[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 [email protected] 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]