[House Report 106-694]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
106th Congress Rept. 106-694
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session Part 1
======================================================================
ENSURING THAT THE SECRETARY OF ENERGY MAY CONTINUE TO EXERCISE CERTAIN
AUTHORITIES UNDER THE PRICE-ANDERSON ACT THROUGH THE ASSISTANT
SECRETARY OF ENERGY FOR ENVIRONMENT, SAFETY, AND HEALTH
_______
June 23, 2000.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Bliley, from the Committee on Commerce, submitted the following
R E P O R T
together with
DISSENTING VIEWS
[To accompany H.R. 4446]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Commerce, to whom was referred the bill
(H.R. 4446) to ensure that the Secretary of Energy may continue
to exercise certain authorities under the Price-Anderson Act
through the Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environment,
Safety, and Health, having considered the same, report
favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill
do pass.
CONTENTS
Page
Purpose and Summary.............................................. 2
Background and Need for Legislation.............................. 2
Hearings......................................................... 3
Committee Consideration.......................................... 4
Committee Votes.................................................. 4
Committee Oversight Findings..................................... 4
Committee on Government Reform Oversight Findings................ 4
New Budget Authority, Entitlement Authority, and Tax Expenditures 4
Committee Cost Estimate.......................................... 4
Congressional Budget Office Estimate............................. 4
Federal Mandates Statement....................................... 5
Advisory Committee Statement..................................... 5
Constitutional Authority Statement............................... 5
Applicability to Legislative Branch.............................. 6
Exchange of Committee Correspondence............................. 6
Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation................... 7
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............ 7
Dissenting Views................................................. 8
Purpose and Summary
The purpose of H.R. 4446 is to ensure that the Secretary of
Energy, acting through the Assistant Secretary of Energy for
Environment, Safety, and Health, can continue to enforce the
civil penalties section of the Price-Anderson Amendments Act,
contained in section 234A of the Atomic Energy Act (P.L. 83-
703, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 2011 et seq.), as amended, for the entire
Department of Energy, including the National Nuclear Security
Administration.
Background and Need for Legislation
The Price-Anderson Act (P.L. 85-256; 42 U.S.C. Sec. 2011 et
seq.) was enacted in 1957 as an amendment to the Atomic Energy
Act of 1954 (P.L. 83-703, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1801 et seq.). The
original Price-Anderson Act provided a limited indemnification
of DOE contractors engaged in activities that involve the risk
of a nuclear accident. The Price-Anderson Amendments Act of
1988 (P.L. 100-408; 42 U.S.C. Sec. 2011 et seq.) the amount of
indemnification, made the inclusion of indemnification
provisions mandatory on all DOE contracts, and created a system
of civil penalties (i.e., fines) for DOE contractors that
violate any DOE rule, regulation, or order relating to nuclear
safety. The provisions relating to civil penalties are
contained in section 234A of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended.
These civil penalties provide a valuable and important
enforcement tool for the DOE to ensure that its contractors pay
proper attention to nuclear safety. Implicit in the ability to
impose civil penalties on contractors are related enforcement
actions, including accident investigations, subpoenas for
information, notices of violation, and orders to abate or
correct hazardous practices. Section 234A of the Atomic Energy
Act is enforced primarily by the Assistant Secretary of Energy
for Environment, Safety, and Health.
Title 32 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2000 (P.L. 106-65, 50 U.S.C. Sec. 2401 et seq.)
created the semi-autonomous National Nuclear Security
Administration (NNSA). Section 3213 of that Act provides that
employees and contractors of the NNSA shall not be subject to
the authority, director, or control of any officer, employee,
or agent of the Department of Energy other than the Secretary
of Energy, the Administrator of the NNSA, or the
Administrator's designee. Under this provision of title 32, the
authority of the Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety,
and Health is limited such that this office is no longer able
to enforce effectively the provisions of section 234A of the
Atomic Energy Act with respect to the facilities and operations
of the NNSA. This office can only make recommendations to the
NNSA Administrator or to the Secretary of Energy, but can no
longer take direct enforcement actions such as issuing notices
of violation, subpoenas for information, or assessment of civil
penalties against the elements of the NNSA.
Current law creates a clear conflict of interest for the
NNSA Administrator, who is now charged with the potentially
conflicting missions of stockpile stewardship and nuclear
weapons development, as well as enforcing nuclear safety rules,
regulations, and orders. To allow the NNSA Administrator to
enforce the Price-Anderson civil penalties could create
conflicting enforcement policies, different investigative
procedures, and inconsistent enforcement across the DOE
complex. Such inconsistencies would be especially problematic
at the DOE sites that perform both NNSA and non-NNSA missions,
such as the Oak Ridge National Laboratory and the Savannah
River Site. The NNSA Act would apparently require dual Price-
Anderson enforcement regimes at those sites, with duplicative
staffs and regulatoryinfrastructures. Further, restrictions on
the authority of the Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environment,
Safety, and Health over the NNSA facilities could significantly
restrict the ability of the Assistant Secretary to gather evidence of
violations at those sites and provide such information to the Secretary
of Energy. NNSA employees and contractors could refuse to cooperate
with accident investigations, denying access to essential documents or
facilities. There could be less independent and objective information
for the Secretary on nuclear safety compliance by the NNSA sites. The
Committee intends that this legislation ensure that a single office at
the Department of Energy, such as the Assistant Secretary of Energy for
Environment, Safety, and Health, is responsible for and can be held
accountable for the enforcement of Section 234A of the Atomic Energy
Act for the entire DOE complex, including the NNSA. The Committee does
not support fragmenting this responsibility between the NNSA and non-
NNSA portions of the Department of Energy.
At the joint hearing held by the Subcommittees on Energy
and Power and Oversight and Investigations on March 14, 2000,
the Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environment, Safety, and
Health testified to this conflict between the responsibilities
of his office to enforce section 234A of the Atomic Energy Act
and the restrictions imposed by section 3213 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 on his authority
over the NNSA. At the March 22, 2000, legislative hearing of
the Subcommittee for Energy and Power, the witness for the
Alliance for Nuclear Accountability testified to the need for
legislation to correct this problem.
Hearings
The Subcommittee on Energy and Power held a legislative
hearing on H.R. 3383 on March 22, 2000. The Subcommittee
received testimony from: Ms. Mary Anne Sullivan, General
Counsel, Department of Energy; the Honorable Richard A.
Meserve, Chairman, Nuclear Regulatory Commission; the Honorable
Jerrold R. Mande, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Labor,
Occupational Safety and Health Administration; the Honorable
John T. Conway, Chairman, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety
Board; Ms. Gary Jones, Associate Director for Energy,
Resources, and Science Issues, Government Accounting Office;
Dr. Charles Shank, Director, Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory; Mr. Robert Van Ness, Assistant Vice President for
Laboratory Administration, University of California; Ms.
Maureen Eldredge, Program Director, Alliance for Nuclear
Accountability; Dr. David Adelman, Project Attorney, Natural
Resources Defense Council; and Mr. Richard Miller, Policy
Analyst, PACE International Union.
Committee Consideration
On April 12, 2000, the Subcommittee on Energy and Power met
in open markup session and approved a Committee Print of this
legislation for Full Committee consideration, as amended, by a
voice vote. The Committee Print was subsequently introduced by
the Subcommittee Chairman and Ranking Minority Member as H.R.
4446. On May 17, 2000, the Committee on Commerce met in open
markup session and ordered H.R. 4446 reported to the House,
without amendment, by a voice vote, a quorum being present.
Committee Votes
Clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives requires the Committee to list the record votes
on the motion to report legislation and amendments thereto.
There were no record votes taken in connection with ordering
H.R. 4446 reported. A motion by Mr. Bliley to order H.R. 4446
reported to the House, without amendment, was agreed to by a
voice vote.
Committee Oversight Findings
Pursuant to clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the Committee held both legislative
and oversight hearings and made findings that are reflected in
this report.
Committee on Government Reform Oversight Findings
Pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, no oversight findings have been
submitted to the Committee by the Committee on Government
Reform.
New Budget Authority, Entitlement Authority, and Tax Expenditures
In compliance with clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules
of the House of Representatives, the Committee finds that H.R.
4446, a bill to ensure that the Secretary of Energy may
continue to exercise certain authorities under the Price-
Anderson Act through the Assistant Secretary of Energy for
Environment, Safety, and Health, would result in no new or
increased budget authority, entitlement authority, or tax
expenditures or revenues.
Committee Cost Estimate
The Committee adopts as its own the cost estimate prepared
by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to
section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
Congressional Budget Office Estimate
Pursuant to clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the following is the cost estimate
provided by the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section
402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974:
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, May 23, 2000.
Hon. Tom Bliley,
Chairman, Committee on Commerce,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 4446, a bill to
ensure that the Secretary of Energy may continue to exercise
certain authorities under the Price-Anderson Act through the
Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environment, Safety, and
Health.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Lisa Cash
Driskill.
Sincerely,
Barry B. Anderson
(For Dan L. Crippen, Director).
Enclosure.
H.R. 4446--A bill to ensure that the Secretary of Energy may continue
to exercise certain authorities under the Price-Anderson Act
through the Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environment,
Safety, and Health
H.R. 4446 would clarify that the Secretary of Energy has
the authority to enforce penalties for nuclear safety
violations under the Price-Anderson Act through the Assistant
Secretary for Environment, Safety, and Health. (The Price-
Anderson Act provides a framework for resolving liability
issues in the event of an accident involving nuclear
materials.) Because the bill would not change current practice,
CBO estimates that H.R. 4446 would have no effect on the
federal budget. The bill contains no intergovernmental or
private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal
governments.
The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Lisa Cash
Driskill. This estimate was approved by Peter H. Fontaine,
Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.
Federal Mandates Statement
The Committee adopts as its own the estimate of Federal
mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget
Office pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act.
Advisory Committee Statement
No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b)
of the Federal Advisory Committee Act were created by this
legislation.
Constitutional Authority Statement
Pursuant to clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the Committee finds that the
Constitutional authority for this legislation is provided in
Article I, section 8, clause 3, which grants Congress the power
to regulate commerce with foreign nations, among the several
States, and with the Indian tribes.
Applicability to Legislative Branch
The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to
the terms and conditions of employment or access to public
services or accommodations within the meaning of section
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act.
Exchange of Committee Correspondence
House of Representatives,
Committee on Science,
Washington, DC, June 7, 2000.
Hon. Thomas J. Bliley,
Chairman, Committee on Commerce, Rayburn House Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Dear Tom: On May 15, 1999, Representative Barton, on behalf
of himself and Mr. Boucher, introduced H.R. 4446--a bill to
ensure that the Secretary of Energy may continue to exercise
certain authorities under the Price-Anderson Act through the
Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environment, Safety, and
Health. The Commerce Committee held a mark-up session on May 17
and ordered the bill reported. The bill contains provisions
that fall within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Science.
In particular, H.R. 4446 impacts five civilian energy
laboratories falling within the Committee on Science's
jurisdiction pursuant to Rule X, clause l(n)(l) of the Rules of
the House.
In deference to your desire to bring this legislation
before the House in an expeditious manner, I will not exercise
this Committee's right to a sequential referral. Despite
waiving its consideration of H.R. 4446, the Science Committee
does not waive its jurisdiction over H.R. 4446. Additionally,
the Science Committee expressly reserves its authority to seek
conferees on any provisions that are within its jurisdiction
during any House-Senate conference that may be convened on this
legislation. I ask for your commitment to support any request
by the Science Committee for conferees on H.R. 4446 as well as
any similar or related legislation.
I request that you include this letter as part of the
Record during consideration of the legislation on the House
floor.
Thank you for your consideration and attention regarding
these matters.
Sincerely,
F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr.,
Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Commerce,
Washington, DC, June 7, 2000.
Hon. F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr.,
Chairman, Committee on Science, House of Representatives, Rayburn House
Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Jim: Thank you for your letter regarding your
committee's jurisdictional interest in H.R. 4446, a bill to
ensure that the Secretary of Energy may continue to exercise
certain authorities under the Price-Anderson Act through the
Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environment, Safety and
Health.
I acknowledge your committee's jurisdiction over portions
of this legislation and appreciate your cooperation in moving
the bill to the House floor expeditiously. I agree that your
decision to forego further action on the bill will not
prejudice the Science Committee with respect to its
jurisdictional prerogatives on this or similar legislation. I
will also include a copy of your letter and this response in
the Committee's report on the bill and the Congressional Record
when the legislation is considered by the House.
Thank you again for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
Tom Bliley,
Chairman.
Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation
Section 1. Exercise of certain Price-Anderson Act authorities through
the Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environment, Safety, and
Health
Subsection (a) amends section 234A of the Atomic Energy Act
of 1954 by adding a new subsection at the end of section 234A
which provides that the Secretary of Energy may,
notwithstanding any other provision of law, exercise any
authority under section 234A through the Assistant Secretary of
Energy for Environment, Safety, and Health. The
``notwithstanding any other provision of law'' clause prevents
section 3213 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2000 from barring the enforcement of section 234A
by the Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environment, Safety,
and Health with respect to the NNSA. This provision will ensure
that section 234A is enforced in a consistent and efficient
manner by a single office in the Department of Energy that is
directly accountable to the Secretary of Energy.
Subsection (b) establishes the effective date of this
amendment as March 1, 2000, the same date that the NNSA became
effective.
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported
In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (new matter is
printed in italic and existing law in which no change is
proposed is shown in roman):
SECTION 234A OF THE ATOMIC ENERGY ACT OF 1954
Sec. 234A. Civil Monetary Penalties for Violations of
Department of Energy Safety Regulations.--a. * * *
e. The Secretary may, notwithstanding any other provision
of law, exercise any authority under this section through the
Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environment, Safety, and
Health.
DISSENTING VIEWS
While H.R. 4446 is intended to ensure that nuclear safety
is a fully-integrated part of operations at the National
Weapons Laboratories, it will have the opposite effect. It will
confuse management at the labs and at the National Nuclear
Security Administration (NNSA).
H.R. 4446 places an external bureaucracy--the Office of the
Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environment, Safety, and
Health--in charge of an integral part of NNSA activities. Under
the National Nuclear Security Administration Act (P.L. 106-65)
the Administrator of the NNSA is given responsibility for
ensuring ``that the Administration complies with all applicable
environmental, safety, and health statutes.'' The statute
further instructs the Administrator to develop procedures to
fully implement that responsibility. Yet, before General John
Gordon--the President's nominee to become the Administrator of
the NNSA--even begins his job, H.R. 4446 would undercut his
responsibility and authority to ensure that environmental,
safety and health statutes are fully implemented.
H.R. 4446 separates authority from responsibility in the
area of nuclear safety. It would also harm the national
security mission of the NNSA by confusing the clear lines of
responsibility in what was intended by Congress to be an
independent agency within DOE. It recreates the problems of
confused lines of authority that P.L. 106-65 has just fixed.
Over the last decade, the need for clear lines of authority and
for joining responsibility with authority has been made clear
through numerous reports and studies. A 1997 study by the
Institute for Defense Analyses concluded that the Department of
Energy (DOE) suffered from confusing and redundant lines of
authority. The 1999 report of the Commission on Sustaining
United States Nuclear Weapons Expertise, chaired by retired
Admiral Henry Chiles, noted DOE's weak management. And most
recently, the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board
issued a report, entitled ``Science at its Best, Security at
its Worst,'' which advised that in the interests of security
and sound management a semi-autonomous agency responsible for
the weapons complex should limit bureaucratic contact with DOE.
This well-intentioned, but ill-designed measure must be
corrected during further consideration to ensure that our
common goals of nuclear safety and national security are
advanced through the NNSA.
Chris Cox.
Heather Wilson.