is a good budget, we
believe this will make sure that the site is safe, and we
continue to do work on it. However, we acknowledge that there
are differing equities, and points of view, and we look forward
to working with you on it.
Senator Murray. Okay. Well, explain to us why the
Department proposes major increases for nuclear weapons and
naval reactors, but cuts cleanup sites like Hanford?
Secretary Granholm. Again, this is a question of balancing
equities across all of the portfolios at DOE, we believe
Hanford is extremely important, it is the largest cleanup site
that we have. We have other cleanup sites as you know, across.
We want to make sure that we do right by the whole of the
budget. And so it is a balance.
Senator Murray. Well, Madam Secretary; Madam Chairwoman,
fiscal year 2024, is going to be really critical for this site,
and I am really disappointed by this year's request. We have
got to do better than this.
Secretary Granholm. I understand.
Senator Feinstein. Thank you, Senator. Senator Hoeven.
CARBON CAPTURE UTILIZATION AND STORAGE
Senator Hoeven. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I appreciate
your holding the hearing today. Thank you so much.
Jen, good to see you again--or excuse me--Secretary, I am
sorry. Good to see you, Secretary. Thanks for being here. I
want to start right out on CCUS (Carbon Capture, Utilization,
and Storage). As you know it is something you and I have talked
about many times.
In terms of getting these projects going and, of course, we
appreciate you coming out to our State last year, as a matter
of fact, on Monday of this week I was part of dedicating the
purchase of the Coal Creek Coal-Fired Electric Plant, 1100-
megawatt plant which is quite a large plant that was purchased
by Rainbow Energy, a remarkably innovative energy company in
North Dakota, from Great River Energy, a Minnesota-based
utility, cooperative.
And so they are moving forward, and of course part of their
plan is to do CCUS, to have CCUS attached. They also have a
biofuels plant on site where they have already started the
carbon capture piece as well, and they want to do the carbon
capture on the coal-fired electric plant.
Not too far from them is another facility, Minnkota,
another cooperative-owned, large coal-fired electric power
plant, and they have what is called Project Tundra, which is
their plan to put carbon capture on their coal-fired electric
plant. And then not too far, to the west of them, we have the
Dakota Gasification Company, which actually converts lignite
coal to synthetic natural gas. They already do carbon capture
for tertiary oil recovery, and have been doing that for some
time, started that back when I was governor.
Now, for the rest of their CO2 stream, they
already separate the CO2, 50 percent of that stream
goes downhole for tertiary recovery. The other 50 percent, now
they are actually building the tertiary storage piece for that,
and we will do geologic storage--not tertiary--geologic storage
for the remaining 50 percent of their CO2 stream to
capture the 45Q tax credit; so that is what is going on.
Now, what we need there are three things that we have put
in place that we need your help on, to keep these projects
moving. The first is the front-end investment funds, so DOE
grants that help put the equipment on these plants to capture
the CO2. That is one.
LOAN PROGRAMS OFFICE INVESTMENT IN CARBON CAPTURE AND UTILIZATION
SEQUESTRATION PROJECTS
Number two, the loan guarantees for the investment they
have to make, so that they can finance it on favorable terms
for the equipment that it takes to separate the CO2.
So first, to help of the front-end funding; two, the loan
guarantees, both through DOE, but also through RUS if they are
cooperative; and then making sure that they are capturing the
45Q tax credit.
So one, we need your help to do this, and we need your
commitment to access these programs in a timely and efficient
way to make this happen. This is about cracking the code on
carbon capture and leading the way forward.
So tell me about your commitment. You are willing to stop,
and what you can do to make this happen sooner versus later.
Secretary Granholm. Great. Thank you.
Senator Hoeven. And accessing these programs.
Secretary Granholm. Yes, yes. I appreciate it. I mean
first, as you are aware, the biggest opportunity is through the
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, a $10 billion commitment to
carbon capture and sequestration obviously, North Dakota and
Wyoming, hugely ripe States for that, given your geology.
Senator Hoeven. Really, the only two States with all the
regulatory of--approvals to do it, both State and Federal EPA
(Environmental Protection Agency) approvals to do it. So we are
ready to go.
Secretary Granholm. Primacy. Yes, we know, we know. And so
you have got great examples of projects. We expect that we will
start to roll out the request for information and the funding
opportunity announcements closer to the end of this year. So
look forward to that.
The Loan Programs Office too, we have an additional request
in our budget because they have, even though they have a $40
billion budget they have got billion worth of requests for the
Loan Program Office services. So hopefully you can help us on
that side on the budget.
And the 45Q tax credit, I am just hopeful that we are able
to increase the value of that tax credit through additional tax
incentive, upping the number so that it becomes really
commercially smart to--and get rewarded by the private sector
to be able to capture the CO2. So on both--on all
three I am bullish about being able to be very helpful.
Senator Hoeven. Appreciate that. Also, as you know, we have
to be able to capture and put the CO2 downhole through the
Energy Environmental Research Center, which you have visited at
the University of North Dakota they do--they have a partnership
with DOE.
Secretary Granholm. Yes.
Senator Hoeven. Called PCOR, which is the Plains
CO2 Reduction Partnership, PCOR. Very important that
we continue that partnership, and that funding continues so
that they can continue to do the work, so that we can put that
CO2 downhole. So that is both funded in our approach
budget, and it is also those contracts are in place, we need
you to make sure your people are working to get them the
funding so they can continue to do that part of the equation
too.
Secretary Granholm. Great. I know they really enjoy working
with them so, yes.
Senator Hoeven. It has been a good partnership.
Secretary Granholm. Yes.
FERC APPROVAL PROCESS
Senator Hoeven. The last thing is, can you help us expedite
FERC (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission) so that we can get
both pipelines to move natural gas around the country, very
important right now, as well as LNG (Liquefied natural gas)
facilities. Is there something you can do to expedite those
approvals, or help expedite those approvals with FERC, we need
that transmission badly.
Secretary Granholm. Well, we know that we have right now,
in terms of terminals. Are you talking about LNG?
Senator Hoeven. Well, I am talking both pipelines to move
LNG.
Secretary Granholm. Pipelines, all right.
Senator Hoeven. So we don't have stranded natural gas at a
time when we need it, as well as the LNG. Plus, actually the
pipelines are really important nationally and internationally,
the LNG facility.
Secretary Granholm. Yes. I mean, we want to make sure that
there is not flaring, and so you have to make sure that the
associated gas is captured and moved. So yes, FERC has already,
I think approved 12 pipeline projects just this year, and they
are well aware of the importance of this, especially given the
geopolitical concerns that everyone shares about the increase
in fuel costs, but also the pulling back of fossil fuels, and
the cost, as a result of the war.
And our allies needing liquefied natural gas as well, so we
have permitted at DOE an additional four terminals to be able
to send liquefied natural gas to Non-Free Trade Agreement
entities, like Europe. And I know FERC has also permitted, FERC
and DOE have permitted another 30 billion cubic feet per day,
of liquefied natural gas permission, although some of those
terminals are not being built yet.
Senator Hoeven. I apologize for going over my time. Thank
you, Madam Chair, I appreciate it.
Senator Feinstein. Based on time of arrival, Senator
Hagerty is next.
Senator Hagerty. Thank you, Senator Feinstein, for holding
this hearing.
Secretary Granholm, thank you for being here today.
Secretary, last year you divested a large financial stake in
Proterra, an electric bus manufacturing company; is that
correct?
Secretary Granholm. Correct.
Senator Hagerty. Why did you divest it?
Secretary Granholm. Why did I divest?
Senator Hagerty. Mm-hmm.
Secretary Granholm. Because I was appointed, every
appointee has to divest of individual stocks.
Senator Hagerty. They have to divest for what reason?
Secretary Granholm. For ethics reasons. You want to make
sure that if you are involved in any decisions related to, for
example, electrification of buses that there is not a conflict
so I divested early.
Senator Hagerty. I appreciate your executive experience,
and I appreciate the fact that you undertook your
responsibilities in a very serious manner, to avoid even the
appearance of a conflict of interest, in this case, where you
had responsibility.
I want to ask you another question. Do you know, Hunter
Biden?
Secretary Granholm. I have met him.
Senator Hagerty. Have you ever had an opportunity, or your
staff had an opportunity to discuss energy policy with Hunter
Biden, given his experience in the space.
Secretary Granholm. No.
Senator Hagerty. Let me turn to another set of questions.
Do you think it was appropriate for Vice President Biden to
conduct foreign policy in Ukraine while an influential
Ukrainian energy company called Burisma, was paying his son a
million a year to serve on his Board? Or while a Russian
billionaire was providing millions of dollars to Hunter Biden,
at the same time that Hunter Biden was apparently paying his
father's business--or living expenses.
Secretary Granholm. With respect, sir, I am here on the
Department of Energy's budget. I am not sure what relevance
that has to the budget. And I also know that President Biden is
an incredibly ethical human being and would never do anything
that would demonstrate a conflict of interest.
Senator Hagerty. Well, as a member of his cabinet, and
somebody who obviously takes conflicts of interest very
seriously, I wanted to see what your opinion was. I have got
another couple of items to ask you about. Hunter Biden rode Air
Force 2 to China to conduct business deals with CCP (Chinese
Communist Party)-aligned figures, at the same time that his
father was meeting with and conducting foreign policy there
with China.
Does that seem right to you? Would you have allowed that if
you were Vice President?
Secretary Granholm. Sir, I am not here to opine on
something that might have happened in the previous
administration, I am here to talk about the Department of
Energy budget.
Senator Hagerty. Well, in this administration, in 2021,
while his father was President, Hunter Biden still owned an
interest in BHR Partners, he owned that in partnership with
Chinese Communist Party entities, and right after his dad,
President Biden met with Xi Jinping, it was announced by Hunter
Biden's lawyer that he divested his interest in that entity.
Yet no one has given the details about when he divested it, how
much profit he made. Do you think that is appropriate?
Secretary Granholm. Sir, I have no information about any of
the things that you are talking about.
Senator Hagerty. Well, let us just go through the basic
facts, because I think you do appreciate the importance of
ethics in government, the importance of avoiding the appearance
of conflicts of interest, but we have emails and photographs
that show that President Biden, while he was Vice President,
running U.S. Foreign Policy in Ukraine, met with several of his
son, Hunter's, business associates including a Burisma
executive, the Ukrainian energy company that, again, paid
hundreds of millions of dollars. You have got $3.5 million
payment from a Russian billionaire that happened around the
same time. You have got Hunter traveling to China on Air Force
2, conducting business there while his father is Vice
President.
I mean, all of this I would think is very concerning
particularly given the fact that it looks like there is a mix
of personal and official business here. I don't think that you
would want to see that. Would you allow personal and business--
and business interests to be mixed in that regard?
Secretary Granholm. Sir, I am not going to, by the
assumptions in the question.
Senator Hagerty. Well, I appreciate the fact that you have
taken your ethical responsibilities seriously here. I think the
American public is very concerned about what may have
transpired. And I think the Biden White House should be
transparent to the American people about this. I appreciate
your willingness to act in a transparent fashion, to deal with
any potential conflict of interest on your own.
I think you set an example for this administration. I wish
the administration would live by its own dictates, and actually
be responsible in their own disclosures. Thank you very much.
Senator Feinstein. Senator Tester.
CLEAN ENERGY AGRICULTURE
Senator Tester. Well, Thank you, Chairwoman Feinstein.
I appreciate the opportunity to visit with Secretary
Granholm. I want to get back to energy. Diesel fuel in Montana
is a $5.44 a gallon, okay, there is a little tax on that, but
it is $5.44 a gallon, which is a lot. And we have got a
situation right now where energy companies are making record
profits, they are doing stock buybacks, they are charging the
hell out of the consumer, and quite frankly blaming a lot of
different issues.
One fact is, is that if they quit using this war as an
opportunity to jack up prices, I think we would see a better
situation for the consumers. We also see last year, for
example, everything west of the Mississippi being in a drought,
everything east of Mississippi had more water than they needed.
I happen to be one of those guys west of Mississippi and we
had the worst crop we have ever had in the history, since my
grandfather homesteaded it in 1910. We didn't cut but a small,
small fraction of what we normally cut, harvest.
So climate change is a problem. And choices for consumers a
problem right now, because quite frankly, I can't put anything
but diesel in my truck, or my tractor, and I would like to be
able to run it on batteries, okay. I would like to be able to
run my field tractor on batteries.
Now, this isn't a 30-horse tractor, this is a 375-horse
tractor. I would like to be able to run it on batteries. I
would like to be able to take my farm at some point in time and
take it off the grid, and have solar, and wind, and put that
into batteries and be able to run my farm off batteries, okay,
because I got great wind resources, trust me, where I live.
The question becomes, you as a visionary, somebody who
takes your job quite seriously as Secretary of Energy is: What
does this budget do to move the ball forward in new generation
that doesn't add to climate change, in battery technology, in
carbon sequestration, to try to be better and cheaper with that
on existing plants, in making nuclear waste benign?
Enlighten me, because I am going to tell you, I am 65 years
old, I have got about another 8 or 10 years left on the farm,
God willing. And in that years I want to have a tractor that I
can't hear, because it has got an electric motor.
[Laughter.]
Secretary Granholm. I want you to have that. And I think
you will have that. Really, because we have this first of all
technology is the answer, right? We are focused on so much of
the advances you have just described, whether it is on battery,
or on wind, and renewables, or on carbon capture sequestration,
or on bio fuels, or on advanced vehicle technology, all of that
is encapsulated within the energy efficiency and renewable
energy increase that we are asking for this committee to
support, and for the whole budget.
But it is also reflected in the Bipartisan Infrastructure
Law that that you were supportive of as well. So carbon capture
for example, there is $10 billion in that Bipartisan
Infrastructure Law for carbon capture.
Senator Tester. So the question is, the real question here
is, we have made some investments but the status quo continues
to be $5.44 diesel fuel, the status quo is not an affordable
battery right now, it is not a battery big enough, it is not
about the--there is all sorts of problems there. The status quo
is carbon sequestration costs a bunch of money. If we can lower
those costs we can lower costs for consumers
Does this budget have adequate dollars in it to invest in
the kind of things that we need for 21st century energy
portfolio?
Secretary Granholm. Yes. It absolutely does. It invests in
the research, and deployment, and development that will get us
away from that. I mean, does this bring down the price of gas
right now? No. But it invests in the technology that will get
us to the point where you can have a tractor that you can't
hear.
Senator Tester. Well, I can say this, it doesn't matter
what field you are in, if there is competition in the
marketplace the consumer gets a fair shake, and I have got a
number of bills in a meat packing industry, but you are not
Secretary of AG (Agriculture), you are Secretary of Energy.
The truth is, there is no competition there. And I don't
think there is near enough competition in the energy sector.
You know, if we can develop some of these resources that, by
the way, benefit both carbon-based fuels, and non-carbon-based
fuels, I think it is a step in the right direction, and you are
the right person to do that job. Thank you very much for doing
it.
Secretary Granholm. Thank you, sir.
Senator Feinstein. Thank you, Senator.
The Chair is pleased to call on the Ranking Member. Senator
Kennedy, welcome.
THE ADMINISTRATION'S ENERGY POLICY
Senator Kennedy. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. I am
sorry I was late, I was in another Committee.
Welcome, Madam Secretary. I have still got a lot of work to
do on your proposed budget, but I just wanted to offer a few
top line comments. After 15 months I think we--any fair-minded
person who has paid attention, would have a general idea of the
principles of the Biden administration. And it seems to me that
the Biden administration believes in bigger government, it
believes in higher taxes, it believes in more regulation, it
believes in more debt, based on the President's proposed
budget, it believes in a weaker military.
Not by its words but by its actions, I think it believes in
higher energy prices. I think that the Biden administration
hates fossil fuels on which, at the moment, the greatest
economy in all of human history depends. I think the Biden
administration thinks that is a mistake. And I think the Biden
administration thinks that higher energy prices will somehow
wean the American people off of fossil fuels.
The attitude seems to be, not in words but in deed, that we
can see the future better than the American people because we
are experts, and the American people just need to take their
medicine with these higher energy prices, and in the long run
they will be better off because we will use them to get rid of
fossil fuels.
Now, let me talk about your budget. It is not going to pass
in its current form, and I think you know that. I support wind
and power, but I am an all-of-the-above energy type guy. I
think eventually we should, and I don't mean sometime in the
next century, we should realistically ask ourselves: When are
wind and power going to be able to stand on their own feet
without subsidies?
I also believe in nuclear power. I can tell from your
budget that at least some of your work colleagues at the
Department don't. I also believe in thermo--or in hydroelectric
power. I believe in hydrogen. I have said it, but I am going to
say it again, I believe in nuclear, and I think you should
ignore the--I think it is clean energy, and the new technology
with these small modular nuclear reactors has great potential.
You shortchange them in your proposed budget. That tells me a
lot.
But I also believe in fossil fuels, and I think it is
wholly unrealistic, certainly now, certainly for the
foreseeable future, and maybe forever to think that this world
can run without fossil fuels. I am very disappointed in your
budget, at its lack of emphasis on geoengineering. I know your
work colleagues don't like geoengineering because they think it
takes our eye off the ball of climate change.
But I think that is a mistake. I think climate change is
real, but I think it will be solved or lessened by American
ingenuity. It won't be done by the Federal Government. I am
also disappointed in the fact that the Department--and that is
why I say it is clear to me the Biden administration believes
in a weaker military--your decision not to fund one of the
major weapons that the United States has at a time when our
security is clearly threatened. Now, I have given you a
mouthful.
It is good to see you, Madam Chair. I am sorry I am late.
Please don't construe it as a sign of disrespect.
I would like to hear what you have to say.
Secretary Granholm. Great. Thank you. Let me focus on a
couple of things I think we can agree on. One is the importance
of nuclear power, and how it is an essential part of our clean
baseload power, and we ought to be keeping the existing fleet
afloat, and we just issued $6 million in civilian--$6 billion
in civilian nuclear credits to be able to do that. And to
hopefully have as many of them stay operating as possible.
But we have also got a $2.5 billion commitment in advanced,
nuclear reactors, as part of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law
column of our budget, that is number one. So we agree on that,
and we want to continue funding the advanced nuclear reactors.
Number two, we agree on hydroelectric power, and we want to
see more dams, and we want to make sure that we are taking
advantage of a form of energy that is clean, dispatchable
baseload power. I would also throw geothermal in there in that
same sort of category. With respect to wind and solar, your
question about when they become, essentially, reliable baseload
power, is all contingent upon making sure that technology of
batteries becomes cheaper, we have a goal, a earth shot of
getting down the price of long-duration storage by 90 percent.
And when we get down the price of long-duration storage,
essentially wind and power become clean, dispatchable baseload
power.
Here is where we don't agree. This administration believes
in the importance of decarbonizing the fossil fuel industry. We
know that we have gotten here for the past 120 years based upon
fossil fuels, we acknowledge that. And we also know that
technology, for the next hundred years, can power us going
forward, decarbonizing is really important. So we agree on
hydrogen, for example, and that Bipartisan Infrastructure Law
invests $9 billion in hydrogen hubs. And I think one of them
that is going to vie for it is in your region.
Senator Kennedy. Mm-hmm.
Secretary Granholm. But we make sure that we can
decarbonize natural gas, for example, and couple it with carbon
capture and sequestration. We are also big believers in the
technology associated with direct air capture, and other carbon
dioxide removal strategies. That is another $3.5 billion in the
budget.
Senator Kennedy. Do you mind if I stop you and ask you
question about LNG. I saw the President's statement. I want you
to correct me if I am wrong. The President about a month ago,
maybe a few weeks ago, time runs together, said: I want to
expand LNG exports. But then I looked at the fine print of his
statement. He said, but I want the plants that produce the LNG
to be powered only with clean energy.
And then he said: But I am not going to change the
regulatory environment for oil and gas. And shortly after that
he came out with new proposed rules for NEPA (National
Environmental Policy Act) that will make it impossible to build
a pipeline. Don't you think that is misleading?
Secretary Granholm. I am not sure exactly what statement
you are referring to. But he did go to Europe and said that: We
will provide another 15 billion cubic meters per year, we will
increase our partnership with them. So as a result the
Department of Energy has permitted four additional LNG
terminals, allowing their volumes to go to Non-Free Trade
Agreement countries in a way to fulfill that.
The Department of Energy and the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission have both permitted another 30 billion cubic feet of
export with the----
Senator Kennedy. But don't you realize the impact that the
proposed changes in NEPA are going to have on the oil and gas
industry?
Secretary Granholm. The proposed changes in NEPA are to
make sure--I am not in the EPA, it is not my call, but----
Senator Kennedy. I know. I know. But it is sure going to
impact you.
Secretary Granholm. The intent there is to continue to use
technology to clean up fossil fuel emissions like methane, and
so making sure that we have got facilities that are not
contributing to the problem, but that are using technology
which they are excited to do. I mean many in the natural gas
world really do want to be able to deploy the technology that
button down pipelines, and make sure that they aren't
contributing further to methane leakage.
Senator Kennedy. But we tried to make NEPA a little more
palatable, not get rid of it, just say you have got to give us
a decision in a couple of years. In the Infrastructure Bill
which the President is very proud of, and he has talked about
it and taken for credit for it, and that is not a pejorative
statement, every chance he has got.
But then you turn right around and undo everything that was
done in the Infrastructure Bill with these new proposed rules
for NEPA. And I know it is coming from EPA.
But Madam Secretary, you are extraordinarily intelligent, I
have watched your career for years, you know as well as I do
the impact this is going to have on LNG plants, on pipelines,
on fossil fuel infrastructure. It is going to slow it down to
the pace of an amoeba.
Secretary Granholm. With respect, I fully disagree.
Senator Kennedy. Okay.
Secretary Granholm. I think that you can have----
[Laughter.]
Secretary Granholm. I think you can accelerate permitting
and still respect the environment, and not slow down the pace
of energy production.
Senator Kennedy. Thank you, Madam Secretary. It is nice to
see you again.
Secretary Granholm. Nice to see you, too.
Senator Kennedy. I am going to call you about Mexico.
Secretary Granholm. Okay.
Senator Kennedy. They are confiscating our assets. We need
to stop them.
Secretary Granholm. All right, we are on it. I hear you.
Senator Feinstein. Senator Shaheen, welcome.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Madam Chair; and Ranking
Member. And thank you, Secretary Granholm, so nice to see you.
Secretary Granholm. Thank you.
ENERGY PRICES
Senator Shaheen. And thank you for the great work that you
and the Department of Energy are doing. We have all these
appropriations subcommittee hearings going on at the same time,
so getting from one to the other is challenging.
But I want to start with what I think is the biggest
concern on many of my constituents' minds, and I am sure you
are hearing this around the country, and that is the high cost
of energy, because of the pandemic, and supply chain issues
created there because of the war in Ukraine, we are seeing the
costs of Energy go up in ways that people were not expecting.
So what can we do to address that?
Secretary Granholm. Thank you for the question. I mean the
President is obsessed about this. You know, he desperately, as
like everybody, wants to make sure that people who go to get
gasoline at the pump are not just shocked, but hurt by it,
especially people who are on fixed and moderate incomes.
So the President has used the biggest tool in our arsenal,
which is the strategic petroleum reserve to try to make up for
some of those barrels that have been pulled off the market
because of the Russian invasion. So Russia right now has about
1.5 million barrels per day, to 2 million off the market. As a
result of the United States, rightfully saying, we are not
going to finance Putin's war, Canada same thing, Europe is on
the verge of deciding the same issue.
If they too decide that they will not take Russian oil that
could get as much as 3 million barrels per day off the market.
That supply constraint is what is causing prices to increase,
which is why the President said, we are going to issue a
million barrels per day from our strategic petroleum reserve,
to try to stabilize the market in as much as he is also calling
for increased production from the oil and gas industry.
The Energy Information Agency is saying that by the end of
this year that the oil and gas industry in the U.S. will be
producing another million barrels per day, but we have still
got a gap, which is why we are calling for all oil producing
nations to step up at this moment and to not finance Russia's
war. So that is number one.
Number two, the President has also called upon an increase,
for example, in ethanol blend so that we reduce demand of oil
increase biofuels. It is a smaller strategy, but he is looking
at every way he possibly can to try to address the problem.
Ultimately though, as you know, the solution lies in moving
to clean energy. And so, even as we are increasing supply right
now, we have to accelerate the move and the technologies which
is what this budget represents, to clean.
Senator Shaheen. Well, Vladimir Putin is certainly helping
move us more expeditiously to address energy in a way that
helps us deal with the climate change. So in the long--in the
short term, however, as we said, there are significant
challenges for families. And so anything we can do to help
address that I think is going to be very important.
ENERGY-SAVINGS PERFORMANCE CONTRACTS
One of the things that I have worked on, and that we have
discussed in the past over the years, is how we address energy
efficiency. It is the cheapest fastest way to deal with our
energy needs. One of the biggest--as you know, the largest
single energy user in the United States is the Federal
Government, and one of the best things we could do is to
promote energy-savings performance contracts within the Federal
Government.
Now, because of the way CBO (Congressional Budget Office)
scores those contracts, it is challenging for Departments to
use those because they are not scored as savings, they are
scored as costs. I think we ought to change that. So far I have
not been able to convince my colleagues that that is something
that makes sense.
But can you talk about, one of the things we saw during the
Obama administration was a performance contracting challenge
that resulted in 340 performance contracts, and $8 billion in
energy savings. Can you talk about the possibility of doing
that kind of challenge again?
Secretary Granholm. I would love to work with you on this,
because I think it is so important to be able to incentivize
the installation of American-made products that end up reducing
energy. It is such a triple win. And I think that particular
challenge, if my numbers are right, created more than 30,000
jobs in American companies. So it is a win, win, win all the
way around. And I would love to work with you on that, because
I love challenges, and I love to incentivize that, and I think
that challenge was particularly effective. I would love to see
it happen again.
Senator Shaheen. Great. Thank you. I look forward to doing
that. We will follow up with the Department.
Secretary Granholm. Okay, great.
WEATHERIZATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
Senator Shaheen. The one other question I had was, in too
many years, and the past few we have seen funding for the
Weatherization Program, and for State energy offices be slowed
down. Can you talk about when our State energy offices can
expect those dollars, and whether we expect them to be
distributed on time this year?
Secretary Granholm. Yes. We are going to distribute them
definitely on time. I just want to make sure I get you the
right numbers here. So right, in April we released a request
for information on the--well that was on the building codes
piece of things. Wait a second.
So we have $500 million through the State Energy Program
for the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. I know that they are
working on the request for information so that they can shape
the funding opportunities, some of that is going to be formula
I believe, as well. We want to get as much of this out this
year as, possible while we are working on all of the other big
slugs of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. This is a hugely
important one. We are working with States as well.
You know, I am a big believer in--as former governor, I
know you are too--in the bottom-up strategies, because so many
at the local level know well how to do this, and they know what
they want to do given their assets. And so both on the State
Energy grants as well as the future-looking energy grants,
which incentivizes states to think about what additional
technologies they want to help shore up inside of their State,
to be able to create jobs in perhaps industrial clusters,
around those energy technologies to create jobs.
Both pieces of those, in addition to what we have known as
Community LIHEP (Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program
(LIHEAP)), which is getting--communities that are at the back
of the line often, who want--who have a strategy of, for
example, weatherizing a community to be provided technical
assistance to navigate the Federal system to be able to access
some of these grant opportunities that they might not otherwise
have the technical ability to do all three of those.
Senator Shaheen. Great, thank you. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
Senator Feinstein. I want to thank you for being here, we
very much appreciate it.
And the hearing record will remain open for 10 days.
Senators may submit additional information or questions for the
record, within that time if they would like. The Subcommittee
requests that all responses to questions be provided within 30
days of receipt.
[The following questions were submitted to the Department,
but the questions were not answered by press time.]
Questions Submitted to Hon. Jennifer Granholm
Questions Submitted by Senator Dianne Feinstein
Gasoline Reserve
Question. DOE operates the Northeast Gasoline Supply Reserve
established in 2014. The reserve was created to provide back-up
gasoline and petroleum supplies in the event of a severe winter storm
or other disruption.
To date, the Northeast Gasoline Supply Reserve has never been used
and costs taxpayers over $20 million in annual appropriations.
According to a DOE study, operating costs for the gasoline reserve are
more than double what some other countries pay for their gasoline
reserves.
Do you agree that the Gasoline Reserve has never been used?
Do you agree that the Gasoline Reserve is more expensive than other
similar reserves?
Do you agree that the Gasoline Reserve would only supply the region
with \1/2\ to 1\1/2\ days of gasoline?
If Congress were to sell the Gasoline Reserve would the Department
oppose?
______
Questions Submitted by Senator John Kennedy
Question. Are emergency releases from SPR the Administration's
long-term plan to combat rising gas prices? If the Administration's
energy policies continue to choke out the fossil fuel industry and
American's use 20 million barrels of oil per day, what is the plan for
when SPR runs out of oil? Is there a plan to refill SPR after the
emergency releases are conducted?
What is the Department doing to ensure our energy grid is secure?
How can Americans be assured that their lights will continue to turn on
and gas will continue to be at the pumps?
Have you or anyone from your department reached out to the
Department of Interior regarding leasing in the Gulf of Mexico?
Will you commit to working with other agencies to help reduce
record high gas/energy prices?
Do you support expanding the use of natural gas domestically--
especially natural gas that is produced here in the United States?
Can you speak on the importance of natural gas, and how it has
helped the US lower emissions for 15 straight years?
Some of the cleanest oil and gas production comes from the Gulf of
Mexico, with that in mind why does the Administration beg countries
with much lower emission standards to increase production? Does China
care about net-zero emissions by 2030?
Environmental Management (Cleanup)
Question. Under the Environmental Management (Cleanup) program the
request includes a 599 percent increase for mission support.
Can you please describe, in some detail, how this funding will be
used and why it requires such a large increase?
Will you work with myself and others in the Louisiana delegation on
potential financial assistance--multi-year funding that has already
been fully appropriated--for CCS projects?
Will this Administration support proposals pending in Congress to
expand the 45Q tax credit for CO2 that is sequestered?
Will you work with us, EPA, and the State of Louisiana on permits
for Class VI injection wells?
Have you given up on SMRs? Is there no more research and
development or promising technologies to pursue? I am interested to
hear your planned path forward on small modular reactors given the
budget request.
Moving to the Advanced Reactors Demonstration Program, what is the
current schedule for each of the two of the two demonstrations being
funded by the Department? Are they still on schedule for commercial
deployment in 2027 and 2028 respectively?
While I am pleased to see an increase in funding for domestic HALEU
in the budget request, the Department has yet to articulate a detailed
plan. Walk us through the Department's plan, including schedule
milestones and associated budgets for production of HALEU.
The fiscal year 2021 appropriations bill provided $75 million to
establish a uranium reserve. Similar to HALEU, most of our uranium
products come from Russia. What efforts has the Department made to
establish the uranium reserve program? What is the path forward for the
program given the budget request includes no additional funding?
Do you have a cost and schedule estimate for how long it will take
to consolidated interim storage sites to be ready to receive nuclear
fuel?
What activities related to interim storage is the Department
currently executing? How will the funds requested in fiscal year 2023
be used?
______
Questions Submitted by Senator John Hoeven
Question. The Plains CO2 Reduction Partnership, or PCOR,
is one of four Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnerships created by
the Department of Energy and administered by the Energy & Environmental
Research Center located in my State, in close alignment with the
University of Wyoming and the University of Alaska at Fairbanks. The
existing four Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnerships (RCSPs)
collectively cover most of the United States, and since their
establishment in 2003, have provided critical leadership in carbon
management.
Congress provided not less than $20 million in the final fiscal
year 2022 appropriations bill for the four RCSPs, amounting to a
minimum of $5 million to the PCOR Partnership.
Will you commit that the Department will follow Congressional
direction in promptly carrying out funds for RCSPs?
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Bill Hagerty
Question. Your budget request for fiscal year 2023 proposes to cut
the critical construction and infrastructure budget line that all 17
National Laboratories depend on to maintain their world leading
facilities by $36 million compared to what this Committee provided in
the fiscal year 2022 Omnibus Appropriations Act. This will result in
delay of major user facilities that the Department has deemed essential
for accomplishing mission and reduce effectiveness. Specifically, at
Oak Ridge National Laboratory, these cuts could reduce the number of
operating cycles at the High Flux Isotope Reactor by at least 20
percent, which will have an effect on medical isotope production and
other critical work. At the Spallation Neutron Source, the numbers of
instruments available for research would be reduced and a potential
reduction in workforce. At the same time, your budget request proposes
to increase funding for research activities that would be conducted at
these facilities.
Are you aware of this imbalance, and the potential consequences to
user facilities across the Department of Energy?
Will you commit to working with me and this Committee to strike the
right balance between research and operations at these facilities?
Question. The isotope supply for the nation--and the western
world--is at risk. Isotopes are important to our security, health,
technologies, and economy, yet recent events in Ukraine have
underscored the vulnerability of our reliance on foreign suppliers and
how the United States lacks the necessary capacity to scale up
production when the supply chain breaks down. Immediate action is
needed to ensure that the nation has a self-sufficient supply of
isotopes that is outside the influence of world events and foreign
countries
Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) is the nation's largest
producer of isotopes--materials used in applications across national
security, medicine, industry, scientific discovery, and deep space
exploration. As home to the High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR), hot cell
facilities for handling radioactive material, and a legacy of isotope
science that dates to the Manhattan Project, ORNL can produce more than
250 isotopes--an institutional strength not found anywhere else in the
Western Hemisphere. But these world-leading facilities are completely
stretched, and the Ukraine crisis and growing demand for isotopes
domestically and globally have exacerbated the situation. Immediate
expansion of capacity and capability is needed to meet current and
future needs in a manner that avoids reliance on foreign supply chains.
Do you agree that HFIR and the associated isotope production
facilities are critical to our national security to avoid reliance on
foreign supply chains of isotopes?
Does the Department support expanding ORNL's isotope production
capacity and capabilities to replace isotopes previously supplied by
Russia?
What is the Department's immediate plan to expand isotope
production capacity and capabilities in the near term?
Question. For years, Congress has provided hundreds of millions of
dollars to develop a first-of-a-kind advanced or small modular reactor.
I think you will agree with me that when an advanced reactor or a small
modular reactor is developed, we want the United States to be the one
that produces and develops that reactor. As I understand it, Congress
requires that funding grants to industry be openly competed, however,
there has not been much competition in the previous years for small
modular reactors. The Department is currently funding a single project
that was not competed. Tennessee is home to the Clinch River Site,
which is the only site that has an early permit for an advanced reactor
from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Should Congress provide funding for the Small Modular Reactor
Program in fiscal year 23, will you commit to ensuring that at least 3
awards be made, and that no more than 50 percent of the total funding
shall go to any one project?
What is occurring in other countries that is enabling SMR
technology deployment to move more quickly than here in the United
States? What are the potential consequences for the United States in
not being first? What does this mean for supply chain buildout and jobs
opportunities in the United States?
Question. In January, your Department published a Funding
Opportunity Announcement (FOA) soliciting proposals for industrial
decarbonization projects. Page 4 of the FOA contained a chart
illustrating that the refining sector is responsible for 17 percent of
all industrial emissions. Yet the word refining does not appear in the
remaining twelve pages comprising the Request for Funding. Industry
tells me that your Department specifically excluded oil refineries from
the parties eligible to apply. In other words, the refineries are
responsible for 17 percent of industrial emissions, but can't seek
Federal assistance to try to remedy the situation. During a House
Energy & Commerce Committee hearing to review the Department of Energy
fiscal year 2022 Budget, you gave response about increasing support for
the downstream energy sector.
Will you work with the Environmental Protection Agency and Small
Refinery Industry to ensure that industry to discuss suggestions to
lower gasoline prices?
Question. Under Federal law--the Manufactured Housing Improvement
Act of 2000--the HUD Code has exclusive dominion over construction and
safety standards in manufactured housing. Therefore, any energy
standards DOE develops for manufactured homes--including the ones you
are developing pursuant to the 2007 EISA law--are merely draft
standards that can't take effect unless and until adopted by HUD, after
consideration by HUD's Manufactured Housing Consensus Committee.
Can you share with the committee what specific steps you took to
consult with HUD and the Manufactured Housing Consensus Committee to
try to develop energy standards that are compatible with the HUD code
and that might have the support of HUD?
Question. Section 413 of EISA requires DOE to develop energy
efficiency standards for manufactured housing. The statute says that
DOE should use the IECC code--Except if it is not cost effective,
comparing energy savings to increased costs to the homeowner. Instead
of analyzing actual costs and burdens to actual manufactured
homebuyers, DOE's proposed rule seems to employ esoteric mathematic
concepts, including assumptions about speculative future price
increases--instead of a simple analysis of the annual cost impact on a
low or moderate income family trying to buy a manufactured home.
Therefore, can you share with this committee any analysis done by
DOE regarding (1) the projected average annual cost increase for
homeowners--resulting from increased mortgage costs directly arising
from the higher home prices that even the DOE proposed rule
acknowledges will occur. (2) The projected average increase in a down
payment requirement related to the higher home price DOE's standards
will cause. (3) The number of families that will no longer be able to
buy a manufactured home--because they will no longer qualify for a
mortgage because higher mortgage payments mean they no longer meet
mortgage debt to income underwriting requirements.
In DOE's proposed rule on this, DOE seemingly offers no evidence
that it followed the statute with regard to this requirement. The
proposed rule offers no evidence that DOE tested out each incremental
increase in energy standards to ensure that each increment meets the
test of being cost effective. Can you offer any concrete evidence to
show that you engaged in such an incremental approach, as required by
statute? Please share the cost/benefit analysis results if they exist.
The Manufactured Housing Institute in its comment letter put forth
a more incremental energy proposal, using the approach required in the
statute. Have you analyzed MHI's proposal--and if you are rejecting
that approach can you explain why you believe your proposed rule is
better.
Question. The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) is partnering with
National Laboratories and industry to establish a clean hydrogen hub to
produce, deliver, store and use clean hydrogen across a multi-state
region. If granted, this regional hub would make Tennessee a leader the
nation for a carbon-neutral future by leveraging existing production,
consumption and connective infrastructure, to provide immediate, long-
term, and diverse clean-energy jobs and union represented employment in
a retired coal region in transition. Your Department has made $8
billion available to invest in these regional hydrogen hubs.
As the Department of Energy implements this program guidance and
distributes grants from the Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations, how
is the agency considering projects where TVA is a partner or co-
applicant?
TVA is fully funded from its ratepayers, and does not take annual
appropriations, so as to not create any disadvantages for my
constituents, will the agency treat any resources put forward by TVA as
a non-Federal cost-share?
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Patrick Leahy
Question. The transportation sector has historically relied heavily
on petroleum, which supports over 90 percent of the sector's energy
needs today, and, as a result, surpassed electricity generation in 2017
to become the largest source of CO2emissions in the country.
The time to act to reduce carbon emissions within the transportation
sector is now, and I applaud the efforts made by President Biden and
the Department of Energy to realize this goal. To address this
challenge, we must work to develop and deploy clean technologies for
all modes of transportation, from rail and road, to sea and air, while
ensuring that mobility solutions for the transit of people and goods
remains affordable and equitable.
Simultaneously, as the energy needs of our transportation systems
have changed, so too has the mechanisms of mobility through which
travelers and goods are transported. We have seen, with the
proliferation of services like ride-sharing and on-demand grocery
delivery, the potential of mobility-as-a-service technology in
transforming transportation systems in urban areas. The next frontier
of mobility aims to increase access to people living outside urban
areas through new modes of medical, cargo and passenger connectivity.
Electric aviation will empower the Delivery & Logistics Industry to
reduce the costs and emissions. Specifically, electric vertical takeoff
and landing vehicles (eVTOL) will integrate with existing
transportation networks and move passengers and delivery-based commerce
more quickly by allowing point to point, airport-free, movement of
people and goods.
Given the urgent need to reduce emissions from the transit sector
and the interest of the Biden administration to support domestic
innovation and manufacturing, how does the Department of Energy intend
to provide resources to American firms to foster the development of new
and early-stage modes of transportation, like eVTOLs, to address the
future conditions of the transportation sector while ensuring that
domestic industry leads global innovation?
Question. Vermont actively hosts a number of demonstration programs
with electric aviation manufacturers and Delivery & Logistics
companies. These demonstrations have exemplified the vast potential of
electric aviation to revolutionize and decarbonize the ways in which
people and goods are transported, while supporting the research and
development activities with applications that go beyond electric
aviation. Ensuring that funding remains available for demonstration
programs like this will help American organizations, educational
institutions, and companies to develop new technologies.
How will the Department of Energy support technological advancement
within the transportation sector through the creation of demonstration
programs specifically related to battery and electrification
technologies?
Question. On March 28, 2022, the Department of Commerce announced
the launch of an investigation into alleged circumvention of duties for
solar panels imported from four Southeast Asian countries. The
investigation is in response to a petition from Auxin Solar, which
alleged that Chinese manufacturers shifted some production to these
countries in an effort to evade 2012 duties. Solar panel imports from
these four countries account for 80 percent of all solar panel imports
to the United States. The Commerce Department is considering up to 250
percent tariffs on these solar panel imports to be applied
retroactively.
The Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) is forecasting that
solar installations for 2022 and 2023 will be cut by 46 percent due to
these circumstances, resulting in a drop of 24 gigawatts of planned
solar capacity. If this capacity is replaced by fossil fuels, the
United States will emit an additional 364 million metric tons of carbon
by 2035. The SEIA is also projecting that 100,000 American solar
workers will lose their jobs. The consequences to this investigation
contradict President Biden's efforts to reduce greenhouse gas pollution
and support good-paying American jobs in the renewable energy industry.
In SEIA's Broad Industry Survey, 88 percent of Vermont solar
companies responded that the investigation will have severe or
devastating impacts to solar business, and that $10 million worth of
projects have already been impacted in Vermont alone. I have heard from
a number of Vermont solar companies that this investigation threatens
their long-term viability, which would not only result in a loss of
jobs in Vermont, but would also stymy the state's ability to address
carbon emissions moving forward.
In May 2021, the Solar Energy Technologies Office released a Multi-
Year Program Plan to accelerate the advancement and deployment of solar
technology. One of the Plan's goals was to expand the solar workforce
to 300,000 employees by 2025.
What is the Department's plan to expand the solar workforce and
open new solar markets in spite of market disruptions caused by the
Department of Commerce's investigation?
Question. On August 18, 2021, the Department announced a plan to
provide $6 million in funding to research and development projects
advancing 5G wireless networking for science applications. Funding
sponsored by the Office of Scientific Computing was awarded to five
National Laboratories. Vermont is home to a U.S. Government Trusted
Foundry, which is also the largest domestic producer of Radio
Frequency-capable chips critical to 5G network implementation.
What are the Department's requirements for trusted microelectronics
in these research and development projects?
How important are trusted supply chains for 5G wireless networking
for science applications?
What value do advanced techniques and materials such as Gallium
Nitride and epitaxial growth provide to science applications of 5G
networking?
SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS
Senator Feinstein. And so thank you so much for being here,
for your words.
And the committee will stand adjourned. Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 11:15 a.m., Wednesday, May 4, the
subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene subject to the call of
the Chair.]
ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023
----------
WEDNESDAY, MAY 18, 2022
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 10:04 a.m. in room SD-192, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Dianne Feinstein (chairwoman)
presiding.
Present: Senators Feinstein, Heinrich, Kennedy, and
Hagerty.
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
National Nuclear Security Administration
STATEMENT OF HON. JILL HRUBY, UNDER SECRETARY FOR
NUCLEAR SECURITY AND ADMINISTRATOR
ACCOMPANIED BY:
HON. MARVIN L. ADAMS, PH.D., DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR FOR DEFENSE
PROGRAMS
HON. COREY HINDERSTEIN, DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR FOR DEFENSE
NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION
ADMIRAL JAMES F. CALDWELL, JR., DIRECTOR, NAVAL NUCLEAR
PROPULSION PROGRAM, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR DIANNE FEINSTEIN
Senator Feinstein. The Subcommittee on Energy and Water
Development will come to order.
Today's hearing is going to review the National Nuclear
Security Administration's fiscal year 2023 budget request.
So thank you, Administrator Hruby and your colleagues for
joining us today.
The budget request for NNSA (National Nuclear Security
Administration) totals $21.4 billion. That's a $754.4 million
or a 3.6 percent increase over fiscal year 2022. I can say it's
an all-time high once again.
The Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Programs, which
successfully reduce nuclear dangers, are essentially held flat.
For such accomplished programs, I would expect to see some
greater investment but just a few key nonproliferation
achievements include the elimination of over 7,230 kilograms of
weapons-usable nuclear material from 48 countries, deployment
of 930 counter-nuclear smuggling systems across 79 countries,
and compilation of the 238 Cesium Irradiator Replacement
Project, their removals from U.S. hospitals and universities.
While nonproliferation programs are held flat, the Weapons
Activities Account sees a $566.2 million or 3.5 percent
increase. Both are budget allocations and the Nuclear Weapons
Complex itself will increasingly struggle to accommodate an
over-taxed system. So I expect this Administration to really
make thoughtful choices.
I'm concerned about plutonium pit production. NNSA is
required to make 80 pits per year by 2030 but acknowledged it
would miss that deadline by anywhere from 2 to 5 years.
While NNSA's fiscal year 2023 budget calls for a $2.4
billion increase for pit production modernization and
infrastructure, it's clear that increased funding year after
year is not going to solve systemic problems.
So I look forward to hearing you discuss with us how we can
confront our nuclear deterrence and budgetary challenges
together. I think that's most important and I thank everyone
for being here.
The distinguished Ranking Member Kennedy will now have an
opening statement and then we will turn to Administrator Hruby
to present testimony on behalf of NNSA.
Thank you.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR JOHN KENNEDY
Senator Kennedy. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Madam Administrator, thank you for being here. Thanks to
all of our witnesses.
I can't think of an agency more important than the Nuclear
Security Administration, especially now.
This proposed budget is not adequate. It's just not. I know
there's a slight increase in funding, but I tell you what's not
slight, the risks that the world faces today that have been
extraordinarily enhanced in the last 3-4 months.
I mean, anybody with a brain above a single cell organism,
which is most Americans, can see what's going on in the world.
President Putin is working with President Xi, is working with
the Ayatollah in Iran. I think President Xi is the quarterback
but the other two players are critical members of the team. I
think their goal is to have Russia dominate Central and Eastern
Europe. I think their goal is to have China dominate the Indo-
Pacific and be allowed to roam free in at least Sub-Saharan
Africa and maybe all of Africa and also make moves in South
America, and I think their goal is to have the Ayatollah in
Iran dominate the Middle East.
Now I view all of this through the lens of the security of
the United States of America. I do not want America to have to
be the world's policemen, but I don't want Russia and China and
the Ayatollah to be the world's policemen either.
This budget, proposed budget eliminates two weapon systems.
It underfunds programs vital to our national security. Our
distinguished Chair mentioned plutonium pit production. This
proposed budget eliminates the tactical submarine-launched
cruise missile, not acceptable. It's going to retire the B83
Gravity Bomb. It's got inadequate funding for plutonium pit
modernization.
We can do better. American people deserve better, and I'm
hoping we can talk about that today. But thank you all for
being here and thank you, thank you to our Chair. I'm sitting
close to her. I'm hoping some of that wisdom and experience
permeates over this way----
Senator Feinstein. Oh, wow.
Senator Kennedy [continuing.] And I mean that. I mean that.
I sit on Judiciary and the Senator was Chairman of our
Judiciary Committee for a long time and I had the wonderful
experience of being there with her for that, too.
So I'm done, Madam Chair.
Senator Feinstein. Thank you.
We will turn over to our witnesses. I think Administrator
Hruby.
SUMMARY STATEMENT OF HON. JILL HRUBY
Ms. Hruby. Thank you. Thank you, Chairwoman Feinstein,
Ranking Member Kennedy, and Members of the Subcommittee for the
opportunity to present the President's fiscal year 2023 budget
request for the Department of Energy's National Nuclear
Security Administration.
We're grateful for the committee's enduring bipartisan
support.
Chairwoman Feinstein, a written statement has been provided
to the subcommittee and I respectfully request that it be
submitted for the record.
Senator Feinstein. So ordered.
Ms. Hruby. NNSA's fiscal year 2023 budget request, as
mentioned, is $21.4 billion. This request is consistent with
our expanded mission and the increasing pace of program
deliverables as described in the 2022 Nuclear Posture Review.
In today's geopolitical environment, this budget reflects a
responsive and responsible path forward.
The weapons activities request is $16.5 billion, supporting
five warhead modernization program, significant infrastructure
recapitalization, and science-based stockpile stewardship.
NNSA is currently engaged in the simultaneous execution of
our largest weapon modernization program effort in decades and
an overhaul of our aging infrastructure. This approach carries
risk but we are positioned to succeed and we are making
progress.
The W88 Alt 370 and the B61-12 have achieved first
production and are on track to meet DoD (Department of Defense)
deliverables. The W80-4, the W87-1, and the W93 are in various
phases of design and will enter production in the 2020s and
2030s. When complete, these programs, coupled with the DoD
platform modernization, will update all three legs of the
Nuclear Triad.
On the infrastructure front, the Uranium Processing
Facility is fully enclosed with a projection completion date of
2026 and the 90 percent designs are underway for our future pit
production facilities at Los Alamos and Savannah River.
Additionally, our innovative approaches on non-nuclear
construction have demonstrated shortened schedule and reduced
costs. We intend to build on these successes going forward.
Our scientific achievements in stockpile understanding
continue and we intend to build on decades of success. This
budget continues funding for the enhanced capabilities for
subcritical experiments, inertial confinement fusion, exascale
computing, and other key capabilities.
The Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation budget request of $2.3
billion demonstrates the Administration's commitment to
reducing global nuclear threats and is an essential complement
to the weapons activities.
Through judicious use of prior year funding, we have a
stable budget that enables targeted increases in high-priority
projects. We continue to believe that it is easier to prevent a
threat than to roll one back and that technical cooperation on
nonproliferation, counterterrorism, and counter-proliferation
with global allies and partners enhances our national security.
Such preemptive action and cooperation have been especially
important in response to the invasion of Ukraine. In 2012, NNSA
removed over 234 kilograms of highly-enriched uranium from
Ukraine. Clearly the risks on the ground are lower today as a
result.
More recently, NNSA personnel have been engaged in
monitoring Ukraine's nuclear facilities and are in close
contact with Ukrainian, regional, and IAEA (International
Atomic Energy Agency) officials. As a result, we are providing
validated data to assist U.S. decision-makers.
NNSA is increasing our support of nuclear power as a clean
energy source to combat climate change. We are expanding our
efforts in safeguards and security by design for advanced
reactors and are working to supply high-assay low-enriched
uranium to support the development of advanced reactors in
partnership with DOE (Department of Energy) Nuclear Energy.
The Naval Reactors budget request of $2.1 billion will
support our nuclear-powered fleet. Progress on Columbia Class
submarine propulsion, ongoing construction of the Spent Fuel
Handling Facility, and expanded research and development are
all key factors in retaining our qualitative advantage and
naval capability for the current and future fleet.
Finally, we recognize that our people are the backbone of
our enterprise. NNSA's Federal salaries and expenses budget
request of $496 million will be used to recruit, retain, and
support 1,958 Federal employees.
Today, NNSA faces mission requirements as difficult as any
in its history. With your continued support, we will deliver.
Thank you and I look forward to your questions.
[The statements follow:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Jill Hruby
Chairman Feinstein, Ranking Member Kennedy, and Members of the
Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to present the President's
fiscal year 2023 budget for the Department of Energy's (DOE) National
Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). NNSA greatly appreciates the
Committee's bipartisan support for our nuclear security mission and for
the talented and dedicated workforce responsible for carrying it out
every day.
The Department meets its enduring national security mission by
maintaining and modernizing the nuclear weapons stockpile so that it is
always safe, secure, reliable, and effective; by reducing global
nuclear threats; and by providing the U.S. Navy's nuclear-powered
submarines and aircraft carriers with militarily effective propulsion
systems. NNSA remains uniquely qualified to fulfill these tasks on
behalf of the American people and in support of our allies and
partners.
The NNSA fiscal year 2023 budget request is informed by the 2022
Nuclear Posture Review and reflects today's increasingly complex
geopolitical environment. Importantly, the budget request provides full
support for the significant nuclear weapons design and production
required to modernize all three legs of the nuclear triad. Once
complete, this effort will provide the U.S. with a safer, more secure,
and more reliable stockpile that, together with the Department of
Defense (DoD) modernization programs, will provide the U.S. with a
modern nuclear deterrent capable of responding to a wider array of
challenges. The fiscal year 2023 budget request also includes continued
funding for the NNSA infrastructure revitalization program needed to
produce the weapons and materials for the planned program of record and
create an enterprise that is more resilient and flexible. Funding for
research, technology, and engineering needed for stockpile
certification and innovation activities is maintained in the request.
At the same time, the fiscal year 2023 budget request recognizes we
must press ahead with our nuclear nonproliferation and nuclear
counterterrorism and counterproliferation efforts as a complementary
approach to respond to geopolitical realities. These programs continue
efforts to implement and support robust security and safeguards for
nuclear materials; shift commercial, research, and medical industries
away from highly radioactive materials and technologies; and develop
technologies for early detection of proliferation activity. This
request recognizes the increased efforts required as nuclear power
expands around the world in response to climate change, and as Russia,
China, and North Korea continue to diversify and expand their nuclear
arsenals.
The NNSA budget request provides the support needed for Naval
Reactors to continue work designing, producing, operating, and
maintaining the nuclear propulsion plants for U.S. nuclear submarines
and aircraft carriers. The request also fully supports three critical
initiatives: the COLUMBIA-class ballistic missile submarine reactor
systems development; construction of the Naval Spent Fuel Handling
Facility; and the refueling and overhaul of the land-based reactor for
continued training and technology testing.
In today's multipolar and more aggressive geopolitical environment,
it is imperative that NNSA is both responsive to needs and acts
responsibly to avoid escalation or arms racing while preparing for an
uncertain future. Our budget request reflects this balance, and our
work has never been more critical to global stability.
nnsa's accomplishments in 2021
Last year, NNSA achieved several key milestones across the nuclear
security enterprise despite the unprecedented circumstances COVID-19
presented.
Life Extension and Weapons Modernization Programs: In 2021, NNSA
completed first production units (FPU) for the W88 Alteration (Alt) 370
and the B61-12 Life Extension programs. Both refurbished weapons have
increased safety and reliability.
Large Line-Item Construction: NNSA has three large line-item
construction projects for nuclear materials underway: two projects
associated with plutonium pit production--one at Los Alamos National
Laboratory and one at the Savannah River Site--and one project
associated with uranium processing at the Y-12 National Security
Complex.
The Los Alamos Plutonium Pit Production Project (LAP4) received
Critical Decision (CD)-1 approval in April 2021. The Savannah River
Plutonium Processing Facility (SRPPF) received CD-1 approval in June
2021. CD-1 approval marks completion of a project's definition phase
and the conceptual design as part of DOE's Order 413.3B process for the
acquisition of capital assets. Clearing the CD-1 process allows NNSA to
establish 90 percent design and associated cost estimation during the
subsequent CD-2 effort.
The Uranium Processing Facility (UPF), consisting of seven
subprojects, has completed three projects on schedule and under budget
and the final four are underway. During 2021, significant construction
activity continued and led to the successful full enclosure of all
buildings in April 2022, setting the stage for equipment installation.
National Ignition Facility (NIF): In August, the National Ignition
Facility at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory achieved a
breakthrough with an experiment that yielded more than 1.3 megajoules
of energy and resulted in a burning plasma state for the first time in
any fusion research facility. Burning plasma research is needed for
high fidelity modeling of nuclear weapons and is one of the milestones
needed to achieve self-sustaining energy production.
Secure Transportation: The Office of Secure Transportation
accomplished 100 percent of its assigned missions safely and securely
with no mission degradation despite operational challenges present from
COVID-19.
Infrastructure Innovation: NNSA purchased the LeMond Carbon
Facility in Oak Ridge, TN to replace facilities at Y-12 built in the
1940s used for process development. Use of NNSA's purchase authority
for acquisitions allows us to accelerate delivery of modern facilities
without the need for new construction.
To support our climate goals, NNSA placed lease orders with the
General Services Administration to replace gas-powered cars with
approximately 50 zero-emissions vehicles, nearly doubling the size of
electric-powered cars in NNSA's fleet.
Nuclear Material Disposal and Reduction: NNSA converted an
additional 91 kilograms of plutonium to an oxide form, for a cumulative
total of 1,187 kilograms, in preparation for final disposition,
continued downblending excess plutonium, and completed construction of
a characterization and storage pad for the first shipment of
downblended plutonium from the Savannah River Site to the Waste
Isolation Pilot Plant. Additionally, the Secretaries of Energy and
Health and Humans Services jointly certified that global supplies of
molybdenum-99 (Mo-99) produced without the use of highly enriched
uranium (HEU) can meet the needs of patients in the U.S. This critical
milestone in nonproliferation efforts also triggered a congressionally
mandated ban on exports of HEU for foreign medical isotope production.
Global Material Security: NNSA conducted over 75 cyber engagements
with international partners to enhance security of nuclear facilities
and materials. Partnerships were also started with several domestic
advanced reactor vendors for `security-by-design' activities to enhance
the security of the systems for both domestic and international use.
NNSA replaced 50 devices (39 domestically and 11 internationally) that
use high-activity radioactive sources with non-radioisotopic
alternative technologies and secured 48 buildings (28 domestically and
20 internationally) with high priority radioactive sources. In
addition, since the start of 2021, NNSA has signed new counter
radioactive material smuggling arrangements with Estonia's Ministry of
Interior, Ukraine's Ministry of Internal Affairs, Ukraine's State
Security Service, Mexico's National Commission for Nuclear Security and
Safeguards, Niger's High Atomic Energy Authority, and Morocco's
Gendarmerie.
Counterterrorism: NNSA's Nuclear Emergency Support Team (NEST)
conducted dozens of operations, including preventative radiological/
nuclear detection support to the Presidential Inauguration,
Presidential Address to a Joint Session of Congress, New Year's Eve
celebrations in Las Vegas and New York City, Super Bowl LV, the Fourth
of July celebration on the National Mall, and the 76th Session of the
United Nations General Assembly. Additionally, NNSA conducted 50
virtual workshops with U.S. public information officers, law
enforcement, first responders, and technical experts concerning
radiological counterterrorism to build capacity and improve crisis and
risk communication.
Workforce Development: NNSA achieved its highest Federal workforce
level since 2013 with a total of 1,825 Federal employees onboard. To
help develop the next-generation workforce, NNSA awarded 13 Minority
Serving Institution Partnership Program grants for a total of 24
consortia grants to reach tens of thousands of students in STEM
disciplines.
nnsa's fiscal year 2023 budget request
The President's fiscal year 2023 budget request for NNSA is $21.4
billion, an increase of $1.0 billion, or 5.1 percent, over the fiscal
year 2022 enacted level. Funding levels do not reflect the mandated
transfer of $92.75 million in fiscal year 2022 to the Office of Nuclear
Energy for operation of the Advanced Test Reactor. This funding request
reflects the expanded mission in NNSA and the need for accelerated
delivery of the modernization and infrastructure programs. The three
NNSA missions--the nuclear deterrent, nuclear security and
nonproliferation, and naval nuclear propulsion--have key deliverables
in fiscal year 2023. In addition, the capabilities to position NNSA to
be successful in the future must be nurtured. We are grateful for the
sustained, bipartisan commitment by Congress and multiple
administrations and ask for continued support.
weapons activities appropriation
The fiscal year 2023 budget request for the Weapons Activities
account is $16.5 billion, an increase of $566 million, or 3.7 percent
over the fiscal year 2022 enacted levels. The request will be
supplemented with prior year balances of $396 million. This budget
request represents the Administration's continued strong commitment to
a safe, secure, reliable, and effective nuclear deterrent backed by
resilient, flexible infrastructure along with cutting edge science,
cyber security, and physical protection.
NNSA is fully aware that delivering the deterrent and capabilities
our nation needs to respond to the current environment requires a
faster pace and a more complete modernization of weapons than over the
last several decades. That is why we are re-establishing production
capabilities lost in the 1990s and overhauling both our physical
infrastructure and human capital to retain technical advantages and
build resilience into our enterprise. NNSA is looking forward to
overcoming obstacles and building on the successes of the previous
year.
The fiscal year 2023 request reflects the need to advance the
weapons modernization programs and production capacity at an
accelerated pace. The Weapons Activities account includes:
--Stockpile Management: Maintenance and modernization of nuclear
weapons and production operations to sustain confidence in the
safety, security, reliability, and military effectiveness of
the stockpile without resuming nuclear explosive testing and
associated activities.
--Production and Infrastructure Modernization: Investment in NNSA's
infrastructure to rebuild capabilities lost in the 1990s and
revitalize and expand the capacity of other elements to support
stockpile modernization and science. These projects range from
significant line-item construction for Plutonium and Uranium
related activities to minor construction of offices and light
labs to operational infrastructure such as electrical and
networking utilities.
--Stockpile Research, Technology, and Engineering: Continued
development of state-of-the-art scientific, engineering, and
manufacturing capabilities to enable continuous improvement in
design, certification, and production of the enduring nuclear
weapons stockpile and to stay ahead of the threat.
--Transportation, Nuclear, and Cyber Security: Keeping pace with
evolving threats and sustaining transportation, cyber and
physical security across the nuclear security enterprise to
improve resilience.
NNSA restructured the Weapons Activities budget in fiscal year 2021
to enable better alignment of portfolios with resources. This allowed
improved prioritization within portfolios that have multiple programs
and interdependencies. Further refinements are proposed in fiscal year
2023 to align programmatic construction with the portfolio each project
supports. Comparisons throughout the Weapons Activities portfolio
assume this alignment in the fiscal year 2022 enacted levels as well.
Stockpile Management
The fiscal year 2023 Stockpile Management budget request is $4.9
billion, an increase of $291 million, or 6.3 percent, over the fiscal
year 2022 enacted level. This portfolio covers the maintenance of a
safe, secure, reliable, and militarily effective nuclear weapons
stockpile. Activities include life extension programs (LEP) and other
weapons modernization activities; surveillance, minor alterations, and
limited life component exchanges; providing the safe dismantlement of
nuclear weapons and components; and providing sustainment of needed
manufacturing capabilities and capacities. The fiscal year 2023 request
also includes funding for Nuclear Enterprise Assurance (NEA) to
prevent, detect, and mitigate subversion risks to the nuclear weapons
stockpile and associated design, production, and testing capabilities.
W88 Alteration (Alt) 370: NNSA expects the W88 Alt 370 program to
enter Phase 6.6, Full-Scale Production, in July 2022. Production is
currently on schedule to meet DoD deployment schedules.
B61-12 LEP: NNSA expects the B61-12 LEP to enter Phase 6.6, Full-
Scale Production, in June 2022. The B61-12 LEP consolidates multiple
variants of the B61 gravity bomb and improves the safety and security
of the weapon. Production is currently on schedule to meet DoD
deployment schedules.
W80-4 LEP: NNSA is continuing Phase 6.3 activities, Development
Engineering, and plans to enter Phase 6.4, Production Engineering, in
fiscal year 2023. The W80-4 FPU date is currently being re-evaluated
due to COVID-19 impacts, slower than planned hiring and increased
attrition, and component technical challenges. The updated FPU schedule
will be developed by mid-2022. NNSA's revised schedule is expected to
support the U.S. Air Force's (USAF) schedule for Long Range Standoff
missile initial operating capability.
W87-1 Modification Program: The W87-1 will replace the aging W78
warhead using a modification of the existing W87-0 design. The W87-1
will deploy new technologies that improve safety and security, address
obsolete designs and materials, and simplify warhead manufacturability.
The fiscal year 2023 budget request supports NNSA's commitment for a
planned FPU in fiscal year 2030 to meet DoD's scheduled deployment of
the Sentinel missile. The request supports Phase 6.3, Development
Engineering, activities including joint testing with USAF Sentinel
missile and Mk21A reentry vehicle program and conducting the Conceptual
Design Review. NNSA plans to enter Phase 6.3 in fiscal year 2022.
W93/Mk7: In February 2022, the NWC voted to authorize the W93's
entry into Phase 2, Feasibility Study and Design Options. NNSA's fiscal
year 2023 funding request will support the Phase 2 activities including
further examination of design concepts from Phase 1, and down-selection
to desired weapon design(s) to be subsequently developed in Phase 2A,
Design Definition and Cost Study, planned for fiscal year 2026. All the
W93's key nuclear components will be based on currently deployed and
previously tested nuclear designs, as well as extensive stockpile
component and materials experience. It will not require additional
nuclear explosive testing to certify. The W93 is vital for continuing
our longstanding cooperation with the UK, which is modernizing its
nuclear forces. The U.S.'s W93 program is a separate but parallel
program critical to the UK's replacement warhead (RW) for its submarine
launched ballistic missile. As an allied but independent nuclear power
that contributes to NATO's nuclear deterrent posture, the UK's nuclear
deterrent is critical to U.S. national security.
Within Stockpile Management, the fiscal year 2023 budget request
includes $1.3 billion for Stockpile Sustainment, an increase of $141
million, or 11.9 percent above the fiscal year 2022 enacted level. This
program is responsible for producing and replacing limited-life
components such as neutron generators and gas transfer systems;
conducting maintenance, surveillance, and evaluations to assess weapon
reliability and detect any potential concerns; and analyzing
information compiled during the annual assessment process.
The request for Stockpile Management also includes $631 million for
Production Operations, an increase of $62 million, or 10.9 percent,
above the fiscal year 2022 enacted level. Included in this request is
funding to support continued growth of base capabilities, both in
staffing and equipment, required to support increased LEP workload as
certain programs reach full-scale production rates.
Production Modernization
The fiscal year 2023 Production Modernization budget request is
$4.64 billion, an increase of $484 million, or 11.6 percent, over the
fiscal year 2022 enacted level. This funding focuses on production
capabilities for nuclear weapons components including primaries, canned
subassemblies, radiation cases and non-nuclear components needed to
sustain the nuclear weapons stockpile near-to long-term.
Primary Capability Modernization: NNSA's most intensive
recapitalization effort is reconstitution of plutonium pit production
fabrication capabilities. NNSA is required to produce no fewer than 80
pits per year (ppy) during 2030. NNSA has outlined a two-site approach
for producing 80 ppy utilizing Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) to
produce 30 ppy and the Savannah River Site (SRS) to produce 50 ppy. The
two-site approach will provide the required capacity while enhancing
resiliency and flexibility. At this time, the production of 30 ppy at
LANL during 2026 remains on schedule with some technical challenges
remaining. However, the production of 50 ppy at SRS during 2030 is not
achievable. The Secretary of Energy and the Nuclear Weapons Council
have both notified Congress regarding the inability to produce 80 ppy
in 2030. However, NNSA remains committed to achieving 80 ppy as close
to 2030 as possible. The fiscal year 2023 budget request funds pit
production and associated efforts with a 26 percent increase compared
to fiscal year 2022. NNSA continues to work with DoD to develop a plan
to maintain the required stockpile until pit production capabilities
are fully established.
The fiscal year 2023 request for LANL Plutonium Modernization will
support equipment installation, continue decontamination and demolition
work, and mature project design for the LAP4. This includes adding
equipment in Plutonium Facility 4 (PF-4) to support 30 ppy in 2026,
construction of a training facility to support workforce development,
and construction of a higher capacity entrance control facility.
The fiscal year 2023 funds for SRPPF will be used to continue the
CD-2 work to establish a 90 percent design. CD-2 is forecast for
completion in early fiscal year 2024. Additionally, the request
supports early site preparation including removal of unnecessary walls
and building systems originally installed for the Mixed Oxide Fuel
Fabrication Facility.
Secondary Capability Modernization: NNSA is also modernizing its
uranium, lithium, and tritium processing efforts necessary to fabricate
nuclear weapon secondaries. NNSA's uranium strategy aims to relocate
enriched uranium processing capabilities into the UPF and other
enduring facilities to reduce mission dependency on Building 9212,
which is over 75 years old. This will be accomplished by completing
construction of UPF to provide new floor space for high hazard
operations; extending the operational lifetime of buildings 9215, 9204-
2E, and 9995 into the 2040s; introducing new processes to increase
safety and efficiency in the new facilities; and supplying the current
stockpile with purified enriched uranium metal.
UPF will provide for the long-term viability, safety, and security
of enriched uranium processing capability in the United States while
significantly improving worker and public safety. The construction is
well underway with a peak production workforce of 3,000 people in
fiscal years 2022 and 2023. Ongoing supply chain issues and delays
associated with the COVID-19 pandemic are projected to result in a
delay of about 8 months beyond the scheduled completion date of
December 2025. A comprehensive annual cost update is being conducted
for the UPF project completion to better understand factors that could
potentially affect total costs. Overall, UPF is 70 percent complete
with the first three non-nuclear infrastructure subprojects completed
under budget and on schedule.
Additionally, in fiscal year 2021, NNSA initiated the Depleted
Uranium (DU) Modernization Program to meet growing mission
requirements. This effort will reconstitute lapsed DU alloying and
component manufacturing capabilities at Y-12; invest in key new
technologies to improve efficiency and reduce lifecycle costs; and
increase the reliability and capacity. The DU Modernization Program
request for fiscal year 2023 is $170 million.
The U.S. no longer maintains a full lithium purification capability
and relies on direct recycling as the main source of lithium for
nuclear weapons systems. NNSA's Lithium Strategy will increase the
supply of lithium by recycling components from dismantled systems,
sustain and recapitalize existing infrastructure through a transition
period, and design and construct a Lithium Processing Facility (LPF) to
house processing capabilities by 2031. LPF will replace capabilities
performed in Y-12's buildings 9204-2 and 9202 and will include
recovery, purification, and component fabrication operations. While
current capabilities can provide a sufficient lithium supply through
2035, operations take place in an aging facility with significant
infrastructure challenges. LPF will alleviate those issues and reduce
risk while providing capacity to meet material demands beyond 2035.
The fiscal year 2023 budget request for the Tritium and Domestic
Uranium Enrichment is $580 million, an increase of $64 million, or 12.4
percent above the fiscal year 2022 enacted level. For Domestic Uranium
Enrichment the fiscal year 2023 budget request supports HEU down-
blending to extend the need date for low-enriched uranium (LEU) for
tritium production to 2044, enrichment technology development, and
acquisition activities to meet future enriched uranium needs. HEU
downblending began in fiscal year 2019 and will continue through fiscal
year 2025. NNSA is currently conducting an analysis of alternatives,
which is expected to conclude in the mid-2020s that will inform a final
down-select of an enrichment options. Other NNSA programs such as
reactor fuel and naval propulsion fuel are also supported by this
effort.
The Tritium Modernization Program's mission is to establish and
operate a domestic source of tritium to meet national security
requirements, which includes recycling tritium gas to maintain required
inventories and sustaining reliable supply chain infrastructure and
equipment. Since 2003, NNSA's tritium production has met all
production, delivery, and schedule requirements. Because NNSA is
currently ramping up production levels at the Tennessee Valley
Authority to meet future delivery requirements, the requested budget
has been increased. NNSA is also in the early phases of constructing
the Tritium Finishing Facility (TFF), which will replace a 1950s-era
facility. TFF will house the finishing, packing, and shipping of gas
reservoirs to meet mission requirements. This major infrastructure
modernization initiative will fulfill a critical mission need and
enable the program to meet contemporary safety standards. The facility
will house functions to receive, inspect, finish, package, and ship
reservoirs. Construction of the site preparation subproject is
scheduled to start in fiscal year 2024.
Non-Nuclear Component Modernization: Non-nuclear components (NNCs)
include a wide array of parts that weaponize the nuclear explosive
package. Examples are gas transfer systems, neutron generators,
microelectronics, and power sources. NNCs make up more than half the
cost of weapon modernization due to the number, complexity, and their
qualification in extreme environments over the warhead lifecycle.
Therefore, delivering NNCs requires an extensive foundation of
capabilities for the design, development, qualification, production,
and surveillance of these components. The fiscal year 2023 request
includes funding to provide equipment for increased manufacturing
capacity at the Kansas City National Security Campus; reconstitute
thermal spray capability for weapon modernization; recapitalize
radiation and major environmental test facilities at Sandia National
Laboratories used to design and qualify NNCs; and tools and equipment
at the Microsystems Engineering, Science and Applications (MESA)
Complex at Sandia, which serves as the only approved source of trusted,
strategically radiation hardened microelectronics.
Infrastructure and Operations
NNSA has been taking significant steps to modernize and
recapitalize its infrastructure to meet expanding demands, reduce
mission and safety risk, and draw down its deferred maintenance
backlog. A well-organized, well-maintained, and modern infrastructure
system is the bedrock of a flexible and resilient nuclear enterprise.
Almost 60 percent of NNSA facilities were beyond their 40-year life
expectancy at the end of fiscal year 2021 with some dating back to the
Manhattan Project. Our modernization and recapitalization efforts will
provide for the safety of our workforce, the communities around our
facilities, and our environment. NNSA can address this challenge only
with sustained, predictable, and timely funding.
The fiscal year 2023 budget request for Infrastructure and
Operations is $2.63 billion, an increase of $144 million or 5.8 percent
over the fiscal year 2022 enacted amount. This increase will enable
NNSA to build on the Infrastructure Modernization Initiative, including
adopting new practices that will streamline construction practices to
save time and money on low-risk, non-nuclear, construction projects.
Deferred maintenance has been a key focus of both NNSA and
Congress. At the end of fiscal year 2021, NNSA had $6.1 billion of
deferred maintenance and an enterprise-wide replacement plant value of
$121.5 billion. While this ratio may seem high, construction of new
facilities and associated demolition of legacy facilities will have a
substantial role in reducing NNSA infrastructure challenges.
Approximately 90 percent of NNSA deferred maintenance is associated
with facilities that are approaching or have surpassed their intended
design life. NNSA is integrating its infrastructure modernization work
with the Department's Office of Environmental Management supported
effort to demolish high-risk excess facilities at the Y-12 National
Security Complex, Lawrence Livermore National Lab, and Los Alamos
National Lab. NNSA is using this intentional approach to prioritize
investments based on mission risk while underscoring the need for
sustained commitment to move beyond legacy infrastructure. The fiscal
year 2023 budget request includes increases in Mission Enabling
Construction accounts so that NNSA can address mission needs, achieve
operational efficiencies, and reduce risks to safety, security, the
environment, and program.
For years, NNSA has used a prioritization methodology for
recapitalization investments that factors in sustainability and
resilience along with safety and mission risk. In fiscal year 2023,
NNSA is increasing its emphasis on climate resiliency projects through
the Energy Resilient Infrastructure and Climate Adaptation (ERICA)
initiative. ERICA is part of NNSA's multifaceted approach to address
climate adaptation and resilience using direct- and indirect-funded
infrastructure programs and alternative financing. For example, the
planned Building 848 Net Zero Energy Upgrade project at Sandia will
move the facility to being 100 percent powered by on-site generated
electricity while also improving its operations, indoor air quality,
and thermal comfort.
NNSA uses data-driven, risk informed tools and initiatives to
improve decisionmaking, accelerate the delivery, and reduce the cost of
commercial-like construction projects. For example, in fiscal year 2019
NNSA established the Enhanced Minor Construction & Commercial Standards
(EMC2) pilot, which is challenging the paradigm for how NNSA executes
low-risk, non-complex construction projects to accelerate delivery and
reduce costs. There are 10 projects in the pilot, including the
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory's Emergency Operations Center
(EOC) which is the first pilot project to be completed earlier this
year. Using the EMC2 approach, the Livermore EOC was completed 13
months after receiving full construction funding in January 2021. In
the first four pilot projects currently underway, estimated cost
savings range from approximately 12 to 31 percent. An additional six
EMC2 projects are projected to result in estimated cost savings of 17
to 38 percent.
Stockpile Research, Technology and Engineering
For Stockpile Research, Technology, and Engineering, the fiscal
year 2023 budget request is $2.89 billion, a decrease of $83 million,
or 2.8 percent below the fiscal year 2022 enacted level. The decrease
results from the use of carryover balances to continue construction of
the U1a Complex Enhancement Project at the Nevada National Security
Site (NNSS). After adjusting for this reduction, the Stockpile
Research, Technology, and Engineering request is stable from fiscal
year 2022 enacted.
This portfolio provides the scientific foundation for science-based
stockpile activities, including the capabilities, tools, and components
needed to assess the active stockpile and to certify warhead
modernization programs without the need for underground nuclear
testing. NNSA's unparalleled science and technical capabilities, and
commitment to their constant improvement, helps cultivate the knowledge
and expertise to maintain confidence in the stockpile. The major
activities in the Stockpile Research, Technology, and Engineering
portfolio are:
Enhanced Capabilities for Subcritical Experiments (ECSE): ECSE will
produce experimental data in underground tunnels at the NNSS that will
enable high fidelity assessment of the current stockpile and
certification of the future stockpile without the need to return to
underground nuclear-explosive testing. ECSE experiments are designed to
remain subcritical throughout the experiment to adhere to the U.S.
policy of ``zero yield.''
Stockpile Responsiveness Program (SRP): SRP is responsible for
exercising and enhancing capabilities across the entire nuclear weapons
development and production process to improve the responsiveness of the
United States to future threats, technology trends, and international
developments not addressed by existing life extension programs. For
example, SRP is investing in efforts to address issues in design for
manufacturability, digital engineering, component, and system
prototyping and testing.
Inertial Confinement Fusion (ICF) Program: The ICF Program supports
the assessment and certification of the nuclear weapon stockpile by
providing the facilities, scientific expertise, and experimental
capability necessary to acquire data at the extreme conditions of
nuclear weapon operation. The ICF program also supports research on
thermonuclear fusion with the goal of reaching fusion ignition and
eventually high fusion yield in the laboratory. The fiscal year 2023
request supports ICF research and facilities, enabling access to
experimental data that underpin the safety, security, and effectiveness
of the nuclear stockpile and continued progress toward the capabilities
necessary to meet long-term stewardship needs.
NNSA Exascale Computing Initiative: The Exascale Computing
Initiative (ECI) will provide NNSA with next-generation simulation
capabilities to support weapons design, science-based stockpile
stewardship, and stockpile certification activities. The fiscal year
2023 budget request will continue funding maturation of next-generation
simulation and computing technologies and enables NNSA to meet its
exascale system initial operation capability in fiscal year 2023,
including transition of the next-generation, validated weapons codes to
next-generation classified computing.
Academic Programs: The challenges of sustaining the nuclear
deterrent long-term demand a strong and diverse base of national
expertise and educational opportunities in specialized technical areas
that uniquely contribute to stockpile stewardship. NNSA's Academic
Programs are designed to cultivate, attract, and retain such a
workforce. Funding in this area supports the Administration's Executive
Order on Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved
Communities through the Federal Government, Academic Alliances and
existing partnerships with Minority Serving Institutions, and an
increase in student engagement and internship opportunities.
Secure Transportation Asset
Secure Transportation Asset (STA) supports the safe, secure
transport of the Nation's nuclear weapons, weapon components, and
special nuclear material throughout the nuclear security enterprise to
meet nuclear security requirements. Nuclear weapon life extension
programs, limited-life component exchanges, surveillance,
dismantlement, nonproliferation activities, and experimental programs
rely on STA to ensure safe, secure, and on-schedule transport. The
fiscal year 2023 budget request for STA is $344 million, an increase of
$13.7 million, or 4.1 percent, above the fiscal year 2022 enacted
amount to increase the Federal Agent workforce to a level necessary to
keep pace with the growing program deliverables.
The Office of Secure Transportation's (OST) priorities for fiscal
year 2023 include modernization and sustainment of transportation
assets. This includes the Safeguards Transporter (SGT) life extension
program to secure its service until replacement by the Mobile Guardian
Transporter (MGT), as well as the entry into service of procured 737-
700 aircraft. The first MGT Production Unit is planned for completion
in fiscal year 2026 and initial rate production is set to commence in
fiscal year 2027. Currently, aircraft are undergoing heavy maintenance
checks, painting to NNSA standards, and a major modification from a
passenger jet to a FlexCombi that is configurable to carry various
loads of personnel and cargo.
OST also remains focused on recruiting, stabilizing, training, and
retaining the Federal Agent and staff workforce necessary to support
mission requirements. OST has committed to a stable human resources
strategy to achieve an optimal agent force. OST has increased staffing
numbers by optimizing position qualifications and managing risk
associated with the Human Reliability Program. Although COVID-19
impacted key milestones and deliverables, OST successfully accomplished
every assigned mission for the previous year.
Defense Nuclear Security
Defense Nuclear Security's fiscal year 2023 budget request is
$882.3 million, an increase of $38.2 million, or 4.5 percent over the
fiscal year 2022 enacted level. The Office of Defense Nuclear
Security's (DNS) primary mission is protecting the facilities, people,
and assets critical to achieving NNSA's important national security
missions. The need for increasing security due to growth across
enterprise from projects such as LAP4 and UPF, along with additional
resources required to sustain core security, has resulted in increased
program requirements for DNS. Support for the request is vital for the
protection of the enterprise, its people, and its sensitive material
and information. DNS remains focused on improving physical security
infrastructure with several new projects and the development and
deployment of new systems. Progress is also being made in countering
unmanned aircraft systems. The first such platform was deployed at LANL
in December 2017. Deployment at other facilities is expected to be
completed in late fiscal year 2022.
Cybersecurity and Emerging Issues
The fiscal year 2023 budget request for information technology and
cybersecurity is $445.7 million, $39.1 million, or 9.6 percent, over
the fiscal year 2022 enacted amount. This request funds ongoing
operations and invests in improvements across NNSA to modernize both
classified and unclassified systems, improves information management
and data governance, implements critical aspects of a zero-trust
architecture in our networks and systems, and allows for the execution
of a robust cybersecurity program. As an example, NNSA recently
recapitalized its deployed cyber sensor platform, significantly
improving the ability to detect and respond to malicious activity.
Maintaining a strong cybersecurity program is a critical defense
mechanism and a powerful deterrence tool. To strengthen oversight of
the cyber program, the budget request includes a recategorization of
certain Cybersecurity program investments into the Information
Technology program. As a result, the request more clearly reflects
investments in cybersecurity tools and services provided to the
enterprise, maintains core cyber operations at the labs, plants, and
sites, and improves management and transparency of these funds.
NNSA also recently completed an enterprise-wide cybersecurity
assessment, in conjunction with the Institute for Defense Analyses,
aimed at evaluating the overall cybersecurity posture and developing a
set of recommendations to improve the program. That review calls for
increased investment in information technology and cyber infrastructure
to better meet current and emerging challenges, as well as outlines
strategies related to workforce development issues. NNSA has already
started acting on the findings and will continue to do so with the
fiscal year 2023 requested budget.
defense nuclear nonproliferation appropriation
The fiscal year 2023 budget request for the Defense Nuclear
Nonproliferation account is $2.3 billion, an increase of $274 million,
or 13.2 percent, over the fiscal year 2022 enacted level. When the use
of prior year balances is considered, the proposed funding level for
the account increases by $397 million, or 19.2 percent. The use of
prior year balances will allow DNN programs to supplement new budget
authority across its programs.
This account funds all activities in the offices of Defense Nuclear
Nonproliferation, Emergency Operations, and Counterterrorism and
Counterproliferation. Within these offices, this appropriation funds
six nonproliferation programs, a counterterrorism and
counterproliferation program, and an incident response program as part
of a whole-of-government approach. Together these efforts provide
policy and technical leadership to prevent or limit the spread of
weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and the related materials,
technology, and expertise as well as to detect and respond to nuclear
terrorism or proliferation events.
Nonproliferation Efforts
For decades, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation (DNN) has developed
and implemented policy and technical solutions to eliminate
proliferation sensitive material and limit or prevent the spread of
materials, technology, and expertise necessary for nuclear and
radiological weapons. By working with governments, international
organizations, and private sector partners around the world these
efforts reduce the reliance on radioactive material in commercial and
research industries; better secure nuclear and radioactive material;
develop capabilities to interdict material outside of regulatory
control; and maintain a robust response capability for nuclear and
radiological incidents at home and abroad.
The fiscal year 2023 budget request will allow the Office of
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation to better confront current and
anticipated proliferation challenges including the growing nuclear
programs and strategic competition with Russia and China, the impacts
of Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, risks related to the North
Korean and Iranian nuclear programs, and disruptive technologies that
lower the barrier to proliferation. Through these efforts DNN aims to
restore American leadership in nonproliferation solutions and cutting-
edge technology required to address future threats.
The Material Management and Minimization (M3) program fiscal year
2023 budget request is $451 million, an increase of $108 million, or
31.5 percent, over the fiscal year 2022 enacted level. M3 programs
reduce and, when possible, eliminate weapons-usable nuclear material
around the world. The fiscal year 2023 budget request supports the
conversion or shutdown of research reactors and isotope production
facilities that use HEU, the use of non-HEU-based Mo-99 production, the
removal and disposal of weapons-usable nuclear material, and the
removal of plutonium from the State of South Carolina. Additionally, to
date, nearly 7,270 kilograms of weapons-usable nuclear material from 48
countries and Taiwan have been removed or confirmed disposed, while 108
civilian research reactors and isotope production facilities have
stopped using weapons-grade material in their work.
The Global Material Security program fiscal year 2023 budget
request is $504 million, a decrease of $27.4 million, or 5.1 percent,
below the fiscal year 2022 enacted level. The fiscal year 2023 request
supports program efforts to prevent terrorists and other actors from
obtaining nuclear and radioactive material for use in an improvised
nuclear device by working with domestic and global partners. This
includes improving the security of vulnerable materials and sites,
promoting the adoption of alternative technologies that do not rely on
radioactive sources, and increasing capacity to detect, disrupt and
interdict illicit trafficking operations. Working through the RadSecure
100 Initiative, NNSA will accelerate and expand permanent risk
reduction, security enhancements, and response integration with local
law enforcement in the top 100 major metropolitan areas of the United
States. To date, NNSA has replaced approximately 130 cesium-137 based
blood irradiators with alternative technologies. The program remains on
track to replace nearly all the estimated 400 such devices in the
United States by 2027 as mandated in the fiscal year 2019 NDAA. In
addition, NNSA is partnering with domestic advanced nuclear reactor
vendors in `security-by-design' activities to enhance the security of
their systems for domestic and international use. Finally, NNSA
continues to build additional partnerships with bilateral and
multilateral partners focused on counter nuclear smuggling. To date,
NNSA partners with 84 countries in this area and continues to expand
cooperation with existing and new partners to expand global counter
nuclear smuggling capabilities.
The Nonproliferation and Arms Control (NPAC) program fiscal year
2023 budget request is $208 million, an increase of $23 million, or
12.4 percent, above the fiscal year 2022 enacted level. The increased
funding request supports two increasingly important activities: (1)
policy and technology development activities for peaceful uses of
nuclear energy along with support for the International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA), and (2) policy and technology development for potential
arms control agreements that extend to new types of strategic weapons
as well as tactical nuclear weapons.
By focusing on ensuring the peaceful use of nuclear energy, NPAC
programs strengthen nonproliferation regimes through the development
and implementation of effective technologies and policies. This is
especially important as nuclear energy programs expand internationally
in response to clean energy implementation to address climate change.
New nuclear safeguards and monitoring and verification technologies are
needed to secure materials and to detect proliferation activities
early. NPAC works to mature technologies and transfer them to the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and partner countries to
implement. The U.S. also supplies IAEA with U.S. subject matter
experts, training, and equipment advice and procurement aid. In fiscal
year 2022 and fiscal year 2023 NPAC is helping establish the
nonproliferation enrichment testing and training platform. This
platform will be turned over to the IAEA for commissioning and
operation in fiscal year 2024. On the policy side, NPAC supports the
development and implementation of Section 123 agreements and the
careful regulation of nuclear technology exports utilizing Part 810
Authorizations.
Approximately $30 million funds increasing nuclear weapons
verification activities. This will improve U.S. technical policy and
readiness for future arms control agreements and associated
verification technology. New investment in the Arms Control Advancement
Initiative will strengthen NNSA's capacity to address future nuclear
warhead monitoring and verification requirements through advanced
technology development, robust modeling and measurements, and sustained
expert engagement to maintain a pipeline of experts to helps advance
arms control objectives over time.
The Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Research and Development (DNN
R&D) program fiscal year 2023 budget request is $720 million, a
decrease of $9 million, or 1.2 percent, below the fiscal year 2022
enacted level. DNN R&D is the key component for the innovation of
United States' technical capabilities to detect nuclear detonations;
foreign nuclear weapons programs' activities; and the presence,
movement, or diversion of special nuclear materials. The program also
sustains and develops foundational nonproliferation technical
competencies that ensure the technical agility needed to support a
broad spectrum of U.S. nonproliferation missions and anticipate
threats. Consistent with the growing nonproliferation challenges, this
funding request for DNN R&D programs will expand activities that
advance the development of next-generation nuclear arms control
monitoring and verification technology and expertise symbiotic with the
NPAC efforts.
The Nonproliferation Construction program fiscal year 2023 budget
request is $72 million, a decrease of $84 million, or 54 percent, below
the fiscal year 2022 enacted level. This decrease is due to the
awarding of the long-lead procurement contracts for gloveboxes,
emergency generators and HEPA filters under CD-3A Phase 2 in fiscal
year 2022 and the expected fiscal year 2023 completion of design work
for the Surplus Plutonium Disposition (SPD) project required for CD-2/
3, Approval of Performance Baseline and Start of Construction. The
fiscal year 2023 budget request supports the implementation of the
dilute and dispose strategy, by continuing design for the SPD project.
The SPD project will add additional glovebox capacity at the SRS to
accelerate plutonium dilution and aid in the removal of plutonium from
South Carolina.
NNSA is requesting the establishment of a Bioassurance Program in
fiscal year 2023. The budget request is $20 million. As the COVID-19
pandemic has shown, the United States needs better capabilities to
anticipate, respond to, and mitigate threats to the bioeconomy. NNSA
proposes to establish a national security bioassurance program to
perform activities to anticipate and detect threats and scale response
solutions to support the security of the future bioeconomy and monitor
and thwart malpractice in this area. This funding supports foundational
work at DOE/NNSA laboratories including the anticipation of
destabilizing threats through modeling, identifying threat signatures
and developing detection technologies, and rapidly developing and
validating safeguards and threat mitigation approaches. NNSA will
integrate its high-security work with the Department's Office of
Science supported ``open'' science work and other government agencies,
providing the full spectrum of capabilities essential for a
bioassurance program informed by national security expertise drawn from
parallel and analogous work on nuclear threats, risks, export controls
and licensing, nonproliferation, detection, and verification.
Nuclear Counterterrorism and Incident Response
The fiscal year 2023 request for the Nuclear Counterterrorism and
Incident Response (NCTIR) program is $439 million, an increase of $68
million, or 18.4 percent, over the fiscal year 2022 enacted amount. The
NCTIR program supports two subprograms: Counterterrorism and
Counterproliferation (CTCP) and Emergency Operations (EO).
CTCP is responsible for countering nuclear terrorism and nuclear
proliferation, responding to nuclear incidents and accidents worldwide,
advancing nuclear forensic capabilities, and building domestic and
international partner capacity concerning emergency preparedness and
response. CTCP's unique scientific and operational capabilities make it
an integral part of the U.S. Government's layered defense against
nuclear terrorism and nuclear proliferation.
CTCP manages the NEST, NNSA's multi-mission emergency response
capability comprised of on-call technical specialists who are trained
and equipped to respond to nuclear incidents and accidents worldwide.
NEST's missions include both national security and public health and
safety disciplines.
NNSA, in conjunction with the Federal Bureau of Investigation
(FBI), supports regional counter-WMD teams in 14 major U.S. cities as
part of the ``Capability Forward'' initiative. CTCP provides
technology, equipment, and training in support of these teams to
enhance regional capabilities to defeat nuclear and radiological
devices, accelerating life-saving responses to a WMD event.
The fiscal year 2023 budget request addresses critical shortfalls
in CTCP's capabilities to execute DOE's Primary Mission Essential
Function (PMEF)-2, Respond to Nuclear Incidents. In coordination with
interagency efforts to identify and address WMD response gaps,
increased funding addresses staffing needs, ensures operational
integration and full-spectrum training and exercises in accordance with
interagency objectives, and supports technology development and
infrastructure requirements.
Additional programmatic funding will also invest in new incident
response expertise and technology; continue NEST equipment
recapitalization efforts with planned procurement for replacement of
diagnostic equipment and detection systems required for the public
health and safety, counter-WMD, and nuclear weapon accident response
mission areas; and bolster CTCP efforts to counter nuclear
proliferation through applied analysis, concept development, predictive
modeling, and testing.
CTCP also contributes to the interagency National Technical Nuclear
Forensics mission, a central pillar of the U.S. strategy to deter
hostile States from providing nuclear material to terrorists. CTCP's
fiscal year 2023 budget request includes $43 million for this effort,
including training and exercises for responders; procurement,
maintenance, logistics, and technical integration of equipment;
readiness to deploy pre- and post-detonation response and device
assessment teams; and laboratory analysis of nuclear or radiological
material.
EO provides both the structure and processes to ensure a
comprehensive and integrated approach to all-hazards emergency
management, thus improving readiness and effectiveness of the DOE
Emergency Management System on a programmatic and performance level
regardless of the nature of the emergency impacting the DOE/NNSA
enterprise or its equities anywhere in the world. The fiscal year 2023
budget request supports Continuity of Operations, Continuity of
Government, and Enduring Constitutional Government programs to advance
the National Continuity Policy and ensure the continued performance and
delivery of essential services under any circumstances. The fiscal year
2023 budget request also provides for 24/7/365 Consolidated Emergency
Operations Center communications and coordination support to the DOE/
NNSA Emergency Management Enterprise and Departmental Senior
Leadership. The request also includes funding for investments in
communications equipment and classified communications system
improvements to support emergency operations and continuity
infrastructure improvements.
naval reactors appropriation
Advancing Naval Nuclear Propulsion
With over 40 percent of the Navy's major combatants being nuclear-
powered, this technology remains critical to our national security
posture. It provides the nation's submarines and aircraft carriers with
unmatched mobility, flexibility, responsiveness, and endurance. The
ability to maintain robust fleet capabilities on long-term missions is
essential for the security of global trade and the security of our
allies. The Office of Naval Reactors is the foundation of this national
achievement in global security. Cutting edge advancements across all
aspects of the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program, from reactor plant
development and design to the disposition of spent fuel, gives the U.S.
Navy a decisive edge in naval warfare and enhances the security and
reliability of the sea-leg of our nuclear triad.
The fiscal year 2023 budget request for Naval Reactors is $2.08
billion, an increase of $163 million, or 8.5 percent, above the fiscal
year 2022 enacted level. The funding does not reflect the mandated
transfer of $92.75 million in fiscal year 2022 to the Office of Nuclear
Energy for operation of the Advanced Test Reactor. The budget request
supports the continued safe and reliable operation of the nuclear-
powered fleet, and it supports investment in technology development to
deliver improvements in propulsion plant performance,
manufacturability, and affordability--for current and future warships.
Funding also supports requirements for the office's three major
projects: COLUMBIA-class ballistic missile submarine reactor systems
development; construction of the Naval Spent Fuel Handling Facility in
Idaho; and the refueling and overhaul of the S8G Prototype land-based
reactor in New York for continued sailor training and technology
testing.
Consistent, sustained funding is vital for the support of these
projects and will allow Naval Reactors to meet current and future force
needs. Close coordination with the Navy led to the start of
construction of the COLUMBIA-class lead ship in fiscal year 2021. The
S8G Refueling Overhaul is expected to reach completion in fiscal year
2023. The Spent Fuel Handling Recapitalization project at the Naval
Reactors Facility in Idaho is making significant progress with an
estimated completion in fiscal year 2026.
AUKUS
On September 15, 2021, Australia, the UK, and the U.S. announced
the creation of an enhanced trilateral security partnership (AUKUS),
focused on peace and security in the Indo-Pacific region. The three
governments are currently 6 months into an 18-month consultation period
to establish the most efficient path forward for the delivery of a
nuclear-powered, conventional, submarine capability to Australia as
expeditiously as possible. As part of the international working group
developing nonproliferation and safeguards aspects of the AUKUS
program, NNSA will provide technical advice to the interagency and our
AUKUS partners on the full suite of requirements that underpin nuclear
stewardship to implement strong safeguards measures and achieve the
AUKUS objectives.
This cooperation is fully consistent with our obligations under the
Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT). The NPT does not prohibit naval
nuclear propulsion. In our role in this trilateral partnership, we
intend to implement the strongest possible nonproliferation standards
to maintain the strength and integrity of the nuclear nonproliferation
regime. Australia is not seeking, and the U.S. and UK are not and will
not assist in any acquisition of nuclear weapons. Additionally,
Australia has committed not to enrich uranium or reprocess spent fuel
in the context of AUKUS.
federal salaries and expenses appropriation
The fiscal year 2023 budget request for Federal Salaries and
Expenses (FSE) is $496 million, an increase of $32 million, or 7
percent, above the fiscal year 2022 enacted level. The increase in this
account will support an additional 132 Federal Full-time Equivalents
(FTE) above the fiscal year 2022 enacted level, bringing the total to
1,958. FSE increases will also support increased space and occupancy
needs, travel costs, support service contractors, training, and other
related expenses.
The NNSA Federal workforce is critical to the success of the
Nation's nuclear security enterprise. NNSA's expanding mission
requirements and pressing modernization and recapitalization needs
require recruiting, training, and retaining a skilled Federal workforce
with the appropriate capabilities to meet mission requirements and
deliver on our objectives. This workforce represents some of the top
minds on nuclear issues, consisting of a diverse team of scientists,
engineers, project and program managers, foreign affairs specialists,
and support staff that perform program and project management and
conduct appropriate oversight of national security missions. NNSA's
Federal workforce is distributed across the enterprise and can be found
in eight States and Washington, DC.
NNSA currently faces two significant hurdles in achieving full
staffing: retirement and private sector competition. As of fiscal year
2021 17.3 percent of NNSA FTE Federal staff are eligible to retire, a
number that is expected to rise to 35.4 percent by fiscal year 2027.
Additionally, in fiscal year 2021 the annual FSE attrition rate was
10.7 percent, higher than the average attrition rate of 8.9 percent
over the past 13 years. NNSA also faces competition from the private
sector for top talent in technical fields.
Combating these trends requires an aggressive, external hiring
strategy. NNSA has utilized a renewed focus on virtual recruitment
events that support hiring across the nuclear security enterprise in
support of all program areas. In October 2021, NNSA initiated a pilot
program for expedited hiring within 15 business days, from the time the
program office selected a candidate to the time Human Resources
provided an entry on duty date. NNSA is applying lessons learned from
this pilot program to continue progress on a streamlined hiring effort.
Finally, NNSA has expanded the effort to enlarge fellowship program
candidate pools and employ available alternative hiring authorities to
compress the hiring timeline for qualified candidates and increase the
overall hiring rate.
NNSA's recruitment and hiring efforts will support mission and
growth requirements and will continue to support the Administration's
goals of promoting racial and economic equity as a way to foster
scientific breakthroughs, research and development excellence, and
enhanced national security.
conclusion
NNSA's enduring responsibility is providing the United States with
a nuclear weapons stockpile and naval nuclear propulsion systems that
are the best in the world while simultaneously promoting
nonproliferation and counterterrorism efforts to reduce overall nuclear
risk. The President's fiscal year 2023 budget, informed by the 2022
Nuclear Posture Review, supports our efforts to keep the nuclear
deterrent and naval nuclear propulsion systems safe, secure, reliable,
and militarily effective. Recognizing the increasingly volatile
geopolitical environment, NNSA must also stay resolute in sustaining
and evolving our nuclear security, non-proliferation, and
counterterrorism efforts to help offset and stay ahead of nuclear
risks.
NNSA has a unique responsibility to provide an effective nuclear
deterrent in a timely manner to protect our Nation and our allies. The
fiscal year 2023 budget request funds the five life extension and
modernization programs that support all three legs of the triad. In
fiscal year 2023 the requested budget also supports significant
investments in new production facilities for uranium processing and
plutonium pit manufacturing at the fastest responsible pace. The budget
request contains close to equal funding for stockpile management and
production modernization, a true indication of the intent to accelerate
activities by working on weapon design and production in parallel with
infrastructure revitalization. The science and engineering support for
the weapons program stays strong to allow for the continued development
of capabilities to design and certify the stockpile without testing and
to stay ahead of threats.
The Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation budget request sustains our
efforts to reduce nuclear risk by eliminating, minimizing, and securing
nuclear and radiological materials. In addition, the DNN portfolio
request recognizes the changing world by increasing support for policy
and technology development aimed at the increased proliferation risks
associated with the increase in nuclear energy around the world,
preparing for an increasingly complex arms control and global stability
environment, and by initiating a bioassurance program. Similarly, the
increased budget request for the counterterrorism and
counterproliferation program is responsive to the changing threat
environment.
The Naval Reactors budget request recognizes the excellent
stewardship provided over the years and continues to support the high
priority needs to replace aging tools, build a new spent fuel handling
facility, and support the COLUMBIA-class production schedule.
The challenges NNSA faces ahead are steep and we are mindful of the
resources entrusted to it. For fiscal year 2023, NNSA scrubbed prior
year balances and used available funds to offset some of the increased
budget needs. NNSA, in partnership with Congress and our colleagues in
the Departments of Energy and Defense, is steadfast in our commitment
to fulfill vital national security mission and deliver our goals. We
greatly appreciate your support.
Prepared Statement of Admiral James F. Caldwell
Chairman Feinstein, Ranking Member Kennedy, and distinguished
members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to appear
before you today and present the President's fiscal year 2023 budget
for Naval Reactors. Your strong support for the work we do ensures our
nuclear Navy can carry out vital missions around the world with
agility, endurance, and firepower. As underscored by the unprecedented
events currently playing out on the world stage, great power
competition is here to stay, therefore it is vital for the United
States that we maintain a robust naval advantage over our adversaries.
Congress' support of our past efforts has allowed the Navy to maintain
these advantages, and your partnership with the Navy is needed now,
more than ever, as we work on the current and future endeavors in naval
nuclear propulsion that are needed to protect the national security of
the United States.
I have had the pleasure of serving as the Director of Naval
Reactors for almost 7 years out of an eight-year tenure. Before that, I
had the privilege of serving in many operational and staff roles
throughout the course of my Navy career. As I reflect on these decades
of service and our Navy's global standing, I am increasingly concerned
that our competitive advantages over our near-peer rivals are
diminishing. It is vitally important for us to focus on technology
investment now; failure to do so could have catastrophic implications
for our future Navy in a future fight. Rivals are pursuing military
modernization programs aimed at achieving regional hegemony in the
near-term and eroding United States preeminence in the long-term. All
domains of the maritime environment are becoming increasingly
contested, and to preserve freedom of the seas, deter conflict, defend
allies, and protect our national interests, we must sustain and grow
our naval warfighting capabilities at an accelerated pace.
As amplified in our latest National Defense Strategy, we cannot
simply do more of what we've done in the past. New advancements and
refinements in nuclear propulsion are needed as the Navy innovates to
increase and expand our competitive advantage. Naval Reactors'
historical investment in advanced technologies has given the nation an
enviable position in the maritime environment; further investments,
however, are necessary to maintain our technological edge well into the
future. Our ships need to retain their advantage against future threats
across multiple domains and must be affordable. We also need to be able
to design and build our propulsion plants faster to ensure the Navy
stays ahead of increasing demands, and we must do this more cost
effectively. As the CNO has conveyed in his Navigation Plan, ``there is
no time to waste--our actions in this decade will set the maritime
balance of power for the rest of the century.'' Our nation took a new
step this past year when the President announced the AUKUS enhanced
tri-lateral security partnership, directing a period of consultation
with the objective of identifying the optimal pathway for delivering a
conventionally-armed, nuclear-powered submarine capability to Australia
by the earliest achievable date. This partnership creates an
opportunity to amplify our naval power, strengthen a key ally and our
own shipbuilding capability, and build the additional industrial and
vendor base capacity our Nation needs. Through the consultation period,
Naval Reactors is also focused on strengthening our partnership with
the United Kingdom, and ensuring Australia understands and establishes
the strong foundation of capabilities necessary to properly steward
nuclear submarine technology. Given the global threats we face, it is
imperative that we ensure our closest allies remain relevant in the
undersea domain.
Our success in the future will rest on the foundation of what we
build today. Therefore, I want to highlight some of the many
contributions of our nuclear fleet. Our ballistic missile submarines
provide the most survivable leg of our nuclear triad and are essential
to our ability to deter major warfare, and provide assurance to our
allies. Our fast attack submarines operate with confidence, undetected,
safeguarding vital commercial sea-lanes, and stand ready to protect
American interests where needed. Our aircraft carriers provide our
nation a credible, sustained ability to project combat power, deter
conflict, and protect our interests around the world.
Lead ship construction for COLUMBIA Class is underway, which will
allow the Navy to continue the seamless execution of the sea-based
strategic deterrent mission that began over six decades ago. The USS
OHIO (SSBN 726), lead ship of today's ballistic missile submarine fleet
was commissioned over 40 years ago. This class will start to be
replaced by the COLUMBIA Class in 2031 with lead boat delivery in
fiscal year 2028. I remain focused on ensuring the transition between
these two classes is uninterrupted--the sea based strategic deterrence
mission is too important to fail. The COLUMBIA Class will be a bedrock
of our national security posture for decades to come and will be the
first submarine to operate for over 40 years on a single reactor core,
an incredible testimonial to the technology investment that has
occurred over the past decades.
In attack submarine shipbuilding, the Navy continues to work toward
a steady cadence of VIRGINIA Class submarine delivery. I recently took
part in sea trials on Pre-Commissioning Units (PCU) MONTANA and OREGON.
This submarine class now makes up over one third of our operational
attack submarines. The Navy is also assessing improvements to
capability and lethality for future VIRGINIA Class submarines; these
improvements will not only add capability to today's fleet but allow
the Navy to prove candidate technologies that will influence our next-
generation attack submarine. Naval Reactors is closely aligned with the
Navy on all of these efforts. Along with the technologies being
inserted for VIRGINIA Class submarines, Naval Reactors has renewed our
focus and investment in advanced technologies which will pave the way
for improvements in speed, energy density, and stealth for the follow
on SSN(X) program. We are also focused on refueling up to seven LOS
ANGELES Class submarines, helping to maintain our submarine force
structure with boats that have the warfighting capability to contribute
effectively to undersea missions.
In aircraft carrier shipbuilding, USS GERALD R. FORD (CVN 78)
continues to make great progress and will soon be employed and
operating alongside U.S. and allied forces. This phenomenal ship is
ready to provide over a half century of naval presence around the
globe. This past year marked a significant event in the employment of
the FORD Class--Full Ship Shock Trials. The positive result of this
testing is a tribute to the precision, rigor, and execution that go
into the design, production, and delivery of the world's most capable
aircraft carrier. The second ship of the FORD Class, the JOHN F.
KENNEDY (CVN 79) continues propulsion plant testing and is on track for
delivery to the Navy in 2024. Progress also continues on construction
of ENTERPRISE (CVN 80) and DORIS MILLER (CVN 81), carriers in a two-
ship buy that allows the Navy to realize important cost savings, while
maintaining a steady, predictable workload within our vital industrial
base.
naval reactors overview
This committee's support has enabled the safe operation of the
nuclear fleet, substantial progress on our key projects, and our
continued oversight and regulation of all areas across the Naval
Nuclear Propulsion Program. Naval Reactors' budget request for fiscal
year 2023 is $2.1 billion. Your past support has allowed significant
progress on our three major Department of Energy funded projects--
COLUMBIA Class propulsion plant development and production, the
refueling overhaul of our research and training reactor in New York,
and the construction of the Naval Spent Fuel Handling Facility in
Idaho. When I first arrived at Naval Reactors in 2015, these three
projects had not yet hit their peak funding. Over the course of the
past several years, these projects have been a major focus for the
Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program. We have managed and lead the way
through many challenges, and today, I can confidently say that the
development and production of the first COLUMBIA Class propulsion plant
is proceeding in support of lead boat construction; and the refueling
of our research and training reactor will complete within fiscal year
2023. With your support, the Program also continues to make significant
progress on construction of an incredibly important Naval Spent Fuel
Handling Facility. While we are staying focused on completing these
efforts, we are also preparing for the future with renewed emphasis on
advanced and innovative technologies.
major projects
COLUMBIA Class Propulsion Plant
The COLUMBIA Class ballistic missile submarine remains the Navy's
number one acquisition priority. Naval Reactors is supporting lead ship
construction and is delivering the life-of-ship reactor core and the
electric drive propulsion system for the COLUMBIA Class program. The
fiscal year 2023 budget includes $53.9 million that will allow
continued support for lead ship propulsion plant design and safety
analysis work required for lead ship reactor testing and delivery.
S8G Prototype Refueling Overhaul
The fiscal year 2023 budget request includes $20 million toward
final execution of the refueling and overhaul of the New York land-
based prototype, which will enable an additional 20 years of Naval
Reactors' commitment to research, development, and initial operator
training. Over the course of the past 3 years, the project has worked
through performance and testing equipment challenges, and in April of
last year met a key milestone--installation of the new reactor core.
This reactor core, called the Technology Demonstration Core, includes
COLUMBIA Class type fuel modules as part of testing and demonstrating
the manufacturability necessary for production and delivery of the
COLUMBIA Class reactor core. We continue to provide strong oversight to
improve cost and schedule performance, and the project will complete in
fiscal year 2023. I look forward to providing the final update on this
multi-year project in next year's appearance before the Committee.
Spent Fuel Handling Recapitalization Project
Naval Reactors is constructing the Naval Spent Fuel Handling
Facility (SFHP), located at the Naval Reactors Facility in Idaho. The
facility is critical to our mission to manage naval spent nuclear fuel
and support aircraft carrier and submarine fleet requirements. The
fiscal year 2023 budget request includes $398 million for continuation
of this project through several key milestones. Economic conditions
influenced by the COVID-19 pandemic and the discovery of unexpected
bedrock conditions beneath the facility's foundations have presented
significant challenges for us. To address these challenges, we
evaluated actions necessary to ensure the overall Project milestones
remain achievable, including additional resources (e.g., extended/added
shifts, parallel and fast-tracking of work efforts) and additional
funding to mitigate impacts to current and future construction
subcontracts. Consistent with these actions, I approved a revision to
the SFHP Performance Baseline in fiscal year 2021. Funding in fiscal
year 2023 will be critical to implementing our construction sequence. I
remain committed to keeping the committee informed of our progress, and
actions to mitigate construction challenges, as we aggressively manage
and oversee this complex and large-scale infrastructure project.
technical base funding
In addition to our three priority projects, Naval Reactors
maintains a high-performing technical base. The technical base is the
set of fundamental skills and capabilities necessary to safely and
effectively support the nuclear Navy. It includes a foundation of
specialists in nuclear materials, nuclear physics, thermal-hydraulic
testing, acoustics, electrical design, software development, system
development, refueling, and other specialized skills, along with the
associated facilities and laboratories to conduct our work. The people
and activities that make up our technical base are leveraged for our
priority projects but also perform essential work to support the
operating fleet and ensure our day-to-day technological advantage over
our competitors. Specifically, the technical base: (1) addresses
emergent needs and challenges of our nuclear fleet, (2) executes
nuclear reactor technology research and development that supports
improving today's fleet and future capabilities, and (3) modernizes
critical infrastructure and reduces the Program's legacy environmental
liabilities. This base also supports the lean yet highly effective
Federal workforce that provides the oversight necessary to carry out
this important technical work safely and efficiently. These activities
provide 24-7 support to the globally deployed nuclear-powered Navy.
Attracting and retaining top talent is critical to our technical base's
ability to fulfill and mature our mission amidst a wide array of
challenges and new demands in this era of strategic competition. The
engineers and scientists at our Naval Nuclear Laboratory and nuclear
capable shipyards are national treasures, who are in high demand from
other areas of our economy. We continue to work with the leadership of
our labs and private shipyards to identify innovative means to stay
competitive in this aggressive talent market.
Program Direction
Our small but highly skilled Federal workforce is critical to
execution of our responsibilities. With the fiscal year 2023 Program
Direction request, I remain highly focused on attracting, developing,
and retaining a talented and diverse workforce to oversee and manage a
wide array of work across the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program to
ensure mission success. The talented and dedicated people at our
Washington, DC headquarters and field offices are absolutely essential
to our strong centralized management and oversight of the important
work we perform for our Nation.
Building ships that have over forty years of expected life requires
staffing continuity to ensure the Nation has a workforce with the deep
technical knowledge needed to execute Naval Reactors' cradle-to-grave
responsibilities of these robust systems. I must have sufficient
Federal staffing to meet the demands of sustaining and improving
today's fleet while simultaneously growing our future capabilities. The
cumulative effect of personnel costs growing above inflationary rates
and an increase in recent senior level retirements has impeded our
ability to reach this goal and challenged our ability to maintain our
staffing levels. The market for this talent is exceptionally
competitive. Increasingly complex systems, new and innovative research
efforts, and growing cyber and other vulnerabilities require additional
expertise and new perspectives that can only be gained through reaching
our full personnel requirements. I will continue to communicate with
the committee on our requirements and progress in reaching our related
staffing goals. In concert with our renewed focus on research and
development that I have highlighted over the last several years, we
need to find new ways to bring the nation's top talent into Naval
Reactors and retain this talent to transition technical innovations
into our submarines and aircraft carriers. I respectfully request
Congress' support, which will allow me to recruit, select, develop, and
retain the talented workforce that was started by Admiral Hyman
Rickover many decades ago and that has proved to be crucial to the
success of the Program.
Research and Development
Our research and development strategy represents a renewed
investment in cutting-edge technologies aimed at reversing an eroding
capability gap with strategic adversaries like China and Russia.
Technology investment must be reinvigorated today to have new
technologies ready for future classes of ships and to lower costs and
reduce construction timelines. It should be noted that these
investments also enhance and improve the performance of today's fleet;
this is especially important given the increasing competition in the
global maritime environment. Our critical research and development is
conducted by the dedicated and talented teams of people at our Naval
Nuclear Laboratory sites--the Bettis Atomic Power Laboratory in
Pittsburgh, the Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory and Kesselring Site in
greater Albany, and the Naval Reactors Facility in Idaho.
Our first priority is always support of today's fleet. Our labs
perform approximately 4,000 technical evaluations annually that enable
Naval Reactors to thoroughly assess and respond to emergent issues,
thereby keeping our ships mission-ready while ensuring nuclear safety.
These efforts are essential to keep our ships at-sea operating abroad
for longer periods of time, our carrier strike groups globally engaged,
and ballistic missile and attack submarines ready to respond at any
time.
Beginning with last year's fiscal year 2022 budget, Naval Reactors
has embarked on a path to identify and develop new technologies for
inclusion in the next generation of nuclear powered ships while
simultaneously delivering the enhanced capabilities to the existing
fleet mentioned earlier. We are pursuing advanced reactor core and fuel
systems, advanced manufacturing and inspection techniques, next-
generation instrumentation and control architectures and sensors, and
asymmetrical applications of emerging technologies (e.g., advanced
power conversion, artificial intelligence, data analytics, additive
manufacturing, and advanced robotics). These advancements have the
potential to deliver both greater capability and lower acquisition and
lifecycle costs, while ensuring the Navy is constantly improving our
advantage and innovating. I commit to further engagement with the
committee on these advanced technology maturation efforts to enhance
understanding and support for the actions described above. I take great
pride in highlighting our innovative and new technologies and how we
can transition them into meeting requirements for the Fleet of
tomorrow.
I want to assure the committee that our investments are supported
by a comprehensive and rigorous planning effort we undertake with our
partners at the Naval Nuclear Laboratory. Our annual work execution
plans are derived from this comprehensive alignment, and I personally
review and approve each plan to ensure we are making the right
investments and tradeoffs in all areas of our business.
Facilities and Infrastructure
Our Naval Nuclear Laboratory facilities and infrastructure are
essential in carrying out Naval Reactors' mission. This year's budget
request supports continuing our recapitalization of Naval Nuclear
Laboratory facilities and infrastructure systems, many of which have
supported the Program since its inception over 70 years ago.
Specifically, this budget includes a consolidation and recapitalization
of our thermal hydraulic testing capabilities that will advance
cutting-edge technologies and improve testing efficiency. Without these
recapitalization efforts, we will be unable to effectively support
nuclear fleet operations and advanced research and development efforts
at the level required by this complex technology. We are ramping up our
efforts in decontaminating and decommissioning (D&D) older facilities
that have been in existence since the start of the Program in the early
1950s. We have approximately $8 billion in environmental liabilities
requiring D&D efforts. Over one-third of this estimate is associated
with the cost to remediate and demolish inactive facilities and
infrastructure at the Naval Nuclear Laboratory sites. We continue to
retire these liabilities in an environmentally responsible and cost-
effective manner to support best use of our funding. I look forward to
future engagement with the committee to discuss our specific actions
and tangible examples of Naval Reactors' long-term plan to reach our
goals. Through our established partnership with the Department of
Energy Office of Environmental Management (DOE-EM), we are leveraging
their experience in efficient, safe, and cost-effective remediation of
environmental liabilities across the complex. I am pleased with the
collaboration on this effort with my partners in DOE-EM.
AUKUS
In September of last year, President Biden announced an enhanced
trilateral security partnership between Australia, the United Kingdom,
and the United States (AUKUS). The three governments are engaging in an
18-month consultation period to seek an optimal pathway for delivering
a conventionally-armed, nuclear-powered submarine capability to
Australia at the earliest achievable date. Naval Reactors is playing a
key leadership role in developing this plan to ensure that our nation's
preeminent expertise is applied to the nuclear-powered submarine
initiative. We are now more than 6 months into this consultation period
and are focused on ensuring Australia understands the full scope of
capabilities necessary to design, build, operate, and maintain a
nuclear navy, as well as properly dispose a nuclear powered ship at the
end of service. This includes an in-depth analysis of the trilateral
partners' existing regulatory frameworks, as well as the existing
educational, industrial, and technical capabilities, and capacities
needed to identify the optimal path forward. This effort involves
emphasizing to Australia the key leadership roles, labor talent, and
infrastructure investments they will need to contribute to bring this
to reality. In February, I along with a team of subject matter experts
from Naval Reactors and the United Kingdom traveled to Australia to
assess their current capability. During this trip, I met with senior
Australian government officials. As part of our discussions, we
emphasized that obtaining a nuclear powered submarine capability is a
long road which requires steadfast commitment to the highest levels of
stewardship. While my number one priority is supporting our current and
future nuclear fleet, the AUKUS efforts are being supported by a small
cadre of experts who are responsible for ensuring the critical facets
of this consultation are completed effectively. The foundation on which
this effort is built is made up of our people, our technology, and the
facilities that support our own Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program. While
Australia is funding this consultation period, Congress' support of
Naval Reactors' fiscal year 2023 budget request is vital to support our
primary mission and allow the Naval Reactors leadership team the
ability to support key activities during the consultation period.
conclusion
The Navy's ability to maintain mastery of the undersea domain and
sustain a formidable forward presence and its resultant value cannot be
simply assumed. Naval nuclear propulsion is an incredible but
unforgiving technology, and must be treated appropriately, with a
constant focus on safe operation. Naval Reactor's cradle-to-grave
responsibility to manage this technology is paramount, and I assure
this committee that I will balance investments in today's fleet with
the requirements of a future fleet, carefully steer future cooperation
efforts, and preserve the focus on providing effective naval nuclear
propulsion for the United States Navy. I appreciate the strong support
this program receives from Congress and respectfully urge your support
for our fiscal year 2023 budget request.
B83 MEGATON NUCLEAR BOMB
Senator Feinstein. Thank you very much.
We'll proceed with the questions then. Deputy Secretary
Adams, in 2018,--excuse me--I wrote to then Secretaries Mattis
and Perry about my concern with the Trump Administration's plan
to retain the B83 Megaton Nuclear Bomb. In short, it appeared
to me to be unnecessary.
While this Administration did request funding to retain the
B83 in fiscal year 2022, I was pleased to see its planned
retirement in the fiscal year 2023 budget request, which
mirrored the Biden Nuclear Posture Review.
Deputy Secretary Adams, what is the current plan for the
B83's retirement?
Dr. Adams. So the current plan, first of all, is to ensure
the safety of that weapon while it is still in the field. We
will be spending appropriately on that.
The second part of the plan is to retire it as soon as
practical in accordance with the Nuclear Posture Review.
Senator Feinstein. Well, I think there was some adequate
notice last year that at least I was concerned with it. What is
the plan for that weapon?
Dr. Adams. The plan is to retire it.
Senator Feinstein. And when would that be?
Dr. Adams. I don't have the details, but I can certainly
take that for the record.
[The information follows:]
The 2022 NPR, led by the U.S. Department of Defense, concluded that
the B83-1 should be retired without executing a program to extend the
system's life. A cost-benefit analysis was conducted, and the NPR
determined the combined age and complexity of the weapon outweighed the
benefits of retaining the weapons in inventory. The specific retirement
date of the B83-1 is classified and will be provided to the committee
through the appropriate means to transmit classified information.
Senator Feinstein. Well, if you would take it and just make
note that I'm interested in it. I will follow it. It seems to
me this is a weapon that should be retired or a bomb that
should be retired. So I'd appreciate that.
NON-PROLIFERATION PROGRAMS
Administrator Hruby and Deputy Secretary Hinderstein, the
Nonpro Programs have a good deal to accomplish. This budget
request doesn't adequately fund these essential programs and
NNSA recently announced it plans to reassess Nonproliferation's
priorities.
Administrator Hruby and Deputy Secretary Hinderstein, can
you each describe your vision for the future of NNSA's
Nonproliferation Program?
Ms. Hruby. Thank you, Senator. I'll start and then ask
Corey to add.
So we have some big challenges, as you mentioned. We have
to figure out a new approach to Russia and China. We have to
reassure our allies and partners that the Nonproliferation
Regime is still working, and we have to look at emerging
threats, especially in light of North Korea's actions, Iran's
potential not re-entry into the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan
of Action), and other activities around the world.
So we think we have a solid budget request to do that.
We're starting some new programs, including programs that focus
more on nuclear energy around the world to make sure that it
isn't a proliferation risk, and I'll let Corey talk about that,
and we also have a small request for a new bio-assurance
program.
Ms. Hinderstein. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
I think it's really important when we look around the world
to recognize that we have invested and will and must continue
to invest in our nonproliferation, nuclear security and
counter-proliferation programs.
We feel like we have placed a budget request in front of
you that meets our most pressing needs, but we also recognize
that the world in this space is changing quite quickly.
As the Administrator said, we are focused on making sure
that the threats that we understand can be met and countered
and that we are anticipating the next threats. We cannot just
look at what the problem was before, we have to look at what
the problem's going to be tomorrow and for that reason, we're
investing in our science and technology base, our research and
development base, and our partnership with allies and other
partners around the world, including the important
international organizations that are able to be operationalized
both every day and in the moment of crisis, such as what we've
faced with Russia's invasion of Ukraine and their reckless
behavior in Ukraine around nuclear facilities.
Senator Feinstein. Thank you very much.
Senator Kennedy.
COLUMBIA CLASS BY 2026
Senator Kennedy. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thanks again to all of you for being here. Admiral,
Columbia Class, we need it. We need it by 2027 which is when
we're supposed to have it. Are we on schedule? Tell me we're
going to have it by 2026.
Admiral Caldwell. Yes, sir. Thanks for the question and
thanks for the support of this subcommittee for my programs. It
allows me to deliver what I need to for the U.S. Navy.
We are on pace to deliver Columbia on schedule. Now my
responsibilities there include the reactor plant and the
propulsion plant. On the reactor plant I'm responsible for
designing and delivering the reactor core, which is designed to
last for over 40 years. That's a pretty heavy technological
lift. That core is under manufacture right now and we are on
pace to deliver that core in advance of the need for the
shipyard's construction schedule.
I'm also responsible in the reactor plant for delivering
the heavy components, the large steam generators, reactor
vessels, things like that, and thanks to the prior support of
this subcommittee I was able to complete the designs and order
those materials on schedule in fiscal year 2019. In fact, we're
on pace to deliver those to support the construction of
Columbia.
In fact, recently I saw the reactor vessel in the shipyard
already up there.
There's a lot of other work that goes on to the reactor
safety analysis and the manuals that go with the reactor plant.
Those are all on the pace that we need to.
The other part of my responsibility is the Department of
Navy-funded responsibility to deliver the electric drive. This
ship will have----
Senator Kennedy. Excuse me, Admiral. Give me about 30 more
seconds.
Admiral Caldwell. Yes, sir.
Senator Kennedy. I'm sorry to interrupt you, but I've got
some questions for----
Admiral Caldwell. All right, sir. Anyway, we're on pace,
sir, and thanks to you for your support.
NUCLEAR-ARMED SEA-LAUNCHED CRUISE MISSILE (SLCM-N)
Senator Kennedy. Okay. I don't know whether to call you
Madam Secretary or Madam Administrator.
Madam Secretary Administrator, how about that, tell me why
you want to cancel the submarine launch cruise missile.
Ms. Hruby. Senator, the decision to cancel the SLCM
(submarine-launched cruise missile) was made in the 2022
Nuclear Posture Review by the Department of Defense. Our job is
to support, you know, to deliver warheads for the Department of
Defense, and our budget request is consistent with that.
Senator Kennedy. You agree with the decision?
Ms. Hruby. Well, it's not my job to agree or to disagree
with the decision. I think there are solid arguments on both
sides of this decision----
Senator Kennedy. Well, you don't have to follow it, do you?
Ms. Hruby [continuing.] And that the capability----
Senator Kennedy. You're not bound by what they're
recommending, are you?
Ms. Hruby. My program of record has to be consistent with
what the Department of Defense wants in their Nuclear Program.
Senator Kennedy. Mm-hmm. So you can't call them up and say
I think you're making a big mistake here? What are they going
to do? Hang up on you? No, I don't think so.
Ms. Hruby. Well, I think they will tell me that's not my
job.
B-83 MEGATON BOMB
Senator Kennedy. Mm-hmm. I think you can handle yourself,
Madam Secretary. I believe you could.
Why do you want to retire the B83 early?
Ms. Hruby. Again, a similar answer that was the decision in
the 2022 Nuclear Posture Review. It is a very old weapon and
the decision was made to immediately retire it in the Nuclear
Posture Review and the NNSA intends to do that as the
Administration decided.
Senator Kennedy. Are there any strategic targets for which
only the B83 can destroy?
Ms. Hruby. My understanding, and again this is not the
heart of my job, but my understanding is that the number of
targets the B83 is credible for has been shrinking and any more
than that would need to be in another session.
Senator Kennedy. An underground nuclear facility could be
targeted by B83, couldn't it?
Ms. Hruby. Again, I don't think that's a discussion we can
have in this forum.
PLUTONIUM PIT PRODUCTION
Senator Kennedy. Yes. All right. Talk to me about the
plutonium pit production capability. Our stockpile's aging.
What are we going to do?
Ms. Hruby. That's the heart of why we're developing the
capability to produce plutonium pits again and we're doing this
in a new manner. We're doing it at two sites, at the Los Alamos
National Laboratory and also at the Savannah River Site.
We think this approach will provide the resilience we need
going forward and the adaptability that we'll need going
forward, but it's a big lift to build a production facility for
nuclear materials and we are making good progress on that at
Los Alamos and we're finishing the design for Savannah River.
Senator Kennedy. I'm just going to close with this comment.
Sometimes people lie and sometimes they run countries and I
think the Ayatollah in Iran habitually lies and if you get rid
of that B83 that you want to eliminate, I think you're going to
make him smile and I don't think that's in America's interests
and I really think you need to reconsider.
Madam Chair, I'm done.
Senator Feinstein. Thank you very much.
Senator Heinrich.
LOS ALAMOS NATIONAL LAB
Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Administrator Hruby, as I know you're aware, yesterday the
Cerro Pelado fire was finally over 70 percent contained, a real
dramatic improvement from a couple weeks ago, when, given wind
conditions, we were all concerned about a run towards Los
Alamos.
Can you talk to me about the ongoing efforts between NNSA,
the county, the Forest Service, and the Park Service to just
coordinate efforts and make sure that we have the maximum
defensible space for the lab?
Ms. Hruby. Yes, Senator Heinrich. Thank you for that
question.
We have paid close attention and continue to pay close
attention to the fire around Los Alamos. I'm happy to say over
the last 3 or 4 years Los Alamos has done a terrific job of
clearing fuel on the laboratory property and as a result of
this fire actually lent the machines to help clear fuels to the
Forest Service and other areas that would provide even a
greater barricade to the fire taking hold at Los Alamos.
Senator Heinrich. I was there on Friday and noticed a lot
of work being done sort of in the moment and I think that to
the extent that we can make sure that we have those treatments
done well before we have an acute event and that means also
coordinating with other agencies to make sure that those
interagency boundaries are treated.
COMPETES/USCIA (CHIPS AND SCIENCE ACT)
As you know, we're in the middle of trying to resolve
differences now between the House and Senate-passed
competitiveness bills, COMPETES or USICA or whatever we decide
to call them, but the COMPETES bill includes the Restore and
Modernize our National Labs Act which authorized just a little
over $30 billion for infrastructure in the labs.
Talk to me about why that's important, what the
infrastructure needs are, and why we need to keep that in the
legislation as we go though conference, what it will actually
mean for American competitiveness and the labs specifically.
Ms. Hruby. Thank you, Senator Heinrich, for that question.
As has already been said at this hearing, but we are
spending a lot of money on revitalizing our production
capabilities and we don't want to make the mistake that we made
before where we paid a lot of attention to the labs and we
didn't pay attention to production. We in fact want a balanced
program, but it's hard to do that within the constraints of the
budget that we have today.
So this bill that you're talking about would provide us the
ability to actually reinvest in the laboratory science
capabilities for our NNSA programs and there are many things
that we need to do and want to do.
We're currently working hard at the Nevada National
Security Site to build new capabilities for sub-critical
experiment, but we know we need reinvestment in our inertial
confinement fusion programs. We know we need investments in
combined radiation experiments at Sandia and so such a bill
would be tremendously beneficial to keep our R&D programs
second to none.
INERTIAL CONFINEMENT FUSION
Senator Heinrich. I have heard concern from the labs
regarding the fiscal year 2023 request in inertial confinement
fusion as well as super-computing and sub-critical experiments.
Are you concerned with the budget levels in any of those
areas and the potential impact on the ability of the lab to
fulfill any of its basic missions in those areas?
Ms. Hruby. The answer is yes. This is something that Marv
and I talk a lot about, how we create room for investment in
science given all the deliverables. At the same time we think
that the budget is adequate to do what we have to do, the main
deliverables in 2023, but we have to make sure that we have a
long-term stable plan and it's a lot easier to invest now than
it will be after we get past the point that investment can
help, and I don't know if Dr. Adams wants to say anything.
Dr. Adams. Very quickly, I'll add that we are looking to
develop a long-term plan for the ICF capabilities that will
involve judicious reinvestments in existing facilities to
upgrade them. It involves maintaining them so that they can
continue to deliver for stockpile stewardship, but in the
longer term, some of these facilities need to be replaced and
developing that long-term strategy is where we're focusing
right now. At that point then we'll know how and where to
invest.
Senator Heinrich. Thank you.
PLUTONIUM PIT PRODUCTION
Senator Feinstein. Administrator Hruby, in April I believe
you testified that NNSA is still working with the Department of
Defense to decide whether 80 plutonium pits per year by 2030 is
the correct number we'll need to meet strategic need.
In the meantime, I'm told we're not going to be able to
produce 50 pits annually at the Savannah River site until 2032
or 2035 at the earliest.
You've also said that no amount of money will achieve the
80 plutonium pit per year capability faster.
So here's the question. In light of these challenges, what
steps is NNSA taking to strengthen pit production management?
Ms. Hruby. Everything you said is true, although we're not
re-examining the requirement for 80 pits per year by 2030.
That's a requirement that's given to us by the Department of
Defense and the Nuclear Weapons Council.
The things that we're doing, we are trying to make sure
that we understand the supply chain issues that may slow
construction when we're ready to begin construction. So we are
asking to pull money in from out years earlier so that we can
buy materials that we know might be supply chain issues, for
example, glove boxes, and so that as soon as we complete
design, we think we can move apace to do the construction.
Senator Feinstein. Thank you.
Senator Kennedy.
Senator Kennedy. I'm going to defer, if it's okay, Madam
Chair, to my colleague from Tennessee.
Senator Feinstein. Senator, please go ahead.
URANIUM PROCESSING FACILITY
Senator Hagerty. Thank you, Senator Feinstein, Senator
Kennedy. Thank you for holding this hearing.
To our witnesses, thank you for being here, all of you.
I'd like to start out with a question about the Uranium
Processing Facility, something that I've been aware of,
underway for many years in my home State of Tennessee, It's one
of the Federal Government's largest construction projects and
over the past 8 years this subcommittee has provided
significant funding, including $600 million in fiscal year
2022, that was $75 million above the President's budget
request.
This year your budget requests $62 million to continue the
construction of UPF (Uranium Processing Facility) and the
project has a long history which includes review teams and the
Government Accountability Office. The project was originally
supposed to be delivered by 2025. Now I understand the new
delivery date has been pushed out to August of 2026, is that
correct, Ms. Hruby?
Ms. Hruby. That is correct.
Senator Hagerty. And what will the impact then be on the
goal of having it cost no more than $6.5 billion if we're going
to extend the project timeline out into another year?
Ms. Hruby. we have a review going on right now to look at
what the cost implications will be for the extension and we
should have those numbers later this summer.
I do want to say this about the UPF. It's a very large
long-term construction project that's very difficult to do and
we were doing that during COVID. The heart of that construction
occurred during COVID. So I just want to say that I think given
the one-of-a-kind construction for a large $6.5 billion
facility that occurred over 8 years that an 8-month
construction delay and what we anticipate to be a relatively
minor cost increase is a commendable accomplishment.
I mean, obviously we'd like to be exactly on time,----
Senator Hagerty. Sure, sure.
Ms. Hruby [continuing.] But given the conditions that we
were working in, I still think this is a tremendous success for
the country.
Senator Hagerty. The scale of the project has concerned me
for many years. I was Commerce Secretary in my home State when
the planning process was going on for this, an ambitious
project, one that needed to be done. I'd love to hear your
thoughts on the importance of the project now in terms of
completing it because I think it'll be good to have on the
record.
Ms. Hruby. Yes. The Uranium Processing Facility, when it's
complete, will allow us to take down buildings that are 70
years old and that really are not safe to operate well into the
future. We would have to invest an incredible amount of money
in them.
So this is really about modernizing an infrastructure that
we anticipate needing to use for generations to come.
Senator Hagerty. I think we're excited in our home State
about the potential for that space as it frees up because it
has great economic development potential and I think it will
help us yield a lot more economic activity from that site, as
well.
One of the things that I wanted to talk with you about is
the management of the project. I know this is a long-term
project, one that is unique, but my understanding is that you
currently have a group of independent project management
experts that oversee the project and they report directly to
you.
I think this group is one of the key reasons that the NNSA
construction projects were removed from the GAO's (Government
Accountability Office) High-Risk List. Now I understand from
the budget request that you're going to reorganize this, get
away from that structure and go back to a structure where you
don't have this accountable group on top of it.
Can you explain to me the thought process there and how
you're going to obtain accountability to see this project
through to the end?
Ms. Hruby. Well, the reorganization that you're referring
to is intended to actually increase our attention to
construction projects. We're going to have some of the largest
construction projects in the U.S. Government not only now but
into the future and I want a continuous stream of
infrastructure and construction project management that we will
have in the new organization and as you know, the person who's
been managing that is about to retire. I want to attract the
absolute best construction manager in the U.S. Government to
that job and I've created a position that I think will allow us
to do that. It will still have the same reporting chain.
Senator Hagerty. Okay. So it'll report directly to you.
They'll still have direct oversight. That's my parochial
interest here is just making sure that we have the type of
talent you describe watching this project as carefully as they
have been to make sure that now the new delivery date in August
of 2026 is met.
Thank you very much. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Feinstein. Would you like to have another round?
COLUMBIA CLASS SUBMARINE
Senator Kennedy. I would. I just have a couple more
questions,----
Senator Feinstein. All right.
Senator Kennedy [continuing.] Madam Chair, if that's okay.
Senator Feinstein. Why don't you go ahead?
Senator Kennedy. Okay. Admiral, I had to cut you off for
the sake of our time constraints. I want to let you finish, but
I do want to ask you one more question about the Columbia Class
submarine.
Can you just briefly explain the importance of that,
particularly in light of our new working relationship with
Australia and others?
Admiral Caldwell. Well, sir, first off, the Columbia Class
submarine recapitalizes our Trident Ballistic Missile Submarine
Force. Today, we have 14 of those and we will recapitalize it
with 12 Columbia Class submarines.
The fact that I'm building a life of ship core means that I
can do the mission with 12 ships versus 14. That saves the U.S.
Government $40 billion in total ownership costs. That's huge,
but importantly that is the foundation for our national
defense.
It is the Number 1 investment priority in the U.S. Navy and
it is the foundation for our strategic deterrent force.
Now specifically that doesn't pertain directly to Australia
but all of the things that I do to deliver the Columbia Class
submarine to provide the nuclear stewardship to provide the
material and all that expertise, that all enables the support
that my program provides to the U.S. Navy as well as the U.K.
Navy because we're heavily involved in supporting the
Dreadnought work that goes on to recapitalize their SBN and
that will all be leveraged to support our new and evolving
relationship with the Australians.
Senator Kennedy. You were about to go into a new topic when
I rudely interrupted.
Admiral Caldwell. I'll hit it real quickly, sir.
Senator Kennedy. You go right ahead.
Admiral Caldwell. The Columbia is going to be powered with
an electric drive motor versus a steam turbine on earlier
ships. That electric drive motor, we know that was a big
important step. So we took a lot of steps to derisk that and my
team built a facility that has all the major components of the
engine room, full size, prototypical, and we've run that.
In August of 2020 we ran that at full power and got a heat
run and it performed superbly, and then we've had a 100-hour
endurance run.
With that effort, we now have taken the final design turn
and we are building the electric drive motor and the supporting
components and they will be delivered to the shipyard to
support the construction and again that's all enabled by the
support of Congress. Thank you, sir.
Senator Kennedy. Okay. Is there anything else anybody would
like to share with us? You've been well coached there. I
understand never volunteer. I don't mean that as a criticism.
When I was a young lawyer, I lost a couple cases that I
would have won if I would have just shut up.
I want to thank you all for coming. We're looking forward
to working with you. I appreciate all the hard work that went
into this budget, this proposed budget, but I really think we
need to sharpen our pencils and do some more, and I do have
some concerns in light of the changing circumstances in terms
of geopolitical risk.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I am done.
Senator Feinstein. Well, thank you.
I want to say thank you to Administrator Hruby, Deputy
Administrators Adams and Hinderstein, and Admiral Caldwell. We
appreciate your being here.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
The hearing will remain open for 10 days. Senators may
submit additional information or questions for the record
within that time if they would like and the subcommittee
requests that all responses to questions for the record be
provided within 30 days.
[The following questions were submitted to the Department,
but the questions were not answered by press time.]
Questions Submitted to Hon. Jill Hruby
Questions Submitted by Senator Jeff Merkley
Question. What work has been completed and is planned on the low
enriched uranium (LEU) research and design program that with the
funding Congress has already provided? In 2016, NNSA submitted to
Congress a conceptual plan with a 15-year timeline from fiscal year
2018-fiscal year 2032. Since then, which activities in the timeline
(e.g., irradiation of HEU fuel samples and/or LEU fuel samples, and
post-irradiation examination) has NNSA completed, and how much has that
shortened the remaining timeline for Navy LEU fuel system development,
if Congress were to provide sufficient funding?
What more needs to be done to complete Navy LEU fuel system
development? What is the timeline for completion of an LEU fuel system?
What is the total estimated cost for development of a Navy LEU fuel
system?
Have the Office of Naval Reactors (NR) and Office of Defense
Nuclear Nonproliferation (DNN) resolved any obstacles to information
sharing between them that is necessary for DNN's research and
development of Navy LEU fuel? If not, what obstacles remain, what is
planned to overcome them, and what additional resources are necessary
to do so?
What discussions has the NNSA had as part of the Australia-United
Kingdom-United States (AUKUS) security pact about providing LEU naval
reactors to Australia? Have any concrete plans or steps been taken to
provide LEU naval reactors to Australia?
______
Questions Submitted by Senator John Hoeven
W80-4
Question. The budget request includes significant funding for the
W80-4, which is the warhead that will be placed in the Long Range Stand
Off weapon, or LRSO, that the Air Force is developing.
Can you provide an update on the schedule for the W80-4?
Are you able to keep up with the schedule the Air Force is using to
develop the LRSO missile?
W87-1
Question. The W87-1 will support the deployment of the Air Force's
next intercontinental ballistic missile, now known as the Sentinel. The
W87-1 will require the production of new plutonium pits, so the
investments we are making in pit production directly support the
development and deployment of this warhead.
Do you expect that we will be manufacturing new plutonium pits in
time to support the initial deployment of the Sentinel?
Plutonium Pit Production
Question. Congress mandated a goal of producing 80 new plutonium
pits per year by 2030 in order to support our nuclear modernization
efforts and ensure that we have the capability to replace our aging
stockpile. NNSA has stated publicly that it will not meet the goal of
producing 80 new pits per year by 2030 for a variety of reasons.
What support do you need from Congress to accelerate progress
toward the production of 80 pits per year?
Sea-Launched Cruise Missile-Nuclear (SLCM-N)
Question. The administration has elected to cancel the sea-launched
nuclear cruise missile, despite the importance that program would have
in deterring Russia and China. The budget request also does not include
any funding for development of a warhead that would be placed on that
missile, even though this committee provided $10 million to begin that
project in fiscal year 2022.
How much money would be required in fiscal year 2023 to keep the
warhead for a sea-launched cruise missile on schedule, should Congress
decide to retain the sea-launched cruise missile program?
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Bill Hagerty
Question. On Monday, May 16, 2022 NNSA announced that it canceled
the solicitation for the management and operations of Y-12 and Pantex,
terminated the award announcement it made in November 2021, and intends
to hold new competitions for separate management contracts of the two
facilities individually.
I want the experts at NNSA to make the decision based on the best
information available while following all applicable laws and
regulations. From the beginning of my term, my only advocacy has been
for that decision to be made as quickly as possible.
This is a big decision, one that my constituents have been waiting
on for a long time.
Administrator Hruby, can you further elaborate on your decision to
separate these two contracts and how it will improve management,
specifically at Y-12 National Nuclear Security Complex?
Administrator Hruby, can you discuss what the new timeline, based
on Monday's announcement, looks like for awarding a final Management &
Operations Contract at Y-12?
What effect, if any, will this decision have on the 5 life
extension programs NNSA is currently undertaking?
Finally, can you discuss what budgetary implications this decision
will have at Y-12 in the coming years?
CONCLUSION OF HEARINGS
Senator Feinstein. Thank you for being here, and we will
stand adjourned. Thank you. The meeting is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 10:44 a.m., Wednesday, May 18, the
subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene subject to the call of
the Chair.]
ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023
----------
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:]
Prepared Statement of the American Council for an Energy-Efficient
Economy
Chair Feinstein, Ranking Member Kennedy, and members of the
subcommittee, the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy
(ACEEE) appreciates the opportunity to provide written testimony on the
appropriations and activities of the Federal agencies under the
subcommittee's jurisdiction. ACEEE, a nonprofit research organization,
develops transformative policies to reduce energy waste and combat
climate change. With our independent analysis, we aim to build a
vibrant and equitable economy--one that uses energy more productively,
reduces costs, protects the environment, and promotes the health,
safety, and well-being of everyone. While we strongly support funding
for a wide variety of energy efficiency programs as detailed in a joint
letter, this testimony focuses on more details on funds needed for the
Department of Energy's Advanced Manufacturing Office (AMO) and other
priority areas to further much needed industrial decarbonization
efforts. For the Fiscal Year 2023 budget ACEEE recommends that funding
for the Department of Energy's Advanced Manufacturing Office (AMO) be
increased to $600 million from $416 million in FY22 to accommodate the
more ambitious agenda of decarbonizing US manufacturing by midcentury,
supported by the enactment last Congress of the Energy Act of 2020 and
the Clean Industrial Technology Act. This goal also requires funding
for industrial decarbonization activities in offices beyond AMO in
light of the ongoing departmental reorganization. Thus we also seek
$200 million for transformative technology adoption at the Office of
Clean Energy Demonstrations (OECD) and funding for two programs within
Manufacturing and Energy Supply Chains (MESC): $30 million for
Industrial Assessment Centers and $40 million for the establishment of
a Flex-Tech program.
Advanced Manufacturing Office (AMO): $600 million to enable the
research, development, demonstration and deployment of industrial
energy efficiency and advanced manufacturing technologies. This level
of funding is intended to accommodate an ambitious agenda of
decarbonizing US manufacturing by the midcentury. This goal of dramatic
reductions requires increases in activity levels across the office and
some important changes in the orientation of the office's goals. AMO
should expand its efforts from promoting energy efficiency to include
reducing carbon emissions for manufacturing and reducing the embodied
carbon in manufactured products more broadly. We expect DOE to release
its long-delayed industrial decarbonization roadmap very soon, and as
AMO rebuilds its staffing, the office should focus on adding expertise
in important decarbonization technology areas identified in its
research road mapping.
While we support providing AMO increased flexibility in funding in
order to reorient the office to the challenge of industrial
decarbonization most effectively, we think the following programs and
objective should be part of the office's direction and have included
our estimate of FY23 funding needed:
--Technical Assistance and Workforce Development:
--Strategic Energy Management: AMO should promote Strategic Energy
Management practices and establish a program to provide
competitive grants to companies for the hiring or
designation of plant energy managers. Strategic Energy
Management is especially important for small and medium-
sized manufacturing plants. ($15 million)
--Save Carbon Now: AMO should expand the Better Plants program to
offer comprehensive assessments and engagements to the
1,500 largest energy using and greenhouse gas emitting
manufacturing facilities in order to address natural gas
shortages and assist decarbonization. These engagements
should include, but not be limited to, targeted assessments
of energy-saving and emissions reduction opportunities,
staff training, technical assistance and analyses, and
education. The enhanced Save Energy Now program run by the
Department of Energy from 2008 to 2011 achieved CO2
emissions reductions of about 1.8 million metric tons per
year and natural gas savings of about 98 TBtu per year.\1\
($55 million)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Wright, A., M. Martin, and S. Nimbalkar. 2010. Results from the
U.S. DOE 2008 Save Energy Now Assessment Inititive: [sic.] DOE's
Partnership with U.S. Industry to Reduce Energy Consumption, Energy
Costs, and Carbon Dioxide Emissions. Oak Ridge, TN: Oak Ridge National
Laboratory. info.ornl.gov/sites/publications/files/
Pub25190.pdfaceee.org/research-report/ie2201.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
--Smart Manufacturing: AMO should support the development and
adoption of smart manufacturing practices (the use of
automated controls to achieve large process efficiencies)
directed towards small and medium-sized manufacturers. This
includes, but is not limited to, extending and expanded
funding for the Clean Energy Smart Manufacturing Innovative
Institute (CESMII) to increase educational and technical
assistance activities directed toward smart manufacturing
adoption. ($30 million)
--Industrial Process Heat Decarbonization R&D: AMO should support
industrial process heating decarbonization through the
establishment of a research, development, and deployment effort
by AMO to promote the adoption of technologies that can
dramatically reduce the GHG emissions from process heating
applications, the largest source of industrial emissions.\2\
($55 million)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Rightor, E., P. Scheihing, A. Hoffmeister, and R. Papar. 2022.
Industrial Heat Pumps: Electrifying Industry's Process Heat Supply.
Washington, DC: American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy.
aceee.org/research-report/ie2201.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations (OCED): $200 million for
transformative technology adoption through the establishment of a grant
program that provides cost-share payments to manufacturing facilities
that make the first at-scale implementations of transformative
technologies to reduce GHG emissions in intensive manufacturing
processes. The high cost of implementing new technologies at an
industrial scale is a key barrier to the process transformations needed
for competitive, decarbonized, domestic manufacturing.
Manufacturing and Energy Supply Chains (MESC):
--Industrial Assessment Centers: $30 million for the Industrial
Assessment Centers (IAC) program to expand the program in order
to increase the number of university-based centers to 40; to
establish satellite centers at community colleges, technical
schools, and union training facilities; and to establish an
apprenticeship program with matching funding for IAC students
at facilities that have received assessments in the recent past
to facilitate the implementation of recommendations.
--Flex Tech: $40 million for the establishment of a Flex-Tech program
that provides grants to States and Tribal governments partnered
with educational institutions and trade associations to provide
energy and greenhouse gas reduction assessments and loans to
implement identified measures at small and medium-sized
manufacturers.
Thank you for the opportunity to share these recommendations, and
please let us know if we can provide additional information.
[This statement was submitted by Alexander Ratner, Federal Policy
Manager, American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy.]
______
Prepared Statement of the American Nuclear Society
On behalf of the 10,000 men and women of the American Nuclear
Society \1\ (ANS), I am pleased to provide recommendations for fiscal
year 2023 appropriations levels for nuclear programs under the
subcommittee's jurisdiction. The American nuclear community is grateful
to the Committee for its continued, bipartisan support for Federal
investments to sustain our existing nuclear fleet and accelerate the
near-term development and deployment of new nuclear energy
technologies. Our recommendations are aligned toward a commercial
scale-up of advanced nuclear reactors in the 2030 timeframe and
consistent with the 2021 ANS report, ``The U.S. Nuclear R&D
Imperative.'' \2\ For Fiscal Year, 2023, ANS recommends a minimum of
$2.2 billion for Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Nuclear Energy
(NE) programs. We recognize this level of funding will present a
challenge to the committee given its current 302(b) allocation.
However, the Russian invasion of Ukraine has laid bare the immediate
U.S. national security interest in strengthening our nuclear supply
chain and reducing our reliance on Russian sources of nuclear fuel and
R&D capabilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The American Nuclear Society is the premier organization for
those who embrace nuclear science and technology for their vital
contributions to improving people's lives and preserving the planet.
ANS membership is open to all and consists of individuals from all
walks of life; including engineers, doctors, students, educators,
scientists, soldiers, advocates, government employees, and others. ANS
is committed to advancing, fostering, and promoting the development and
application of nuclear sciences and technologies to benefit society.
\2\ ANS Task Force on Public Investment in Nuclear Research and
Development (Feb. 2021). The U.S. Nuclear R&D Imperative (pp. 1-39,
Rep.) https://www.ans.org/file/3177/2/ANS percent20RnD percent20Task
percent20Force percent20Report.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
doe office of nuclear energy
Directed R&D and University Programs
(Fiscal Year 2023 Recommendation: $161 million)
ANS strongly supports the administration's request for this new
programmatic structure, which consolidates NE funding for universities
(and small businesses) into a unified program that will provide
stewardship for university-based nuclear education programs, campus
research reactors, and start-up companies. While still tightly aligned
with Departmental missions, this new structure will eliminate the need
to ``tax'' existing NE programs to provide the funding needed required
for effective stewardship of nuclear education and research at U.S.
universities.
ANS STRONGLY opposes the inclusion of any congressional earmark in
this account. While we are mindful of Congress' power of the purse, the
inclusion of project-specific earmarks at this time would effectively
gut this new program before it has a chance to become established,
negatively impacting existing competitively awarded projects, and
inflicting tangible damage to America's overall nuclear
competitiveness.
Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program (ARDP)
(Fiscal Year 2023 Recommendation: $245 million)
For fiscal year 2023 ANS recommends $140 million for Risk Reduction
for Future Demonstrations, $85 million for NRIC, $15 million for
Regulatory Development, and $5 million for Advanced Reactor Safeguards.
Advanced Nuclear Fuel Availability Program
(Fiscal Year 2023 Recommendation--$360 million: $300 million for
commercial enrichment and deconversion capacity and $60 million
for downblending of HEU)
Consistent with the Energy Act of 2020, it is imperative that DOE
establish a competitive commercial high-assay low-enriched uranium
(HALEU) fuel supply chain in the U.S. The urgency is real. Russia can
no longer be considered a feasible HALEU supplier. Without a reliable
HALEU supply, lead commercial customers will be less likely to make
commitments to build advanced reactors. We recognize the administration
has not yet submitted a comprehensive plan to address HALEU needs, but
there is increasing consensus within the U.S. nuclear community that a
$300-400 million level of investment will be required to stimulate
sufficient commercial interest. Therefore, ANS requests $300 million
for fiscal year 2023 to support the deployment of a U.S. commercial
HALEU supply chain and $60 million for the fresh HEU downblending
bridge program.
High Enriched Uranium Recovery for HALEU (EBR-II)
(Fiscal Year 2023 Recommendation: $25.75 million)
ANS recommends $25.75 million to transition EBR-II spent fuel
processing operations in order to meet the increasing needs of
industry.
Fuel Cycle R&D; Fuel Cycle Laboratory R&D
(Fiscal Year 2023: Recommendation $35 million)
ANS recommends not less than $20 million for metallic fuels and $15
million for additional fuel cycle laboratory R&D.
Accident Tolerant Fuels
(Fiscal Year 2023 Recommendation: $165 million)
ANS recommends $120 million for continued participation of the
industry-led teams in the cost-shared R&D program including support for
testing, code development, and licensing of ATF with higher fuel
utilization. ANS also recommends $10 million to continue silicon-
carbide development and $35 million for laboratory specific work in
support of ATF.
TRISO Fuel and Graphite Qualification
(Fiscal Year 2023 Recommendation: $37 million)
Versatile Test Reactor
(Fiscal Year 2023 Recommendation: $45 million)
Currently, the only fast research reactor available is located in
Russia. While the VTR may not be necessary for near-term licensing of
certain advanced reactors, the Committee must recognize that a fast
neutron irradiation facility remains mission critical for sustaining
U.S. advanced nuclear energy in the long-term. We believe NE should use
some portion of the requested funding to explore the potential cost
savings of aligning VTR component fabrication with Natrium ARDP project
and, in concert with the DOE Office of Science, assess opportunities
for producing isotopes for which the U.S. currently relies on Russia
for significant supply.
Light Water Reactor Sustainability
(Fiscal Year 2023 Recommendation: $62 million)
ANS recommends $62 million to enable this program to accelerate LWR
modernization efforts while continuing to support hydrogen
demonstrations. ANS also requests that no less than $12 million be used
to support new or previously awarded hydrogen demonstration projects.
Advanced SMR R&D Support
(Fiscal Year 2023 Recommendation: $211 million)
Demonstrating the next generation of advanced light water small
modular reactors will support both domestic deployment and export of
U.S. technology and enable broad U.S. leadership in new technologies.
Nuclear Waste Disposal/Integrated Waste Management
(Fiscal year 2023 Recommendation: $53 million)
ANS supports the requested level for these programs. We strongly
urge the Committee to reject any attempt to limit DOE's authority to
direct funding to particular States or localities. The U.S. is in the
beginning stages of rebuilding a used nuclear fuel management program
that has been dormant for far too long. Now is not the time to
foreclose on any option which can help the U.S. manage its fuel
resources more effectively.
Program Direction
(Fiscal Year 2023 Recommendation: $100 million)
The management responsibilities that come with DOE NE program
additions have increased substantially over the past several years
while staffing levels have reduced and Program Direction funding has
remained consistent. This convergence has created challenges in many
areas, including contracting management and program execution. ANS
recommends $100 million for fiscal year 2023 which will allow DOE NE to
add experienced staff and address current staffing deficiencies.
Advanced Reactor Technologies
(Fiscal Year 2023 Recommendation: $70 million)
The Advanced Reactor Technologies subprogram conducts essential R&D
activities to reduce technical risks associated with advanced reactor
technologies and systems. The subprogram R&D scope reflects input from
advanced reactor stakeholders with a goal of enabling industry to
mature and ultimately demonstrate advanced reactor technologies by the
2030s. ANS recommends $70 million total for the subprogram, with $16
million for the microreactor program and $20 million for the MARVEL
reactor. The MARVEL reactor will support fuel acquisition and
construction in fiscal year 2023. ANS also recommends $15 million for
the ARC-20 program.
International Nuclear Energy Cooperation
(Fiscal Year 2023 Recommendation: $8 million)
doe office of clean energy demonstrations
Advanced Reactor Demonstrations
(Fiscal Year 2023 Recommendation: $70 million)
While passage of the 2021 Infrastructure and Jobs Act provided
funding for the Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program (ARDP); the bill
did not entirely fund both demonstration projects. ANS recommends an
additional $70 million for continued ARDP support.
doe office of science
Isotope R&D and Production Program
(Fiscal Year 2023: $102 million)
ANS strongly supports DOE's Isotope program and its missions to
produce isotopes in short supply, manage DOE inventories of stable and
long-lived isotopes, and conduct research and development activities on
new isotope applications in medicine and industry. In addition to
isotopes produced in DOE reactors and accelerators, there are new
opportunities to use DOE legacy materials, such as strontium 90 for
space and undersea applications, that were once considered waste. The
DOE Isotope office should have the authority and resources it needs to
facilitate the beneficial commercial use of these materials.
Low-Dose Radiation Program
(Fiscal Year 2023 Recommendation: $20 million to support low-dose
radiation research activities)
Through recent congressional direction, the Department of Energy's
Office of Science Biological and Environmental Research is to re-
establish a research program devoted to the human health effects of
low-dose radiation at a funding level of no less than $5 million. To
maintain progress in fiscal year 2023, and with the imminent release of
the National Academies of Sciences guidance report on the development
of a long-term strategy for low-dose radiation research in the U.S.,
ANS recommends $20 million for the program.
Expanded funding will allow for new technologies and approaches for
examining biological mechanisms by which ionizing radiation produces
cancer and non-cancer health outcomes, and the integration of
mechanistic biological insights with epidemiological data. This funding
is also needed to support interdisciplinary training and integrated
cross-professional research programs devoted to understanding and
quantifying radiation health effects at low doses. The program will
also support education and outreach activities to disseminate
information and promote public understanding of low-dose radiation.
[This statement was submitted by Craig H. Piercy, Executive
Director/CEO, American Nuclear Society.]
______
Prepared Statement of the American Society for Microbiology
The American Society for Microbiology (ASM) appreciates the
opportunity to submit outside witness testimony for the fiscal year
2023 Energy and Water Development, and Related Agencies appropriations
bill in support of increased funding for the Department of Energy
Office of Science. The American Society for Microbiology (ASM) is one
of the largest professional societies dedicated to the life sciences
and is composed of 30,000 scientists and health practitioners. ASM's
mission is to promote and advance the microbial sciences.
The Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Science is a leader in
advancing critical industries of the future, including quantum
information science, artificial intelligence, high performance
computing, advanced communications networks, future energy
technologies, and engineering biology. As we rise to meet the
challenges of the 21st Century, microbial science funded by the DOE
Office of Science remains vitally important. ASM urges Congress to fund
the DOE Office of Science at $8.8 billion in fiscal year 2022, an
increase of 18 percent above fiscal year 2022 and consistent with the
bipartisan House and Senate DOE Science for the Future Act.
Funding from the DOE Office of Science through the National
Laboratories, universities, and other programs has generated some of
our most economically important innovations and is the primary driver
of basic research, including critical areas of genome-scale,
quantitative analysis of microbial research. This support has enabled
researchers to use microbes to solve energy and environmental problems,
and to bring those solutions to scale by developing empirical,
computational, and mechanistic modeling tools.
Office of Science funding led to the creation of the Bioenergy
Research Centers, which support research into viable and sustainable
domestic biofuel and bioproducts industries. Each of the four Centers
is led by a DOE national laboratory or university, and each takes an
innovative approach to improving and scaling up advanced biofuel and
bioproduct production processes. Recent investments in the Joint Genome
Institute and the National Microbiome Data Collaborative will lead to
more effective analysis of microbiome data and better coordination of
multidisciplinary microbiome research across the Federal Government.
DOE National Laboratories were effectively deployed in the fight
against COVID-19, using their supercomputing and modeling capabilities
to both understand components of the virus and to find drug compounds
to treat it. Thousands of projects funded by NIH (National Institutes
of Health) and NSF (National Science Foundation) utilize DOE facilities
each year, and more than fifty Fortune 500 companies and many small
businesses use these facilities to conduct the underlying research
required to develop innovative technologies and products that drive the
economy, including the growing bioeconomy.
Microbial Research is Needed to Face 21st Century Challenges
Our society faces several large, complex, and interconnected
challenges, many of which can be addressed through microbial research.
Inexpensive renewable sources of energy, fuels, and chemicals are
essential for continued economic growth, but the environmental
tradeoffs of increased energy production must also be considered.
Microbial science funded by DOE Office of Science can lead the way in
developing sustainable strategies to feed an ever-growing population by
increasing plant and agricultural productivity and quality; by
providing strategies to ensure that future U.S. citizens enjoy clean
air, water, and a high standard of living; in transforming human health
by providing everything from new pharmaceuticals, reagents for
precision medicine, and next generation antibiotics; and by producing
cost-competitive fuels, chemicals, and materials from abundant
renewable resources. These and other advances in decarbonization, the
production of biomaterials or bio-based polymers, and others based on
new microbial catalysts will only happen with strong, stable
investments in the Office of Science.
The Office of Science currently funds four Bioenergy Research
Centers (BRC), which support research into viable and sustainable
domestic biofuel and bioproducts industries. These four Centers are
developing viable and sustainable domestic biofuels and bioproducts
derived from non-food plant biomass, such as poplar, switchgrass, and
sorghum. This research will lead to lower greenhouse gas emissions,
bring jobs to rural areas, and boost our energy security, and we
strongly encourage Congress to continue fully funding the Bioenergy
Research Centers.
DOE-Funded Microbiome Research Spurs Innovation
In its stewardship of innovation at DOE's National Laboratories,
universities, and other programs, the Office of Science is a critical
partner in advancing areas of national need, supporting research in key
emerging areas including artificial intelligence and microbiome
research. The Biological and Environmental Research (BER) Directorate
at DOE explores the frontiers of genome-enabled biology, deepens our
understanding of physical and biogeochemical Earth processes, and
enables innovation and discovery through their user-facilities. Funding
is crucial not only for the continuation of research for existing
programs within the BER, but also for new initiatives such as the
National virtual climate lab and the Biopreparedness Research Virtual
Environment (BRaVE).
Microbiome science aims to advance understanding of microbial
communities (microbiomes) for applications in areas such as health
care, food production, and environmental restoration to benefit
individuals, communities, and the environment. Scientific understanding
of the microbiome has evolved significantly since the concept of the
human microbiome emerged two decades ago. We now know that microbial
communities exist everywhere, making the microbiome relevant to all
living things. Yet, there remains much to discover regarding how
microbiomes function as communities, interact with their hosts and
environment, and their overall potential to improve health and
ecosystems. The rapid pace of discovery has led to greater technology
needs and data sharing infrastructure.
The Interagency Strategic Plan for Microbiome Research, fiscal year
2018-2022, developed by the Microbiome Interagency Working Group
(MIWG), provides recommendations for improving coordination of
microbiome research among Federal agencies and between agencies and
non-Federal domestic and international microbiome research efforts. The
5-year Strategic Plan coordinates microbiome research activities across
21 government agencies, describing the interagency objectives,
structure and operating principles, and research focus areas. As noted
in the Interagency Strategic Plan for Microbiome Research, microbiome
data is ``Big Data,'' which requires consistent and reliable database
and resource coordination to facilitate data collection, analysis,
interoperability, and data sharing. The NMDC (National Microbiome Data
Collaborative) is aimed at empowering this type of microbiome research.
Spearheaded by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, in partnership
with Los Alamos, Oak Ridge, and Pacific Northwest national
laboratories, the NMDC is leveraging DOE's existing data-science
resources and high-performance computing systems to develop a framework
that facilitates more efficient use of microbiome data for applications
in energy, environment, health, and agriculture.
Our nation's ability to make significant advances in solving energy
and environmental problems depends on advances in the microbial
sciences. This will only be possible if Congress continues its
commitment to robust and sustained funding increases for the Department
of Energy's Office of Science.
[This statement was submitted by Allen Segal, Director of Public
Policy and
Advocacy, American Society for Microbiology.]
______
Prepared Statement of the American Society of Plant Biologists
On behalf of the American Society of Plant Biologists (ASPB), we
submit this written testimony to support $8.8 billion for the
Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Science in fiscal year 2023.
Within this amount, ASPB supports proportional increases in funding for
the Office of Basic Energy Sciences (BES) and the Office of Biological
and Environmental Research (BER). ASPB also supports at least $575
million for the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) in
fiscal year 2023.
The following testimony highlights the importance of biology-
particularly plant biology, which is a major backbone of efforts to
enhance bioenergy production-as the Nation seeks to address energy
security and other vital issues. We 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, founded in 1924 as the American Society of Plant
Physiologists, was established to promote the growth and development of
plant biology, to encourage and publish research in plant biology, and
to promote the interests and professional advancement of plant
scientists in general. ASPB members educate, mentor, advise, and
nurture future generations of plant biologists; they work to increase
understanding of plant biology, as well as science in general, in K-16
schools and among the general public; they advocate in support of plant
biology research; they work to convey the relevance and importance of
plant biology; and they provide expertise in policy decisions world-
wide.
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 essential to life on Earth.
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 fuels, foods,
fabrics, pharmaceuticals, and building materials; and in the
understanding of basic biological principles that underpin improvements
in plant growth and home-grown energy sources for all Americans.
Plant biology is at the center of numerous scientific breakthroughs
in the increasingly interdisciplinary world of alternative energy
research. For example, researchers at National Renewable Energy
Laboratory (NREL) published research that demonstrates the ability to
convert wet waste carbon (food waste derived from fatty acids) to
sustainable aviation fuels-highlighting the potential to meet aviation
needs and environmental challenges. 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. This research is critical for our future in bioenergy
production.
Even though foundational and mission-oriented plant biology
research-the kind of research DOE funds-underpins vital advances in
practical applications in energy, health, and the environment, plant
scientists have had to maximize and leverage modest Federal funding to
understand the basic function and mechanisms of plants. Strong
investments in plant biology research are important 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. For example, continued basic and applied research in
fields like synthetic biology will enable the creation and production
of more energy dense, carbon neutral fuels and expand the production of
energy-efficient biomass.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://roadmap.ebrc.org/energy/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Securing the Plant Science Talent Pipeline
As discussed above, many of the challenges brought by a changing
world will be addressed specifically by plant scientists. A significant
increase in crop productivity will be needed to match the demand for
food expected from the rate of population growth. At the same time,
climate change will present new trials for crops and other plant
ecosystems. These challenges will require efforts to increase
productivity beyond current practices, including improvement in crop
water use efficiency and enhanced crop photosynthesis efficiency and
performance, to name just a few approaches. More knowledge and
innovation will be needed to replace chemicals from non-renewable
sources (from fuels to biomedical applications) with plant-derived
metabolites. These types of innovations will require contributions from
basic and applied plant science fields and collaboration from other
sciences and engineering.
To tackle these challenges, a strong and diverse community of plant
scientists, with increased involvement from women and minority
scientists, will be needed. However, the current training pipeline is
not primed to ensure the availability of this workforce. Plant science
doctoral degrees, both basic and agronomy-related, have remained
stagnant over the past two decades. A strong investment in plant
science research, both basic and applied, renewed efforts to transform
public perception of plant biology and plant biologists, and a push to
increase the number of students entering the pipeline leading to plant
science degrees are necessary to change these trends. Developing the
workforce that will contribute the solutions to future challenges is
urgent. With this need in mind, ASPB applauds the awards DOE has made
in training the next generation of scientists. However, more efforts,
including outreach to and investments in women and minority
researchers, is vital for the US to maintain its energy leadership.
doe recommendations
Because the ASPB membership has 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 fundamental plant biology and,
specifically, with respect to recommendations for bioenergy research
funding through DOE's Office of Science.
The BER and BES programs within the Office of Science are crucial
to understanding how basic biological processes work. Sustained funding
for these programs is vital because the discoveries made in these areas
will ultimately be the foundation for the next fuels and technologies
we use in our daily lives. Support from ARPA-E is critical to advancing
plant synthetic biology technologies, and ASPB implores the committee
to include sustained, targeted funding for synthetic biology research
in the program.
In addition:
--We commend the DOE Office of Science, through its programs in BES
and BER, for having funded the Bioenergy Research Centers and
the Energy Frontier Research Centers. ASPB strongly encourages
additional funding for the DOE Office of Science that would
specifically target funding toward individual and small-group
grants for bioenergy and plant growth research.
--Considerable research interest is now focused on processing plant
biomass for energy production. Fundamental discoveries of the
genes that control plant growth and enable plant growth in
response to stresses, including drought, are needed to secure
our energy future. 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 and
conversion efficiency in processing to fuels and high-value co-
products. Therefore, ASPB calls for DOE to support research
targeted at efforts to increase the utility and agronomic
performance of bioenergy feedstocks, both in the field and for
their end users in the bioeconomy.
Thank you for your consideration of our testimony on behalf of the
American Society of Plant Biologists. For more information about the
American Society of Plant Biologists, please see www.aspb.org.
[This statement was submitted by Crispin Taylor, CEO, American
Society of Plant Biologists.]
______
Prepared Statement of the Assiniboine and Sioux Rural Water Supply
System and Dry Prairie Rural Water System
bureau of reclamation
1. Fiscal Year 2023 Budget Request
The Assiniboine and Sioux Rural Water Supply System and Dry Prairie
Rural Water System respectfully request fiscal year 2023 appropriations
of $6.808 million, part of the Bureau of Reclamation Rural Water
Program (Table 1).
The fiscal year 2023 Federal funding request is $1.799 million for
the Assiniboine and Sioux Rural Water Supply System (ASRWSS) and $5.009
million for the Dry Prairie Rural Water System (DPRWS) to fully
complete project construction at a combined cost of $6.808 million,
including projected 5 percent inflation during fiscal year 2022. The
request completes all elements of the Fort Peck Reservation Rural Water
System, Montana, (PL 106-382, October 27, 2000). Future requests will
be limited to inflation on projects initiated in fiscal year 2023 and
fiscal year 2024 that are not covered by the 5 percent projected
inflation in fiscal year 2022.
TABLE 1
FY 2023 FUNDING REQUESTFORT PECK RESERVATION RURAL WATER SYSTEM (PL 106-
382)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sponsor/Project Feature Federal
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assiniboine and Sioux Rural Water Supply System
Complete Project Improvements....................... 1,798,886
---------------
Subtotal........................................ $1,798,886
Dry Prairie Rural Water System
Outlook Branches.................................... 5,009,199
---------------
Subtotal........................................ $5,009,199
---------------
Total................................................... $6,808,085
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The project expresses the greatest appreciation to the Chair and
subcommittee for their unwavering support during the construction of
this vital infrastructure in a vast area of Montana only slightly
smaller than the state of Massachusetts.
2. Project Status and Funding Needs
The project was greatly assisted by fiscal year 2022 appropriations
of $17.191 million and fiscal year 2022 allocations of $39 million by
the Bureau of Reclamation from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL)
as shown in Table 2.
Considerable project inflation through fiscal year 2021 in PVC pipe
material prices, an increase of more than 100 percent, triggered a re-
pricing of the project by the Reclamation Technical Service Center in
Denver. The re-pricing was completed on March 31, 2022, and resulted in
an increase in the authorized construction ceiling for ASRWSS from
$220.026 million to $229.456 million or an increase of $9.430 million.
Similarly, the authorized construction celling for DPRWS was increased
from $132.367 million to $172.617 million an increase of $40.250
million of which $30.950 million was Federal and $9.660 million was
non-federal.
After applying funds as shown in Table 2 to all remaining projects
in fiscal year 2022, a cost of $6.484 million remained to complete both
projects within the Reclamation-adjusted authorized ceilings. That
amount was increased by 5 percent for projected fiscal year 2022
inflation to arrive at the request for fiscal year 2023 of $6.808
million. PVC pipe material prices in fiscal year 2022 have soared an
additional 19 percent.
TABLE 2
FUNDS NEEDED TO COMPLETE PROJECTS GIVEN FISCAL YEAR 2022 ALLOCATIONS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Remaining Costs and Available Funding ASRWSS DPRWS Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FUNDING TO COMPLETE PROJECTS
TSC Remaining Project Costs (-15 percent for Design $41,223,447 $83,698,704 $124,922,151
contingencies+ TERO/GRT) and Post-October 201 remaining
Costs in Master Plan.......................................
Available Funding
FY 2021 Carryover....................................... $22,510,222 $29,123,079 $51,633,301
FY 2022 Appropriations.................................. 17,000,000 191,000 17,191,000
BIL
Initial Allocation.................................. 0 7,000,000 7,000,000
Reserve (Requires Concurrence of Boards)............ 0 32,000,000 32,000,000
-----------------------------------------------
Subtotal................................................ $39,510,222 $68,314,079 $107,824,301
Needed to Complete Remaining Projects
Total................................................... $1,713,225 $15,384,625 $17,097,850
Federal............................................. 1,713,225 4,770,665 6,483,890
Non-Federal......................................... 0 10,613,959 10,613,959
CEILING AND REPRICING AJUSTMENTS
October 2021 Indexed Authorized Ceiling
Total................................................... $220,026,000 $132,367,105 $352,393,105
Federal............................................. 220,026,000 100,599,000 320,625,000
Non-Federal......................................... 0 31,768,105 31,768,105
Re-priced Authorized Ceiling (From October 2021 Master Plan
Adjusted for TSC Pricing)..................................
Total................................................... $229,455,857 $172,617,259 $402,073,116
Federal............................................. 229,455,857 131,189,117 360,644,974
Non-Federal......................................... 0 41,428,142 41,428,142
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The recognition, cooperation, collaboration, and focus of the
Bureau of Reclamation at the National, regional, area, and project
level were extraordinary during the inflationary crisis, and both
projects are grateful.
Note that the decisions by Reclamation on the allocation of fiscal
year 2022 appropriations, BIL funding, and remaining work to be
completed within both projects have been discussed extensively with
Reclamation but are not formalized at the time of this writing. Table 2
is based on the expectations of both projects based on discussions, but
not formal allocations, which are still coming.
With fiscal year 2023 appropriations as requested and future
adjustments for inflation, both projects can be successfully completed
as originally envisioned. Both projects will serve their water users
with safe, adequate, and reliable water supplies for the foreseeable
future without shortage in supply or deficiency in quality.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
Prepared Statement of the Association of State Floodplain Managers
The Association of State Floodplain Managers (ASFPM) appreciates
the opportunity to provide this Outside Witness Testimony for the
Committee's record for the fiscal year 2023 Energy and Water
Development Appropriations legislation. ASFPM has a membership of
20,000 members, including members in 37 state chapters. Our members are
largely State and local officials, but also include many engineers,
planners, and other professionals supporting local communities' efforts
to reduce flood risk and wisely manage floodplains and flood-prone
areas within their jurisdictions. Our membership additionally includes
members of research and academic institutions, and the insurance and
lending industries.
Recommendations in ASFPM's OWT testimony pertain to the following
Corps of Engineers programs: Section 22 Planning Assistance to States
(PAS) $15 million; Flood Plain Management Services (FPMS) $25 million;
National Flood Risk Management Program (NFRMP), including Silver
Jackets ($10 million), and support for planning and technical
assistance for nonstructural, natural feature, and nature-based feature
alternatives within all Corps flood risk management program planning,
as emphasized in WRDA 2020; and support for two studies directed in
WRDA 2007 Water Resources Priorities Study (Sec. 2032) and WRDA 2014
Review of Emergency Response Authorities (Sec. 3029).
Increase Funding for Corps of Engineers Technical Assistance.
ASFPM has long supported the technical assistance programs of the
Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works Program. In these programs, the
Corps of Engineers can provide expertise and assistance to communities
in developing solutions to flood challenges that can help make major
strides toward reducing flood losses--often at considerably less costs,
and without multi-million-dollar taxpayer investments in large Corps
projects. The Corps' technical assistance programs include: Section 22
Planning Assistance to States (PAS) (WRDA 1974, (PL 93-251), as
amended); Flood Plain Management Services (FPMS) (Section 206, 1960
Flood Control Act (PL 86-645), as amended), National Flood Risk
Management Program (NFRMP), and the Silver Jackets program.
Appropriations for these programs are made through the Investigations--
Remaining Items section of the Energy and Water Development
Appropriations.
While these programs represent a relatively small portion of the
total Army Corps budget, they provide a high return on investment. Many
smaller jurisdictions, including lower-income and economically-
disadvantaged and rural communities that generally would never qualify
for a major Corps project or be able to afford the long-term Operations
and Maintenance costs for major projects, especially through provision
of key technical assistance, can develop smaller projects which can
utilize non-structural, natural, or nature-based features, or a
combination of structural and non-structural measures. In addition, the
Army Corps' Silver Jackets program has the special advantage of being
able to bring together numerous other programs from within the Federal
family as well as State and locally-based programs to assist in
addressing flood-related challenges. Also, WRDA 2020 has enhanced FPMS
authority (see Sec. 111) and has broadly encouraged the Corps to
utilize these techniques and approaches in flood risk management and
community resiliency. Silver Jackets especially is continuing to build
key linkages across governments that enhance cooperative approaches.
ASFPM members strongly urge that these technical assistance
programs be funded at considerably higher levels than in the past. The
fiscal year 2022 final appropriations included $9 million for Planning
Assistance to States (PAS), $12 million for Flood Plain Management
Services (FPMS) and $6.5 million for the National Flood Risk Management
Program (NFRMP). The Silver Jackets funding is included in the funds
for the NFRMP. We note that the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act
included a one-time $30 million and $45 million appropriation for PAS
and FPMS, respectively, to increase Corps technical assistance
capability in the short term. We would urge a base level of funding for
PAS at $15 million, FPMS at $25 million, and $10 million for NFRMP in
fiscal year 2023 to expand the use and availability of these important
authorities and assistance.
We also strongly recommend expanding Corps engagement with such
programs for their major value in helping States and communities to
reduce future losses due to flooding, especially where watershed
development and effects of climate change are increasing flooding risks
and costs. Many communities in many coastal and inland areas across the
Nation are already experiencing and are anticipating increased
flooding, erosion problems, and deteriorating water supplies from more
frequent and intense rainfall events and coastal storms, rising sea
levels, and increasing stormwater runoff and urban flooding from
changing climate and land use changes in watersheds. To address these
flooding problems, many communities need expert engineering, economic,
environmental, and planning assistance and data to assess and help
identify potential structural and/or non-structural solutions to their
flooding problems.
Many smaller communities simply cannot afford to maintain such
expertise in their local governments on a permanent basis and can
benefit greatly from Corps of Engineers technical support. We note that
only a few Corps Districts across the country have made use of these
opportunities to bring Corps expertise to their communities outside the
context of major Corps construction projects. Large numbers of
communities lack the advantage to tap Corps expertise and support where
and when it is often most needed and would be helpful and beneficial.
We urge that Corps technical assistance be prioritized with dedicated
staffing in each Corps District. We would urge the subcommittee to
consider report language supporting efforts at Corps Headquarters to
educate Corps Districts regarding these programs and to encourage their
use.
National Flood-Related Study Provisions. We would also urge the
subcommittee to provide funding for two important WRDA-authorized
studies. The Corps' Water Resources Priorities Study, begun in 2016,
but thus far not complete, will assess the Nation's flooding
vulnerabilities across all regions of the U.S. and analyze the
effectiveness of programs, authorities, policies, roles, and activities
for flood damage and flood risk reduction. This unique study,
originally authorized in WRDA 2007 (Section 2032) will provide Congress
with a broad overview perspective of Federal flood risk reduction
programs and trends, including ways to potentially reduce costs by
improving the effectiveness, efficiency, and accountability of existing
programs and strategies. We have clearly witnessed an enormous increase
in the Nation's flood disaster impacts and costs. Average annual costs
have grown from approximately $4 billion in the 1980's to $17 billion
(2010--2018), and FEMA has recently estimated that total average
national flood damages have risen (2009--2019) to $39.3 billion,
including both coastal and riverine impacts. Obviously, some years have
witnessed damages far exceeding these levels. ASFPM believes such a
study may be even more necessary today than when it was first
authorized.
Additionally, for many of the same reasons, we would also urge the
Committee to consider including funds for the Corps' Review of
Emergency Response Authorities study, authorized in Section 3029(b) and
(c) of WRDA 2014, including providing Congress and the public with
required biennial reports on emergency repair and rehabilitation
expenditures under the Public Law 84-99 program. We are increasingly
concerned that there are many situations where Federal taxpayers are
repeatedly paying for the same levee and other flood control project
repairs, and where improved flood damage reduction plans, such as
voluntary buyout plans, identification of floodways, and levee setbacks
and realignments, are necessary. These actions can make room for
increasingly large flood volumes being experienced and should be
developed to reduce disaster costs and improve floodplain and
environmental management, simultaneously.
Once again, thank you for considering the views of the Association
of State Floodplain Managers. If you have questions or would like
further information, please contact Chad Berginnis, ASFPM Executive
Director.
[This statement was submitted by Chad Berginnis, Executive
Director,
Association of State Floodplain Managers.]
______
Prepared Statement of the Business Council for Sustainable Energy
Chairmen Leahy and Feinstein and Ranking Members Shelby and
Kennedy:
The Business Council for Sustainable Energy appreciates the
opportunity to submit testimony in support of funding for the clean
energy programs at the Department of Energy in the Fiscal Year 2023
Energy and Water Appropriations Bill.
The BCSE is a coalition of companies and trade associations from
the energy efficiency, energy storage, natural gas, renewable energy,
sustainable transportation and emerging decarbonization technology
sectors. It includes independent electric power producers, investor-
owned utilities, public utilities, equipment manufacturers, commercial
end users and service providers in energy and environmental markets.
Founded in 1992, the coalition's diverse business membership is united
around the revitalization of the U.S. economy and the creation of a
clean, secure, and reliable energy future in America.
The BCSE is pleased to have an independent small- and medium-size
businesses initiative under its banner, the Clean Energy Business
Network (CEBN). Together, the BCSE and CEBN represent a broad range of
the clean energy economy, from Fortune 100 companies to small
businesses working in all 50 States and over 350 Congressional
districts. On a national basis, these industries support over 3 million
U.S. jobs.
Our organizations were encouraged to see Congress enact the
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), Public Law 117-58, to
provide an influx of funding for clean energy and energy efficiency
programs at DOE in areas such as weatherization and State energy
programs, hydrogen hubs, and the new DOE Office of Clean Energy
Demonstrations. Congress has recognized the United States of America
must lead the world in clean energy and energy efficiency technologies
to meet the need for energy security and grid reliability and safety,
while boosting economic growth and reducing environmental impacts.
While the IIJA investment is monumental, it does not negate the need
for sustained, year-on-year increases to all of DOE's clean energy,
energy efficiency, and innovation activities.
We urge Congress to continue to adequately fund Department of
Energy (DOE) clean energy programs for the offices of Energy Efficiency
and Renewable Energy (EERE), Fossil Energy and Carbon Management (FE),
Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability (EDER), Advanced Research
Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) and other essential DOE clean energy
programs. These Federal research development and deployment funds can
be used to leverage business investment to accelerate deployment and
emissions reductions in all sectors of the economy.
The 2022 Sustainable Energy in America Factbook recently released
by the BCSE and BloombergNEF shows that despite the lingering pandemic,
global supply chain bottlenecks, rising inflation, and considerable
uncertainty in 2021, the clean energy and energy efficiency transition
continued, with a record-breaking year for deployment of renewable
power, battery storage and sustainable transportation, and an
unprecedented injection of new capital into companies, technologies and
projects. We encourage you to build upon this momentum with sustained
support for clean energy programs in fiscal year 2023.
The Council welcomes the opportunity to share information from the
Factbook and we look forward to working with you throughout the fiscal
year 2023 budget cycle. Please feel free to reach out to Ruth McCormick
at rmccormick@bcse.org with any questions.
A document containing fiscal year 2023 clean energy industry
funding requests for BCSE members in the renewable energy, energy
efficiency, energy storage, and natural gas sectors can be found here
for your reference.
[This statement was submitted by Lisa Jacobson, President, Business
Council for Sustainable Energy.]
______
Prepared Statement of the Carbon Utilization Research Council
Summary of CURC Fiscal Year 2023 Recommendation: The Carbon
Utilization Research Council (``CURC'') is an industry coalition
focused on technology solutions for the responsible use of our fossil
energy resources in a balanced, low carbon generation portfolio.\1\
CURC recommends $1,388,250,000 for the CCUS & Power Systems Program,
funded by the Fossil Energy Research and Development (FE R&D) budget.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For more information, please visit www.curc.net.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benefits of Investment in Carbon Management Technologies:
Deployment of carbon management technologies including carbon capture,
utilization, and storage (CCUS) will have emissions reductions
benefits, contribute to a growing economy, and play a critical role in
the ongoing energy transition. In addition to providing low-carbon,
dispatchable electricity to load follow intermittent renewables on the
electric grid, CCUS provides a mean to reduce emissions from hard-to-
decarbonize industrial processes including cement production and
steelmaking and can help to create low- and zero- carbon fuels
including hydrogen that have a wide variety of applications to
decarbonize transportation, hard-to-abate industries, and provide long
term, seasonal storage for the grid. International climate authorities
like the International Energy Agency have determined that reaching
economywide net-zero emissions in any scenario is ``virtually
impossible'' without CCUS.
Federal investment in CCUS RD&D will also substantially benefit
U.S. economic competitiveness, as the technology will allow us to
maintain existing jobs and expertise in incumbent industries in
addition to creating new, high-wage jobs in the energy and
manufacturing sectors.
CURC-EPRI Roadmap: CURC and the Electric Power Research Institute
(EPRI) continuously evaluate technology needs that reflect changing
markets and policies that impact fossil fuel use in the electric
sector, which are communicated through an Advanced Technology Roadmap.
The Roadmap identifies a suite of CCUS technologies that, if
implemented, can deliver low carbon emission, fossil-fueled power
plants between 2025-2035 that are cost-competitive with other sources
of electricity. Several technologies identified in the Roadmap are
readying for large-scale pilot testing while others are preparing for
commercial demonstration. It is critical that a program is implemented
to successfully commercialize these technologies to successfully meet
any proposed net-zero objectives. This means annual Federal budgets
must increase to support the scale-up effort.
Federal Support of RD&D: The U.S. has been a leader in the
development of fossil energy technology with the support of the DOE's
world class CCUS RD&D programs. In 2020, Congress recognized the need
for expedited development and deployment of these technologies through
the enactment of Public Law 116-260, which authorized approximately
$6.7 billion over 5 years for carbon management RD&D. These
authorizations are in alignment with the recommendations of the CURC-
EPRI Roadmap and will allow DOE to continue to make substantial
progress in the development and commercialization of CCUS technologies
for applications across sectors, including electric power.
ccus & power systems program fiscal year 2022 specific budget
recommendations
CURC recommends full funding of the authorization levels for Carbon
Management activities included in Public Law 116-260. However, CURC has
several overarching comments regarding fiscal year 2022 funding for the
CCUS and Power Systems Program:
1. Any additional funding provided by Committee for new program
activities should not come at the expense of existing initiatives, for
which the Department has already made substantial progress to
commercialize technologies.
2. Funding for selected projects under the Coal FIRST Initiative
should be provided to construct project facilities, as each project is
intended to demonstrate technologies that will result in net-zero
carbon electricity and hydrogen production and are in line with the
objectives of this Administration.
3. Continued funding should be directed to the Department to
retrofit existing coal- and natural gas-fired electric power
facilities, which will be critical to achieve the Administration's
electric sector decarbonization objectives.
4. Substantial investment is needed to enable large-scale carbon
storage, which underpins the entire value proposition of electric power
and industrial sector carbon capture as well as negative emissions
carbon capture technologies.
Carbon Capture Commercialization: CURC recommends $500M. CURC
recommends funding for the Department to initiate a Carbon Capture
Commercialization Program consistent with commercial demonstration
objectives authorized in PL 116-260 and recommends that expanded
funding for the Department be used to fund commercial-scale
applications of carbon capture technologies for coal, natural gas, and
industrial applications.
Carbon Capture: CURC recommends $205M. Consistent with the
objectives of Public Law 116-260, CURC's recommendation includes
funding to support research, development, large-scale pilot projects,
and carbon capture test centers for a variety of transformational
carbon capture technologies to improve the efficiency and lower the
cost of carbon capture in both power and industrial sector
applications. Funding for carbon capture should also be applied to new
transformational technologies that are part of the DOE's Advanced
Energy Systems program (addressed below), as intended by the carbon
capture program authorization in the Energy Act of 2020, as those
technologies inherently include carbon capture as part of the overall
process. CURC supports efforts to evaluate industrial carbon capture
and negative emissions technologies, but not at the expense of critical
existing R&D for post- and pre-combustion capture technologies. CURC
recommends full funding for the National Carbon Capture Center (NCCC),
which is a critical path for testing and scaling up new technologies.
Front-End Engineering and Design: CURC recommends $50M for a front-
end engineering and design (FEED) program on coal, natural gas, and
industrial applications of carbon capture technologies, consistent with
objectives authorized in Public Law 116-260, which will provide
technical and economic data necessary to accelerate CCUS project
deployment. Funds within this appropriation should also be utilized to
conduct FEED studies of carbon dioxide storage complexes that may be
part of the carbon capture projects selected for a DOE award.
Carbon Storage: CURC recommends $200M. CURC supports the authorized
funding levels for Carbon Storage activities included in Public Law
116-260. CURC notes that direct air capture and other negative
emissions technologies will also be dependent on a robust carbon
storage industry and recommends a more robust program as follows:
--Storage Infrastructure: CURC--$180M.
--Regional Initiatives: CURC--$30M to diversify the Regional
Initiatives' efforts, which were spun out of the Regional
Carbon Sequestration Partnerships (RCSPs). The Regional
Initiatives develop the geologic framework and
infrastructure necessary to validate and deploy carbon
storage, including the assessment of locations for
CarbonSAFE or other commercial-scale carbon storage
projects.
--CarbonSAFE: CURC--$150M to fully fund CarbonSAFE Phase III
projects selected in fiscal year 2020 through to Phase IV
and, with remaining funds, solicit proposals for additional
CarbonSAFE projects. CarbonSAFE Phase III effort will seek
permits, continue to integrate efforts with regional
sources of CO2, demonstrate technical viability
of storage sites and support development of the
qualification processes necessary for a site to begin to
commercially accept CO2.
--CCUS Storage R&D: CURC--$20M. CURC recommends continued focus on
R&D at all TRL levels to address technical gaps to improve
reliability of CCUS storage, including continued
characterization of potential storage opportunities, monitoring
and modeling technologies, risk assessment and mitigation tools
should be supported.
Carbon Utilization: CURC recommends $55.25M. CURC recommends
funding for Carbon Utilization RD&D activities consistent with Public
Law 116-260.
Advanced Energy Systems: CURC recommends $273M. Public Law 116-260
includes authorizing language for R&D and large-scale pilot projects
for a variety of transformational carbon management technologies,
including those covered by the Advanced Energy Systems program that
inherently include carbon capture as part of their system process. CURC
recommends funding for specific subprograms as follows:
--Advanced Gasification Systems: $20M. CURC recommends continued
focus on research for low cost, modular gasification
technologies that will increase efficiency and lower capital
costs for coal and biomass to hydrogen or power applications,
as well as research to support a broad range of R&D.
--Advanced Turbines: $50M. CURC recommends funding to undertake R&D
to improve the efficiency of gas turbines, to utilize 100
percent hydrogen as well as hydrogen-natural gas blends as well
as ammonia and ammonia-hydrogen blends, and to test and
validate components and their performance as an integrated
system.
--Fuel Cells: $40M. CURC recommends funding for the development of
next generation fuel cell technologies to produce both power
and hydrogen from fossil fuels.
--Advanced Combustion Systems: $68M. CURC recommends funding to
advance novel energy conversion technologies, including
chemical looping ($11M), pressurized oxycombustion ($29M), and
supercritical CO2 systems ($38M) for bench-scale
work as well as to advance promising technologies to pilot-
scale testing.
Supercritical CO2Technology (STEP): CURC recommends
$20M. CURC recommends efforts, consistent with the original scope of
work, to complete the necessary design and construction of the 10-MW
pilot and to conduct the necessary testing for the facility. CURC also
recommends funds for competitively awarded research and development
activities, coordinated with the Offices of Nuclear Energy (NE) and
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), to advance the use of
supercritical power cycles.
Transformational Coal Pilot Plant Program: CURC recommends $10M,
consistent with fiscal year 2021 appropriations, to continue funding
Phase III projects selected in fiscal year 2021.
Cross Cutting R&D Program: CURC recommends $75M. CURC's
recommendations for Cross Cutting R&D include:
--Sensors and Controls: $8M to improve monitoring of systems and
apply solutions to mitigate stress on fossil systems that
increasingly operate under cycling load conditions.
--Extreme Environmental Materials: $16M. CURC recommends $8M to
support high temperature and pressure component testing under
real operating conditions, a project underway between DOE and
industry; and $8M for the A-USC Materials Consortium.
--Water Management R&D: $15M for thermoelectric applications of water
use and reuse, reduced water withdrawals, clean-up of water
discharge, and zero liquid discharge (ZLD) technologies.
--Computational Science: $11M.
--Advanced Energy Storage Initiative: $5M. CURC supports funding for
thermal, mechanical, and chemical storage systems that can be
integrated with fossil power systems.
--University Training and Research: $4M to develop the next
generation workforce for the fossil energy generation industry
which is experiencing a very large generation gap.
Other Initiatives Within Fossil Energy Research and Development:
Outside of the CCUS and Power Systems Program, CURC provides the
following recommendations within the broader FE R&D portfolio:
--Natural Gas Utilization: $40M. CURC recommends the establishment of
a new research and development initiative within the Natural
Gas Technologies office to effectively utilize natural gas for
decarbonization solutions. Within those funds, CURC recommends
$40,000,000 for sustainable fuels and chemicals research and
development focused on conversion of natural gas, natural gas
liquids and other gas streams to low-carbon products, including
chemicals and fuels such as ammonia and low carbon hydrogen.
Comprehensive planning approaches for transitioning segments of
the economy to hydrogen and other low-carbon fuels should be a
part of the program, including analysis of the infrastructure
required to store and transport these fuels. CURC also supports
the establishment of a Center for Sustainable Fuels and
Chemicals at the National Energy Technology Lab and a funding
level of up to $15,000,000 for this initiative from within
available funds for sustainable fuels and chemicals research
and development.
--Hydrogen RD&D: $86M. CURC encourages the FE to expand hydrogen
research, development and demonstration activities that support
fossil fuel-derived hydrogen production equipped with CCUS
technologies that results in significantly reduced carbon
dioxide intensity. CURC encourages the Committee to recognize
the importance of low- and zero-carbon hydrogen production for
a variety of end uses and to support continued collaboration
with the EERE, OE, and NE.
[This statement was submitted by Shannon Angielski, Executive
Director, Carbon Utilization Research Council.]
______
Prepared Statement of the Central Arizona Water Conservation District
On behalf of the Central Arizona Water Conservation District
(CAWCD), I encourage you to include an allocation of $10.7 million for
the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation's Salinity Control Basinwide Program for
the Colorado River Basin in the Fiscal Year 2023 Energy and Water
Development Appropriations bill. Continued funding for the Basinwide
Program, which supports salinity control projects, will help protect
the water quality of the Colorado River that is used by approximately
40 million people for municipal and industrial purposes and used to
irrigate approximately 4 million acres in the United States.
CAWCD manages the Central Arizona Project, a multi-purpose water
resource development and management project that delivers Colorado
River water into central and southern Arizona. The largest supplier of
renewable water in Arizona, CAP delivers up to 1.5 million acre- feet
of Arizona's 2.8-million-acre-foot Colorado River entitlement each year
to municipal and industrial users, agricultural irrigation districts,
and Tribal communities.
Our goal at CAP is to provide an affordable, reliable and
sustainable supply of Colorado River water to a service area that
includes more than 80 percent of Arizona's population. These renewable
water supplies are critical to Arizona's economy and to the economies
of Native American communities throughout the state. Nearly 90 percent
of economic activity in the State of Arizona occurs within CAP's
service area. The canal provides an economic benefit of $100 billion
annually, accounting for one-third of the entire Arizona gross state
product. CAP also helps the State of Arizona meet its water management
and regulatory objectives of reducing groundwater use and ensuring
availability of groundwater as a supplemental water supply during
future droughts. Achieving and maintaining these water management
objectives is critical to the long-term sustainability of a State as
arid as Arizona.
the colorado river basin salinity control program--its history and
significance
Recognizing the rapidly increasing salinity concentration in the
Lower Colorado River and its impact on water users, Arizona joined with
the other Colorado River Basin States in 1973 and organized the
Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum (Forum). In 1974, in
coordination with the U.S. Department of the Interior and the U.S.
State Department, the Forum worked with Congress on the passage of the
Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act (Act) to offset increased
damages caused by continued development and use of the waters of the
Colorado River. Title I of the Salinity Control Act deals with the
United States' commitment to the quality of water being delivered to
Mexico. Title II of the act deals with improving the quality of the
water delivered to the U.S. users.
In the early years of the Program, Reclamation implemented salinity
control through large projects that were funded with specific line-item
amounts. In 1995, Congress amended the act and created Reclamation's
Basinwide Program. Under this program, Reclamation funds competitive
proposals that 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. The lining or piping of canals and
laterals prevents leakage into the groundwater and the dissolution and
transportation of salts to the Colorado River and its tributaries.
States provide a 30 percent cost share of the projects implemented by
Reclamation. CAWCD and other key water providers in the United States
and Mexico are working to maintain salinity standards.
negative impacts of concentrated salts
Natural and man-induced salt loading to the Colorado River creates
environmental and economic damages. The Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) has identified that more than 60 percent of the salt load of the
Colorado River comes from natural sources. With the significant Federal
ownership in the Basin, most of this comes from federally administered
lands. Human activity, principally irrigation, adds to the salt load of
the Colorado River. Further, natural and human activities concentrate
the dissolved salts in the River.
In 2020 the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) estimated the
quantifiable damages to Lower Basin water users due to elevated
salinity levels at about $354 million per year. Modeling by Reclamation
indicates that quantifiable damages would increase to approximately
$671 million annually by 2040 if the program were not to continue.
Damages, by water usage sector, include the following:
--A reduction in the ability to reclaim and reuse water for
beneficial uses, including drinking water and irrigation water
supplies, due to high salinities in the water delivered to
water treatment and reclamation facilities;
--A reduction in the yield of salt sensitive crops and increased
water use to meet the leaching requirements in the agricultural
sector;
--Increased use of imported water and cost of desalination and brine
disposal for recycling water in the municipal 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; and
--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.
conclusion
Implementation of salinity control practices through Reclamation's
Basinwide Program has proven to be a very cost-effective method of
controlling the salinity of the Colorado River. In fact, the salt load
of the Colorado River has now been reduced by roughly 1.2 million tons
annually. However, shortfalls in recent Basinwide Program funding
levels have led to inefficiencies in the implementation of the overall
Program. The funding amount requested is required to get the Basinwide
Program back on pace with the overall Program implementation needs.
The current drought that has significantly impacted the West
affects the amount of and quality of available water, which in turn has
the potential to exacerbate the salinity concentration levels. As such,
we respectfully request $10.7 million for the U.S. Bureau of
Reclamation's Basinwide Program for the Colorado River Basin in the
Fiscal Year 2023 Appropriations bill.
Continuation of adequate funding levels for salinity within this
program will prevent further degradation of water quality of the
Colorado River and significant increases of economic damages to its
nearly 40 million municipal, industrial and irrigation users.
[This statement was submitted by Theodore C. Cooke, General
Manager, Central Arizona Water Conservation District.]
______
Prepared Statement of the Clean Hydrogen Future Coalition
Summary of CHFC Fiscal Year 2023 Recommendation: CHFC recommends
$865,000,000 for clean hydrogen research, development, and deployment
(RD&D) activities at the Department of Energy for fiscal year 2023.
These recommendations would direct $745,000,000 to clean hydrogen
programs within the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
(EERE) and $120,000,000 to clean hydrogen programs within the Office of
Fossil Energy and Carbon Management. In order to effectively utilize
these funds, the CHFC recommends that the Department continues its
collaboration between the Offices of EERE, Fossil Energy and Carbon
Management, Nuclear Energy, and Science.
Background on the Clean Hydrogen Future Coalition: The Clean
Hydrogen Future Coalition (CHFC) is a diverse group of stakeholders
supporting Federal clean hydrogen policies that will stimulate the
adoption of clean hydrogen in the U.S. and enable our country to
achieve national decarbonization objectives while also increasing U.S.
global competitiveness. CHFC members represent a broad spectrum of
forward-thinking entities in industries that will play a critical role
in the transition to a clean energy economy with a robust role for
clean hydrogen.
Importance of Investments in Clean Hydrogen RD&D: With its ability
to be used as a fuel source for transportation, as an industrial or
chemical feedstock, or to produce and store electricity, clean hydrogen
will have a critical role in accelerating decarbonization across all
sectors of our economy. For example, clean hydrogen will be necessary
to decarbonize heavier modes of transport--including heavy-duty
trucking, shipping, and aviation--that are substantially more
difficult, if not impossible, to electrify than passenger vehicles.
Clean hydrogen can also be used to power certain high-temperature
industrial processes that cannot be electrified and for which other
mitigation options are limited or unavailable. In the electric power
sector, clean hydrogen can be used to produce CO2 emissions-
free electricity and can be used to enable the long-duration energy
storage necessary to achieve the net-zero emission electric grid
envisioned by the Biden administration.
The CHFC was pleased to see the Department of Energy announce its
Hydrogen Earthshot last year, which seeks to reduce the cost of clean
hydrogen by 80 percent to $1 per 1 kilogram in 1 decade (``1 1 1'').
This is a very ambitious goal and will require significant funding for
public-private partnerships, as well as additional policy tools like a
clean hydrogen production tax credit (PTC).
The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) provides
significant investments that will promote the development of the U.S.
hydrogen economy, including funding for regional hydrogen hubs that
will drive capital investments in hydrogen production, transport,
distribution, and end-use. The IIJA will also provide critical funding
to drive down production costs for electrolytic hydrogen. These
programs will be critical to advancing clean hydrogen in the U.S., but
robust R&D funding from Congress is still needed to develop new, cost-
effective technologies to scale hydrogen infrastructure necessary to
reach decarbonization objectives and to fully leverage the investments
made by the IIJA.
fy 2023 specific budget recommendations--office of energy efficiency
and renewable energy
The CHFC recommends $745 million for clean hydrogen RD&D activities
within EERE. While EERE has traditionally housed the majority of
Federal RD&D programs related to hydrogen, CHFC encourages the
Committee to provide direction to DOE requiring cross-Department
collaboration on hydrogen RD&D activities.
Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technologies: CHFC recommends $370 million.
The CHFC provides the following direction for that funding:
--Research, Development, and Demonstration: The CHFC recommends that
the Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technology Program expands its clean
hydrogen RD&D activities based on the detailed priorities
included in the IIJA in coordination with the Offices of Fossil
and Nuclear Energy. The Department should continue research on
novel onboard hydrogen tank systems, trailer delivery systems
to reduce cost of delivered hydrogen, novel chemical hydrogen
carriers, and development of material-based storage and
hydrogen storage materials. Funding for electrolyzer
development, including high-temperature electrolyzer RD&D
activities should be funded with the $250 million appropriated
by the IIJA for these activities. The Department should be
directed to continue to advance fuel cell technology
development for the transportation fleet, including for long
haul and heavy-duty trucking, aviation, rail and maritime
applications.
--Nuclear Demonstration: CHFC recommends that $18 million be provided
to cost-share the Office of Nuclear Energy hydrogen
demonstration project, including for high temperature
electrolysis research and development at a national laboratory.
--H2@scale Front-End Engineering and Design: The CHFC recommends $120
million for a front-end engineering and design (FEED) program
intended to support the hydrogen hub funding made available in
the IIJA. Funding FEED studies will enable industry to more
rapidly access private sector capital to invest in projects.
The Department should conduct FEED studies on projects that
will produce clean hydrogen with low-, net-zero, or net-
negative carbon dioxide emissions. Eligible hydrogen
technologies should include hydrogen production integrated with
wind or solar power generation, autothermal reforming, compact
hydrogen generators, biomass combustion to hydrogen, and solid
waste and plastics to hydrogen.
Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy, Industrial Decarbonization:
Given the potential of hydrogen technologies to significantly
decarbonize applications in the industrial sector, the CHFC recommends
$50 million for an Industrial End Use RD&D program. The Department
should utilize these funds for a research, development, and
demonstration program focused on technologies that include fuel cells
and direct use of hydrogen to replace fossil fuel use, including non-
road vehicle applications. The Department should include in its efforts
the iron and steel, chemical manufacturing, and other industrial
applications requiring high temperatures.
SuperTruck III Program: CHFC recommends $300 million for continued
funding of the SuperTruck III program to improve the energy and freight
efficiency of heavy- and medium-duty long- and regional-haul vehicles.
These funds should be used to invest in private sector efforts to build
and manufacture new hydrogen fueled truck designs and associated
fueling and other infrastructure needed to support the expansion of a
hydrogen trucking industry.
Building Technologies, Safety, Codes and Standards: CHFC recommends
$25 million to address significant R&D gaps that are stalling the
transition to lower-carbon and zero-carbon fuels in buildings. The CHFC
encourages the Department to continue to explore research and
development that can advance systems and appliances, driven by
delivered fuels including renewable fuels and hydrogen, to meet
consumer demand for safe, high efficiency and environmentally friendly
products in residential and commercial building applications, increased
utilization of renewable fuels and hydrogen, appliance venting, hybrid
fuel-fired and electrically-driven systems, and on-site (micro)
combined heat and power to include cooling and integration with
renewables. The Department should also conduct a study and testing
programs to examine the potential for integration of renewable fuels
and hydrogen in building applications.
fy 2023 specific budget recommendations--office of fossil energy and
carbon management
The CHFC recommends $120 million for the Office of Fossil Energy
and Carbon Management to undertake hydrogen-related RD&D activities
within the Fossil Energy Research and Development (FE R&D) Program. The
FE R&D Program should continue to leverage existing expertise to
further develop clean hydrogen production from fossil fuels coupled
with carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) with low- and net-
zero CO2 emissions, or net-negative emissions when fossil
fuels are co-fired with sustainable biomass resources. The Office of
Fossil Energy and Carbon Management is also uniquely positioned to
assess issues related to hydrogen transport and distribution
Natural Gas Technologies: The CHFC recommends $50 million for the
Natural Gas Technologies Program as follows:
--Natural Gas Hydrogen RD&D: CHFC recommends $50 million for research
and development related to the conversion of natural gas into
low-carbon, sustainable products, including chemicals and
fuels, such as ammonia and hydrogen. As part of this program,
the Department should consider how these chemicals and fuels,
including hydrogen, can decarbonize industries. The Department
should also continue its efforts at the Center for Sustainable
Fuels and Chemicals at the National Energy Technology Lab.
CCUS and Power Systems: CHFC recommends $70 million for hydrogen-
related RD&D activities within the CCUS and Power Systems Program as
follows:
--Advanced Turbines R&D: CHFC recommends that within available funds
for Advanced Energy Systems, $50 million be made available for
Advanced Turbines. The Department should use these funds for a
research and development program focused on utilizing clean
hydrogen, clean hydrogen-natural gas blends, and ammonia and
ammonia-hydrogen blends, to test and validate components and
their performance as an integrated system, working
cooperatively with industry, universities, and other
appropriate parties.
--Solid Oxide Fuel Cells: CHFC recommends $20 million for the
development of next generation SOFC/SOEC technologies to
produce power and hydrogen from fossil fuels, biogas, and
hydrogen. Recognizing the significant progress made in system
integration and lifetime extension for SOFC's from this
program, this activity builds on research and development to
enable efficient, cost-effective electricity generation and
hydrogen production with minimal use of water. This program
will result in development of SOFC/SOEC technologies to produce
hydrogen and electricity while benefiting from the synergy in
the EERE hydrogen and fuel cell programs relative to
infrastructure developments and safety of end use. This funding
will preserve U.S. leadership in SOFC/SOEC technology, ensure
utilization of extensive fossil fuel resources in the U.S., and
will result in ultra-high efficiency production of power and
hydrogen.
[This statement was submitted by Shannon Angielski, President,
Clean Hydrogen Future Coalition.]
______
Prepared Statement of the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum
Waters from the Colorado River are used by approximately 40 million
people for municipal and industrial purposes and used to irrigate
approximately 5.5 million acres in the United States. Natural and man-
induced salt loading to the Colorado River creates environmental and
economic damages. In 2020 the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation)
estimated the quantifiable damages to Lower Basin water users due to
elevated salinity levels at about $354 million per year. Congress
authorized the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program (Program)
through the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act (Act) (Public Law
93-320) in 1974 to offset increased damages caused by continued
development and use of the waters of the Colorado River. Modeling by
Reclamation indicates that the quantifiable damages will rise to
approximately $671 million annually by the year 2040 without
continuation of the Program. Congress has directed the Secretary of the
Interior to implement a comprehensive program for minimizing salt
contributions to the Colorado River. Reclamation serves as the lead
Federal agency in implementing the Program. Reclamation primarily
institutes salinity control through its Basinwide Program. A funding
level of $10.7 million is required in 2023 to prevent further
degradation of the quality of the Colorado River and a commensurate
increase in downstream economic damages to water users.
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 federally owned, much of which is
administered by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). In authorizing the
Program, Congress recognized that most of the salts in the Colorado
River originate from federally owned lands. Title I of the act deals
with programs downstream of Imperial Dam that enable the U.S. to meet
its commitment regarding the quality of waters being delivered to
Mexico (Minute No. 242 of the International Boundary and Water
Commission, United States and Mexico). Title II of the act addresses
measures upstream from Imperial Dam, thus improving the quality of the
water delivered to users in the United States. This testimony deals
specifically with Title II efforts.
In the early years of the Program, Reclamation implemented salinity
control through large projects, which were funded with specific line-
item amounts. In 1995, Congress amended the act and created
Reclamation's Basinwide Program. Under this program, Reclamation funds
competitive proposals for projects 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. The lining
or piping of canals and laterals prevents leakage of water into the
groundwater system and the dissolution and transportation of salts to
the Colorado River and its tributaries. It is more efficient and cost
effective for Reclamation to perform the off-farm distribution system
improvements prior to NRCS treating the on-farm acres with salinity
control practices (i.e., Reclamation should pipe a canal or lateral
prior to the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) putting a
pressurized sprinkler system on farm). Shortfalls in recent Basinwide
Program funding levels have led to inefficiencies in the implementation
of the overall Program. The funding amount identified above is required
to get the Basinwide Program back on pace with the overall Program
implementation needs.
Concentration of salt in the Colorado River causes approximately
$354 million annually in quantified damages and significantly more in
unquantified damages in the United States and results in poor water
quality for United States users. Damages, by water usage sector,
include the following:
--a reduction in the ability to reclaim and reuse water for
beneficial uses, including drinking water and irrigation water
supplies, due to high salinities in the water delivered to
water treatment and reclamation facilities,
--a reduction in the yield of salt sensitive crops, increased water
use to meet leaching requirements and additional actions
necessary to comply with the Clean Water Act within the
agricultural sector,
--increased use of imported water and cost of desalination and brine
disposal for recycling water in the municipal 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 a corresponding increase in sewer fees in the industrial
sector,
--a decrease in the lifespan of treatment facilities and pipelines in
the utility sector, and
--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 necessary to minimize
accumulation of salts in groundwater basins.
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 to
facilitate compliance with Section 303(c) of the Clean Water Act
(Public Law 92-500). In so doing, it adopts a Plan of Implementation
consistent with these standards. 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 higher salinity concentrations in the water will be more
widespread in the United States and Mexico.
In summary, implementation of salinity control practices through
Reclamation'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 Program. Adequate funding levels for
salinity control 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. A
modest investment in source control pays huge dividends in improved
water quality for nearly 40 million Americans.
[This statement was submitted by Don A. Barnett, Executive
Director, Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum.]
______
Prepared Statement of the Colorado River Board of California
This testimony is provided by the Colorado River Board of
California (Board) and is in support of fiscal year 2023 funding for
the Department of the Interior for Title II Colorado River Basin
Salinity Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-320), as amended. In the
act, Congress designated the Department of the Interior, Bureau of
Reclamation (Reclamation) to be the lead agency for salinity control in
the Colorado River Basin. Reclamation primarily implements salinity
control through its Basinwide Program, established by Congress through
an amendment to the act in 1995. Funding levels for the Basinwide
Program have fallen behind in recent years, and a funding level of
$10.7 million is requested to be provided in FY-2023 to prevent further
degradation of the quality of Colorado River water supplies and
increased economic damages. Under the Basinwide Program, Reclamation
funds competitive proposals for projects 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. The
lining or piping of canals and laterals prevents leakage of water into
the groundwater system and the dissolution and transportation of salts
to the Colorado River and its tributaries.
The Colorado River System is used by approximately 40 million
people for municipal and industrial purposes and used to irrigate
approximately 5.5 million acres in the United States, and supplies
municipal and agricultural uses in Mexico. Within Southern California,
the Colorado River serves close to 20 million residents and 860,000
acres of irrigated agriculture, including municipal, industrial, and
agricultural water users in Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside,
San Bernardino, San Diego, and Ventura Counties. Natural and human-
induced salt loading to the Colorado River creates environmental and
economic damages. In 2020 Reclamation estimated the quantifiable
economic damages from salt in the Colorado River at about $354 million
per year. Modeling by Reclamation indicates that these economic damages
could rise to nearly $671 million annually by the year 2040 without
continued implementation of the Basinwide Program.
The 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 in 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. Every 3 years the Forum also 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 2020 Plan of Implementation for continued salinity control
efforts within the Colorado River Basin. The Forum's 2020 Plan of
Implementation can be found on this website: https://
coloradoriversalinity.org/docs/2020 percent20REVIEWpercent20-
percent20Finalpercent20wpercent20appendices.pdf.
If adequate funds are not appropriated to Reclamation's Basinwide
Program, significant environmental and economic damages associated with
increasing salinity concentrations in Colorado River water will become
more widespread in the United States and Mexican portions of the
Colorado River Basin. For example, damages occur from:
--A reduction in the ability and increased costs to reclaim and reuse
water for consumptive beneficial use, including drinking water
supply and irrigation, due to high salinities in the water
delivered to water treatment and reclamation facilities;
--A reduction in the yield of salt-sensitive crops, increased water
use to meet the leaching requirements to maintain crop
productivity, and additional actions necessary to comply with
the Clean Water Act in the agricultural sector;
--Increased use of imported water and increased cost of desalination
and brine disposal for recycling water in the municipal 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 residential 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 a corresponding increase in sewer fees in the industrial
sector;
--A decrease in the lifespan of treatment facilities and pipelines in
the utility sector; and
--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 necessary to minimize accumulation of salts in
groundwater basins.
The 2020 Plan of Implementation, as adopted by the Basin States and
approved by EPA, calls for 62,400 tons annually of additional salinity
control measures to be implemented by Reclamation, Natural Resources
Conservation Service, and Bureau of Land Management by 2024. Over the
past years, the Basinwide Program has proven to be a very cost-
effective approach to help mitigate the impacts of increased salinity
in the Colorado River. Adequate Federal funding of this important
program is essential. Based on current program cost levels,
Reclamation's funding for the Basinwide Program must be at least $10.7
million to meet those annual salinity control targets.
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 Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San
Diego, and Ventura Counties. The protection and improvement of Colorado
River water quality through an effective salinity control program
avoids additional economic and environmental damages to California, the
other Colorado River Basin States and Mexico that rely on Colorado
River water resources.
Thank you for your consideration of this testimony.
______
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. We are writing to support
robust fiscal year 2023 funding for the Department of Energy's (DOE)
electric transportation programs, including the Vehicle Technologies
Program, Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technologies Office, ARPA-E, Department
of Energy Loan Programs, Clean Cities, and programs established by the
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) to increase electric vehicle (EV)
deployment across the country.
EDTA's members represent the entire value chain of electric drive,
including vehicle manufacturers, battery and component manufacturers,
utilities and energy companies, smart grid and charging infrastructure
developers. Collectively, we are committed to realizing the economic,
national security and environmental benefits of displacing oil with
electricity in hybrid, plug-in hybrid, battery, and fuel cell electric
vehicles. DOE's research, development and deployment programs speed the
innovation needed to transition to e-mobility.
The importance of electrifying transportation has been widely
documented. Emissions from the transportation sector threaten public
health and the environment. A recent report published in Lancet
Planetary Health documents that air pollution is responsible for nearly
seven million premature deaths each year. Electric transportation is
essential to reducing these harmful emissions. The Union of Concerned
Scientists studied the total emissions reductions of electric drive in
every region of the country. The study found that no matter where in
the U.S. an EV is charged and operated, it has fewer total well-to-
wheels emissions than the average gasoline-powered vehicle sold today.
Electrification is also a national security imperative. According
to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, the transportation
sector accounted for approximately 26 percent of the Nation's energy
use in 2020; 90 percent of that energy came from petroleum fuels. This
reliance is a chronic threat to U.S. energy and economic security. As
we are being reminded today, oil reliance also keeps consumers and
businesses vulnerable to volatile markets and spiking prices. The price
of electricity is more stable and affordable than gasoline, with gas
costing nearly three times as much per gallon compared to the eGallon
price equivalent for electricity.
In her testimony to the subcommittee on April 28, 2022, Secretary
Granholm detailed the role of DOE's portfolio of electrification
programs in realizing the environmental, economic and competitiveness
benefits of e-mobility. Specifically, DOE's Vehicle Technologies
Program is a critical element of the National effort to decarbonize
transportation, leveraging private sector investments to promote
innovation in advanced vehicles, infrastructure and manufacturing
chains. The program advances research in batteries and power
electronics, electric drive motors, components and charging
technologies. Increased range, reduced costs, and improved performance
are battery advances supported by the Battery and Electric Drive
Technology subprogram. Critical supporting infrastructure, including
charging systems and codes and standards for communication with the
grid, are being developed in the Vehicle Systems Simulation & Testing
program.
The Vehicle Technologies Program is also advancing electric
alternatives in commercial vehicles. The truck and transit segment is
projected to grow rapidly in the next two decades. Research,
demonstration, and deployment of electric drive technologies for
combination tractors, heavy-duty pickup trucks and vans and vocational
vehicle technologies' systems and components will speed technology
breakthroughs and contribute to cost reductions while providing public
health benefits and energy cost savings throughout the economy.
The SuperTruck Program is an important part of this effort. We
support increased program investment in Class 7 and Class 8 vehicles,
which are a significant part of the commercial fleet. An expanded
program should continue to engage partners from across the
manufacturing chain--chassis original equipment manufacturers,
intermediate and final stage manufacturers, including hybrid system
suppliers, and infrastructure providers--to improve performance in
vocational vehicles.
Through the Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technologies Office, DOE is
working with industry to accelerate the availability of fuel cell
electric vehicles. There are over 12,000 of these zero emission
electric vehicles on American roads today. DOE's Hydrogen Shot seeks to
reduce the cost of clean hydrogen by 80 percent to $1 per 1 kilogram in
one decade, improving the affordability of the production, storage, and
distribution of clean hydrogen to help achieve the goals of H2@Scale.
Improvement of battery technology remains an industry priority to
help achieve cost parity of EVs with ICE vehicles. Battery prices fell
approximately 89 percent between 2010 and 2020, with a 13 percent drop
in 2020 alone, according to BNEF. Prices are expected to continue to
decrease--despite challenges associated with material sourcing--with
the development of novel battery chemistries, more efficient
manufacturing, and simplified pack designs.
To address these material sourcing challenges, we support the
Department's efforts to strengthen the domestic supply chain for
critical elements in EV batteries, including lithium, nickel, and
cobalt. The Department's recently announced $3 billion investment,
directed under the BIL, will enhance domestic capacity to meet demand
for these critical elements.
ARPA-E's role is essential in overcoming high-risk technological
barriers that the private sector may not attempt in the early stages of
research and development. Past programs, such as Robust Affordable Next
Generation Energy Storage Systems (RANGE) and Batteries for Electrical
Energy Storage in Transportation (BEEST), helped improve performance
and reduce costs of batteries. New programs would expedite innovation
in critical materials and develop new processes to recycle, reuse, and
reclaim battery materials.
We ask that the subcommittee continue its record of support for
these programs, particularly in vehicle and infrastructure deployment
activities and in early market development, education, validation and
enabling activities. We support increased collaboration among
universities, the 17 National Laboratories, and industry to address
these challenges and develop clean energy solutions. Continued funding
of the Department's loan programs, including Title 17 and Advanced
Technology Vehicles Manufacturing (ATVM), will build domestic capacity
and support good-paying manufacturing jobs.
EDTA also strongly supports the Clean Cities program. Clean Cities
works with nearly 75 local and regional coalitions to expand deployment
of electric drive and alternative fuel cars and trucks and recharging/
fueling infrastructure, especially in underserved and BIPOC
communities. These voluntary and locally-driven efforts have a
demonstrated record of success, including the cumulative displacement
of more than 12 billion gasoline gallon equivalents (GGEs) of petroleum
with alternative fuels since the program began in 1993.
To advance the Administration's effort to install 500,000 charging
stations across the country through the National EV Infrastructure
(NEVI) Program, we support directing resources to help municipalities
participate. These resources could be used to reduce the time and costs
for permitting, inspecting, and interconnecting eligible infrastructure
through standardized requirements, online application systems,
recognition programs, and other technical assistance.
We appreciate the Committee's long-standing support for the
important research, development and deployment programs at the
Department of Energy. At this inflection point for the climate change
action and for the electric drive industry, we respectfully request
that appropriations for fiscal year 2023 reflect the magnitude of both
our National energy challenge and our electric drive opportunity.
Thank you for your consideration.
[This statement was submitted by Genevieve Cullen, President,
Electric Drive Transportation Association.]
______
Prepared Statement of Energy Efficiency Strategy Group Organizations
We, the undersigned, write today to urge you to support robust
energy efficiency (EE) investments in critical programs managed by the
U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). Increasing investment in these
programs can deliver significant emissions reductions, grow jobs in the
clean energy sector, and provide savings to American consumers.
Energy efficiency, a key domestic resource, is critical to ensuring
safe, reliable, and affordable energy to Americans now and in the
future. Efficiency measures have cut our energy use in half relative to
the size of the U.S. economy since 1980. This energy waste reduction
has effectively delivered more than $2,000 in annual savings per
American. According to the American Council for an Energy-Efficient
Economy, scaling up key energy efficiency-related policies and programs
can slash U.S. energy use and greenhouse gas emissions by about 50
percent by 2050. These energy savings would amount to more than $700
billion in 2050.
The U.S. energy efficiency workforce is comprised of over 2.1
million Americans, which is the largest share of the entire U.S. energy
sector and is more than all combined jobs in clean and fossil energy
generation. Most of these jobs provide good compensation and cannot be
shipped overseas, ensuring that future generations of Americans can
pursue competitive careers in energy efficiency.
The importance of the U.S. DOE in research, technical assistance,
and market integration efforts that have driven gains in energy
efficiency cannot be overstated. U.S. DOE EE programs provide
exceptional value to American consumers and businesses, yielding
benefits that far outweigh the relatively nominal outlays appropriated
by Congress. According to various impact evaluation studies, DOE's
innovation investments have had a benefit-to-cost ratio of 33 to 1 and
generated billions of net economic benefits for the country.
We respectfully request fiscal year 2023 regular appropriations
funding for the following DOE programs, as summarized below:
Buildings Technologies (BTO): $542 million to develop innovative,
cost-effective technologies, tools, and solutions that help U.S.
homeowners, consumers, and businesses achieve peak energy efficiency
performance in their buildings across all sectors of our economy.
Within this account, robust funding is needed for:
--Residential Buildings Integration (RBI): $122 million for DOE to
collaborate with the residential building industry to improve
the energy efficiency of both new and existing homes. RBI
develops critical technologies, tools, and solutions that help
U.S. consumers and businesses achieve peak efficiency
performance in residential buildings across the country. RBI's
work supports workforce development and training and has
partnerships with thousands of small businesses in this sector,
the construction trades, equipment, smart grid technology and
systems suppliers, integrators, and State and local
governments. The integration research, demonstration, and
market transformation activities of RBI are critical as we
transform America's new and existing residential buildings and
work towards the Administration's goal of weatherizing 2
million homes.
--Commercial Building Integration (CBI): $80 million for the
program's research, development, and evaluation help advance a
range of innovative building technologies and solutions, paving
the way for high performing buildings that could use between 50
percent and 70 percent less energy than typical buildings. CBI
works with industry, small businesses, academia, the National
labs, and other entities to advance energy efficiency solutions
and technologies for commercial buildings. The program, which
considers buildings as systems and as part of the electric
grid, continues to be transformative in moving industry
partners to embrace innovation.
--Efficiency Standards, Building Codes, and Test Procedures: $90
million for equipment and building standards, including $60
million for appliance standards and $30 million for the
Building Energy Codes Program. DOE is responsible for setting
minimum energy efficiency standards for appliances, equipment,
and lighting to ensure new models continue to make progress on
efficiency as technology matures. The Department is far behind
in issuing new appliance standards, making an increased focus
critical. DOE plays an important support and technical
assistance role in the development and implementation of
building energy codes, which are adopted by States and local
governments for new construction and renovations of residential
and commercial buildings, that reflect developments in building
energy efficiency and ``lock in'' savings for the life of the
building. Education, training, and technical assistance have
been woefully underfunded over the past several years and can
be very impactful in assisting in codes' adoption and effective
implementation.
--Emerging Technologies (ET): $160 million for the program to enable
cost-effective, energy-efficient technologies to be developed
and introduced into the marketplace. ET funds and directs
applied research and development (R&D) for technologies and
tools that support building energy efficiency, particularly
electric technologies for a carbon-free grid.
--Grid-interactive Efficient Buildings (GEB): $50 million for DOE to
ensure that a high level of energy efficiency is a core element
of this new crosscutting program and a baseline characteristic
for GEBs which are also connected, smart, and flexible. The
Office should engage with the public and private sectors,
including the building and manufacturing industries and State
and local governments, to share information on GEB
technologies, costs, and benefits, and to provide information
to position American companies to lead in this area. Funding
for Connected Communities and other deployment activities is
encouraged.
Advanced Manufacturing Office (AMO): $600 million to enable the
research, development, demonstration, and deployment of industrial
energy efficiency and advanced manufacturing technologies. This level
of funding is intended to accommodate an ambitious agenda of
decarbonizing U.S. manufacturing by the midcentury. This goal of
dramatic reductions requires increases in activity levels across the
Office and some important changes in the orientation of the Office's
goals. AMO should expand its efforts from promoting energy efficiency
to include efforts to reduce carbon emissions for manufacturing and
reduce the embodied carbon in manufactured products. Additionally, as
AMO rebuilds its staffing, the Office should focus on adding expertise
in important decarbonization technology areas identified in its
research road mapping.
--Technical Assistance and Workforce Development:
--Energy Management: $15 million for efforts to promote Strategic
Energy Management practices and $30 million for the
establishment of a program to provide competitive grants to
companies for the hiring or designation of plant energy
managers. For Strategic Energy Management, AMO should focus
efforts on small and medium-sized manufacturing plants.
--Save Carbon Now: $55 million for the Better Plants program to
expand that program to offer comprehensive assessment and
engagements to the 1,500 largest greenhouse gas emitting
manufacturing facilities. These engagements should include,
but not be limited to, targeted assessments, staff
training, technical analyses of opportunities, and
education.
--Existing Low-Carbon Technology: $60 million for the establishment
of a grant program for manufacturing plants to install
underutilized existing low-carbon technologies.
--Smart Manufacturing: $30 million for support of the development
and adoption of smart manufacturing practices directed
towards small and medium-sized manufacturers. This
includes, but is not limited to, expanded funding for the
Clean Energy Smart Manufacturing Innovative Institute
(CESMII) to increase educational and technical assistance
activities directed toward smart manufacturing adoption.
--Industrial Efficiency and Decarbonization: $55 million for
industrial process heating decarbonization through the
establishment of a research, development, and deployment effort
by AMO to promote the adoption of technologies that can
dramatically reduce the GHG emissions from process heating
applications.
Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations (OCED): $200 million for
transformative technology adoption through the establishment of a grant
program that provides cost-share payments to manufacturing sites that
make at-scale implementation of transformative technologies to reduce
GHG emissions in intensive manufacturing processes.
Manufacturing and Energy Supply Chains (MESC):
--Industrial Assessment Centers: $30 million for the Industrial
Assessment Centers (IAC) program to expand the program in order
to increase the number of university-based centers to 40; to
establish satellite centers at community colleges, technical
schools, and union training facilities; and to establish an
apprenticeship program with matching funding for IAC students
at facilities that have received assessments in the recent past
to facilitate the implementation of recommendations.
--Flex Tech: $40 million for the establishment of a Flex-Tech program
that provides grants to States and Tribal governments partnered
with educational institutions and trade associations to provide
energy and greenhouse gas reduction assessments and loans to
implement identified measures at small and medium-sized
manufacturers.
Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP): At least $100 million to
provide project and policy expertise to all Federal agencies, including
not less than $60 million for the Department to continue its work
through the Assisting Federal Facilities with Energy Conservation
Technologies (AFFECT) program and $2 million for the Performance Based
Contract National Resource Initiative. With minimal funding, FEMP
supports all agencies of the Federal Government in their quest to save
energy and money for the American taxpayer while improving agency
infrastructure and addressing deferred maintenance. FEMP is at the
forefront of efforts to improve Federal building energy performance,
which is accomplished in part by accessing and leveraging private
capital in performance contracts. FEMP's work has attracted private
capital used to finance over 400 projects across two dozen agencies and
resulted in $7.8 billion in investments in Federal energy efficiency
and renewable energy improvements. These improvements have generated
approximately $17.7 billion in cumulative energy cost savings for the
Federal Government. Specified funding for AFFECT has been provided in
prior fiscal years to provide small grants to Federal agencies to help
achieve energy savings and resilience goals. These grants are then
leveraged through performance contracts, allowing agencies to utilize
private finance to complete innovative and comprehensive energy and
water conservation projects that would not otherwise be possible.
Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP): At least $422.5 million is
recommended for the Weatherization Assistance Program, including $375
million for the base Program, $10 million for training and technical
assistance, and $37.5 million for the Weatherization Readiness Fund.
R&D investments will continue to make emerging technologies cheaper and
more accessible, but DOE's Weatherization Assistance Program is
particularly important for bringing energy efficiency to communities
and families that need it most. According to the Energy Information
Administration, over 25 million American households report forgoing
food or medicine to pay energy costs, while over 12 million households
report being unable to use their heating or cooling equipment. Since
1976, WAP has helped make more than 8 million homes more efficient,
saving the average recipient about $4,200 over the lifetime of their
home. Each WAP dollar produces $4.50 in benefits, including energy
savings as well as improved health and safety. Federal weatherization
assistance also helps workers and small businesses.
State Energy Program (SEP): At least $115 million is recommended
for State Energy Program grants, including $25 million to be used for
technical assistance on energy and related air quality in schools. At
least $90 million of the SEP funds shall be utilized for direct formula
grants to the States. SEP leverages over $10 for every Federal dollar
invested and saves over $7 for every Federal dollar invested. In
addition to energy efficiency and renewable energy programs, SEP is
critical for dealing with cyber security and energy emergency
preparedness and response. SEP is extremely flexible and is the basis
for a variety of partnership programs.
U.S. Energy & Employment Report (USEER): $2 million for the Office
of Policy to complete the annual U.S. energy employment report that
includes a comprehensive statistical survey to collect data, publish
the data and provide a summary report. The information collected will
include data related to employment figures and demographics in the U.S.
energy sector. The report presents a unique snapshot of energy
efficiency employment in key sectors of the economy, including
construction and manufacturing.
Energy Information Administration: $144 million to continue
important data collection, analysis, and reporting activities on energy
use and consumption, including the Commercial Buildings Energy
Consumption Survey and the Residential Buildings Energy Consumption
Survey.
We stand ready to work with Congress, the White House, and Federal
agencies to identify ways the U.S. can improve the affordability and
access of energy-efficient technologies, unlock utility savings for
consumers, reduce energy-related carbon emissions, and improve public
health. We appreciate your consideration of our requests.
Sincerely,
Advanced Energy Economy (AEE)
Alliance to Save Energy
American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE)
Building Performance Association (BPA)
Business Council for Sustainable Energy (BCSE)
E4TheFuture
Environmental and Energy Study Institute (EESI)
Federal Performance Contracting Coalition (FPCC)
Institute for Market Transformation (IMT)
International Code Council (ICC)
National Association for State Community Services Programs (NASCSP)
National Association of Energy Service Companies (NAESCO)
National Association of State Energy Officials (NASEO)
Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC)
Southeast Energy Efficiency Alliance (SEEA)
U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC)
[This statement was submitted by Dane Farrell, Energy Efficiency
Strategy Group Organizations.]
______
Prepared Statement of the Federal Performance Contracting Coalition
Chair Feinstein, Ranking Member Kennedy, and members of the
subcommittee, as you deliberate on the important programs to be funded
in the FY23 appropriations bills, we respectfully request that $100
million be allocated to the Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP)
within the Office of the Under Secretary Infrastructure (formerly
within the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy) at the
U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), with $60 million designated to the
Federal Energy Efficiency Fund, also known as Assisting Federal
Facilities with Energy Conservation Technologies (AFFECT) grant
program. We also request the following report language be included:
``The Committee recommends $100,000,000 for the Federal Energy
Management Program. The recommendation provides not less than
$60,000,000 for the Department to continue its work through the
Assisting Federal Facilities with Energy Conservation
Technologies (AFFECT) program. The Committee directs FEMP to
continue requiring all AFFECT grant funding to be leveraged
through private sector investment in Federal infrastructure to
ensure maximum overall investment in resiliency, efficiency,
emissions reductions, and security. Funding should be directed
to projects that attract at least 10 dollars for each Federal
dollar invested and that utilize public-private partnerships
like energy savings performance contracts (ESPCs) and utility
energy service contracts (UESCs).''
In fiscal year 2022, Congress graciously directed $20 million for
the AFFECT program. This small amount of funding allows agencies to
continue to address resiliency as well as backlog maintenance, critical
upgrade and maintenance needs, and other infrastructure on our Federal
sites such as military bases, VA hospitals, and GSA buildings. The FPCC
knows that we can address such critical infrastructure needs using
fewer dedicated Federal dollars through performance contracting, and
the AFFECT program facilitates just that.
The FPCC believes that using just a nominal amount of appropriated
dollars for critical priorities such as cybersecurity, resiliency, and
net-zero/deep energy efficiency retrofits will net:
--Additional private-sector dollars invested in the Federal
Government,
--Improved Federal facility resiliency,
--Significant energy cost savings,
--Emissions reductions while addressing critical infrastructure
failures, and
--Enhanced attention to ongoing operations and maintenance and
regular equipment replacement costs
In fact, fewer dollars need to be appropriated overall if they are
leveraged with private sector dollars. Leveraging allows precious
Federal resources to focus on core mission objectives and transfers
project execution risk to the private sector.
FEMP is the appropriate place for these dollars as they will be
available to leverage performance contracting for all Federal agencies.
FEMP has provided small amounts of appropriated dollars to leverage
performance contracting through the AFFECT grant program for the past
several years. The $11 million appropriated in fiscal year 2021
resulted in DOE investing a total of $13 million in AFFECT funding in
17 Federal agency projects that, when combined with the investment from
the private sector, are expected to surpass $737 million in
infrastructure improvements. Congress further recognized the benefit of
this program by providing it with $250 million in one-time funding
through the bipartisan infrastructure law--and make no mistake: when
considering the substantial amount of derelict and outdated
infrastructure in Federal facilities, these dollars are needed more
than ever to meet requirements to improve energy and water utilization
and site resiliency. Performance contracting projects, which focus on
new technologies and resiliency, will help agencies across the Federal
Government address backlog maintenance, which the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) estimates is $174 billion government-wide. At a
minimum, it would specifically address the $7.2 billion in cost-
effective energy-related backlog maintenance already identified in
Congressionally mandated audits (EISA 2007, Section 432), which must
now be addressed after the passage of the Energy Policy Act of 2020.
FEMP, with minimal funding, supports all agencies of the Federal
Government in their quest to become more efficient, resilient, and
secure and to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The FEMP function of
assisting all Federal agencies allows them to achieve these goals while
saving money for the American taxpayer, improving aging infrastructure,
and addressing deferred maintenance. FEMP also plays the critical role
of trainer, facilitator, and honest broker for all Federal facilities
wishing to address necessary facilities- and energy-related
infrastructure.
As the single largest U.S. energy consumer with more than 360,000
buildings and structures comprising 3 billion square feet, the Federal
Government has a significant opportunity and responsibility to lead by
example through demonstrating and deploying energy and water
conservation best practices and technology solutions. FEMP is at the
forefront of responding to Administration priorities, statutory
requirements, and Federal agency needs while helping to maintain
resilient, efficient, and secure installations for mission assurance.
FEMP assists Federal agencies with various needs, including technology
development and integration, infrastructure improvements, energy
project development and implementation assistance, and workforce
development.
Energy Savings Performance Contracts (ESPCs) and Utility Energy
Service Contracts (UESCs) are alternative financing methods created by
Congress that utilize private sector resources and capabilities to
complete Federal energy projects. Under an ESPC, a private company
finances and implements an energy savings project for a Federal agency,
measures and verifies that the installed measures are working as
promised, and guarantees that energy savings will accrue. The private
sector is then repaid over time through the savings on the customer's
utility bill. As such, these contracts allow Federal agencies to
address critical maintenance backlogs and infrastructure needs with no
added expenditures by the Federal Government. According to FEMP, DOE
IDIQ ESPC projects have achieved over $17.7 billion in guaranteed
energy savings across the Federal Government and generated investments
of $7.8 billion in Federal energy efficiency and renewable energy
improvements. These projects have resulted in approximately 615
trillion Btu in life cycle energy savings for the Federal Government,
demonstrating their effectiveness as a tool to improve the Nation's
energy independence and security posture.
FEMP's role is essential. It provides training, guidance, and
technical assistance to help agencies achieve their energy, water, and
carbon reduction goals. Additionally, FEMP provides oversight of every
ESPC for the life of the contract. Because agencies are short on
personnel, this is a critical function to ensure dollars are well spent
and maximize environmental impact.
Utilizing performance contracting to address infrastructure
improvements instead of using appropriated funds for direct services is
a commonsense approach that reduces risk to the Federal Government and
ensures that projects are well managed since the private sector partner
must guarantee performance to get paid.
In past years, when appropriated dollars have been scarce, FEMP
funding has leveraged between $800 million and $1.4 billion in private
investment in Federal infrastructure with no added cost to the Federal
Government, using money from existing funding streams. A 2013 report by
the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) titled Beyond Guaranteed
Savings: Additional Cost Savings Associated with ESPC Projects found
that for a typical ESPC, the actual cost savings to the Federal
Government is 174 percent to 197 percent of the guaranteed savings by
the contractor.
The members of the Federal Performance Contracting Coalition (ABM,
AECOM, Ameresco, CEG Solutions, Constellation, Energy Systems Group,
Honeywell, Johnson Controls Inc., NORESCO, Schneider Electric, Siemens,
Southland Energy, and Trane) know firsthand how impactful ESPCs are in
saving energy costs, taxpayer money, and creating jobs in every State
in the country. Our members represent approximately 90 percent of the
Energy Savings Performance Contracts (ESPCs) in Federal facilities.
They are committed to working with Congress and the Administration to
facilitate more, faster, bigger, and better ESPC projects. Thank you
for your consideration of our request.
[This statement was submitted by Dane Farrel, Director, Government
Affairs.]
______
Prepared Statement of the Gas Turbine Association
The Gas Turbine Association* (GTA) appreciates the opportunity to
provide the Senate Committee on Appropriations with our industry's
statement concerning recommended FY23 funding levels for the Department
of Energy (DOE) Fossil Energy and Carbon Management R&D Program.
GTA is fully supportive of the decarbonization goals that require
significant investment with a relevant technology roadmap. GTA
understands the global urgency surrounding Energy Security, Energy
Equity, and Environmental Sustainability. Our deeply held belief is
centered on the long-term value and benefit that gas turbine technology
has made and will continue to make in terms of contributing to a
balanced and greener energy solution. Our technology, innovative
history, and pathway forward are centered on optimizing output,
improving thermal efficiency, and achieving environmental friendliness
by reducing GHG emissions (with a goal of achieving a zero-carbon
impact). We have worked successfully and have commercialized low
emissions products since the 1970's. Our investment path has focused on
meeting the need for low-cost energy production and ensuring the
operating flexibility that is driven by today's changing market
demand--gas turbines complement renewable energy systems to ensure grid
stability and resiliency. Our fast start/stop capability is unmatched
in the market. Gas turbines will contribute significantly to the
decarbonization of the energy market.
The GTA strongly believes that DOE R&D funding should be
prioritized to improve the performance and carbon footprint of our
Nation's installed base of power generation infrastructure. Programs
that incorporate diversity, equity, and inclusion elements to promote
the representation and participation of different groups in the R&D
space are an essential investment in underserved communities.
Representing the largest share of current electrical generation
across the country, gas turbines provide critically important
electrical generation capacity and dispatchability functions that are
key to effective and efficient grid operations. These benefits include:
--Firming capacity enabling broader adoption and interconnection of
renewable generation facilities,
--Integrating carbon capture and storage solutions, including both
pre- and post-combustion carbon capture technologies,
--Securing energy through reliance on domestic sources of supply to
meet our Nation's growing energy needs,
--Meeting social justice energy goals through affordable access.
With this country's focus on infrastructural improvements,
accelerated electrification and US manufacturing, we are entering a
period when the U.S. economy will depend more than ever on advanced gas
turbine technologies. Gas turbines are used extensively throughout the
U.S. for centralized and distributed electrical power generation, as
well as industrial applications. Gas turbines can reduce local air
pollution, increase energy resilience, lower utility costs and energy
burdens, and create good-paying jobs. By advancing energy security and
stability, gas turbines can provide increasing support for equality of
opportunity and access to energy.
In addition, investing in improved turbine efficiencies as part of
a ``performance package'' paired with carbon-capture technologies can
help to operationalize lowest-cost carbon capture solutions. These
solutions would in turn provide important elements enabling
environmental justice: delivering resilient, clean, affordable power
with advanced decarbonized gas turbine technology. This decarbonization
may include the existing installed fleet, a significant portion of
which is located within communities identified by the EPA as bearing a
disproportionate burden of environmental harms and adverse health
outcomes.\1\ Additionally, reducing the cost of capture promotes
adoption, preserving existing jobs and communities while creating new
jobs to modernize these vital assets. The gas turbine community looks
forward to developing world class technology to ensure US net-zero
generation and lead the world in affordable clean power.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ United States Environmental Protection Agency, ``Power Plants
and Neighboring Communities'', US EPA Clean Air Markets, Retrieved 05/
20/2022, www.epa.gov/airmarkets/power-plants-and-neighboring-
communities#graphing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As the US National Academy of Sciences has highlighted in a recent
report, Advanced Technologies for Gas Turbines: ``the gas turbine
industry will continue to play a critically important role in the
generation of electric power, aircraft propulsion, and the oil and gas
industry for decades to come, both domestically and globally.'' The GTA
therefore strongly believes that advancing gas turbine technology
should be a priority for the DOE and our Nation in order to keep our
economy strong, preserve jobs, and maintain this country's preeminent
position as a global gas turbine technology provider.
Based on input from the National Academies study and other industry
stakeholders, the GTA believes that the core element of these programs
should include the following:
1. Improved Efficiency. Increase combined cycle efficiency to
more than 67 percent and simple cycle efficiency to more than
50 percent. This involves both improvements to existing
installed power generation facilities as well as development
and commercialization of technologies for new generation
systems. Each percentage point increase in efficiency of the
U.S. gas turbine power generation fleet results in emissions
reductions equivalent to taking 2 million cars off the road,
and provides an economic benefit of more than $7 billion to the
U.S. economy.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 10-yr projection with EIA fuel price projections and 1
percentage point efficiency improvement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Improvements in Fuel Flexibility, enabling gas turbines to
operate with high proportions of hydrogen (including pure H2)
and other renewable gas fuels. This will make it possible to
achieve low to no CO2 emissions within our existing
generation base and power production infrastructure. Gas
turbines also have a significant role to play in compression
and distribution of hydrogen, leveraging existing
infrastructure and supporting upgrading of our Nation's gas
distribution network.
3. Compatibility with Renewable Energy Sources delivering
resilient, clean and smart grids. This will enhance efficiency
and operational flexibility by reducing turbine start up times
and improving the ability to accommodate flexible power demands
inherent in integrating intermittent power sources into the
grid while retaining grid stability and enhancing resilience.
4. Cutting-edge Technologies--research and development in areas
including combustion; heat transfer; high temperature materials
including superalloys, coatings, and ceramics paired with
improved manufacturability;
5. Technology Demonstration and Validation Capabilities--support
component testing, subscale testing, and full-scale testing in
existing fleets
In recent years the Fossil Energy budget has provided $27 million/
year for gas turbine technology R&D. This was increased to $35 million
in FY 2022, however this level is still only a fraction of the funding
authorized for this program by Congress in 2020. In the FY 2021 omnibus
appropriations bill, the Energy Policy Act of 2020 established a
dedicated line item for advanced gas turbine research and development.
To build upon this development, the GTA urges the Senate to increase
gas turbine R&D funding for the Fossil Energy Research and Development
(FER&D): High Efficiency Turbines program to $50 million to match the
level authorized in the Energy Act of 2020.
With natural gas being key to our energy future, the DOE should
invest in gas turbine research as part of a broad portfolio to
accelerate decarbonization of our economy and robust U.S. manufacturing
and job growth. GTA supports enhanced investment in research and
development to minority institutions and HBCUs with programs advancing
technology in clean energy, energy efficiency and climate programs
geared to underserved communities.
Gas turbines produce less than half the CO2 per megawatt hour than
other fossil fuels, and have the ability to integrate hydrogen and
other fuels to achieve low or zero-carbon emissions
--Gas turbines are key to stabilizing the electrical grid.
--Gas turbines, with their rapid response capability, are essential
for integrating with intermittent renewable energy sources to
provide reliable power at all times.
--Gas turbines are a vital part of the growing distributed generation
infrastructure.
--Gas turbines are a major manufacturing export sector for the United
States--the U.S. exports more than $10 billion annually in gas
turbine systems and components, and has a trade surplus of $6
billion per year in turbine technologies.
Gas turbines provide a variety of functions essential to the
effective, efficient and sustainable operation of America's energy
system and our Nation's economy. In addition to the attributes outlined
above, gas turbines are the primary source of dispatchable power for
microgrids across the country (including hospitals, schools, military
installations and the US Capitol complex), and underpin critical
infrastructure including our Nation's natural gas distribution network.
In addition, gas turbines ensure the stability and reliability of our
Nation's electric grid while supporting hundreds of thousands of high-
paying jobs in US manufacturing, engineering, operations, repair and
related occupations.
The Department of Energy's R&D programs play a very important role
in supporting the ongoing competitiveness of American manufacturers in
the energy industry. Today's most advanced gas turbines have combined
cycle efficiency levels exceeding 61 percent. In both the United States
and other countries, there is a focus on technology advancements
towards 65 percent, and long-term 67 percent+. In particular, China has
identified advanced gas turbines as an industrial sector with critical
strategic and economic implications and is devoting vast resources to
building its gas turbine manufacturing industry as part of the ``Made
in China 2025'' initiative. Maintaining the competitive edge for the
U.S. gas turbine industry is critical to sustaining our manufacturing
base and its jobs, producing electricity more efficiently, improving
air quality, and increasing exports. An enhanced DOE focus on gas
turbine technology R&D funding would lead to improved private/public
strategic partnerships which are critical to R&D success and rapid
market deployment. Examples of technology advancement areas include the
development and integrated testing of: fuel-flexible combustors;
turbine components; advanced cooling concepts; advanced aerodynamics;
improved materials; and more capable coatings.
In short, advancing gas turbine technology is important to the
United States. And increased DOE funding in this strategic area can
maximize the potential of every R&D dollar.
The GTA respectfully requests $50 million in FY23 appropriations
for the Fossil Energy R&D: High Efficiency Turbines Program targeted to
advanced gas turbine R&D to meet critical national goals including
decarbonization and environmental justice, fuel efficiency to lower the
cost of electricity, high-tech jobs, grid stability and reliability,
and fuel flexibility, as well as ensuring the US maintains its
preeminent position in the global market.
[This statement was submitted by Salvatore A. DellaVilla, Managing
Director, Gas Turbine Association.]
______
Prepared Statement of Lincoln Network
Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein, Ranking Member John Kennedy, and
Members of the subcommittee:
My name is Lars Erik Schonander. I am a Policy Technologist at
Lincoln Network, a think tank to help bridge the gap between Silicon
Valley and DC along with leveraging technology and technical talent to
solve governance and policy challenges.
The Department of Energy has requested $144 million for FY 2023 for
the Energy Information Administration (EIA).\1\ As Congress considers
that request, the committee should require the EIA to collect and
report data on foreign investments in the U.S. energy sector to restore
transparency in our energy industry as a requirement for fulfilling the
request. I respectfully urge the committee to consider making EIA
collect data on foreign energy investment in the United States again.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Department of Energy, ``Department of Energy FY 2023
Congressional Budget Request,'', March 2022, https://www.energy.gov/
sites/default/files/2022-04/doe-fy2023-budget-in-brief-v6.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Much like in the 1970s, when the United States founded the
Department of Energy, we are in a chaotic period for the energy sector.
With gas prices at new heights,\2\ it is critical that the public has a
transparent picture of America's energy industry, and who controls and
invests in the assets in said industry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Ella Koeze and Clifford Krauss, ``Why Gas Prices Are So High,''
New York Times, June 14, 2022, https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/
2022/06/14/business/gas-prices.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
When Congress established the Department of Energy by passing the
Department of Energy Organization Act of 1977, lawmakers included the
following language to ensure transparency about foreign influence in
the US energy sector and other matters: \3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ General Accounting Office, GAO/NSIAD-90-25BR, Foreign
Investment: Federal Data Collection on Foreign Investment in the United
States (1989), p. 12, https://www.gao.gov/assets/nsiad-90-25br.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In accordance with the Department of Energy Organization Act, 42
U.S.C. 7257(8), the Energy Information Administration (EIA) prepares an
annual report for the Secretary of Energy and for transmittal to
Congress that summarizes foreign investment, energy operations, and
financial performance in U.S. energy enterprises. The information is
available for use by the Congress, government agencies, and the public.
These reports provided legibility to our energy industry. For
example, the ``Acquisitions and Divestitures in U.S. Energy by Foreign
Direct Investors 2007'' report shows what companies and what countries
bought and sold American energy companies.\4\ Similarly, the ``Profiles
of Foreign Direct Investment in U.S. Energy'' report shows what regions
of the world were investing in our petroleum industry.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Energy Information Administration, ``Acquisitions and
Divestitures in U.S. Energy by Foreign Direct Investors 2007,'' 2007,
https://www.eia.gov/finance/archive/fdiad2007.pdf.
\5\ Energy Information Administration, ``Profiles of Foreign Direct
Investment in U.S. Energy,'' 1990, https://play.google.com/books/
reader?id=Hayc48sTggYC&pg=GBS.PA8&hl=en.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reviewing the history of this program, however, shows that the
Department of Energy has stopped collecting this information.\6\ As a
result of a $15.2 million budget cut at EIA in 2011, a variety of data
collection programs were canceled.\7\ One of these programs was the
form EIA-28, the ``Financial Reporting System.'' The EIA-28 form was
the basis for the annual EIA reports providing analysis on foreign
investment in our energy industry. Since its cancellation, no reports
have been generated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Lars Erik Schonander, ``The United States Should Collect Data
on Foreign Energy Investment Again,'' RealClearEnergy, May 24, 2022,
https://www.realclearenergy.org/articles/2022/05/24/
the_united_States_should_collect_data_on_foreign_energy_investment_again
_ 834001.html, May 24, 2022.
\7\ Energy Information Administration, ``Immediate Reductions in
EIA's Energy Data and Analysis Programs Necessitated by FY 2011 Funding
Cut,'' April 28, 2011, https://www.eia.gov/pressroom/releases/
press362.php.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Committee should direct the Department of Energy to report to
Congress on how to restart this program and collect this information.
While EIA tried to restart the collection of the data after 2011, as
seen by notices in the Federal Register in 2013,\8\ these submissions
did not lead to the form being used again. Congress should require the
Department of Energy to investigate why this program was cut in 2011
and why attempts to bring it back later did not succeed, and then
mandate the Department of Energy to bring back the program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ 78 Fed. Reg. No. 48 (March 12, 2013), https://www.govinfo.gov/
content/pkg/FR-2013-03-12/pdf/2013-05632.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
conclusion
The funds that Congress provides to the Energy Information
Administration offer the American people one of the best sources of
information on our energy industry. In FY 2023, the Committee should
mandate that funding to the EIA be tied to collecting data that
provides transparency on how foreign investors interact with our energy
industry. Doing so would allow the American people and Congress to
understand the full extent of foreign countries' investment in our
energy industry.
[This statement was submitted by Lars Erik Schonander, Policy
Technologist,
Lincoln Network.]
______
Prepared Statement of Methane Action
Mr. Chairman and Members of the subcommittee,
In this testimony, on behalf of Methane Action, a not for profit
organization, I summarize our detailed recommendations \1\ for removing
methane and other major greenhouse gases from the atmosphere and
beginning the governance of these methods. These recommendations are
from scientists, lawyers, economists and engineers with expertise in
the rapidly evolving science and policy of methane removal.\2\ The
world must rapidly reduce emissions, of potent short-lived climate
pollutants (SLCPs) \3\ such as methane, which is over 80 times more
powerful than CO2 in its impact period of 20 years. Methane
is now at twice its preindustrial levels in the atmosphere and rising
every year, and a burst of methane could erupt at any time from the
melting permafrost and shallow waters off Siberia. Therefore, we must
develop and deploy methods of converting or removing methane and other
``SLCPs'' responsibly and soon.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ We have provided, e.g., a memo to your staff under the title
``Catalog of Research Needs''.
\2\ (See, E.g., scientists' letter of April 2021 at
MethaneAction.org).
\3\ Mitigating climate disruption in time: A self-consistent
approach for avoiding both near-term and long-term global warming.
Dreyfus, G. B., Xu, Y., Shindell, D. T., Zaelke, D., & Ramanathan, V.
(2022). Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 119(22),
e2123536119. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2123536119.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We recommend that you include in your FY23 bill the language below
to create a Climate Restoration Program and that your Committee Report
include descriptions of the removal methods below to guide the EPA,
though the agency could adjust the details.
Suggested Bill Language: After adding $22,200,000 to the ARPA-E
section total, insert: ``Of the funds included under this heading, no
less than $22,200,000 shall be allocated for the establishment of a
Climate Restoration Program led by the Secretaries of Energy and
Agriculture, the Bureau of Reclamation and the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency, for the research, development,
assessment and deployment of methods for the long term removal,
oxidation or destruction of methane and other greenhouse gases, near
and far from their sources, whether related to energy or not, using,
among other methods: filters, oxidation, photocatalysis, metal
catalysts, biological action, enhanced rock weathering, and
agricultural innovations including regenerative agriculture to improve
soil health and carbon drawdown, as further described in the report
accompanying this act.''
Suggested Committee Report Language: Several of the following
Climate Restoration research programs could cover more than 1 year with
contracts or grants committed or obligated in FY23. These examples are
illustrative and not meant to be definitive or exhaustive. All are
expected to be cost-effective. For comparing the cost of removing
methane and other climate-forcing gases, the term ``CO2
equivalent'' (CO2-eq) refers to removing an amount of the
gas that has global warming potential equivalent to an equal amount of
CO2. The Committee expects reports on the benefits, co-
benefits and costs.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ We note that most scientists calculate that methane is at least
80 times more powerful in its warming than CO2 over 20 years
and this makes its removal far more important than the 100 year
equivalent estimates used in older accounting. See, Abernethy S,
O'Connor FM, Jones CD, Jackson RB. 2021 Methane removal and the
proportional reductions in surface temperature and ozone. Phil. Trans.
R. Soc. A 379: 20210104--''Our results demonstrate the effectiveness of
methane removal in delaying warming thresholds and reducing peak
temperatures, and also allow for direct comparisons between the impacts
of methane and carbon dioxide removal that could guide future research
and climate policy.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Explanation of the Research Proposed
1. Zeolite surfaces. Zeolites are porous, high surface area
alumina-silicate minerals used as molecular sieves and in water-
treatment applications. Copper (Cu)--and iron (Fe)-zeolites are
methane-oxidizing catalysts already used to convert methane to methanol
(CH3OH), a partial oxidation product (one added oxygen atom). More
recently, zeolites have been shown to oxidize methane to carbon
dioxide.\5\ The ability of zeolites to adsorb CO2 from the
atmosphere is well known. Scientists have screened almost 100,000
zeolite structures as potential methane sorbents. Relatively low-
temperature methane oxidation has already been shown in zeolites such
as Cu-ZSM-5 and Fe-ZSM-5, with Fe zeolites able to oxidize methane at
room temperature. Higher temperatures and pressures generally lead to
greater conversion efficiencies. Teams leading: Stanford University,
U.S.; Massachusetts Institute of Technology (M.I.T.), U.S. (partially
funded to date by ARPA-E) Cost range: Target of $100 per metric ton of
CO2 equivalent. For active systems with blowers, air
handling will be required (hence the desire to partner with operating
DAC facilities). Passive systems do not require such air handling.
Funding need: $500,000/yr, 2 years ($1,000,000 total) for sorbent and
catalyst development at ambient methane concentration. $1,000,000
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Methane removal and atmospheric restoration. Jackson, R. B.,
Solomon, E. I., Canadell, J. G., Cargnello, M., & Field, C. B. (2019).
Nature Sustainability, 2(6), 436-438. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-
019-0299-x; Atmospheric- and Low-Level Methane Abatement via an Earth-
Abundant Catalyst. Rebecca J. Brenneis, Eric P. Johnson, Wenbo Shi, and
Desiree L. Plata, 29 December 2021, ACS Environment Au. https://
doi.org/10.1021/acsenvironau.1c00034.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Photocatalytic surfaces (small scale urban solar chimneys)--
prototype testing. Photocatalysts are metal oxide minerals activated by
sunlight or by artificial UV-light able to oxidize organic pollutants
and greenhouse gases, at room temperature.\6\ The smaller the size of
the nanoparticles and the larger the surface area and porosity, the
faster the oxidation rate. Several are proven to fully oxidize methane,
such as modified zinc oxide or titanium dioxide. Trials will be
conducted on the ventilation system of an agricultural facility with
cows. Then a prototype will be tested on a landfill. Cost range: Based
on estimations of infrastructure requested results in a cost ton-\1\
CO2-eq is $166 by 2030 with a target of $100 by 2040.
Funding need: $1,500,000 per year for 3 years + additional $1,000,000
to build the pilot plant. $5,500,000
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ The comprehensive performance analysis on a novel high-
performance air-purification-sterilization type PV-Trombe wall. Yu, B.,
Li, N., Yan, C., et al. (2022). Renewable Energy, 182, 1201-1218.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2021.11.029; A new double-skin facade
system integrated with TiO2 plates for decomposing BTEX. Building and
Environment, 180, 107037. Li, H., Zhong, K., & Zhai, Z. J. (2020).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2020.107037.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Photocatalytic large-scale solar chimneys and solar chimney
power plants. Giant solar chimneys can be constructed that cause heated
air to updraft, which provides flowing air that can generate
electricity through a turbine, comparable to a windmill.\7\ The
structure and coatings on the solar chimney allow flowing air to be
cleansed of methane via photocatalytic coatings or other methods. Cost
range: Based on estimations of infrastructure requested results in a
cost per ton CO2-eq is $166 by 2030 with a target of $100 by
2040. Funding need: $1,000,000 per year for 3 years: $3,000,000
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Removal of non-CO2 greenhouse gases by large-scale atmospheric
solar photocatalysis. De Richter, R., Ming, T., Davies, P., Liu, W., &
Caillol, S. (2017). Progress in Energy and Combustion Science, 60, 68-
96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2017.01.001; Ming, Tingzhen, et al.
``Solar chimney power plant integrated with a photocatalytic reactor to
remove atmospheric methane: A numerical analysis.'' Solar Energy 226
(2021): 101-111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2021.08.024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Iron salt aerosols demonstration phase. Many ships burn low-cost
bunker fuels that contain metals including iron that may have the
favorable side effect of enhancing the naturally occurring chlorine
atom sink for methane.\8\ Existing evidence supports the theory that
the mix of particle-phase iron, sunshine, and sea spray (containing
natural chloride) generates chlorine atoms that will oxidize methane in
the ship's plume. University researchers are prepared to demonstrate
this mechanism using a combination of laboratory experiment, reaction
system modeling and field tests. After appropriate assessment,
consultation, permitting and governance, practitioners could then
harness its power to control methane at scale. It is important to note
that this approach would take advantage of present-day shipping traffic
and the large volumes of air that are in contact with dilute ship
plumes. Cost-range: $9 per metric ton of CO2-eq or less. A
full environmental impact assessment should be completed before
deployment. $1,500,000
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ A nature-based negative emissions technology able to remove
atmospheric methane and other greenhouse gases. Ming, T., de Richter,
R., Oeste, F. D., Tulip, R., & Caillol, S. (2021). Atmospheric
Pollution Research, 12(5), 101035. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.apr.2021.02.017; Wittmer, J., & Zetzsch, C. (2017). Photochemical
activation of chlorine by iron-oxide aerosol. Journal of Atmospheric
Chemistry, 74(2), 187-204. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10874-016-9336-6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Chlorine based photochemical removal at point sources. (Type 1)
This method generates chlorine atoms using low-cost light sources and
uses a catalytic mechanism to recycle chlorine within a closed reactor.
The innovators are at technology readiness level 3 (experimental proof
of concept) and seek to bring this to technology readiness 5
(validation in relevant environment). Cost-range: Modeling based on
power requirement results in a price of $9 per ton of CO2-
eq. Funding needed: $2 million to build a prototype to field to test at
livestock barns and a coal mine
vent. $2,000,000
6. Chlorine-based photochemical removal in the global atmosphere.
(Type 2) This method generates chlorine atoms using sunlight by
generating an aerosol of FeCl3 in marine environment where
there are sea brines. The reaction is catalytic in iron, the chlorine
atoms being provided by the sea salt. The innovators are at technology
readiness level 4 (prototype for the aerosol generation tested in-
doors) and seek to bring this to technology readiness level 5
(validation in relevant environment). Cost-range: Modeling based on
FeCl3 consumption results in a price of $2-3 per ton of
CO2-eq. $2,000,000
7. Chlorine-based photochemical removal. (Type 3--Alternative
Methods) The generation of Cl atoms can be made by photolysis of
Cl2 gas, produced by the well-established chlor-alkali
industrial process. Other methods to generate chlorine atoms to remove
methane will be explored. In particular, in order to be able to rapidly
react if a methane burst occurs (for instance from methane hydrates,
due to a submarine landslide after an earthquake). Cost-range: $20 per
ton of CO2-eq, based on estimations of chlorine gas prices
and the cost of UV light at 254 nm for photolysis. Funding needed:
$300,000
8. Climate chemistry global model to study accelerated recovery of
the stratospheric ozone layer. Enhancing the tropospheric production of
hydroxyl radicals and chlorine atoms will increase oxidative capacity
of the troposphere and might reduce the amount of halogenated compounds
reaching the stratosphere. Before conducting open-air field tests,
global computer modeling is needed to anticipate benefits and any
possible side effects of halogenated gases from natural sources, such
as chloromethane produced by plankton, and anthropogenic sources. This
can be done using the climate-chemistry global model LMDz-INCA. Funding
needed: $100,000 per year for 3 years: $300,000
9. Accelerate the recovery of the stratospheric ozone layer. Study
the use of high altitude solar photovoltaic platforms, which receive 5
times more solar energy than land-based PV panels, to generate UVB and
UVC light to enhance the photolysis of N2O and CFCs, the
oxidation of methane and the production of oxygen atoms and ozone below
the lower stratosphere.\9\ Laboratory research and R&D are needed to
optimize the aerostatic platform and the UV lamps materials (quartz or
other materials transparent for low wavelength UV). Funding needed:
$300,000 per year for 3 years: $900,000
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Solar power generation using high altitude platforms
feasibility and viability. Aglietti, G. S., Markvart, T., Tatnall, A.
R., & Walker, S. J. (2008). Progress in Photovoltaics: Research and
Applications, 16(4), 349-359. https://doi.org/10.1002/pip.815.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. Generation of hydroxyl radicals to increase methane removal by
oxidation. Hydroxyl radicals are the predominant naturally occurring
agents that naturally oxidize methane in the atmosphere. Commercially
available hydroxyl generators based on UVB or UVC light exist, but for
large scale use the energy consumption is high. Other methods for
large-scale generation of hydroxyl radicals will be explored. Cost-
range: Based on estimations of infrastructure requested results in
initial cost-range estimation of $200-1000 per ton of CO2-
eq. Funding need: $400,000 per year for 3 years: $1,200,000
11. Surface-based Photocatalytic Enhanced Methane Oxidation
(SPEMO). The Department of Energy, in cooperation with EPA, and the
Secretaries of Interior, Agriculture and State could contract for 3
years of research and development of SPEMO to assess alternative
methods to:
(I) lower methane emissions from coal mines, oil wells and
animal farms, and
(II) apply photocatalytic paint to buildings, rooftops,
photovoltaic panels, or in a ventilated conduit to reduce
methane in the general atmosphere as a complement to commercial
photocatalytic paints and coatings already being used because
of their self-cleaning property and ability to reduce urban
pollution such as nitrogen oxides and volatile organic
compounds. $3,000,000
12. Methane mitigation via wetlands management. Wetlands emit 31
percent of total methane emitted. The Bureau of Reclamation, in
consultation with the Army Corps of Engineers, should conduct an
investigation of relative wetland emissions of methane, through field
surveys and laboratory experiments, to determine how alternative
management practices could reduce greenhouse gas emissions and restore
natural ecosystems. $1,500,000
[This statement was submitted by John Fitzgerald, Methane Action--
MethaneAction.org.]
______
Prepared Statement of the Mni Wiconi Project
1. Fiscal Year 2023 OMR Request
The Mni Wiconi Project respectfully requests $ 33.7 million in
appropriations for operation, maintenance and replacement (OMR)
activities in fiscal year 2023, including $2.082 million for the Bureau
of Reclamation (BOR). The OMR request includes roughly $ 6.184 million
for necessary crossing, pump station, and SCADA improvements.
Additionally, the OSRWSS Core needs $38 million for South Core Line
(Phase V) Replacement (see Section 2). Report language is also
requested.
OMR funds will be used as summarized in Table 1 by the Oglala Sioux
Rural Water Supply System (OSRWSS), Rosebud Sioux Rural Water System
(RSRWS), and Lower Brule Sioux Rural Water System (LBSRWS).
Table 1-Updated
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OSRWSS
--------------------------- RSRWS LBSRWS Reclamation TOTAL
Coreline Distribution
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Employees.............. 17 33 14 13 8 85
Labor and Fringe Benefits........ $1,488,956 $2,115,004 $847,269 $990,600 $1,025,100 $6,466,929
Labor Overhead Costs............. 680,304 856,577 587,371 201,400 425,000 2,750,652
Non-Labor Costs
Electricity/Natural Gas/ 650,000 775,836 230,000 139,800 350,000 2,145,636
Propane.....................
Telephone/Communications..... 40,000 52,014 23,500 34,900 ........... 150,414
Water Treatment Chemicals/ 500,000 243,132 30,000 105,500 ........... 878,632
Supplies....................
Wells, Pumps, Motors & 400,000 88,511 62,000 104,500 ........... 655,011
Replacement.................
Water Testing................ 140,000 32,782 10,000 ........... ........... 182,782
Vehicle OMR.................. 83,000 299,407 85,200 97,400 17,000 582,007
Water Service Providers...... ........... ............ 310,500 ........... ........... 310,500
Travel-Training.............. 60,000 92,882 6,840 33,800 15,000 208,522
Other........................ 337,000 95,066 200,391 215,600 250,000 1,098,057
Emergency Leak Repairs....... 500,000 ............ ........... ........... ........... 500,000
Extraordinary Replacements
Meter vault, fuel tank & ........... ............ ........... 200,000 ........... 200,000
security upgrades...........
GPS/GIS...................... ........... 100,000 ........... 27,500 ........... 127,500
PLC Upgrades (44)............ ........... 1,000,000 ........... ........... ........... 1,000,000
West Brule Elevated Tank ........... ............ ........... 1,900,000 ........... 1,900,000
Replacement.................
Replace Standby Generator (3) ........... ............ ........... 700,000 ........... 700,000
Increase Pipe Size: 8" to 12 ........... 2,500,000 ........... ........... ........... 2,500,000
(Sharps to Rockyford--15 mi)
Replace Sharps East ........... 2,000,000 ........... ........... ........... 2,000,000
Reservoir: 1 MG.............
White River PS Replacement... ........... ............ 2,500,000 ........... ........... 2,500,000
Existing Community Transfer
Wounded Knee OM&R............ ........... 25,000 ........... ........... ........... 25,000
Priority Community System
Upgrades
Production Well Replacements. ........... 600,000 ........... ........... ........... 600,000
Projects
White River Bore Crossing.... 5,310,000 ............ ........... ........... ........... 5,310,000
SCADA Redundancy Telemetry 65,000 ............ ........... ........... ........... 65,000
Improvements................
High Service Pump Station VFD 808,800 ............ ........... ........... ........... 808,800
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL............................ $11,063,060 $10,876,211 $4,893,071 $4,751,000 $2,082,100 $33,665,442
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The OSRWSS Core System is the heart of the Mni Wiconi Project and
serves the three Indian Reservations and the West River/Lyman-Jones
Rural Water System (WRLJ) in 7 off-reservation counties covering
southwestern South Dakota with a design capacity of 52,000 people. The
Project now serves 41,250. Public Law 100-516, as amended, our
authorizing legislation, found that:
. . . the United States has a trust responsibility to ensure
that adequate and safe water supplies are available to meet the
economic, environmental, water supply, and public health needs
of the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation, Rosebud Indian
Reservation and Lower Brule Indian Reservation . . .
The request as presented in Table 1 will meet the purposes of the
Act. Appropriation by Congress of adequate funds will fulfill the
fiduciary responsibilities of the United States as articulated in the
Act.
The Project has been treating and delivering more water each year
from the OSRWSS Water Treatment Plant near Fort Pierre. The population
will continue to grow within the service area and will reach the design
population late in the next decade. The OMR budget must be adequate to
(1) keep pace with the system and its growing population and (2)
protect and preserve the $470 million investment held by the United
States in trust for the Tribes and by WRLJ. Funds are needed to
properly operate and maintain the infrastructure.
We appreciate the President's focus on improving critical water
infrastructure in his requested $20.021 million for the Mni Wiconi
Project. However, more is needed. We remind you of the Project's
overall needs, including OMR for community systems when they are
transferred into the Project, along with the actual costs of the
upgrade work. We also remind you that the oversight budget decreases
funds for routine maintenance and extraordinary replacements as
referenced in Section 7.
2. Crossing and Phase V Project/Existing Community Transfers/
Extraordinary Replacements
Included in Table 1 is roughly $6.184 million for a crossing, pump
station replacement, and SCADA improvements. The Coreline needs $ $5.31
million to replace the White River Coreline crossing because there is a
leak in the steel pipe under the river that is growing in size. This
crossing is essential for the Pine Ridge Reservation and surrounding
area south of the White River crossing. It also needs $808,800 million
for the High Service Pump Station VFD Project and $65,000 for SCADA
improvements.
Not included in Table 1 for the OMR request, but a critical need
for the OSRWSS Core is the South Core Replacement (Phase V) Project,
which will move the lines around the City of Ft. Pierre to address
recurrent leaks in the area. Project costs are estimated at $38
million.
Annual budgeting by the Administration must reflect: (1) increases
in water deliveries as project population was added between 2013 and
2015 with no corresponding increase in funding; (2) aging facilities in
need of maintenance and replacement (since start of construction in
1994 and through end of construction in fiscal year 2015); and (3) 40
existing communities that must be transferred to the respective Indian
rural water systems. It is critical that Project features not fall into
disrepair and that sufficient funds are available for the OMR of
existing community systems that are scheduled for inclusion in the
Project in fiscal year 2023 (or were transferred earlier). Funding is
also needed for the actual upgrade work, costs for which total in the
tens of millions for the Indian Project Sponsors. We also ask the
Subcommittee to be mindful of what BOR calls ``extra-ordinary
replacements,'' which are actually necessary and routine when pumps,
water treatment equipment, pipelines, and other facilities fail and
require replacement to continue operations.
The Mni Wiconi Project should be a shiny, new project that stands
out as a beacon of modern technology. It provides under-privileged
communities with safe and adequate drinking water of the highest
quality and to improve the health and well-being of a low-income
population, purposes that have been frustrated by inadequate attention
to infrastructure maintenance.
It is important to remember that for OMR activities, the Indian
projects are left with the appropriated figure minus the approximate $2
million that BOR takes for oversight. The reduced amount does not
account for the needed storage towers, crossing replacement, the
community upgrade work, any additional community system transfers, or
unexpected extraordinary replacements.
The Promise Zone designation for the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation
was announced in April 2015. It focused on developing solutions to
infrastructure challenges and the necessary resources to upgrade
existing community systems, among other things, to revitalize the
region. The request in Table 1 is consistent with the Promise Zone
designation (and last Administration's Opportunity Zone designation),
and underscores the need for OMR funding for routine maintenance,
``extra-ordinary'' replacements and existing community systems
following transfer.
The need is the same on the Rosebud and Lower Brule Indian
Reservations. Adequate funding for all activities, including community
water systems that are transferred, is a necessity for the three Indian
rural water systems in the Mni Wiconi Project. The following report
language is requested (see previous Congresses for similarity):
Mni Wiconi Project, South Dakota.--Reclamation is directed to
continue working with the Tribes and relevant Federal agencies,
such as the Department of Agriculture, the Environmental
Protection Agency, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Indian
Health Service, and the Department of Housing and Urban
Development to coordinate use of all existing authorities and
funding sources to finish needed community system upgrades and
connections, as well as any transfers of those systems, as
quickly as possible. The Administration is encouraged to
include appropriate funding for transferred community systems
in future budget requests. (House Report 114-532, Fiscal Year
2017)
BOR's annual budget requests properly included the transfer of
existing community systems and responsibility for operation and
maintenance. The budget needs to reflect those transfers:
. . . The project consists of new systems to be constructed, as
well as 40 existing Mni Wiconi community systems.
Responsibilities of the Secretary under the Act include the
operation and maintenance of existing water systems and
appurtenant facilities on the Pine Ridge, Rosebud, and Lower
Brule Indian Reservations. (Fiscal Year 2012-18 Budget
Justifications, p. GPR-49)
BOR and other Federal agencies are now assisting the Tribes with a
pathway for funding transfers and future OMR activities for the 40
existing community systems as they become part of the Project and
eligible for funding. It is crucial that these efforts continue. OMR
funding is needed for communities that were upgraded and will be
transferred (or have been transferred) to the Project.
3. OSRWSS Regional Core Facilities
The staff of the OSRWSS core system includes 17 employees. The
staff operates and maintains the 14 million gallon per day regional
water treatment plant, 203 miles of main transmission pipeline from 12
inches to 27 inches in diameter, nine major pumping stations (4
Megawatt total capacity), nine reservoirs (4.2 million gallons of
capacity) and supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system,
necessary to deliver safe and adequate drinking water to the service
areas of OSRWSS, RSRWS, LRSRWS and WRLJ. Again, the Core Facilities
need a crossing replacement, pump station project and SCADA
improvements at a cost of roughly $6.184 million and total funding at
$11,063,060.00. The OSRWSS Core also needs $38 million for the South
Core Line Replacement (Phase V) Project.
4. OSRWSS Distribution on Pine Ridge Indian Reservation
The OSRWSS Distribution's 33 employees are responsible for
maintaining 760 miles of PVC water mains and service lines, 30 high
production water wells, 33 booster pumps and treatment stations, 38
water storage reservoirs, and 2,206 metered residences. The water
system has been designed and constructed over a 24-year period, and
services a total population of 21,510 residents on the Pine Ridge
reservation. The construction of the water system is now complete and
valued in excess of $150 million, although 20 additional community
system upgrades and transfers are still pending. To operate and
maintain our water system has become a challenge. The core system east
of Kyle has 4 reservoirs which have a total of 520,000 gallons of
storage, this equates to only enough for less than 6 hours of storage
in emergency situations. Table 1 shows a proposed 1-million-gallon
reservoir to be constructed adjacent to the Sharps East Reservoir that
would increase the emergency storage to 18 hours. Table 1 also proposes
increasing the existing 8'' waterline to a 12'' line over the 15 mile
stretch from Sharps to the Rockyford Hwy 27/Hwy 2 Intersection Our
older system will also require an estimated $1 million to replace all
the obsolete programmable logic controllers (PLC) in our (44) pump and
control stations located throughout the Reservation.
5. Rosebud Sioux Rural Water System (RSRWS)
The staff of RSRWS or Sicangu Mni Wiconi has 14 full-time
employees. The staff operates and maintains 425 miles of mainline, 15
major pumping stations, 20 water storage reservoirs, 9 supply wells
with two associated chlorination facilities, and SCADA system. A new
production well was funded by Indian Health Service for 2023 for RSRWS
to increase ground water production and water supply. The proposal was
previously denied by BOR. A current RAX project is proposed to replace
a critical asset known as White River PS. Asset management indicated
replacement is needed at this site. The RSRWS budget also includes
water service contracts with the City of Mission, Tripp County Water
Users District (TCWUD) and others in the secondary service area now
including the City of White River at a total cost of $310,500. The
newly approved cooperative agreement negotiated in 2022 allows payments
to the City of White River tribal residents in the amount of $60,000.
No new monies were appropriated for this expense so the budget was
reprogrammed to cover the additional costs. Likewise, in 1995 the
citizens of Mission voted to transfer their municipal system to the Mni
Wiconi Project and in 2003 a final agreement between the Tribe, the
City of Mission, and BOR was consummated and the former municipal
system is now held in trust for the Tribe as part of the RSRWS. The
inclusion and OMR of the Mission system are authorized by Section 3A
(a) (8) of the Mni Wiconi Project Act, as amended. The recent completed
community upgrades in Antelope, Butte Creek, Okreek, and Parmelee
communities are in the process of being transferred into the RSRWSS to
be held in trust. Upcoming Upper Swift Bear and Spring Creek community
water system upgrades will be completed by the end of fiscal year 2022.
RSRWS is proposing a budget request of $4,893,071.00 for fiscal year
2023 including the RAX request for the White River PS replacement.
6. Lower Brule Rural Water System (LBRWS)
The LBRWS consists of a water treatment plant, six booster
stations, three tanks/reservoirs, approximately 75 miles of core
pipeline and approximately 300 miles of distribution pipeline. LBRWS
has a staff of 12 full-time and two part-time employees to provide the
operation and maintenance of these facilities. As shown in Table 1,
wages and fringe benefits total $990,600.
The budget continues to include $200,000 to upgrade main line meter
vaults and $27,500 to obtain the GPS location of water lines installed
by ranchers and to add the lines to the current GIS database. The meter
pit upgrades will improve access to the meter vaults and prolong the
life of the equipment within the meter pits, while the GPS/GIS
information will provide needed information for the operation and
maintenance as well as the management of the system.
The Kennebec Booster Station (KBS) was originally designed based on
the OST pipeline to Vivian being a 14-inch pipe. However, a significant
portion of this line is only a 12-inch pipe. The consequence of this
smaller pipe is significantly reduced inlet pressure at the pumps in
the KBS. This has led to cavitation occurring in the pumps which has
led to numerous pump replacements and complete booster station
shutdowns, at times. To solve this issue, LBRWS has begun pumping less
water with the KBS and supplying additional water with the LBRWS Water
Treatment Plant (WTP). This method of solving the problem is working
well, but to fully meet water needs and design standards the size of
the West Brule elevated tank needs to be increased. In addition,
standby generators for the WTP and booster stations #1 and #2 should be
upgraded/replaced. As a result, the budget includes $1,900,000 to
replace the existing West Brule tank with a larger tank and $700,000 to
upgrade/replace generators for the WTP and booster stations. LBRWS will
continue to work with the BOR 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.
7. Bureau of Reclamation (BOR)
The BOR's budget is for oversight of operation and maintenance
activities for all tribal systems, including the employment of an
equivalent 8.0 persons. BOR pays the Western Area Power Administration
for Project preference power used by the OSRWSS core system and Rosebud
core system. BOR also pays for cathodic protection services for OSRWSS
core system, Rosebud, and OSRWSS on-reservation DWM&C systems. BOR
costs are expended before funds reach the Project.
[This statement was submitted by Ron Blacksmith, Core System
Manager, Oglala Sioux Rural Water Supply System; Chuck Jacobs,
Distribution System Director,
Oglala Sioux RWSS; Young Colombe, Manager, Rosebud Sioux Rural Water
System; and Jim McCauley, Manager, Lower Brule Sioux Rural Water
System.]
______
Prepared Statement of the National Association of State Energy
Officials
Chair Feinstein, Ranking Member Kennedy, and members of the
subcommittee, I am David Terry, Executive Director of the National
Association of State Energy Officials (NASEO) testifying on behalf of
our 56 governor-designated state and territory members. NASEO
respectfully requests funding for the following U.S. Department of
Energy (DOE) programs: $90 million for the U.S. State Energy Program
(SEP) as formula funding to States with no more than 5 percent of the
appropriated amount for use by DOE in providing technical assistance
and support; $375 million for the Weatherization Assistance Program
(with robust funding for the innovation and resilience funds); $392
million for the Building Technologies Office, with $20 million for
building energy codes, and $50 million for grid-interactive efficient
buildings; $602 million for the Vehicle Technologies Office; $535
million for SETO; $202 million for CESER, with robust support for ISER
and program direction; A robust increase for the Office of Electricity
including $81 million for energy storage and $50 million for regional
electricity market development; $478 for carbon management within FECM;
$100 million for FEMP; and $90 million for the Grid Deployment Office.
The DOE $4 billion request for EERE is justified given the
extraordinary energy affordability, climate, and reliability crises the
Nation is facing.
A bipartisan ``Dear Colleague'' letter led by Mr. Reed and Ms.
Collins supporting funding for SEP and Weatherization was received and
signed by 47 Members. The SEP statute provides States with flexibility
to advance energy affordability and security, resilience, renewables,
efficiency, EVs, grid planning and more in ways that link with state
policy to achieve greater national impact. States work collaboratively
using SEP formula funds to accelerate results: REVWest EV charging
initiative (e.g., AZ, ID, NV, UT, WY); Microgrid Working Group (e.g.,
KY, IL, PA, TN, WA); Southeast EV initiative (e.g., KY, TN, AL); the
Western Petroleum Response Collaborative which responds to supply
disruptions caused by natural disasters (e.g., AK, WA, CA, OR);
coordination on carbon utilization and hydrogen (e.g., LA, ND, WY, MT,
AZ, CO); and building-grid electric management (e.g., CA, GA, WA, MS,
IL, OR, TN, SC). Past Administrations have taken a portion of the SEP
formula funds provided by Congress for competitive awards on DOE-
directed priority topics. NASEO strongly opposes this approach which
limits States' ability to address their unique priorities. We urge
Congress to explicitly provide the requested $90 million as formula
funding to States with no more than 5 percent of the appropriated
amount for use by DOE in providing technical assistance and support.
SEP formula funds enable States to leverage DOE's research
activities and work with the private sector to improve electricity
resilience, accelerate clean energy development, catalyze investments
in carbon capture, advance low-carbon hydrogen markets, support
manufacturing energy efficiency, lower home energy costs through energy
efficiency, and accelerate energy technology innovation through State-
private sector partnerships. Two Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL)
studies found that $1 of SEP formula funds leverages $10.71 of State
and private funds and realizes $7.22 in energy cost savings for
citizens and businesses. With SEP funds, the State Energy Offices lead
or co-lead energy emergency planning and response across electricity,
natural gas, and petroleum products in coordination with DOE's CESER-
which provides expertise to the States and energy industry. SEP formula
funds are the key connection between billions of dollars spent by DOE
on R&D and the priorities of States. State energy policy guides energy
markets and a constructive DOE-state relationship can achieve greater
impact. A greater reliance by DOE on the States and their local
businesses and communities to ensure Federal R&D meets real world
conditions would maximize the impact of R&D.
Below are examples of States' utilization of SEP formula funds:
California-Development of Appliance Standards. California uses SEP
funds for appliance efficiency standards. In 2020 California's general
services lamps standard became national, and in 2021 the state
established standards for desktop/notebook computers, gaming systems,
and pool pumps. Examples of previous standard successes: portable air
conditioners saving 369 gigawatt-hours annually, and sprinklers saving
150 billion gallons of water annually.
Louisiana-Government and Industry Partners Set the Stage for CCUS
and Hydrogen. Louisiana uses SEP funds to lead two major components of
the State's strategy to combat climate change and develop its economy:
achieve primacy in CO2 sequestration and coordinate the LA-AR-OK
initiative to establish a hub for the production and use of clean
hydrogen. The State Energy Office facilitated the announcement of two
operating agreements for ``blue'' hydrogen/CCUS projects in 2021,
positioning the state as a global leader in carbon management.
Alabama-Energy Efficiency for Local Governments. Alabama used a
portion of their SEP funds to support energy efficiency upgrades at
wastewater treatment plants and local facilities. In all, 29 grants to
local governments, universities, and non-profits increased energy
efficiency and reduce costs by deploying variable frequency drives,
lighting, and efficient HVAC systems. In addition, Alabama's Energy
Security Plan is supported with SEP funds allowing for needed updates
to adapt to changes in Alabama's energy portfolio and infrastructure.
Alaska-Grants for Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging Stations. Alaska
leveraged SEP funds to award $1 million in grants to support Level-2
and DC fast-charging EV charging station deployment. The nine
communities awarded grants are in critical locations along the State's
highway system and will provide matching funds to complete the process.
The program will develop new industries, help promote the economy, and
save Alaskans money.
Delaware-Energy Efficiency Fund. The Delaware Energy Office
operates a highly successful Energy Efficiency Investment Fund
supported in part by SEP funds. Last year, the fund provided $9.2
million across 218 projects, avoiding 69.7 million kWh and 151,540
MMBtu annually; saving $4.9 million in annual energy costs; and
reducing 57,429 metric tons of CO2 emissions, equivalent to 12,490
passenger vehicles driven for 1 year. Each dollar of program funds
leveraged $5.82 in external investment.
Illinois-Leverage $16 Million with 79 Percent of Funds Going to EJ
Communities. The Illinois Energy Office used SEP funds to support
upgrades at four publicly-owned wastewater treatment plants, leveraging
$16,018,574 in funds from municipalities and saving 2,431,955 kWh
annually. Of the funds awarded, 79 percent was granted to facilities
serving EJ communities.
Kentucky-Tool to Site Solar Projects at Reclaimed Mines. The
Kentucky Energy and Environmental Cabinet used SEP to create a web-
based tool that enables users to identify potential solar energy siting
opportunities in Kentucky, including on previous mine locations. The
tool was created in response to an increasing number of solar
developers supporting corporate sustainability goals, and to support
wholesale market clean energy procurement demand. The tool helps
developers and landowners assess solar site suitability and makes it
easy for developers to use GIS Site Suitability Analysis to site solar
installations on reclaimed minefields. The website includes information
about land reclamation.
Maine-Supports Clean Energy, Energy Efficiency, Climate, and COVID
Coordination. The Maine Governor's Energy Office used SEP funds to
develop and implement such nation-leading energy initiatives as a
Statewide energy assessment, the State's first energy storage market
assessment, clean transportation roadmap, and energy workforce study.
The office's work is aimed at reducing energy volatility for Maine
consumers, for instance by advancing the country's first floating
offshore wind demonstration project and new programs aimed at
installing 100,000 new high-efficiency air source heat pumps by 2025.
In 2021, the Governor's Energy Office assisted in the implementation of
the State's 4-year climate action plan, Maine Won't Wait, outlining how
Maine will achieve the statutory requirement to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions of 45 percent by 2030 from 1990 levels and 80 percent by
2050, achieve carbon neutrality by 2045, and achieve 80 percent
renewable energy by 2030, while strengthening the economy and doubling
the number of clean energy jobs in Maine.
Mississippi-Industrial Energy Efficiency Program. The Mississippi
State Energy Office used SEP funds to design the Mississippi Industrial
Energy Efficiency Program to assist the State's manufacturers with
making energy-efficient upgrades. Projects have resulted in improved
working conditions for approximately 2,500 employees across a wide
variety of manufacturers, ranging from catfish processing to HVAC
component production. Those projects include lighting upgrades,
compressed air system replacements and building envelope improvements
that cover over 2.95 million square feet of manufacturing space.
Montana-Implementing Energy Projects in State-Owned Veteran
Retirement Homes. The Montana Energy Office leveraged SEP funds to
upgrade lighting and ventilation systems at Veteran retirement homes in
Glendive and Columbia Falls. The project surpassed the statutorily-
required cost effectiveness target and increased resident comfort
through dimmable, high-resolution lighting, which is less disruptive to
sleep patterns; provides high contrast to lessen risk of slips and
falls; and increases contrast for people with limited vision.
New Hampshire-School Energy Cost Savings. Since 2018, New Hampshire
has used a portion of their SEP funds for the School Energy Efficiency
Development Program, an annual competitive matching grant that allows
schools in small communities to complete energy efficiency projects.
This program's dual purpose to create a safer, healthier learning
environment for students and staff, and reduce a local school's energy
costs has been successful. For example, in 2020, $80,000 was awarded to
the New Boston Central School for LED lighting and controls, resulting
in 110,812 kWhs of annual electricity savings and $21,000 in annual
cost savings.
New Mexico-Advancing Cutting-Edge Sustainable Buildings and EVs.
The State Energy Office uses SEP funds to support implementation of the
2021 Sustainable Buildings Tax Credit Program. The program incentivizes
New Mexico's commitment to cutting-edge sustainable building practices
including the provision for the installation of energy-conserving
products in existing commercial and residential buildings-helping to
improve existing buildings and low income and affordable housing. This
program advances adoption of EVs through a tax incentive for EV-ready
buildings-existing, new, commercial, residential-to make EV charging
available or provide the appropriate electrical upgrades for charger
installation. The tax incentive also provides bonuses for a fully
electric house, and/or for meeting net-zero carbon certification, zero
energy certification, zero waste certification or zero water
certification.
North Dakota-Deploy Solar Panels, Bolster Resiliency, Educate
Students. SEP Funds supported installation of 115 solar panels and an
inverter at the Bismarck Public Schools Career Academy. In addition to
powering the building, instructors at the school plan to start
incorporating the panels into their lessons.
Oregon. The Oregon Department of Energy utilized a portion of their
SEP funds to create the Oregon Guidebook for Local Energy Resilience:
for Small and Medium Electric Utilities, a technical resource for the
38 consumer-owned electric utilities serving Oregon. The Guidebook will
help consumer-owned utilities improve local energy resilience through
business continuity planning; identifying strategic efficiency and
distributed renewables resilience opportunities; and understanding ways
to leverage Federal and State emergency management planning efforts.
The office's resilience policy analyst engaged with consumer-owned
utilities to share the recommendations and offer guidance to implement
resilience-focused actions.
South Carolina-High School Energy, Chemistry, and Supply Chain
Education. South Carolina uses a portion of its SEP funds to offer
mini-grants for highly-visible demonstration projects that promote
emerging energy technologies and innovation. The program targets South
Carolina's State and local government agencies, public colleges,
universities and school districts. Last year, seven projects were
selected, including, for example, the Blythewood High School's Bengal
Biodiesel grant to help expand the school's Chemistry 2 class where
students are being taught lab procedures in making B100 biodiesel fuel
out of waste streams and learning about supply chain logistics. The
class will be expanded to 75 students and includes workforce issues and
engaging with equipment manufacturers. The class's B100 will be used in
school buses and other on-road equipment around the community after
successful tests in the school's tractor. The project was profiled by
MotorWeek, the Nation's longest running auto publication.
Tennessee-Leading the Charge on Transportation Electrification. The
Tennessee Office of Energy Programs (OEP) used a portion of their SEP
funds-in partnership with the Tennessee Valley Authority-to support EV
fast-charging and add 40 priority charging locations in order to double
the State's fast-charging network. OEP also leveraged SEP funds to
partner with TN-DOT on the plan for IIJA-funded EV fast-charging. The
Drive Electric Tennessee Roadmap aims to increase EV adoption to
200,000 EVs by 2028, up from 18,494 in 2022. This work has been
foundational to the State's leadership in EV infrastructure and EV-
related manufacturing.
Washington-Energy Emergency Response. The Washington State Energy
Office utilized SEP funds to address critical energy emergency
preparedness and response. In 2021, heavy rain led to flooding and
landslides, damaging infrastructure in Washington and British Columbia
resulting in a regional fuel emergency. The State Energy Office led
efforts to ensure critical fuel deliveries and coordinated with British
Columbia and the multi-State Western Petroleum Shortage Collaborative
in response to crude oil refinery closures. The positive outcome was
the result of planning and coordination at the State, Federal, and
international levels.
Wisconsin-Enhancing Energy Security for Local and Tribal
Governments. The Wisconsin Office of Energy Innovation utilized a
portion of their SEP funds to enhance energy security for local and
Tribal governments with its Statewide Assistance for Energy Reliability
and Resiliency (SAFER2) initiative. The program improves the efficacy
of Wisconsin's response to long-term energy outages by partnering with
local governments and Tribal emergency managers to gain a better
understanding of the resiliency of critical energy infrastructure;
provide templates for fuel shortage contingency plans; improve cyber-
security awareness; and enhance the understanding of roles and
responsibilities of both State and local partners during an energy
emergency?.
[This statement was submitted by David Terry, Executive Director,
National
Association of State Energy Officials.]
______
Prepared Statement of the National Community Action Foundation
Chairwoman Feinstein, Ranking Member Kennedy and Members of the
subcommittee: Thank you for this opportunity to present the views of
the National Community Action Foundation (NCAF) on fiscal year 2023
appropriations for the Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP), which
is administered by the Department of Energy.
Recommendation: We urge the subcommittee to provide the following
for the fiscal year 2023 Weatherization Assistance Program: the funding
requested in the President's budget for the core program at no less
than $362.2 million and $90 million for the Weatherization Readiness
Fund for a total of $452.2 million. To the extent that budget
constraints make this recommendation difficult, we urge you to
prioritize funding the Weatherization Readiness Fund. We also urge the
subcommittee to reject the proposed ``LIHEAP Advantage'' $100 million
project for reasons we outline below. We hope your report will provide
guidance to the Department of Energy regarding better integration of
the program funded in this appropriation with the soon-to-be-initiated
program funded by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.
The National Community Action Foundation (NCAF) represents the
Nation's local Community Action Agencies, known as CAAs. These agencies
make up 81 percent of the local agencies that are funded by the WAP to
recruit and evaluate eligible homes and to install the appropriate set
of efficiency measures and health or safety improvements. CAAs deeply
appreciate the subcommittee's long record of support for the
Weatherization Assistance Program. Your record of oversight and support
has kept the program strong and effective. We appreciate the trust that
has been placed in our network to deliver more than $3.5 billion worth
of energy upgrades to America's most vulnerable energy consumers under
the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA).
Status of the Two Weatherization Initiatives as Seen from the
`Ground': The expanded program funded by IIJA will begin in the late
fall or early winter of 2022 after DOE approves the plans that States
must submit by October 1. Since passage of the bipartisan
Infrastructure bill, we have been informing the Department and Senators
that the WAP needs changes in DOE policies. These changes were
described in a bi-partisan House and Senate letter to Secretary
Granholm, initiated by Senators Reed, Collins, Shaheen and Coons. The
same four champions of Weatherization also sponsored the statutory
changes contained in S. 3769--``The Weatherization Assistance Program
Improvements Act of 2022.'' With planning now underway and a deadline
three- and one-half months after this testimony, the Department's lack
of action is increasingly concerning. We hope the subcommittee's
ongoing oversight can add weight to the recommendations and that your
entire membership will support the provisions of S. 3769.
Fortunately, the initial months after full funding becomes
available will be devoted primarily to recruiting contractors and
employees who will be trained in the specialized skills the program
requires of its workforce. The tight labor market in the construction
field means this period will be especially challenging. CAAs and their
non-profit partners look forward to recruiting residents of assisted
communities into these ``green jobs.'' We trust Congress and DOE
understand this part of the workforce will take longer to train and,
therefore, will cost more to become fully skilled.
The fiscal year 2022 appropriated programs in 17 States, which
started April 1, are proceeding. Plans for the other States' programs,
which begin July 1, are on track for approval. In these administrative
functions, DOE has set a shining example of timely issuance of the
information grantees need to complete applications and of release of
appropriated funds.
Also, the recently announced addition of categorical eligibility
for HUD-assisted properties, which this subcommittee urged DOE to
achieve, is a major improvement that will progress CAAs' outreach work
and result in many multi-family buildings being weatherized. Thank you
for your persistent leadership that achieved this result.
Our Fiscal Year 2023 Recommendations in Depth:
First, I want to address the question that is sure to emerge in
times of budget constraints: Why would we need a regular program in
fiscal year 2023 through fiscal year 2027 when the IIJA program is
funded and running?
In short, the two programs are so different that both are required
to be able to appropriately serve the housing stock in America's most
disadvantaged communities. The ``regular'' or base program can do work
that cannot be done with IIJA funds. It is an essential complement. One
example of the reason both are needed is the as-yet-undefined statutory
requirement to ``Buy American.'' CAAs vastly prefer to Buy American at
all times, and we strongly support the policy. However, WAP buys many
mid-range household appliances, especially efficient refrigerators.
While GE and Whirlpool (under multiple brand names) manufacture some
appropriate models in the U.S., agencies often cannot obtain American-
made appliances in many markets in a timely manner. Imports cannot be
purchased with IIJA funds, so homes in markets with only imports
available will be weatherized with annual appropriations funds. Also,
in some rural markets with few willing contractors, it may be necessary
to use annual appropriations funds to weatherize eligible multi-family
buildings.
The Weatherization Readiness Fund at $90 Million: Appropriating the
Weatherization Readiness Fund at $90 million would allow our agencies
to repair not only the homes that will be deferred during inspections
in the fiscal year 2023 program year, but to also repair the tens of
thousands of dwellings on their ``deferral'' lists awaiting repairs
because of previous years' inspections.
The President's Request is woefully inadequate to the backlog of
deferred eligible homes. In the Budget document, DOE provided research
showing that the cost to repair the number of anticipated deferred
homes in the PY2023 program alone was $43.8 million. The Request is
less than 75 percent of the funds needed, and neither figure allows
subgrantees to address previously deferred homes. Our members strongly
believe that, if the Committee must make tradeoffs when considering the
requested WAP increases, the Readiness Fund should be the highest
priority.
Readiness Barriers: Further, DOE prohibits using annual program
funds in combination with the IIJA funds. This DOE policy must be
changed. Under current DOE policy, any home that is repaired using
Weatherization Readiness Funds cannot be weatherized with IIJA funds.
This prohibition will create impossible real-world stumbling blocks to
getting the greatly expanded pool of eligible homes retrofitted.
Further, it means hundreds of thousands of homes of the most
disadvantaged Americans who live in substandard housing cannot be
served. This reality is contrary to the government's commitment to
focusing on families with the greatest disadvantages. The Committee can
correct this problem by directing DOE to allow a combination of annual
and IIJA funds.
The LIHEAP Advantage Request: We cannot recommend the subcommittee
move forward with the President's funding request for the ``LIHEAP
Advantage'' initiative. It is a costly project that would ostensibly
``test'' what is long-standing practice. LIHEAP and Weatherization are
already inseparably intertwined.
--Most WAP participants today are LIHEAP recipients referred to the
program;
--More than $400 million a year is transferred by States to the local
WAP programs, and;
--LIHEAP funds measures that DOE cannot fund in most States.
Our member agencies ``braid'' multiple funding sources, including
DOE's WAP, LIHEAP, some USDA funding and many utility efficiency
program funds, to address a single home. With the newly established
eligibility for HUD assisted buildings, we expect to see HUD programs
added into these ``braids.''
Studies on the varieties of long-standing, State and local
''leveraged' programs and their outcomes were completed in 2014 by Oak
Ridge National Laboratory. New, nationwide research could be useful as
part of the planned evaluation of the IIJA program. However, studies of
a ``pilot'' of these already-widespread practices would not add to the
whole-program review. Notably, true innovations and pilot efforts are
already part of the program, and DOE is expected to select winners of
the first two rounds of Innovation and Enhancement competitive grants
shortly. These are mandated to occur annually. Duplication is
unnecessary.
A Final Point: The LIHEAP Advantage initiative proposes to use
State Energy Program authority so that the proposed projects can
provide ``deep retrofits'' not allowable with WAP funds (except with
Innovation Grant funds). This acknowledges that there is insufficient
authority under WAP to deliver needed services. This demonstration
would be a tangential, ineffective way to address the need for a
higher-impact program. The legislative changes which have been
incorporated in The Weatherization Assistance Program Improvements Act,
S. 3769, and its House companion, H.R. 7947, will have the same effect
along with the proposed regulatory changes DOE must make to cut red
tape.
This subcommittee's oversight of the program and your policy
guidance have been highly supportive of positive changes. Thank you in
advance for your continuing leadership and support as Community Action
and its energy partners prepare to accelerate the Weatherization of the
most inefficient and vulnerable American homes.
[This statement was submitted by David Bradley, Chief Executive
Officer,
National Community Action Foundation.]
______
Prepared Statement of the National Congress of American Indians
On behalf of the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI),
thank you for this opportunity to provide testimony on fiscal year 2023
funding for the Department of Energy (DOE), Department of Defense
(DOD)--U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), and Department of the
Interior (DOI)--Bureau of Reclamation (BOR), involving our
recommendation of $408.84 million in funding.
A 2007 report by Dr. Theodore Jojola, Ph.D., developed for the NCAI
Policy Research Center, found that underinvestment in physical
infrastructure not only harms the social, physical, and mental
wellbeing of Tribal communities, but also impairs the ability of Tribal
communities to thrive.\1\ Physical infrastructure reinforces and shapes
the socio-cultural and political milieu of the community and plays a
role in competitively positioning the economy of its enterprises for
capital gain.\2\ The provision and placement of basic utilities for the
adequate provision of drinking water, sanitation, and electricity are
considered fundamental for the physical and mental health of
communities as well as being a measure of the overall quality of
life.\3\ Further, there is a strong link between physical
infrastructure and economic development.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ NCAI Policy Research Center, Physical Infrastructure and
Economic Development, May 2007, 3-4, available at: https://
www.ncai.org/attachments/PolicyPaper_OAYcOPFdNTxazqx
AOZGImEXOHFGoAnZlOepYZcUnSqRGgoWUTLp_Jojola percent20and percent20Gover
percent20FINAL percent20FORMATTED percent205.8.07.pdf, accessed on: May
25, 2022.
\2\ Id. at 2.
\3\ Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human
Rights, The Human Right to Adequate Housing, Fact Sheet No. 21/Rev.1,
available at: https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/
Publications/FS21_rev_1_Housing_en.pdf, accessed on: May 25, 2022.
\4\ Physical Infrastructure and Economic Development at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unfortunately, the conditions noted by Dr. Jojola in 2007 have
persisted, with the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (USCCR) finding in
2018 that the efforts undertaken by the Federal Government from its
initial 2003 report to 2018 have resulted in only minor improvements,
at best; and in some respects, the U.S. Government has backslid in its
treatment of Native Americans.\5\ Specifically, the USCCR report notes
that many Native Americans face unique challenges and harsh living
conditions resulting from the United States having removed their Tribal
Nations to locations without access to adequate resources and basic
infrastructure upon which their Tribal governments can foster thriving
communities.\6\ In its 2003 report, USCCR summarized the funding
shortfall to which Native Americans were subjected stating that, ``laws
and policies are meaningless without resources to enforce them.
Resources are an important demonstration of the U.S. government's
commitment to its responsibilities, including the obligation to
preserve civil and other rights . . . [u]nder-funding violates the
basic tenets of the trust relationship between the [Federal] Government
and Native peoples and perpetuates a civil rights crisis in Indian
Country.'' \7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, Broken Promises: Continuing
Federal Funding Shortfall for Native Americans, 3-4, available at:
https://www.usccr.gov/files/pubs/2018/12-20-Broken-Promises.pdf,
accessed on: May 25, 2022.
\6\ Id. at 1.
\7\ Id. at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross-referencing Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Native
American Crosscut data with Appropriations Committee reports reveals
that fiscal year 2022 spending for Native American programs represents
approximately 0.49 percent of total regular appropriations budget
authority within this subcommittee's jurisdiction. With Federal
investment metrics such as these, it is no surprise that Indian Country
is in a State of catastrophe by national standards.
Despite this chronic underinvestment, Indian Country is an
important economic driver in the U.S. Economy.\8\ Collectively, Tribal
Nations comprise the 13 largest employers in the United States, with
Tribal businesses employing more than 700,000 employees, providing
economic opportunity for both Native and non-Native workers.\9\
Evidence indicates that where Tribal Nations are successful with
economic development that poverty rates and other health issues are
lower, while educational outcomes and real per capita income are
higher.\10\ Further, revenue generated on Tribal lands results in a
spillover effect that supports local workforces and generates tax
revenue.\11\ As such, an investment to promote the building blocks of
physical infrastructure in Indian Country is an investment in America
for all Americans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Patrice H. Kunesh, Getting real about Indian Country--
surprising progress in the heartland, https://indiancountrytoday.com/
opinion/getting-real-about-indian-country-surprising-progress-in-the-
heartland, Accessed: April 6, 2022.
\9\ Id.
\10\ Id.
\11\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
department of energy
Cross-referencing OMB Native American Crosscut data with
Appropriations Committee reports reveals that spending for Native
American programs represents approximately 0.19 percent of total fiscal
year 2022 regular appropriations budget authority for DOE within this
subcommittee's jurisdiction. By comparison, for every $100 appropriated
to DOE, less than two dimes go to Indian Country. While this statistic
is shocking, the fiscal year 2022 omnibus represents more than twice
the investment in DOE Native American programs as the previous 2 years
and more than four times the investment of FYs 2018 and 2019. This does
not mean that Tribal programs are now adequately funded--it is a signal
that funding for Tribal programs at DOE has been so woefully inadequate
for so long that even increasing funding by four times still only
equals a fraction of a penny of every dollar appropriated to the Agency
by this subcommittee.
In order to address these funding deficiencies, this subcommittee
should provide at least $150 million for the Office of Indian Energy
Policy and Programs, including resources for the feasibility studies,
assessments, planning, and financial and technical assistance necessary
to create a pipeline of projects for underutilized programs with
prohibitive cost barriers such as the Tribal Energy Loan Guarantee
Program (TELGP); at least $2.5 million for TELGP credit subsidies and
$2 million for TELGP Administrative Costs; $15.9 million for the Office
of Legacy Management Legacy Sites in and around Indian Country; and
$5.3 million for the National Nuclear Security Administration's Tribal
College and University Advanced Manufacturing Initiative.
bureau of reclamation
Indian water rights are vested rights and resources for which the
United States has a trust responsibility. The U.S. Supreme Court first
recognized Indian water rights in Winters v. United States in 1908.\12\
Under the Winters doctrine, when Congress reserves land, Congress
implicitly reserves water sufficient to fulfill the purpose of the
reservation and the water rights of Tribes often are senior to non-
Indian water rights holders.\13\ In Arizona v. California, the Supreme
Court ruled that Tribal Nations have rights to enough water to
cultivate every irrigable acre on a reservation.\14\ However, despite
the priority of Indian reserved water rights, non-Indian populations
frequently have greater access to and allocations of water through
infrastructure, leading to disputes that typically have been litigated
and/or resolved by negotiated settlements.\15\ The adjudication of
these rights is complex and costly for Tribal Nations, spanning an
average of 22 years.\16\ The Infrastructure Investments and Jobs Act of
2021 (IIJA) established the Indian Water Rights Settlement Completion
Fund to satisfy Tribal water settlement obligations as authorized by
Congress, along with the mandatory funding for Indian water rights
settlements from the Reclamation Water Settlement Fund authorized
through fiscal year 2029; \17\ however, the amount does not include the
cost of ongoing operation requirements for existing settlements and
excludes future water settlements or court orders.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Winters v. United States, 207 U.S. 564, 575-77 (1908).
\13\ See Winters v. United States.
\14\ Arizona v. California, 373 U.S. 546 (1963).
\15\ Congressional Research Service, Bureau of Reclamation:
History, Authorities, and Issues for Congress, R46303, available at:
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R46303, accessed on: May
26, 2022.
\16\ L. Sanchez, E. Edwards, and B. Leonard, Beyond ``paper''
water: The complexities of full leveraging Tribal water rights,
available at: https://www.minneapolisfed.org/article/2022/beyond-paper-
water-the-complexities-of-fully-leveraging-tribal-water-rights,
accessed on: May 25, 2022.
\17\ Bureau of Reclamation, Fiscal Year 2023 Congressional
Justification, Permanent Appropriations--5, available at: https://
www.usbr.gov/budget/2023/FY-2023-Bureau-of-Reclamation-Budget-
Justifications.pdf, accessed on: May 26, 2022.
\18\ Id. at General Statement--2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
BOR has trust and treaty obligations to Tribal Nations to promote
and protect their water rights.\19\ This subcommittee must provide at
least $34 million for ongoing operational needs of Indian water
settlements in fiscal year 2023; at least $100 million for developing,
managing, and protecting Tribal water and related resources; and work
with authorizing committees to provide a permanent mandatory funding
solution for future Indian water rights settlements and for the
operation and maintenance of previously enacted Indian water rights
settlements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See Generally Seminole Nation v. United States, 316 U.S. 286
(1942); Winters v. United States; Arizona v. California.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
u.s. army corps of engineers
USACE implements the Tribal Partnership Program (TPP), which
provides an opportunity to assist with water resources projects that
address economic, environmental, and cultural resource needs including
flood damage reduction, environmental restoration, and protection and
preservation of natural and cultural resources. Tribal relations with
USACE have been historically contentious as well as under-resourced,
leading to the underutilization of TPP. Congress should provide $17
million for the TPP with at least $5 million for investigations and $12
million for construction and provide $3 million for the Tribal Nations
Program-which implements the Army Corps' Tribal Policy Principles-to
conduct outreach, consultation, and improve partnerships and relations
with Tribal Nations.
conclusion
Tribal Nations have paid for every penny obligated to Indian
Country hundreds of times over by providing this Nation with our land.
In order to uphold this Nation's promises to its people, it must first
uphold its promises to this land's First Peoples. We must continue down
the path of Nation-to-Nation growth, so that all of our people may
flourish.
[This statement was submitted by Larry Wright, Jr., Director of
Leadership
Engagement, National Congress of American Indians.]
______
Prepared Statement of the National Hydropower Association
The National Hydropower Association (NHA) respectfully requests
$222,000,000 for the Department of Energy's (DOE) Water Power
Technologies Office (WPTO) in the Fiscal Year 2023 Energy and Water
Development Appropriations measure. NHA recommends $85,000,000 for
hydropower and $137,000,000 for marine energy. NHA also supports robust
funding for the operations and maintenance (O&M) programs of the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and Bureau of Reclamation (BuRec) to
increase capacity and generation at their facilities, addressing the
billions of dollars of backlogged O&M needs.
Funding Justification.--The U.S. water power sector has tremendous
beneficial impacts on our Nation's electric grid, the economy, and
environment. In 2020, hydropower delivered almost 40 percent of total
U.S. renewable electricity generation and pumped storage projects
provided 93 percent of total energy storage in the country. Hydropower
also avoids approximately 200 million metric tons of CO2
emissions each year. In addition to providing affordable, renewable
power to the grid, hydropower and pumped storage help integrate greater
amounts of variable renewable generation, such as wind and solar, while
maintaining grid reliability and resilience. Finally, the water power
industry employs more than 60,000 Americans, creating good-paying jobs
in communities across the country.
The water power sector is poised to do even more to support a 100
percent clean energy future. The U.S. has significant underutilized
water power resources, including non-powered dams, conduits, new pumped
storage potential, and untapped marine energy. Advancement of new and
innovative technologies, operations, and approaches to harness these
resources in a globally competitive marketplace is enhanced by Federal
funding that augments research, development, and deployment (RD&D)
efforts being led by industry with support from universities and the
National Labs. A growing U.S. water power sector will support efforts
to address climate change and reduce carbon emissions, assist in grid
reliability and resiliency, while also advancing our National economic
goals. Significant increases in funding for the WPTO is critical and
will help create high-value employment and support businesses across
the country that comprise the water power supply chain.
NHA commends Congress for its increased support of the DOE WPTO in
recent years, culminating in the $162,000,000 appropriation in fiscal
year 2022. While a step in the right direction, this funding is well
below other DOE renewable programs. Policymakers, including many on
this committee, had the foresight to make significant and sustained
Federal technology RD&D investments in the wind and solar industries.
Thanks to these prudent investments, wind and solar technologies
improved and the costs for deploying them went down. Today, the wind
and solar industries are developing utility scale projects. A ``solar-
scale'' level of Federal investment for advanced water power
technologies is required to accelerate the pace of demonstrations and
deployments, reduce costs, and increase adoption along a similar
trajectory of more mature renewables.
Overview of DOE Water Power Technologies Office Investments.--
Congress reauthorized DOE's water power activities through passage of
the Water Power R&D Act of 2020 and the Reliable Investment in Vital
Energy Reauthorization Act (RIVER Act). These WPTO investments support
innovation of advanced technologies to increase power production and
reduce costs, improve grid reliability and resilience, create new
market opportunities that improve economic growth, and fund cross-
institutional foundational research to support workforce development.
Increased WPTO funding will help the United States achieve its clean
energy goals through the development of new water power energy
generation resources.
Hydropower.--NHA requests $85,000,000 for the hydropower program.
Hydropower is a proven renewable electricity resource, accounting for
nearly 7 percent of all U.S. electricity production. Increased WPTO
investments could significantly expand electricity generation from this
resource.
Growth opportunities for hydropower in the U.S. include adding
generation to non- powered dams. Currently, only 3 percent of the
approximately 90,000 existing dams in the U.S. generate electricity.
Other opportunities include increasing efficiencies and expanding
capacity at existing hydropower projects, new pumped storage
facilities, and new small hydro development. Pumped storage represents
a significant opportunity because it provides ancillary services that
ensure grid reliability, is the only proven long-duration energy
storage system in the United States, and can integrate intermittent
renewable generation resources on the grid.
The WPTO invests in hydropower technology RD&D for innovative,
standardized, and modular approaches to hydropower development that can
lower project costs compared to traditional development which requires
site specific engineering. For small hydropower, the WPTO supports
standardization of new turbine designs, as well as new advanced
materials and manufacturing across the sector, including applications
at non-powered dams, irrigation channels, and other waterways,
including greenfield sites. This work increases generation
opportunities with innovations that also improve environmental
performance. It also helps reduce costs for companies that have
capitalization challenges to fund this work. The WPTO supports DOE's
Advanced Energy Storage Initiative and focuses on the role of
hydropower and pumped storage in grid reliability and resiliency by
supporting innovative technologies and conducting new research to
evaluate and improve the flexibility and grid services provided by
these projects. The WPTO also supports development of innovative
environmental mitigation technologies, such as novel fish passage
systems and other advancements.
Marine Energy.--NHA requests $137,000,000 for the marine energy
program. Marine energy is a carbon-free, renewable resource that can
make a material contribution to decarbonize our domestic energy
portfolio. The DOE recently found that marine energy has the technical
potential to provide 2,300 TWhs a year of electricity generation in the
United States--the equivalent to 57 percent of 2019 energy consumption.
Marine energy is widespread, consistent, reliable, energy dense,
and can be generated close to large urban centers with significant
load. Marine energy technologies are rapidly innovating, with a number
of systems globally nearing commercialization, but Congress must invest
additional resources in this sector to ensure its future domestic
viability and to keep cutting-edge development in the United States.
Last year, NHA's Marine Energy Council (MEC) released a
Commercialization Strategy for Marine Energy. The strategy sets
technology deployment targets, starting with 50 megawatts by 2025,
which are the critical first steps for the domestic marine energy
sector to materially contribute to the effort against climate change.
Follow on targets include 500 megawatts by 2030 and 1 gigawatt by 2035.
To achieve these targets, Federal policymakers must:
--Dramatically increase technology advancement and testing support;
--Establish a clear, timely, and predictable regulatory framework for
marine energy projects; and,
--Implement a fair incentive regime structure that facilitates volume
manufacturing and rapid market deployment.
The WPTO supports industry-led RD&D for marine energy systems and
subsystems ultimately leading to reduced costs and increased
deployments. The WPTO validates the reliability of marine energy
technologies and the value of integrating energy from prototype devices
into the electric grid and Blue Economy applications. These funds
provide risk mitigation, technical advancement and review, and early
market growth opportunities.
There are wide ranges of design approaches to marine energy
systems. It is likely that different designs will be most effective in
diverse resource areas or for various market applications. Increased
funding is required to support the design, construction, and validation
of marine energy systems in open water deployments and alongside
offshore co-location opportunities, with a balanced approach across
resource areas that reflects the higher funding requirements of more
mature designs.
Marine energy technologies also present unique engineering
challenges that require collaborative foundational innovations by
cross-institution teams of researchers. NHA urges dedicated funding for
National Marine Energy Center operations and continuation of support
for foundational research activities led by universities and other
research institutions affiliated with the Centers to accelerate
development of the marine energy sector and help train a skilled
workforce for the Labs and industry.
In addition, a key barrier to marine energy technology development
is the difficulty of testing new designs. Funding is needed to
establish and expand testing infrastructure including open-water test
centers, such as PacWave, along with other capabilities. Funds are also
needed to conduct the tests, through regular and consistent Funding
Opportunity Announcements and the TEAMER program, along with
environmental monitoring technologies and research to expedite
permitting and in-water demonstration. NHA also recommends continued
close coordination with other agency partners, including the U.S. Navy
on national security applications for marine energy devices at the Wave
Energy Test Site in Hawaii.
Finally, marine energy systems can also be a cost-effective and
reliable power source in several distributed Blue Economy markets, such
as aquaculture, desalination, oil and gas production, underwater data
centers, and other emerging needs. However, prototypes must be tailored
to specific applications and their performance demonstrated to
facilitate adoption in these markets. NHA urges continued funding of
the WPTO Powering the Blue Economy activities.
Other Recommendations.--NHA recommends that DOE lead an effort with
FERC, USACE, BuRec, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
and other Federal resource agencies to review and provide
recommendations on how to address the amount of time, effort, and
funding that is required to permit, license, and relicense marine
energy projects.
Finally, NHA urges Congress to increase funding to USACE and BuRec
to operate, maintain, and upgrade their existing projects, as well as
to add non-federal hydropower development to their non-powered
infrastructure. NHA also believes there are ways to make this
investment that do not increase costs to the power customers. The
Federal hydropower system makes up approximately half of U.S.
hydropower generation. Many of these projects are candidates for
upgrades and/or have backlogged O&M needs. USACE and BuRec projects
make the Federal Government itself one of the largest renewable energy
providers in the country. Reinvesting in these projects will help to
address climate change, provide economic and job opportunities, and
maximize the benefits of this public infrastructure.
Sincerely.
[This statement was submitted by Malcolm Woolf, President and CEO,
National Hydropower Association.]
______
Prepared Statement of The Nature Conservancy
Chairwoman Feinstein, Ranking Member Kennedy and members of the
subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to present The Nature
Conservancy's (TNC's) testimony on fiscal year (FY) 2023 appropriations
for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), Bureau of Reclamation
(Reclamation) and Department of Energy (DOE).
TNC thanks the subcommittee for its attention to the water
resources needs of the country, especially including past support for
natural infrastructure, which the Corps and Reclamation can use to
enhance water infrastructure and improve environmental outcomes. Using
natural infrastructure provides effective and cost-effective multi-
benefit solutions to many water resource management problems. TNC also
applauds the subcommittee's past commitments to vital clean energy
technology research, development and deployment programs. These
programs are a critical pillar of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions and avoid the worst effects of climate change. TNC strongly
encourages the subcommittee to continue to support natural
infrastructure and clean energy programs again in FY23.
u.s. army corps of engineers
Sustainable Rivers Program (SRP): SRP is an initiative to modernize
the operations of the Nation's reservoirs to enhance water supply,
flood protection, hydropower generation and recreation, while restoring
critical ecosystems and the economically valuable services they
provide. The challenges related to providing water supply and flood
protection are growing and will only increase due to climate change.
SRP works collaboratively with local communities, water stakeholders,
States and other Federal agencies to update decades-old water
management practices to better meet society's needs. With increased
funding in FY20-FY22, the Corps has been able to significantly expand
the program from 16 rivers--encompassing 66 reservoirs and 5,083
downstream river miles--to 43 rivers--encompassing more than 90
reservoirs and nearly 12,500 downstream river miles, while still not
being able to meet the demand for the program within the Corps. In
FY22, the Corps was able to fund only 40 percent of requests from Corps
districts for SRP involvement. TNC requests you increase funding to
$7.5 million for SRP in FY23.
Navigation and Ecosystem Sustainability Program (NESP): NESP is an
important, dual-purpose program that allows the Corps to address both
navigation and ecosystem restoration in an integrated approach along
the upper Mississippi and Illinois rivers. Past committee support led
to $5 million in pre-construction engineering and design (PED) funding
in the Corps' fiscal year 2021 work plan. Then the Infrastructure
Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) FY22 work plan moved NESP into
construction and provided $732 million for Lock and Dam 25 replacement
and $97.1 million for fish passage at Lock and Dam 22. TNC requests the
subcommittee continue its strong support for NESP by providing it $84
million in FY23, including $35 million for ecosystem restoration and
$49 million for PED at LaGrange Lock and Dam.
Chesapeake Bay Oyster Recovery: Ongoing oyster restoration work has
functionally restored several tributaries in Virginia and Maryland and
demonstrates that strong partnerships between private, State and
Federal agencies can accomplish tangible outcomes in the Chesapeake
Bay. TNC requests $5 million in FY23 to continue the essential work of
restoring the eastern oyster.
Engineering With Nature: The Corps' Engineering With Nature (EWN)
initiative is using a collaborative, science-based approach to better
deliver a full range of economic, social, and environmental benefits
from water resources infrastructure. It is leading work to share, train
and support Corps districts and other partners how to effectively
develop nature-based projects. Its innovative approaches are building
more resilient communities and a healthier environment. We urge you to
maintain funding for EWN at $16.25 million in FY23 in its own budget
line.
South Florida Ecosystem Restoration (SFER) Program: Congress made a
historic investment last year to advance Everglades restoration
projects, increasing funding for SFER to $350 million in FY22, a $100
million increase over FY21, and investing almost $1.1 billion in SFER
as part of the IIJA. With some of the largest and most important
restoration projects now underway, TNC encourages increased funding for
authorized Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan and SFER projects.
In order to complete authorized projects and keep pace with state
investments, TNC requests $725 million for SFER in FY23.
Continuing Authorities Programs: TNC supports the Continuing
Authorities Programs that promote ecosystem restoration and the use of
nature-based solutions, including beneficial uses of dredged material
(Section 204), aquatic ecosystem restoration (Section 206) and project
modifications for improvement of the environment (Section 1135). In
addition, WRDA 2020 clarified that small flood control projects
(Section 205) can use natural and nature-based features. For FY23, TNC
urges you, at a minimum, to maintain funding for these programs at
their FY22 enacted levels.
In addition, TNC supports the following projects and programs and
requests your support for them at the FY23 requested level.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Project/Program Account Budget Request
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brandon Road Lock and Dam, Aquatic Constr$47,880,500
Nuisance Species Barrier, IL.......
Claiborne and Millers Ferry Locks Investigations $400,000
and Dams (Fish Passage), Lower
Alabama River......................
Hatchie/Loosahatchie Habitat Investigations $400,000
Restoration (Tennessee and
Arkansas)..........................
Upper Mississippi River Restoration Constr$55,000,000
Program............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
bureau of reclamation
Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery and San Juan River
Basin Recovery Programs: These programs take a balanced approach to
recovering four threatened and endangered fish species by implementing
a range of basin-wide strategies, including improved management of
Federal dams and irrigation infrastructure, river and floodplain
habitat improvement, stocking of endangered fish, and management of
non-native fish species. These efforts provide Endangered Species Act
compliance for more than 2,500 water projects. TNC supports the budget
request for these programs, which includes $7.655 million for the
Endangered Species Recovery Implementation Program (Upper Colorado and
San Juan River Basin) and $21.4 million for the Colorado River
Compliance Activities account.
WaterSMART and Drought Response Programs: In 2020, Congress
modified the WaterSMART Program to allow grants to non-profit
organizations working with traditional grant recipients, provide higher
levels of match for multi-purpose projects, and support nature-based
solutions. These changes will help prioritize projects that both
enhance water delivery reliability and benefit watershed health.
Nevertheless, we remain concerned that some projects funded through
WaterSMART grants can increase consumptive use of water, which makes
water shortages worse. TNC requests your continued oversight of the
grants by including report language similar to the FY20 bill (Senate
Report 116-102 at page 65). That language directed ``Reclamation to
ensure that all projects funded under 42 U.S.C. 10364 are in compliance
with 42 U.S.C. 10364(a)(3)(B) and to articulate the use of the
conserved water with its annual award announcements.''
Similarly, grants associated with Reclamation's Drought Response
Program frequently fund new groundwater pumping. Given that development
of a permanent or long-term new water supply through groundwater
pumping is contrary to the other purposes of WaterSMART--to conserve
water, build ecological resilience to the impacts of climate change,
and provide environmental benefit--TNC requests your oversight to
ensure Reclamation prioritizes other drought resilience strategies over
new groundwater pumping.
Cooperative Watershed Management Program: The Cooperative Watershed
Management Program provides funding to support on-the-ground capacity
to develop, plan, and design watershed management projects. With the
passage of the IIJA, funding for these capacity-building activities is
more important than ever, as stakeholders often need dedicated
resources to prepare projects at a more impactful scale. TNC requests
full funding for the Cooperative Watershed Management at $20 million in
FY23.
u.s. department of energy
TNC supports robust funding for multiple DOE programs that
accelerate the advancement of clean energy technologies and facilitate
the department's shift in focus toward decarbonization of the U.S.
economy. This includes programs that were created or reauthorized by
the Energy Act of 2020 and the IIJA. We encourage Congress to
adequately resource community consultation processes across the
Department's technology deployment programs, with specific emphasis in
the Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations. Agency staffing for such
work must be adequate to the complexity of the issues and the health,
economic and civic capacity needs of underserved communities must be
foregrounded in developing these projects.
Solar and Wind Energy Technologies: TNC requests full funding to
support the overall research, development and deployment mission of
these critical energy technology offices, including $420 million for
the Solar Technology Office and $420 million for the Wind Technology
Office.
Clean Energy Demonstration Projects: TNC requests at least $250
million in FY23 funding to support the newly established Office of
Clean Energy Demonstrations for technology-neutral solicitations
focused on crosscutting energy challenges. We recommend the Office of
Clean Energy Demonstrations prioritize technology demonstrations for
the highest emitting sectors.
Industrial Energy Innovation Research and Development: To develop a
robust portfolio of emerging technologies, TNC requests $650 million
for industrial decarbonization activities, including $344 million for
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, $281 million for Fossil Energy
and Carbon Management, and $25 million for the Office of Science.
Advanced Nuclear Energy: TNC requests full funding in FY23 for two
critical programs established under the Energy Act of 2020: $300
million for the Advanced Nuclear Fuel Availability Program and $250
million for the Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program, including
funding all year-three demonstration and risk reduction cost-share
requirements in the proposals selected by DOE.
Electric Power Grid Modernization: TNC supports robust funding for
several programs to implement DOE's Building a Better Grid Initiative.
This request includes $600 million for the Smart Grid Investment
Program and $500 million for the Transmission Facilitation Program. We
also encourage the committee to include language directing the
Secretary of Energy to facilitate the development of the Office of Grid
Deployment, as authorized by the IIJA.
Carbon Capture, Utilization and Storage (CCUS) and Carbon Removal:
TNC supports robust funding for the Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon
Management's (FECM) mission to advance the deployment of a full suite
of carbon management technologies. TNC requests $607.5 million for CCUS
and Power Systems. This amount would support DOE's research,
development and deployment efforts for carbon capture, carbon
utilization, carbon storage, and FECM's contributions to the broader
carbon dioxide removal crosscut program.
Advanced Vehicle Technologies: TNC supports robust funding to help
advance the decarbonization of the transportation sector or the
development of new zero-carbon fuels for transportation and other end
uses. To that end, we request $602.731 million for the Vehicle
Technologies Office.
Loan Programs Office: TNC supports the role of the DOE Loan
Programs Office (LPO) in spurring commercialization and deployment of
emerging technologies by providing loans and loan guarantees. TNC
requests $160 million for the Title 17 Innovative Technology Loan
Guarantee Program to expand loan authority by $16 billion; $300 million
for Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Loan Program (ATVM), and
$20 million for the Tribal Energy Loan Guarantee Program to cover
credit subsidy cost or loan guarantees and direct loans. This request
aims to provide additional loan authority, credit subsidy funding, and
program eligibility tweaks to further improve LPO's ability to finance
innovative energy and manufacturing projects in the United States and
help fund community grant-making and technical assistance for clean
energy planning.
[This statement was submitted by Jimmy Hague, Senior Water Policy
Advisor, The Nature Conservancy.]
______
Prepared Statement of the Nuclear Energy Institute \1\
The strategic R&D investments directed by this Committee have
helped the U.S. reclaim its position as the global leader in nuclear
energy innovation. To sustain the undeniable momentum toward widespread
deployment of the technological breakthroughs enabled by these
investments, NEI recommends a minimum of $2.6 billion for Office of
Nuclear Energy (NE) programs in fiscal year 2023. Recommendations for
specific program elements are set forth below. The funding level for
those DOE NE program elements that are not discussed below should be
consistent with or greater than fiscal year 2022. Recommendations are
also provided for specific programs within the Office of Clean Energy
Demonstrations, NNSA, the Office of Science, and the NRC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ NEI is responsible for establishing nuclear industry policy on
matters affecting the nuclear energy industry, including the regulatory
aspects of generic operational and technical issues. NEI members
include entities licensed to operate commercial nuclear power plants in
the United States, nuclear plant designers, major architect/engineering
firms, fuel cycle facilities, nuclear material licensees, and other
organizations and entities involved in the nuclear energy industry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This increased investment is consistent with achieving first-of-a-
kind operations of advanced nuclear reactors by 2030 and supporting the
increased use of nuclear energy to achieve a reliable, affordable,
decarbonized grid by mid-century or sooner. Congress should also
continue to provide adequate funding necessary to meet commitments to
affected communities and States conducting cleanup of DOE's shutdown
uranium enrichment facilities and former nuclear weapons material
production facilities.
DOE Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations.--We thank Congress for
its continued support for the two ARDP projects and the establishment
of the Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations.
Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program (FY23 Recommendation--$70
million).
Microreactor Demonstration Program (FY23 Recommendation--$30
million).--NEI recommends establishing a new demonstration focused on
rapid deployment of microreactors. The total program cost would be $150
million.
doe office of nuclear energy
Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program (FY23 Recommendation--$235
million).--The ARDP program is helping develop a pipeline of
technologies for demonstration and NRIC is supporting demonstrations
and deployment. NEI recommends: Risk reduction for future
demonstrations: $140 million, NRIC: $75 million, Regulatory
Development: $15 million and Advanced Reactor Safeguards: $5 million.
Advanced SMR R&D Support (FY23 Recommendation--$211 million).--
Demonstrating the next generation of advanced light water small modular
reactors will support both domestic deployment and export of U.S.
technology and enable broad U.S. leadership in new technologies.
Light Water Reactor Sustainability (FY23 Recommendation--$62
million).--Increased funding will enable the program to accelerate LWR
modernization efforts while continuing to support hydrogen
demonstrations. Not less than $12 million should be used to support new
or previously awarded hydrogen demonstration projects.
Advanced Reactor Technologies (FY23 Recommendation--$70 million).--
NEI recommends the funding level for the microreactor program and
MARVEL should be a minimum of $16 million and $20 million,
respectively. The latter will support fuel acquisition and construction
in FY23. The ARC-20 program should be funded at $15 million.
Versatile Test Reactor (FY23 Recommendation--$45 million)
Accident Tolerant Fuels (FY23 Recommendation--$165 million).--The
industry is working aggressively to accelerate the commercial
development, testing, and licensing of accident tolerant fuels. $120
million is recommended to continue the participation of the industry-
led teams in the cost-shared R&D program including support for the
testing, code development, and licensing of ATF with higher fuel
utilization, $10 million is recommended to continue silicon-carbide
development, and $35 million is for laboratory specific work in support
of ATF.
Advanced Nuclear Fuel Availability Program (FY23 Recommendation--
$360 million: $300 million for commercial enrichment and deconversion
capacity and $60 million for downblending of HEU).--Russia, the only
commercial supplier of HALEU, is no longer a viable supplier. The
urgency to develop a domestic HALEU supply chain has increased and an
alternate short-term supply of HALEU must be found to bridge the gap
before domestic capacity is available, or else current demonstration
projects will be at risk. Therefore, $300 million is requested for FY23
to support the deployment of a competitive commercial HALEU supply
chain in the U.S. in the coming years. In the meantime, the fastest
path to support near-term needs is a fresh HEU downblending bridge
program. For FY23, $60 million is requested for the bridge program. The
total cost of a downblending bridge program is expected to be less than
$160 million.
TRISO Fuel and Graphite Qualification (FY23 Recommendation--$37
million)
Gateway for Accelerated Innovation in Nuclear (FY23 Recommendation--$10
million)
High Enriched Uranium Recovery from EBR-II spent fuel (FY23
Recommendation--$25.75 million).--This funding level is requested to
transition EBR-II spent fuel processing operations to seven days a
week, 24 hours a day to meet the needs of the industry.
Nuclear Waste Disposal (FY23 Recommendation--$100 million).--The
estimated taxpayer liability for DOE's failure to satisfy its
obligation under the NWPA has reached over $40 billion with almost $9
billion already being paid from the Judgment Fund. The funding for
Nuclear Waste Disposal should be increased substantially and DOE should
be directed to re-establish an organization to resume management of the
program and to begin implementation of an integrated nuclear waste
management system that allows for private consolidated interim spent
fuel storage approaches.
Directed R&D and University Programs (FY23 Recommendation--$161
million).--Direct funding for university programs provides stability
for all programs. We support DOE's proposal to create the new program
line that includes NEUP, SBIR/STTR, and TCF.
International Nuclear Energy Cooperation (FY23 Recommendation--$10
million).--The Office of Nuclear Energy plays a critical role in
facilitating international nuclear energy cooperation. This is critical
to promoting the adoption of U.S. nuclear technologies abroad,
assisting allies and partners in achieving their energy security and
climate goals while creating American jobs and promoting U.S.
leadership in nuclear safety, security and nonproliferation.
Program direction (FY23 Recommendation--$100 million).--The
responsibilities that DOE NE is managing have increased substantially
over the last few years while the staffing levels have reduced and
program direction funding has remained roughly constant. This
confluence of events has created challenges in many areas including
contracting management and execution. An increase in program direction
funding is necessary to ameliorate these issues.
DOE Office of International Affairs (FY23 Recommendation--$62
million).--The Office of International Affairs plays a vital role in
enhancing global energy security and increasing U.S. energy exports and
trade. Given the important role that nuclear energy plays in achieving
these objectives, industry encourages prioritization of nuclear energy
cooperation in close coordination with the Office of Nuclear Energy.
NNSA--Uranium Reserve (FY23 Recommendation--$150 million).--The
uranium reserve will create a national security strategic stockpile and
preserve critical fuel cycle capabilities.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (FY23 Recommendation--$35 million for
Advanced Reactor Regulatory Infrastructure Activities and $20 million
for International Cooperation and Assistance Activities).--Suggested
report language: The Committee emphasizes the importance of timely,
efficient, and effective regulatory activities related to advanced
nuclear energy to meeting crucial climate and energy security goals.
The Committee recommends not less than $35,000,000 for Advanced Reactor
Regulatory Infrastructure Activities.
Nuclear Supply Chain (FY23 Recommendation--$5 million).--The DOE
should establish a program that is focused specifically on the nuclear
supply chain needed to successfully deploy advanced reactors and $5
million should be initially provided for this purpose. This new nuclear
supply chain program could be established in the Office of Nuclear
Energy or within the Office of Manufacturing and Energy Supply Chains.
Low Enriched Uranium Supply for the Existing Fleet (FY23
Recommendation--$400 million).--The U.S. reactor fleet currently
obtains about 20 percent of its enriched uranium from Russia. The U.S.
nuclear energy industry is committed to ceasing reliance on Russian
enriched uranium. NEI requests $400 million for FY23 to appropriately
fund new programs to increase domestic mining, conversion, and LEU
enrichment capacity and increase diversity of supply.
DOE Office of Science Isotope R&D and Production Program (FY23
Recommendation--$102.451 million).--Suggested report language: The
Committee remains interested in ensuring that a sufficient supply of
Strontium-90 is available for industrial purposes, utilizing legacy
materials, and provides $5,000,000 within available funds to carry out
the findings of the FY-221 Sr-90 plan to prepare capsules for removal
and transfer for beneficial use.
[This statement was submitted by Maria Korsnick, President and
Chief Executive Officer, Nuclear Energy Institute.]
______
Prepared Statement of the Nuclear Waste Strategy Coalition \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The NWSC is an ad hoc organization representing the collective
interests of member state utility regulators, consumer advocates,
attorneys general, and radiation control officials; Tribal governments;
local governments; electric utilities with operating and/or shutdown
nuclear reactors; and other experts on nuclear waste policy matters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The NWSC calls upon Congress to appropriate funds in Fiscal Year
2023 to the Department of Energy (DOE) and Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) such that each agency has the sustainable annual
funding necessary to undertake critical activities related to
developing, managing, and regulating an integrated program for the
storage, transportation, and disposal of the Nation's spent nuclear
fuel (SNF), Greater-Than-Class C (GTCC) waste, and other high-level
radioactive waste (HLW). For DOE, relevant programs include:
--Fuel Cycle Research & Development program, which includes relevant
subprograms:
--Integrated Waste Management Systems (DOE request: $53 million);
and
--Used Nuclear Fuel Disposition Research & Development (DOE
request: $46.875 million).
--Nuclear Waste Fund Oversight program (DOE request: $10.205
million).
To conduct activities necessary to develop and manage a multi-
generational, national integrated nuclear waste program and carry out
the related recommendations herein, DOE needs sustained and
significantly more funding for expansion of activities under these
items. As a general matter, direction to DOE and the NRC concerning
nuclear waste management remains unclear. Despite new Congressional
appropriations of $27.5 million to DOE in Fiscal Year 2021 and in
Fiscal Year 2022 for ``expenses necessary for nuclear waste disposal
activities to carry out the purposes of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of
1982, Public Law 97-425, as amended, including interim storage
activities,'' this funding did not establish the meaningful integrated
nuclear waste management program that our Nation needs but has lacked
for more than a decade. Thus, our testimony focuses on the need for
Congress to:
--Direct and sufficiently fund the establishment of a national
integrated nuclear waste management program that addresses
storage, transportation, and disposal;
--Direct and sufficiently fund the formation of a new, independent
waste management organization and the orderly transition of
these responsibilities from DOE; and
--Provide sustainable annual access to the Nuclear Waste Fund (NWF)
for a national integrated program, whether managed by DOE or,
preferably, a new, independent entity.
consequences of inaction on nuclear waste management
The national nuclear waste management program established under the
1982 Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA) was effectively terminated more
than a decade ago by executive action. Subsequently, Congress has
failed to provide meaningful direction or funding for that program or
any national integrated nuclear waste management program. Since 1983,
approximately $56 billion has been credited to the NWF, including over
$21.5 billion collected from electric ratepayers and over $30 billion
in interest that continues to accumulate (approximately $1.7 billion a
year). The approximate $44 billion balance sits stranded in U.S.
Treasury Securities and unappropriated for its intended purpose. These
facts have resulted in a de facto national policy of inaction that
negatively impacts:
--Host States & Communities. The de facto policy indefinitely strands
80,000 metric tons of commercial SNF and HLW at operating and
decommissioned reactor sites in 34 States without their
consent. At shutdown sites, the stranded waste impedes
beneficial property reuse.
--All U.S. Taxpayers. The de facto policy has already cost U.S.
taxpayers more than $9 billion, and this liability is growing
by approximately $2 million per day.
--Electric Customers. While no longer paying fees into the NWF per
court order, ratepayers in more than 40 States paid billions of
dollars that are not being used for their intended purpose.
nwsc call for action & specific requests/recommendations
Starting with the subcommittee's markup of the fiscal year 2023 EWD
bill, Congress should take action to mitigate these real consequences
of the Federal Government's inaction. To recognize that the Federal
Government can and should establish a national integrated nuclear waste
management program, and to set such a program up for success, Congress
should immediately take the following steps:
1. Direct and sufficiently fund the establishment of a national
integrated nuclear waste management program that is designed to
make progress on permanent disposal in parallel with progress
on consolidated interim storage (CIS) and transportation.
DOE has conducted significant transportation work over the
years and has recently re-initiated work on a consent-based
siting (CBS) process to facilitate Federal CIS facilities.
However, regarding the critical need for permanent
disposal, DOE not only has taken Yucca Mountain off the
table but also has suggested it cannot take action on
permanent disposal until Congress provides new direction
and funding. Thus, other than disposal-related R&D, DOE is
not making measurable progress on permanent disposal, which
frustrates progress on the other two critical parts of an
integrated program-CIS and transportation. We are not alone
in stressing an integrated approach. In its report,
Commercial Spent Nuclear Fuel: Congressional Action Needed
to Break Impasse and Develop a Permanent Disposal
Solution,\2\ GAO relayed that ``nearly all of the experts
we interviewed said the United States needs an integrated
waste management strategy'' (p. 30) and recommended that
Congress direct DOE accordingly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2021). Commercial Spent
Nuclear Fuel: Congressional Action Needed to Break Impasse and Develop
a Permanent Disposal Solution (GAO-21-603).
At a minimum, Congress should consider directing and
funding constructive, near-term, disposal-related actions
by Federal agencies, such as (i) Development of generic
repository standards by the Environmental Protection Agency
and NRC; and (ii) Expansion of DOE's CBS work to
incorporate disposal facilities in addition to CIS
facilities. While the NWSC has numerous concerns about the
CBS initiative, we want it to be successful, and the lack
of progress on permanent disposal is perhaps the biggest
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
impediment to siting CIS facilities.
Finally, we continue to request that the subcommittee
provide: (i) Funds for NRC and DOE to carry out their
respective roles regarding siting and/or licensing of a
repository and, simultaneously, private or Federal CIS
facilities; (ii) Funds for the continuation and expansion
of constructive SNF transportation initiatives (assessment
of infrastructure needs at shutdown sites; testing,
certification, and procurement of railcars, licensed
transportation containers, components; etc.); and (iii)
Increased financial and technical assistance to Tribal,
State, and local governments for transportation-related
emergency preparedness training and activities-both by DOE
and by private transportation to non-federal CIS facilities
licensed by the NRC.
2. Direct and sufficiently fund the formation of a new,
independent waste management organization and the orderly
transition of these responsibilities from DOE.
Although the NWSC continues to support the establishment
of a dedicated office in DOE that focuses on nuclear waste
management, DOE has exhibited no interest in implementing
this change.\3\ We believe the Blue Ribbon Commission on
America's Nuclear Future (BRC) recommendation for a new,
single-purpose organization remains the best solution for
governance reform. While the DOE team seems committed to
progress, the current structure falls short in comparison
to a model that provides additional accountability and
reasonably insulates the organization from political
interference and excessive turnover in key positions. A new
waste management organization could be structured in
numerous ways, but we urge consideration of the government-
owned corporation model (see S.3322, last introduced by the
late Senator George Voinovich in 2010) \4\ instead of
models that set up government agencies with both
politically-appointed leadership and oversight boards that
tend to change with every administration and lack the long-
term continuity needed to make progress on this issue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See May 3, 2021 letter from eight organizations to DOE
Secretary Granholm and Nov. 23, 2021 response letter from DOE Secretary
Granholm to NWSC Chair Katie Sieben.
\4\ United States Nuclear Fuel Management Corporation Establishment
Act of 2010, as introduced by the late Senator George Voinovich
(S.3322) and Congressman Fred Upton (H.R.5979).
3. Provide sustainable annual access to the NWF for a national
integrated program, whether managed by DOE or, preferably, a
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
new, independent entity.
We call upon the EWD subcommittee to take the lead on
reforming the Federal budgetary treatment of the NWF such
that sustainable annual access is provided to the funds
collected from electric customers-as well as to the
annually accumulating interest of approximately $1.7
billion-to support the development and management of a
multi-generational, national integrated nuclear waste
storage, transportation, and disposal program. Recognizing
the importance of funding to program success, the BRC,
members of Congress,\4\ and several other experts have
urged NWF reforms. While appreciating the budgetary
complexities involved in implementing these necessary
reforms, the NWSC notes that Congress has recently
navigated around such complexities to access similar funds
(e.g., Land and Water Conservation Fund, Harbor Maintenance
Trust Fund) and should find a similar path to ensure that
the NWF is used for its intended purpose.
bills proposing to prohibit use of federal funds for private cis
The NWSC opposes new measures proposing the outright prohibition on
use of Federal funds (i.e., the Judgment Fund) for private interim
storage of SNF until such time that a permanent repository is available
to accept the SNF. This includes S.3741 as introduced in the Senate and
its identical companion in the House (H.R.6901).
The NWSC strongly reiterates the need to make progress on permanent
disposal in parallel with progress on CIS and transportation and
appreciates state, Tribal, and community resistance to becoming de
facto permanent sites given the Federal Government's inaction on
disposal. That is precisely why we are urging in the strongest terms
immediate action by Congress and the Administration to reestablish a
national integrated nuclear waste management program.
Respectfully, the consequence of the approach advanced in S.3741
and H.R.6901 is to leave the Nation without any potential near-term
options to make progress on removing SNF from existing sites and
reducing the growing financial burden on all U.S. taxpayers. Simply, we
need Congress and the Administration to refrain from taking options off
the table and to instead focus on facilitating options and meaningful
progress on SNF management. The NWSC has repeatedly (and again herein)
suggested positive, widely endorsed approaches (by the BRC, GAO,
Members of Congress, et al.) that Congress and the Administration
should pursue.
We also highlight concerns about authorizing in appropriations
bills. From a stakeholder perspective, the appropriations process does
not lend itself to sufficient notice and debate of provisions that have
a substantial impact. To be clear, the inclusion of new language that
would prohibit the use of Federal funds (i.e., the Judgment Fund) for
private interim storage of SNF until such time that a permanent
repository is available to accept the SNF substantially impacts NWSC
members, and if such language must be considered at all, we urge that
it be vetted in the authorizations committees with subject matter
jurisdiction.
concerns with prior senate ewd appropriations language
The NWSC reiterates concerns with certain Senate-proposed
provisions (e.g., Section 306 of S. 2470, 116th Cong., 2019). First,
such language would fail to move forward on CIS and permanent disposal
in parallel, a key element of a successful integrated nuclear waste
management program. Second, establishment of specific consent-based
siting requirements by statute is unnecessary, as potential hosts
should have the flexibility to negotiate the process and conditions
that best serve the interests of their jurisdictions. Third, it would
not address underlying funding concerns while expanding Congressional
authority to tap the NWF and increase the potential for restarting the
fee on electric customers. Finally, such language raised consequential
questions about whether DOE will be allowed to engage Federal or
private CIS initiatives and whether CIS access may be limited.
uranium enrichment decontamination & decommissioning (d&d) tax
The NWSC opposes reinstatement of a uranium enrichment D&D tax.
Although supportive of environmental cleanup of enrichment sites, U.S.
nuclear-generating utilities and their customers should not be singled
out again to pay for D&D of DOE facilities developed for national
defense.
closing
The NWSC appreciates your leadership and urges you to take action
this session to ensure meaningful progress toward a national integrated
nuclear waste management program.
[This statement was submitted by Katrina McMurrian, Executive
Director,
Nuclear Waste Strategy Coalition.]
______
Prepared Statement of the Oregon Water Resources Congress
The Oregon Water Resources Congress (OWRC) continues to support
increased funding for the U.S. Department of the Interior's Bureau of
Reclamation's (Reclamation) Water and Related Resources program and
requests that a minimum of $2 billion be included in the fiscal year
2023 Budget, an increase from the $1.7 billion enacted for fiscal year
2022. Reclamation's highly effective WaterSMART Initiative has been
woefully underfunded for years and needs significant resources to meet
the broad and diverse water supply and infrastructure needs in the 17
western States Reclamation serves. Additional funding will help
leverage State and local resources, support collaborative partnerships,
and enhance coordination between other Federal agencies.
OWRC was established in 1912 as a trade association to support the
protection of water rights and promote the wise stewardship of water
resources statewide. OWRC members are local governmental entities,
which include irrigation districts, water control districts, drainage
districts, water improvement districts, and other agricultural water
suppliers that deliver water to roughly one-third of all irrigated land
in Oregon. These water stewards operate complex water management
systems, including water supply reservoirs, canals, pipelines, pumps,
and hydropower facilities. About one-half of our members are in
Reclamation Projects and most of our members have been awarded grants
under the WaterSMART program or have contracts with Reclamation.
watersmart initiative in oregon
Reclamation's WaterSMART Initiative and related programs have been
successfully used in Oregon to implement an array of water
conservation, water efficiency, and infrastructure modernization
projects. OWRC strongly supports increased funding for Reclamation's
WaterSMART Grants and the Water Conservation Field Services Program
(WCFSP)-the two programs used the most by Oregon's irrigation districts
to support water conservation activities. These programs are an
important part of the overall funding package for water resources
projects collaboratively developed by local communities, supported with
local and State funding, and designed to meet those communities' unique
needs while still meeting the goal of water conservation.
The WCFSP is a key component in supporting irrigation districts and
similar water delivery systems' water conservation efforts. The WCFSP
has provided a breadth of technical assistance to irrigation districts
and provided partial funding for materials used to pipe and line
canals, water measurement and other technology, and water conservation
plans-all supporting water conservation efforts being implemented by
these districts. Providing increased funding for WCFSP projects will
yield immediate and cost-effective water conservation measures in all
17 western States served by Reclamation.
Additionally, we believe the management of the WCFSP should remain
with the Regional Offices to retain the close connection between
Reclamation and Project managers and ensure Reclamation's resources are
used to best support the management of its Projects. The WCFSP is one
of the Reclamation services most appreciated by our members. The
regional staff, and particularly the local area office staff,
understand the unique operating and delivery challenges of the various
Projects, and therefore provide very meaningful support to the managers
of those Projects.
watersmart grants
WaterSMART cost-share grants have supported Oregon districts'
efforts to improve water delivery systems, conserve water, and
implement innovative projects to meet water needs in Oregon. These
projects have been a key ingredient in the districts' cooperative
efforts with other stakeholders in their respective river basins to
address in-stream, water quality, and water supply needs of their
basins, without reducing the amount of land to which the districts
deliver water and avoiding regulatory actions by Federal or State
agencies. There continues to be more applicants than available funding
and additional financial resources are needed to enable local water
suppliers to continue their work to conserve water and help meet the
Secretary's water conservation goal. With a return of over $5 for every
$1 of Federal investment, and non-federal match generally exceeding the
required amount, this program far surpasses the results of other
partnerships between the Federal Government and local project sponsors.
The following projects are examples of how the WaterSMART Initiative
has been recently used in Oregon:
2021 Water and Energy Efficiency Projects:
--Klamath Irrigation District, Supervisory Control and Data
Acquisition and Automation Improvements.--The District, located
in southern Oregon, will install twenty-one new Supervisory
Control and Data Acquisition components on gates and canals
throughout the system that do not currently have automated
controls. The project will provide near real-time data on flow
rates, water elevations, and control device statuses, and is
expected to result in annual water savings of 19,500 acre-feet
by reducing spills, over-deliveries, and seepage. Conserved
water can be stored in Upper Klamath Lake for a longer period,
which may benefit fish species, including the endangered Short
nosed Sucker and Coho Salmon, by increasing lake levels and
reducing lake temperatures, while also providing a more
reliable supply for growers during times of shortage. In
addition, conserved water may be available for the fall
waterfowl migration at the Lower Klamath National Wildlife
Refuge. The project has significant support from stakeholders,
including the Klamath Basin National Wildlife Refuge Complex,
the Farmers Conservation Alliance, and Ducks Unlimited.
Reclamation Funding: $500,000, Total Project Cost: $1,071,774
--North Unit Irrigation District, Optimized Conveyance Efficiency and
Control in Main Canal.--The District, located in central
Oregon, will upgrade the automation at nine gated check
structures and seven measuring stations along the main canal of
its distribution system. The improvements will increase
conveyance efficiency and operational control, resulting in an
expected annual water savings of 3,337 acre-feet.
Overallocation of the Deschutes River and an agreement to adapt
dam operations to reduce impact on endangered species has
limited District water usage to 60-75 percent of a water user's
minimum water right. The district has shut down periodically
because of drought and shortage. Water conserved because of the
project will be stored within Haystack Reservoir for a more
controlled and targeted release during the irrigation season to
avoid further reductions during times of drought. Reclamation
Funding: $244,871, Total Project Cost: $511,611
2020 Water and Energy Efficiency Projects:
--Klamath Irrigation District, C-4-a Canal Lining/Piping Project.--
The District will convert 1.5 miles of the currently open Canal
to 3,000 feet of Ethylene Propylene Diene Monomer lining and
5,000 feet of high-density polyethylene pipe. The project is
expected to result in an annual water savings of 664 acre-feet
which is currently lost to seepage, evaporation, and
operational spills. The project is expected to improve lake
levels to benefit fish species such as the endangered Shortnose
Sucker, and to provide a potential late season supply for other
water users in times of shortage. In addition, conserved water
may be available for the fall waterfowl migration at the Lower
Klamath National Wildlife Refuge. Water and Energy Efficiency
Grant: $210,650 Total Project Cost: $421,301
--Middle Fork Irrigation District, Coe Branch Pipeline and Irrigation
Efficiency Project.--The District will install a high-density
polyethylene pipe from its existing diversion on Coe Creek to
an existing settling pond to provide clean irrigation water to
its users. When sedimentation worsens in Coe Creek, the
District must meet irrigation demand with water from Laurance
Reservoir and its tributaries. The district will use the
settling pond to remove glacial sediment from the water before
it is delivered to irrigators, thereby avoiding diversions from
Laurance Lake. By more efficiently and effectively removing
sediment, the project will also allow water users to install
high-efficiency micro-sprinklers. Water and Energy Efficiency
Grant: $266,600 Total Project Cost: $1,460,400
2021 Small-Scale Water Efficiency Projects
--North Unit Irrigation District, Lateral 41-9 and 58-3-2 Piping
Project.--The District, in central Oregon, will convert two
open canals with 4,450 linear feet of buried high-density
polyethylene pipe. This project will reduce water lost to
seepage, improve conveyance efficiency, and reduce problematic
sediment transport. This project is prioritized through several
planning efforts, including the District's System Improvement
Plan. Reclamation Funding: $74,691, Total Project Cost:
$149,383
--Talent Irrigation District, East Main Canal Chamberland Shotcrete
Project.--The District, in southern Oregon, will line two
unlined sections of the East Main Canal totaling 320 linear
feet, with reinforced shotcrete liner. The upgrade will
increase the efficiency and reliability of water deliveries.
The project supports the District's Water Management and
Conservation Plan of 2018. Reclamation Funding: $16,220, Total
Project Cost: $32,441
--West Extension Irrigation District, Irrigation Main Water Meter
Project, Boardman East.--The District, in northeast Oregon,
will install nine magnetic meters at the head of six piped
laterals. The project will allow the District to see at a
glance how much water is being delivered down each lateral.
This project will help the District better manage their water
supply, resulting in improved water supply consistency and
resilience to drought. The metering of these laterals is
identified in the 2016 update of the District's Boardman Master
Plan. Reclamation Funding: $32,500, Total Project Cost: $65,000
Further innovative projects like the ones above could be developed
and implemented in Oregon if more funding is made available through the
WaterSMART Initiative. Additionally, OWRC would like to see the funding
cap increased from $1 million to $5 million in areas where there are
known endangered, threatened, or vulnerable species. By increasing the
funding cap, Reclamation would have the ability to fund projects aimed
at improving species habitat at a higher level, allowing for these
important projects to move forward.
We respectfully request the appropriation of at least $2 billion
for Reclamation's Water and Related Resources program for fiscal year
2023. Providing increased funding for the WaterSMART Initiative is a
wise investment that will leverage resources, increase strategic
partnerships, and yield immediate and long-term benefits for our
Nation's economy, environment, and communities. Thank you for the
opportunity to provide testimony regarding the fiscal year 2023 budget
for the U.S Bureau of Reclamation.
Sincerely.
[This statement was submitted by April Snell, Executive Director,
Oregon Water Resources Congress.]
______
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 with
funding of $8.8 billion in fiscal year (FY) 2023. In particular, we
urge you to provide $378 million for Mathematical, Computational, and
Computer Sciences Research in the Advanced Scientific Computing
Research (ASCR) program within the Office of Science. We also emphasize
the importance of support for graduate students through the
Computational Sciences Graduate Fellowship and request that $21 million
be provided in FY 2023.
written testimony
On behalf of SIAM, we submit this written testimony for the record
to the subcommittee on Energy and Water Development Appropriations of
the United States Senate.
SIAM has approximately 14,000 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 over 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.
SIAM appreciates your Committee's leadership on and recognition of
the critical role of the Department of Energy (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.
SIAM is grateful for the strong funding that the Office of Science
received in FY 2022, and we join with the research community to request
that you continue this momentum by providing the Office of Science with
$8.8 billion for fiscal year 2023. The requested amount is necessary
for ensuring continued support for areas such as mathematics and
scientific research to help address national priorities, foster
economic growth, and create jobs.
Advanced Scientific Computing Research.--Activities within the
Advanced Scientific Computing Research (ASCR) program play a key role
in supporting research that begins to fulfill the needs described
above. Within the overall amount for ASCR, we urge you to provide $378
million for Mathematical, Computational, and Computer Sciences Research
in FY 2023, consistent with the President's FY 2023 budget request.
This level of funding is needed to ensure the long-term health and
viability of the high-performance computing (HPC) ecosystem that DOE
relies on for conducting groundbreaking discovery science while
supporting increased investment in priority areas such as quantum
computing and artificial intelligence.
Core research activities within ASCR enable the development of
critical tools for computational science, modeling, and data analysis
that enhance advanced computing capabilities and seed new areas of
research with potential for revolutionary advancements. Sustained
investment in basic research ultimately enabled the global leadership
in HPC that the U.S. currently enjoys. While our strength in HPC is
exemplified by the groundbreaking exascale systems currently being
assembled, this position is increasingly being challenged by overseas
competitors.
We strongly support the Administrations plan's to reorientate ASCR
toward longer term research as the Exascale Computing Initiative comes
to fruition and funding for the associated Exascale Computing Project
continues its planned decline. This shift is underpinned by strategic
visioning exercises that have produced several recommendations for
reinvigorating ASCR's research agenda. These include a substantial
reinvestment in foundational science and increased support for high-
risk/high-reward research activities, especially at universities.\1\
Such an approach will help maintain the long-term viability and
vibrancy of the broader HPC research community as ASCR looks toward the
post-exascale future.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Advanced Scientific Computing Advisory Committee (ASCAC),
subcommittee on Exascale Transition, ``Transition Report'', https://
science.osti.gov/-/media/ascr/ascac/pdf/meetings/202004/
Transition_Report_202004-
ASCAC.pdf?la=en&hash=5164916FE5158EE8919C26804B4CF7F6
DDA36E9D.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to the critical role that it already plays in priority
areas like artificial intelligence and quantum information science,
ASCR's research portfolio will be a critical asset to the Department's
efforts to drive innovation in climate and Earth systems predictability
and renewable energy. Specifically, research in applied mathematics and
computational science will enable new capabilities in environmental
sensing and edge computing with applications in Earth systems
prediction and climate forecasting. In addition, advancements in
modeling, simulation, and optimization can help improve grid
reliability and the integration of renewable energy sources into the
broader power distribution system.
Supporting the Pipeline of Mathematicians and Scientists.--SIAM is
grateful for Congress's strong support of the Computational Sciences
Graduate Fellowships (CSGF) in FY 2022, providing a $5 million increase
after it had been flat funded since FY 2015, but requests that $21
million be provided for the Computational Science Graduate Fellowship
(CSGF) in FY 2023 within the overall amount for research. Researchers
trained in computational science and working in universities, national
laboratories, and industry are essential to propel advances in many DOE
critical research areas. This program helps ensure the existence of an
adequate supply of scientists and engineers with strong computational
research experience and close ongoing ties to DOE to meet future
national workforce needs.
The increase we are requesting to CSGF reflects the growing need
for an expanded workforce in emerging areas of importance to DOE such
as artificial intelligence and data science. As international
competition in science and engineering intensifies, maintaining U.S.
leadership in these areas will increasingly depend on our ability to
cultivate a scientific workforce with strong research experience and
close ties to DOE. An increase in funding to CSGF would also enable
ASCR to address a consistent oversubscription in the program and
advance diversity, equity, and inclusion through expanded outreach to
minority serving institutions.
In addition to CSGF, this level of funding for the research program
would support increases for the Reaching a New Energy Sciences
Workforce (RENEW) initiative, started in FY 2022, and support the new
Accelerate and FAIR initiatives, which would further broaden and
diversify the applied mathematics and computer science research
communities by increasing opportunities for students and institutions
that are currently underrepresented.
The Role of Mathematics in Meeting Health, Energy, and Security
Challenges.--Support for applied mathematics and computational science
is critical to sustaining the Nation's global scientific and
technological leadership, energy production capabilities, and national
security. By exploiting DOE's world class supercomputing capabilities,
mathematicians and computational scientists supported by the
abovementioned programs pioneer new modeling and simulation techniques
that enable substantial breakthroughs in materials synthesis, energy
distribution, and human physiology among other complex areas where
laboratory experiments or field observations are too costly, time
consuming, or simply insufficient. This was demonstrated recently in
the midst of the novel coronavirus pandemic. Researchers at Oak Ridge
National Laboratory (ORNL) developed a computational model of the novel
coronavirus. They then ran the model on ORNL's supercomputer, Summit,
and were able to identify 77 molecular compounds that could serve as
the basis for therapeutic drugs to counter COVID-19.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ https://chemrxiv.org/articles/
Repurposing_Therapeutics_for_the_Wuhan_Coronavirus_
nCov-2019_Supercomputer-Based_Docking_to_the_Viral_S--
Protein_and_Human_
ACE2_Interface/11871402/3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 of energy 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.
Thank you again for your ongoing support of the DOE Office of
Science. 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 FY
2023 appropriations process.
[This statement was submitted by Dr. Susanne C. Brenner, President;
Dr. Anne Gelb, Vice President for Science Policy; and Dr. Suzanne L.
Weekes,
Executive Director, Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics.]
______
Prepared Statement of Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Lightsource
Dear Chair Feinstein and Ranking Member Kennedy,
As a faculty member at Iowa State University, I appreciate the
strong support you have provided for the Energy and Water Development
Appropriations Bills since they have funded the large-scale X-ray light
sources that are operated by the Department of Energy's Office of
Science, Basic Energy Sciences (DOE-BES). These facilities, such as the
Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Lightsource (SSRL) in Menlo Park
California use electricity to create beams of X-ray light that are many
millions of times brighter than the sun. They are essential for the US
to remain internationally competitive on the world research stage, and
represent a pinnacle of technological achievement. Examples of their
use include the development of advanced materials that will form the
basis of transformative technologies, allowing our society to do more
with less, such as ultra-high density digital storage media or new
energy storage, and are vital for a low-carbon future. During the
recent Covid-19 pandemic the X-ray light sources delivered scientific
data that was pivotal in the development of new drugs and treatments;
more than 90 percent of drug discovery over the last decade has
resulted from work performed at X-ray light sources. In other research
areas, unique insights from X-ray light have allowed safe and effective
cleanup of legacy environmental contamination of nuclear materials, and
have proved pivotal in understanding the optimum ways to maintain the
Nation's nuclear stockpile. My research group relies on large-scale X-
ray light sources for developing new materials for water treatment.
I have seen firsthand how DOE BES User Facilities enable
discoveries that drive the Nation's economy, strengthen national
security, and improve quality of life. Therefore, as the budget for DOE
in fiscal year 2023 is developed, I urge you to work to increase the
fiscal year 2023 DOE science budget, in particular for scientific user
facilities that serve a large number of science and technology areas
and researchers in the US.
Despite challenging budgetary times, it remains clear that US
interests gain real benefits from innovations enabled by the Federal
investment in major science facilities, and in particular SSRL. We
therefore urge you to work to increase funding for SSRL and the other
DOE BES laboratories, as this is a strong investment to strengthen the
scientific and engineering workforce and build the US economy.
Sincerely.
[This statement was submitted by Joe Charbonnet, PhD, Assistant
Professor, Iowa State University.]
______
Prepared Statement of the United Barrier Technologies, Inc. \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ United Barrier Technologies is focused on developing new
innovative flood control solutions that will transform the Flood
Control Industry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chairwoman Feinstein, Ranking Member Kennedy, and Members of the
Energy and Water subcommittee on Appropriations, thank you for the
opportunity to submit the following testimony in support of funding an
additional $4 million for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Engineer
Research and Development Center (ERDC), Coastal & Hydraulics Laboratory
for test and evaluation of new innovative flood control barriers.
Current flood control solutions, levees and floodwalls, are outdated,
unreliable and expensive, and are unable to protect our Nation from
increasing flooding due to climate change. Congress should allocate
greater resources for new innovative flood control barriers.
The Socioeconomic Impacts of Flooding. Flooding is the most
pervasive natural disaster in the United States. For example, Hurricane
Harvey caused $125 billion in damages. Harvey's hurricane flooding
forced 39,000 people out of their homes, destroyed one million motor
vehicles and forced 200,000 homes to lose power.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ How Much Damage Did Hurricane Harvey Cause? https://
www.hurricaneharveyfirm.com/blog/2020/january/how-much-damage-did-
hurricane-harvey-cause-/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In spring 2019, the Midwest experienced severe flooding causing
over $20 billion in damages to public and private property and losses
to crops and livestock. Over 80 levee systems within the Army Corps
levee portfolio were overtopped or breached. Over 700 miles of levees
were damaged.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Infrastructure Report Card: Levees https://
infrastructurereportcard.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Levees-
2021.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Climate change and the concentrating of population and economic
activity in flood-prone areas are increasing flood risk. This has
implications for prosperity and economic security as well as societal
wellbeing because flooding, typically, affects the poorest and most
marginalized populations more deeply. It is incumbent on the Federal
Government to test and evaluate new modern flood control barriers with
vastly improved resilience to flood risk.
Deficiencies of Levees and Floodwalls. Sumerians pioneered using
earthen levees to protect against major flooding in southern
Mesopotamia from around 3500 B.C. Today, the United States continues to
rely on these ancient, pre-industrial, flood control solutions. There
are over 100,000 miles of levees and floodwalls throughout the United
States. These legacy flood control solutions have significant flaws
including:
(1) Permanent Structures that Block Public View and Water
Access. These permanent structures are huge, elongated,
monolithic, structures that block the public's view and access
to water. These restrictions negatively impact property values,
tourism, business, the community's aesthetic appeal and the
public's enjoyment of the seas. For these reasons, any
proposals for the construction of these legacy solutions are
often met with considerable public resistance and litigation.
(2) Permanent Structures that Fail. Levees and floodwalls have
unacceptably high failure rates. Dirt is an essential element
that makes up levees. However, the presence of water causes
dirt to become unstable. As a result, as water levels rise, so
do the risks of levee structural failures. Research shows that
levees start to fail at 50 percent of their protective
height.\4\ Home owners living near levees have a 25 percent+
chance of having their homes destroyed by flood waters caused
by failed levees.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Obtaining Fragility Curves on Levees Subjected to Flooding.
https://www.ecsmge-2019.com/uploads/2/1/7/9/21790806/0622-ecsmge-
2019_lopez-acosta.pdf.
\5\ Levees in the USACE Galveston District. https://
www.swg.usace.army.mil/Portals/26/docs/PAO/Levee.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) Permanent Structures that Have Negative Impacts on the
Environment. They:
-- Interfere with the natural development of plant life
(flora).
-- Interfere with the natural development of animal life
(fauna).
(4) Expensive to Build. The average cost for levees and
floodwalls is $57 million per linear mile. These costs include
planning, materials, equipment, labor and cost creep due to
long construction times.
Requirements for the Next Generation Flood Control Barriers. The
general public wants mobile flood control barriers that allow views of
the water and access to the water, barriers that will not fail,
barriers with minimal impacts to the environment and barriers that can
be deployed at a reasonable cost. It is imperative that ERDC
investigate new innovative flood control solutions with the following
characteristics:
(1) New Flood Control Barriers Should be Mobile. Mobile,
railcar-based barriers can be rolled into position only during
flood emergency periods, and kept out of site in storage yards
when not needed. In short, the barrier should be visible to the
public when necessary and out of view when not. This will allow
the public to maintain views of the water and access to the
water. Communities will also maintain their aesthetic appeal
and property values.
(2) The Flood Control Barriers Should be Made of Very Heavy
Steel. Heavy steel barriers are highly reliable and cannot be
breached by water. Their weight can be supplemented with
ballast flood water taken from the flood location.
Transitioning to steel barriers will also invigorate the steel
and railcar industries in the United States.
(3) Minimal Environmental Impact and Climate Change Adaptable.
The railroad tracks have a small footprint and minimal impact
on flora and fauna. The mobile barriers can adapt to climate
change by swapping out shorter railcars with new taller ones.
(4) Provide Flood Protection for Marginalized Communities. A
mobile flood control barrier can be deployed cost-effectively
to low-income communities. The only infrastructure needed is
railroad track. Railroad track can also provide much-needed
transportation options, including: trolleys, bike paths and
walkways.
(5) Lower Cost. The average cost for mobile flood control
barrier systems should be approximately $30 million per linear
mile. These costs include railcars, installation of the
railroad tracks, storage, labor, system management and other
costs. In addition, the system's mobility provides for shared
use of the railcars with other locations, which will
dramatically lower the $30 million system cost.
Need for Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC) Funding.
ERDC is the premier research and development center for the Army Corps
of Engineers to conduct test and evaluation of new innovative solutions
to mitigate the risks of flooding. This new research project will
better protect properties and infrastructure and reduce the impacts of
flooding on peoples' lives and livelihoods. Investments in this
technology will spur economic development, create jobs and protect the
environment and public health.
Report Language.
We recommend the following report language:
The Committee provides not less than $4,000,000 for U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, Engineer Research and Development
Center (ERDC) to conduct prototyping and test and
evaluation of innovative mobile flood control barrier
systems. The Committee supports efforts to develop the next
generation of flood control barriers to improve cost,
performance, and overcome the deficiencies of permanent,
fixed barriers.
We thank the Committee for your consideration of this testimony.
[This statement was submitted by Phillip M. DeLaine, Jr.,
President, United
Barrier Technologies, Inc.]
______
Prepared Statement of the WateReuse Association
Thank you for providing the opportunity to submit written testimony
on Fiscal Year 2023 appropriations. I write today on behalf of the
WateReuse Association and its members to highlight the importance of
the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation's (USBR) Title XVI-WIIN Water
Reclamation and Reuse Competitive Grants Program and the Desalination
and Water Purification Program. The Title XVI-WIIN Program and
Desalination and Water Purification Program have helped communities
across the West build drought resilience, keep nutrients and other
pollutants out of sensitive waterways, save billions of dollars
relative to importing water, and grow sustainable economies. They are
key economic and climate resiliency tools.
Given the critical role that water recycling plays in water
resources management and the overwhelming demand for projects as
authorized in section 4009(c) of Public Law 114-322, we urge you to
include $20 million for Title XVI-WIIN in Energy and Water Development
appropriations legislation for fiscal year 2023. Along with direct
appropriations provided by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act
of 2021, this funding will help USBR meet the overwhelming demand for
Title XVI-WIIN program dollars. In addition to our request for Title
XVI-WIIN, we support a funding level that meets demand for USBR's
Desalination and Water Purification Program in fiscal year 2023. The
Desalination Program invests in projects in Reclamation States that
involve ocean or brackish water desalination. In the arid West,
desalination is an important tool that can help communities increase
their water supply.
The WateReuse Association is a not-for-profit trade association for
water utilities, businesses, industrial and commercial enterprises,
non-profit organizations, and research entities that engage in and on
water recycling. WateReuse and its state and regional sections
represent more than 200 water utilities serving over 60 million
customers, and over 300 businesses and organizations across the
country. Our mission is to engage our members in a movement for safe
and sustainable water supplies, to promote acceptance and support of
recycled water, and to advocate for policies and funding that increase
water reuse.
Since Title XVI's inception in 1992, Congress has authorized 53
Title XVI recycling projects producing more than 400,000 acre-feet of
drought-resistant water supply. To date, USBR has obligated over $700
million in Federal funding, which has been leveraged with non-federal
funding to implement more than $3.3 billion in water reuse
improvements--a nearly 5:1 leverage ratio. Due to the popularity of
Title XVI-WIIN, the program has a large backlog exceeding $700 million
in Federal cost share for eligible projects, and demand is expected to
grow as more projects become eligible. While the IIJA will help USBR
meet some of this demand, additional discretionary appropriations are
and will continue to be needed.
Water projects funded through the Title XVI program have been used
to increase the supply of fresh drinking water, generate sustainable
irrigation water for landscaping and agricultural use, restore
sensitive ecosystems, and help industries expand and create jobs, among
other purposes. The program is not limited to the reuse of municipal
wastewater--it also helps communities identify beneficial uses for
industrial, agricultural, and domestic wastewater, as well as impaired
ground and surface water. Investments through the Title XVI competitive
grants program have helped both urban and rural communities across the
West build a strong and secure economic future.
A recent GAO report (GAO-19-110) highlighted a number of
illustrative Title XVI projects. For example, program investments
helped one drought-stricken water district in California develop
infrastructure to use more than 2 billion gallons of recycled water to
irrigate sports fields, golf courses, parks, school grounds, and
medians. Another project is providing drought-resistant recycled water
to farmers to irrigate 45,000 acres of farmland, reducing demand on the
area's over-drafted groundwater basin. Other Title XVI projects have
been used to prevent saltwater intrusion into aquifers, restore
marshes, wetlands, and other habitat, and create potable drinking
water.
Thank you for considering our requests and please do not hesitate
to reach out if you have any questions.
Sincerely.
[This statement was submitted by Greg Fogel, Director of Government
Affairs and Policy, WateReuse Association.]
______
Prepared Statement of the Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska
Chairwoman Feinstein, Ranking Member Kennedy and Members of the
Committee, thank you for taking public testimony on appropriations for
the United States Army Corps of Engineers for Fiscal Year 2023.
winnebago lands legislation
My name is Victoria Kitcheyan, and I am the Chairwoman of the
Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska. I am here to tell our story of forced
removals by the United States Army, our reservation that was
established by treaty along the banks of the Missouri River and the
wrongful condemnation of our lands by the United States Army Corps of
Engineers.
Today, the Winnebagos make our home on a reservation along the
hills and banks of the Missouri River in Northeastern Nebraska and
Northwestern Iowa. We have over 5,000 Tribal members and Tribal
enterprises that employ thousands of employees in Nebraska and Iowa and
around the world.
The Winnebago people are originally from present-day Wisconsin. In
the mid-1800s, our people were forcibly removed by the United States
Army from Wisconsin to Minnesota, Iowa, South Dakota, and finally in
1865 to the Winnebago Indian Reservation in Nebraska and Iowa. Our
treaty promised that land was ``set apart for the occupation and future
home of the Winnebago Indians, forever....'' I will say that again--
Forever.
Unfortunately, the United States did not live up to this promise.
After enduring a history of removals, our land, reserved by treaty, was
still taken from us as recently as 1970--52 years ago. At that time,
the U.S. Army Corps began condemning lands along the Missouri River
including our lands reserved by treaty which was then broken.
In 1970, the Army Corps improperly and illegally condemned almost
2,000 acres of land of our reservation in Iowa and Nebraska. The Corps
filed two condemnation proceedings against the Tribe, one in Iowa and
one in Nebraska. Usually, the U.S. would be required to defend the
Tribe as part of its trust responsibility for our land, however,
because the Army Corps itself is a Federal entity, the U.S. could not
defend our interests. The Tribe had to defend its own interests in
multiple lawsuits, in multiple States, in multiple courts, on extremely
short notice and with limited resources. One of our councilmen at the
time, Louis ``Louie'' Larose, tells an account that the Tribe only had
one day get a lawyer to defend its lands.
The Tribe lost in both courts. When the Tribe appealed to the
Federal Court of Appeals, the Tribe prevailed in its lawsuit in
Nebraska. The Appeals Court found that the Army Corps did not have
Congressional authorization to condemn our Reservation lands.
The Tribe also appealed the Iowa case to the Federal Court of
Appeals. After years of litigation and appeals, the Eighth Circuit
Court of Appeals found that the condemnation was illegal but the Court
did not have the authority to order the Army Corps to return the land
to the Tribe because of res judicata, the matter was already decided.
To this day, the Tribe has been fighting for the return of our
land. The Tribe exhausted its remedies in the court system. After
decades of seeking redress from the U.S. Army Corps and United States
Department of the Interior (``Interior''), the Tribe was told to go to
Congress. So we did. Legislation was introduced in the U.S. House of
Representatives in the 115th and the 116th Congresses but did not pass.
Last year, the Winnebago Land Transfer Act was introduced to right
this wrong and restore our homelands. We thank the legislation's bi-
partisan sponsor and original co-sponsors, Representative Sharice
Davids, a member of our sister Tribe, the Ho-Chunk Nation,
Representative Darren Soto, and Representative Randy Feenstra, our
congressman on the Iowa side of our reservation where these lands are
located, and co-sponsor Representative Cindy Axne.
The bill would transfer the Tribe's former reservation lands from
the Army Corps back to Interior. The land in this bill is mostly
woodland and marsh along the Iowa side of the Missouri River and a
recreational, hunting and fishing area. Once restored to us, the
Winnebago Wildlife and Parks Department would be responsible for this
land just like all of our land. The Department oversees hunting and
fishing on 10,000 acres of woodland on the Nebraska side of the
Missouri River. Hunters come from all over the country to hunt at
Winnebago. The Department has the experience and resources to regulate
recreational and conservation activities and ensure Winnebago laws and
regulations are enforced. The Department's website provides information
on fees and regulations and offers an online process to obtain hunting
and fishing licenses. The Tribe would not make much change to the
conservation measures in place now by the U.S. Army Corps and the State
of Iowa Department of Natural Resources.
On October 5, 2021, the subcommittee for Indigenous Peoples of the
United States held a legislative hearing for the first time on the
bill. We are grateful that Interior supports our legislation. Secretary
Deb Haaland, the first Native American Secretary, has made restoration
of Tribal homelands one of her top priorities.
Upon passage of our legislation, we hope that the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers makes the timely and efficient transfer of the land back
to us a priority. Only then would the United States right this wrong
and ensure that our Tribe's homelands are protected, respected and
preserved.
For 50 years, the Winnebago People have waited for their land to be
returned. Councilman Larose has served on the Winnebago Tribal Council
intermittently for the past 50 years. He was the Tribe's Chairman in
the early 1970s when the land at Snyder's Bend was illegally condemned
by the United States Army Corps of Engineers. He bore witness to the
proceedings where our lands were lost. He sits on the Council today and
has fought hard for the return of these lands. During his service to
the Tribe, he has not given up on getting our land back and we have
never been closer to the moment when our land will finally be returned
to the Tribe.
Homelands are the lifeblood of American Indians, Alaska Natives and
Native Hawaiians. Our legislation is a prime example and an opportunity
for a wrong to be made right. Congress must do everything it can to
protect all Tribal homelands.
Congressional relief is our last hope. This bill has now been
introduced in Congress three times. We hope the third time is a charm.
It is time for Congress to act and pass this bill to restore the
promises our country made to us in a treaty, the supreme law of the
land.
carlisle indian boarding school
The Boarding School Era is a stain on American history born under
genocidal Federal policy against Tribes. We appreciate Interior's
leadership and Secretary Haaland's willingness to bring this dark
history into the light through the Federal Indian Boarding School
Initiative. All Tribes have been impacted by boarding schools in their
own way. Implementation of the Initiative in a meaningful way will be
costly, lengthy, labor-intensive, and complex. We ask that Congress
steadfastly supports this Initiative.
The Tribe is working with the U.S. Army Corps at the War College in
Carlisle, Pennsylvania, the site of one of the original Indian boarding
schools. We are seeking repatriation of our precious children's remains
that are buried in its cemetery. We seek the United States' respect and
cooperation to bring them home where they belong. To date, although our
discussions with the Army Corps have been fruitful and the Army Corps
has been cooperative, their cooperation is ultimately voluntary and
could stop at any time. Congress must support this delicate and sacred
process and these efforts. We will not give up until we see justice and
our children are home.
[This statement was submitted by Victoria Kitcheyan, Chairwoman,
Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska.]
LIST OF WITNESSES, COMMUNICATIONS, AND PREPARED STATEMENTS
----------
Page
Adams, Hon. Marvin L., Ph.D., Deputy Administrator for Defense
Programs, National Nuclear Security Administration, U.S.
Department of Energy........................................... 69
American:
Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, Prepared Statement
of the..................................................... 101
Nuclear Society, Prepared Statement of the................... 102
American Society:
for Microbiology, Prepared Statement of the.................. 105
of Plant Biologists, Prepared Statement of the............... 107
Assiniboine and Sioux Rural Water Supply System and Dry Prairie
Rural Water System, Prepared Statement of the.................. 109
Association of State Floodplain Managers, Prepared Statement of
the............................................................ 112
Business Council for Sustainable Energy, Prepared Statement of
the............................................................ 114
Caldwell, Admiral James F. Jr., Director, Naval Nuclear
Propulsion Program, U.S. Department of Energy.................. 69
Prepared Statement of........................................ 85
Carbon Utilization Research Council, Prepared Statement of the... 115
Central Arizona Water Conservation District, Prepared Statement
of the......................................................... 118
Clean Hydrogen Future Coalition, Prepared Statement of the....... 119
Collins, Senator Susan M., U.S. Senator From Maine, Statement of. 42
Colorado River:
Basin Salinity Control Forum, Prepared Statement of the...... 122
Board of California, Prepared Statement of the............... 123
Connor, Mr. Michael, Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil
Works)......................................................... 1
Prepared Statement of........................................ 6
Questions Submitted to....................................... 36
Summary Statement of......................................... 4
Electric Drive Transportation Association, Prepared Statement of
the............................................................ 124
Energy Efficiency Strategy Group Organizations, Prepared
Statement of................................................... 126
Federal Performance Contracting Coalition, Prepared Statement of
the............................................................ 129
Feinstein, Senator Dianne, U.S. Senator From California:
Opening Statement of
Questions Submitted by
Gas Turbine Association, Prepared Statement of the............... 131
Granholm, Hon. Jennifer, Secretary, U.S. Department of Energy.... 41
Questions Submitted to....................................... 63
Summary Statement of......................................... 42
Hagerty, Senator Bill, U.S. Senator From Tennessee, Questions
Submitted by
Hinderstein, Hon. Corey, Deputy Administrator for Defense Nuclear
Nonproliferation, National Nuclear Security Administration,
U.S. Department of Energy...................................... 69
Hoeven, Senator John, U.S. Senator From North Dakota, Questions
Submitted by
Hruby, Hon. Jill, Under Secretary for Nuclear Security and
Administrator, National Nuclear Security Administration, U.S.
Department of Energy........................................... 69
Prepared Statement of........................................ 72
Questions Submitted to....................................... 98
Summary Statement of......................................... 71
Kennedy, Senator John, U.S. Senator From Louisiana:
Questions Submitted by
Statement of................................................. 2
Leahy, Senator Patrick, U.S. Senator from Vermont, Questions
Submitted by................................................... 66
Lincoln Network, Prepared Statement of........................... 133
McConnell, Senator Mitch, U.S. Senator From Kentucky, Questions
Submitted by................................................... 38
Merkley, Senator Jeff, U.S. Senator From Oregon, Questions
Submitted by................................................... 98
Methane Action, Prepared Statement of............................ 135
Mni Wiconi Project, Prepared Statement of the.................... 138
National:
Association of State Energy Officials, Prepared Statement of
the........................................................ 142
Community Action Foundation, Prepared Statement of the....... 145
Congress of American Indians, Prepared Statement of the...... 147
Hydropower Association, Prepared Statement of the............ 149
Nature Conservancy, Prepared Statement of The.................... 151
Nuclear:
Energy Institute, Prepared Statement of the.................. 154
Waste Strategy Coalition, Prepared Statement of the.......... 156
Oregon Water Resources Congress, Prepared Statement of the....... 159
Palumbo, Mr. David, Deputy Commissioner of Operations, Bureau of
Reclamation.................................................... 12
Prepared Statement of........................................ 13
Questions Submitted to....................................... 39
Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Prepared
Statement of the............................................... 162
Spellmon, Lieutenant General Scott A., Chief of Engineers and
Commanding General, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers............... 7
Prepared Statement of........................................ 9
Questions Submitted to....................................... 37
Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Lightsource, Prepared Statement of 164
Tester, Senator Jon, U.S. Senator From Montana, Questions
Submitted by
United Barrier Technologies, Inc., Prepared Statement of the..... 164
WateReuse Association, Prepared Statement of the................. 166
Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska, Prepared Statement of the........... 167
SUBJECT INDEX
----------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE--CIVIL
Department of the Army
Corps of Engineers--Civil
Page
Construction..................................................... 10
Emergency Management............................................. 11
Investigations................................................... 9
Operation and Maintenance (O&M).................................. 10
Regulatory Program............................................... 10
Reimbursable Program............................................. 10
Summary of Fiscal Year 2023 Budget............................... 9
__________
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
National Nuclear Security Administration
Additional Committee Questions................................... 98
B83 Megaton Nuclear Bomb......................................... 90
B-83 Megaton Bomb................................................ 92
Columbia Class:
by 2026...................................................... 91
Submarine.................................................... 97
COMPETES/USCIA (CHIPS and Science Act)........................... 94
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Appropriation................... 80
Federal Salaries and Expenses Appropriation...................... 84
Inertial Confinement Fusion...................................... 94
Los Alamos National Lab.......................................... 93
Major Projects................................................... 87
Naval Reactors:
Appropriation................................................ 83
Overview..................................................... 86
NNSA's:
Accomplishments in 2021...................................... 73
Fiscal Year 2023 Budget Request 74
Non-Proliferation Programs....................................... 90
Nuclear-Armed Sea-Launched Cruise Missile (SLCM-N)............... 92
Plutonium Pit Production
Technical Base Funding........................................... 87
Uranium Processing Facility...................................... 95
Weapons Activities Appropriation................................. 74
Office of the Secretary
Additional Committee Questions................................... 62
Administration's Energy Policy, The.............................. 57
Advanced Manufacturing........................................... 49
Carbon Capture Utilization and Storage........................... 51
Clean Energy Agriculture......................................... 55
Climate Change's Impact on the State of California............... 45
Consent-Based Siting for Interim Nuclear Waste Storage........... 47
Energy:
Prices
Storage Technologies......................................... 46
Savings Performance Contracts................................ 61
FERC Approval Process............................................ 53
Hanford Site..................................................... 50
Loan Programs Office Investment in Carbon Capture and Utilization
Sequestration Projects......................................... 52
Offshore Wind Technology......................................... 48
Weatherization Assistance Program
__________
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Reclamation
Additional Committee Questions................................... 35
Central Utah Project Completion Act (CUPCA)...................... 16
[all]