[Senate Hearing 118-]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


 
    ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024

                              ----------                              


                         WEDNESDAY, MAY 3, 2023

                                       U.S. Senate,
           Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The subcommittee met at 10:03 a.m. in room 192, Dirksen 
Senate Office Building, Hon. Patty Murray (chair) presiding.
    Present: Senators Murray, Tester, Durbin, Shaheen, Merkley, 
Coons, Baldwin, Heinrich, Kennedy, McConnell, Murkowski, 
Graham, Hoeven, Hyde-Smith, Hagerty, and Britt.

                          DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

                        Office of the Secretary

STATEMENT OF HON. DAVID TURK, DEPUTY SECRETARY
ACCOMPANIED BY HON. JILL HRUBY, UNDER SECRETARY FOR NUCLEAR SECURITY, 
            ADMINISTRATOR OF THE NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY 
            ADMINISTRATION


               opening statement of senator patty murray


    Senator Murray. The Hearing of the Senate Appropriations 
Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development will, please, come 
to order.
    We are here today to talk about President Biden's fiscal 
year 2024 budget request for the Department of Energy, 
including the National Nuclear Security Administration.
    As Senator Feinstein, of course, continues her recovery, I 
want to thank Ranking Member Kennedy for being flexible and 
working with me to keep these hearings rolling, and keep our 
appropriations process on track.
    For our country to keep families safe and stay competitive, 
and my colleagues have heard me say this many times now, ``. . 
. we have to work in a timely, bipartisan way, and live up to 
our responsibility here to provide the funding our Nations 
needs.''
    That is why it is so important that we are continuing to 
hold these hearings and return to regular order for the first 
time in years. After all, our competitors, like China, are not 
waiting for us to work out our differences and fund our 
government, and they certainly aren't considering trashing 
their Nation's credit, or cutting the investments that keep 
them competitive, like some House Republicans are suggesting we 
do.
    Our adversaries are doing everything they can to get ahead. 
So, if we are going to continue to lead on the world stage, we 
have to lock arms, work together, and make sure our funding 
keeps pace at this critical moment. And if we want to stay 
ahead we can't just focus on defense spending, we have to 
invest in the many other programs that keep our country strong, 
and safe, and competitive.
    Today's hearing is a prime example, because the work 
happening across the Department of Energy has tremendous 
implications for our national security and our global 
competitiveness. The Department of Energy supports critical 
programs to keep our energy supplies cheap, clean, and abundant 
so people can go about their day, and everyone, from mom and 
pop shops, to large corporations, can do their business.
    DOE (Department of Energy) keeps our energy grid secure, it 
reduces our dependence on foreign energy, it drives down energy 
prices, and a lot more. And the Department is leading the way 
on scientific discoveries, supporting cutting-edge research, 
like the research happening at the Pacific Northwest National 
Lab in my Home State of Washington. Advancements within our 
national lab system, like those we regularly see at PNNL 
(Pacific Northwest National Lab), send a message to the world 
that our Nation is still a global leader in scientific 
discovery.
    It is also a reminder to us all why we must continue 
investing in research. We cannot seed ground and let countries 
like China get ahead of us and capitalize on the defining 
discoveries of the future. As long as those discoveries are 
happening in America, then the jobs that follow should stay in 
America too. And I am sure we all agree on that.
    The Department has a key role in this, as it does in 
helping our country lead in the green energy space. The climate 
crisis is a national security threat, an economic threat, and 
if we invest in research, in green manufacturing, and bringing 
those jobs here to our shores, it is also an opportunity to 
make sure the U.S. remains the energy superpower of the 21st 
century.
    Congress has made promising progress on this in recent 
legislation, between investments in hydrogen power in the 
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the Inflation Reduction Act's 
policy to usher in a boom in green manufacturing for batteries, 
and electric vehicles, and more, and advancements in 
fundamental scientific research through the CHIPS (Creating 
Helpful Incentives to Produce Semiconductors) and Science Act 
authorizations.
    But there is more work to be done. And this budget request 
shows the Biden Administration is committed to making the 
investments we need to maintain our competitive edge. I am 
pleased to see President Biden is calling for healthy increases 
for the Department of Energy, so we can improve our grid, an 
existing energy infrastructure, develop and deploy new 
technologies, lower our emissions and tackle the climate 
crisis, and of course, safely, maintain our nuclear resources.
    I am also pleased that yesterday DOE, Washington State 
Department of Ecology, and EPA (Environmental Protection 
Agency), announced the conceptual agreement in Hanford Site 
Holistic Negotiations. I look forward to receiving some 
detailed briefings regarding the actual terms and revisions, 
alongside my colleagues in the Washington State Delegation.
    To that end, while I am glad to see this budget request 
includes the largest proposal ever, to see the essential 
cleanup efforts at Hanford Site in Washington State, I am 
concerned that at the same time this budget increases nuclear 
weapons activities by 10 percent, while increasing nuclear 
nonproliferation and environmental cleanup efforts by less than 
1 percent.
    These programs are too important to be treated as an 
afterthought. Just as safely maintaining our Nuclear Weapons 
Program is a critical responsibility, so are our 
nonproliferation and legacy nuclear waste cleanup efforts which 
help keep risks in check.
    So, I look forward to discussing with our witnesses, how we 
make thoughtful choices here, and make sure our nuclear 
deterrence, energy advancements, and research enterprise, are 
getting the funds that they need, because the Department of 
Energy does play an absolutely crucial role in protecting our 
country, and helping us stay in motion, stay competitive, and 
stay ahead of competitors, like China, that are close on our 
heels.
    Thank you. And with that, I will turn it over to Ranking 
Member Kennedy.


                   statement of senator john kennedy


    Senator Kennedy. Thank you, Madam ``Double'' Chair. I agree 
with just about everything my colleague said, except for the 
part where she criticized Republicans, but other than that--She 
did say so. I want to thank all of you for being here. I just 
wanted to share a few general thoughts with you. In America you 
can believe what you want, but I am a big believer in free will 
and responsibility.
    A French philosopher of the last century, very famous, 
tough to read, but if you plow through his works he had a lot 
to say. Called Jean-Paul Sartre, said, ``To be is to act''. He 
said, ``All we are is the sum of actions''. And so, despite 
what we say, what you do is what you believe, and frankly, 
everything else is just cottage cheese.
    Now, in government, where you spend your money is what you 
believe. Forget the rhetoric, follow the money. Follow the 
money. I am a big believer in using--and I think it is the 
answer to many, not just of the problems of the United States, 
but our neighbors' problems across the world, at least in terms 
of energy. I believe that we should use technology to make all 
forms of energy more available, cheaper, and cleaner, all forms 
of energy.
    I support green energy, I support nuclear, I support 
hydroelectric energy, I support geothermal, I support oil and 
gas, in terms of trying to provide for a cleaner environment I 
think it is worth pursuing geoengineering.
    And I say all of that because I look at your proposed 
budget, keeping in mind, that what you do is what you believe, 
and in government, where you spend your money is what you 
believe. You are proposing that we increase funding for green 
energy by 38 percent, I support green energy, I think it is 
going to have to learn how to stand on its own two feet, but I 
support it. But you only increase funding for fossil energy by 
2 percent, and you actually cut nuclear energy funding by 12 
percent.
    Now, pull up that first slide for me. Here, I will just 
hold it.
    [The information follows:]

    
    
    
    
    
    


    Senator Kennedy. This is from your website, okay, ``Nuclear 
Power is Most Reliable Energy Source and it is Not Even 
Close'', and that is true, particularly in terms of capacity 
factor. Okay.
    So, how come you are not funding it that way? How come? I 
mean, these advanced, small, modular nuclear reactors have 
enormous potential. And if I read, this is part of your 
website, I would say, wow, the Department agrees. But your 
proposal for funding falls millions and millions and millions 
of dollars short.
    LNG (Liquefied Natural Gas), LNG, do you know what most 
countries do when they don't have natural gas, they use coal, 
they burn wood. We should be encouraging LNG. I am hoping to 
hear today what you are doing to make--to cut some of the red 
tape.
    But those are my general thoughts. I don't want to end on a 
negative note. Thank you for being here. I am looking forward 
to your testimony.
    And I am thinking about Senator Feinstein, and Secretary 
Granholm, if they are listening now--well if they are listening 
now I would tell them both to get a life, okay--but if they--
but I just want them to know that I hope they are feeling 
better. And I look forward to seeing both of them back soon.
    Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Senator Murray. Thank you very much, Ranking Member 
Kennedy.
    I will now briefly introduce our panel. We have David Turk, 
Deputy Secretary of the Department of Energy, who is here 
filling in for Secretary Granholm who, we all hope is feeling 
better, and Jill Hruby, Under Secretary for Nuclear Security, 
Administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration.
    We will begin with the witness testimony from Deputy 
Secretary Turk. You have 5 minutes for your testimony.


                  summary statement of hon. david turk


    Mr. Turk. Well, Chair Murray, Ranking Member Kennedy, 
Members of the Committee, I am honored to be with you all today 
to discuss the President's fiscal year 2024 budget request for 
the Department of Energy.
    Over the past 2 years, it has been my great privilege, and 
I really want to underline ``privilege'', to support Secretary 
Granholm, to support Administrator Hruby, and all our 
Department of Energy colleagues on our incredibly, incredibly 
important missions.
    And thank you, Senator Kennedy, for the well wishes. And 
our Chair as well, for Secretary Granholm. I just spoke with 
her before this hearing. I think she is actually paying 
attention to this hearing, just because she is so dedicated to 
the cause, but she is feeling much better. And I am happy to be 
here.
    Senator Kennedy. I think there are some Jeopardy reruns on, 
which would be much more interesting.
    Mr. Turk. And we all thank you, all of us at the 
Department, thank you for your leadership and support, from 
strengthening our energy security, reshoring our supply chains, 
catalyzing American innovation through cutting-edge research 
and development, including in our labs, like PNNL, that Chair 
Murray knows so well, to maintaining a strong nuclear 
deterrent. Together, we have taken critical steps to ensure the 
United States can outmaneuver aggressors, out-compete our 
rivals, and create new jobs and opportunities for all our 
people.
    The President's budget request for fiscal year 2024 will 
empower us to drive these endeavors forward, even in the face 
of emerging and historic challenges.
    And I completely agree with you, Chair Murray, on how 
critical this moment is, right now, in particular.
    Vladimir Putin has injected extreme volatility into global 
markets, and left working people in the United States, and I 
would say around the world as well, to bear higher energy 
costs. In response, we are pursuing a strategy of energy 
security through partnerships and energy diversity. We are 
aggressively tackling climate change head-on like never before 
in our country's history, thanks to the historic legislation 
passed in the last Congress.
    Congress, in fact, has made the United States the world's 
most attractive destination for investment and clean energy. We 
are backing unprecedented deployment of cost-competitive clean 
technologies, solar, wind, electric vehicle storage, we are 
funding demonstration like never before of next-generation 
dispatchable sources, clean hydrogen, advanced nuclear, and 
carbon capture.
    We are building a more resilient, reliable grid that can 
integrate these clean solutions, while better weathering 
disruptions, and cyber attacks, and we are shoring up our 
supply chains so that no adversaries will be able to threaten 
our access to energy. And that is all to the benefit of 
American companies, American communities and American workers.
    Over the past 2 years, for example, planned investments in 
America's battery, solar, and wind supply chains have reached 
over $100 billion.
    This will support thousands and thousands of new jobs 
across our country, and it will allow Americans to take pride 
in purchasing technology stamped, ``Made in the USA.''
    We know that we also need to double down even further on 
science and innovation. This is not the time to back off our 
science efforts, it is the time to double down on that part of 
our portfolio.
    In fact, we are proposing the largest ever budget for our 
Office of Science, including over $1 billion for fusion 
research. Our Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management is 
advancing a suite of CCUS (Carbon capture, utilization and 
storage) technologies, as well as technologies for recovering 
critical minerals from carbon sources. The more we can improve 
performance, reduce costs, the faster we can deploy, lowering 
bills, and improving the lives of our fellow Americans.
    This budget also prioritizes DOE's National Security 
responsibilities. Russia's aggression and China's nuclear 
expansion have reinforced the essential role of nuclear 
deterrence.
    In response, the President requested an appropriation for 
NNSA (National Nuclear Security Administration) that supports 
the simultaneous modernization of our stockpile and our 
infrastructure. Importantly, the budget will also allow the 
NNSA to build the Federal workforce needed to meet our 
increasing mission requirements, a particular priority for 
Administrator Hruby, appropriate priority, in my judgment.
    And the request would deepen activities regarding arms 
control, nonproliferation, counterterrorism, and the safe use 
of civil nuclear power.
    In addition, this budget also requests over $8 billion for 
environmental management. This funding allows us to treat 
radioactive tank waste, and address contamination issues at 
Hanford, and across all of our sites.
    And as our Chair knows, and just recognized, yesterday we 
reached a milestone, in announcing a conceptual agreement 
between us, the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency), and 
Washington State's Department of Ecology, for how we will 
manage millions of gallons of tank waste at the Hanford site in 
a safe, effective, and achievable manner. And thank you, Chair, 
for all your leadership on this issue, for many, many years.
    Lastly, I want to particularly highlight a small but very 
vital portion of our budget, ``departmental administration'', 
this covers a broad range of work critical to our success, 
including independent data analysis, policy coordination, 
financial management, general counsel, internal safety and 
security and cross office coordination, something particularly 
important in a Department of our size.
    While this account amounts to just over 2.8 percent over 
fiscal year 2024 request, your support here has an outsized 
benefit on achieving all of our missions.
    Let me conclude with another thank you for your past and 
for your future support for all that the Department of Energy, 
and our passionate, our dedicated team, have done, and can do 
further to help our fellow Americans.
    Administrator Hruby, and I, look forward to all of your 
questions.
    [The statement follows:]
                  Prepared Statement of David M. Turk
    Chair Murray, Ranking Member Kennedy, and Members of the Committee, 
it is an honor to appear before you today to discuss the President's 
Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 Budget request for the Department of Energy 
(``the Department'' or ``DOE'').
    Serving the American people as the Deputy Secretary of Energy, I am 
entrusted with the awesome responsibility to lead a highly talented DOE 
workforce. I am continuously amazed by their steadfast dedication to 
our mission and the innovative solutions they bring to some of our 
nation's most pressing problems. As a result of their tireless efforts, 
the Department has made significant strides in ensuring America's 
security and prosperity by addressing our energy, environmental, and 
nuclear security challenges through transformative science and 
technology solutions.
    Together, we have advanced the energy, economic, and national 
security of the United States. We are cementing America's place as a 
trailblazer in the clean energy economy of the future and a leader in 
the fight against the climate crisis. The scientists and engineers at 
our National Laboratories, the crown jewels of the nation's research 
and innovation ecosystem, are paving the way for major scientific 
breakthroughs that will have an immeasurable impact on the world we 
live in. Through funding opportunities and in collaboration with 
States, Tribal nations, institutions of higher education, and local 
governments around the country, we are helping to create thousands of 
good-paying jobs in fields that are critical to the success of the 
American economy.
    The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) does 
extraordinary work to maintain a safe, secure, reliable, and effective 
nuclear deterrent, reduce global nuclear threats, and provide our naval 
fleet with militarily effective nuclear propulsion. It has undertaken a 
needed modernization of our nuclear arsenal and the infrastructure used 
for production and science.
    These new capabilities will position us to execute our challenging 
missions well into the future. Working closely with allies and 
partners, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and the 
interagency, NNSA has provided significant support to reduce nuclear 
risks to Ukraine and the surrounding region since the beginning of 
Russia's further invasion of Ukraine over 1 year ago.
    The Department is committed to advancing this Administration's 
energy, climate, and nuclear security and nonproliferation goals. I 
want to thank Congress for the ongoing, bipartisan support for the 
Department of Energy. The Secretary and I look forward to working 
closely with the Committee as you consider the FY 2024 Budget for DOE.
                             budget topline
    DOE's FY 2024 Budget Request is $51.99 billion, an increase of $6 
billion (13.6 percent) over the FY 2023 enacted level. The Budget 
addresses some of the critical opportunities we face, making historic 
investments in cutting-edge research at National Laboratories, 
strengthening the Nation's nuclear security enterprise, creating jobs, 
reducing health and environmental hazards for at-risk communities, and 
strengthening the cybersecurity and resilience of the energy sector, 
including advancing critical climate goals. This is urgent work DOE is 
uniquely prepared to continue.
   making historic investments in cutting-edge research at national 
                     laboratories and universities
    Within the historic investment of $23.8 billion for NNSA, funding 
builds on cutting edge science for NNSA's laboratories to contribute 
beyond the enduring nuclear missions. For example, the FY 2024 Budget 
Request includes funding to recapitalize radiation and major 
environmental test facilities at Sandia National Laboratories used to 
design and qualify Non-Nuclear Capabilities; and prioritizes the High 
Explosives Science and Engineering facility at Pantex, including 
capital equipment purchases, construction, and transition to operate.
    The FY 2024 Budget Request will also continue funding maturation of 
next-generation simulation and computing technologies. Additionally, El 
Capitan, the first exascale computer for national security, is expected 
to come online at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory this year. At 
over two exaflops it will, for a time, be the world's most powerful 
supercomputer.
    The Budget also provides $8.8 billion for the Office of Science, 
advancing toward the authorized level in the CHIPS and Science Act to 
support cutting-edge research at the DOE National Laboratories and the 
Department's university partners, and to build and operate world-class 
scientific user facilities.
    The Office of Science is uniquely positioned within the Federal R&D 
structure to capitalize on these investments today to enhance our 
nation's innovation capabilities and expand to harness its full 
research potential from this baseline. This level of funding would 
support critical advancements in emerging technologies like Quantum 
Information Science, Artificial Intelligence, and the potential of 
nuclear fusion. These are all promising game changing technologies for 
which the National Labs already have strong programs and user 
facilities.
    Within funding for Science, the Budget provides: over $1 billion to 
achieve fusion on the decadal timescale; provides new computing insight 
through quantum information science and artificial intelligence that 
addresses scientific and environmental challenges; expands innovation 
in the microelectronics ecosystem; leverages data, analytics, and 
computational infrastructure to strengthen and support U.S. biodefense 
and pandemic preparedness strategies and plans; furthers the Nation's 
understanding of climate change; and positions the United States to 
meet the demand for isotopes.
    Finally, the Budget proposes $35 million in the Office of Energy 
Efficiency and Renewable Energy to initiate planning, outreach, and 
proposal solicitation for a new national laboratory at a Historically 
Black College and University, Tribal College and University, or 
Minority Serving Institution. This 18th national lab is expected to 
focus on a just and equitable transition for all communities and 
advancing diversity in the STEM workforce; the lab's expected work will 
be relevant to EERE's mission given its long history of supporting 
place-based analytical work, research and development, and community 
engagement and investment in disadvantaged and marginalized 
communities.
           creating jobs building clean energy infrastructure
    The Budget invests nearly $1.2 billion to support clean energy 
workforce and infrastructure projects across the Nation, including $425 
million to weatherize and retrofit low-income homes, $83 million to 
electrify tribal homes and transition tribal colleges and universities 
to renewable energy, and $107 million for the Grid Deployment Office to 
support utilities and State and local governments in building a grid 
that is more reliable and resilient and that integrates accelerating 
levels of renewable energy. The newly established Office of State and 
Community Energy Programs will launch a new Energy Burden Reduction 
Pilot with $50 million to retrofit low-income homes with efficient 
electrical appliances and systems. These investments, which complement 
and build upon the extraordinary funding in the Infrastructure 
Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) and Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), will 
create good-paying jobs while driving progress toward the 
Administration's climate goals, including carbon pollution-free 
electricity by 2035.
                      advancing energy innovation
    To support U.S. preeminence in developing innovative technologies 
that accelerate the transition to a clean energy economy, the Budget 
invests $9.4 billion, an increase of more than 19.7 percent over the 
2023 enacted level of $7.8 billion, in DOE clean energy research, 
development, and demonstration. These investments would improve clean 
power technologies, strengthen clean energy-enabling transmission and 
distribution systems, decarbonize transportation, advance carbon 
management technologies, and improve energy efficiency in industry and 
buildings. This funding would also leverage the tremendous innovation 
capacity of the National Laboratories, universities, and entrepreneurs 
to transform America's power, transportation, buildings, and industrial 
sectors.
                accelerating industrial decarbonization
    Across the more than $1.2 billion in discretionary DOE industrial 
decarbonization activities, the Budget reflects the importance of 
strategically supporting U.S. industrial decarbonization through 
innovation, targeted investment, and technical assistance. The Budget 
supports an across-DOE Industrial Technologies joint strategy team to 
drive adoption of industrial decarbonization solutions including 
through the Office of Manufacturing and Energy Supply Chains. It also 
supports expanded research and development efforts in the Office of 
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy's Industrial Efficiency and 
Decarbonization Office. Within the $1.2 billion mentioned above, the 
Budget includes $160 million for the Office of Clean Energy 
Demonstrations to support at least two large-scale industrial 
decarbonization projects.
  strengthening domestic and international clean energy supply chains
    The Budget includes a $75 million investment to launch a Global 
Clean Energy Manufacturing effort within the Office of Manufacturing 
and Energy Supply Chains that would build resilient supply chains for 
energy sector components critical to national and energy security 
through engagement with allies, enabling an effective global response 
to the climate crisis while creating economic opportunities for the 
United States to support the global clean technology market.
    In addition, the Administration supports the use of the Defense 
Production Act at DOE to support rebuilding domestic uranium production 
and enrichment capacity to establish a secure supply for the Nation's 
current and future nuclear fleet and also to reduce reliance on foreign 
supplies of uranium, as well as other clean energy technologies to 
ensure robust supply chains for electrical transformers and other 
critical grid components. The Budget also includes $75 million in the 
Office of Manufacturing and Energy Supply Chains for DOE to carry out 
the President's recent determinations under the Defense Production Act.
    reduces health and environmental hazards for at-risk communities
    The Budget includes $8.3 billion for the Environmental Management 
program and reflects this Administration's strong commitment to clean 
up and protect communities that supported defense production programs 
and government-sponsored nuclear energy research. As the largest 
environmental cleanup program in the world, Environmental Management 
plays a key role in cleaning the environment, contributing to national 
security priorities, investing in the future and aiding community 
efforts to build strong economies, growing jobs, and preparing for a 
clean energy future. This investment will enable the Department of 
Energy to treat radioactive tank waste, take down contaminated 
buildings, and ship and dispose legacy waste and clean soil and 
groundwater across Environmental Management sites.
    The Budget includes broad support for underserved communities, 
including $70 million for Community Capacity Building Initiatives in 
the Office of Environmental Management and NNSA, to address areas of 
persistent poverty around the Department's sites.
    The Budget also includes $196 million for the Office of Legacy 
Management to protect human health and the environment by providing 
long-term management solutions at over 100 World War II and Cold War 
era sites where the Federal Government operated, researched, produced, 
and tested nuclear weapons and/or conducted scientific and engineering 
research.
  strengthening the cybersecurity and resilience of the energy sector
    The Budget provides $245 million for the Office of Cybersecurity, 
Energy Security, and Emergency Response to enhance the security of 
energy technologies and the energy supply chain. The Budget supports 
increased assistance to States, local governments, Tribes, and 
Territories for emergency planning and preparation, including for 
events caused by the impacts of climate change. An additional $301 
million is provided for the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, including 
$49.8 million in additional funding for the Major Maintenance Program 
for required upgrades to the West Hackberry Physical Security Program.
         strengthening the nation's nuclear security enterprise
    The Budget makes a historic investment of $23.8 billion for the 
Nation's nuclear security enterprise to implement the integrated 
deterrent described in the President's Nuclear Security Strategy, the 
National Defense Strategy, and the accompanying Nuclear Posture Review 
(NPR) through support for a safe, secure, reliable, and effective 
nuclear stockpile combined with nuclear nonproliferation, arms control, 
and counterterrorism. In addition, the Budget continues robust, 
executable funding for the recapitalization of NNSA's physical 
infrastructure, including essential scientific and production 
facilities to ensure the deterrent remains viable without underground 
explosive nuclear testing.
    NNSA has a broad and complex array of priorities that reflect its 
expanded mission and the necessity to adapt in today's changing 
international environment. Our nuclear deterrent remains the 
cornerstone of our national defense and an assurance for our allies 
around the globe. NNSA is currently undertaking five warhead 
modernization programs and a major infrastructure revitalization 
effort. Once complete, NNSA's modernized infrastructure will enable us 
to maintain a safe, secure, and reliable stockpile in the face of a 
wide array of challenges.
    Simultaneously, NNSA is continuing progress on its nuclear 
security, nonproliferation, and counterterrorism efforts. These 
critical programs ensure that we are aligned with our allies and 
partners to prevent an arms race, advance global stability, thwart 
state and non-state actors from acquiring nuclear weapons capabilities, 
and enhance U.S. and global security.
Stockpile Management
    The Budget proposes $5.2 billion in FY 2024 for Stockpile 
Management to maintain a safe, secure, reliable, and effective nuclear 
deterrent through five areas that directly support the Nation's nuclear 
weapons stockpile: stockpile major modernization, stockpile 
sustainment, weapons dismantlement and disposition, production 
operations, and nuclear enterprise assurance. The Budget incorporates 
$3.1 billion for five major modernization programs that extend the 
lifetime of the Nation's nuclear stockpile, enhancing security and 
safety features, and meet modern deterrence needs.
Production Modernization
    The Budget includes $5.6 billion for Production Modernization to 
support modernizing the facilities, infrastructure, and equipment that 
produce materials and components to meet stockpile requirements and 
maintain the Nation's nuclear deterrent. The program encompasses five 
components critical to weapon performance and sustainment of the 
Nation's nuclear weapons stockpile: primary capability modernization, 
secondary capability modernization, tritium and domestic uranium 
enrichment, non-nuclear component modernization, and capability-based 
investments. The Budget includes $2.8 billion to reestablish the 
Nation's capability to produce 80 plutonium pits per year as close to 
2030 as possible and continue ongoing plutonium operations at Los 
Alamos National Laboratory.
Stockpile Research, Technology and Engineering
    The Budget incorporates $3.2 billion for Stockpile Research, 
Technology, and Engineering to provide the scientific foundation for 
stockpile decisions and actions; develop the expert personnel required 
to support the current and future stockpile; and provide the 
capabilities, tools, and components needed to support all missions. The 
funding includes $1 billion in assessment sciences, which funds 
experiments focused on design and production requirements, continues 
the implementation of the Enhanced Capabilities for Subcritical 
Experiments (ECSE) subprogram, and $782 million for Advanced Simulation 
and Computing, which is preparing for NNSA's first exascale high-
performance computing capability.
Infrastructure and Operations
    The Budget proposes $2.8 billion for Infrastructure and Operations 
to maintain, operate, and modernize NNSA infrastructure in a safe and 
secure manner that supports program execution while maximizing return 
on investment and reducing enterprise risk. Of this amount, $650 
million is included for infrastructure recapitalization to improve the 
condition and extend the design life of structures, capabilities, and 
systems to meet program demands; reduce future operating costs by 
replacing older facilities with new, more efficient facilities; and 
reduce safety, security, environment, and program risk. The budget 
includes funding for the initial phase of the Kansas City Non-nuclear 
Expansion Transformation (KC NExT), a multi-year effort to increase 
manufacturing capacity to support the nuclear modernization program. 
The budget also includes $718 million in Maintenance and Repair for 
predictive, preventive, and corrective maintenance activities to 
maintain facilities, property, assets, systems, roads, and vital safety 
systems.
   restoring american leadership in arms control and nonproliferation
    The Budget includes $2.5 billion for NNSA to reduce nuclear risks 
and counter the global challenge of nuclear proliferation. As called 
for in the National Security Strategy, the Budget funds 
nonproliferation and nuclear risk reduction-related activities across 
NNSA's Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation, Emergency Operations, and 
Counterterrorism and Counterproliferation programs, including programs 
to strengthen the Nation's capability to prevent, counter and respond 
to nuclear incidents at home and abroad. For the first time in our 
history, we face two near-peer nuclear powers in Russia and the 
People's Republic of China (PRC) as well as the expanding nuclear 
programs of North Korea and Iran. Moreover, Russia's war in Ukraine, 
nuclear saber rattling, and recent suspension of the New START Treaty 
are challenging the fundamental framework and principles of the nuclear 
security and nonproliferation regimes at a time when peaceful uses of 
nuclear energy are needed more than ever to address critical climate 
priorities. NNSA is investing in strategic stability, nonproliferation, 
nuclear and emergency preparedness measures--which are even more 
important during times such as these when tensions are high, 
miscalculation is possible, and strategic competition is escalating. 
This Budget also supports the research and development of next- 
generation detection, monitoring and verification tools needed to 
implement high priority efforts, including elements of the Australia-
United Kingdom-United States (AUKUS) partnership, and prevent strategic 
surprise, supports activities with Ukrainian and regional partners 
associated with radiological and nuclear security, expands efforts in 
safeguards and security for new advanced nuclear power reactors, and 
builds on the bioassurance efforts started in FY 2023.
                       powering the nuclear navy
    The Budget includes $1.96 billion for DOE's Naval Nuclear 
Propulsion Program to ensure safe and reliable operation of reactor 
plants in nuclear-powered submarines and aircraft carriers. The Budget 
prioritizes investments in research and development to maintain 
American dominance while continuing to support improvements to the 
Naval Nuclear Laboratory infrastructure. This includes long lead-time 
technology development for the future nuclear fleet, with support for 
the U.S. Navy's timeline for the next-generation attack submarine.
                  supporting other defense activities
    The Budget provides $1.1 billion to support defense activities 
conducted by the Department including Legacy Management (LM), 
Environment, Health, Safety and Security, Enterprise Assessments, 
Specialized Security Activities, Hearings and Appeals, and Defense 
Related Administrative Support (DRAS). DRAS offsets administrative 
expenses for work supporting defense-oriented activities in 
Departmental Administration.
                      administration and oversight
Energy Information Agency
    The Budget includes $156.6 million for the Energy Information 
Agency (EIA) to enable EIA to continue delivering the critical energy 
information products on which its stakeholders rely, including weekly 
petroleum and natural gas inventory reports, comprehensive monthly 
forecasts of energy markets, and long-term outlooks for U.S. and global 
energy production and consumption.
Office of Technology Transitions
    The Budget includes $56.6 million to focus on commercialization of 
promising technologies. This includes funding the Energy Program for 
Innovation Clusters (EPIC) to encourage growth of regional energy 
innovation ecosystems, training National Laboratory scientists and 
engineers on customer outreach and partnership through the private 
sector through Energy I-Corps, supporting an Energy Tech University 
prize, supporting market and commercialization analytics, and 
coordinating tech transfer. Funding is also included within the Budget 
for the Foundation for Energy Security and Innovation to accelerate the 
commercialization of new and existing energy technologies by raising 
and investing funds through engagements with the private sector and 
philanthropic communities.
Departmental Administration
    The Budget includes $433.5 million for Departmental Administration 
to fund management and mission support organizations that have 
enterprise-wide responsibility for international engagement and 
promotion of global market opportunities, administration, accounting, 
budgeting, contract and project management, human resources, 
congressional and intergovernmental liaison, energy policy, information 
management, life-cycle asset management, legal services, workforce 
diversity and equal employment opportunity, ombudsman services, small 
business advocacy, sustainability, and public affairs. In FY 2024 the 
Budget funds new statistical and trend analysis capabilities within the 
Office of Policy, with support from the Energy Information Agency.
Office of the Inspector General
    The Budget includes $165.2 million in discretionary authority. 
Also, the Office of the Inspector General would receive funding within 
the Administration's proposed $150 million in mandatory funding.
                               conclusion
    I want to again thank the Committee for its ongoing and bipartisan 
support for the DOE mission. Thank you for the opportunity to be here 
today. I am happy to answer your questions.

          PROPOSED DOE FUNDING CUTS TO FISCAL YEAR 2022 LEVELS

    Senator Murray. Thank you very much. We will now begin a 
round of 5-minute questions for our panel. I ask my colleagues 
to keep track of the clock and stay within that.
    Deputy Secretary Turk, your budget request for nondefense 
Department of Energy programs recommends a very healthy 
increase for the fiscal year 2023. And that funding, as I said, 
is really critical for programs that support clean energy, and 
environmental cleanup, and scientific discovery, our national 
security, our global competitiveness. It is a lot.
    House Republicans, as you know, have voted to cut overall 
funding back to fiscal year 2022 levels or worse. Can you give 
us some concrete examples of how cutting DOE back to those 
levels will hurt working-class Americans?
    Mr. Turk. Well, thank you, Madam Chair, for the question. I 
will give you three specific examples of what this means, and I 
will compare what the House Republicans are proposing versus 
the fiscal year 2023 enacted; it would be even worse if you 
compared it to what we are proposing in fiscal year 2024, but 
just compared to what is already in law on the baselines.
    So first on consumers, all that we are doing to try to help 
lower energy costs for consumers. What the fiscal year 2022 
level would be is a $62 million cut to weatherization, a 
program incredibly popular. What that translates into is more 
than 12,000 of our fellow Americans not getting the benefits of 
that program, in terms of reducing their energy bills, and 
providing greater efficiency.
    The rebates that was such an important part of the 
legislation that was passed last Congress, and thank you, to 
Senator Heinrich, and Chair Murray, and many others who were 
very supportive of that, this means that American consumers 
will not benefit from those rebates. And our estimates are that 
American consumers, overall, would benefit $1 billion in terms 
of lowering their bills each year, annually, because of that. 
So that will not be out there benefiting consumers across our 
country.
    On the science side, we have done some estimates of what 
that reduction in science, and it is a reduction, it is a 
significant reduction going to that fiscal year 2022 level, 
what that means is we would have to lay off 5,200 scientists, 
and others, who work at our labs.
    It would mean all the science that we were planning to do, 
want to do, need to do to be competitive in the world, just as 
you said, Madam Chair, in terms of China and other countries 
stepping up, we would have less ability to deal with that.
    In fact, we would have 2,600 less users being able to come 
to all of our phenomenal facilities, and they would have to go 
abroad, or somewhere else, to do the science that they want to 
do.
    And then third on the competitiveness side, this is a very 
competitive environment, with China, with other countries 
around the world, all of those provisions in the historic 
legislation passed last year, all those provisions, cutting 
back to the fiscal year 2022 level, at this critical, critical 
moment as we are getting momentum, the $100 billion, I 
mentioned for battery manufacturing, all of that is pulled back 
at this critical moment when we are actually making progress.
    Senator Murray. So, I think it is fair to say that cuts of 
that magnitude would force your Department to really make some 
tradeoffs between key priorities, like keeping pace with our 
competitors' investments in research and innovation, and 
protecting our nuclear arsenal, and a lot more.
    Mr. Turk. Absolutely.

                        HANFORD CLEAN-UP MISSION

    Senator Murray. Okay. Thank you. I was encouraged to see an 
historic request for the Hanford Site in Washington State, 
especially as compared to fiscal year 2023 which was, as we all 
know, completely insufficient, and as I talked about, I am 
pleased that DOE, Washington State, Department of Ecology, and 
EPA have reached that conceptual agreement after more than 60 
mediation sessions.
    In the announcement yesterday, DOE said that the 
President's proposed fiscal year 2024 requests is consistent 
with those conceptual agreements as it relates to tank waste. 
That is great news. But let us remind everybody, the Federal 
Government has a legal and moral obligation to clean up the 
Hanford Site, and protect Hanford workers. I am certain you 
understand how strongly I feel about meeting that obligation.
    So, I am pleased that your budget builds on the progress we 
made at the Office of River Protection, specifically on the 
High Level Waste Facility's Construction, but I am concerned 
that you are taking on unnecessary risks at Hanford's Richland 
Office which, we should just not be robbing Peter to pay Paul.
    Let me ask you what conditions merited the $85.3 million 
decrease to Richland from fiscal year 2023? And what risks 
would we be taking on as a result of that reduced level?
    Mr. Turk. Well, first of all let me completely agree, there 
is both a legal and a moral responsibility that all of us 
share, in the Executive Branch and in Congress, and thank you 
for your leadership again, for many, many years on this issue. 
I know it is something Secretary Granholm is passionate about, 
she has been out to Hanford, I have been out to Hanford. I will 
be going out there in the not too distant future. And 
certainly, our Environmental Management colleagues live and 
breathe this every day, in terms of making progress on this 
front.
    The Conceptual Agreement is a big, big deal, and it is 
great to have reached this milestone, but we have got an awful 
lot of work going forward. Anyone who has visited Hanford knows 
we have got a lot of work going forward, for decades, out 
there.
    Of our over $8 billion budget for the Environmental 
Management portfolio, $3 billion of that is for Hanford; that 
is the largest request in recent history for Hanford. As you 
said, we need to make thoughtful choices, and when we looked at 
that $3 billion envelope in terms of our back and forth with 
the White House and OM, (Office of Management and Budget), we 
made choices, we have made thoughtful choices, but we would be 
eager to have further conversations with you and your staff to 
make sure that we are all going forward in the way we should at 
Hanford.
    Senator Murray. Thank you very much.
    Senator Kennedy.

            THE COST OF THE U.S. PURSUING CARBON NEUTRALITY

    Senator Kennedy. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Mr. Secretary, thanks for being here. I want to tap your 
expertise for a moment. Give me; give me your best estimate, 
just an estimate, I know, of how soon you think the United 
States of America will be carbon neutral?
    Mr. Turk. So, I think, according to the climate scientists 
around the world, and certainly the cutting-edge scientists 
that we need to rely on here in the U.S., we have got to get 
carbon neutral by 2050. And I am very comfortable with that 
target, and I think that is the appropriate target.
    Senator Kennedy. By 2050?
    Mr. Turk. Which is only 27 years. That is not a long time 
away.
    Senator Kennedy. And how much will that cost?
    Mr. Turk. So, the cost that I focus on even more, is all 
the costs that will happen if we don't get our act together.
    Senator Kennedy. No. The total cost. How much will it cost 
to get us carbon neutral?
    Mr. Turk. It is going to cost trillions of dollars, and it 
will cost tens of trillions of dollars if we don't get our act 
together.
    Senator Kennedy. How many trillions?
    Mr. Turk. I don't have the estimate or the numbers in front 
of me, I have seen a variety of different estimates, but it is 
a large amount. Fundamentally transforming our energy economy--
--
    Senator Kennedy. Tell me the estimates----
    Mr. Turk [continuing]. Is a big deal.
    Senator Kennedy. Tell me the estimates that you have seen?
    Mr. Turk. I don't have those numbers, right on hand.
    Senator Kennedy. So, you are advocating that we become 
carbon neutral, but you don't know how much it is going to 
cost?
    Mr. Turk. So there is an awful lot of estimates out there, 
it depends on technology improvements----
    Senator Kennedy. You are the Deputy Secretary----
    Mr. Turk [continuing]. And other kinds of things.
    Senator Kennedy. You are the expert.
    Mr. Turk. I know with certainty----
    Senator Kennedy. Give me an estimate of how much it is 
going to cost?
    Mr. Turk. I know with a certainty, of all the experts I 
have spoken about, it is cheaper to get our act together, than 
it is to not get our act together on climate change.
    Senator Kennedy. Okay. Then tell me the cost----
    Mr. Turk. It is orders of magnitude.
    Senator Kennedy [continuing]. Versus the cost if we don't 
do it?
    Mr. Turk. I think it is orders of magnitude different. If 
we don't get our act together----
    Senator Kennedy. I know that. But you don't have a cost? 
You want us to get there, but you can't tell the American 
taxpayer how much it is going to cost? Is that your testimony?
    Mr. Turk. It is going to save us money, and there is a lot 
of jobs that a lot of Americans----
    Senator Kennedy. Well, how do we know, if you don't know 
how much it is going to cost?
    Mr. Turk. I would be happy to pull up the latest numbers 
that I have seen and let you----
    Senator Kennedy. How about $50 trillion; is that right?
    Mr. Turk. It is going to cost trillions of dollars; there 
is no doubt about it.
    Senator Kennedy. Okay. If we spend trillions of dollars, 
and we achieve--some of your colleagues estimate $50 trillion. 
And it disappoints me that you are not willing to give the 
estimates.
    I hope you are not telling me you have no idea how much it 
is going to cost, that creates a whole new host of problems. 
But if it costs $50 trillion, as some of your colleagues have 
testified, to become carbon neutral by 2050, and I am all for 
carbon neutrality, by the way; how much is that going to lower 
world temperatures? Or how much is that going to reduce the 
increase in world temperatures?
    Mr. Turk. So, every country around the world needs to get 
its act together. Our emissions are about 13 percent of global 
emissions right now.
    Senator Kennedy. Yes; but if you could answer my question. 
If we spend $50 trillion to become carbon neutral in the United 
States of America by 2050, you are the Deputy Secretary of 
Energy, give me your estimate of how much that is going to 
reduce world temperatures?
    Mr. Turk. So first of all, it is a net cost, it is what 
benefits we are having from getting our act together and 
reducing all of those climate benefits. We are seeing----
    Senator Kennedy. Let me ask again.
    Mr. Turk [continuing]. Hundreds of trillions of dollars 
right now----
    Senator Kennedy. Maybe I am not being clear. If we spent 
$50 trillion to become carbon neutral by 2050 in the United 
States of America, how much is that going to reduce world 
temperatures?
    Mr. Turk. This is a global problem, so we need to reduce 
our emissions, and we need to do everything we can to----
    Senator Kennedy. How much, if we do our part, is it going 
to reduce world temperatures?
    Mr. Turk. So we are 13 percent of global emissions right 
now.
    Senator Kennedy. You don't know, do you? You don't know, do 
you?
    Mr. Turk. You can do the math, we need to----
    Senator Kennedy. You don't know, do you, Mr. Secretary?
    Mr. Turk. So we are 13 percent of global emissions, and if 
we----
    Senator Kennedy. If you know, why won't you tell me?
    Mr. Turk [continuing]. Went to zero, that would be 13 
percent less----
    Senator Kennedy. You don't know, do you? You just want us 
to spend $50 trillion, and you don't have the slightest idea 
whether it is going to reduce world temperatures.
    Now, I am all for carbon neutrality. But you are the Deputy 
Secretary of the Department of Energy, and you are advocating 
we spend trillions of dollars to seek carbon neutrality, and 
you can't--and this isn't your money, or my money, it is 
taxpayer money--and you can't tell me how much it is going to 
lower world temperatures?
    Mr. Turk. Very----
    Senator Kennedy. Or you won't tell me? You know but you 
won't?
    Mr. Turk. In my heart of hearts, there is no way the world 
gets its act together on climate change unless the U.S. leads.
    Senator Kennedy. Tell me how much it is going to reduce----
    Mr. Turk. The U.S. needs to lead.
    Senator Kennedy [continuing]. You can't tell me. Either 
that or you won't.
    Mr. Turk. Well, 13 percent, 15 percent off the----
    Senator Kennedy. And that is--the President of the United 
States needs--I have still got a few seconds. I have got 22 
seconds. I am going to use them a different way.
    Mr. Secretary, shame on you for not answering my questions.

             GETTING PLUTONIUM PIT PRODUCTION BACK ON TRACK

    Madam Administrator, how are we going to get plutonium pit 
production back on track?
    Ms. Hruby. Well, thanks Senator Kennedy. We are doing--the 
most important thing we have to do to get pit production back 
on track is get craft workers in the facilities, finish our 
designs, get craft workers in the facilities, and that is 
happening. And so, we have got great confidence between changes 
we are making in our processes, getting people on board, doing 
equipment pre-buys, particularly for glove boxes, which are 
limited manufacturers in the United States. That we will be 
able to make pits. We are going to be late. We are trying to 
catch up.
    Senator Kennedy. Thank you, ma'am.
    Senator Murray. Thank you. Senator Heinrich.

                IMPACTS OF INCREASED GLOBAL TEMPERATURES

    Senator Heinrich. Secretary Turk, let me give this a try. 
What is the difference between living in a world with 1 degree 
of increased--1 degree C, of increased temperature and, say, 3 
degrees C of increased temperature and the difference in the 
cost that we will experience, as a Nation, under those two 
scenarios?
    Mr. Turk. So, the orders of magnitude are so much greater 
if we don't get our act together, than if we do what we need to 
do, and we have all those jobs, especially in America, if we 
lead on the clean energy front, orders of magnitude difference.

            IMPACTS OF REPEALING THE INFLATION REDUCTION ACT

    Senator Heinrich. Let us talk about those jobs for a 
moment. The Inflation Reduction Act was signed into law about 9 
months ago, our friends in the House of Representatives have 
put forward legislation to repeal that, that is despite 
announcements representing at least $150 billion in 
manufacturing investments in the United States, 46 factories, 
18,000 jobs that represents, what would be the impact if we 
repealed the incentives that are in the Inflation Reduction 
Act?
    Mr. Turk. So, I think they would be catastrophic at this 
absolutely critical moment, as Chair Murray said at the outset. 
We are seeing the kind of momentum at reshoring American 
manufacturing across the board, not just with batteries, not 
just with solar PV (photovoltaic), but across the board, we are 
seeing that momentum, because Congress has led, because the 
United States Government is leading, putting in place those 
kinds of incentives. You take those away, and those jobs are 
going to go elsewhere, and we are going to see those 
opportunities.
    Senator Heinrich. 2022 was a record year for factory 
investment in the United States. Are we expecting the same 
thing in 2023?
    Mr. Turk. We are expecting even more.
    Senator Heinrich. Yes.
    Mr. Turk. We are seeing momentum, why would we cut back 
as--on the moment we are actually succeeding.

                         NATIONAL LAB STAFFING

    Senator Heinrich. To shift gears a little bit, there is 
approximately 30,000 folks who are employed at Sandia and Los 
Alamos National Laboratories, both of those labs have cited 
workforce retention and recruitment as their primary issue in 
addressing national security missions.
    We appropriated a number of funds through the National 
Defense Authorization Act and the Appropriation Bills, to try 
and address that. Has that had a positive impact? And what else 
can we do to address the retention issues?
    Mr. Turk. So let me turn it over to Administrator Hruby.
    Senator Heinrich. Under Secretary----
    Mr. Turk. I will just say this is a big, big deal for the 
Secretary, for myself, for all of us. And there is an awful lot 
of work we need to do on this front.
    Senator Heinrich. Administrator.
    Ms. Hruby. Thanks, Senator Heinrich. Well, I am happy to 
report we have made some changes that are helping. We are not 
going to take our eye off of it. We can't do our job without 
those 30,000 people, and all the other people in the 
enterprise. Because of the increases in attrition that we were 
seeing after COVID, we made a--we authorized a mid-year salary 
adjustment at the laboratories, plants, and sites. We leaned 
forward in terms of adding flexibility to benefits that were 
more consistent with what we--the high tech industry we have to 
compete with.
    We leaned forward in terms of a competitive raise package 
for 2023, and as a result of those activities, among other 
things we are trying to do to improve the work environment and 
the productivity, the overall attrition is close to normal now, 
at both Los Alamos, and Sandia, and across the complex. We 
still have pockets where it is quite high.
    Senator Heinrich. Mm-hmm.
    Ms. Hruby. Where it is very competitive. Actually, I am 
sure the high tech market has helped us. There is always a 
tradeoff there, but we need to continue to lean forward, and we 
need to provide the very best work environment, because we have 
the very best work, so we can keep people, if we can do that. 
Thank you.

               INFLATION REDUCTION ACT AND INFRASTRUCTURE

                 INVESTMENT AND JOBS ACT IMPLEMENTATION

    Senator Heinrich. Deputy Secretary Turk, let us go back to 
the IRA (Inflation Reduction Act) for a minute. Can you walk us 
through implementation and all the things that DOE is doing now 
to make that legislation a success?
    Mr. Turk. So, this is a big, big deal, and big piece of 
legislation, and certainly, when you put it together with the 
Bipartisan Infrastructure Legislation, this is the largest 
climate and clean energy legislation, not just in the U.S. by 
orders of magnitude, it is the biggest legislation ever in the 
history of humanity.
    And there is an awful lot we are doing at the Department of 
Energy. So, we have a couple hundred of our folks working with 
Treasury and IRS (Internal Revenue Service) to bring our 
expertise to bear on all the tax provision piece of it. We also 
have about $100 billion that you all, that taxpayers have 
entrusted to us, just at the Department of Energy.
    That is 70 new programs that we are setting up. Many of 
them are competitive cost-share programs, like the hydrogen 
hubs that have gotten so much attention. So we have created new 
offices, we have created a new Under Secretary for 
Infrastructure, we have now hired up over 500 people to fill 
those offices, and taken folks from other parts of the 
Department to have that instant capacity.
    And we are putting out FOAs (Funding Opportunity 
Announcements) almost on a daily--funding opportunity 
announcements for companies and communities across the country, 
almost on a daily, sometimes hourly basis to make sure those 
opportunities are out there for that real-world impact.
    Senator Heinrich. Thank you.

               IMPLEMENTATION OF FUNDING FOR TRIBAL LOAD

              GUARANTEE PROGRAM AND INDIAN ENERGY PROGRAMS

    Senator Murray. Thank you. Mr. Deputy Secretary, ensuring 
that our Tribes and indigenous communities have access to 
clean, reliable power is really critical, we recently provided 
$75 million in the Inflation Reduction Act for the Tribal Loan 
Guarantee Program to help our Tribes and Tribal entities deploy 
clean energy. And we also provided the Indian Energy Program 
new funding to start electrifying the 30,000 Tribal homes that 
do not have access to power.
    Can you talk about how the Department is implementing those 
new investments, and making sure that our Tribes and Tribal 
entities know about this, and have access to those 
opportunities?
    Mr. Turk. So this is a top priority for us. On the Tribal 
Loan Program, it was terrific to be able to issue loans 
directly to Tribes. That is not something that we had before, 
and thanks to Congress we have that ability to do that.
    We have been very proactive in all our conversations and 
reaching out to Tribes, to leaders all across the country, we 
have literally had hundreds of outreach meetings.
    The Head of our Loan Program Office, Jigar Shah, was just 
out recently meeting with the Head of the Nez Perce Tribe, to 
make sure that we are making aware everybody who can take 
advantage of these programs. And I am told we are, hopefully, 
on track to have a first loan this summer, with many more to 
come after that.
    And our Indian Energy Office is working all the levers and 
all the authorities that they have as well, to be very 
proactive and forward-leaning here.
    Senator Murray. Well, as you know, Tribes in Washington 
State, and really across the country, they each have unique 
energy demands and challenges. Talk to me about how the 
Department is working, specifically, with Tribes to identify 
their specific needs and opportunities?
    Mr. Turk. Well, I think we--you hit the nail on the head, 
it is unique challenges, it is uniquely situated. I know in my 
own meetings you can't make assumptions about what communities 
or what Tribes need, you have got to listen and put in the 
actual work, and the sweat equity, to not only do the webinars 
and do the calls, but actually go out to the communities, to 
listen to the communities, and to figure out what tools we have 
in the tool belt to help that particular community, and this 
particular community, and have it driven by the Tribe itself, 
as it should be, given the sovereignty of the Tribes.
    So that is the approach that we are taking. It is time 
intensive, it is resource intensive, that is why it is so 
important to keep the funding streams coming on that front so 
that we can have the ability to do that kind of proactive 
outreach, and listening to make sure that we are bringing all 
the tools that we have to the table to help Tribes.

                   INDUSTRIAL DECARBONIZATION FUNDING

    Senator Murray. Thank you. Thank you for your attention to 
that. You know, industrial emissions made up roughly 30 percent 
of the U.S. climate emissions, and to address the climate 
crisis we need to modernize our industrial manufacturing base, 
and work to reduce emissions across the cement, steel, 
aluminum, glass, paper, and ceramics industries.
    Last Congress, we provided about $6 billion for that work 
across multiple DOE program offices and functions; how do you 
plan to get this industrial decarbonization funding out the 
door quickly and effectively?
    Mr. Turk. Well, we have got the historic amount, the over 
$6 billion, and then we also have our regular appropriations 
request, so we are requesting $320 million more in our annual 
appropriations request, all complementary to that $6 billion as 
well.
    What we are doing is bringing folks across the Department. 
We have a variety of offices that have expertise that can help 
in the industrial decarbonization space. The Secretary has 
launched a Joint Strategy Team on industrial technologies. It 
literally brings 80 folks from a variety of different offices 
across the Department, so that we can have a coherent strategy, 
a proactive strategy on industrial technology.
    We have got subgroups for iron and steel, and subgroups for 
petrochemicals, to break this up into the manageable chunks it 
needs to be broken up.
    We have also had great conversations with our White House 
colleagues, and our interagency colleagues, to make sure that 
this is an all-of-government, unified effort going forward.
    And we have had terrific discussions with your colleagues, 
your staff on the committee, about having some modest funding 
to support these joint strategy teams, so that we can make sure 
that this continues, and there is a real center of gravity, and 
institutionalization going forward.
    Senator Murray. Well, thank you very much; and thank you 
for being here today.
    Senator Heinrich has kindly agreed to take over the gavel 
for the committee. And I appreciate that. And will give him a 
chance to settle in here, and turn it back over to him. So, 
thank you.

                        TRANSMISSION PERMITTING

    Senator Heinrich [presiding]. We had a recent hearing with 
Secretary Granholm, where I talked to her fairly extensively 
about things like ``reconductoring'', and other transmission, 
Grid Enhancing Technologies. Can you talk a little bit, 
Secretary Turk, about the funds that we appropriated through 
the Infrastructure Law, how those are being used to facilitate 
the transmission that continues to largely be a permitting and 
planning challenge, but is obviously one of the primary 
bottlenecks to getting dramatic amounts of additional clean 
generation onto the grid?
    Mr. Turk. Well, first of all Senator, thank you, for your 
focus on transmission. This is a big, big deal. And if we don't 
get the transmission right in our country we are not going to 
be successful in all of our efforts. There have been some 
estimates, some credible estimates, in fact, that of the all 
the climate benefits we get from the Inflation Reduction Act, a 
full 80 percent of those won't come to fruition unless we can 
do transmission at a higher rate going forward. We are doing 
about 1 percent per year in terms of enhancements on the 
transmission side of things.
    So, we do have some funding streams, but we created a whole 
new office, the Grid Deployment Office, to lean in, to use 
those funding streams to get leverage from those funding 
streams. But we are also very aware that a key issue here, just 
as you said, is permitting. And right now, we are not doing 
what we need to do in terms of permitting in the timelines 
associated with permitting for new transmission lines across 
our country.
    We are engaged right now in extensive conversations with 
the White House, with interagency colleagues, our Secretary has 
spoken about this before, to use an existing law, and a law 
from 2005, to actually streamline the transmission permitting 
to have time lines, and very aggressive time lines to really 
get our act together on the transmission permitting side.
    There is also reconductoring in a number of key 
technologies that are very complementary to building new 
transmission lines, as well, that we are very focused on.

     DECARBONIZING THE TRANSPORTATION SECTOR AND ELECTRIC VEHICLES

    Senator Heinrich. Great. You spoke a little bit about the 
work being done to decarbonize the industrial sector, talk a 
little bit about the work that DOE is doing to decarbonize the 
transportation sector, particularly things like heavy trucking, 
trains, even aviation.
    Mr. Turk. So, transportation is the largest source of our 
emissions in the country, and we are very focused on this, have 
been for many years, but have some new tools and new resources 
in our tool belt. One of those is the funding for building out 
our charging infrastructure, and we have a joint office. It is 
a new experiment. A joint office with us and the Department of 
Transportation, that is working out incredibly well, and we are 
getting funding to States to get it out the door, to build 
those EV (electric vehicles) chargers across the country, to 
reduce that range anxiety, and to make sure consumers across 
the country, not just in urban areas, but across the country, 
can benefit from electric vehicles.
    We are also working on other parts, not just the passenger 
vehicle side, just as you said. Trucking, aviation, are 
incredibly important areas that we can lean in on. We have got 
a Super Trucks Program that is really leaning in on R&D 
(Research and Development), and trying to bring technical 
solutions and reduce those costs so that we can have low-
carbon, no-carbon trucking solutions as well.
    Senator Heinrich. Senator Hagerty, would you like to ask a 
few questions?

                     NUCLEAR ENERGY IS CLEAN ENERGY

    Senator Hagerty. Thank you, Senator Heinrich.
    I would like to first direct my questions to the Deputy 
Secretary, to talk about small modular reactors. It is a topic 
that comes up very often as I talk to leaders around the world, 
and to business leaders as well. And I think you have had some 
discussion with Ranking Member Kennedy already today, but I 
would like to just establish a couple of basic points first.
    My first question: Does the Department consider nuclear 
energy clean, sustainable, and carbon-free energy? A yes/no 
answer would be fine.
    Mr. Turk. Absolutely. Nuclear energy is a top priority for 
us.
    Senator Hagerty. And as I said, my colleague, Ranking 
Member Kennedy, I think, has already confirmed with you that 
the Department would state that: ``Nuclear power is the most 
reliable energy source and it is not even close.'' That is a 
direct quote, and also to quote, ``Nearly two times more 
reliable is natural gas and coal units, and almost three times 
more reliable than wind and solar plants.'' That is from the 
Department's Office of Nuclear Energy website.
    So I would like to come back to you and ask, that given 
that nuclear energy is clean, carbon free, and more reliable 
than other energy sources; do you agree that the United States 
should be encouraging the production of more nuclear power?
    Mr. Turk. Absolutely. And we have got a lot of fundings, 
thanks to Congress, to extend the lifetime of our existing 
nuclear, which is incredibly important. It is about 20 percent 
of our overall electricity generation in our country, as you 
know, Senator. And then also focusing; just as you said, on 
SMRs; on the small modular reactors, the reactors of the 
future, top priority for us.
    Senator Hagerty. Well, the demand is clearly there, as I 
said, as I speak with leaders around the world. I was just in 
Latin America and talking with leaders there, who are trying to 
make transitions, and they see this as a great opportunity to 
partner with the United States of America, and also it is an 
area that would satisfy important demands while meeting certain 
climate objectives.
    My next question is that, given all of that, why aren't we 
building more nuclear power plants?
    Mr. Turk. So, this is where we have got the $6 billion in 
credits to try to extend the lifetime extension of the existing 
nuclear, and we are working as quick as we can on the Advanced 
Reactor Demonstration Program, at being the leader in small 
modular reactors.
    And it is not just Latin America. I was in Latin America as 
well where everybody is focused on SMRs and U.S. leadership in 
that space, but it is Eastern Europe, and it is a lot of other 
countries around the world. So, there is huge U.S. domestic 
opportunities, but there is also a lot of jobs in an export 
environment as well. So completely agree with you on that 
point.
    Senator Hagerty. I spent a great deal of time in my 
previous job working with Japan and their Energy Security and 
their strategy there. There is also a tremendous demand in 
developed economies like Japan, in particular. That is why I 
think it is very important to direct our scarce government 
resources toward technological innovation, increasing 
efficiency, and doing things of that nature.

                        ADVANCING NUCLEAR ENERGY

    And my next question is that, do you agree that is in our 
Nation's interest for the next generation of nuclear reactor 
technology, and also the related supply chains, and the 
technologies that are around it, to be developed and pioneered 
here in the United States?
    Mr. Turk. Absolutely.
    Senator Hagerty. My concern is that this administration 
seems to be more focused on pouring billions of taxpayer 
dollars into wind and solar, when we have a serious situation 
where China controls a lot of the natural resources, and a lot 
of the supplies there, as opposed to being a competitive 
advantage for America.
    Where in contrast, if we look at nuclear power, it is an 
area where the United States actually does possess a lead we 
can build a supply chain that doesn't pass through China, but 
it requires us to develop the next generation of this 
technology right here in the United States.
    In March the DOE released a series of reports that were 
focused on green energy technologies, including a report 
focused solely on advanced nuclear. That report stated, and I 
am going to quote, ``It is likely that the first design to 
reach a critical mass of orders may be a Gen III plus SMR.''
    I attended an event in March, in which the Tennessee Valley 
Authority, GE Hitachi, Ontario Power, and Synthos, announced 
that they are teaming up to advance the global deployment of 
grid-scale modular nuclear reactor. That first SMR in North 
America is going to be built in Canada, not in the United 
States.
    However, the next SMR, and the first in the United States, 
could be built at the Clinch River Site in Oak Ridge, 
Tennessee. You might be wondering why I am talking about this. 
That site in Oak Ridge, that site has an early site permit for 
SMR that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has already issued. 
So, wouldn't deployment in the United States of commercial 
grid-scale module reactors be a substantial step toward our 
leadership in this technology?
    Mr. Turk. Absolutely. And Oak Ridge in Tennessee, have had 
a real leadership for decades in this space.
    Senator Hagerty. Mm-hmm. So my question then: Does the 
Department support this project?
    Mr. Turk. So we have been very supportive of projects 
across the country, we are spending billions of dollars and 
really prioritizing this, and the quicker we can get this 
technology available in Tennessee, across our country, and 
across the world, the better the world will be.
    Senator Hagerty. Does the President's budget request have 
any funding for this particular project in it?
    Mr. Turk. So the President's budget request for this fiscal 
year took into account that we had some extraordinary funding, 
especially for the ARDP, the Advanced Reactor Demonstration 
Program, through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Legislation. So 
because there was a significant amount of funding there, we 
made thoughtful choices and thoughtful decisions to make sure 
that we had a balanced portfolio across all of our----
    Senator Hagerty. In fact, there is zero funding right now.
    Mr. Turk. And that----
    Senator Hagerty. And what I want to do is encourage you to 
accelerate this, because the market opportunity is before us. 
Thank you.
    Mr. Turk. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Senator Heinrich. Senator Murkowski.
    Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    And I appreciate the questions from my colleague. Know that 
I think that this is an area where we can and we should be 
leading. There is no reason why we should not. So, I am with 
you in supporting your urging to the Agency, to the Department 
to advance.

THE INCLUSION OF ALASKA AND HAWAII IN DOE'S 2023 NATIONAL TRANSMISSION 
                    NEEDS STUDY AND GEOVISION REPORT

    I want to talk, not about nuclear but something that I 
think doesn't get enough attention, and that is the potential 
for geothermal. We have got great resources, certainly in my 
State, but we have them in other parts of the country as well.
    Over the past couple months the Department issued two 
critical studies, one related to geothermal, and one was the 
National Transmission Needs Study for 2023. I think both of 
these studies are very important, very timely, but two very 
glaring omissions. They were national studies, but they somehow 
or other forgot two States. I just don't understand it. 
Actually, I find it inexcusable and astonishing that Hawaii and 
Alaska would not be included, particularly, in a study for 
geothermal.
    When you are thinking about geothermal heat and volcanoes, 
what do you think of? You think of Hawaii, you think of Alaska. 
And so, it was remarkable. We saw one briefing provided to 
Congress, the slide simply showed the resources in the Lower 
48, and there was a question mark over Alaska, and over Hawaii.
    And in the GeoVision report, the Department cites a couple 
reasons for the exclusion, and they said: That the modeling was 
used, primarily--the modeling that was used was primarily 
designed for the contiguous United States.
    Okay. I can kind of get that, but the fact of the matter 
is, it is Hawaii and Alaska are never going to be part of the 
contiguous United States, and so if we are going to just 
completely keep them out of any future assessments, I think we 
would agree that that is not right, that is not reasonable.
    So, I would ask you to commit to conducting a study of the 
geothermal resources that we have in Alaska and in Hawaii.
    Mr. Turk. Well, let me say this, Senator. And I am not sure 
this is done that often in D.C. hearings, but we need to do 
better.
    Senator Murkowski. Thank you.
    Mr. Turk. And I am heading to Alaska in a few weeks as, you 
know, and looking forward to having whatever meetings you find 
helpful.
    Senator Murkowski. Right.
    Mr. Turk. To make sure that I am aware. Our Secretary has 
been up there as well visiting with you. And making sure that 
all of us, throughout the Department, not just our Arctic 
Energy Office, and Erin Whitney, who is our new leader of that 
office, but all of us at the Department are doing what we 
should.
    On the Transmission Needs Study, we have relied on existing 
modeling for that need study, it is an interim, and now we are 
putting the final together, and Alaska will be part of that 
Final Need Study.
    Senator Murkowski. Yes.
    Mr. Turk. And we are working on that to make sure. We need 
to, frankly, work with you, and work with others, to make sure 
we have the modeling, we have the analysis. Either that we do, 
or that others do, so that we can make good resource decisions 
off on that front. But we are making improvements on the 
Transmission Needs Study.
    Senator Murkowski. Okay.
    Mr. Turk. And then on the map issue, I spent a significant 
time, yesterday and today, with colleagues at our Department, 
we need to do better on that front.

  ALASKA'S NEED FOR TRANSMISSION UPGRADES AND FUNDING UNDER THE GRID 
                   RESILIENCE AND INNOVATION PROGRAM

    Senator Murkowski. I really appreciate you recognizing that 
Alaska is not going to be at a disadvantage when it comes to 
Federal funding, because we are not part of that Transmission 
Needs Study. So, I thank you for that commitment. I also thank 
you for committing that you can do better.
    And I appreciate the fact that you are coming to the State 
of Alaska. As you know, Secretary Granholm has had an 
opportunity to be up North, see one small geothermal community, 
if you will, we are certainly happy to include you in that site 
visit. But there is a lot more, certainly, that we can look to.
    The Grid Resilience issue, and Transmission Needs Study, 
the Matanuska Electric Association, and our Alaska Energy 
Authority, are working together on applications for funding for 
the Grid Resilience and the Innovation Program, the GRIP 
Program, you are going to be getting a letter pretty soon from 
me, and the other members of the delegation, in support of 
these applications.
    But if Alaska was included in the Transmission Needs Study, 
you would absolutely see that it is in desperate need of 
transmission upgrades, probably more so than any other region 
in the country. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill funds 
represents an incredible opportunity for us in Alaska to 
stabilize an aging grid by bringing it to modern standards, 
enhancing resiliency in the face of unprecedented natural 
disasters, climate change, rugged geographic terrain, these 
improvements are really, I can't underscore enough, how 
critical they are to preparing our State for a fuel diverse 
clean energy future, as well as integrating new sources of 
energy along this.
    And so, as you are planning your trip, if we can make sure 
that this is on your itinerary, we will work with you in 
advance. I am looking forward to the opportunity to discuss 
more of these, as well as what we are doing with small hydro, 
the Arctic Energy Office that you have noted, and then the 
opportunities for potential, resources related to our critical 
minerals.
    So, with that, Mr. Chairman, I thank the committee.
    Senator Heinrich. Senator Coons.
    Senator Coons. Thank you, Chairman Heinrich.
    Great to see you again Mr. Deputy Secretary, Under 
Secretary; Under Secretary Hruby, thank you for your work to 
advance nonproliferation, and support for our safety, and your 
efforts to reduce the nuclear risks posed by Russia and 
Ukraine.

             FOUNDATION FOR ENERGY SECURITY AND INNOVATION

    Deputy Secretary Turk, thank you. Both to you and, I guess, 
to all the DOE employees who are working so hard to implement 
the CHIPS and Science Act, the Inflation Reduction Act, the 
Infrastructure Law, there is so much to work on.
    A key piece, I think, of the CHIPS and Science bill for 
your Department, was legislation I introduced, along with 
Senators Graham and Lujan, to create the Foundation for Energy 
Security and Innovation.
    Borrowing off of what several other Federal agencies have a 
public-private partnership to create a foundation that would 
channel private investment to accelerate commercialization. The 
DOE budget request includes $31 million to launch this new 
foundation.
    I would be interested in: How you expect the FESI 
(Foundation for Energy Security and Innovation) to serve as a 
force multiplier, or to expand the Department's activities? And 
how critical is this initial pump-priming funding to what will 
be a largely self-sustaining foundation?
    Mr. Turk. Well, thank you, first Senator, for your 
leadership on this issue, and Senator Graham, and several 
others, who are instrumental in giving us the ability to have 
this foundation. FESI, is the acronym that we affectionately 
call it, internally, and we are looking to set this up as 
quickly as we possibly can.
    As you know, earlier this year we sent out a request for 
information to make sure we are learning lessons from other 
Departments who have foundations. We are working right now to 
get the Board up and running, and we will do that this year.
    And so, this initial tranche of funding is incredibly 
helpful to leverage funding that we can get from others, as a 
complement to all that we are doing.
    And let me say a big thank you to your leadership, for the 
historic legislation that was passed in last Congress. It is 
both an enormous task, and responsibility on our shoulders, but 
it is an honor to be part of a Department implementing this 
historic opportunity for all our fellow Americans.

              SUPPORTING CLEAN HYDROGEN AND HYDROGEN HUBS

    Senator Coons. And thank you for your strong focus on clean 
hydrogen. I was grateful for the chance to host the Secretary 
in Delaware, and a number of others, at the Air Liquide 
Innovation Campus. There are a number of world-class hydrogen 
technology, innovators in Newark, Delaware.
    I am excited that Delaware is joining the Southeastern PA, 
and Southern New Jersey on the Mid-Atlantic Clean Hydrogen Hub. 
I think our region is a strongly competitive choice that is 
centrally located in one of the most densely populated and 
developed corridors in our country, that has world-class 
industry, a skilled union workforce, existing hydrogen 
transport, as well as general infrastructure, and an innovation 
ecosystem that is, I think, unparalleled.
    How is the Department thinking about organized Labor's role 
in shaping the hydrogen economy, and in the priority process 
for the Hydrogen Hubs Program?
    Mr. Turk. So it is a huge part of how we are thinking of 
hydrogen and the hydrogen hubs, in particular, but a lot of the 
other infrastructure funding, the historic funding that we have 
gotten. So on the hydrogen hubs, and others of our funding 
opportunities, we actually require something called a Community 
Benefits Plan.
    Senator Coons. Right.
    Mr. Turk. So, if you want to get money from the Federal 
Government, if you want to be entrusted with taxpayer dollars, 
we think that you should work in your community with labor, 
with other community leaders, and taking into account 
environmental justice concerns, and issues as well.
    And make sure that there is a plan there, not only for your 
company to make money, that is great in this clean energy 
economy, but to do it the right way, to have those quality 
jobs, to work with unions, going forward. So that is a full 20 
percent of the criteria for anyone to get funding through these 
grant opportunities.
    Senator Coons. And there is, I think, an opportunity for us 
to keep moving forward in terms of our legislative work around 
hydrogen.
    Senator Cornyn and I have four bills in this Congress to 
try and complement and fill gaps in our investments. The 
Hydrogen Infrastructure Initiative would support early adopters 
and help scale the deployment of hydrogen in maritime, in heavy 
industry, in heavy duty truck applications, as well as building 
out transport and storage infrastructure. I am grateful for his 
partnership and his recognition. This is a real opportunity for 
regions all over the country.

  INCREASING DOMESTIC DEMAND FOR HYDROGEN AND REGIONAL PARTNERING ON 
                              CLEAN FUELS

    How could additional demand side measures complement your 
existing work on hydrogen at the Department? And how can 
Congress support President Biden's efforts to coordinate with 
other regional partners like Canada, on clean fuels including 
hydrogen?
    Mr. Turk. So, this is an absolutely critical moment for 
hydrogen, an Uber-critical moment. If we do things the right 
way with the funding and authority that you all have given us, 
but it is not enough. And thank you for all your continued 
work. There are some gaps in areas that we need to keep focus 
on.
    I think you are absolutely right to focus on the demand 
side, and to make sure that we have got the demand part of it, 
as we are ramping up supplies, and we have got the tax credits 
and the hydrogen hubs providing that clean hydrogen supply. So 
we have had extensive conversations with the White House and 
interagency: What can we do as a Federal Government to provide 
some of that demand? And we are looking at the funding and 
authorities that we have of how we can use some of that to 
encourage that much more on the demand side piece.
    And certainly, working with Canada, working with other 
international partners on this is a win-win for all of us, and 
we are really leaning in on that as well.
    And thank you for all your efforts on the international 
side as well, not just on hydrogen, but across the board.
    Senator Coons. Thank you. I look forward to continuing to 
work with you.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Senator Heinrich. Senator Hoeven.
    Senator Hoeven. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Thanks to both of our witnesses for being here today.
    And Governor, if you deferred, thank you for that as well. 
I appreciate it.
    Senator Shaheen. I will always defer to the Governor.
    Senator Hoeven. Fellow Governor, I appreciate you very 
much. Thank you. And I am not surprised. That working with you 
is always good.

               REGIONAL CARBON SEQUESTRATION PARTNERSHIPS

    Secretary Turk, you are very familiar with Energy & 
Environmental Research Center, you are also very familiar with 
the four regional partnerships, they pretty much cover the 
country. As a matter of fact, their Chairman is--his university 
is involved, one just like University of North Dakota is with 
EERC (Energy & Environmental Research Center). We put--myself 
and others, put legislation in the 2023 Appropriations Bill 
that provides, quote, ``Not less than $20 million for the 
Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnerships.'' This is not new. 
This has been going on for a long time, and we can't put CO2 
down hole without these partnerships doing what they do, and 
what they have been doing for a long time.
    Will you commit to ensuring the fiscal year 2023 funding 
supports the missions of the RCSP's (Regional Carbon 
Sequestration Partnerships)--and I have talked to Secretary 
Granholm about this as well, I am sure you are aware of that--
will you commit to ensuring the fiscal year 2023 funding 
supports the mission of the RCSP's regional partnerships, as 
intended by Congress? And I know what the intent was, because I 
helped write the legislation. I am not guessing on this one.
    Mr. Turk. Well, first of all Senator, thank you for your 
personal leadership, and North Dakota's leadership including on 
CCUS. As you know, I worked for a fellow--a previous Senator 
from North Dakota and I----
    Senator Hoeven. I think you and I see eye-to-eye on it, but 
my question is whether you can get it done?
    Mr. Turk. So on this particular program, the Regional 
Carbon Sequestration Partnerships, I know there are some 
differences of opinion of folks on this side of the room, and 
we want to make sure that we are responsive, not only to you, 
but to other viewpoints on this, and going forward. We would 
like nothing more than clarity of what that guidance is for us 
going forward on this incredibly important piece.
    I am familiar. And I know our Secretary had a chance to 
visit with the folks at the Plains CO2 Reduction Partnership. I 
know for many, many years the incredibly impressive work that 
has been done by UND (University of North Dakota), and others, 
throughout the State on these issues. And so, I think there is 
a lot there to build on.
    Senator Hoeven. Yes, you----
    Mr. Turk. But we need clarity, we just want clarity from 
you all.
    Senator Hoeven. Yes. You recognize and agree that it is 
important work, correct?
    Mr. Turk. It is incredibly important work.
    Senator Hoeven. Okay. Then will you work with, as far as we 
work now on the 2024 appropriation, to make sure that we get 
this done?
    Mr. Turk. Happy to work with you on that.
    Senator Hoeven. Thank you, Secretary. And I do appreciate 
your efforts on this issue, very much. Thank you.

 NNSA'S NUCLEAR MODERNIZATION PROGRAM AND INFRASTRUCTURE MODERNIZATION

    Administrator Hruby, the W-84 warheads, and the plutonium 
pits--and I think again, our Chairman's--Los Alamos, and some 
of his labs, I think are working on these as well. But we 
need--there is a lot of synchronization here, as you know, with 
the modernization and the refurbishments that goes into the B-
52, into the LRSO (Long-Range Stand-Off), the GBSD (Ground 
Based Strategic Deterrent), and all those things in terms of 
all the delivery systems to modernize our nuclear forces, have 
to coincide with the development that is being done on the W-84 
warhead, the warheads that go on the LRSO, the replacement to 
the ALCM (air-launched cruise missile), and same with the pit 
production.
    All this, and this not only affects, obviously, our bomber 
fleet, our ICBM (intercontinental ballistic missile) fleet, our 
submarines, our whole nuclear arsenal. This is the upgrade to 
our nuclear arsenals. This is, you know, the insides. Are you 
going to keep all of those on schedule? And I want you to go 
through both the warheads, and the plutonium pits. You know, 
the--I think, particularly, you have got some supply chain 
issues. Is it on the W-4--wait, I lose track of which ones--of 
the W-84, right, but then you have also got the others that go 
for the--the Sentinel, and then the SLBM (Submarine-Launched 
Ballistic Missile).
    So just kind of make--are we going to keep all this on 
schedule, very important? And of course, costs increase if we 
get off schedule too?
    Ms. Hruby. Right. Well, let me address your question in two 
parts. So, the first part is about the Weapon Modernization 
Program, and that program is on schedule and synced up with the 
Department of Defense, including the W80-4 for the LRSO. Just 
attended a briefing for the Department of Defense, we are 
entirely synced up there. That does not require new pits.
    So that leads me to the second part of the answer, which is 
how we are doing on infrastructure modernization, and on that 
front we have experienced schedule delays and cost overruns 
that we are working hard to catch up. But it is a very, very 
difficult time--it is a very difficult thing to do, to 
establish new nuclear production capabilities that we just 
simply stopped in this country. As well as it is a particularly 
difficult time to do large construction.
    But we are doing all sorts of things, working to increase 
the number of skilled crafts, working with unions, and trade 
shops, and technical schools, breaking the projects into 
smaller more manageable pieces, delaying some projects to get 
the ones done that are started. We have lots of--and having 
some success, and increasing the number of people on site, and 
increasing the pace of those activities, but that we have 
suffered some schedule and cost problems there.
    Senator Hoeven. We have worked very hard to fully fund the 
enterprise, and we need you to take all the steps to keep it on 
schedule.
    Ms. Hruby. Yes, sir.
    Senator Hoeven. Thank you, again, to both of you, 
appreciate it.
    Thank you, Madam Chairman.
    Senator Murray [presiding]. Thank you. Senator Shaheen.
    Senator Shaheen. Thank you both for being here, and for 
your testimony.

  USING BIL AND IRA FUNDING TO PROVIDE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE TO LOCAL 
                              COMMUNITIES

    Secretary Turk, I am going to begin with you. In New 
Hampshire we have a very effective energy nonprofit that has 
Energy Circuit Riders, that have been individual, only a 
couple, but they have been going around helping communities 
look at how they can be more efficient with their energy use, 
as well as looking at alternative sources of energy.
    We are putting a lot of money into States like New 
Hampshire, through the Inflation Reduction Act, and the 
Bipartisan Infrastructure package. So can you talk about how 
this budget is going to support technical assistance and 
outreach so that communities know what is available? And how 
can we help them take advantage of what is in those pieces of 
legislation?
    Mr. Turk. Well, thanks to you, Senator, and leadership from 
others, we do have these historic tools in our tool belt, on 
efficiency, and rebates, and all across the board; it is 
incredibly exciting to have that. But it does no good if 
communities----
    Senator Shaheen. Right.
    Mr. Turk [continuing]. If households, if families aren't 
aware of them, and we don't make it easy to take full advantage 
of this. So, I think you are absolutely right to focus on the 
technical assistance piece, and making sure that everything we 
are doing. From designing the funding opportunities in the 
first place, to designing the web interface for rebates and 
making sure that that is easily accessible. And a part of our 
new Under Secretary for Infrastructure is an incredibly 
important office. It has not gotten as much attention as I 
think deserves, it is called the State and Community Energy 
Program Office.
    And the theory of the case there is to make sure that we 
have the human resources that can interface with communities, 
that can have those engagements, those discussions, in a very 
proactive, but also in a very respectful way, because each 
community is different in terms of what the opportunities and 
the challenges are on that front.
    And what we want to do is help design particular programs, 
you can take advantage of this and this, maybe this isn't quite 
a good fit over here for you. And then make sure that all the 
deadlines they are aware of, make sure the application process 
is an easy application process, make sure consumers in those 
regions, in those communities have that opportunity.
    That is going to take an awful lot of effort and 
leadership, not only from us, but funding including for the 
State and Community Energy Program Office in fiscal year 2024, 
and for years after that as well.
    Senator Shaheen. Well, I hope you will think about Members 
of Congress as potential outreach opportunities to help our 
communities take advantage of what is available. We have been 
trying to do that, and the closer we can work with you all the 
better.

   WORKING WITH OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES ON BIL AND IRA FUNDED PROGRAMS

    And that brings up another aspect of this, and that is: Can 
you talk about how you are working with other Federal agencies 
who are also engaged in promoting the programs in those two 
pieces of legislation: Treasury, EPA, other agencies that have 
overlapping jurisdictions? But in order for this to work, 
everybody has to work together.
    Mr. Turk. Everybody has to work together, and having been 
in the Government, in the Executive Branch, it is challenging, 
but the prize is huge if we are able to actually get our acts 
together on this front.
    So, a few concrete examples of this; one, is the Federal 
Government uses an awful lot of energy, and all of our 
facilities across the country. There is a program called FEMP 
(Federal Energy Management Program), and there is--some 
additional historic levels of funding that you all have 
provided last Congress for a program called EFEKT (). This is 
hundreds of millions of dollars to try to help improve the 
efficiency of those Federal facilities across the country.
    And so, we are trying to lean in on that, and make sure the 
Federal facilities, whether they are our facilities, or other 
facilities, can take advantage of that funding going forward. 
We have a couple hundred of our DOE staff working with IRS and 
Treasury, helping to design those tax incentives that are so 
important, to make sure that it takes into account the energy 
expertise that we have to get the biggest bang for taxpayer 
buck from those pieces as well.
    You mentioned EPA, EPA is setting up a number of incredibly 
important programs, and we are trying to work hand-in-hand with 
them to make sure that they get the biggest bang for buck from 
their efforts going forward as well.
    So this is something we are going to--to your point--on 
using you as outreach, leveragers, you know, your communities 
better than we do. And so, we will absolutely do that with you, 
and with other Senators, and look forward to that kind of 
engagement.
    Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you. And I am glad you 
mentioned FEMP, because one of my other questions was going to 
be about what we are doing to help Federal entities with energy 
savings. We have the Cold Regions Research and Engineering Lab 
in Hanover, New Hampshire, which is a very important lab for 
the Federal Government. I know that they would like additional 
opportunities to save energy. And as well as the White Mountain 
National Forest where they have a very inefficient building 
that is too small, they welcome over 60,000 visitors a year, we 
need to help them build a new building that is compliant with 
our climate goals. So thank you very much. Thank you, both.
    Secretary Hruby, I had a chance to see you at the Armed 
Services, so you answered my questions then. Thank you.
    Senator Murray. Thank you. Senator Hagerty.

        MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS CONTRACTS FOR Y-12 AND PANTEX

    Senator Hagerty. Thank you. Administrator Hruby, I would 
like to come back to you. It is good to see you again. I wanted 
to go over a couple of topics that we talked about last year 
when you were before the committee. The management and the 
operation contract for the Y-12 National Security Complex, and 
the delays, that I know frustrate you, and the cost overruns 
that are associated with the construction of the UPF, the 
Uranium Processing Facility there in Tennessee.
    My first question on the management and the operations of 
Y-12 can you give me an update on the time line for the new 
competition that is underway there?
    Ms. Hruby. I can. We extended the contract at Y-12 through 
September 2025. There are some options to extend beyond that. 
But that is our target, 2025. As I think you know, we are doing 
the competition for Pantex first, and then we will follow it 
with the competition for Y-12.
    Senator Hagerty. Y-12.
    Ms. Hruby. The Pantex draft RFP is on the street, in fact 
comments are due back next week, so we are moving along with 
that schedule. We are trying to get more input, do some new 
things in that contract which I think will help us with 
stability, for both of those sites, going forward.
    Senator Hagerty. On your decision to split Pantex and Y-12, 
can you give me a little more color in terms of the thought 
process there.
    Ms. Hruby. Yes.
    Senator Hagerty. How do you think that will work?
    Ms. Hruby. Absolutely. Yes. So the decision to split the 
contracts was because both of these sites--well, first, as you 
know, they used to be separate.
    Senator Hagerty. Mm-hmm.
    Ms. Hruby. We combined them back when it looked like our--
we envisioned a complex that was smaller, more consolidated, 
and therefore combined these two contracts. What we have found 
is that the geopolitical environment is such that we are no 
longer consolidating. In fact, we are adding responsibilities 
at both of these sites that are pretty substantial. And they 
are quite different from one another in terms of the work that 
they do. So, we felt that concentrated leadership both from the 
Federal side and the contractor side, was really important at 
both sides; and that for all the growth, both in terms of 
construction projects and program growth, we really needed the 
sites to have dedicated leadership again.

            COMPLETION OF Y-12'S URANIUM PROCESSING FACILITY

    Senator Hagerty. Let me move on to another topic we have 
discussed, that is on the UPF again. Congress has already 
appropriated over $5.5 billion for the project, originally it 
was supposed to be delivered by 2025, and it was not to exceed 
$6.5 billion. Can you give me an update on where we are with 
the schedule, and the funding for that?
    Ms. Hruby. Yes. Unfortunately, on UPF, it looks like we are 
3 to 4 years behind. We are trying really hard to meet the 3, 
it sounds terrible, but to not be further than 3 years behind. 
There is some good science about this that we have been able to 
increase the workforce, we have completed pretty much all of 
our equipment buys now, on UPF, and we are in the phase of 
construction that is more predictable and reliable, assuming 
that we can get the workforce there, and that is looking good, 
but----
    Senator Hagerty. Well, with the time line expansion, I know 
that means an expansion of cost too, so I appreciate your 
continued diligence on this, to try to manage it.

       PRODUCTION OF TRANSFORMERS AND ELECTRICAL STEEL COMPONENTS

    I want to turn back to you, Deputy Secretary, for just a 
moment, on an issue that Secretary Granholm raised with the 
Senate Energy Committee last month. She said that an additional 
$1- to $2 billion investment injection is needed to boost 
domestic manufacturing rhythm structure, yet the President's 
budget only requests $75 million for the Office of 
Manufacturing and Energy Supply Chains, that can be used to 
accelerate the production of domestic energy technologies, 
including, I am going to quote, ``Critical power grid 
infrastructure, like transformers.''
    This is an area I have got a deep concern in. We have got a 
real choke point in transformer capacity in the United States. 
So, my question is, why does the budget only request $75 
million, if the Secretary is indicating we need a lot more 
funding for this?
    Mr. Turk. Well, thank you, Senator for raising this issue. 
This is a real challenge right now on transformers, and I have 
had several conversations, I am sure you have with utility 
executives----
    Senator Hagerty. Yes.
    Mr. Turk [continuing]. And others in this business about 
just how critical the challenge is right now. We have got 
something called our Electricity Sector Coordinating Council, 
made up of CEOs across the industry. We created a Tiger Team to 
explore this issue, and try to make sure that we have got good 
analysis, both on the challenge side, and then what we need to 
do, going forward.
    I know there is some funding, as you have said, in the 
fiscal year 2024 budget request, I will say I don't think that 
is enough. I think we need more. And there have been very good 
conversations with Members of Congress, including for last 
year's Supplemental, last year's Omnibus that, unfortunately, 
did not come to fruition for a significant amount of additional 
funding.
    So happy to have further conversations and appreciate 
your----
    Senator Hagerty. I would appreciate if you would follow up 
with my staff on this. It is a national security issue.
    Mr. Turk. Absolutely.
    Senator Hagerty. And it is not just the transformers, it is 
the electrical steel components that go into it as well. But 
these are real choke points that--as you know.
    Mr. Turk. I completely agree.
    Senator Hagerty. A critical national security issue. Thank 
you for updating us on that when you get your team together 
with ours. Thank you.
    Mr. Turk. Right.
    Senator Murray. Thank you. That will end our hearing today. 
And I want to thank the witnesses and my colleagues for 
participating in today's hearing. I look forward to working 
together on this year's appropriations bills, to make sure that 
we provide the Department of Energy and National Security 
Administration the resources that you need.
    I will keep the hearing record open for 1 week. Committee 
members who would like to submit written questions for the 
record should do so by 5 p.m., Wednesday, May 17.
    We appreciate both of you for being here, and for the 
Agencies responding to those questions in a reasonable amount 
of time.

                          SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS

    With that, we stand adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 11:20 a.m., Wednesday, May 3, the 
subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene subject to the call of 
the Chair.]