[Senate Report 115-258]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 437
115th Congress } { Report
SENATE
2d Session } { 115-258
======================================================================
ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2019
_______
May 24, 2018.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Alexander, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted the
following
REPORT
[To accompany S. 2975]
The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 2975)
making appropriations for energy and water development and
related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2019,
and for other purposes, reports favorably thereon and
recommends that the bill do pass.
New obligational authority
Total of bill as reported to the Senate................. $43,766,000,000
Amount of 2018 appropriations........................... 60,582,716,000
Amount of 2019 budget estimate.......................... 31,610,121,000
Bill as recommended to Senate compared to--
2018 appropriations................................. -16,816,716,000
2019 budget estimate................................ +12,155,879,000
CONTENTS
----------
Page
Purpose.......................................................... 4
Summary of Estimates and Recommendations......................... 4
Introduction..................................................... 4
Title I:
Department of Defense--Civil: Department of the Army:
Corps of Engineers--Civil:
Investigations....................................... 11
Construction......................................... 17
Mississippi River and Tributaries.................... 25
Operation and Maintenance............................ 27
Regulatory Program................................... 47
Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program...... 47
Flood Control and Coastal Emergencies................ 48
Expenses............................................. 48
Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil
Works)............................................. 48
General Provisions--Corps of Engineers--Civil............ 49
Title II:
Department of the Interior:
Central Utah Project Completion Account.................. 49
Bureau of Reclamation:
Water and Related Resources.......................... 51
Central Valley Project Restoration Fund.............. 59
California Bay-Delta Restoration..................... 60
Policy and Administration............................ 60
General Provisions--Department of the Interior........... 61
Title III:
Department of Energy:
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy................... 65
Cybersecurity, Energy Security, and Emergency Response... 78
Nuclear Energy........................................... 81
Fossil Energy Research and Development................... 84
Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves................... 91
Strategic Petroleum Reserve.............................. 91
Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve....................... 91
Energy Information Administration........................ 91
Non-Defense Environmental Cleanup........................ 91
Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning
Fund................................................... 92
Science.................................................. 92
Advanced Research Projects Agency--Energy................ 98
Innovative Technology Loan Guarantee Program............. 99
Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Loan Program.. 99
Tribal Energy Loan Guarantee Program..................... 100
Office of Indian Energy Policy and Programs.............. 100
Departmental Administration.............................. 100
Office of the Inspector General.......................... 101
Weapons Activities....................................... 102
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation......................... 105
Naval Reactors........................................... 107
Federal Salaries and Expenses............................ 108
Defense Environmental Cleanup............................ 108
Other Defense Activities................................. 111
Power Marketing Administrations:
Operation and Maintenance, Southwestern Power
Administration..................................... 112
Construction, Rehabilitation, Operations and
Maintenance, Western Area Power Administration..... 113
Falcon and Amistad Operating and Maintenance Fund.... 113
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission..................... 113
General Provisions--Department of Energy................. 138
Title IV:
Independent Agencies:
Appalachian Regional Commission.......................... 138
Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board.................. 139
Delta Regional Authority................................. 139
Denali Commission........................................ 140
Northern Border Regional Commission...................... 140
Nuclear Regulatory Commission............................ 140
Office of Inspector General.......................... 141
Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board..................... 142
General Provisions........................................... 143
Title V: General Provisions...................................... 144
Compliance With Paragraph 7, Rule XVI, of the Standing Rules of
the
Senate......................................................... 144
Compliance With Paragraph 7(c), Rule XXVI, of the Standing Rules
of the
Senate......................................................... 146
Compliance With Paragraph 12, Rule XXVI, of the Standing Rules of
the
Senate......................................................... 147
Budgetary Impact of Bill......................................... 147
Comparative Statement of Budget Authority........................ 148
PURPOSE
The purpose of this bill is to provide appropriations for
fiscal year 2019, beginning October 1, 2018 and ending
September 30, 2019, for energy and water development, and for
other related purposes. It supplies funds for water resources
development programs and related activities of the Corps of
Engineers' civil works program in title I; for the Department
of the Interior's Bureau of Reclamation and Central Utah
Project in title II; for the Department of Energy's energy
research and development activities, including environmental
restoration and waste management, and atomic energy defense
activities of the National Nuclear Security Administration in
title III; and for independent agencies and commissions,
including the Appalachian Regional Commission, Delta Regional
Authority, Denali Commission, Northern Border Regional
Commission, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in title IV.
SUMMARY OF ESTIMATES AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The fiscal year 2019 budget estimates for the bill total
$31,610,121,000 in new budget (obligational) authority. The
recommendation of the Committee totals $43,766,000,000. This is
$12,155,879,000 above the budget estimates and $16,816,716,000
below the enacted appropriation for the current fiscal year.
The Committee notes the enacted appropriation for the
current fiscal year includes $17,419,716,000 in supplemental
appropriation for disaster relief requirements.
Subcommittee Hearings
To develop this recommendation, the Committee held three
budget hearings in April 2018 in connection with the fiscal
year 2019 budget requests for the Corps of Engineers, Bureau of
Reclamation, Department of Energy and National Nuclear Security
Administration, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The
hearings provided officials from the agencies with an
opportunity to present the administration's most pressing
priorities to the Committee. The Committee also invited and
received recommendations from Senators and outside witnesses.
INTRODUCTION
The Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development's 302(b)
allocation totals $43,766,000,000 of net budget authority for
fiscal year 2019, including adjustments, which represents an
increase of $566,000,000 above fiscal year 2018 enacted levels.
Within the amount recommended, $21,892,000,000 is classified as
defense (050) spending and $21,874,000,000 is classified as
non-defense (non-050) spending.
The Committee's recommendation includes funding for the
highest priority activities across the agencies funded in the
bill. The recommendation includes funds for critical water
infrastructure, including our Nation's inland waterways, ports,
and harbors; agricultural water supply and drought relief in
the West; groundbreaking scientific research and development,
including world-class supercomputing; support for the Nation's
nuclear weapons, non-proliferation, and nuclear Navy programs;
and critical economic development.
TITLE I
CORPS OF ENGINEERS--CIVIL
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
Corps of Engineers--Civil
OVERVIEW OF RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $6,927,000,000 for the Corps of
Engineers [Corps], an increase of $2,142,417,000 above the
budget request.
The Committee's recommendation sets priorities by
supporting our Nation's water infrastructure. Specifically, the
Committee recommendation provides adequate appropriations to
utilize all of the estimated fiscal year 2019 revenues for the
fifth consecutive year, from the Inland Waterways Trust Fund
and for the fifth consecutive year meets the target prescribed
in the Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014
[WRRDA], as amended, for Corps projects eligible for Harbor
Maintenance Trust Funds.
INTRODUCTION
The Corps' civil works mission is to provide quality,
responsive engineering services to the Nation in peace and war.
Approximately 23,000 civilians and about 290 military officers
are responsible for executing the civil works mission. This
bill only funds the civil works functions of the Corps.
The Corps maintains our inland waterways, keeps our ports
open, manages a portion of our drinking water supply, provides
emission free electricity from dams, looks after many of our
recreational waters, helps manage the river levels during
flooding, provides environmental stewardship, and emergency
response to natural disasters. The annual net economic benefit
generated by the Corps' civil works mission is estimated to be
$109,830,000,000, which equates to a return of about $16.60 for
every $1 expended.
The Corps' responsibilities include:
--navigation systems, including 13,000 miles of deep draft
channels, 12,000 miles of inland waterways, 239 lock
chambers, and 1,067 harbors which handle over 2.3
billion tons of cargo annually;
--flood risk management infrastructure, including 709 dams,
14,700 miles of levees, and multiple hurricane and
storm damage risk reduction projects along the coast;
--municipal and industrial water supply storage at 136
projects spread across 25 States;
--environmental stewardship, infrastructure, and ecosystem
restoration;
--recreation for approximately 370 million recreation visits
per year to Corps projects;
--regulation of waters under Federal statutes; and
--maintaining hydropower capacity of nearly 24,000 megawatts
at 75 projects.
ONGOING CORPS REFORM EFFORTS
The Committee commends the Corps for its several ongoing
internal initiatives to change itself and improve how it
delivers Civil Works water infrastructure and related programs.
Recent efforts to streamline the processing of section 408
actions for alterations or use of Corps Civil Works projects
are vitally important. Important changes include maximum
delegation of decision-making to the field, narrowed scope for
evaluating impacts and elimination of certain procedural
requirements. For example, the requirement for a section 408
action for routine Operation and Maintenance was eliminated;
the requirement for developing a 60-percent design before
submitting an application for a 408 action has been eliminated;
and a more limited application of navigational servitude to 408
actions which eliminated the need for numerous permits in
coastal areas. The Director of Civil Works has also issued
formal direction to, among other things, operationalize risk-
informed decisionmaking to change behavior by shifting from a
more regimented- and compliance-based paradigm to a more agile
approach that allows for more project- and situation-specific
adaptation based on risk after documenting any associated
risks. The Corps is also pursuing 12 specific actions to
improve permitting efficiencies, including aggressive
implementation of Executive Order 13807 (One Federal Decision);
clarification of policy to consider removal of obsolete
structures as creditable mitigation bank actions; alignment of
section 404 or section 10 permits with section 408 actions; and
establishment of a Lead District approach for projects that
cross multiple jurisdictions such as pipeline projects. The
Committee strongly encourages the continuation of these and
other aggressive actions to improve program and project
delivery.
BUDGET STRUCTURE CHANGES
The fiscal year 2019 budget request for the Corps proposed
numerous structural changes, including creation of two new
accounts--Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund and Inland Waterways
Trust Fund--and the shifting of various studies and projects
between accounts. The Committee rejects all such proposed
changes and instead recommends funding for the requested
studies and projects in the accounts in which funding has
traditionally been provided. Unless expressly noted, the
Committee recommends studies and projects remain at the funding
levels included in the budget request, but in different
accounts than in the budget request. In particular:
--Projects requested in the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund
account are shown in the Construction, Mississippi
River and Tributaries, or Operation and Maintenance
accounts, as appropriate;
--Projects requested in the Inland Waterways Trust Fund
account are shown in the Construction account;
--Dredged material management plans requested in the
Investigations account are shown in the Operation and
Maintenance account;
--Dam safety modification studies requested in the
Investigations account are shown in the Dam Safety and
Seepage/Stability Correction Program in the
Construction account;
--Dam Safety and Seepage/Stability Correction Program
management costs requested in the Expenses account are
shown in the Construction account; and
--Sand mitigation projects requested in the Harbor
Maintenance Trust Fund account are shown in the
Construction account.
Additionally, the recommendation includes the Poplar
Island, Maryland beneficial use of dredged material project
within the Environmental Restoration business line as in
previous years.
If the Corps proposes budget structure changes in future
fiscal years, the proposal shall be accompanied by a display of
the funding request in the traditional budget structure.
DEEP DRAFT NAVIGATION
The budget request this year fails to adequately fund our
nation's harbors. The Committee is disappointed the fiscal year
2019 budget request only proposes to spend $965 million for
Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund [HMTF]-related activities, which
is $477 million below the spending target of $1,442,000,000
established by WRRDA, as amended. For fiscal year 2019, the
Committee recommends an estimated $1,528,401,000 for HMTF-
related activities, which exceeds the WRRDA spending target.
INLAND WATERWAYS SYSTEM
The Committee notes that the budget request only proposed
to spend $5,250,000 of the estimated $105,000,000 deposits for
fiscal year 2019 into the Inland Waterways Trust Fund [IWTF].
This would leave an estimated $99,750,000 of fiscal year 2019
deposits unspent. By only proposing to fund one of the four
ongoing construction projects that were funded last year, the
budget request disregards the existing Capital Investment
Strategy and the advice and recommendations of industry experts
and professional engineers.
The Committee rejects the budget request's proposal to
reform inland waterways financing by increasing the amount paid
by commercial navigation users of inland waterways,
particularly when the administration fails to make full use of
the fees already collected for this purpose.
ADDITIONAL FUNDING
The Committee recommends funding above the budget request
for Investigations, Construction, Operation and Maintenance,
and Mississippi River and Tributaries. This funding is for
additional work (including new starts) that either was not
included in the budget request or was inadequately budgeted. A
study or project may not be excluded from evaluation for
additional funding for being inconsistent with administration
policy.
The administration is reminded these funds are in addition
to its budget request, and administration budget metrics shall
not be a reason to disqualify a study or project from being
funded. The focus of the allocation process shall favor the
obligation, rather than the expenditure, of funds for work in
fiscal year 2019.
Funding associated with each category may be allocated to
any eligible study or project, as appropriate, within that
category; funding associated with each subcategory may be
allocated only to eligible studies or projects, as appropriate,
within that subcategory.
Work Plan.--Not later than 60 days after the date of
enactment of this act, the Corps shall provide to the
Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress a work
plan consistent with the following general guidance, as well as
the specific direction the Committee provides within each
account: (1) a detailed description of the rating system(s)
developed and used to evaluate studies and projects; (2)
delineation of how these funds are to be allocated; (3) a
summary of the work to be accomplished with each allocation,
including phase of work and the study or project's remaining
cost to complete (excluding Operation and Maintenance); and (4)
a list of all studies and projects that were considered
eligible for funding but did not receive funding, including an
explanation of whether the study or project could have used
funds in fiscal year 2019 and the specific reasons each study
or project was considered as being less competitive for an
allocation of funds.
The work plan shall include a single group of new starts
for Investigations and Construction. None of the funds may be
used for any item for which the Committee has specifically
denied funding.
The Committee urges the Corps within its Flood and Coastal
Storm Damage Reduction mission to strive for a balance between
inland and coastal projects.
New Starts.--The recommendation includes seven new study
starts and six new construction starts to be distributed across
the authorized mission areas of the Corps. Of the new starts in
Investigations, two shall be for navigation studies, two shall
be for flood and storm damage reduction studies, one shall be
for an environmental restoration study, and two shall be for
navigation, flood and storm damage reduction, environmental
restoration, or multi-purpose studies. Of the new study starts
for navigation, one shall be for a Small, Remote, or
Subsistence Harbor. Of the new study starts for flood and storm
damage reduction, one shall be for a multi-purpose watershed
study to assess coastal resiliency. Of the new construction
starts, one shall be for a navigation project, one shall be for
a flood and storm damage reduction project, one shall be for an
additional navigation or flood and storm damage reduction
project, two shall be for environmental restoration projects,
and one shall be for a navigation, flood and storm damage
reduction, environmental restoration, or multi-purpose project.
As all new starts are to be chosen by the Corps, all shall
be considered of equal importance, and the expectation is that
future budget submissions will include appropriate funding for
all new starts selected.
A study is not completed until preconstruction engineering
and design [PED] is completed. No new start or new investment
decision shall be required when moving from feasibility to PED.
When evaluating proposals for new feasibility studies, the
Corps is encouraged to give priority to those studies with
executed Feasibility Cost Sharing Agreements and a sponsor with
the ability to provide any necessary cost share for the study
phase. The Corps is encouraged to support opportunities to
restore critical habitat and enhance the Nation's economic
development, job growth, and international competitiveness.
A new construction start shall not be required for work
undertaken to correct a design deficiency on an existing
Federal project; it shall be considered ongoing work.
ASIAN CARP
The Secretary of the Army, acting through the Chief of
Engineers, shall make every effort to submit to Congress the
Report of the Chief of Engineers for the Brandon Road
feasibility study according to the original published schedule
of February 2019. The Corps is encouraged to allocate
sufficient funding provided in this act to ensure the Report of
the Chief of Engineers for the Brandon Road feasibility study
is published in this timeframe. The Corps is also directed to
provide quarterly updates to the Committees on Appropriations
of both Houses of Congress on the progress and status of
efforts to prevent the further spread of Asian carp as well as
the location and density of carp populations, including the use
of emergency procedures.
The Corps shall continue to collaborate with the U.S. Coast
Guard, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the State of
Illinois, and members of the Asian Carp Regional Coordinating
Committee to identify and evaluate whether navigation protocols
would be beneficial or effective in reducing the risk of
vessels inadvertently carrying aquatic invasive species,
including Asian carp, through the Brandon Road Lock and Dam in
Joliet, Illinois. Any findings of such an evaluation shall be
included in the quarterly briefings to the Committees. The
Corps is further directed to implement navigation protocols
shown to be effective at reducing the risk of entrainment
without jeopardizing the safety of vessels and crews within 90
days of enactment of this act. The Corps and other Federal and
State agencies are conducting ongoing research on potential
solutions.
UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS
The Committee is concerned by a U.S. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement bulletin published in 2017 that confidently
assesses that a Chinese unmanned aerial systems (UAS)
manufacturer was using its products to provide critical
infrastructure data to the Chinese Government. The Corps shall
immediately determine whether UAS that were the subject of the
August 2017 bulletin are currently in use and report back to
the Committee within 180 days. Due to the critical
infrastructure funded in this bill that has an extensive
national security component, any vulnerability to foreign
surveillance is a serious concern to this Committee and the
Corps shall prioritize purchases of American-made UAS in the
future.
REPROGRAMMING
The Committee is retaining the reprogramming legislation
provided in the Energy and Water Development and Related
Agencies Appropriations Act, 2018.
CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING
The Committee did not accept or include congressionally
directed spending, as defined in section 5(a) of rule XLIV of
the Standing Rules of the Senate. However, the Committee has
recommended additional programmatic funds for Investigations,
Construction, Operations and Maintenance, and Mississippi River
and Tributaries to address deficiencies in the budget request.
In some cases, these additional funds have been included within
defined categories, as in prior years, and are described in
more detail in their respective sections below.
REPORTING REQUIREMENT
The Corps shall provide a monthly report to the Committees
on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress, which includes
the total budget authority and unobligated balances by year for
each program, project, or activity, including any prior year
appropriations.
The Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works) shall
provide a monthly report to the Committees on Appropriations of
both Houses of Congress, which includes the total budget
authority and unobligated balances by year for each activity
funded in the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army
(Civil Works) account, including any prior year appropriations.
INVESTIGATIONS
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $123,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 82,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 123,000,000
The Committee recommends $123,000,000 for Investigations,
an increase of $41,000,000 from the budget request. The
Committee's recommendation allows the Corps to begin seven new
feasibility study starts.
INTRODUCTION
Funding in this account is used to develop feasibility and
PED studies to address the Nation's water infrastructure needs,
in support of project authorization. The Committee recognizes
that the budget request does not provide adequate funding for
Investigations, and specifically PED funding, to allow many of
America's most important waterways to move efficiently from
planning to construction. The Committee therefore recommends
additional funding to be used to seamlessly continue
feasibility studies into the PED study phase.
NEW STARTS
The Corps is directed to designate new starts in accordance
with the direction in the front matter under the heading
``Additional Funding''.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The table below displays the budget request and the
Committee's recommendation for Investigations.
CORPS OF ENGINEERS--INVESTIGATIONS
[In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget Committee
Project title estimate recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ALABAMA
BLACK WARRIOR AND TOMBIGBEE RIVERS, AL.. 100 ..............
GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, AL.......... 250 ..............
CALIFORNIA
EAST SAN PEDRO BAY ECOSYSTEM 298 298
RESTORATION, CA........................
ILLINOIS
INTERBASIN CONTROL OF GREAT LAKES-
MISSISSIPPI RIVER......................
AQUATIC NUISANCE SPECIES, IL, IN, OH 200 200
& WI (BRANDON ROAD)................
INDIANA
MISSISSINEWA LAKE, IN................... 1,500 ..............
IOWA
GRAND RIVER BASIN, IA & MO.............. 100 100
NEW MEXICO
RIO GRANDE, SANDIA PUEBLO TO ISLETA 825 825
PUEBLO, NM.............................
NEW YORK
BUFFALO HARBOR, NY...................... 300 ..............
HUDSON RIVER HABITAT RESTORATION, NY.... 355 355
OHIO
CLEVELAND HARBOR, OH.................... 350 ..............
DELAWARE LAKE, OH....................... 750 ..............
OREGON
COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2024 10,265 ..............
IMPLEMENTATION.........................
COUGAR LAKE, OR......................... 1,500 ..............
HILLS CREEK, OR......................... 1,500 ..............
LOOKOUT POINT LAKE, OR.................. 1,500 ..............
TEXAS
COASTAL TEXAS PROTECTION AND RESTORATION 2,675 2,675
STUDY, TX..............................
CORPUS CHRISTI SHIP CHANNEL, TX......... 250 ..............
GIWW- BRAZOS RIVER FLOODGATES & COLORADO 50 50
RIVER LOCK, TX.........................
GRAPEVINE LAKE, TX...................... 1,500 ..............
HOUSTON SHIP CHANNEL, TX................ 603 603
MATAGORDA SHIP CHANNEL, TX.............. 200 200
PROCTOR LAKE, TX........................ 1,500 ..............
VIRGINIA
ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BRIDGE 1,600 1,600
REPLACEMENT AT NORTH LANDING, VA.......
NORFOLK HARBOR, VA...................... 300 ..............
-------------------------------
SUBTOTAL, ITEMS UNDER STATES...... 28,471 6,906
REMAINING ITEMS
ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR ONGOING WORK
FLOOD AND STORM DAMAGE REDUCTION.... .............. 7,500
FLOOD CONTROL................... .............. 5,000
SHORE PROTECTION................ .............. 2,000
NAVIGATION.......................... .............. 9,823
COASTAL AND DEEP-DRAFT.......... .............. 9,000
INLAND.......................... .............. 6,000
OTHER AUTHORIZED PROJECT PURPOSES... .............. 5,000
ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION OR .............. 5,500
COMPLIANCE.....................
COORDINATION STUDIES WITH OTHER AGENCIES .............. ..............
ACCESS TO WATER DATA................ 360 360
COMMITTEE ON MARINE TRANSPORTATION 50 50
SYSTEMS............................
OTHER COORDINATION PROGRAMS
COORDINATION WITH OTHER WATER 400 400
RESOURCE AGENCIES..............
INTERAGENCY AND INTERNATIONAL 400 400
SUPPORT........................
INTERAGENCY WATER RESOURCE 100 100
DEVELOPMENT....................
INVENTORY OF DAMS............... 400 400
SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS.......... 1,000 1,000
FERC LICENSING.................. 100 100
PLANNING ASSISTANCE TO STATES....... 5,000 8,000
COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA
AUTOMATED INFORMATION SYSTEMS 250 250
SUPPORT TRI-CADD...................
COASTAL FIELD DATA COLLECTION....... 1,000 1,000
ENVIRONMENTAL DATA STUDIES.......... 80 80
FLOOD DAMAGE DATA................... 230 230
FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT SERVICES..... 15,000 15,000
HYDROLOGIC STUDIES.................. 500 500
INTERNATIONAL WATER STUDIES......... 125 125
PRECIPITATION STUDIES............... 200 200
REMOTE SENSING/GEOGRAPHIC 75 75
INFORMATION SYSTEM SUPPORT.........
SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL INFORMATION 50 50
CENTERS............................
STREAM GAGING....................... 550 550
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS.............. 1,000 1,000
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT................ 16,258 25,000
OTHER--MISCELLANEOUS
DISPOSITION OF COMPLETED PROJECTS... 1,000 1,000
NATIONAL FLOOD RISK MANAGEMENT 5,000 5,000
PROGRAM............................
NATIONAL SHORELINE MANAGEMENT STUDY. 400 400
PLANNING SUPPORT PROGRAM............ 3,500 3,500
TRIBAL PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM.......... 500 1,500
-------------------------------
SUBTOTAL, REMAINING ITEMS......... 53,528 116,093
ACCOUNTING ADJUSTMENT........... 1 1
-------------------------------
GRAND TOTAL................... 82,000 123,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Biscayne Bay Coastal Wetlands Project.--The Committee
continues to support this vital project to protect drinking
water supplies in eastern Miami-Dade County from saltwater
intrusion and to enhance the coastal and marine ecology of
Biscayne Bay and the offshore coral reef system. The Committee
notes support from Miami-Dade County and the South Florida
Water Management District to incorporate highly treated,
reclaimed wastewater as an additional source of freshwater to
assist the rehydration of these coastal wetlands. The Committee
encourages the Corps to consider the incorporation of this
potential source of freshwater into further study, design, and
construction of the project and to evaluate the potential to
use additional volumes of reclaimed wastewater to restore
freshwater artesian springs within the Bay through underground
injection to the shallow, underlying aquifer.
Bubbly Creek.--The Committee encourages the Corps to resume
its study of the revitalization of the South Fork of the South
Branch of the Chicago River (known as ``Bubbly Creek'') now
that the Environmental Protection Agency has completed its
evaluation of the study area and removed the site from its
Superfund program.
Disposition of Completed Projects.--Disposition studies not
included in the budget request that have a non-federal interest
who has expressed interest in assuming responsibility for a
facility shall be considered eligible for additional funding
provided in this account. The Committee understands the Corps
recommended no action for the Upper Monongahela and Allegheny
River Studies in 2017. No funds provided may be used to take
any action on the recommendations from the Upper Monongahela
and Allegheny River Studies.
Mid-Chesapeake Bay Island.--The Corps has completed the
supplemental chief's report and is awaiting approval from the
administration before budgeting for the Mid-Chesapeake Bay
Island Project (James and Barren Islands). The Committee
encourages the Corps to provide funding for PED for this
project through the annual budget process or with additional
funds.
Puget Sound Nearshore Study.--The Committee encourages the
Corps to proceed with the tiered implementation strategy using
all existing authorities as outlined in the Puget Sound
Nearshore Ecosystem Restoration Project Feasibility Study,
Completion Strategy Guidance dated June 2015. The Corps is
further directed to recognize the Puget Sound Nearshore Study
as the feasibility component for the purposes of Section 544 of
the Water Resources Development Act of 2000. The Committee
notes that the WIIN Act authorized construction of the Puget
Sound Nearshore Ecosystem Restoration Project, and reminds the
Corps that no new start, new investment decision, or new phase
decision shall be required to move this project from
feasibility to PED.
Rahway River Basin (Upper Basin), New Jersey.--There has
been an agreement to provide further analysis of the Rahway
River Basin Flood Risk Management Feasibility Study led by the
Corps' New England District. The Corps is encouraged to include
funding in the fiscal year 2019 work plan to complete the
necessary detailed analysis in conjunction with cost sharing
agreements with the non-federal sponsor.
Research and Development.--The Committee recommends
additional funding for increasing collaboration research
partnerships to advance the capability to evaluate methods for
restoring ecosystem conservation.
Research and Development, Additional Topic--Urban Flood
Damage Reduction and Stream Restoration in Arid Regions.--The
Committee recommendation includes $1,500,000 for the Corps'
Flood & Coastal Systems research and development [R&D] program
to continue its focus on the management of water resources
infrastructure and projects that promote public safety, reduce
risk, improve operational efficiencies, reduce flood damage,
sustain the environment, and position our water resource
infrastructure to be managed as adaptable systems due to the
implications of hydrologic uncertainties. The R&D program shall
also continue its focus on science and technology efforts to
address needs for resilient water resources infrastructure,
specifically as impacted by post-wildfire conditions including
increased sedimentation and debris flow. The tools and
technologies developed under this program shall also be
applicable to other parts of the country.
Research and Development, Additional Topic.--The Committee
recognizes the importance of sustainable oyster reefs for
protecting vital navigation channels and coastal
infrastructure, supporting commercial fisheries, and
maintaining healthy ecosystems. Recent restoration efforts have
not achieved the intended success for U.S. oyster populations,
and the identification of effective restoration strategies
remains a critical gap. The Corps is encouraged to develop
partnerships with research universities to leverage expertise
and enhance the Engineer Research and Development Center's
mission.
San Francisco Waterfront Seawall.--The Committee is deeply
concerned that the seawall protecting over three miles of San
Francisco's waterfront and the city's financial district is in
disrepair and at risk of failure. The Seawall provides
essential flood protection for 24 million residents and
visitors, $100,000,000,000 in real estate and economic
activity, and the confluence of several rail transportation
lines. The Committee understands the Corps first determined
there was a Federal interest in the project in 2016 and has
begun the Continuing Authorities Program section 103 project to
address the highest priority areas first. Given expected sea
level rise, increasing earthquake risk, and the unstable nature
of the Seawall's Bay Mud infill foundation, the Committee
strongly urges the Corps to prioritize work on this critical
life safety project.
Study of Water Resources Development Projects by Non-
Federal Interests.--Section 1126 of the Water Infrastructure
Improvements for the Nation Act of 2016 [WIIN Act] allows the
Secretary, at the request of a non-federal interest, to provide
technical assistance relating to any aspect of a feasibility
study if the non-federal interest contracts with the Secretary
to pay all costs of providing such technical assistance. The
Committee has heard concerns that the Corps is not providing
technical assistance consistent with the spirit of this
provision and directs the Corps to brief the Committees on
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress on the perceived
limitations to providing (1) review and comment of a non-
federal interest's draft work products by Corps staff at the
District and Division levels, (2) Corps District staff
preparation of work products and assistance to the non-federal
interest in preparing work products, (3) assistance in
obtaining public review and comments, and (4) consultation and
coordination with other State and Federal agencies and affected
Native American Tribes on environmental, permitting, and
cultural resource compliance matters.
Study on Performance of Innovative Materials.--Section 1173
of the WIIN Act required the Secretary to enter into a contract
with the Transportation Research Board of the National Academy
of Sciences ``to develop a proposal to study the use and
performance of innovative materials in water resources
development projects carried out by the Corps of Engineers.''
The Committee encourages the Corps to prioritize commencing
this work with the National Academy of Sciences.
Upper Des Plaines River and Tributaries Project.--The
Committee is aware that the project area was flooded with
record high crests overflowing the Des Plaines River last
summer, resulting in damage to more than 3,200 residences. The
Committee urges the Corps to move forward with design of the
flood damage reduction project, while the non-federal sponsor
prepares a proposal for advance work on a number of flood
features under Section 204 of the Water Resources Development
Act of 1986, as amended.
Upper Mississippi River-Illinois Waterway System.--The
Committee is concerned that despite longstanding bipartisan
support from Congress for the Navigation Ecosystem
Sustainability Program [NESP], the Corps has failed to move
forward on this project. The Committee recognizes that an
updated economic analysis of the project is necessary to
produce a benefit-to-cost ratio [BCR], which will inform how
the Corps is able to move forward to construction of the
project. The Corps is directed to determine the necessary cost
and scope of this analysis and report to the Committees on
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress on their findings
within 30 days of enactment of this act. This analysis shall
also consider the benefits of potentially re-scoping the
project.
Water Quality and Salinity Impacts on Oyster Reefs.--The
Committee encourages the Corps, when conducting or reviewing
environmental assessments or environmental impact statements
for navigation or coastal restoration projects in areas where
oyster reefs exist, to consider water quality and salinity
impacts on those reefs and, when appropriate, to mitigate any
negative impacts. The Committee also looks forward to the
Corps' completion of the Congressionally-required assessment
and report on the beneficial use of dredged material as
substrate for oyster reef development.
Willamette River.--The Committee directs the Corps to
prioritize the restoration floodplain and aquatic habitat
through cost-effective and tested means, such as fish-passage
and culvert enhancement for salmon and steelhead listed under
the Endangered Species Act.
Additional Funding for Ongoing Work.--The Committee
recommendation includes $41,000,000 in additional funds for
Investigations. From these additional funds, the Corps is
authorized to begin seven new feasibility studies. The Corps is
directed to allocate these additional funds in accordance with
the direction in the front matter under the heading
``Additional Funding''. Of the additional funding provided in
this account, not less than $16,500,000 shall be allocated to
PED activities. Of the additional funding recommended in this
account for Navigation and Coastal and Deep Draft Navigation,
the Corps shall allocate not less than $2,500,000 for
Navigation PED. Additionally, the Corps shall comply with the
following direction in allocating funds made available for
Investigations:
--When evaluating ongoing studies for funding, the Corps
shall consider completing or accelerating ongoing
studies or to initiating new studies that will enhance
the Nation's economic development, job growth, and
international competitiveness; are for projects located
in areas that have suffered recent natural disasters;
are for projects the protect life and property; or are
for projects to address legal requirements.
--The Corps shall consider giving priority to flood and storm
damage reduction studies related to preserving National
Historic Landmarks that are threatened by shoreline
erosion.
--The Corps shall include appropriate requests for funding in
future budget submissions for PED and new feasibility
studies initiated in fiscal year 2019. The Corps shall
prepare the budget to reflect study completions,
defined as completion of PED.
--Funding shall be available for existing studies, including
studies in the PED phase, and the updating of economic
analyses and cost estimates for studies that have
received appropriations. Ongoing studies that are
actively progressing and can utilize the funding in a
timely manner are eligible for these additional funds.
construction
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $2,085,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 871,733,000
Committee recommendation................................ 2,161,000,000
The Committee recommends $2,161,000,000 for Construction,
an increase of $1,289,267,000 from the budget request. The
Committee's recommendation allows the Corps to select six new
construction starts to begin in fiscal year 2019.
introduction
Funding in this account is used for construction, major
rehabilitation, and related activities for water resources
development projects having navigation, flood and storm damage
reduction, water supply, hydroelectric, environmental
restoration, and other attendant benefits to the Nation. Funds
to be derived from the HMTF will be applied to cover the
Federal share of the Dredged Material Disposal Facilities
Program.
new starts
The Corps is directed to designate new starts in accordance
with the direction in the front matter under the heading
``Additional Funding''.
committee recommendation
The table below displays the budget request and Committee's
recommendation for Construction:
CORPS OF ENGINEERS--CONSTRUCTION
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget estimate
Item ------------------------------------------------ Committee
Construction HMTF IWTF recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CALIFORNIA
AMERICAN RIVER COMMON FEATURES, NATOMAS BASIN, 42,000 .............. .............. 42,000
CA.............................................
HAMILTON CITY, CA............................... 6,000 .............. .............. 6,000
ISABELLA LAKE, CA............................... 118,000 .............. .............. 118,000
SANTA ANA RIVER MAINSTEM, CA.................... 15,000 .............. .............. 15,000
YUBA RIVER BASIN, CA............................ 35,500 .............. .............. 35,500
DELAWARE
DELAWARE BAY COASTLINE, ROOSEVELT INLET TO LEWIS .............. 150 .............. 150
BEACH, DE......................................
FLORIDA
HERBERT HOOVER DIKE, FL (SEEPAGE CONTROL)....... 96,000 .............. .............. 96,000
SOUTH FLORIDA ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION 67,500 .............. .............. 67,500
(EVERGLADES), FL...............................
GEORGIA
SAVANNAH HARBOR DISPOSAL AREAS, GA & SC......... .............. 10,500 .............. 10,500
SAVANNAH HARBOR EXPANSION, GA................... 49,000 .............. .............. 49,000
ILLINOIS
OLMSTED LOCKS AND DAM, OHIO RIVER, IL & KY...... 29,750 .............. 5,250 35,000
UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER RESTORATION, IL, IA, MN, 33,170 .............. .............. 33,170
MO & WI........................................
IOWA
MISSOURI RIVER FISH AND WILDLIFE RECOVERY, IA, 10,000 .............. .............. 10,000
KS, MO, MT, NE, ND & SD........................
KENTUCKY
ROUGH RIVER LAKE, KY............................ 40,000 .............. .............. 40,000
MARYLAND
ASSATEAGUE, MD.................................. .............. 600 .............. 600
POPLAR ISLAND, MD............................... .............. 21,000 .............. 21,000
MASSACHUSETTS
BOSTON HARBOR, MA............................... 15,105 .............. .............. 15,105
NEW JERSEY
CAPE MAY INLET TO LOWER TOWNSHIP, NJ............ .............. 7,200 .............. 7,200
RARITAN RIVER BASIN, GREEN BROOK SUB-BASIN, NJ.. 5,000 .............. .............. 5,000
OREGON
COLUMBIA RIVER AT THE MOUTH, OR & WA............ 28,000 .............. .............. 28,000
PENNSYLVANIA
EAST BRANCH CLARION RIVER LAKE, PA.............. 14,000 .............. .............. 14,000
TEXAS
BUFFALO BAYOU AND TRIBUTARIES, TX............... 11,908 .............. .............. 11,908
CORPUS CHRISTI SHIP CHANNEL, TX................. 13,000 .............. .............. 13,000
LEWISVILLE DAM, TX.............................. 55,000 .............. .............. 55,000
WASHINGTON
COLUMBIA RIVER FISH MITIGATION, WA, OR & ID 46,000 .............. .............. 46,000
(CRFM).........................................
MUD MOUNTAIN DAM, WA............................ 25,000 .............. .............. 25,000
WEST VIRGINIA
BLUESTONE LAKE, WV.............................. 7,810 .............. .............. 7,810
---------------------------------------------------------------
SUBTOTAL, ITEMS UNDER STATES.............. 762,743 39,450 5,250 807,443
REMAINING ITEMS
ADDITIONAL FUNDING..............................
FLOOD AND STORM DAMAGE REDUCTION............ .............. .............. .............. 150,000
FLOOD CONTROL........................... .............. .............. .............. 150,000
SHORE PROTECTION........................ .............. .............. .............. 50,000
NAVIGATION.................................. .............. .............. .............. 500,250
INLAND WATERWAYS TRUST FUND REVENUES........ .............. .............. .............. 122,750
OTHER AUTHORIZED PROJECT PURPOSES........... .............. .............. .............. 70,000
ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION OR COMPLIANCE. .............. .............. .............. 50,000
ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE............ .............. .............. .............. 75,000
AQUATIC PLANT CONTROL PROGRAM................... .............. .............. .............. 12,000
CONTINUING AUTHORITIES PROGRAM
AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION (SECTION 206). 1,500 .............. .............. 10,000
BENEFICIAL USES OF DREDGED MATERIAL (SECTION .............. 500 .............. 8,317
204).......................................
EMERGENCY STREAMBANK AND SHORELINE .............. .............. .............. 8,000
PROTECTION (SECTION 14)....................
FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS (SECTION 205)........ 500 .............. .............. 8,000
MITIGATION OF SHORE DAMAGES (SECTION 111)... .............. .............. .............. 500
NAVIGATION PROGRAM (SECTION 107)............ .............. .............. .............. 8,000
PROJECT MODIFICATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT OF THE 1,000 .............. .............. 8,000
ENVIRONMENT (SECTION 1135).................
SHORE PROTECTION (SECTION 103).............. .............. .............. .............. 3,000
DAM SAFETY AND SEEPAGE/STABILITY CORRECTION 88,655 .............. .............. 100,405
PROGRAM........................................
EMPLOYEES' COMPENSATION......................... 17,000 .............. .............. 17,000
INLAND WATERWAYS USERS BOARD--BOARD EXPENSE..... 60 .............. .............. 60
INLAND WATERWAYS USERS BOARD--CORPS EXPENSE..... 275 .............. .............. 275
RESTORATION OF ABANDONED MINES.................. .............. .............. .............. 2,000
---------------------------------------------------------------
SUBTOTAL.................................. 108,990 500 .............. 1,353,557
---------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL..................................... 871,733 39,950 5,250 2,161,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aquatic Plant Control Program.--Of the funding recommended
for the Aquatic Plant Control Program, $1,000,000 shall be for
activities for the control of flowering rush. Of the funding
recommended for the Aquatic Plant Control Program, $5,000,000
shall be for nationwide research and development to address
invasive aquatic plants; within this funding, the Corps is
encouraged to support cost-shared aquatic plant management
programs. Of the funding recommended for the Aquatic Plant
Control Program, $6,000,000 shall be for watercraft inspection
stations, as authorized by section 1039 of the WRRDA, and
related monitoring.
Camp Ellis Beach, Saco, Maine.--The Committee is concerned
by the continued delay in implementing a solution at Camp Ellis
Beach in Saco, Maine. To address continued erosion which has
destroyed 37 homes to date, the Committee is aware that the
Corps' initial study recommended a shore damage mitigation
project consisting of a 750-foot-long spur jetty, and placement
of about 360,000 cubic yards of beach fill along the beach. The
Committee is further aware that the project's design and costs
are under review and being updated in preparation of a new
report to Congress detailing a path ahead on the project.
Accordingly, the Committee directs the Secretary to
expeditiously submit this report to the Committees on
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress. This report shall
include any additional legislative authorities necessary for
the project to be approved and constructed.
Cano Martin Pena Ecosystem Restoration Project, San Juan,
Puerto Rico.--The Committee recognizes the importance of the
Cano Martin Pena Ecosystem Restoration Project to residents'
health and wellbeing, the local economy and environment, and
the reduction of coastal flood and storm damage risk. The
Committee encourages the Corps to include appropriate funding
in future budget requests and to coordinate closely with non-
federal interests in Puerto Rico to minimize project planning
and construction delays.
Central Everglades Planning Project.--The Committee
recognizes the importance of restoring America's Everglades,
and urges the Corps to expedite the required validation report
for the Central Everglades Planning Project and begin PED work
and construction on PPA South as soon as practicable to
complement the efforts of the South Florida Water Management
District.
Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal Dispersal Barrier,
Illinois.--The issue of hydrologic separation should be fully
studied by the Corps and vetted by the appropriate
congressional authorizing committees and specifically enacted
into law. No funds provided in this act may be used for
construction of hydrologic separation measures.
Columbia River Fish Mitigation.--The Committee understands
the Pacific Lamprey are a culturally and ecologically important
fish species to Pacific Northwest Tribal nations. The Corps and
several Tribal nations have worked in partnership for years to
develop and execute a Pacific Lamprey conservation program in
the Columbia River basin, focused on implementing passage
improvements. In part these activities have made it unnecessary
for this species to be listed under the Endangered Species Act,
however, adult returns remain low. The Committee understands
the Corps is currently crafting a status report on these
Pacific Lamprey improvements, and identifying possible
activities to support Pacific Lamprey passage. The Committee
directs the Corps to uphold the agency's Tribal treaty
responsibilities by working with relevant Tribal nations to
develop and implement a plan based on the status report to
support efforts to restore the Pacific Lamprey.
Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan [CERP]--Indian
River Lagoon-South.--The Committee recognizes the importance of
restoring America's Everglades, and eliminating discharges from
Lake Okeechobee that help fuel harmful algal blooms in the St.
Lucie River and Indian River Lagoon. The Committee urges the
Corps to expedite preparations for design work on the C-23 and
C-24 Reservoirs that, along with the C-44 Reservoir, will serve
as crucial elements of the Indian River Lagoon-South CERP
project to collect and clean discharges before they enter the
Lagoon.
Continuing Authorities Program.--The Committee recommends
$53,817,000 for the Continuing Authorities Program [CAP], an
increase of $50,817,000 from the budget request. CAP is a
useful tool for the Corps to undertake small localized projects
without being encumbered by the lengthy study and authorization
phases typical of most Corps projects. Within the CAP and to
the extent already authorized by law, the Corps is encouraged
to consider projects that enhance coastal and ocean ecosystem
resiliency. The management of CAP should continue consistent
with direction provided in previous fiscal years.
Cook County Environmental Infrastructure.--The Committee is
aware of the high level of interest in Cook County for
additional resources for the Section 219 Cook County
Infrastructure Project. Given Cook County's population of 5.2
million people, the Committee urges the Corps to support the
project at a higher funding level to address the wide and
expansive range of needs in this County.
Dam Safety Assurance and Seepage/Static Instability
Correction Program.--The Committee rejects the budget request
proposal regarding Herbert Hoover Dike, which would make funds
provided in this program available only if the State of Florida
commits certain funds. Consistent with long-standing
congressional direction, the Corps may not require funding in
excess of legally required cost-shares for studies and projects
as a criterion for funding decisions. The Corps shall apply dam
safety funds to the highest priority projects.
Howard Hanson Dam.--The Committee is aware that the
National Marine Fisheries Service [NMFS] is preparing a
Biological Opinion [BiOp] to determine the impact of ongoing
operations of Howard Hanson Dam, including the Howard Hanson
Dam--Additional Water Storage Project, on Endangered Species
Act [ESA]-listed species and is engaging in consultations with
the Corps. The Committee is also aware that an updated BiOp is
anticipated in fiscal year 2018. The Committee encourages the
Corps to continue consultations with NMFS and urges the Corps
to work with resource co-managers to develop interim and long-
term measures to maintain fish runs past Howard Hanson Dam,
while upholding ESA and municipal and industrial water supply
responsibilities.
La Grange Lock and Dam.--The Corps is directed to brief the
Committee not later than 30 days after the enactment of this
act on the current status of this project.
Levee Safety Program.--The Committee noted in the report
for the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 that it is
concerned that the Corps has not taken steps to implement the
levee safety initiatives required under WRRDA. The Committee
directed the Corps, in conjunction with FEMA, to put together a
plan of action by June 21, 2018, that includes tangible
milestones for how the Agencies will meet the requirements
under WRRDA section 3016. The Committee has not yet received a
progress report and directs the Corps to provide an update
within 30 days after enactment of this act.
McCook and Thornton Reservoirs, Illinois.--The Committee
encourages the Corps to use McCook Reservoir as a test pilot
for the Non-Federal Implementation Pilot Program under WRRDA
section 1043.
Metro East Levees.--The Committee is disappointed by the
lack of funding provided to the Metro East levee system. This
levee rehabilitation project will help protect communities in
the Metro East region from rising waters on the Mississippi
River. The Committee urges the Corps to include funding for the
Metro East levee system in the Corps' fiscal year 2019 work
plan.
Mud Mountain Dam.--The Committee commends the Corps for
initiating construction to support the October 2014 Mud
Mountain BiOp and mitigate the impact of the ongoing operation
of Mud Mountain Dam on species listed under ESA by replacing
the barrier structure and building a new fish passage facility.
The Committee notes with interest that the Corps awarded a
contract for the construction of the fish passage facility in
March 2018, and reminds the Corps that complex, multi-year
construction projects require consistent funding. Therefore,
the Committee encourages the Corps to uphold the agency's ESA
and Tribal treaty responsibilities by requesting sufficient
funding in future budgets to complete construction of the fish
passage facility by 2020 and fully implement the BiOp
requirements.
Napa River.--The Committee urges the Corps to expeditiously
complete the Determination of Federal Interest in coordination
with the local sponsor and to continue construction through
completion of the justified and necessary elements of the
project. The Committee also urges the Corps to prioritize
repairs of the defective floodgates.
Natural Infrastructure Options.--The Committee directs the
Corps to engage with State and local government and non-profit
organizations, where appropriate, on projects in diverse
geographic areas to evaluate the effectiveness of a variety of
natural infrastructure options, such as shellfish reef and
natural vegetation, in order to promote resiliency and reduce
damage from coastal erosion, storm surge, and flooding. Such
features should be incorporated into approved projects where
appropriate and effective.
Oyster Restoration.--The Committee supports Gulf Coast
oyster restoration efforts and the Chesapeake Bay Oyster
Restoration Program and encourages the Corps to provide
sufficient funding in future budget submissions or the fiscal
year 2019 work plan.
Prioritization of Projects in Drought-Stricken Areas.--The
Committee urges the Corps to prioritize any authorized projects
that would alleviate water supply issues in areas that have
been afflicted by severe droughts in the last three fiscal
years, to include projects focused on the treatment of brackish
water.
Project Modifications for Improvement of the Environment.--
Within the Section 1135 Continuing Authorities Program
authority and to the extent already authorized by law, the
Committee urges the Corps to give priority to projects that
restore degraded wetland habitat and stream habitat impacted by
construction of Corps levees with executed Feasibility Cost
Share Agreements.
Public-Private Partnerships.--The Committee notes that the
Chief of Engineers continues to express strong support for
public-private partnerships as a method to reduce the Federal
cost of future construction projects. In 2018, Congress
directed the Corps to issue its policy on how proposals for
public-private partnerships will be considered by the Corps and
how these partnerships will be incorporated into budget policy.
The Corps is directed to prioritize completion of this policy
to meet the September 18, 2018 deadline.
Rehabilitation of Corps Constructed Dams.--The Committee is
aware that implementation guidance for section 1177 of the WIIN
Act is awaiting approval from the administration. The Corps is
directed to submit this implementation guidance to the
Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress as
expeditiously as possible.
South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Justification Sheet
Accuracy.--The Committee, the Department of the Interior, and
non-federal project sponsors rely on accurate and timely budget
information for South Florida Ecosystem Restoration [SFER]
projects from the Corps. The Committee directs the Corps to
carefully ensure the accuracy of all budget justification
sheets that inform SFER Integrated Financial Plan documents for
fiscal year 2019 by September 30, 2018.
South San Francisco Bay Shoreline.--The Committee was
deeply disappointed by the lack of a new construction start in
the fiscal year 2019 budget request for the first phase of the
South San Francisco Bay Shoreline project and the lack of
funding for a feasibility study of the next phase of the
project. This project provides critical flood protection to
communities, businesses, and municipal structures in Santa
Clara County. In addition, this project will restore
approximately 2,900 acres of former salt production ponds to
tidal marsh habitat and improve recreational access to
surrounding communities. The Committee strongly urges the Corps
to prioritize progress on this project with additional funding
allocated through the fiscal year 2019 work plan or with
recently appropriated disaster funds.
The Dalles Dam.--The Committee is aware that Section 204 of
the Flood Control Act of 1950 (Public Law 81-516) authorized
the construction of the Dalles Dam on the Columbia River. The
original project authorization recognized that construction of
the Dalles would result in population dislocations and that
Indian villages would necessarily have to be relocated. The
original authorization intended that the Corps would build a
new Indian village in response to the dislocation of Tribes. It
is not the Committee's intent to expand the Corps' mission.
Rather, the Committee intends that the Corps uphold its
responsibility to Tribes as was originally intended when
Congress authorized the Dalles by mitigating the impacts of a
Corps project to Tribes.
Additional Funding for Ongoing Work.--The Committee
recommendation includes $1,289,267,000 in additional funds for
Construction above the budget request. The Corps shall allocate
these additional funds in accordance with the direction in the
front matter under the heading ``Additional Funding''. Of the
additional funding provided for flood and storm damage
reduction, flood control, and environmental restoration or
compliance, the Corps shall allocate not less than $15,400,000
for projects for hurricane and storm damage risk reduction and
environmental restoration with both structural and
nonstructural project elements. Of the additional funds
recommended in this account for flood and storm damage
reduction and flood control, the Corps shall allocate not less
than $20,000,000 to continue construction of projects which
principally include improvements to rainfall drainage systems
that address flood damages. Of the additional funds recommended
in this account for flood and storm damage reduction,
navigation, and other authorized project purposes, the Corps
shall allocate not less than $30,000,000 to authorized
reimbursements for projects with executed project partnership
agreements and that have completed construction or where non-
Federal sponsors intend to use the funds for additional water
resource development activities. Of the additional funds
recommended in this account, no less than $1,800,000 is to
complete a plan for a purpose outside of the Corps' traditional
mission.
When allocating the additional funding provided in this
account, the Corps is encouraged to evaluate authorized
reimbursements in the same manner as if the projects were being
evaluated for new or ongoing construction and shall consider
giving priority to the following:
--Benefits of the funded work to the national economy;
--Extent to which the work will enhance national, regional,
or local economic development;
--Number of jobs created directly by the funded activity;
--Ability to obligate the funds allocated within the calendar
year, including consideration of the ability of the
non-Federal sponsor to provide any required cost share;
--Ability to complete the project, separable element, or
project phase with the funds allocated;
--Legal requirements, including responsibilities to Tribes;
--For flood and storm damage reduction projects (including
authorized nonstructural measures and periodic beach
renourishments),
--Population, economic activity, or public infrastructure at
risk, as appropriate, and
--The severity of risk of flooding or the frequency with
which an area as experienced flooding;
--For shore protection projects, projects in areas that have
suffered severe beach erosion requiring additional sand
placement outside of the normal beach renourishment
cycle or in which the normal beach renourishment cycle
has been delayed;
--For navigation projects, the number of jobs or level of
economic activity to be supported by completion of the
project, separable element, or project phase;
--For projects cost hared with the IWTF, the economic impact
on the local, regional, and national economy if the
project is not funded, as well as discrete elements of
work that can be completed within the funding provided
in this line item;
--For other authorized project purposes and environmental
restoration or compliance projects, to include the
beneficial use of dredged material; and
--For environmental infrastructure, projects in rural
communities, projects with greater economic impact,
projects in counties or parishes with high poverty
rates, projects owed past reimbursements, and projects
that will provide substantial benefits to water quality
improvement.
The Committee recommendation includes the full use of all
estimated fiscal year 2019 annual revenues in the IWTF as well
as the sufficient additional IWTF prior year revenues to ensure
ongoing new construction projects may proceed with an efficient
funding profile. Funds recommended herein for inland waterways
shall only be available for ongoing new construction projects,
which have a fiscal year 2019 estimate of $246,000,000 above
the administration's budget request. The Corps shall allocate
all funds recommended in the IWTF Revenues line item along with
the statutory cost share from funds provided in the Navigation
line item prior to allocating the remainder of funds in the
Navigation line item.
MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $425,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 244,735,000
Committee recommendation................................ 350,000,000
The Committee recommends $350,000,000 for Mississippi River
and Tributaries, an increase of $105,265,000 above the budget
request. Funds recommended in this account are for planning,
construction, and operation and maintenance activities
associated with water resource projects located in the lower
Mississippi River Valley from Cape Girardeau, Missouri to the
Gulf of Mexico.
The table below displays the budget request and Committee's
recommendation:
MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget estimate
Item -------------------------------- Committee
MR&T HMTF recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONSTRUCTION
CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO & TN................ 75,847 .............. 75,847
MISSISSIPPI RIVER LEVEES, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO &TN............ 32,885 .............. 32,885
ATCHAFALAYA BASIN FLOODWAY SYSTEM, LA........................... 200 .............. 200
-----------------------------------------------
SUBTOTAL, CONSTRUCTION.................................... 108,932 .............. 108,932
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO & TN................ 54,680 .............. 54,680
MISSISSIPPI RIVER LEVEES, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO &TN............ 8,984 .............. 8,984
HELENA HARBOR, PHILLIPS COUNTY, AR.............................. .............. 715 715
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AR............................... 364 .............. 364
LOWER ARKANSAS RIVER, NORTH BANK, AR............................ 304 .............. 304
LOWER ARKANSAS RIVER, SOUTH BANK, AR............................ 187 .............. 187
ST FRANCIS BASIN, AR & MO....................................... 5,900 .............. 5,900
TENSAS BASIN, BOEUF AND TENSAS RIVERS, AR & LA.................. 2,123 .............. 2,123
WHITE RIVER BACKWATER, AR....................................... 1,000 .............. 1,000
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IL............................... 38 .............. 38
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, KY............................... 95 .............. 95
ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, LA........................................... 8,865 .............. 8,865
ATCHAFALAYA BASIN FLOODWAY SYSTEM, LA........................... 1,755 .............. 1,755
BATON ROUGE HARBOR, DEVIL SWAMP, LA............................. .............. 555 555
BAYOU COCODRIE AND TRIBUTARIES, LA.............................. 48 .............. 48
BONNET CARRE, LA................................................ 3,821 .............. 3,821
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, LA............................... 807 .............. 807
LOWER RED RIVER, SOUTH BANK LEVEES, LA.......................... 498 .............. 498
MISSISSIPPI DELTA REGION, LA.................................... 490 .............. 490
OLD RIVER, LA................................................... 9,246 .............. 9,246
TENSAS BASIN, RED RIVER BACKWATER, LA........................... 2,750 .............. 2,750
GREENVILLE HARBOR, MS........................................... .............. 930 930
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MS............................... 135 .............. 135
VICKSBURG HARBOR, MS............................................ .............. 940 940
YAZOO BASIN, ARKABUTLA LAKE, MS................................. 5,509 .............. 5,509
YAZOO BASIN, BIG SUNFLOWER RIVER, MS............................ 168 .............. 168
YAZOO BASIN, ENID LAKE, MS...................................... 5,296 .............. 5,296
YAZOO BASIN, GREENWOOD, MS...................................... 799 .............. 799
YAZOO BASIN, GRENADA LAKE, MS................................... 5,334 .............. 5,334
YAZOO BASIN, MAIN STEM, MS...................................... 1,201 .............. 1,201
YAZOO BASIN, SARDIS LAKE, MS.................................... 6,231 .............. 6,231
YAZOO BASIN, TRIBUTARIES, MS.................................... 901 .............. 901
YAZOO BASIN, WILL M WHITTINGTON AUX CHAN, MS.................... 357 .............. 357
YAZOO BASIN, YAZOO BACKWATER AREA, MS........................... 538 .............. 538
YAZOO BASIN, YAZOO CITY, MS..................................... 737 .............. 737
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MO............................... 208 .............. 208
WAPPAPELLO LAKE, MO............................................. 4,878 .............. 4,878
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, TN............................... 47 .............. 47
MEMPHIS HARBOR, MCKELLAR LAKE, TN............................... .............. 2,125 2,125
-----------------------------------------------
SUBTOTAL, OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE....................... 134,294 5,265 139,559
REMAINING ITEMS
ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR ONGOING WORK DREDGING.................... .............. .............. 5,000
FLOOD CONTROL............................................... .............. .............. 55,000
OTHER AUTHORIZED PURPOSES................................... .............. .............. 40,000
COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA.............................. 600 .............. 600
MAPPING......................................................... 819 .............. 819
MISSISSIPPI RIVER COMMISSION.................................... 90 .............. 90
-----------------------------------------------
SUBTOTAL, REMAINING ITEMS................................. 1,509 .............. 101,509
-----------------------------------------------
TOTAL, MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES.................. 244,735 5,265 350,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lower Mississippi River Main Stem.--The budget request
proposes to consolidate several activities across multiple
States into one line item. The Committee does not support this
change and instead recommends continuing to fund these
activities as separate line items.
MAT Sinking Unit.--The MAT Sinking Unit [MSU] has been a
key component in maintaining the Mississippi River channel for
70 years. The Committee understands that without a timely
replacement, the current Mississippi River channel alignment is
at risk of migrating, threatening levees, endangering the
public, and interrupting river commerce. Because this vital
equipment can be utilized nationwide to protect riverbank
erosion and sloughing, it is unclear why the Corps proposes to
fund its replacement out of the Mississippi Rivers and
Tributaries account rather than the Plant Replacement and
Improvement Program [PRIP]. Therefore, the Corps shall brief
the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress on
why the replacement must be funded in the MR&T account instead
of PRIP.
Additional Funding for Ongoing Work.--When allocating the
additional funding recommended in this account, the Corps shall
consider giving priority to completing or accelerating ongoing
work that will enhance the nation's economic development, job
growth, and international competitiveness, or to studies or
projects located in areas that have suffered recent natural
disasters. While this funding is shown under remaining items,
the Corps shall use these funds in investigations,
construction, and operation and maintenance, as applicable.
When allocating the additional funding recommended in this
account the Corps shall allocate not less than $30,000,000 for
additional flood control construction projects outside of the
Lower Mississippi River Main Stem. Of the additional funds
recommended in this account for other authorized project
purposes, the Corps shall allocate not less than $2,000,000 for
operation and maintenance of facilities that are educational or
to continue land management of mitigation features. Of the
additional funds recommended in this account, the Corps shall
allocate not less than $5,000,000 for dredging of ports and
harbors.
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $3,630,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 2,076,733,000
Committee recommendation................................ 3,740,000,000
The Committee recommends $3,740,000,000 for Operation and
Maintenance, an increase of $1,663,267,000 above the budget
request.
INTRODUCTION
Funding in this account is used to fund operations,
maintenance, and related activities at water resource projects
that the Corps operates and maintains. These activities include
dredging, repair, and operation of structures and other
facilities, as authorized in the various river and harbor,
flood control, and water resources development acts. Related
activities include aquatic plant control, monitoring of
completed projects where appropriate, removal of sunken
vessels, and the collection of domestic waterborne commerce
statistics.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The table below displays the budget request and Committee's
recommendation for Operation and Maintenance.
CORPS OF ENGINEERS--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget estimate
Item -------------------------------- Committee
O&M HMTF recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ALABAMA
ALABAMA RIVER LAKES, AL......................................... 17,121 .............. 17,121
BLACK WARRIOR AND TOMBIGBEE RIVERS, AL.......................... 23,336 .............. 23,436
GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, AL.................................. 7,515 .............. 7,765
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AL............................... 198 .............. 198
MOBILE HARBOR, AL............................................... .............. 22,240 22,240
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, AL................................... .............. 110 110
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, AL............................. 85 .............. 85
TENNESSEE--TOMBIGBEE WATERWAY WILDLIFE MITIGATION, AL & MS...... 1,800 .............. 1,800
TENNESSEE--TOMBIGBEE WATERWAY, AL & MS.......................... 27,996 .............. 27,996
WALTER F GEORGE LOCK AND DAM, AL & GA........................... 8,926 .............. 8,926
WATER/ENVIRONMENTAL CERTIFICATION, AL........................... .............. 70 70
ALASKA
ANCHORAGE HARBOR, AK............................................ .............. 9,265 9,265
CHENA RIVER LAKES, AK........................................... 6,292 .............. 6,292
DILLINGHAM HARBOR, AK........................................... .............. 970 970
HOMER HARBOR, AK................................................ .............. 770 770
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AK............................... 200 .............. 200
NINILCHIK HARBOR, AK............................................ .............. 600 600
NOME HARBOR, AK................................................. .............. 2,055 2,055
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, AK................................... .............. 750 750
ARIZONA
ALAMO LAKE, AZ.................................................. 3,342 .............. 3,342
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AZ............................... 534 .............. 534
PAINTED ROCK DAM, AZ............................................ 3,086 .............. 3,086
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, AZ............................. 107 .............. 107
WHITLOW RANCH DAM, AZ........................................... 935 .............. 935
ARKANSAS
BEAVER LAKE, AR................................................. 8,791 .............. 8,791
BLAKELY MT DAM, LAKE OUACHITA, AR............................... 9,131 .............. 9,131
BLUE MOUNTAIN LAKE, AR.......................................... 1,870 .............. 1,870
BULL SHOALS LAKE, AR............................................ 7,761 .............. 7,761
DEGRAY LAKE, AR................................................. 7,438 .............. 7,438
DEQUEEN LAKE, AR................................................ 1,433 .............. 1,433
DIERKS LAKE, AR................................................. 1,506 .............. 1,506
GILLHAM LAKE, AR................................................ 1,305 .............. 1,305
GREERS FERRY LAKE, AR........................................... 7,840 .............. 7,840
HELENA HARBOR, AR............................................... .............. 15 15
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AR............................... 646 .............. 646
MCCLELLAN-KERR ARKANSAS RIVER NAVIGATION SYSTEM, AR............. 50,995 .............. 50,995
MILLWOOD LAKE, AR............................................... 4,335 .............. 4,335
NARROWS DAM, LAKE GREESON, AR................................... 5,751 .............. 5,751
NIMROD LAKE, AR................................................. 2,340 .............. 2,340
NORFORK LAKE, AR................................................ 6,134 .............. 6,134
OSCEOLA HARBOR, AR.............................................. .............. 15 15
OUACHITA AND BLACK RIVERS, AR & LA.............................. 7,979 .............. 7,979
WHITE RIVER, AR................................................. 25 .............. 25
YELLOW BEND PORT, AR............................................ .............. 100 100
CALIFORNIA
BLACK BUTTE LAKE, CA............................................ 2,620 .............. 2,620
BUCHANAN DAM, HV EASTMAN LAKE, CA............................... 2,104 .............. 2,104
CHANNEL ISLANDS HARBOR, CA...................................... .............. 6,290 6,290
COYOTE VALLEY DAM, LAKE MENDOCINO, CA........................... 3,540 .............. 3,540
CRESCENT CITY HARBOR, CA........................................ .............. 200 200
DRY CREEK (WARM SPRINGS) LAKE AND CHANNEL, CA................... 7,494 .............. 7,494
FARMINGTON DAM, CA.............................................. 478 .............. 478
HIDDEN DAM, HENSLEY LAKE, CA.................................... 2,182 .............. 2,182
HUMBOLDT HARBOR AND BAY, CA..................................... .............. 4,510 4,510
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, CA.............. 10 .............. 10
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, CA............................... 3,450 .............. 3,450
ISABELLA LAKE, CA............................................... 1,389 .............. 1,389
LOS ANGELES COUNTY DRAINAGE AREA, CA............................ 22,633 .............. 22,633
MERCED COUNTY STREAMS, CA....................................... 458 .............. 458
MOJAVE RIVER DAM, CA............................................ 2,092 .............. 2,092
MORRO BAY HARBOR, CA............................................ .............. 2,400 2,400
NEW HOGAN LAKE, CA.............................................. 2,878 .............. 2,878
NEW MELONES LAKE, DOWNSTREAM CHANNEL, CA........................ 1,652 .............. 1,652
OAKLAND HARBOR (50 FOOT PROJECT), CA............................ .............. 19,076 19,076
OCEANSIDE HARBOR, CA............................................ .............. 2,470 2,470
PINE FLAT LAKE, CA.............................................. 4,437 .............. 4,437
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, CA................................... .............. 1,350 1,350
REDWOOD CITY HARBOR, CA......................................... .............. 5,950 5,950
RICHMOND HARBOR, CA............................................. .............. 10,145 10,145
SACRAMENTO RIVER (30 FOOT PROJECT), CA.......................... .............. 2,300 2,300
SACRAMENTO RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES (DEBRIS CONTROL), CA........... 1,095 .............. 1,095
SACRAMENTO RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES (DEBRIS CONTROL), CA (NAV)..... .............. 798 798
SACRAMENTO RIVER SHALLOW DRAFT CHANNEL, CA...................... .............. 210 210
SAN DIEGO HARBOR, CA............................................ .............. 4,400 4,400
SAN FRANCISCO BAY DELTA MODEL STRUCTURE, CA..................... 1,191 .............. 1,191
SAN FRANCISCO HARBOR AND BAY, CA (DRIFT REMOVAL)................ .............. 3,101 3,101
SAN FRANCISCO HARBOR, CA........................................ .............. 4,335 4,335
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER, PORT OF STOCKTON, CA......................... .............. 5,000 5,000
SAN PABLO BAY AND MARE ISLAND STRAIT, CA........................ .............. 3,049 3,049
SANTA ANA RIVER BASIN, CA....................................... 12,537 .............. 12,537
SANTA BARBARA HARBOR, CA........................................ .............. 3,360 3,360
SANTA CRUZ HARBOR, CA........................................... .............. 15 15
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, CA............................. 1,344 .............. 1,344
SUCCESS LAKE, CA................................................ 3,543 .............. 3,543
SUISUN BAY CHANNEL, CA.......................................... .............. 3,664 3,664
TERMINUS DAM, LAKE KAWEAH, CA (DAM SAFETY)...................... 2,785 .............. 2,785
VENTURA HARBOR, CA.............................................. .............. 5,370 5,370
YUBA RIVER, CA.................................................. 180 .............. 180
YUBA RIVER, CA (NAV)............................................ .............. 1,435 1,435
COLORADO
BEAR CREEK LAKE, CO............................................. 587 .............. 587
CHATFIELD LAKE, CO.............................................. 1,889 .............. 1,889
CHERRY CREEK LAKE, CO........................................... 6,479 .............. 6,479
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, CO.............. 17 .............. 17
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, CO............................... 347 .............. 347
JOHN MARTIN RESERVOIR, CO....................................... 4,071 .............. 4,071
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, CO............................. 560 .............. 560
TRINIDAD LAKE, CO............................................... 1,775 .............. 1,775
CONNECTICUT
BLACK ROCK LAKE, CT............................................. 671 .............. 671
COLEBROOK RIVER LAKE, CT........................................ 2,583 .............. 2,583
HANCOCK BROOK LAKE, CT.......................................... 821 .............. 821
HOP BROOK LAKE, CT.............................................. 1,285 .............. 1,285
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, CT............................... 474 .............. 474
MANSFIELD HOLLOW LAKE, CT....................................... 784 .............. 784
NORTHFIELD BROOK LAKE, CT....................................... 391 .............. 391
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, CT................................... .............. 900 900
STAMFORD HURRICANE BARRIER, CT.................................. 572 .............. 572
THOMASTON DAM, CT............................................... 1,022 .............. 1,022
WEST THOMPSON LAKE, CT.......................................... 893 .............. 893
DELAWARE
INDIAN RIVER INLET & BAY, DE.................................... .............. 7 7
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, DE............................... 70 .............. 70
INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, DELAWARE RIVER TO CHESAPEAKE BAY, DE & MD .............. 12,450 12,450
INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, REHOBOTH BAY DELAWARE BAY................ .............. 30 30
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, DE................................... .............. 200 200
WILMINGTON HARBOR, DE........................................... .............. 5,491 5,491
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, DC............................... 80 .............. 80
POTOMAC AND ANACOSTIA RIVERS, DC (DRIFT REMOVAL)................ .............. 930 930
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, DC................................... .............. 30 30
FLORIDA
CANAVERAL HARBOR, FL............................................ .............. 4,149 4,149
CENTRAL AND SOUTHERN FLORIDA, FL................................ 14,429 .............. 14,429
CENTRAL AND SOUTHERN FLORIDA, FL (NAV).......................... .............. 1,033 1,033
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, FL............................... 814 .............. 814
INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, JACKSONVILLE TO MIAMI, FL................ 2,980 .............. 2,980
JACKSONVILLE HARBOR, FL......................................... .............. 6,560 6,560
JIM WOODRUFF LOCK AND DAM, LAKE SEMINOLE, FL, AL & GA........... 7,560 .............. 7,560
MANATEE HARBOR, FL.............................................. .............. 3,845 3,845
MIAMI HARBOR, FL................................................ .............. 6,070 6,070
OKEECHOBEE WATERWAY, FL......................................... 1,229 .............. 1,229
OKEECHOBEE WATERWAY, FL (NAV)................................... .............. 1,091 1,091
PALM BEACH HARBOR, FL........................................... .............. 2,785 2,785
PANAMA CITY HARBOR, FL.......................................... .............. 55 55
PENSACOLA HARBOR, FL............................................ .............. 1,390 1,390
PORT EVERGLADES HARBOR, FL...................................... .............. 5,850 5,850
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, FL................................... .............. 1,275 1,275
REMOVAL OF AQUATIC GROWTH, FL................................... .............. 3,290 3,290
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, FL............................. 132 .............. 132
TAMPA HARBOR, FL................................................ .............. 980 980
WATER / ENVIRONMENTAL CERTIFICATION, FL......................... .............. 180 180
GEORGIA
ALLATOONA LAKE, GA.............................................. 9,257 .............. 9,257
APALACHICOLA, CHATTAHOOCHEE AND FLINT RIVERS, GA, AL & FL....... 1,332 .............. 1,332
ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, GA.............................. 3,000 .............. 3,000
BRUNSWICK HARBOR, GA............................................ .............. 5,258 5,258
BUFORD DAM AND LAKE SIDNEY LANIER, GA........................... 11,395 .............. 11,395
CARTERS DAM AND LAKE, GA........................................ 7,591 .............. 7,591
HARTWELL LAKE, GA & SC.......................................... 11,119 .............. 11,119
HARTWELL LAKE, GA & SC (NAV).................................... .............. 40 40
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, GA............................... 196 .............. 196
J STROM THURMOND LAKE, GA & SC.................................. 11,069 .............. 11,069
J STROM THURMOND LAKE, GA & SC (NAV)............................ .............. 59 59
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, GA................................... .............. 100 100
RICHARD B RUSSELL DAM AND LAKE, GA & SC......................... 9,681 .............. 9,681
SAVANNAH HARBOR, GA............................................. .............. 34,312 34,312
SAVANNAH RIVER BELOW AUGUSTA, GA................................ .............. 201 201
WEST POINT DAM AND LAKE, GA & AL................................ 7,828 .............. 7,828
HAWAII
BARBERS POINT HARBOR, HI........................................ 295 .............. 295
HONOLULU HARBOR, HI............................................. .............. 7,300 7,300
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, HI............................... 278 .............. 278
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, HI................................... .............. 663 663
IDAHO
ALBENI FALLS DAM, ID............................................ 1,182 .............. 1,182
DWORSHAK DAM AND RESERVOIR, ID.................................. 4,902 .............. 4,902
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, ID............................... 377 .............. 377
LUCKY PEAK LAKE, ID............................................. 10,292 .............. 10,292
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, ID............................. 716 .............. 716
ILLINOIS
CALUMET HARBOR AND RIVER, IL & IN............................... .............. 4,616 4,616
CARLYLE LAKE, IL................................................ 5,719 .............. 5,719
CHICAGO HARBOR, IL.............................................. .............. 3,583 3,583
CHICAGO RIVER, IL............................................... 286 .............. 286
CHICAGO SANITARY AND SHIP CANAL DISPERSAL BARRIER, IL........... 18,920 .............. 18,920
FARM CREEK RESERVOIRS, IL....................................... 413 .............. 413
ILLINOIS WATERWAY (MVR PORTION), IL & IN........................ 43,727 .............. 43,727
ILLINOIS WATERWAY (MVS PORTION), IL & IN........................ 2,060 .............. 2,060
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, IL.............. 50 .............. 50
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IL............................... 1,973 .............. 1,973
KASKASKIA RIVER NAVIGATION, IL.................................. 2,222 .............. 2,222
LAKE MICHIGAN DIVERSION, IL..................................... .............. 851 851
LAKE SHELBYVILLE, IL............................................ 6,272 .............. 6,272
MISSISSIPPI RIVER BETWEEN MISSOURI RIVER AND MINNEAPOLIS (MVR 70,824 .............. 70,824
PORTION), IL...................................................
MISSISSIPPI RIVER BETWEEN MISSOURI RIVER AND MINNEAPOLIS (MVS 39,140 .............. 39,140
PORTION), IL...................................................
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, IL................................... .............. 106 106
REND LAKE, IL................................................... 5,542 .............. 5,542
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, IL.................... .............. 680 680
WAUKEGAN HARBOR, IL............................................. .............. 1,526 1,526
INDIANA
BROOKVILLE LAKE, IN............................................. 1,813 .............. 1,813
BURNS WATERWAY HARBOR, IN....................................... .............. 4,619 4,619
CAGLES MILL LAKE, IN............................................ 1,195 .............. 1,195
CECIL M HARDEN LAKE, IN......................................... 1,243 .............. 1,243
INDIANA HARBOR, IN.............................................. .............. 10,998 10,998
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IN............................... 1,051 .............. 1,051
J EDWARD ROUSH LAKE, IN......................................... 1,375 .............. 1,375
MISSISSINEWA LAKE, IN........................................... 1,274 .............. 1,274
MONROE LAKE, IN................................................. 1,374 .............. 1,374
PATOKA LAKE, IN................................................. 1,498 .............. 1,498
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, IN................................... .............. 190 190
SALAMONIE LAKE, IN.............................................. 1,313 .............. 1,313
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, IN.................... .............. 55 55
IOWA
CORALVILLE LAKE, IA............................................. 5,599 .............. 5,599
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, IA.............. 6 .............. 6
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IA............................... 1,282 .............. 1,282
MISSOURI RIVER FISH AND WILDLIFE RECOVERY, IA, KS, MO, MT, NE, 4,829 .............. 4,829
ND & SD........................................................
MISSOURI RIVER--SIOUX CITY TO THE MOUTH, IA, KS, MO & NE........ 13,200 .............. 13,200
RATHBUN LAKE, IA................................................ 2,974 .............. 2,974
RED ROCK DAM AND LAKE RED ROCK, IA.............................. 5,954 .............. 5,954
SAYLORVILLE LAKE, IA............................................ 7,934 .............. 7,934
KANSAS
CLINTON LAKE, KS................................................ 2,354 .............. 2,354
COUNCIL GROVE LAKE, KS.......................................... 1,378 .............. 1,378
EL DORADO LAKE, KS.............................................. 738 .............. 738
ELK CITY LAKE, KS............................................... 1,031 .............. 1,031
FALL RIVER LAKE, KS............................................. 1,145 .............. 1,145
HILLSDALE LAKE, KS.............................................. 967 .............. 967
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, KS.............. 4 .............. 4
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, KS............................... 1,250 .............. 1,250
JOHN REDMOND DAM AND RESERVOIR, KS.............................. 1,727 .............. 1,727
KANOPOLIS LAKE, KS.............................................. 4,134 .............. 4,134
MARION LAKE, KS................................................. 1,833 .............. 1,833
MELVERN LAKE, KS................................................ 3,146 .............. 3,146
MILFORD LAKE, KS................................................ 2,153 .............. 2,153
PEARSON--SKUBITZ BIG HILL LAKE, KS.............................. 1,397 .............. 1,397
PERRY LAKE, KS.................................................. 2,495 .............. 2,495
POMONA LAKE, KS................................................. 2,063 .............. 2,063
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, KS............................. 472 .............. 472
TORONTO LAKE, KS................................................ 733 .............. 733
TUTTLE CREEK LAKE, KS........................................... 2,399 .............. 2,399
WILSON LAKE, KS................................................. 1,844 .............. 1,844
KENTUCKY
BARKLEY DAM AND LAKE BARKLEY, KY & TN........................... 17,631 .............. 17,631
BARREN RIVER LAKE, KY........................................... 3,622 .............. 3,622
BIG SANDY HARBOR, KY............................................ .............. 1,960 1,960
BUCKHORN LAKE, KY............................................... 2,079 .............. 2,079
CARR CREEK LAKE, KY............................................. 1,869 .............. 1,869
CAVE RUN LAKE, KY............................................... 1,155 .............. 1,155
DEWEY LAKE, KY.................................................. 3,780 .............. 3,780
ELVIS STAHR (HICKMAN) HARBOR, KY................................ .............. 915 915
FALLS OF THE OHIO NATIONAL WILDLIFE, KY & IN.................... 34 .............. 34
FISHTRAP LAKE, KY............................................... 1,858 .............. 1,858
GRAYSON LAKE, KY................................................ 1,211 .............. 1,211
GREEN AND BARREN RIVERS, KY..................................... 2,735 .............. 2,735
GREEN RIVER LAKE, KY............................................ 4,849 .............. 4,849
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, KY............................... 1,015 .............. 1,015
KENTUCKY RIVER, KY.............................................. 22 .............. 22
LAUREL RIVER LAKE, KY........................................... 2,343 .............. 2,343
MARTINS FORK LAKE, KY........................................... 1,697 .............. 1,697
MIDDLESBORO CUMBERLAND RIVER BASIN, KY.......................... 266 .............. 266
NOLIN LAKE, KY.................................................. 2,853 .............. 2,853
OHIO RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS, KY, IL, IN & OH...................... 68,524 .............. 68,524
OHIO RIVER OPEN CHANNEL WORK, KY, IL, IN, OH, PA & WV........... 7,639 .............. 7,639
PAINTSVILLE LAKE, KY............................................ 1,282 .............. 1,282
ROUGH RIVER LAKE, KY............................................ 3,461 .............. 3,461
TAYLORSVILLE LAKE, KY........................................... 1,148 .............. 1,148
WOLF CREEK DAM, LAKE CUMBERLAND, KY............................. 10,313 .............. 10,313
YATESVILLE LAKE, KY............................................. 1,889 .............. 1,889
LOUISIANA
ATCHAFALAYA RIVER AND BAYOUS CHENE, BOEUF & BLACK, LA........... .............. 12,675 12,675
BARATARIA BAY WATERWAY, LA...................................... .............. 100 100
BAYOU BODCAU RESERVOIR, LA...................................... 1,289 .............. 1,289
BAYOU LAFOURCHE AND LAFOURCHE JUMP WATERWAY, LA................. .............. 100 100
BAYOU PIERRE, LA................................................ 33 .............. 33
BAYOU SEGNETTE WATERWAY, LA..................................... .............. 10 10
BAYOU TECHE, LA................................................. .............. 50 50
CADDO LAKE, LA.................................................. 208 .............. 208
CALCASIEU RIVER AND PASS, LA.................................... .............. 18,639 18,639
FRESHWATER BAYOU, LA............................................ .............. 759 759
GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, LA.................................. 30,185 .............. 30,185
HOUMA NAVIGATION CANAL, LA...................................... .............. 100 100
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, LA............................... 1,068 .............. 1,068
J BENNETT JOHNSTON WATERWAY, LA................................. 11,881 .............. 11,881
LAKE PROVIDENCE HARBOR, LA...................................... .............. 1,315 1,315
MERMENTAU RIVER, LA............................................. .............. 1,540 1,540
MISSISSIPPI RIVER OUTLETS AT VENICE, LA......................... .............. 200 200
MISSISSIPPI RIVER, BATON ROUGE TO THE GULF OF MEXICO, LA........ .............. 89,169 89,169
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, LA................................... .............. 11 11
REMOVAL OF AQUATIC GROWTH, LA................................... .............. 250 250
WALLACE LAKE, LA................................................ 245 .............. 245
WATERWAY FROM EMPIRE TO THE GULF, LA............................ .............. 14 14
MAINE
DISPOSAL AREA MONITORING, ME.................................... .............. 1,050 1,050
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, ME............................... 100 .............. 100
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, ME................................... .............. 1,000 1,000
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, ME.................... .............. 30 30
MARYLAND
BACK CREEK, MD.................................................. .............. 13 13
BALTIMORE HARBOR AND CHANNELS (50 FOOT), MD..................... .............. 23,645 23,645
BALTIMORE HARBOR, MD (DRIFT REMOVAL)............................ .............. 415 415
CLAIBORNE HARBOR, MD............................................ .............. 5 5
CUMBERLAND, MD AND RIDGELEY, WV................................. 201 .............. 201
FISHING CREEK, MD............................................... .............. 10 10
HERRING CREEK, TALL TIMBERS, MD................................. .............. 10 10
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MD............................... 126 .............. 126
JENNINGS RANDOLPH LAKE, MD & WV................................. 6,285 .............. 6,285
KNAPPS NARROWS, MD.............................................. .............. 5 5
LOWER THOROFARE, DEAL ISLAND, MD................................ .............. 5 5
MIDDLE RIVER & DARK HEAD CREEK, MD.............................. .............. 3 3
NEAVITT HARBOR, MD.............................................. .............. 3 3
OCEAN CITY HARBOR AND INLET AND SINEPUXENT BAY, MD.............. .............. 5 5
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MD................................... .............. 485 485
ROCK HALL HARBOR, MD............................................ .............. 5 5
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, MD............................. 173 .............. 173
WICOMICO RIVER, MD.............................................. .............. 4,000 4,000
MASSACHUSETTS
BARRE FALLS DAM, MA............................................. 888 .............. 888
BIRCH HILL DAM, MA.............................................. 886 .............. 886
BOSTON HARBOR, MA............................................... .............. 7,150 7,150
BUFFUMVILLE LAKE, MA............................................ 731 .............. 731
CAPE COD CANAL, MA.............................................. 2,535 .............. 2,535
CAPE COD CANAL, MA (NAV)........................................ .............. 5,207 5,207
CHARLES RIVER NATURAL VALLEY STORAGE AREA, MA................... 391 .............. 391
CONANT BROOK LAKE, MA........................................... 334 .............. 334
EAST BRIMFIELD LAKE, MA......................................... 684 .............. 684
HODGES VILLAGE DAM, MA.......................................... 725 .............. 725
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MA............................... 348 .............. 348
KNIGHTVILLE DAM, MA............................................. 1,252 .............. 1,252
LITTLEVILLE LAKE, MA............................................ 721 .............. 721
NEW BEDFORD FAIRHAVEN AND ACUSHNET HURRICANE BARRIER, MA........ 505 .............. 505
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MA................................... .............. 950 950
TULLY LAKE, MA.................................................. 914 .............. 914
WEST HILL DAM, MA............................................... 1,034 .............. 1,034
WESTVILLE LAKE, MA.............................................. 1,050 .............. 1,050
MICHIGAN
CHANNELS IN LAKE ST CLAIR, MI................................... .............. 190 190
DETROIT RIVER, MI............................................... 72 .............. 72
DETROIT RIVER, MI (NAV)......................................... .............. 6,810 6,810
GRAND HAVEN HARBOR, MI.......................................... 18 .............. 18
GRAND HAVEN HARBOR, MI (NAV).................................... .............. 1,750 1,750
HOLLAND HARBOR, MI.............................................. .............. 600 600
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MI............................... 260 .............. 260
KEWEENAW WATERWAY, MI........................................... 27 .............. 27
LUDINGTON HARBOR, MI............................................ .............. 500 500
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MI................................... .............. 833 833
ROGUE RIVER, MI................................................. .............. 1,200 1,200
SAGINAW RIVER, MI............................................... .............. 2,425 2,425
SEBEWAING RIVER, MI............................................. 531 .............. 531
ST CLAIR RIVER, MI.............................................. .............. 1,510 1,510
ST JOSEPH HARBOR, MI............................................ .............. 1,500 1,500
ST MARYS RIVER, MI.............................................. 3,153 .............. 3,153
ST MARYS RIVER, MI (NAV)........................................ .............. 25,179 25,179
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, MI.................... .............. 3,138 3,138
MINNESOTA
BIGSTONE LAKE--WHETSTONE RIVER, MN & SD......................... 462 .............. 462
DULUTH--SUPERIOR HARBOR, MN & WI................................ 750 .............. 750
DULUTH--SUPERIOR HARBOR, MN & WI (NAV).......................... .............. 6,790 6,790
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MN............................... 240 .............. 240
LAC QUI PARLE LAKES, MINNESOTA RIVER, MN........................ 1,349 .............. 1,349
MINNESOTA RIVER, MN............................................. .............. 260 260
MISSISSIPPI RIVER BETWEEN MISSOURI RIVER AND
MINNEAPOLIS (MVP PORTION), MN............................... 71,737 .............. 71,737
ORWELL LAKE, MN................................................. 508 .............. 508
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MN................................... .............. 103 103
RED LAKE RESERVOIR, MN.......................................... 143 .............. 143
RESERVOIRS AT HEADWATERS OF MISSISSIPPI RIVER, MN............... 5,244 .............. 5,244
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, MN.................... .............. 246 246
MISSISSIPPI
BILOXI HARBOR, MS............................................... .............. 1,748 1,748
EAST FORK, TOMBIGBEE RIVER, MS.................................. 290 .............. 290
GULFPORT HARBOR, MS............................................. .............. 3,215 3,215
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MS............................... 116 .............. 116
MOUTH OF YAZOO RIVER, MS........................................ .............. 30 30
OKATIBBEE LAKE, MS.............................................. 1,740 .............. 1,740
PASCAGOULA HARBOR, MS........................................... .............. 6,151 6,151
PEARL RIVER, MS & LA............................................ 89 .............. 89
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MS................................... .............. 131 131
ROSEDALE HARBOR, MS............................................. .............. 935 935
WATER/ENVIRONMENTAL CERTIFICATION, MS........................... .............. 40 40
YAZOO RIVER, MS................................................. .............. 30 30
MISSOURI
CARUTHERSVILLE HARBOR, MO....................................... .............. 615 615
CLARENCE CANNON DAM AND MARK TWAIN LAKE, MO..................... 6,955 .............. 6,955
CLEARWATER LAKE, MO............................................. 3,740 .............. 3,740
HARRY S TRUMAN DAM AND RESERVOIR, MO............................ 11,638 .............. 11,638
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, MO.............. 2 .............. 2
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MO............................... 1,512 .............. 1,512
LITTLE BLUE RIVER LAKES, MO..................................... 1,347 .............. 1,347
LONG BRANCH LAKE, MO............................................ 3,282 .............. 3,282
MISSISSIPPI RIVER BETWEEN THE OHIO AND MISSOURI RIVERS (REG 30,821 .............. 30,821
WORKS), MO & IL................................................
POMME DE TERRE LAKE, MO......................................... 2,767 .............. 2,767
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, MO............................. 172 .............. 172
SMITHVILLE LAKE, MO............................................. 1,606 .............. 1,606
SOUTHEAST MISSOURI PORT, MISSISSIPPI RIVER, MO.................. .............. 409 409
STOCKTON LAKE, MO............................................... 5,691 .............. 5,691
TABLE ROCK LAKE, MO & AR........................................ 10,331 .............. 10,331
MONTANA
FT PECK DAM AND LAKE, MT........................................ 5,534 .............. 5,534
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MT............................... 154 .............. 154
LIBBY DAM, MT................................................... 2,636 .............. 2,636
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, MT............................. 125 .............. 125
NEBRASKA
GAVINS POINT DAM, LEWIS AND CLARK LAKE, NE & SD................. 10,087 .............. 10,087
HARLAN COUNTY LAKE, NE.......................................... 2,337 .............. 2,337
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, NE.............. 3 .............. 3
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NE............................... 466 .............. 466
MISSOURI RIVER--KENSLERS BEND, NE TO SIOUX CITY, IA............. 46 .............. 46
PAPILLION CREEK, NE............................................. 858 .............. 858
SALT CREEKS AND TRIBUTARIES, NE................................. 3,347 .............. 3,347
NEVADA
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NV............................... 77 .............. 77
MARTIS CREEK LAKE, NV & CA...................................... 1,278 .............. 1,278
PINE AND MATHEWS CANYONS LAKES, NV.............................. 816 .............. 816
NEW HAMPSHIRE
BLACKWATER DAM, NH.............................................. 823 .............. 823
EDWARD MACDOWELL LAKE, NH....................................... 732 .............. 732
FRANKLIN FALLS DAM, NH.......................................... 1,017 .............. 1,017
HOPKINTON--EVERETT LAKES, NH.................................... 1,857 .............. 1,857
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NH............................... 90 .............. 90
OTTER BROOK LAKE, NH............................................ 1,395 .............. 1,395
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NH................................... .............. 300 300
SURRY MOUNTAIN LAKE, NH......................................... 801 .............. 801
NEW JERSEY
BARNEGAT INLET, NJ.............................................. .............. 8 8
CHEESEQUAKE CREEK, NJ........................................... .............. 50 50
COLD SPRING INLET, NJ........................................... .............. 3 3
DELAWARE RIVER AT CAMDEN, NJ.................................... .............. 15 15
DELAWARE RIVER, PHILADELPHIA TO THE SEA, NJ, PA & DE............ .............. 27,785 27,785
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, NJ.............. 45 .............. 45
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NJ............................... 487 .............. 487
MANASQUAN RIVER, NJ............................................. .............. 2 2
NEW JERSEY INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, NJ............................ .............. 50 50
NEWARK BAY, HACKENSACK AND PASSAIC RIVERS, NJ................... .............. 8,000 8,000
PASSAIC RIVER FLOOD WARNING SYSTEMS, NJ......................... 667 .............. 667
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NJ................................... .............. 2,223 2,223
RARITAN RIVER TO ARTHUR KILL CUT-OFF, NJ........................ .............. 20 20
RARITAN RIVER, NJ............................................... .............. 50 50
SANDY HOOK BAY AT LEONARD, NJ................................... .............. 10 10
SHOAL HARBOR AND COMPTON CREEK, NJ.............................. .............. 10 10
SHREWSBURY RIVER, MAIN CHANNEL, NJ.............................. .............. 25 25
NEW MEXICO
ABIQUIU DAM, NM................................................. 3,715 .............. 3,715
COCHITI LAKE, NM................................................ 3,585 .............. 3,585
CONCHAS LAKE, NM................................................ 2,726 .............. 2,726
GALISTEO DAM, NM................................................ 935 .............. 935
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, NM.............. 27 .............. 27
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NM............................... 561 .............. 561
JEMEZ CANYON DAM, NM............................................ 849 .............. 849
MIDDLE RIO GRANDE ENDANGERED SPECIES COLLABORATIVE PROGRAM, NM.. 2,117 .............. 2,117
SANTA ROSA DAM AND LAKE, NM..................................... 1,385 .............. 1,385
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, NM............................. 199 .............. 199
TWO RIVERS DAM, NM.............................................. 1,056 .............. 1,056
UPPER RIO GRANDE WATER OPERATIONS MODEL STUDY, NM............... 746 .............. 746
NEW YORK
ALMOND LAKE, NY................................................. 741 .............. 741
ARKPORT DAM, NY................................................. 330 .............. 330
BAY RIDGE AND RED HOOK CHANNELS, NY............................. .............. 25 25
BLACK ROCK CHANNEL AND TONAWANDA HARBOR, NY..................... 5 .............. 5
BLACK ROCK CHANNEL AND TONAWANDA HARBOR, NY (NAV)............... .............. 6,229 6,229
BRONX RIVER, NY................................................. .............. 30 30
BROWNS CREEK, NY................................................ .............. 30 30
BUFFALO HARBOR, NY.............................................. .............. 2,754 3,055
BUTTERMILK CHANNEL, NY.......................................... .............. 400 400
EAST RIVER, NY.................................................. .............. 10 10
EAST SIDNEY LAKE, NY............................................ 766 .............. 766
EASTCHESTER CREEK, NY........................................... .............. 5 5
FIRE ISLAND INLET TO JONES INLET, NY............................ .............. 50 50
FLUSHING BAY AND CREEK, NY...................................... .............. 30 30
GLEN COVE CREEK, NY............................................. .............. 15 15
GREAT KILLS HARBOR, NY.......................................... .............. 20 20
GREAT SOUTH BAY, NY............................................. .............. 25 25
HUDSON RIVER CHANNEL, NY........................................ .............. 100 100
HUDSON RIVER, NY (MAINT)........................................ .............. 9,650 9,650
HUDSON RIVER, NY (O & C)........................................ .............. 2,704 2,704
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NY............................... 1,391 .............. 1,391
JONES INLET, NY................................................. .............. 50 50
LONG ISLAND INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, NY........................... .............. 50 50
MATTITUCK HARBOR, NY............................................ .............. 15 15
MORICHES INLET, NY.............................................. .............. 50 50
MOUNT MORRIS DAM, NY............................................ 3,785 .............. 3,785
NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY CHANNELS, NY & NJ....................... .............. 9,000 9,000
NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY HARBOR, NY & NJ......................... .............. 16,000 16,000
NEW YORK HARBOR, NY............................................. .............. 8,548 8,548
NEW YORK HARBOR, NY & NJ (DRIFT REMOVAL)........................ .............. 10,373 10,373
NEW YORK HARBOR, NY (PREVENTION OF OBSTRUCTIVE DEPOSITS)........ .............. 1,416 1,416
PORTCHESTER HARBOR, NY.......................................... .............. 50 50
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NY................................... .............. 2,522 2,522
ROCHESTER HARBOR, NY............................................ .............. 1,200 1,200
SHINNECOCK INLET, NY............................................ .............. 50 50
SOUTHERN NEW YORK FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS, NY.................... 854 .............. 854
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, NY.................... .............. 610 610
WESTCHESTER CREEK, NY........................................... .............. 5 5
WHITNEY POINT LAKE, NY.......................................... 1,386 .............. 1,386
NORTH CAROLINA
ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, NC.............................. 5,590 .............. 5,590
B EVERETT JORDAN DAM AND LAKE, NC............................... 4,780 .............. 4,780
CAPE FEAR RIVER ABOVE WILMINGTON, NC............................ 84 .............. 84
CAPE FEAR RIVER ABOVE WILMINGTON, NC (NAV)...................... .............. 317 317
FALLS LAKE, NC.................................................. 3,275 .............. 3,275
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NC............................... 190 .............. 190
MANTEO (SHALLOWBAG) BAY, NC..................................... .............. 1,550 1,550
MASONBORO INLET AND CONNECTING CHANNELS, NC..................... 50 .............. 50
MOREHEAD CITY HARBOR, NC........................................ .............. 5,570 5,570
NEW RIVER INLET, NC............................................. 3,555 .............. 3,555
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NC................................... .............. 700 700
ROLLINSON CHANNEL, NC........................................... .............. 790 790
SILVER LAKE HARBOR, NC.......................................... .............. 1,085 1,085
W KERR SCOTT DAM AND RESERVOIR, NC.............................. 3,417 .............. 3,417
WILMINGTON HARBOR, NC........................................... .............. 14,715 14,715
NORTH DAKOTA
BOWMAN HALEY, ND................................................ 328 .............. 328
GARRISON DAM, LAKE SAKAKAWEA, ND................................ 15,769 .............. 15,769
HOMME LAKE, ND.................................................. 337 .............. 337
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, ND............................... 530 .............. 530
LAKE ASHTABULA AND BALDHILL DAM, ND............................. 1,999 .............. 1,999
PIPESTEM LAKE, ND............................................... 503 .............. 503
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, ND............................. 123 .............. 123
SOURIS RIVER, ND................................................ 2,029 .............. 2,029
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, ND.................... .............. 85 85
OHIO
ALUM CREEK LAKE, OH............................................. 2,236 .............. 2,236
ASHTABULA HARBOR, OH............................................ .............. 2,359 2,359
BERLIN LAKE, OH................................................. 3,098 .............. 3,098
CAESAR CREEK LAKE, OH........................................... 2,145 .............. 2,145
CLARENCE J BROWN DAM, OH........................................ 1,268 .............. 1,268
CLEVELAND HARBOR, OH............................................ .............. 6,789 7,139
CONNEAUT HARBOR, OH............................................. .............. 1,130 1,130
DEER CREEK LAKE, OH............................................. 1,664 .............. 1,664
DELAWARE LAKE, OH............................................... 2,393 .............. 2,393
DILLON LAKE, OH................................................. 1,495 .............. 1,495
FAIRPORT HARBOR, OH............................................. .............. 1,158 1,158
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, OH............................... 736 .............. 736
MASSILLON LOCAL PROTECTION PROJECT, OH.......................... 101 .............. 101
MICHAEL J KIRWAN DAM AND RESERVOIR, OH.......................... 1,466 .............. 1,466
MOSQUITO CREEK LAKE, OH......................................... 1,857 .............. 1,857
MUSKINGUM RIVER LAKES, OH....................................... 17,127 .............. 17,127
NORTH BRANCH KOKOSING RIVER LAKE, OH............................ 556 .............. 556
OHIO-MISSISSIPPI FLOOD CONTROL, OH.............................. 1,699 .............. 1,699
PAINT CREEK LAKE, OH............................................ 1,523 .............. 1,523
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, OH................................... .............. 306 306
ROSEVILLE LOCAL PROTECTION PROJECT, OH.......................... 37 .............. 37
SANDUSKY HARBOR, OH............................................. .............. 1,313 1,313
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, OH.................... .............. 255 255
TOLEDO HARBOR, OH............................................... .............. 4,427 4,427
TOM JENKINS DAM, OH............................................. 825 .............. 825
WEST FORK OF MILL CREEK LAKE, OH................................ 2,412 .............. 2,412
WILLIAM H HARSHA LAKE, OH....................................... 2,665 .............. 2,665
OKLAHOMA
ARCADIA LAKE, OK................................................ 615 .............. 615
BIRCH LAKE, OK.................................................. 778 .............. 778
BROKEN BOW LAKE, OK............................................. 2,074 .............. 2,074
CANTON LAKE, OK................................................. 2,119 .............. 2,119
COPAN LAKE, OK.................................................. 1,171 .............. 1,171
EUFAULA LAKE, OK................................................ 6,828 .............. 6,828
FORT GIBSON LAKE, OK............................................ 4,998 .............. 4,998
FORT SUPPLY LAKE, OK............................................ 917 .............. 917
GREAT SALT PLAINS LAKE, OK...................................... 298 .............. 298
HEYBURN LAKE, OK................................................ 861 .............. 861
HUGO LAKE, OK................................................... 2,524 .............. 2,524
HULAH LAKE, OK.................................................. 735 .............. 735
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, OK............................... 650 .............. 650
KAW LAKE, OK.................................................... 2,215 .............. 2,215
KEYSTONE LAKE, OK............................................... 4,539 .............. 4,539
MCCLELLAN-KERR ARKANSAS RIVER NAVIGATION SYSTEM, OK............. 20,810 .............. 20,810
OOLOGAH LAKE, OK................................................ 2,320 .............. 2,320
OPTIMA LAKE, OK................................................. 63 .............. 63
PENSACOLA RESERVOIR, LAKE OF THE CHEROKEES, OK.................. 164 .............. 164
PINE CREEK LAKE, OK............................................. 1,671 .............. 1,671
SARDIS LAKE, OK................................................. 1,285 .............. 1,285
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, OK............................. 1,360 .............. 1,360
SKIATOOK LAKE, OK............................................... 1,697 .............. 1,697
TENKILLER FERRY LAKE, OK........................................ 4,318 .............. 4,318
WAURIKA LAKE, OK................................................ 1,859 .............. 1,859
WISTER LAKE, OK................................................. 758 .............. 758
OREGON
APPLEGATE LAKE, OR.............................................. 1,042 .............. 1,042
BLUE RIVER LAKE, OR............................................. 1,014 .............. 1,014
BONNEVILLE LOCK AND DAM, OR & WA................................ 2,084 .............. 2,084
BONNEVILLE LOCK AND DAM, OR & WA (NAV).......................... .............. 5,915 5,915
CHETCO RIVER, OR................................................ .............. 785 785
COLUMBIA RIVER AT THE MOUTH, OR & WA............................ .............. 23,535 23,535
COOS BAY, OR.................................................... .............. 6,958 6,958
COQUILLE RIVER, OR.............................................. .............. 26 26
COTTAGE GROVE LAKE, OR.......................................... 1,261 .............. 1,261
COUGAR LAKE, OR................................................. 2,360 .............. 2,360
DEPOE BAY, OR................................................... .............. 10 10
DETROIT LAKE, OR................................................ 5,894 .............. 5,894
DORENA LAKE, OR................................................. 1,281 .............. 1,281
ELK CREEK LAKE, OR.............................................. 174 .............. 174
FALL CREEK LAKE, OR............................................. 1,475 .............. 1,475
FERN RIDGE LAKE, OR............................................. 2,013 .............. 2,013
GREEN PETER--FOSTER LAKES, OR................................... 2,147 .............. 2,147
HILLS CREEK LAKE, OR............................................ 1,483 .............. 1,483
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, OR.............. 60 .............. 60
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, OR............................... 628 .............. 628
JOHN DAY LOCK AND DAM, OR & WA.................................. 5,688 .............. 5,688
LOOKOUT POINT LAKE, OR.......................................... 2,052 .............. 2,052
LOST CREEK LAKE, OR............................................. 3,621 .............. 3,621
MCNARY LOCK AND DAM, OR & WA.................................... 9,623 .............. 9,623
NEHALEM BAY, OR................................................. .............. 5 5
PORT ORFORD, OR................................................. .............. 5 5
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, OR................................... .............. 400 400
ROGUE RIVER AT GOLD BEACH, OR................................... .............. 5 5
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, OR............................. 99 .............. 99
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, OR.................... .............. .............. 10,265
SIUSLAW RIVER, OR............................................... .............. 10 10
SKIPANON CHANNEL, OR............................................ .............. 5 5
TILLAMOOK BAY & BAR, OR......................................... .............. 5 5
UMPQUA RIVER, OR................................................ .............. 939 939
WILLAMETTE RIVER AT WILLAMETTE FALLS, OR........................ 161 .............. 161
WILLAMETTE RIVER BANK PROTECTION, OR............................ 170 .............. 170
WILLOW CREEK LAKE, OR........................................... 748 .............. 748
YAQUINA BAY AND HARBOR, OR...................................... .............. 3,080 3,080
PENNSYLVANIA
ALLEGHENY RIVER, PA............................................. 7,863 .............. 7,863
ALVIN R BUSH DAM, PA............................................ 874 .............. 874
AYLESWORTH CREEK LAKE, PA....................................... 416 .............. 416
BELTZVILLE LAKE, PA............................................. 1,640 .............. 1,640
BLUE MARSH LAKE, PA............................................. 3,682 .............. 3,682
CONEMAUGH RIVER LAKE, PA........................................ 1,703 .............. 1,703
COWANESQUE LAKE, PA............................................. 2,664 .............. 2,664
CROOKED CREEK LAKE, PA.......................................... 2,955 .............. 2,955
CURWENSVILLE LAKE, PA........................................... 1,060 .............. 1,060
DELAWARE RIVER, PHILADELPHIA, PA TO TRENTON, NJ................. .............. 3,850 3,850
EAST BRANCH CLARION RIVER LAKE, PA.............................. 5,891 .............. 5,891
FOSTER JOSEPH SAYERS DAM, PA.................................... 2,165 .............. 2,165
FRANCIS E WALTER DAM, PA........................................ 2,720 .............. 2,720
GENERAL EDGAR JADWIN DAM AND RESERVOIR, PA...................... 337 .............. 337
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, PA.............. 60 .............. 60
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, PA............................... 1,110 .............. 1,110
JOHNSTOWN, PA................................................... 1,581 .............. 1,581
KINZUA DAM AND ALLEGHENY RESERVOIR, PA.......................... 1,550 .............. 1,550
LOYALHANNA LAKE, PA............................................. 1,529 .............. 1,529
MAHONING CREEK LAKE, PA......................................... 1,457 .............. 1,457
MONONGAHELA RIVER, PA........................................... 15,183 .............. 15,183
OHIO RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS, PA, OH & WV.......................... 45,472 .............. 45,472
OHIO RIVER OPEN CHANNEL WORK, PA, OH & WV....................... 1,765 .............. 1,765
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, PA................................... .............. 170 170
PROMPTON LAKE, PA............................................... 850 .............. 850
PUNXSUTAWNEY, PA................................................ 719 .............. 719
RAYSTOWN LAKE, PA............................................... 5,281 .............. 5,281
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, PA............................. 76 .............. 76
SCHUYLKILL RIVER, PA............................................ .............. 100 100
SHENANGO RIVER LAKE, PA......................................... 3,080 .............. 3,080
STILLWATER LAKE, PA............................................. 872 .............. 872
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, PA.................... .............. 105 105
TIOGA--HAMMOND LAKES, PA........................................ 3,480 .............. 3,480
TIONESTA LAKE, PA............................................... 2,699 .............. 2,699
UNION CITY LAKE, PA............................................. 611 .............. 611
WOODCOCK CREEK LAKE, PA......................................... 1,156 .............. 1,156
YORK INDIAN ROCK DAM, PA........................................ 1,396 .............. 1,396
YOUGHIOGHENY RIVER LAKE, PA & MD................................ 2,827 .............. 2,827
PUERTO RICO
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, PR............................... 134 .............. 134
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, PR................................... .............. 100 100
SAN JUAN HARBOR, PR............................................. .............. 630 630
RHODE ISLAND
BLOCK ISLAND HARBOR OF REFUGE, RI............................... .............. 2,550 2,550
FOX POINT BARRIER, NARRANGANSETT BAY, RI........................ 2,335 .............. 2,335
GREAT SALT POND, BLOCK ISLAND, RI............................... .............. 350 350
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, RI............................... 134 .............. 134
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, RI................................... .............. 300 300
WOONSOCKET, RI.................................................. 1,424 .............. 1,424
SOUTH CAROLINA
ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, SC.............................. 3,487 .............. 3,487
CHARLESTON HARBOR, SC........................................... .............. 20,564 20,564
COOPER RIVER, CHARLESTON HARBOR, SC............................. .............. 3,867 3,867
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, SC............................... 75 .............. 75
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, SC................................... .............. 875 875
SOUTH DAKOTA
BIG BEND DAM, LAKE SHARPE, SD................................... 9,900 .............. 9,900
COLD BROOK LAKE, SD............................................. 345 .............. 345
COTTONWOOD SPRINGS LAKE, SD..................................... 260 .............. 260
FORT RANDALL DAM, LAKE FRANCIS CASE, SD......................... 12,178 .............. 12,178
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, SD............................... 356 .............. 356
LAKE TRAVERSE, SD & MN.......................................... 827 .............. 827
OAHE DAM, LAKE OAHE, SD & ND.................................... 12,865 .............. 12,865
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, SD............................. 144 .............. 144
TENNESSEE
CENTER HILL LAKE, TN............................................ 7,719 .............. 7,719
CHEATHAM LOCK AND DAM, TN....................................... 8,384 .............. 8,384
CHICKAMAUGA LOCK, TENNESSEE RIVER, TN........................... 3,253 .............. 3,253
CORDELL HULL DAM AND RESERVOIR, TN.............................. 8,571 .............. 8,571
DALE HOLLOW LAKE, TN............................................ 7,828 .............. 7,828
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, TN............................... 328 .............. 328
J PERCY PRIEST DAM AND RESERVOIR, TN............................ 5,623 .............. 5,623
OLD HICKORY LOCK AND DAM, TN.................................... 11,491 .............. 11,491
TENNESSEE RIVER, TN............................................. 25,952 .............. 25,952
WOLF RIVER HARBOR, TN........................................... .............. 920 920
TEXAS
AQUILLA LAKE, TX................................................ 1,140 .............. 1,140
ARKANSAS--RED RIVER BASINS CHLORIDE CONTROL--AREA VIII, TX...... 1,799 .............. 1,799
BARDWELL LAKE, TX............................................... 2,045 .............. 2,045
BELTON LAKE, TX................................................. 4,752 .............. 4,752
BENBROOK LAKE, TX............................................... 4,159 .............. 4,159
BRAZOS ISLAND HARBOR, TX........................................ .............. 85 85
BUFFALO BAYOU AND TRIBUTARIES, TX............................... 3,343 .............. 3,343
CANYON LAKE, TX................................................. 5,070 .............. 5,070
CHANNEL TO HARLINGEN, TX........................................ .............. 650 650
CHANNEL TO PORT BOLIVAR, TX..................................... .............. 100 100
CORPUS CHRISTI SHIP CHANNEL, TX................................. .............. 5,050 5,300
DENISON DAM, LAKE TEXOMA, TX.................................... 7,980 .............. 7,980
ESTELLINE SPRINGS EXPERIMENTAL PROJECT, TX...................... 39 .............. 39
FERRELLS BRIDGE DAM, LAKE O' THE PINES, TX...................... 4,159 .............. 4,159
FREEPORT HARBOR, TX............................................. .............. 4,700 4,700
GALVESTON HARBOR AND CHANNEL, TX................................ .............. 6,630 6,630
GIWW, CHANNEL TO VICTORIA, TX................................... .............. 30 30
GIWW, CHANNEL TO CHOCOLATE BAYOU, TX............................ .............. 30 30
GRANGER DAM AND LAKE, TX........................................ 6,772 .............. 6,772
GRAPEVINE LAKE, TX.............................................. 5,185 .............. 5,185
GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, TX.................................. 25,500 .............. 25,500
HORDS CREEK LAKE, TX............................................ 1,619 .............. 1,619
HOUSTON SHIP CHANNEL, TX........................................ .............. 23,300 23,300
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, TX............................... 1,657 .............. 1,657
JIM CHAPMAN LAKE, TX............................................ 1,895 .............. 1,895
JOE POOL LAKE, TX............................................... 2,645 .............. 2,645
LAKE KEMP, TX................................................... 280 .............. 280
LAVON LAKE, TX.................................................. 3,932 .............. 3,932
LEWISVILLE DAM, TX.............................................. 7,557 .............. 7,557
MATAGORDA SHIP CHANNEL, TX...................................... .............. 6,450 6,450
NAVARRO MILLS LAKE, TX.......................................... 2,042 .............. 2,042
NORTH SAN GABRIEL DAM AND LAKE GEORGETOWN, TX................... 4,231 .............. 4,231
O C FISHER DAM AND LAKE, TX..................................... 2,851 .............. 2,851
PAT MAYSE LAKE, TX.............................................. 1,397 .............. 1,397
PROCTOR LAKE, TX................................................ 2,666 .............. 2,666
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, TX................................... .............. 325 325
RAY ROBERTS LAKE, TX............................................ 2,172 .............. 2,172
SABINE--NECHES WATERWAY, TX..................................... .............. 11,250 11,250
SAM RAYBURN DAM AND RESERVOIR, TX............................... 8,963 .............. 8,963
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, TX............................. 295 .............. 295
SOMERVILLE LAKE, TX............................................. 4,904 .............. 4,904
STILLHOUSE HOLLOW DAM, TX....................................... 6,621 .............. 6,621
TEXAS CITY SHIP CHANNEL, TX..................................... .............. 50 50
TOWN BLUFF DAM, B A STEINHAGEN LAKE, TX......................... 7,582 .............. 7,582
WACO LAKE, TX................................................... 5,669 .............. 5,669
WALLISVILLE LAKE, TX............................................ 2,232 .............. 2,232
WHITNEY LAKE, TX................................................ 10,253 .............. 10,253
WRIGHT PATMAN DAM AND LAKE, TX.................................. 5,418 .............. 5,418
UTAH
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, UT............................... 24 .............. 24
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, UT............................. 477 .............. 477
VERMONT
BALL MOUNTAIN, VT............................................... 1,434 .............. 1,434
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, VT............................... 174 .............. 174
NORTH HARTLAND LAKE, VT......................................... 1,171 .............. 1,171
NORTH SPRINGFIELD LAKE, VT...................................... 739 .............. 739
TOWNSHEND LAKE, VT.............................................. 1,577 .............. 1,577
UNION VILLAGE DAM, VT........................................... 860 .............. 860
VIRGIN ISLANDS
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, VI............................... 49 .............. 49
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, VI................................... .............. 50 50
VIRGINIA
ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY--ACC, VA......................... 2,644 .............. 2,644
ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY--DSC, VA......................... 1,438 .............. 1,438
GATHRIGHT DAM AND LAKE MOOMAW, VA............................... 2,709 .............. 2,709
HAMPTON ROADS, NORFOLK & NEWPORT NEWS HARBOR, VA (DRIFT REMOVAL) .............. 1,500 1,500
HAMPTON ROADS, VA (PREVENTION OF OBSTRUCTIVE DEPOSITS).......... .............. 38 38
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, VA............................... 432 .............. 432
JAMES RIVER CHANNEL, VA......................................... .............. 350 350
JOHN H KERR LAKE, VA & NC....................................... 13,820 .............. 13,820
JOHN W FLANNAGAN DAM AND RESERVOIR, VA.......................... 2,888 .............. 2,888
NORFOLK HARBOR, VA.............................................. .............. 21,625 21,925
NORTH FORK OF POUND RIVER LAKE, VA.............................. 848 .............. 848
PHILPOTT LAKE, VA............................................... 5,520 .............. 5,520
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, VA................................... .............. 1,215 1,215
WASHINGTON
BELLINGHAM HARBOR, WA........................................... .............. 2 2
CHIEF JOSEPH DAM, WA............................................ 600 .............. 600
COLUMBIA AND LOWER WILLAMETTE RIVERS BELOW VANCOUVER, WA & .............. 47,220 47,220
PORTLAND, OR...................................................
COLUMBIA RIVER AT BAKER BAY, WA & OR............................ .............. 5 5
COLUMBIA RIVER BETWEEN CHINOOK AND SAND ISLAND, WA.............. .............. 1 1
COLUMBIA RIVER BETWEEN VANCOUVER, WA AND THE DALLES, OR......... .............. 881 881
COLUMBIA RIVER FISH MITIGATION, WA, OR & ID..................... 3,476 .............. 3,476
EVERETT HARBOR AND SNOHOMISH RIVER, WA.......................... .............. 1,980 1,980
FRIDAY HARBOR, WA............................................... .............. 2 2
GRAYS HARBOR, WA................................................ .............. 11,237 11,237
HOWARD HANSON DAM, WA........................................... 12,680 .............. 12,680
ICE HARBOR LOCK AND DAM, WA..................................... 5,075 .............. 5,075
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, WA.............. 70 .............. 70
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WA............................... 922 .............. 922
LAKE CROCKETT (KEYSTONE HARBOR), WA............................. .............. 16 16
LAKE WASHINGTON SHIP CANAL, WA.................................. 1,079 .............. 1,079
LAKE WASHINGTON SHIP CANAL, WA (NAV)............................ .............. 6,987 6,987
LITTLE GOOSE LOCK AND DAM, WA................................... 3,506 .............. 3,506
LOWER GRANITE LOCK AND DAM, WA.................................. 4,347 .............. 4,347
LOWER MONUMENTAL LOCK AND DAM, WA............................... 3,430 .............. 3,430
MILL CREEK LAKE, WA............................................. 5,486 .............. 5,486
MOUNT SAINT HELENS SEDIMENT CONTROL, WA......................... 135 .............. 135
MUD MOUNTAIN DAM, WA............................................ 6,174 .............. 6,174
NEAH BAY, WA.................................................... .............. 17 17
OLYMPIA HARBOR, WA.............................................. .............. 2 2
PORT TOWNSEND, WA............................................... .............. 14 14
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, WA................................... .............. 1,046 1,046
PUGET SOUND AND TRIBUTARY WATERS, WA............................ .............. 1,485 1,485
QUILLAYUTE RIVER, WA............................................ .............. 1,673 1,673
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, WA............................. 463 .............. 463
SEATTLE HARBOR, WA.............................................. .............. 1,816 1,816
STILLAGUAMISH RIVER, WA......................................... 2,917 .............. 2,917
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, WA.................... .............. 80 80
SWINOMISH CHANNEL, WA........................................... .............. 2 2
TACOMA HARBOR, WA............................................... .............. 15 15
TACOMA, PUYALLUP RIVER, WA...................................... 178 .............. 178
THE DALLES LOCK AND DAM, WA & OR................................ 3,274 .............. 3,274
WILLAPA RIVER AND HARBOR, WA.................................... .............. 44 44
WEST VIRGINIA
BEECH FORK LAKE, WV............................................. 1,842 .............. 1,842
BLUESTONE LAKE, WV.............................................. 4,863 .............. 4,863
BURNSVILLE LAKE, WV............................................. 3,240 .............. 3,240
EAST LYNN LAKE, WV.............................................. 2,183 .............. 2,183
ELKINS, WV...................................................... 118 .............. 118
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WV............................... 474 .............. 474
KANAWHA RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS, WV................................ 9,978 .............. 9,978
OHIO RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS, WV, KY & OH.......................... 29,834 .............. 29,834
OHIO RIVER OPEN CHANNEL WORK, WV, KY & OH....................... 2,684 .............. 2,684
R D BAILEY LAKE, WV............................................. 1,811 .............. 1,811
STONEWALL JACKSON LAKE, WV...................................... 1,504 .............. 1,504
SUMMERSVILLE LAKE, WV........................................... 2,579 .............. 2,579
SUTTON LAKE, WV................................................. 2,522 .............. 2,522
TYGART LAKE, WV................................................. 1,693 .............. 1,693
WISCONSIN
EAU GALLE RIVER LAKE, WI........................................ 829 .............. 829
FOX RIVER, WI................................................... 4,267 .............. 4,267
GREEN BAY HARBOR, WI............................................ .............. 3,920 3,920
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WI............................... 41 .............. 41
KEWAUNEE HARBOR, WI............................................. 18 .............. 18
MILWAUKEE HARBOR, WI............................................ .............. 2,570 2,570
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, WI................................... .............. 325 325
STURGEON BAY HARBOR AND LAKE MICHIGAN SHIP CANAL, WI............ 6 .............. 6
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, WI.................... .............. 200 200
WYOMING
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, WY.............. 15 .............. 15
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WY............................... 123 .............. 123
JACKSON HOLE LEVEES, WY......................................... 588 .............. 588
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, WY............................. 107 .............. 107
-----------------------------------------------
SUBTOTAL, PROJECTS LISTED UNDER STATES.................... 1,943,355 892,425 2,847,596
REMAINING ITEMS
ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR ONGOING WORK NAVIGATION MAINTENANCE...... .............. .............. 25,000
DEEP-DRAFT HARBOR AND CHANNEL........................... .............. .............. 473,952
DONOR AND ENERGY TRANSFER PORTS......................... .............. .............. 50,000
INLAND WATERWAYS........................................ .............. .............. 50,000
SMALL, REMOTE, OR SUBSISTENCE NAVIGATION................ .............. .............. 50,000
OTHER AUTHORIZED PURPOSES................................... .............. .............. 45,000
AQUATIC NUISANCE CONTROL RESEARCH............................... 675 .............. 675
ASSET MANAGEMENT/FACILITIES AND EQUIP MAINT (FEM)............... 3,650 .............. 4,650
BUDGET/MANAGEMENT SUPPORT FOR O&M BUSINESS PROGRAMS STEWARDSHIP 900 .............. 900
SUPPORT PROGRAM................................................
PERFORMANCE-BASED BUDGETING SUPPORT PROGRAM................. 2,000 .............. 2,000
RECREATION MANAGEMENT SUPPORT PROGRAM....................... 1,550 .............. 1,550
OPTIMIZATION TOOLS FOR NAVIGATION........................... 322 .............. 322
CIVIL WORKS WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (CWWMS)..................... 10,000 .............. 10,000
COASTAL INLET RESEARCH PROGRAM.................................. 2,700 .............. 7,975
COASTAL OCEAN DATA SYSTEM (CODS)................................ 2,500 .............. 6,500
CULTURAL RESOURCES (NAGPRA/CURATION)............................ 1,000 .............. 1,000
CYBERSECURITY................................................... 4,000 .............. 4,000
DREDGE MCFARLAND READY RESERVE.................................. .............. 11,690 11,690
DREDGE WHEELER READY RESERVE.................................... .............. 15,000 15,000
DREDGING DATA AND LOCK PERFORMANCE MONITORING SYSTEM............ 1,120 .............. 1,120
DREDGING OPERATIONS AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH (DOER)........... 6,450 .............. 6,450
DREDGING OPERATIONS TECHNICAL SUPPORT PROGRAM (DOTS)............ 2,820 .............. 2,820
EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS REDUCTION PROGRAM............................ 300 .............. 300
FACILITY PROTECTION............................................. 4,500 .............. 4,500
FISH & WILDLIFE OPERATING FISH HATCHERY REIMBURSEMENT........... 5,400 .............. 5,400
HARBOR MAINTENANCE FEE DATA COLLECTION.......................... .............. 795 795
INLAND WATERWAY NAVIGATION CHARTS............................... 4,500 .............. 4,500
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED FEDERAL FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS.......... 20,000 .............. 20,000
MONITORING OF COMPLETED NAVIGATION PROJECTS..................... 3,900 .............. 10,500
NATIONAL COASTAL MAPPING PROGRAM................................ 6,300 .............. 13,000
NATIONAL DAM SAFETY PROGRAM (PORTFOLIO RISK ASSESSMENT)......... 10,000 .............. 15,000
NATIONAL EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS PROGRAM (NEPP).................. 5,500 .............. 5,500
NATIONAL (LEVEE) FLOOD INVENTORY................................ 5,000 .............. 5,000
NATIONAL (MULTIPLE PROJECT) NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT 3,700 .............. 5,200
ACTIVITIES.....................................................
NATIONAL PORTFOLIO ASSESSMENT FOR REALLOCATIONS................. 500 .............. 500
REGIONAL SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM............................ 3,500 .............. 3,500
RESPONSE TO CLIMATE CHANGE AT CORPS PROJECTS.................... .............. .............. 1,500
REVIEW OF NON-FEDERAL ALTERATIONS OF CIVIL WORKS
PROJECTS (SECTION 408)...................................... 8,500 .............. 8,500
SUSTAINABLE RIVERS PROGRAM (SRP)................................ 400 .............. 400
VETERAN'S CURATION PROGRAM AND COLLECTIONS MANAGEMENT........... 6,500 .............. 6,500
WATERBORNE COMMERCE STATISTICS.................................. 4,670 .............. 4,670
WATER OPERATIONS TECHNICAL SUPPORT (WOTS)....................... 500 .............. 6,500
-----------------------------------------------
SUBTOTAL, REMAINING ITEMS................................. 133,357 27,485 892,369
ACCOUNTING ADJUSTMENT........................................... 21 8 35
-----------------------------------------------
TOTAL, OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.......................... 2,076,733 919,918 3,740,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coastal Inlet Research Program.--The Committee understands
that communities, infrastructure, commerce, and resources that
are tied to the coastal nearshore region are all vulnerable to
damage from extreme coastal events and long-term coastal
change. The Committee recommends additional funding to
establish a multi-university-led effort to identify engineering
frameworks to address coastal resilience needs, to develop
adaptive pathways that lead to coastal resilience, measure the
coastal forces that lead to infrastructure damage and erosion
during extreme storm events, and to improve coupling of
terrestrial and coastal models. Funding in addition to the
budget request is also recommended for the Corps to continue
work with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's
National Water Center on protecting the Nation's water
resources.
Debris Removal.--Funding is recommended for debris removal
activities pursuant to 33 U.S.C. 603a, as amended by the WIIN
Act, with priority given to urban waterways.
Donor and Energy Transfer Ports.--The additional funding
recommended in this account for donor and energy transfer ports
shall be allocated in accordance with 33 U.S.C. 2238c. The
Committee notes the Corps issued implementation guidance for
section 1110 of the WIIN Act but has not completed the
necessary work to execute all authorized uses for this funding.
The Committee directs the Corps to fully execute subsection (c)
of 33 U.S.C. 2238c within 90 days of enactment of this act.
Emerging Harbors.--The Committee understands that Hampton
Harbor in New Hampshire qualifies as an emerging harbor. The
Corps is directed to brief the Committees on Appropriation of
both Houses of Congress within 30 days of enactment of this act
on how the Corps prioritizes additional HMTF dollars for
emerging harbors that experience unexpected levels of
deterioration or are at severe risk of closing outside of their
scheduled dredging cycles.
Enhanced Options for Sand Acquisition for Beach
Renourishment Projects.--The Committee urges the Corps to
provide States with guidance and recommendations to implement
cost effective measures and planning for sand management.
Isle of Shoals North and Cape Arundel Dredged Material
Placement Site.-- The Cape Arundel Disposal Site in the State
of Maine selected by the Department of the Army as an
alternative dredged material disposal site under section 103(b)
of the Marine Protection Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972,
shall remain open until April 15, 2024, until the remaining
disposal capacity of the site has been utilized, or until final
designation of an Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site for
southern Maine under section 102(c) of the Marine Protection
Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, whichever first occurs,
provided that the site conditions remain suitable for such
purpose and that the site may not be used for disposal of more
than 80,000 cubic yards from any single dredging project.
John W. Flannagan Dam and Reservoir.--The Committee
supports efforts to optimize regional economic benefits and
enhanced downstream recreation opportunities along the Russell
Fork River. The Committee understands the Corps has recently
completed a Section 216 Initial Appraisal for the John W.
Flannagan Dam and Reservoir and found that a feasibility-level
study is warranted to accommodate additional whitewater
releases. The Committee urges the Corps to implement the
recommendations identified in the Initial Appraisal and within
the additional funds provided in this account, prioritize an
optimization analysis to formulate and evaluate Federal
interest in changing project operations at the John W.
Flannagan Dam and Reservoir as it relates to winter drawdown to
increase regional economic benefits and extend whitewater
recreation opportunities.
Kennebec River Long-Term Maintenance Dredging.--In fiscal
year 2018, Congress directed the Assistant Secretary of the
Army (Civil Works), in consultation with the Navy, to submit a
report to the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of
Congress, proposing a long-term plan for regular maintenance of
the Kennebec River. The Committee urges the Secretary to
prioritize the completion of this report. Within 90 days
enactment of this act, the Secretary shall brief the Committees
on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress on the status of
ongoing discussions with the Navy and the identification of a
long-term plan.
Monitoring of Completed Navigation Projects--Fisheries.--
The Committee is concerned that a reduction in or elimination
of navigational lock operations on the Nation's inland
waterways is having a negative impact on river ecosystems,
particularly the ability of a number of endangered, threatened
and game fish species to migrate through waterways,
particularly during critical spawning periods. The Committee is
aware of preliminary research that indicates reduced lock
operations on certain Corps designated low-use waterways is
directly impacting migration and that there are effective means
to mitigate the impacts. The Committee believes maximizing the
ability of fish to use these locks to move past the dams has
the potential to restore natural and historic long-distance
river migrations that may well be critical to species survival.
In fiscal year 2018, the Committee recommended funding to
continue preliminary research on the impact of reduced lock
operations on riverine fish.
The Committee understands the research underway is proving
valuable and, within available funds for ongoing work, directs
the Corps to continue this research at no less than the 2017
level. The goal of the continued funding is to support the
ongoing research and, where appropriate, expand the work to
look at ecosystem level impacts and additional waterways, lock
structures, lock operation methods, and fish species that will
more fully inform the Corps' operations.
Monitoring of Completed Navigation Projects-Non-Destructive
Testing.--The Committee supports the Corps efforts to
significantly improve safety, efficiency, reliability, and cost
of maintaining critical and aging infrastructure, particularly
post-tensioned anchorages at locks and dams along the navigable
waterways and flood-control facilities in the United States.
The Committee is also aware that innovative and technically
advanced non-destructive testing [NDT] methods of inspection
have been developed collaboratively by the Corps that will
assist in performing this vital mission more safely and more
accurately at significantly less cost than current methods. Of
the funding provided in the Monitoring Completed Navigation
Projects, $600,000 shall be used to continue the validation and
deployment of NDT tools, modeling, and management practices for
trunnion rods on dams of interest in navigable waterways.
Monitoring of Completed Navigation Projects-Structural
Health Monitoring.--Of the funding provided, $4,000,000 shall
be to support the structural health monitoring program to
facilitate research to maximize operations, enhance efficiency,
and protect asset life through catastrophic failure mitigation.
National Dam Safety Program.--In cooperation with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and the Bureau of
Reclamation, the Corps is directed to conduct a comprehensive
Independent External Peer Review [IEPR] of risk-informed dam
safety practices in these three Federal agencies with the
intent to inform improvements broadly in national dam safety
practices. The Corps is directed to contract with an
independent peer review organization in accordance with its
current review policy and the National Academy of Science IEPR
process. The IEPR shall also consider how dam safety practices
are affected by human factors, as well as how risk informed
analysis in other industries may be applicable to dam safety
practices.
San Rafael Channel.--The Committee is aware that the last
full dredging of the San Rafael Channel was in 2002. This lack
of dredging is becoming a public safety issue as the San Rafael
Police and Fire Department, who have taken over emergency
services and search and rescue operations, are based in the
Channel and need access and capacity for bay patrols, rescues,
and other public safety activity. Given public safety concerns,
the Committee urges the Corps to prioritize dredging of the San
Rafael Channel.
Soil Moisture and Snowpack Monitoring Program.--Following
the 2011 Missouri River Flood, the Government Accountability
Office released a report concluding that increased soil
moisture and snowpack monitoring could have mitigated the
impact of the flood on communities along the Missouri River.
Accordingly, WRRDA section 4003 authorized a soil moisture and
snowpack monitoring program to be administered by the Corps in
coordination with the National Oceanic Atmospheric
Administration, the Natural Resources Conservation Service, the
U.S. Geological Survey, and the Bureau of Reclamation. Section
1179 of the WIIN Act identified the Corps as the lead agency
for carrying out and coordinating this monitoring program.
Activities necessary to carry out soil moisture and snowpack
monitoring are eligible for funds provided in this account. The
Corps is also encouraged to provide sufficient funding in
future budget submissions for this program.
Upper Missouri River Basin.--The Committee recognizes the
importance of recreation on Corps-owned sites across the upper
Missouri River Basin and encourages the Corps to prioritize
much needed repairs and other maintenance at these sites.
Water Operations Technical Support.--Funding in addition to
the budget request is included for research into atmospheric
rivers first funded in fiscal year 2015.
WIFIA Planning and Development.--The Water Infrastructure
Finance and Innovation Act [WIFIA] is another alternative
financing tool that has received strong support from many
Members of Congress. The Environmental Protection Agency's
WIFIA program was initiated in fiscal year 2015, but to date,
the Corps has not requested funding nor provided requested
information on how a corresponding program for the Civil Works
program would be implemented. Therefore, the Corps again is
directed to provide to the Committees on Appropriations of both
Houses of Congress a detailed plan for how WIFIA would be
implemented, including an estimated schedule for when funding
could be used to provide loans. The Committee recommends an
additional $1,000,000 in this account to continue that effort.
WRRDA Section 4001.--The Committee urges the Secretary to
follow through on previous direction provided by Congress to
financially support the Susquehanna, Delaware, and Potomac
River Basin Commissions. Congress has made clear its intent and
expects the Corps to budget accordingly. The Corps is directed
to brief the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of
Congress within 30 days of enactment of this act on the Federal
role in the River Basin Commissions.
WRRDA Section 6002.--The Committee supports the Corps'
performing a review of its inventory, in accordance with WRRDA
section 6002, not later than 1 year after the date of enactment
of this act.
Additional Funding for Ongoing Work.--The Committee cannot
support a level of funding that does not fund operation and
maintenance of our Nation's aging infrastructure sufficiently
to ensure continued competitiveness in a global marketplace.
Federal navigation channels maintained at only a fraction of
authorized dimensions and navigation locks and hydropower
facilities well beyond their design life result in economic
inefficiencies and risk infrastructure failure, which can cause
substantial economic losses. The Committee recommendation
includes additional funds for projects and activities to
enhance the Nation's economic growth and international
competitiveness.
The Committee is concerned that the Administration's
criteria for navigation maintenance disadvantage small, remote,
or subsistence harbors and waterways from competing for scarce
navigation maintenance funds. Accordingly, the Committee
directs the Corps to revise the criteria used for determining
which navigation maintenance projects are funded to develop a
reasonable and equitable allocation under the Operation and
Maintenance account. The Committee supports including criteria
to evaluate economic impact that these projects provide to
local and regional economies.
Any costs to cover administrative fees or any other efforts
necessary to resolve encroachments that were the result of past
land surveying errors made by the Corps shall be eligible for
additional funding provided in this account.
When allocating the additional funding recommended in this
account, the Corps shall consider giving priority to the
following:
--Ability to complete ongoing work maintaining authorized
depths and widths of harbors and shipping channels
(including small, remote, or subsistence harbors),
including where contaminated sediments are present.
--Ability to address critical maintenance backlog;
--Presence of the U.S. Coast Guard;
--Extent to which the work will enhance national, regional,
or local economic development;
--Extent to which the work will promote job growth or
international competitiveness;
--Number of jobs created directly by the funded activity;
--Ability to obligate the funds allocated within the calendar
year;
--Ability to complete the project, separable element, project
phase, or useful increment of work within the funds
allocated;
--For harbor maintenance activities,
--Total tonnage handled;
--Total exports;
--Total imports;
--Dollar value of cargo handled;
--Energy infrastructure and national security needs served;
--Designation as strategic seaports;
--Lack of alternative means of freight movement; and
--Savings over alternative means of freight movement.
REGULATORY PROGRAM
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $200,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 200,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 200,000,000
The Committee recommends $200,000,000 for the Regulatory
Program, the same as the budget request.
Salton Sea.--The Committee is concerned with the worsening
air quality and habitat impacts related to Salton Sea and
encourages the Corps to prioritize permitting for the Salton
Sea Management Plan.
FORMERLY UTILIZED SITES REMEDIAL ACTION PROGRAM
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $139,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 120,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 120,000,000
The Committee recommends $120,000,000 for the Formerly
Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program, the same as the budget
request.
FLOOD CONTROL AND COASTAL EMERGENCIES
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $35,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 27,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 35,000,000
The Committee recommends $35,000,000 for Flood Control and
Coastal Emergencies, an increase of $8,000,000 above the budget
request.
EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $185,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... $187,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 193,000,000
The Committee recommends $193,000,000 for Expenses, an
increase of $6,000,000 above the budget request. This
appropriation finances the expenses for the Office of the Chief
of Engineers, the Division Offices, and certain research and
statistical functions of the Corps. No funding is recommended
for creation of an Office of Congressional Affairs.
Additional funding recommended in the Expenses account is
for activities that were previously funded under Remaining
Items and later migrated to the Expenses account. These
include: up to $2,000,000 annually for the executive direction
and management of the Dam Safety Program, which will allow for
more appropriated Construction funds to be used on dam safety
activities; not less than $2,000,000 annually to efficiently
fund the Guidance Update Management Program [GUMP], providing
vital up-to-date policy and technical guidance ensuring the
excellence and quality of Corps Civil Works program; and not
less than $2,000,000 annually for developing a Civil Works Data
Modernization Program that focuses on improving and modernizing
data management systems, data system integration methods, and
making data publically available.
Deauthorizations.--Within 90 days of enactment of this act,
the Corps shall provide to the Committees on Appropriations of
both Houses of Congress a list of all projects that have been
deauthorized or will be deauthorized in the next two fiscal
years as a result of section 1302 of the WIIN Act.
Inventory of Corps Projects.--Within 120 days after
enactment this act, the Corps shall submit to the Committee on
Appropriations of both houses of Congress an inventory of all
authorized Corps studies and projects in each state. For each
study and project identified, the Corps shall include by State,
the specific authorization, respective mission area, remaining
Federal cost to complete, and the current status.
OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE ARMY (CIVIL WORKS)
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $5,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 5,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 5,000,000
The Committee recommends $5,000,000 for the Office of the
Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works), the same as the
budget request.
The Committee counts on a timely and accessible executive
branch in the course of fulfilling its constitutional role in
the appropriations process. The requesting and receiving of
basic, factual information is vital to maintain a transparent
and open governing process. The Committee recognizes that some
discussions internal to the executive branch are pre-decisional
in nature and, therefore, not subject to disclosure. However,
the access to facts, figures, and statistics that inform these
decisions are not subject to the same sensitivity and are
critical to the appropriations process. The administration
needs to do more to ensure timely and complete responses to
these inquiries.
GENERAL PROVISIONS--CORPS OF ENGINEERS--CIVIL
Section 101. The bill includes a provision related to
reprogramming.
Section 102. The bill includes a provision related to
transfers to the Fish and Wildlife Service.
Section 103. The bill includes a provision related to open
Lake disposal of dredged material.
Section 104. The bill includes a provision related to the
acquisition of buoy chain.
Section 105. The bill includes a provision related to
permitting for the discharge of dredged or fill material.
TITLE II
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
CENTRAL UTAH PROJECT COMPLETION ACCOUNT
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $10,500,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 7,983,000
Committee recommendation................................ 15,000,000
The Committee recommends $15,000,000 for the Central Utah
Project Completion Account, which includes $898,000 for
transfer to the Utah Reclamation Mitigation and Conservation
Account for use by the Utah Reclamation Mitigation and
Conservation Commission, $1,398,675 for necessary expenses of
the Secretary of the Interior, and up to $1,500,000 for the
Commission's administrative expenses. This allows the
Department of the Interior to develop water supply facilities
that will continue to sustain economic growth and an enhanced
quality of life in the western States, the fastest growing
region in the United States. The Committee remains committed to
complete the Central Utah Project, which would enable the
project to initiate repayment to the Federal Government.
Bureau of Reclamation
OVERVIEW OF RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $1,478,000,000 for the Bureau of
Reclamation [Reclamation], an increase of $490,983,000 above
the budget request. The Committee recommendation sets
priorities by supporting our Nation's water infrastructure.
INTRODUCTION
In addition to the traditional missions of bringing water
and power to the West, Reclamation continues to develop
programs, initiatives, and activities that will help meet new
water needs and balance the multitude of competing uses of
water in the West. Reclamation is the largest wholesaler of
water in the country, operating 338 reservoirs with a total
storage capacity of 140 million acre-feet. Reclamation projects
deliver 10 trillion gallons of water to more than 31 million
people each year, and provide 1 out of 5 western farmers with
irrigation water for 10 million acres of farmland that produce
60 percent of the Nation's vegetables and 25 percent of its
fruits and nuts. Reclamation manages, with partners, 289
recreation sites that have 90 million visits annually.
FISCAL YEAR 2019 WORK PLAN
The Committee recommends funding above the budget request
for Water and Related Resources. Reclamation is directed to
submit a work plan, not later than 60 days after the date of
enactment of this act, to the Committees on Appropriations of
both Houses of Congress proposing its allocation of these
additional funds. The work plan shall be consistent with the
following general guidance.
--None of the funds may be used for any item for which the
Committee has specifically denied funding.
--The additional funds are provided for ongoing studies or
projects that were either not included in the budget
request or for which the budget request was inadequate.
--Funding associated with a category may be allocated to
eligible studies or projects within that category.
--Reclamation may not withhold funding from a study or
project because it is inconsistent with administration
policy. The Committee notes that these funds are in
excess of the administration's budget request, and that
administration budget metrics should not disqualify a
study or project from being funded.
REPROGRAMMING
The Committee is retaining the reprogramming legislation
provided in the Energy and Water Development and Related
Agencies Appropriations Act, 2018.
DROUGHT RESILIENCY
Congress has invested approximately $500 million over the
past 4 years in drought and water supply-related activities.
The Committee remains intently focused on the need for
substantially increased investment in improving drought
resiliency as well as in finding opportunities for agencies to
combine water supply benefits with other mission priorities. In
Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 2017, the Committee began the transition
from mitigating an ongoing drought in the West to preparing for
the next one. The Committee continues that approach in this
year's bill by recommending another $196 million for the
drought resiliency programs authorized in the WIIN Act.
The Committee directs Reclamation to continue working with
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Marine
Fisheries Service, and relevant State agencies to undertake
comprehensive, around the clock, real-time monitoring of water
supply conditions and their impact on endangered species during
critical periods in the winter and spring.
The Committee believes that the only answer to these
chronic droughts is a combination of additional storage,
substantial investments in desalination and recycling, improved
conveyance, and increased efficiencies in the uses of water
both for agriculture and potable purposes. As the West has
consistently been the fastest growing part of the country, it
is incumbent on Reclamation to lead the way in increasing the
water that is available from year to year and to incentivize
more efficient use of the water that is available.
UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS
The Committee is concerned by a U.S. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement bulletin published in 2017 that confidently
assesses that a Chinese unmanned aerial systems [UAS]
manufacturer was using its products to provide critical
infrastructure data to the Chinese government. Reclamation
shall immediately determine whether UAS that were the subject
of the August 2017 bulletin are currently in use and report
back to the Committee within 180 days. Due to the critical
infrastructure funded in this bill that has an extensive
national security component, any vulnerability to foreign
surveillance is a serious concern to this Committee and
Reclamation shall prioritize purchases of American-made UAS in
the future.
CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING
The Committee did not accept or include congressionally
directed spending, as defined in section 5(a) of rule XLIV of
the Standing Rules of the Senate. However, the Committee has
recommended additional programmatic funds above the budget
request for the Water and Related Resources account. In some
cases, these additional funds have been included within defined
categories, as in prior years, and are described in more detail
in their respective sections below.
WATER AND RELATED RESOURCES
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $1,332,124,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 891,017,000
Committee recommendation................................ 1,382,000,000
The Committee recommends $1,382,000,000 for Water and
Related Resources, an increase of $490,983,000 above the budget
request.
INTRODUCTION
The Water and Related Resources account supports the
development, management, and restoration of water and related
natural resources in the 17 western States. The account
includes funds for operating and maintaining existing
facilities to obtain the greatest overall level of benefits, to
protect public safety, and to conduct studies on ways to
improve the use of water and related natural resources. Work
will be done in partnership and cooperation with non-federal
entities and other Federal agencies.
The Committee recommends increased funding in the Water and
Related Resources account on a number of line items to better
allow Reclamation to address the immediate impacts of the
drought.
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION--WATER AND RELATED RESOURCES
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget estimate Committee recommendation
---------------------------------------------------------------
Project title Resources Facilities Resources Facilities
management OM&R management OM&R
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ARIZONA
AK CHIN INDIAN WATER RIGHTS SETTLEMENT ACT .............. 16,200 .............. 16,200
PROJECT........................................
COLORADO RIVER BASIN--CENTRAL ARIZONA PROJECT... 6,272 648 6,272 648
COLORADO RIVER FRONT WORK AND LEVEE SYSTEM...... 2,303 .............. 2,303 ..............
SALT RIVER PROJECT.............................. 649 250 649 250
SAN CARLOS APACHE TRIBE WATER SETTLEMENT ACT 1,550 .............. 1,550 ..............
PROJECT........................................
YUMA AREA PROJECTS.............................. 1,183 22,626 1,183 22,626
CALIFORNIA
CACHUMA PROJECT................................. 778 790 778 790
CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECTS:........................ .............. .............. .............. ..............
AMERICAN RIVER DIVISION, FOLSOM DAM UNIT/ 1,377 8,838 1,377 8,838
MORMON ISLAND..............................
AUBURN-FOLSOM SOUTH UNIT.................... 35 2,184 35 2,184
DELTA DIVISION.............................. 4,812 6,772 4,812 6,772
EAST SIDE DIVISION.......................... 1,290 2,772 1,290 2,772
FRIANT DIVISION............................. 1,393 3,324 1,393 3,324
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER RESTORATION SETTLEMENT.... 35,000 .............. 35,000 ..............
MISCELLANEOUS PROJECT PROGRAMS.............. 8,771 400 8,771 400
REPLACEMENTS, ADDITIONS, AND EXTRAORDINARY .............. 17,444 .............. 17,444
MAINT. PROGRAM.............................
SACRAMENTO RIVER DIVISION................... 1,675 495 1,675 495
SAN FELIPE DIVISION......................... 185 98 185 98
SAN JOAQUIN DIVISION........................ .............. .............. .............. ..............
SHASTA DIVISION............................. 474 9,460 474 9,460
TRINITY RIVER DIVISION...................... 12,291 4,777 12,291 4,777
WATER AND POWER OPERATIONS.................. 3,989 10,793 3,989 10,793
WEST SAN JOAQUIN DIVISION, SAN LUIS UNIT.... 3,219 5,681 3,219 5,681
ORLAND PROJECT.................................. .............. 873 .............. 873
SALTON SEA RESEARCH PROJECT..................... 300 .............. 300 ..............
SOLANO PROJECT.................................. 1,162 2,534 1,162 2,534
VENTURA RIVER PROJECT........................... 400 36 400 36
COLORADO
ANIMAS-LA PLATA PROJECT......................... 612 2,185 612 2,185
ARMEL UNIT, P-SMBP.............................. 10 393 10 393
COLLBRAN PROJECT................................ 185 2,416 185 2,416
COLORADO-BIG THOMPSON PROJECT................... 198 13,727 198 13,727
FRUITGROWERS DAM PROJECT........................ 50 139 50 139
FRYINGPAN-ARKANSAS PROJECT...................... 152 12,424 152 12,424
FRYINGPAN-ARKANSAS PROJECT--ARKANSAS VALLEY .............. .............. .............. ..............
CONDUIT........................................
GRAND VALLEY UNIT, CRBSCP, TITLE II............. 506 2,326 506 2,326
LEADVILLE/ARKANSAS RIVER RECOVERY PROJECT....... .............. 2,586 .............. 2,586
MANCOS PROJECT.................................. 78 420 78 420
NARROWS UNIT, P-SMBP............................ .............. 38 .............. 38
PARADOX VALLEY UNIT, CRBSCP, TITLE II........... 1,502 2,811 1,502 2,811
PINE RIVER PROJECT.............................. 79 388 79 388
SAN LUIS VALLEY PROJECT, CLOSED BASIN........... 118 2,832 118 2,832
SAN LUIS VALLEY PROJECT, CONEJOS DIVISION....... 16 34 16 34
UNCOMPAHGRE PROJECT............................. 767 174 767 174
UPPER COLORADO RIVER OPERATIONS PROGRAM......... 870 .............. 870 ..............
IDAHO
BOISE AREA PROJECTS............................. 3,014 2,571 3,014 2,571
COLUMBIA AND SNAKE RIVER SALMON RECOVERY PROJECT 19,000 .............. 19,000 ..............
LEWISTON ORCHARDS PROJECTS...................... 1,383 27 1,383 27
MINIDOKA AREA PROJECTS.......................... 2,188 3,475 2,188 3,475
PRESTON BENCH PROJECT........................... 14 33 14 33
KANSAS
ALMENA UNIT, P-SMBP............................. 44 481 44 481
BOSTWICK UNIT, P-SMBP........................... 331 935 331 935
CEDAR BLUFF UNIT, P-SMBP........................ 39 535 39 535
GLEN ELDER UNIT, P-SMBP......................... 71 3,402 71 3,402
KANSAS RIVER UNIT, P-SMBP....................... .............. 102 .............. 102
KIRWIN UNIT, P-SMBP............................. 17 446 17 446
WEBSTER UNIT, P-SMBP............................ 16 481 16 481
WICHITA PROJECT--CHENEY DIVISION................ 88 403 88 403
MONTANA
CANYON FERRY UNIT, P-SMBP....................... 238 5,009 238 5,009
EAST BENCH UNIT, P-SMBP......................... 59 666 59 666
FORT PECK RESERVATION / DRY PRAIRIE RURAL WATER 4,731 .............. 4,731 ..............
SYSTEM.........................................
HELENA VALLEY UNIT, P-SMBP...................... 5 166 5 166
HUNGRY HORSE PROJECT............................ .............. 434 .............. 434
HUNTLEY PROJECT................................. 7 46 7 46
LOWER MARIAS UNIT, P-SMBP....................... 91 1,508 91 1,508
LOWER YELLOWSTONE PROJECT....................... 716 30 716 30
MILK RIVER PROJECT.............................. 447 1,467 447 1,467
MISSOURI BASIN O&M, P-SMBP...................... 1,047 117 1,047 117
ROCKY BOYS/NORTH CENTRAL MT RURAL WATER SYSTEM.. 3,984 .............. 3,984 ..............
SUN RIVER PROJECT............................... 52 268 52 268
YELLOWTAIL UNIT, P-SMBP......................... 22 8,939 22 8,939
NEBRASKA
AINSWORTH UNIT, P-SMBP.......................... 69 131 69 131
FRENCHMAN-CAMBRIDGE UNIT, P-SMBP................ 372 1,964 372 1,964
MIRAGE FLATS PROJECT............................ 13 98 13 98
NORTH LOUP UNIT, P-SMBP......................... 93 140 93 140
NEVADA
LAHONTAN BASIN PROJECT.......................... 4,992 4,859 4,992 4,859
LAKE TAHOE REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM......... 115 .............. 115 ..............
LAKE MEAD /LAS VEGAS WASH PROGRAM............... 700 .............. 700 ..............
NEW MEXICO
CARLSBAD PROJECT................................ 2,551 1,300 2,551 1,300
EASTERN NEW MEXICO RURAL WATER SUPPLY........... .............. .............. .............. ..............
MIDDLE RIO GRANDE PROJECT....................... 12,634 10,885 12,634 10,885
RIO GRANDE PROJECT.............................. 1,860 5,074 1,860 5,074
RIO GRANDE PEUBLOS PROJECT...................... 1,000 .............. 1,000 ..............
TUCUMCARI PROJECT............................... 15 16 15 16
NORTH DAKOTA
DICKINSON UNIT, P-SMBP.......................... .............. 449 .............. 449
GARRISON DIVERSION UNIT, P-SMBP................. 9,221 12,284 9,221 12,284
HEART BUTTE UNIT, P-SMBP........................ 82 1,326 82 1,326
OKLAHOMA
ARBUCKLE PROJECT................................ 66 183 66 183
MCGEE CREEK PROJECT............................. 124 835 124 835
MOUNTAIN PARK PROJECT........................... 34 673 34 673
NORMAN PROJECT.................................. 72 310 72 310
WASHITA BASIN PROJECT........................... 240 1,093 240 1,093
W.C. AUSTIN PROJECT............................. 57 555 57 555
OREGON
CROOKED RIVER PROJECT........................... 268 457 268 457
DESCHUTES PROJECT............................... 386 189 386 189
EASTERN OREGON PROJECTS......................... 471 216 471 216
KLAMATH PROJECT................................. 13,755 3,745 13,755 3,745
ROGUE RIVER BASIN PROJECT, TALENT DIVISION...... 1,774 615 1,774 615
TUALATIN PROJECT................................ 177 216 177 216
UMATILLA PROJECT................................ 572 2,549 572 2,549
SOUTH DAKOTA
ANGOSTURA UNIT, P-SMBP.......................... 130 688 130 688
BELLE FOURCHE UNIT, P-SMBP...................... 385 836 385 836
KEYHOLE UNIT, P-SMBP............................ 198 720 198 720
LEWIS AND CLARK RURAL WATER SYSTEM.............. 100 .............. 100 ..............
MID-DAKOTA RURAL WATER PROJECT.................. .............. 15 .............. 15
MNI WICONI PROJECT.............................. .............. 13,475 .............. 13,475
OAHE UNIT, P-SMBP............................... 37 73 37 73
RAPID VALLEY PROJECT............................ .............. 79 .............. 79
RAPID VALLEY UNIT, P-SMBP....................... .............. 208 .............. 208
SHADEHILL UNIT, P-SMBP.......................... 153 466 153 466
TEXAS
BALMORHEA PROJECT............................... 37 13 37 13
CANADIAN RIVER PROJECT.......................... 57 88 57 88
LOWER RIO GRANDE WATER RESOURCES CONSERVATION 50 .............. 50 ..............
PROGRAM........................................
NUECES RIVER PROJECT............................ 107 869 107 869
SAN ANGELO PROJECT.............................. 37 594 37 594
UTAH
HYRUM PROJECT................................... 90 197 90 197
MOON LAKE PROJECT............................... 19 105 19 105
NEWTON PROJECT.................................. 50 104 50 104
OGDEN RIVER PROJECT............................. 286 224 286 224
PROVO RIVER PROJECT............................. 1,191 512 1,191 512
SANPETE PROJECT................................. 59 13 59 13
SCOFIELD PROJECT................................ 253 99 253 99
STRAWBERRY VALLEY PROJECT....................... 751 46 751 46
WEBER BASIN PROJECT............................. 1,082 959 1,082 959
WEBER RIVER PROJECT............................. 100 198 100 198
WASHINGTON
COLUMBIA BASIN PROJECT.......................... 4,436 8,473 4,436 8,473
WASHINGTON AREA PROJECTS........................ 329 138 329 138
YAKIMA PROJECT.................................. 744 6,083 744 6,083
YAKIMA RIVER BASIN WATER ENHANCEMENT PROJECT.... 13,200 .............. 13,200 ..............
WYOMING
BOYSEN UNIT, P-SMBP............................. 191 1,893 191 1,893
BUFFALO BILL DAM, DAM MODIFICATION, P-SMBP...... 33 2,764 33 2,764
KENDRICK PROJECT................................ 68 4,047 68 4,047
NORTH PLATTE PROJECT............................ 78 1,209 78 1,209
NORTH PLATTE AREA, P-SMBP....................... 72 5,437 72 5,437
OWL CREEK UNIT, P-SMBP.......................... 6 99 6 99
RIVERTON UNIT, P-SMBP........................... 8 580 8 580
SHOSHONE PROJECT................................ 34 761 34 761
---------------------------------------------------------------
SUBTOTAL, ITEMS UNDER STATES.............. 207,939 293,656 207,939 293,656
REMAINING ITEMS
ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR ONGOING WORK RURAL WATER. .............. .............. 86,500 ..............
FISH PASSAGE AND FISH SCREENS............... .............. .............. 10,000 ..............
WATER CONSERVATION AND DELIVERY............. .............. .............. 241,844 ..............
ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION AND COMPLIANCE.... .............. .............. 40,000 ..............
FACILITIES OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, AND .............. .............. .............. 4,000
REHABILITATION.............................
COLORADO RIVER BASIN SALINITY CONTROL PROJECT, 1,934 13,519 1,934 13,519
TITLE I........................................
COLORADO RIVER BASIN SALINITY CONTROL PROJECT, 6,000 .............. 6,000 ..............
TITLE II.......................................
COLORADO RIVER STORAGE PROJECT (CRSP), SECTION 5 3,513 6,397 3,513 6,397
COLORADO RIVER STORAGE PROJECT (CRSP), SECTION 8 3,347 .............. 3,347 ..............
COLORADO RIVER WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 940 .............. 940 ..............
DAM SAFETY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR .............. 1,300 .............. 1,300
DAM SAFETY PROGRAM.............................
INITIATE SAFETY OF DAMS CORRECTIVE ACTION... .............. 66,500 .............. 66,500
SAFETY EVALUATION OF EXISTING DAMS.......... .............. 20,284 .............. 20,284
EMERGENCY PLANNING & DISASTER RESPONSE PROGRAM.. .............. 1,300 .............. 1,300
ENDANGERED SPECIES RECOVERY IMPLEMENTATION 19,152 .............. 19,152 ..............
PROGRAM........................................
ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION............ 1,844 .............. 1,844 ..............
EXAMINATION OF EXISTING STRUCTURES.............. .............. 9,123 .............. 9,123
GENERAL PLANNING ACTIVITIES..................... 2,000 .............. 2,000 ..............
INDIAN WATER RIGHTS SETTLEMENTS AAMODT 8,301 .............. 8,301 ..............
LITIGATION SETTLEMENT..........................
BLACKFEET IWRS.............................. 10,000 .............. 10,000 ..............
CROW TRIBE RIGHTS........................... 12,772 .............. 12,772 ..............
NAVAJO-GALLUP............................... 68,932 671 68,932 671
LAND RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PROGRAM............... 10,684 .............. 10,684 ..............
LOWER COLORADO RIVER OPERATIONS PROGRAM......... 31,176 .............. 31,176 ..............
MISCELLANEOUS FLOOD CONTROL OPERATIONS.......... .............. 980 .............. 980
NATIVE AMERICAN AFFAIRS PROGRAM................. 10,571 .............. 12,425 ..............
NEGOTIATION & ADMINISTRATION OF WATER MARKETING. 2,462 .............. 2,462 ..............
OPERATION & PROGRAM MANAGEMENT.................. 1,204 2,437 1,204 2,437
POWER PROGRAM SERVICES.......................... 2,193 307 2,193 307
PUBLIC ACCESS AND SAFETY PROGRAM................ 600 206 600 206
RECLAMATION LAW ADMINISTRATION.................. 2,148 .............. 2,148 ..............
RECREATION & FISH & WILDLIFE PROGRAM 6,497 .............. 6,497 ..............
ADMINISTRATION.................................
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT:
DESALINATION AND WATER PURIFICATION PROGRAM. 1,753 1,150 18,653 1,150
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM.............. 11,014 .............. 16,765 ..............
SITE SECURITY ACTIVITIES........................ .............. 26,220 .............. 26,220
UNITED STATES/MEXICO BORDER ISSUES--TECHNICAL 90 .............. 90 ..............
SUPPORT........................................
WATERSMART PROGRAM WATERSMART GRANTS............ 10,000 .............. 34,000 ..............
WATER CONSERVATION FIELD SERVICES PROGRAM... 1,750 .............. 4,179 ..............
COOPERATIVE WATERSHED MANAGEMENT............ 250 .............. 2,250 ..............
BASIN STUDIES............................... 2,000 .............. 5,200 ..............
DROUGHT RESPONSE & COMPREHENSIVE DROUGHT 2,901 .............. 4,000 ..............
PLANS......................................
TITLE XVI WATER RECLAMATION & REUSE PROGRAM. 3,000 .............. 54,406 ..............
---------------------------------------------------------------
SUBTOTAL, REMAINING ITEMS................. 239,028 150,394 726,011 154,394
UNDERFINANCING.................................. .............. .............. .............. ..............
---------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL..................................... 446,967 444,050 933,950 448,050
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anadromous Fish Screen Program.--The Committee is concerned
that insufficient resources are being devoted to completing
work on the last two remaining priority unscreened diversions
on the Sacramento River, both of which have been specifically
identified as priorities in the California Natural Resources
Agency Sacramento Valley Salmon Resiliency Strategy. The
Committee strongly urges Reclamation to allocate sufficient
resources from within available funds to complete the screening
of these high priority diversions.
Arkansas Valley Conduit.--The Committee understands
Reclamation has proactively worked over the past year to
identify cost savings by using existing locally owned
facilities. Despite receiving appropriations since 2009 and the
project being in its final phase, the fiscal year 2019 budget
request includes no funding for this Conduit, jeopardizing the
clean drinking water supply to rural Southeastern Colorado. The
Committee further understands that the project could incur a
delay cost of 3 percent, costing taxpayers more than $1,000,000
to achieve the same results. The Committee urges Reclamation to
prioritize additional funding to build and maintain critical
infrastructure in rural communities across the Nation.
Aquifer Recharge.--The Committee is aware that many States
have implemented new methods of recharging aquifers for
increased water storage and drought mitigation. The Committee
directs Reclamation to work closely with project beneficiaries
to identify and resolve any barriers to aquifer recharge
projects when appropriate, while utilizing full authority to
prioritize funds for ongoing projects through completion.
CALFED Water Storage Feasibility Studies.--In testimony
before the Subcommittee, the Commissioner of Reclamation
asserted that the agency would complete feasibility studies for
the Sites and Temperance Flat reservoirs by the end of August
2018 and would complete the feasibility study for the Los
Vaqueros reservoir by November 2018. The Committee notes that
these studies have taken more than 15 years and expects
Reclamation to take such steps as are necessary to ensure that
each of these studies is completed as soon as possible.
Columbia Basin Project.--The Committee understands the
Odessa Subarea of the Columbia Basin Project is facing
significant challenges as groundwater from the aquifer has been
declining. This rapid decline has put agriculture production
and commercial, municipal, and industrial water uses at risk.
The Committee commends Reclamation's work with the State of
Washington and impacted irrigation districts to prevent further
depletion of the aquifer and deliver surface water to
agricultural lands within the Columbia Basin Project through a
pressurized delivery system. In May 2018, Reclamation issued a
Supplemental Information Report for the Odessa Groundwater
Replacement Program that allows Reclamation to request funding
to support the project, which to date has been supported
through State, local, and private investments. The Committee
encourages Reclamation to request funding in future budgets to
support projects associated with the Odessa Groundwater
Replacement Program.
Groundwater Recharge.--Using the funds recommended under
the heading ``Water Conservation and Delivery'', Reclamation
shall make funding available for water conservation programs,
conjunctive use projects, and other projects to maximize
groundwater storage and beneficial use.
Projects Serving Military Installations.--The Committee is
concerned that Reclamation's criteria for allocating funding
have not adequately accounted for projects that would directly
benefit military base operations and national security
facilities. The Committee directs Reclamation to brief the
Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress within
30 days of delivering the report to Congress, which was
required in the fiscal year 2018 appropriations bill, on the
recommendations contained within that report.
Rural Water Projects.--Voluntary funding in excess of
legally required cost shares for rural water projects is
acceptable but shall not be used by Reclamation as a criterion
for allocating additional funding recommended by the Committee
or for budgeting in future years.
Salton Sea.--The Committee encourages Reclamation to
establish an interagency Salton Sea working group to coordinate
Corps permitting, Environmental Protection Agency financing
opportunities, and Department of Agriculture restoration work
as well as expedite implementation of objectives set forth in
the August 2016 Memorandum of Understanding.
Scoggins Dam, Tualatin Project, Oregon.--The Committee
supports the budget request for preconstruction activities at
Scoggins Dam under the Safety of Dams program. Consistent with
the Tualatin Project Water Supply Feasibility Study authorized
in Public Law 108-137 and statutory authority granted by Public
Law 114-113 allowing for additional benefits to be conducted
concurrently with dam safety improvements, the Committee
directs Reclamation to evaluate alternatives, including new or
supplementary works, provided that safety remains the paramount
consideration, to address dam safety modifications and
increased storage capacity. Considering the high risk
associated with Scoggins Dam, the Committee urges Reclamation
to work with local stakeholders and repayment contractors to
prioritize this joint project including feasibility and
environmental review of the preferred alternative in fiscal
year 2019. The Committee understands that a replacement
structure downstream could significantly reduce project costs
for both the Federal Government and local stakeholders.
Reclamation may accept contributed funds from non-federal
contractors to expedite completion of any level of review.
Research and Development: Desalination and Water
Purification Program.--Of the funding recommended for this
program, $12,000,000 shall be for desalination projects as
authorized in section 4009(a) of the WIIN Act.
Research and Development, Science and Technology Program.--
The Committee is aware that the Reclamation Science and
Technology Office has been investing in efforts under the Open
Water Data Initiative to integrate currently fragmented water
supply data from several Federal agencies into a connected,
national water data framework. Furthermore, the Committee
understands that the Science and Technology Office has a future
goal to develop web-based decision support tools. The Committee
urges Reclamation to expedite the development and testing of a
web-based Water Supply Decision Support System that will help
Federal, State, municipal, Tribal, and private water managers
and users make better water-use decisions to support water
conservation and drought resilience in the western States. Such
a system will allow a diverse group of water managers and users
to better leverage the Federal Government's investment in
producing water supply data on river levels, snow pack,
weather, and climate.
St. Mary's Diversion Dam and Conveyance Works.--The
Committee encourages Reclamation to use additional funding for
the Milk River Project to move forward with its design work for
the St. Mary Canal Diversion Dam, including completion of
designs, specifications, and cost estimates. The committee also
encourages Reclamation to consider the replacement of the St.
Mary Canal Diversion Dam as an extraordinary maintenance
measure, and allow local stakeholders additional flexibility in
paying for a dam replacement, instead of one lump sum payment.
WaterSMART Program.--The Committee encourages Reclamation
to prioritize eligible Water Conservation projects that will
provide water supplies to meet the needs of threatened and
endangered species.
WaterSMART Program: Title XVI Water Reclamation & Reuse
Program.--Of the funding recommended for this program,
$20,000,000 shall be for water recycling and reuse projects as
authorized in section 4009(c) of the WIIN Act.
Yakima River Basin Integrated Water Resource Management
Plan.--The Committee supports the Yakima River Basin Integrated
Water Resource Management Plan [Plan]. This innovative water
management plan represents years of collaboration in the Yakima
River Basin among stakeholders including Reclamation, the State
of Washington, the Yakama Nation, irrigators and farmers,
conservation organizations, recreationists, and local
governments to address water supply needs for agriculture, fish
and wildlife, and municipal use. The Committee encourages
Reclamation to request funding in future budgets to implement
additional authorized elements of the Plan.
Additional Funding for Water and Related Resources Work.--
The Committee recommendation includes an additional
$490,983,000 above the budget request for Water and Related
Resources studies, projects, and activities. Priority in
allocating these funds shall be given to advance and complete
ongoing work; including preconstruction activities and where
environmental compliance has been completed; improve water
supply reliability; improve water deliveries; enhance national,
regional, or local economic development; promote job growth;
advance Tribal and nontribal water settlement studies and
activities; or address critical backlog maintenance and
rehabilitation activities. Reclamation is encouraged to
allocate additional funding for aquifer recharging efforts to
address the ongoing backlog of related projects. Of the funds
recommended under the heading ``Water Conservation and
Delivery'', $30,000,000 is allocated to fund Colorado River
water conservation, including the Lower Colorado River
Operations Program and the Upper Colorado River Operations
Program. Of the additional funding recommended under the
heading ``Water Conservation and Delivery'', $134,000,000 shall
be for water storage projects as authorized in section 4007 of
Public Law 114-322. Of the additional funding recommended under
the heading ``Environmental Restoration or Compliance'', not
less than $30,000,000 shall be for activities authorized under
sections 4001 and 4010 of Public Law 114-322 or as set forth in
Federal-State plans for restoring threatened and endangered
fish species affected by the operation of Reclamation's water
projects. Reclamation is reminded that activities authorized
under Indian Water Rights Settlements are eligible to compete
for the additional funding under ``Water Conservation and
Delivery''.
Buried Metallic Water Pipe.--Reclamation shall continue
following its temporary design guidance.
CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT RESTORATION FUND
GROSS APPROPRIATION
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $41,376,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 62,008,000
Committee recommendation................................ 62,008,000
OFFSETTING COLLECTIONS
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $41,376,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 62,008,000
Committee recommendation................................ 62,008,000
NET APPROPRIATION
Appropriations, 2018....................................................
Budget estimate, 2019...................................................
Committee recommendation................................................
The Committee recommends $62,008,000 for the Central Valley
Project Restoration Fund, the same as the budget request. This
appropriation is fully offset by collections, resulting in a
net appropriation of $0.
The Central Valley Project Restoration Fund was authorized
in the Central Valley Project Improvement Act, title 34 of
Public Law 102-575. This fund uses revenues from payments by
project beneficiaries and donations for habitat restoration,
improvement and acquisition, and other fish and wildlife
restoration activities in the Central Valley project area of
California. Payments from project beneficiaries include several
required by the act (Friant Division surcharges, higher charges
on water transferred to non-Central Valley Project users, and
tiered water prices) and, to the extent required in
appropriations acts, additional annual mitigation and
restoration payments.
CALIFORNIA BAY-DELTA RESTORATION
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $37,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 35,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 35,000,000
The Committee recommends $35,000,000 for California Bay-
Delta Restoration, the same as the budget request.
This account funds activities that are consistent with the
CALFED Bay-Delta Program, a collaborative effort involving 18
State and Federal agencies and representatives of California's
urban, agricultural, and environmental communities. The goals
of the program are to improve fish and wildlife habitat, water
supply reliability, and water quality in the San Francisco Bay-
San Joaquin River Delta, the principle hub of California's
water distribution system.
POLICY AND ADMINISTRATION
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $59,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 61,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 61,000,000
The Committee recommends $61,000,000 for Policy and
Administration, the same as the budget request.
This account funds the executive direction and management
of all Reclamation activities, as performed by the
Commissioner's offices in Washington, DC; Denver, Colorado; and
five regional offices. The Denver office and regional offices
charge individual projects or activities for direct beneficial
services and related administrative and technical costs. These
charges are covered under other appropriations.
Reclamation Project Reimbursability Decisions.-- In
September 2017, the Department of the Interior's Office of
Inspector General released a report calling into question
Reclamation's method of financial participation in the State of
California's Bay-Delta Conservation Plan. The Committee is
concerned that Reclamation was not satisfactorily transparent
in its use of funds for activities that were not included in
the budget request. Reclamation is directed to submit an annual
report 60 days after the end of each fiscal year detailing the
use of financial assistance agreements to redirect appropriated
funds from their intended purpose outlined in the previous
year's budget request. Reclamation is directed to review and
report to the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of
Congress within 90 days after enactment of this act, on the
advisability of developing additional financial controls and
requiring more extensive written justifications for
determinations of what costs are reimbursable for complex
projects involving major Federal expenditures and multiple
funding sources.
GENERAL PROVISIONS--DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Section 201. The bill includes a provision regarding
reprogramming.
Section 202. The bill includes a provision regarding the
San Luis Unit and Kesterson Reservoir.
TITLE III
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Overview of Recommendation
The Committee recommends $34,990,015,000 for the Department
of Energy, an increase of $9,512,377,000 above the budget
request.
The Committee recommendation sets priorities by supporting
the Office of Science and ARPA-E, leading the world in
scientific computing, addressing the Federal Government's
responsibility for environmental cleanup and disposal of used
nuclear fuel, keeping large construction projects on time and
on budget, effectively maintaining our nuclear weapons
stockpile, and supporting our nuclear Navy.
Introduction
The mission of the Department of Energy [Department] is to
ensure America's security and prosperity by addressing its
energy, environmental, and nuclear challenges through
transformative science and technology solutions. To accomplish
this mission, the Secretary of Energy [Secretary] relies on a
world-class network of national laboratories, private industry,
universities, States, and Federal agencies, which allows our
brightest minds to solve our Nation's most important
challenges.
The Committee's recommendation for the Department includes
funding in both defense and non-defense budget categories.
Defense funding is recommended for atomic energy defense
activities, including the National Nuclear Security
Administration, which manages our Nation's stockpile of nuclear
weapons, prevents proliferation of dangerous nuclear materials,
and supports the Navy's nuclear fleet; defense environmental
cleanup to remediate the former nuclear weapons complex; and
safeguards and security for Idaho National Laboratory. Non-
defense funding is recommended for the Department's energy
research and development programs (including nuclear, fossil,
and renewable energy, energy efficiency, grid modernization and
resiliency, and the Office of Science), power marketing
administrations, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and
administrative expenses.
Reprogramming Guidelines
The Committee's recommendation includes control points to
ensure the Secretary spends taxpayer funds in accordance with
congressional direction. The Committee's recommendation also
includes reprogramming guidelines to allow the Secretary to
request permission from the Committee for certain expenditures,
as defined below, which would not otherwise be permissible. The
Secretary's execution of appropriated funds shall be fully
consistent with the direction provided under this heading and
in section 301 of the bill, unless the Committee includes
separate guidelines for specific actions in the bill or report.
Prior to obligating any funds for an action defined below
as a reprogramming, the Secretary shall notify and obtain
approval of the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of
Congress. The Secretary shall submit a detailed reprogramming
request in accordance with section 301 of the bill, which
shall, at a minimum, justify the deviation from prior
congressional direction and describe the proposed funding
adjustments with specificity. The Secretary shall not, pending
approval from the Committee, obligate any funds for the action
described in the reprogramming proposal.
The Secretary is also directed to inform the Committees on
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress promptly and fully
when a change in program execution and funding is required
during the fiscal year.
Definition.--A reprogramming includes:
--the reallocation of funds from one activity to another
within an appropriation;
--any significant departure from a program, project,
activity, or organization described in the agency's
budget justification as presented to and approved by
Congress;
--for construction projects, the reallocation of funds from
one construction project identified in the agency's
budget justification to another project or a
significant change in the scope of an approved project;
--adoption of any reorganization proposal which includes
moving prior appropriations between appropriations
accounts; and
--any reallocation of new or prior year budget authority, or
prior year deobligations.
Direction on Research and Development Activities
The budget request proposes a shift away from later-stage
research and development activities to refocus the Department
on an early-stage research and development mission. The
Committee believes that such an approach will not successfully
integrate the results of early-stage research and development
into the U.S. energy system and thus will not adequately
deliver innovative energy technologies, practices, and
information to American consumers and companies. The Committee
directs the Department to implement mid- and late-stage
research and development activities as directed in this report
in a timely manner.
Crosscutting Initiatives
The recommendation supports several crosscutting
initiatives funded in prior years that reach outside of
individual program offices to draw on the diverse disciplines
within the agency as a whole. These initiatives, which address
the Energy-Water Nexus; grid modernization; subsurface science,
technology and engineering research, development, and
deployment; cybersecurity; advanced materials, and the Beyond
Batteries Initiative have allowed for a more comprehensive
review of complex issues.
Grid Modernization.--The Department is directed to continue
the ongoing work between the national laboratories, industry,
and universities to improve grid reliability and resiliency
through the strategic goals of the Grid Modernization
Initiative and encourages the Department to include all applied
energy programs to ensure broad energy system resilience and
modernization. Further, the Committee supports the Grid
Modernization Laboratory Consortium and supports continued
implementation of the Grid Multi-Year Program Plan. The
Committee directs the Department to emphasize national grid
resilience modeling and improved grid cyber resilience to
address emerging national resilience challenges of the grid and
related energy systems, planned investments in energy storage
to improve grid flexibility and resilience, and advanced
sensors and control paradigms that promise to improve energy
system resilience of the future smart grid. The Committee
recognizes that the inaugural projects funded for a 3-year
duration will be concluding in fiscal year 2019 and therefore
the Department is directed to continue support for the Grid
Modernization Initiative and the Grid Modernization Laboratory
Consortium and provide a plan to Congress to extend the multi-
year program plan to include priorities for field validation of
the most successful research outcomes with industry and State
stakeholders to accelerate adoption of the key Department
results.
Beyond Batteries Initiative.--The Committee is supportive
of the Department's approach to consider energy storage
holistically, and focus on advances in controllable loads,
hybrid systems, and new approaches to energy storage. The
Committee agrees that advances in this wide range of energy
storage technologies will allow for loads to be combined with
generation from all sources to optimize use of existing assets
to provide grid services, and increase grid reliability. The
Department shall continue to use all of its capabilities to
accelerate the development of storage technologies, including
the basic research capabilities of the Office of Science, the
technology expertise of the Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, the grid-level knowledge of the Office of
Cybersecurity, Energy Security and Emergency Response, and the
rapid technology development capabilities of ARPA-E. The
Committee directs the Department to coordinate efforts among
various existing Department programs to maximize efficiency of
funds and expand vital research.
The Department is encouraged to prioritize achieving a
long-term goal of deploying technologies at $100/kWh or less
cost installed while being able to cycle twice per day,
discharging for at least 4 hours, with a lifetime of roughly 20
years or at least 8,000 cycles.
Subsurface Crosscut.--The Committee supports the ongoing
Subsurface Technology and Engineering Research [SubTER]
Initiative, focused on revolutionizing sustainable subsurface
energy production and storage through transformational
improvements in the ability to access, characterize, predict,
and adaptively manipulate subsurface fracture and flow
processes. SubTER aims to double reservoir recovery, decrease
the environmental footprint, and enhance energy security and
public safety. The Committee supports the SubTER program's
approach to increasing domestic supply of oil, gas, and
geothermal energy resources by manipulating the permeability of
subsurface rock formations to injection fluids. To validate
methods which enhance oil and gas recovery from fracking wells,
the Committee encourages the Department to conduct pilot field
tests of promising technologies with university and industry
partners to reduce permeability and control the flow of fluids
in the subsurface with targets of blocking highly permeable
pathways that reduce sweep efficiency in porous rock and
plugging fractures in shales.
Energy-Water Nexus.--The Committee recognizes water and
energy are critical resources that are reciprocally linked. The
Energy-Water Nexus crosscut consists of a collaboration of
agencies, national laboratories, State and local governments,
utilities, industry, and the science community working
collectively to address energy and water resource challenges,
specifically as they relate to energy security and energy
sector water needs.
Advanced Materials.--The Committee supports the
Department's attention to advanced materials research and
development, focusing on lightweight materials and composites,
and corrosion and materials under extremes. The Committee
understands in previous years, other program offices
independently had standalone existing materials programs, and
continues to support formal coordination across offices through
the Materials Working Group. Continued coordination supports
the Department's ability to impact the materials development
cycle from scientific discovery to technological innovation and
deployment.
Cybersecurity Crosscut.--Cybersecurity activities within
the Department cover a broad scope ranging from the protection
of Department assets against cybersecurity threats to improving
cybersecurity in the electric power and oil and natural gas
sectors to other areas in the national security portfolio. As
cybersecurity threats become more complex, and the Department
increases its focus on cybersecurity research and development,
it is vital that there be clear crosscutting objectives and
coordination across the Department. The Committee directs the
Department to develop a plan that integrates all of the
Department's cybersecurity research, development, and
deployment investments, and brief the Committees on
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress within 90 days after
enactment of this act.
Arctic Energy Office.--The Committee supports the promotion
of research, development, and deployment of electric power
technology that is cost-effective and well-suited to meet the
needs of rural and remote regions of the United States,
especially where permafrost is present or located nearby. In
addition, the Committee further supports research, development
and deployment in such regions of enhanced oil recovery
technology, including heavy oil recovery, reinjection of
carbon, and extended reach drilling technologies; gas-to-
liquids technology and liquefied natural gas, including
associated transportation systems; small hydroelectric
facilities, river turbines, and tidal power; natural gas
hydrates, coal bed methane, and shallow bed natural gas; and
alternative energy, including wind, geothermal, and fuel cells.
The Department is encouraged to support a renewed focus on the
Arctic region, and as a cross-cutting activity, use the Arctic
Energy Office as a centralized area to support the use of
energy resources, but also innovative activities, including
microgrids and integrated energy systems.
Regional Initiatives.--The Committee continues to urge the
Department to utilize investments through existing regional
capabilities that include industry, universities, and State and
regional economic development assets. The Committee further
encourages the national laboratories to expand their geographic
outreach through people and access to specialized equipment and
user facilities in order to contribute to the success of these
regional initiatives.
Commonly Recycled Paper
The Secretary shall not expend funds for projects that
knowingly use as a feedstock commonly recycled paper that is
segregated from municipal solid waste or collected as part of a
collection system that commingles commonly recycled paper with
other solid waste at any point from the time of collection
through materials recovery.
ENERGY PROGRAMS
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $2,321,778,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 695,610,000
Committee recommendation................................ 2,322,000,000
The Committee recommends $2,322,000,000 for Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy [EERE], an increase of
$1,626,390,000 above the budget request. Within available
funds, the Committee recommends $162,500,000 for program
direction.
Congressional Direction.--The Committee directs the
Department to maintain a diverse portfolio of early-, mid-, and
late-stage research, development, and market transformation
activities. Regular consultation with industry is encouraged to
avoid duplication of private-sector efforts. The Committee
further directs the Department to fully execute the funds
appropriated in this act, as directed in this report, in a
timely manner and to keep Congress apprised of progress in
implementing funded programs, projects, and activities.
Further, the Committee directs the Department to give priority
to stewarding the assets and optimizing the operations of EERE-
designated user facilities across the Department of Energy
complex. In future budget requests, the Committee directs EERE
to demonstrate a commitment to operations and maintenance of
facilities that support the Department's critical missions.
Workforce Development.--The development of a skilled
workforce is critical to the successful deployment and long-
term sustainability of energy efficient and renewable energy
technologies. The Committee encourages funding within EERE
programs to be allocated to training and workforce development
programs that assist and support workers in trades and
activities required for the continued growth of the U.S. energy
efficiency and clean energy sectors. Furthermore, the Committee
encourages the Department to work with 2-year, public
community, and technical colleges for job training programs
that lead to an industry-recognized credential in the energy
workforce.
Electrification Futures Study.--The Committee encourages
continued coordination between the EERE and the Office of
Cybersecurity, Energy Security, and Emergency Response to
evaluate the impacts of mass electrification on the utility
business model and the electricity distribution system of the
U.S. through the Electrification Futures Study.
Cybersecurity.--The Committee believes cybersecurity
vulnerabilities must be addressed as renewable energy
technologies enter into the marketplace. The Committee also
believes there is a gap with respect to distributed generators
and behind-the-substation generators, storage, smart buildings
technologies and electric vehicles where the potential for
cyberattacks will continue to grow and threaten the modern
grid. Within funds recommended for EERE, not less than
$20,000,000 is recommended to establish a program that will
bring cybersecurity into early-stage technology R&D so that it
is built into new technology for this effort. Within 180 days
after enactment of this act, the Department shall submit to the
Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress a
multi-year program plan for this effort to encompass all EERE
programs.
Energy Star.--The Department is encouraged to support the
Environmental Protection Agency's efforts to reexamine Energy
Star guidelines and standard operating procedures to ensure
transparency, predictability, and consistency for all
stakeholders.
VEHICLE TECHNOLOGIES
The Committee recommends $337,500,000 for Vehicle
Technologies, including $7,000,000 for operations and
maintenance of the National Transportation Research Center.
Within this amount, the Committee recommends not less than
$163,200,000 for Battery and Electrification Technologies to
lower the cost of batteries across light-, medium- and heavy-
duty vehicles through battery processing science, advanced
battery chemistries, materials research, and modeling and
simulation of battery performance. The Committee recommends not
less than $38,100,000 for electric drive research and
development including high power density electric drive
systems, wireless charging and power electronic for extreme
fast charging. The Committee also supports research and
development to lower the cost of batteries for electric
vehicles through cobalt-free materials and roll-to-roll
manufacturing. Funding in this area shall also support research
and development to improve electric motor technology through
advanced material processing and the use of high-performance
computing for multi-physics discovery to understand these new
processes.
The Committee further recommends $25,000,000 for Energy
Efficient Mobility Systems, including the Systems and Modeling
for Accelerated Research in Transportation [SMART] Mobility,
Big Data Solutions for Mobility [Big Data], and Advanced
Computing for Energy [ACE] initiatives, including HPC4Mobility
and HPC-enabled analytics. These investments are critical to
expanding U.S. energy security, economic vitality, and quality
of life. Therefore, the Committee supports continued funding
for research that allows the U.S. to continue its leadership in
advancing state-of-the-art transportation infrastructure.
The Committee recommends $43,000,000 for Advanced Engine
and Fuel Technologies for research focused on advanced fuel
formulations that optimize engine performance. Within this
amount, $24,500,000 is recommended for the Co-Optimization of
Engine and Fuels Multi-Laboratory Consortium.
The Committee recommends $60,000,000 for Materials
Technology. Within this amount, $25,000,000 is recommended for
early-stage research on multi-material joining and propulsion
materials at the national laboratories, and carbon fiber-
reinforced composites at the Carbon Fiber Technology Facility.
Within available funds, the Committee recommends
$10,000,000 for continued funding of section 131 of the 2007
Energy Independence and Security Act for transportation
electrification.
The Committee recommends $25,000,000 to continue the five
awards under the SuperTruck II program and encourages the
Department to provide additional early-stage research funding
for heavy-duty vehicle technologies as part of the program.
Within available funds, the Committee recommends
$46,300,000 for Outreach, Deployment, and Analysis. Within this
amount, $37,800,000 is recommended for deployment through the
Clean Cities Program. The Department is encouraged to ensure
balance in the award of funds to achieve varied aims in
fostering broader adoption of clean vehicles and installation
of supporting infrastructure. The Committee further encourages
the Department to prioritize projects in States where the
transportation sector is responsible for a higher percentage of
the State's total energy consumption and is the largest source
of greenhouse gases.
The Committee supports Advanced Vehicle Competitions, a
collegiate engineering competition that provides hands-on,
real-world experience to demonstrate a variety of advanced
technologies and designs, and supports development of a
workforce trained in advanced vehicles. The Committee
recommends $2,500,000 following the successful EcoCAR 3
competition to support a new 4-year collegiate engineering
competition, EcoCAR 4.
The Committee recommends $10,000,000 to continue improving
the energy efficiency of commercial off-road vehicles,
including up to $5,000,000 for fluid power systems.
The Committee is concerned with the Department's lack of
requested funding for natural gas vehicle research and
development. With an abundant source of low-cost domestic
natural gas, this resource as a transportation fuel is becoming
the alternative fuel of choice for high fuel use fleets and
off-road vehicles. Further research is needed on natural gas
storage, natural gas engines, and fueling infrastructure
optimization. Within available funding, the Committee
recommends $15,000,000 to address technical barriers to the
increased use of natural gas vehicles, including the
development of novel compression and liquefaction technologies,
advanced materials, and improvements in processes for
conditioning, storing and dispensing natural gas. The Committee
directs the Department to undertake a comprehensive study, with
stakeholder input, on natural gas vehicle deployment in on- and
off-road transportation, identifying barriers to increased
deployment of natural gas vehicles.
BIOENERGY TECHNOLOGIES
The Committee recommends $215,000,000 for Bioenergy
Technologies.
Within available funds, the Committee recommends not less
than $30,000,000 for Advanced Algal Systems to sustain the
investment in development of algal biofuels.
The Committee further recommends $30,000,000 for Feedstock
Supply and Logistics, $50,000,000 for Demonstration and Market
Transformation, and $10,000,000 for Analysis and
Sustainability.
The Committee further recommends $95,000,000 for Conversion
Technologies. Within this amount, $20,000,000 is recommended to
continue activities of the Agile Biology Foundry intended to
achieve substantial improvements in conversion efficiencies and
the scale-up of biological processes with lower development
costs and lead times.
Within available funds, the Committee recommends $5,000,000
within Conversion Technologies to continue the research
biopower program, which makes full and innovative use of
biomass, municipally-derived biosolids, municipal solid waste,
and livestock waste.
Within available funds the Committee recommends $5,000,000
to support the development and testing of new domestic
manufactured low-emission, high-efficiency, residential wood
heaters that supply easily accessed and affordable renewable
energy and have the potential to reduce the national costs
associated with thermal energy.
The Committee recognizes that biomethane or anaerobic
digesters can provide important solutions to meet renewable
energy goals, as well as address environmental and economic
challenges and divert organic waste from landfills. The
Committee encourages the Department to fund research,
development, and demonstration activities to help lower upfront
development costs and promote smaller-scale, community
digesters. Within available funds for Conversion Technologies,
the Committee recommends $5,000,000 to improve the efficiency
of community and smaller digesters that accept both farm and
food wastes.
Within available funding, the Committee recommends not less
than $10,000,000 to establish a multi-university partnership to
conduct research and enhance educational programs that improve
alternative energy production derived from urban and suburban
wastes. The Committee further directs the Department to
collaborate with institutions in Canada and Mexico to leverage
capacity and capitalize on North American resources.
Within available funds, the Committee supports research to
develop the foundation for scalable technologies to use carbon
dioxide produced in biorefineries to produce higher value
fuels, chemicals or materials.
HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL TECHNOLOGIES
The Committee recommends $115,000,000 for Hydrogen and Fuel
Cell Technologies.
Within the amounts recommended, the Committee recommends
$39,000,000 for Hydrogen Fuel Research and Development for
efforts to reduce the cost and improve the performance of
hydrogen generation and storage systems, hydrogen measurement
devices for fueling stations, hydrogen compressor components,
and hydrogen station dispensing components. The Department
shall continue to research novel onboard hydrogen tank systems,
as well as trailer delivery systems to reduce cost of delivered
hydrogen. Further, the Department is directed to support
research and development activities that reduce the use of
platinum group metals, provide improvements in electrodes and
membranes and balance-of-plant components and systems. The
Committee recommends $1,000,000 for Systems Analysis, including
research on in-situ metrology for process control systems for
manufacturing of key hydrogen system components.
Within the amounts recommended, $19,000,000 is recommended
for Hydrogen Infrastructure Research and Development. Further,
the Department is directed to continue the H2@Scale Initiative,
which couples current research efforts within the program with
new opportunities for using hydrogen to provide grid resiliency
and advance a wide range of industrial processes for the
production of fuels, chemicals, and materials.
The Committee recommends $19,000,000 for Technology
Acceleration activities, including $3,000,000 for manufacturing
research and development, and $7,000,000 for industry-led
efforts to demonstrate a hydrogen-focused integrated renewable
energy production, storage, and transportation fuel
distribution/retailing system. Regular consultation with
industry is encouraged to avoid duplication of private-sector
activities.
The Committee further recommends $7,000,000 for Safety,
Codes, and Standards to maintain a robust program and engage
regulatory and code officials to support their technical needs
relative to infrastructure and vehicle safety.
The Committee encourages the Secretary to work with the
Secretary of Transportation and industry on coordinating
efforts to deploy hydrogen fueling infrastructure.
SOLAR ENERGY
The Committee recommends $239,500,000 for Solar Energy.
Within available funds, the Committee recommends
$55,000,000 for Concentrating Solar Power research,
development, and demonstration to reduce overall system costs,
better integrate subsystem components, develop higher-
temperature receivers, and improve the design of solar
collection and thermal energy storage. Within this amount,
$5,000,000 is recommended for competitively selected projects
focused on advanced thermal desalination technologies.
The Committee recommends $70,000,000 for Photovoltaic
Research and Development to develop new or improved high-
performance cell materials and architectures and achieve
greater than 40-percent cell efficiencies. The Department is
encouraged to cooperate with industry and academia in its
research and development efforts.
The Committee recommends $35,000,000 for Balance of System
Soft Cost Reduction to reduce non-hardware costs through new
techno-economic tools and methodologies for distributed energy
resources; an assessment of the potential for block-chain
technologies to improve management of distributed solar; and
standardization of planning, permitting, and installation tools
and methodologies. Within this amount, the Committee recommends
not less than $1,000,000 for the joint Solar Ready Vets program
within the Department of Defense as a way to train America's
veterans to fill the growing need for solar industry workers.
Within the amounts recommended for Balance of System Soft
Cost Reduction, $5,000,000 is recommended to re-invigorate the
National Community Solar Partnership program to provide
technical assistance to low- and moderate-income individuals,
businesses, non-profit organizations, and State, local, and
tribal governments to increase use of community solar
installations.
Further, the Committee recommends $49,500,000 for Systems
Integration to address the technical barriers to increased
solar penetration on the grid, including grid reliability,
dispatchability, power electronics, and communications. The
Committee encourages research and development efforts to target
grid storage improvements, demand-response and load-shaping
technologies, and modeling and planning tools for distributed
energy resources.
The Committee recommends $30,000,000 for Manufacturing
Competitiveness to develop advanced low-cost manufacturing
process technologies, including thickness reduction and faster
processing with fewer steps. Within this area, the Committee
also supports early-stage research on photovoltaics based on
earth abundant materials focusing on scalable production
methods, material stability, and ultrahigh efficiency tandem
photovoltaic cell manufacturing approaches. To directly address
fundamental barriers that could limit new technology's
adoption, the Committee believes the fastest approach for rapid
commercialization of new photovoltaic technologies would be to
bring national laboratory capabilities and academia, in
partnership with early-stage companies to develop a new
photovoltaic U.S. manufacturing base. The Department is
directed to create a 5-year domestic manufacturing capability
consortium focused on inherently scalable production methods
such as solution processing, roll-to-roll manufacturing, the
science of inherent material stability, and ultrahigh
efficiency through tandem manufacturing. Within available
funds, the Committee recommends not less than $10,000,000 for
the first year of the consortium.
WIND ENERGY
The Committee recommends $80,000,000 for Wind Energy.
The Committee supports research using high-performance
computing, modeling and simulation, including the Atmosphere to
Electrons initiative, and reliability and grid integration
efforts. Further, the Department is directed to give priority
to stewarding the assets and optimizing the operations of the
Department-owned wind research and development facilities.
Within available funds, the Committee recommends not less than
$30,000,000 for the National Wind Technology Center, which
shall include the development of a large-scale research
platform to support next-generation wind energy science and
manufacturing and systems integration of multiple energy
generation, consumption, and storage technologies with the
grid.
The Committee encourages the Department to prioritize
distributed wind technologies that reduce costs and improve
performance, and to collaborate with industry to invest in the
development and demonstration of technologies and practices
that advance distributed wind. Within available funds, the
Committee recommends $10,000,000 for distributed wind.
The Committee directs the Department to support the
advancement of innovative technologies for offshore wind
development, including freshwater, deepwater, shallow water,
and transitional depth installations. In addition, the
Department is directed to support the innovative offshore wind
demonstration projects for which funding has been allocated in
previous fiscal years, and further supports efforts to optimize
their development, design, construction methods, testing plans,
and economic value proposition. The Committee recommends not
less than $6,000,000 in new project development for the
offshore wind demonstration projects to be allocated equitably
between the approved projects, and to provide not less than 18
months of additional development to ensure success. The
Committee further directs the Department to support the
deployment and testing of scale floating wind turbines designed
to reduce energy costs. Within available funds, the Committee
recommends not less than $30,000,000 for the Department to
prioritize early-stage research on materials and manufacturing
methods and advanced components that will enable accessing
high-quality wind resources, on development that will enable
these technologies to compete in the marketplace without the
need for subsidies, and on activities that will accelerate
fundamental offshore-specific research and development such as
those that target technology and deployment challenges unique
to U.S. waters. Further, the Committee recommends not less than
$10,000,000 for existing national-level offshore wind test
facilities.
The Committee supports the Department's research on the
effects of offshore wind, especially the impact of marine sound
and other stressors on marine mammals, and encourages the
Department to work with nonprofit research institutions, like
aquariums, to continue this work.
WATER POWER
The Committee recommends $105,000,000 for Water Power.
Hydropower Technologies.--Within available funds, the
Committee recommends $35,000,000 for conventional hydropower
and pumped storage activities, including up to $6,600,000 for
the purposes of section 242 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005.
Within available funds, the Department is directed to continue
research, development, and deployment efforts on pumped
hydropower storage technologies and use cases.
Marine and Hydrokinetic Technology Research, Development,
and Deployment.--The Committee recommends $70,000,000 for
marine and hydrokinetic technology research, development, and
deployment activities, including research into mitigation of
marine ecosystem impacts of these technologies.
Within the funding available for marine and hydrokinetic
technology, $30,000,000 is recommended for a balanced portfolio
of competitive solicitations to support industry-led and
university research, development, and deployment of marine and
hydrokinetic technologies; and support wave, ocean current,
tidal and in-river energy conversion components and systems
across the high- and low-technology readiness spectrum to
increase energy capture, reliability, survivability, and
integration into local or regional grids for lower costs and to
assess and monitor environmental effects. Within this amount,
not less than $8,000,000 is recommended to support
collaborations between universities, Marine Renewable Energy
Centers, and national laboratories. Further, not less than
$5,000,000 is recommended to prioritize infrastructure needs at
marine and hydrokinetic technology testing sites operated by
Marine Renewable Energy Centers. The Department is directed to
support ongoing design of the previously awarded open-water
wave energy test facility within available funds. The
Department is also directed to continue its coordination with
the U.S. Navy on marine energy technology demonstration.
The Committee encourages close coordination between the
Department and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, other relevant agencies and
industry to reduce the amount of time to permit marine energy
test and validation projects.
GEOTHERMAL TECHNOLOGIES
The Committee recommends $85,000,000 for Geothermal
Technologies.
Within available funds, $53,000,000 is recommended for
Enhanced Geothermal Systems. To facilitate necessary technology
development and expand understanding of subsurface dynamics,
the Committee recommends $30,000,000 for the continuation of
activities of the Frontier Observatory for Research in
Geothermal Energy [FORGE], with activities to include ongoing
novel subsurface characterization, full-scale well drilling,
and technology research and development to accelerate the
commercial pathway to large-scale enhanced geothermal systems
power generation.
Further, the Committee recommends $15,000,000 for
Hydrothermal, $10,000,000 for Low-Temperature and Co-produced
Resources, and $7,000,000 for Systems Analysis.
The Committee recognizes that enhanced geothermal systems
are versatile, inherently modular, and scalable from
residential utilization to district heating opportunities and
large power parks that can provide baseload capacity. The
Committee encourages the Department to support enhanced
geothermal system applications for industrial and residential
uses.
The Committee directs the Department to continue its
efforts to identify prospective geothermal resources in areas
with no obvious surface expressions.
ADVANCED MANUFACTURING
The Committee recommends $311,000,000 for Advanced
Manufacturing.
The Committee recommends $80,000,000 for Advanced
Manufacturing Research and Development Projects.
The Committee recommends $171,000,000 for Advanced
Manufacturing Research and Development Facilities. The
Committee recommends $25,000,000 for the Manufacturing
Demonstration Facility and the Carbon Fiber Technology Facility
for early-stage research in additive manufacturing, carbon
fiber and composites development, and manufacturing of multi-
material systems to reduce the energy intensity and life-cycle
energy consumption of domestic manufactured products, thereby
increasing the competitiveness of U.S. manufacturing
industries. Within funding for the Manufacturing Demonstration
Facility, $5,000,000 is recommended for the development of
additive systems and automation technologies that have the
potential to deposit multiple materials allowing for hybrid
material solutions that enhance performance in extreme
environments and enable precise property profiles.
The Committee recognizes the important role large-area
additive manufacturing can play in helping to advance the
deployment of building, transportation, and clean energy
technologies. The Committee directs the Department to further
foster the partnership between the National Laboratories,
universities, and industry to use bio-based thermoplastics
composites, such as micro- and nano-cellulosic materials, and
large-area 3-D printing to overcome challenges to the cost and
deployment of building, transportation, and energy
technologies.
In addition, the Committee recommends $20,000,000 to
support the development of additive manufacturing involving
nanocellulosic feedstock materials made from forest products to
overcome challenges to the cost and deployment of building,
transportation, and energy technologies, and encourages the
Department to leverage expertise and capabilities for large-
scale additive manufacturing through partnerships between
universities and the Manufacturing Demonstration Facility.
To ensure grid reliability and resiliency, energy storage
at scale must be achieved. Validation of materials for
production of energy storage is both slow and expensive,
currently taking an average of 18 years from concept to
commercialization. For technologies such as batteries,
materials innovation is traditionally separate from scale-up
and device integration, and this disconnect slows progress.
Therefore, within the amounts recommended, the Committee
recommends $20,000,000 for a manufacturing demonstration
facility specifically focused on accelerating the processes
needed for clean energy materials to go from discovery to
scale-up, which will drive manufacturing innovation, lower the
cost of battery energy storage, and spur job creation by
bringing down the timeline for validation from an average of 18
years to an average of 5 years.
The Committee recommends $25,000,000 for the third year of
research and development efforts to lower the cost and energy
intensity of technologies to provide clean, safe water through
the Energy-Water Desalination Hub. The Committee is concerned
that after 2 years of funding for this hub in fiscal years 2017
and 2018, the Department still has not completed the
cooperative agreement solicitation and award process to begin
work in this important research area. Therefore, upon enactment
of this act, the Committee directs the Department to brief the
Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress on
schedule and milestones for soliciting and evaluating proposals
from qualified consortia and awarding a 5-year cooperative
agreement.
The Committee recommends $56,000,000 to support four Clean
Energy Manufacturing Institutes [CEMIs], including $14,000,000
each for the Smart Manufacturing Innovation Institute, the
Reducing Embodied-energy and Decreasing Emissions [REMADE]
Institute, and the Rapid Advancement in Process Intensification
Deployment [RAPID] Institute, and a CEMI selection to be
announced. The Committee notes the PowerAmerica Next Generation
Power Electronics Manufacturing Innovation Institute and the
Advanced Composites Manufacturing Innovation Institute have
both received $70,000,000 over the past 5 years to stand up a
sustainable effort, and encourages the Department to work with
one or more national laboratories and universities to build a
sustainable plan for these institutes. The Committee is pleased
with the ongoing work of the innovative advanced manufacturing
opportunities through the CEMIs, and directs the Department to
issue a solicitation and make an award for the sixth CEMI not
later than October 1, 2018.
The Committee recommends $25,000,000 to continue Critical
Materials Hub. The Committee notes many municipal recycling
facilities where collected recyclables are separated, now use
technologies which are aging and inefficient. The Committee
directs the Department to conduct a study to determine if the
eddy current technology, which is now in use by most
facilities, might be upgraded to increase the supply of
recycled aluminum and to make recommendations as to how this
might be accomplished and report to the Committees on
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress within 180 days after
enactment of this act.
The Committee recommends $40,000,000 for the Industrial
Technical Assistance program. Within this amount, the Committee
recommends $12,000,000 to provide ongoing support for the
Combined Heat and Power [CHP] Technical Assistance Partnerships
[TAPs] and related CHP Technical Partnership activities at the
Department, including $5,000,000 for the TAPs and $7,000,000
for related CHP activities. The Committee also encourages the
Department to prioritize research, development, and
demonstration of district energy systems, and work to
accelerate greater deployment of district energy systems in
communities, campuses, industries, and cities nationwide by
supporting adaptive regional and local technology, and market
opportunities.
The Committee encourages the Department to continue its
efforts of extending the Industrial Assessment Centers to
underserved areas and furthering the geographic reach of the
program to regions that are less likely to be adequately
serviced because of their distance from the current Centers.
Therefore, the Committee recommends $10,000,000 to expand the
technical assistance provided by the Industrial Assessment
Centers and fund no fewer than two but no more than four
additional centers. The Committee recognizes the great
potential for energy savings in municipal, industrial, and
agricultural wastewater treatment systems and encourages the
Department to expand on the technical assistance provided by
the Industrial Assessment Centers to address these needs.
Within the funds recommended for the Industrial Assessment
Centers, the Committee recommends $3,000,000 for wastewater
treatment technical assistance.
Within available funds, the Committee recommends
$10,000,000 for district heating. The Committee further directs
the Department to collaborate with industry on the potential
energy efficiency and energy security gains to be realized with
district energy systems.
The Committee supports research and development on
improving foundational materials and processes applicable to
aluminum and other primary metal industries.
The Committee supports the issuance of a competitive
solicitation for university/industry-led teams to improve the
efficiency of drying processes, which consume approximately 10
percent of the energy used in the manufacturing sector.
The Committee directs the Department to develop a national
smart manufacturing plan that will identify areas where the
Department can facilitate more rapid development, deployment
and adoption of smart manufacturing technologies. The
Department shall submit a plan to the Committees on
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress not later than 180
days after the enactment of this act.
BUILDING TECHNOLOGIES
The Committee recommends $225,000,000 for Building
Technologies.
Within available funds, the Committee recommends
$39,000,000 for the Commercial Building Integration program for
a program of core research and development of more cost-
effective integration techniques and technologies that could
help the transition toward deep retrofits. In addition, the
Committee encourages the Department to increase engagement with
private sector stakeholders to develop market-transforming
policies and investments in commercial building retrofits.
Within available funds, the Committee recommends
$28,000,000 for the Residential Building Integration program.
The Committee encourages funding to be concentrated on industry
teams to facilitate research, demonstrate and test new systems,
and facilitate widespread deployment through direct engagement
with builders, the construction trades, equipment
manufacturers, smart grid technology and systems suppliers,
integrators, and State and local governments.
The Committee recommends $108,000,000 for the Emerging
Technologies subprogram. Within available funds, the Committee
recommends not less than $30,000,000 for building-grid
integration research and development consistent with a
transactive energy system, including development of advanced
transactive control methodologies, field validation and testing
in existing buildings, continuation of the Building-to-Grid
Integration Demonstration, and coordination with the Office of
Cybersecurity, Energy Security, and Emergency Response
transactive energy systems activities. Within this amount,
$5,000,000 is recommended to continue promoting regional
demonstrations of new, utility-led, residential Connected
Communities advancing smart grid systems. Further, within
available funds for Emerging Technologies, the Committee
recommends not less than $18,000,000 for HVAC & Refrigeration
R&D, $14,000,000 for Building Envelope and $5,300,000 for
Building Energy Modeling.
Within available funds for Emerging Technologies, the
Committee recommends $25,000,000 for research, development,
demonstration, and commercial application activities related to
advanced solid-state lighting technology development. If the
Secretary finds solid-state lighting technology eligible for
the Twenty-First Century Lamp prize, specified under section
655 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007,
$5,000,000 shall be made available to fund the prize or
additional projects for solid-state lighting research and
development.
Within available funds, the Committee recommends
$10,000,000 for research and development for energy efficiency
efforts related to the direct use of natural gas in residential
applications, including gas heat pump heating and water
heating, onsite combined heat and power, natural gas appliance
venting, green pilots, and micro-meters.
Within available funds, the Committee recommends $5,000,000
for novel earlier stage research, development, and
demonstration of technologies to advance energy efficient,
high-rise Cross-Laminated Timber [CLT] building systems. The
Committee directs the Department to support university
research, in partnership with national labs, for developing,
building, and evaluating CLT wall systems for embodied energy
content, operating energy efficiency, wall moisture profiles,
structural connector durability, and health monitoring sensors.
The Committee recommends $50,000,000 for Equipment and
Buildings Standards. The Department has missed two deadlines
for reports to Congress mandated by section 305 of the Energy
Independence and Security Act [EISA] of 2007. These reports are
invaluable sources of information for the Committee and other
stakeholders about the status of energy conservation standards
and the Department's plans to comply with its statutory
obligations. The Department shall submit to the Committees on
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress a status report
within 30 days after enactment of this act. The Committee
recommends $7,000,000 for the Building Energy Codes Program to
provide assistance to States and to organizations that develop
model codes and standards to improve building resilience as
well as efficiency.
Energy efficiency is a critical component of infrastructure
development strategies. The Committee recognizes the importance
of the Transformation in Cities initiative for local government
planning and directs the Department to continue to support the
goals of the initiative.
The Committee is concerned with the Department's recently
announced plans to cancel the 2019 Solar Decathlon, pending a
reevaluation of the program. The Committee recommends not less
than $5,000,000 for the Solar Decathlon. The annual competition
has engaged thousands of university students to apply energy
research and development to the practical concerns of housing
by balancing design excellence and smart energy production and
innovation, energy efficiency, and market potential. While the
Committee understands that commercialization of technology is
important, this should not become the sole or even the primary
focus of the competition. Therefore, not later than 30 days
after the enactment of this act, the Department shall brief the
Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress on its
plans for preserving the Solar Decathlon in its current form,
any adjustments to the competition, and plans by the Department
to accelerate adoption of suitable energy and water efficient
technologies in the marketplace.
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
The Committee recommends $31,000,000 for the Federal Energy
Management Program.
The Committee encourages the continued use of the Assisting
Federal Facilities with Energy Conservation Technologies grant
program to leverage more private sector investment in aging
Federal facilities and infrastructure.
WEATHERIZATION AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL PROGRAM
The Committee recommends $306,000,000 for the
Weatherization and Intergovernmental Program.
Within this amount, $251,000,000 is recommended for the
Weatherization Assistance Program [WAP], including $248,000,000
for Weatherization Assistance Grants and $3,000,000 for
Training and Technical Assistance; and $55,000,000 is
recommended for State Energy Program grants.
The Committee recognizes the importance of providing
Federal funds under the Weatherization and Intergovernmental
Program to States and tribes in a timely manner to avoid any
undue delay of services to eligible low-income households, and
to encourage local high-impact energy efficiency and renewable
energy initiatives and energy emergency preparedness.
Therefore, the full amount of the funds recommended for WAP and
the State Energy Program shall be obligated to States, tribes,
and other direct grantees not later than 60 days after
enactment of this act.
Within available funds, $500,000 is recommended for current
WAP grant recipients via the Weatherization Innovation Pilot
Program to develop and implement strategies to treat harmful
substances, including vermiculite.
The Committee supports WAP's continued participation in the
interagency working group on Healthy Homes and Energy with the
Department of Housing and Urban Development. The Department is
encouraged to further coordinate with the Office of Lead Hazard
Control and Healthy Homes on energy-related housing projects.
The Committee directs the Department to begin tracking the
occurrence of window replacements, which supports the reduction
of lead-based paint hazards in homes.
STRATEGIC PROGRAMS
The Committee recommends $12,500,000 for Strategic
Programs.
Within available funds, $2,500,000 is recommended for the
Energy Transition Initiative [ETI] to support ongoing
initiatives to address high energy costs, reliability, and
inadequate infrastructure challenges faced by island and remote
communities. The Committee supports ETI's efforts to develop a
cross-sector initiative of organizations pursuing energy
transition efforts that will address energy challenges, build
capacity, accelerate the sharing of best practices and
innovations between similarly-situated regions, and leverage
specialized expertise into commercial opportunity. The
Committee further directs the Department to support initiatives
for building of cost-effective, resilient energy infrastructure
on island and remote communities, including in Alaska, the
Caribbean, Hawaii, New England, and elsewhere.
Cybersecurity, Energy Security, and Emergency Response
Appropriations, 2018....................................................
Budget estimate, 2019................................... $95,800,000
Committee recommendation................................ 260,000,000
The Committee recommends $260,000,000 for Cybersecurity,
Energy Security, and Emergency Response, an increase of
$164,200,000 above the budget request. Within available funds,
the Committee recommends $28,500,000 for program direction.
Early-Stage Research, Electricity Sector.--The Committee
rejects the budget's sole focus on early-stage research. Most
utilities have limited research and development budgets,
primarily due to regulatory constraints designed to keep
electricity costs low for consumers. Additionally, utilities
are unlikely to implement new concepts because most utilities
would need to use their own systems for testing and evaluation,
which could impact consumers. State public utility commissions
also have limited budgets that do not support research and
development. The States rely heavily on the Department's
technical assistance on assessments of data and tools to help
them evaluate grid modernization alternatives. The Department
plays a vital role, not only in early-stage research, but also
in deployment, field testing, and evaluation.
CYBERSECURITY FOR ENERGY DELIVERY SYSTEMS
The Committee recommends $80,829,000 for Cybersecurity for
Energy Delivery Systems.
The Committee recommends $10,000,000 for the DarkNet
project to explore opportunities for getting the Nation's
critical infrastructure off the Internet and shielding the
Nation's electricity infrastructure from disruptive cyber
penetration.
The Committee supports extension of cyber risk information
sharing tools to close remaining vulnerabilities in the
distribution and transmission system. The Committee encourages
the Department to continue existing work within ongoing
programs and to invest in research addressing power system
vulnerabilities in supply chain and life cycle management for
critical power system components and advanced adaptive
defensive methods for grid control systems.
TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY
The Committee recommends $39,000,000 for Transmission
Reliability.
The Committee supports continued investment in advanced
grid modeling algorithms and tool development to ensure
resilient grid controls and protection systems that meet the
challenges of the emerging smart grid.
RESILIENT DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS
The Committee recommends $38,671,000 for Resilient
Distribution Systems.
Within available funding, $5,000,000 is recommended to
develop high fidelity sensors and use data analytics to improve
operations in steady-state and under extreme conditions, and to
continue early-stage research to develop low-cost, printable
sensors that can predict the health of critical equipment in
the electric delivery system.
The Committee supports the promotion of regional
demonstrations of new, utility-led, residential Connected
Communities advancing smart grid systems. The Department shall
focus on identifying and addressing technical and regulatory
barriers impeding grid integration of distributed energy
systems to reduce energy costs and improve the resiliency and
reliability of the electric grid. The Committee supports
advanced control concepts and open test beds for new
distribution control tools for enhanced distribution system
resilience.
ENERGY STORAGE
The Committee recommends $41,000,000 for Energy Storage.
Within available funds, the Committee continues to support
development of an operational energy storage test facility
capable of performance-driven data in a utility environment.
The Committee supports the Beyond Batteries initiative and
cost-shared demonstrations of energy storage technologies with
the private sector needed to achieve the Department's
technology goal. Low-cost, grid-scale energy storage is crucial
to a 21st century electricity grid, and the Department's
storage research, development and deployment efforts shall
support nationwide efforts to improve grid resiliency,
reliability, and security, empower consumers, and increase
integration of a broad range of generation sources.
The Committee encourages the Department to further the
development and demonstration of non-battery advanced storage
components, including compressed air energy storage development
and demonstration to enable efficiency improvements for
utility-scale, bulk energy storage solutions.
The Committee notes that innovation and advancement in
distributed energy resources is helping the Nation's power grid
to better address reliability, resiliency, safety, and
accessibility. This enhances our Nation's energy security and
global leadership. The Committee encourages the Department to
further advance the development and demonstration of innovative
battery and non-battery energy storage components. Energy
storage is needed to better enable distributed energy
resources; integrate intermittent uses such as water heaters,
electric vehicle chargers, battery storage systems, and pumps;
help balance supply and demand in the power grid to aid
consumers to better manage their energy costs; protect
residential and commercial customers and public services from
power interruptions; and improve grid security and reliability.
The Committee supports grid-scale field demonstrations of
energy storage projects, either as single facilities or as
aggregations of units, with a focus on new use cases rather
than new battery chemistry. The Committee encourages the
Department to support State energy offices and universities
with energy storage planning and deployment, and to participate
in industry-led safety codes and standards development. The
Committee also supports funding for development of analytical
methods for including energy storage in electric system
planning, as well as for development of software tools to
better value energy storage technologies. The Committee
encourages the Department to remain committed to research and
development partnerships related to the development and
deployment of energy storage, with stakeholders in diverse
geographic regions with unique market dynamics and policy
challenges that can help to inform nationwide efforts to
improve grid resiliency, reliability, and security, empower
consumers, and increase integration of a broad range of
generation sources. The Committee encourages the Department to
make additional investments in cutting-edge storage
technologies and relevant software, including conventional and
advanced batteries. The Committee further encourages the
Department to prioritize pilot scale initiatives with relevant
utilities and State energy organizations that have the
potential to advance real-time deployment and testing of these
technologies.
The Committee is supportive of research for novel materials
and system components to resolve key cost and performance
challenges for electrochemical energy storage systems based on
earth abundant advanced chemistries. In addition, the Committee
supports continued materials research that will improve the
understanding and predictability of energy storage systems and
components, as well as enable safer and more reliable materials
and systems to be developed.
TRANSFORMER RESILIENCE AND ADVANCED COMPONENTS
The Committee recommends $7,000,000 for Transformer
Resilience and Advanced Components.
Within available funds, the Committee directs the
Department to continue to support research and development for
advanced components and grid materials for low-cost, power flow
control devices, including both solid state and hybrid concepts
that use power electronics to control electromagnetic devices
and enable improved controllability, flexibility, and
resiliency.
INFRASTRUCTURE SECURITY AND ENERGY RESTORATION
The Committee recommends $18,000,000 for Infrastructure
Security and Energy Restoration.
The Committee supports further development of energy sector
situational awareness capabilities through Eagle-I, the Federal
Government's situational awareness tool for national power
outages. The Committee encourages the Department to further
illustrate how to benefit from increased access to more varied
sources of data.
The Committee previously directed the Department to submit
a report identifying strategic laboratory, university, and
industry partnerships that would enhance national security and
assist industry in addressing critical threats, including
electromagnetic pulses [EMP], geomagnetic disturbances [GMD],
cyber-attacks, and supply chain disruptions. The Committee
looks forward to receiving this report expeditiously. The
Committee supports the establishment of an EMP/GMD testing
facility that can, without posing risk to the existing grid,
replicate EMP/GMD events and cyber-attacks on a real world
configuration of critical grid components and systems. Such a
facility is necessary to expose entire substations, including
devices such as Extra High Voltage Transformers and subsystem
components, to the combined effects of the complete composite
EMP Waveform for early stage research and development, as well
as testing and validation purposes at both the transmission and
distribution levels. The Committee encourages the Department to
ensure such a facility to be a collaborative public-private
effort between national laboratories, utilities, and research
universities.
Nuclear Energy
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $1,205,056,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 757,090,000
Committee recommendation................................ 1,206,000,000
The Committee recommends $1,206,000,000 for Nuclear Energy,
an increase of $448,910,000 above the budget request. The
Committee's recommendation prioritizes funding for programs,
projects and activities that will ensure a strong future for
nuclear power in the United States.
Nuclear power provides more than 20 percent of our Nation's
electricity and nearly 60 percent of our emissions-free
electricity. Electricity generation from our Nation's operating
nuclear power plants is critical to our national security,
economy, and way of life. Nuclear power is a reliable,
resilient source of power, and the Department is encouraged to
seek opportunities to take advantage of that fact to meet its
long-term needs.
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
INTEGRATED UNIVERSITY PROGRAM
The Committee recommends $5,000,000 for the Integrated
University Program.
The Committee notes the administration repeatedly attempts
to defund this program, despite continued success in developing
highly qualified nuclear specialists to meet national needs.
NUCLEAR ENERGY ENABLING TECHNOLOGY
The Committee recommends $149,200,000 for Nuclear Energy
Enabling Technology.
Within this amount, the Committee recommends $50,000,000
for Crosscutting Technology Development, $28,200,000 for
Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling and Simulation, $41,000,000
for National Scientific User Facilities, and $30,000,000 for
the Energy Innovation Hub for Modeling and Simulation. The
Committee notes that the budget request made the short-sighted
recommendation to cancel the Energy Innovation Hub for Modeling
and Simulation for the second year in a row, despite the
important contributions it continues to make to improving
operations and safety of operating nuclear reactors, and its
likely application in licensing accident tolerant fuels and
other advanced technologies.
REACTOR CONCEPTS RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, AND DEMONSTRATION
The Committee recommends $302,000,000 for Reactor Concepts
Research, Development, and Demonstration.
Advanced nuclear technologies hold great promise for
reliable, safe, emission-free energy and should be a priority
for the Department. The Department was previously directed to
provide a report that sets aggressive, but achievable goals to
demonstrate a variety of private-sector advanced reactor
designs and fuel types by the late 2020s. The Department is
directed to expedite that report and provide it to the
Committee as soon as possible.
Advanced Reactor Technology.--Within available funds, the
Committee recommends $150,000,000, for Advanced Reactor
Technology, including $22,000,000 for the fourth year of the
advanced reactor concepts program.
The Committee supports the Department's goal to accelerate
reactor manufacturing, development, and deployment of advanced
reactors. The Department is encouraged to leverage its
technological capabilities in materials research and
development, advanced manufacturing, high-fidelity modeling and
simulation, sensors and control systems to transform the
methods of reactor design, manufacturing, licensing and
operation. The Committee recommends $30,000,000 above the
budget request for the demonstration of a Transformational
Challenge Reactor concept.
Versatile Fast Reactor.--The Committee supports the budget
request and recommends $15,000,000 for the Versatile Fast
Reactor. The Department was previously directed to provide a
report that details all current programs and projects within
the Office of Nuclear Energy, whether the Department plans to
continue to support each program or project, and the expected
out-year funding through completion of the program or project.
The Department is directed to expedite that report and provide
it to the Committee as soon as possible.
Light Water Reactor Sustainability.--Within available
funds, the Committee recommends $47,000,000. The most cost-
effective way for the United States to maintain low-cost,
carbon-free electricity is to safely extend the lives of our
Nation's existing nuclear reactors from 60 to 80 years.
Therefore, the Committee recommends additional funding above
the budget request for this activity as a priority. The
Committee directs the Secretary to use funding in this activity
to continue research and development work on the technical
basis for subsequent license renewal. The Secretary shall focus
funding in this program on materials aging and degradation,
advanced instrumentation and control technologies, and
component aging modeling and simulation. The Secretary shall
also coordinate with industry to determine other areas of high-
priority research and development in this area.
FUEL CYCLE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
The Committee recommends $267,300,000 for Fuel Cycle
Research and Development.
Within available funds, $30,000,000 is recommended for
Material Recovery and Waste Form Development, $6,000,000 is
recommended for Materials Protection, Accountancy, and Controls
for Transmutation, and $8,500,000 is recommended for Systems
Analysis and Integration.
The Committee continues to strongly support the
recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's
Nuclear Future and believes that near-term action is needed to
address the accumulating inventory of spent nuclear fuel. The
Committee recommends $35,300,000 for Integrated Waste
Management System activities. Funding is recommended to
implement plans to consolidate spent nuclear fuel from around
the United States to one or more private or government interim
central storage facilities. Priority shall be given to
accepting spent nuclear fuel from shutdown reactors, and to
accelerating the development of a transportation capability to
move spent fuel from its current storage locations. Within
funds recommended, the Committee recommends up to $10,000,000
for the Secretary, within existing authorities, to contract for
the management of spent nuclear fuel to which the Secretary
holds the title or has a contract to accept title, which
includes contracting with a private company for consolidated
interim storage of spent nuclear fuel.
The Committee directs the Secretary to work across the
administration and to report to the Committees on
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress, not later than 180
days after the date of enactment of this act, with information
regarding existing resources and funding opportunities for
which communities hosting decommissioned/decommissioning
reactors may be eligible. The report shall also include what
opportunities exist for these affected communities to consider
alternative uses for these sites upon completion of the
decommissioning process.
The Committee does not adopt the budget proposal to
eliminate research and development activities previously funded
in this account. The Committee recommends $62,500,000 to
continue research and development activities on behavior of
spent fuel in long-term storage, under transportation
conditions, and in various geologic media, which will continue
to be important to developing a solution to the waste problem.
Priority shall be placed on the ongoing study of the
performance of high-burnup fuel in dry storage and on the
potential for direct disposal of existing spent fuel dry
storage canister technologies.
The Committee continues to place a high priority on the
development of nuclear fuels with enhanced accident-tolerant
characteristics to significantly mitigate the potential
consequences of a nuclear accident. The Committee urges the
Secretary to maintain focus and priority on achieving results
in these efforts. The Committee recommends $125,000,000 for the
Advanced Fuels program. The Department is directed to continue
implementation of the accident tolerant fuels development
program, the goal of which remains development of accident
tolerant nuclear fuels leading to commercial reactor fuel
assembly testing by 2022. Within this amount not less than
$55,600,000 is recommended to continue the participation of
three industry-led teams in Phase 2 of the cost-shared research
and development program. Further, the Committee recommends not
less than $20,000,000 to support accident tolerant fuels
development at the national laboratories and other facilities,
including at the Advanced Test Reactor, the Transient Reactor
Test Facility, and the Halden reactor. In addition to amounts
awarded through the Small Business Innovation Research and
Small Business Technology Transfer programs, $3,000,000 is to
continue the previously awarded small business projects to
develop ceramic cladding for accident tolerant fuels.
Finally, the United States currently lacks either a supply
of high assay low enriched uranium [HALEU], or a process to
make HALEU, for advanced reactor designs that would require
enrichment up to 20 percent, below levels considered usable for
nuclear weapons. The Committee recommends $10,000,000 for the
Department to begin work to design and build a demonstration
facility to produce HALEU from naval spent nuclear fuel or
other available HEU within the Department's inventory. The
Committee notes that using naval spent fuel for this purpose
has the added benefit of potentially reducing the volume of
waste that would eventually require disposal in a permanent
repository.
INFRASTRUCTURE
RADIOLOGICAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT
The Committee recommends $29,000,000 for Radiological
Facilities Management, including $20,000,000 for continued safe
operations and maintenance of Oak Ridge National Laboratory hot
cells.
IDAHO FACILITIES MANAGEMENT
The Committee recommends $238,000,000 for Idaho Facilities
Management. The Advanced Test Reactor [ATR] is a vital asset
that provides research capability across the Department. The
Department was previously directed to provide a report that
lists all current and planned users for the ATR for the next 3
years, the operating cost attributed to each user, and the
source of funds that will be applied to cover the costs for
each user. The Department is directed to expedite that report
and provide it to the Committee as soon as possible.
Fossil Energy Research and Development
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $726,817,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 502,070,000
Committee recommendation................................ 727,000,000
The Committee recommends $727,000,000 for Fossil Energy
Research and Development, an increase of $224,930,000 above the
budget request. Within available funds, the Committee
recommends $61,070,000 for program direction.
Early-Stage Research and Development.--The Fossil Energy
Research and Development program advances transformative
scientific research, development, and deployment of
technologies that enable the reliable, efficient, affordable,
and environmentally sound use of fossil fuels. Fossil energy is
an essential part of the United States' energy future, and the
National Energy Technology Laboratory [NETL] supports the
Office of Fossil Energy in this critical national priority. The
Committee rejects the approach to only provide funds for early-
stage research. Such restrictions would cripple innovation and
development, and would reduce the number of energy technologies
adopted in the marketplace.
Fossil Energy Roadmap.--The Committee previously directed
the Department to develop a cohesive policy and technology
strategy and supporting roadmap or long term plan for its
Fossil Energy Research and Development portfolio and supporting
infrastructure. This roadmap will guide the discovery or
advancement of technological solutions and incorporate lessons
learned for the future of research, development, and
demonstration efforts on advanced carbon capture and storage
[CCS] technologies, advanced fossil energy systems, and
crosscutting fossil energy research, as well as guide the
discovery or advancement of technological solutions for the
prudent and sustainable development of unconventional oil and
gas. The Committee looks forward to receiving the roadmap
expeditiously.
NETL.--No funds shall be used for the closure of NETL
sites. The Committee supports NETL's mission to discover,
develop, and deploy new technologies to support a strong
domestic fossil energy path. The Committee previously directed
the Department to conduct a comprehensive assessment of Fossil
Energy writ large to include the Fossil Energy Headquarters
programs, NETL, and relevant competencies of other national
laboratories which support the mission of the Office of Fossil
Energy. The Committee looks forward to receiving the assessment
expeditiously.
National Carbon Capture Center.--The Committee recommends
funding for the National Carbon Capture Center consistent with
the cooperative agreement and fiscal year 2018. The Committee
continues to encourage the Department to establish university
partnerships to support ongoing fossil energy programs, to
promote broader research into CCS technologies, and to expand
its technology transfer efforts. The Department has previously
funded several university-based CCS projects and is encouraged
to build on an established research base to support ongoing
research and to address the wider implementation of CCS
technologies.
The Committee reiterates the importance of adequate Federal
support to promote design-related work and testing for a
commercial-scale, post-combustion carbon dioxide capture
project on an existing coal-fueled generating unit as well as
fossil energy research, development, and deployment of
breakthrough technologies.
COAL CCS AND POWER SYSTEMS
The Committee recommends $463,030,000 for Coal CCS and
Power Systems.
The Committee does not support the Department's proposal to
reorganize or consolidate the Carbon Capture, Carbon Storage,
Advanced Energy Systems, crosscutting research and development
programs, and the Supercritical CO2 Technology
Program [STEP].
The Committee supports the Department's Cooperative
Agreements to develop cost sharing partnerships to conduct
basic, fundamental, and applied research that assist industry
in developing, deploying, and commercializing efficient, low-
carbon, nonpolluting energy technologies that could compete
effectively in meeting requirements for clean fuels, chemical
feedstocks, electricity, and water resources. The Committee
encourages the Department to fund activities that promote the
reuse of captured carbon dioxide from coal, natural gas,
industrial facilities, and other sources for the production of
fuels and other valuable products. Within the ongoing CCS
Program, the Department is encouraged to pursue an aggressive
timeline to develop advanced carbon storage and utilization
technologies and enhanced oil recovery that will improve the
economics associated with domestic energy production. The
Committee supports small-scale and modular coal-fired
technologies with reduced carbon outputs or carbon capture that
can support incremental power generation capacity additions
that will enable a step-change in performance, efficiency, or
cost of electricity as compared to the technology in existence
on the date of enactment.
The Committee supports small-scale and modular coal-fired
technologies with reduced carbon outputs or carbon capture that
can support incremental power generation capacity additions
that will enable a step-change in performance, efficiency, or
cost of electricity as compared to the technology in existence
on the date of enactment.
The Committee recommends research and development as well
as pilot-scale activities that will improve the performance,
reliability and efficiency of both new- and existing-fossil
fuel fired power plants, including solvent-based, heat-
integrated carbon capture and storage research and testing at
pilot-scale facilities installed at a commercial power plant
with focus on solvent physical property impact on column
performance, transformative approaches to mitigate emissions,
and solvent quality maintenance to ultimately reduce capital
and operating costs; development and testing of materials for
highly efficient energy platforms; advancement of gasification
systems; development of carbon products from coal; development
of transformational energy conversion systems including
pressurized oxycombustion, supercritical CO2 cycles,
and chemical looping technologies; advancement of turbine
technologies for higher efficiency and pressure cycles;
development of fuel cells; coal and methane to liquid fuels;
development and testing of advanced water management
technologies; and continued investigation of rare earths
recovery from coal and coal refuse.
Within funds available for CCS and Power Systems, the
Committee recommends not less than $30,000,000 to support a new
solicitation for Front-End Engineering and Design [FEED]
studies of two commercial-scale carbon capture power projects
for retrofit at an existing coal plant and for a coal or
natural gas plant that generates carbon dioxide suitable for
utilization or storage. A FEED study shall incorporate work
from feasibility studies and testing to provide specific
project definition, detailed design, scopes of work, material
purchasing and construction schedules, cost for project
execution, and subsurface, structural, and environmental
permitting requirements.
Carbon Capture.--Achieving low-cost carbon capture
technology is important to facilitating economic environmental
mitigation solutions for the power and industrial sectors while
opening up a broader carbon utilization economy. The Committee
encourages the Department to focus its Carbon Capture research,
development and deployment efforts on improving the efficiency
and decreasing the costs of carbon capture technologies,
demonstrating carbon capture technologies for private sector-
driven adoption at fossil energy power systems and industrial
sources, and to identify how these technologies can be
integrated within business models and operations. This includes
small- and large-scale pilot testing of technologies moving
through the program pipeline on both coal and natural gas
applications, as well as on industrial sources.
Carbon Storage.--Within available funds for Carbon Storage,
the Committee recommends $12,000,000 for Carbon Use and Reuse
to continue research and development activities to support
valuable and innovative uses for carbon. The Committee believes
the potential for carbon dioxide utilization technologies to
become economically viable has improved in recent years, and
these technologies should continue to receive attention from
the Office of Fossil Energy. The Committee urges the Office of
Fossil Energy to prioritize research on carbon dioxide
utilization technologies, direct air capture technologies, and
industrial source capture. The Committee also encourages the
Office of Fossil Energy to collaborate with the Bioenergy
Technologies program within the EERE, the private sector, and
academia to support projects that utilize carbon dioxide in the
production of algae and other potentially marketable products.
The Committee supports early-stage research and development in
conversion of coal pitch/coal to carbon fiber and in other
value-added products for alternative uses of coal. Within
Carbon Storage, the Committee recommends $55,000,000 for
Storage Infrastructure. The Committee recognizes the successful
work of the Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnerships and the
important role they play in supporting the research and
development of carbon utilization and storage. The Committee
supports the focus on infrastructure development strategies
through continued efforts to expand regional geological
characterization to reduce uncertainties, collect and analyze
data, facilitate and inform regional permitting and policy
challenges. The Department is directed to fulfill prior
commitments to the Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnerships.
Further, the Committee recommends funding beyond the current
phase, through a multiyear continuation of competitively
selected partnerships to expand the work of the existing
partnerships. The Committee recommends not less than
$20,000,000 for a competitive continuation of the Regional
Carbon Sequestration Partnership Program and not less than
$30,000,000 to continue the four-phase CarbonSAFE initiative.
The Committee directs the Department to work collaboratively
with the Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnerships to develop
a Storage Infrastructure roadmap through 2025 to identify the
knowledge gaps and technology and policy developments that are
needed to close those gaps.
Advanced Energy Systems.--The Committee recommends up to
$30,000,000 for solid oxide fuel cell systems, which supports
research and development to enable efficient, cost-effective
electricity generation with minimal use of water. The Committee
encourages the Department to promote and assist in the research
and development of new higher efficiency gas turbines used in
power generation systems to allow the United States to upgrade
and increase the reliability and resiliency of the Nation's
electrical grid system, to better compete against the threat of
foreign competitors who are being subsidized by their
governments, while reducing the cost of electricity and
significantly lowering emissions. This includes awarding grants
and funding contract proposals from industry, small businesses,
universities and other appropriate parties.
The Committee supports coal and coal biomass to liquids
activities and encourages the Department to focus on research
and development to improve cost and efficiency of coal-to-fuels
technology implementation and polygeneration. The Committee
recognizes the importance of emerging technologies such as,
coal-to-liquids [CTL] fuel conversion. Within available funds,
the Committee supports research and development that will
ensure CTL technologies have an opportunity to grow. The
Committee supports the activities proposed in Power Generation
Efficiency which would focus on improving the reliability and
efficiency of existing plants through early stage research and
development.
Crosscutting Research.--The Committee supports Advanced
Ultrasupercritical Materials research and development to
identify, test, qualify, and develop a domestic supply chain
capable of producing components from high temperature steam
materials.
STEP.--The Committee rejects the proposed changes in the
request to the STEP Program, and recommends $25,000,000 to
complete the necessary design and construction of the 10MW
pilot facility, and conduct the necessary testing, including
long-duration testing for the facility.
NETL Coal Research and Development.--Within available funds
for NETL Coal Research and Development, the Committee
recommends $18,000,000 for the Department to continue its
external agency activities to develop and test advanced
separation technologies and accelerate the advancement of
commercially viable technologies for the recovery of rare earth
elements and minerals from U.S. coal and coal byproduct
sources. The Committee expects research to support pilot-scale
and experimental activities for near-term applications.
NATURAL GAS TECHNOLOGIES
The Committee recommends $53,200,000 for Natural Gas
Technologies.
Risk-Based Data Management System.--Within available funds,
the Committee recommends $5,200,000 to continue the Risk Based
Data Management System [RBDMS] to support a cloud-based
application and necessary cybersecurity initiatives. In
addition, funding shall support the continued integration of
FracFocus and RBDMS for improved public access to State-oil and
gas-related data, as well as for State regulatory agencies to
support electronic permitting for operators, eForms for
improved processing time for new permits, operator training
from the improved FracFocus 3.2 after enhancements are
implemented, and miscellaneous reports, such as Produced Water
Report: Current and Future Beneficial Uses Report. The
Committee supports the continued efforts to provide public
transparency, while protecting proprietary information.
Methane Hydrate Activities.--The Committee recommends
$20,000,000 for methane hydrates. The Committee notes that the
budget request includes no money for actual research into the
methods for producing methane hydrates. The Committee
encourages the Department to perform a long-term methane
hydrate production test in the Arctic, as proposed in the
Methane Hydrate Advisory Committee's earlier recommendations
(May 21, 2014) to the Department.
Environmentally Prudent Development.--The Committee
recommends $10,000,000 for the Environmentally Prudent
Development subprogram.
Emissions Mitigation from Midstream Infrastructure.--The
Committee recommends $12,000,000 for the Emissions Mitigation
from Midstream Infrastructure subprogram. The Committee
recommends funds for natural gas infrastructure research,
including advanced materials and novel sensor technologies. The
Department is directed to incorporate this research into its
ongoing work in this field, so that it shall complement the
Emissions Mitigation from Midstream Infrastructure subprogram.
Emissions Quantification from Natural Gas Infrastructure.--
The Committee recommends $6,000,000 for the Emissions
Quantification from Natural Gas Infrastructure research
subprogram.
UNCONVENTIONAL FOSSIL ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES
The Committee recommends $54,000,000 for Unconventional
Fossil Energy Technologies. The Committee notes the importance
of providing research support that will assure sustainable,
reliable, affordable, and environmentally sound supplies of
domestic unconventional fossil energy resources.
The Committee understands the Department is continuing to
conduct a study on the feasibility of establishing an ethane
storage and distribution hub in central Appalachia. The
Department is directed to identify the Federal agencies with
jurisdictional oversight of such a project and to coordinate
with the liaisons of those agencies to streamline the
permitting application and approval process for a central
Appalachian ethane storage and distribution hub. Further, the
Department is directed to brief the Committees on
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress on their findings and
recommendations once complete.
The Department is encouraged to explore research and
development for safe drilling and completion technologies that
use no fresh water and can be deployed in horizontal wells.
Within available funds, $15,500,000 is recommended for
research to better understand reservoirs and to improve low
recovery factors from unconventional natural gas and oil wells
and $15,500,000 is recommended to continue research toward
enhanced recovery technologies in shale oil, low permeability
reservoirs, residual oil zone reservoirs, fractured reservoirs,
and conventional oil reservoirs. The Department shall solicit,
award and manage these research projects on a nationwide basis
directly with researchers from universities and not-for-profit
research organizations. The projects may include research
projects to improve environmental mitigation, water quality and
treatment, infrastructure technology as well as the societal
impacts of unconventional shale plays. These awards shall
identify ways to improve existing technologies, encourage
prudent development, provide cost-effective solutions, and
develop a better understanding of these reservoirs' resource
potential.
The Committee recommends $17,500,000 for the Unconventional
Field Test Sites.
The Committee recognizes the Department's ongoing efforts
to support research into the exploration for and development of
emerging unconventional oil and/or gas reservoirs, and directs
the Department to direct future allocations to projects in
locations geologically representative of the unconventional
reservoir of interest. The Committee encourages continued
efforts to characterize emerging unconventional reservoirs but
with emphasis on geographic areas where geological conditions
are optimal for the generation and accumulation of economically
significant amounts of oil or gas in the geological
formation(s) being studied, as indicated by published reports
and existing early-stage commercial activity. The Committee
further encourages a focus of available resources on potential
unconventional reservoirs for which there is limited data
rather than well-known existing reservoirs. University-led
research is preferred to ensure a broad range of expertise is
utilized to address the entire range of environmental, socio-
economic, geological, and technical challenges associated with
unconventional oil and gas development. The Committee also
recognizes that private industry participation in very early
development phase research projects, although desirable, is
often difficult to achieve due to the highly proprietary nature
of early-stage exploration data.
The Committee recommends $4,000,000 for further research on
multipronged approaches for characterizing the constituents of
and managing the cleaning of water produced during the
extraction of oil and natural gas, of which $2,000,000 is
recommended to partner with research universities engaged in
the study of characterizing, cleaning, treating, and managing
produced water and who are willing to engage though public
private partnerships with the energy industry to develop and
assess commercially viable technology to achieve the same. The
Committee encourages the Department to work with the energy
producing industry to identify and develop--to a commercial
scale--technologies that can characterize, clean and
effectively treat produced water to have beneficial reuse.
The Committee directs the Department to continue its
research partnership with the Department of Transportation on
the crude oil characterization study to improve the safety of
crude oil transported by rail. The Committee recommends up to
$1,500,000 for completion of the study.
The Committee recognizes that the United States possesses
vast domestic coal reserves that cannot be mined economically
at current prices. Although some natural gas is absorbed by
coal and can be economically recovered through methane
extraction, more efficient recovery mechanisms are feasible. To
validate methods for recovering a greater fraction of energy
contained in deep coal deposits, the Committee encourages the
Department to conduct pilot field tests of technologies for in-
situ biological conversion of coal to natural gas with
university participants, and evaluate the feasibility of
converting coal deposits in both the Western and Eastern United
States into natural gas.
NATIONAL ENERGY TECHNOLOGY LABORATORY
The Committee recommends $50,000,000 for NETL Research and
Operations and $45,000,000 for NETL Infrastructure.
NETL Infrastructure.--The Committee directs the Department
to prioritize funds to provide site-wide upgrades for safety,
avoid an increase in deferred maintenance, and provide for the
continued update and refresh of Joule through the final year of
a 3-year lease.
Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $4,900,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 10,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 10,000,000
The Committee recommends $10,000,000 for Naval Petroleum
and Oil Shale Reserves, the same as the budget request.
Strategic Petroleum Reserve
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $252,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 175,105,000
Committee recommendation................................ 175,105,000
The Committee recommends $175,105,000 for the Strategic
Petroleum Reserve, the same as the budget request.
Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $6,500,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 10,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 10,000,000
The Committee recommends $10,000,000 for the Northeast Home
Heating Oil Reserve, the same as the budget request.
Energy Information Administration
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $125,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 115,035,000
Committee recommendation................................ 125,000,000
The Committee recommends $125,000,000 for the Energy
Information Administration, an increase of $9,965,000 above the
budget request.
The Committee recognizes the importance of building energy
information and the opportunity for better data collection
presented by new technologies. The Department is encouraged to
upgrade the Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Surveys to
a real-time data collection system with rapid reporting of
results, without compromising statistical validity or data
security.
Non-Defense Environmental Cleanup
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $298,400,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 218,400,000
Committee recommendation................................ 353,240,000
The Committee recommends $353,240,000 for Non-Defense
Environmental Cleanup, an increase of $134,840,000 above the
budget request.
Small Sites.--The Committee recommends $174,000,000 for
Small Sites. Within the available funds, the Committee
recommends $10,000,000 for work required pursuant to the
agreement reached in 2012 between the Department, the Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation, and State and local
governments to complete the demolition of K-25 in exchange for
preserving the historic contributions made by the K-25 site to
the Manhattan Project. The Committee also recommends
$20,000,000 for operations, maintenance, and cleanup activities
to support the Manhattan Project National Historical Park sites
in Hanford, Washington, and Los Alamos, New Mexico. The Park
tells an important story in our Nation's history: the
development and production of the technology and materials
necessary to create the world's first atomic bomb.
Within available funds, the Committee recommends
$55,000,000 to continue work at Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory, $45,000,000 for Moab, and $25,000,000 to continue
the removal of the High Flux Beam Reactor stack at Brookhaven.
Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning Fund
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $840,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 752,749,000
Committee recommendation................................ 840,818,000
The Committee recommends $840,818,000 for Uranium
Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning [UED&D]
activities, an increase of $88,069,000 above the budget
request.
The Committee recommendation includes $195,000,000 for East
Tennessee Technology Park to continue cleanup and demolition of
all remaining facilities including the K-1200 complex and the
K-1600 complex, and to conduct remedial actions, and site
closure activities. The Committee also recommends $206,000,000
for Paducah, and $408,099,000 for Portsmouth. Additional
funding of $60,000,000 above the budget request is recommended
for the Portsmouth Site, and the Department shall not barter,
transfer, or sell uranium during fiscal year 2019 to generate
additional funding for Portsmouth cleanup that is in excess of
the amount of funding recommended.
Science
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $6,259,903,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 5,390,972,000
Committee recommendation................................ 6,650,000,000
The Committee recommends $6,650,000,000 for Science, an
increase of $1,259,028,000 above the budget request.
Distinguished Scientist Program.--The Committee recommends
$4,000,000 to support the Department's Distinguished Scientist
Program, as authorized in section 5011 of Public Law 110-69 to
promote scientific and academic excellence through
collaborations between institutions of higher education and
national laboratories to be funded from across all Office of
Science programs.
Quantum Information Science.--The Committee supports the
Office of Science's coordinated and focused research program in
quantum information science to support the Department's
science, energy, and national security missions. This emerging
field of science promises to yield revolutionary new approaches
to computing, sensing, communication, and metrology, as well as
our understanding of the universe, and accordingly the
Committee recommends $105,000,000 as requested across the
Office of Science programs to advance early stage fundamental
research in this field of science.
Small Business Innovation Research.--The Committee
recognizes the importance of small businesses in meeting the
research and development mission of the Department and is
concerned that the Department's previous delays in issuing
Small Business Innovation Research [SBIR] and Small Business
Technology Transfer [STTR] awards had a negative impact on
small businesses. The Committee directs the Department to meet
its congressionally mandated deadlines of reviewing small
businesses' applications for SBIR/STTR awards as required by
P.L. 112-81.
ADVANCED SCIENTIFIC COMPUTING RESEARCH
The Committee recommends $980,000,000 for Advanced
Scientific Computing Research.
The Committee recommends $232,706,000 for the Exascale
Computing Project. In addition, the Committee recommends
$205,000,000 for the Oak Ridge Leadership Computing Facility,
$145,000,000 for the Argonne Leadership Computing Facility,
$110,000,000 for the National Energy Research Scientific
Computing Center, and $85,000,000 for ESnet. The Committee
supports the Department's efforts to fully fund an upgrade to
ESnet and urges the Department to submit budget requests that
provide ESnet the ability to procure the technology and
operational resources needed for mission success. Further, the
Committee recommends $10,000,000 for the Computational Sciences
Graduate Program. The Committee recommends not less than
$24,000,000 for Research and Evaluation Prototypes.
The Committee recommends not less than $159,000,000 for
Mathematical, Computational, and Computer Sciences Research to
support the development of critical tools for advanced
computing. The Committee is supportive of recent research
thrusts to develop scientific machine learning tools to enhance
scientific discovery from user facility data and fundamental
research in quantum information science that will lay the
groundwork for deployable quantum computing systems.
The Committee recommends $75,667,000 for Computational
Partnerships [SciDAC]. Within available funding for SciDAC, the
Committee recommends up to $13,000,000 to support work on
artificial intelligence and big data focused on the development
of algorithms and methods to identify new ways of extracting
information from data generated at the Office of Science's
large user facilities or validating use of machine learning in
the Office of Science's program's scientific simulations. This
is the only funding recommended within the Office of Science
that shall be available for this work. Further, none of the
funding in the Office of Science is available for clinical
trials or therapeutics.
BASIC ENERGY SCIENCES
The Committee recommends $2,193,400,000 for Basic Energy
Sciences [BES].
The Committee recommends not less than $110,000,000 for the
Energy Frontier Research Centers to continue multi-
disciplinary, fundamental research needed to address scientific
grand challenges. The Committee continues to support the EPSCoR
program and its goals of broadening participation in
sustainable and competitive basic energy research in eligible
jurisdictions. The Committee recommends $20,000,000 for EPSCoR
and directs the Department to resume annual or at minimum,
biennial, Implementation Grant solicitations. The Committee
further directs the Department to submit a report to the
Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress not
later than 90 days after enactment of this act that provides a
plan for future solicitations.
The Committee recommends not less than $519,009,000 to
fully fund optimal operations at the five BES light sources and
to adequately invest in the recapitalization of key instruments
and infrastructure, and in staff and other resources necessary
to deliver critical scientific capabilities to users. Within
the available funds, the Committee recommends $118,200,000 for
the operation of NSLS-II. Recognizing that the Department has
constructed only half of the 60 beamlines that the NSLS-II can
accommodate, and has not yet requested funding for the
construction of additional beamlines in fiscal year 2019, the
Committee directs the Department to submit as part of its
fiscal year 2020 budget request a plan for the buildout of
additional beamlines to fully leverage the capabilities of the
NSLS-II.
The Committee recommends $285,000,000 for high-flux neutron
source operations which will allow for both Spallation Neutron
Source [SNS] and High Flux Isotope Reactor [HFIR] to proceed
with the most critical deferred repairs, replace outdated
instruments, and make essential machine improvements. The
Committee does not recommend funding for the Lujan Neutron
Scattering Center.
The Committee recommends not less than $140,000,000 to
fully fund optimal operations at the five BES Nanoscale Science
Research Centers and to adequately invest in the
recapitalization of key instruments and infrastructure, and in
staff and other resources necessary to deliver critical
scientific capabilities to users.
The Committee recommends $24,088,000 for the Batteries and
Energy Storage Hub, the Joint Center for Energy Storage
Research [JCESR]. The Committee is highly supportive of the
work of JCESR to develop energy storage research prototypes for
transportation and grid applications beyond lithium-ion
technologies. These prototypes will demonstrate the potential
to scale up manufacturing prototype batteries to decrease costs
and increase energy density of novel energy storage concepts.
The Committee supports the continued research and development
for JCESR, to ensure the outcome of basic research leads to
practical solutions that are competitive in the marketplace.
The Committee recommends not less than $15,000,000 for the
Fuels from Sunlight Hub. The Committee directs the Department
of Energy to submit a solar fuels research initiative strategic
plan within 120 days after enactment of this act. The 10-year
plan shall include research challenges and opportunities,
program goals and milestones to overcome scientific and
technological impediments, a description of coordination
between the Office of Science, EERE, and ARPA-E to leverage
basic research and early-stage translational research in solar
fuels to accelerate the pace of innovation, an assessment of
U.S. leadership in solar fuels research relative to
international competition and the extent to which the
Department's investments are sufficient to maintain U.S.
leadership.
The Committee supports funding for energy research
activities related to enhanced efficiency in energy conversion
and utilization, including emergent polymer optoelectronic
technologies, to ensure continued competitiveness in a global
marketplace. The Department is directed to continue its
partnership with qualified institutions of higher education in
this effort. The Committee encourages the Department to
continue funding to support research and development needs of
graduate and post-graduate science programs at Historically
Black Colleges and Universities.
The Committee recommends $26,000,000 for exascale systems.
Within the amounts recommended for Construction, the
Committee recommends $70,000,000 for the Proton Power Upgrade
project at the Spallation Neutron Source, $15,000,000 for the
Second Target Station preliminary engineering design and to
continue work towards a project baseline, $50,000,000 for the
Advanced Light Source Upgrade, $140,000,000 for the Advanced
Photon Source Upgrade, $28,000,000 for LCLS-II HE, and
$139,300,000 for LCLS-II.
Not less than $14,100,000 is available for Other Project
Costs, of which $6,000,000 is for the High Energy Upgrade at
LCLS-II; $6,100,000 is for LCLS-II; and $2,000,000 is for the
Advanced Light Source Upgrade.
BIOLOGICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH
The Committee recommends $715,000,000 for Biological and
Environmental Research. The Committee recognizes the unique and
beneficial role that the Department plays for the Nation in the
advancement of biosciences to address core departmental
missions in energy and the environment. The Department is
directed to give priority to optimizing the operation of
Biological and Environmental Research User Facilities.
The Committee recommends $371,000,000 for Biological
Systems Science, including not less than $100,000,000 for the
four recently selected Bioenergy Research Centers. The
Committee directs the Department to maintain Genomic Science as
a top priority and recommends $90,000,000 for Foundational
Genomics Research and $34,908,000 for Biomolecular
Characterization and Imaging Science. The Committee recommends
$70,000,000 for the Joint Genome Institute, an essential
component for genomic research. The Committee recognizes the
importance of the emerging field of microbiome research to the
mission objectives of the Office of Science and more broadly
within the Department, especially in relation to energy
security and environmental sustainability. To address
programmatic opportunities in microbiome research and
development and to maintain U.S. leadership in the field, the
Committee recommends an additional $10,000,000 to begin the
establishment of a national microbiome database. The Department
should lead this effort in collaboration with other Federal
agencies.
The Committee recommends $344,000,000 for Earth and
Environmental Systems Sciences. Within available funding for
Earth and Environmental Systems Sciences, the Committee
recommends not less than $40,000,000 for Terrestrial Ecosystem
Science, of which not less than $10,000,000 is for NGEE-Arctic,
$8,300,000 is for the SPRUCE field site, $5,800,000 is for Next
Generation Ecosystem Experiments Tropics, $6,800,000 is for
Watershed Function SFA, and $5,700,000 is for AmeriFLUX Long-
Term Earth System Observations. Within available funding for
Earth and Environmental Systems Sciences, the Committee
recommends not less than $22,143,000 for Subsurface
Biogeochemical Research, including not less than $3,000,000 to
support on-going research and discovery related to mercury
biogeochemical transformations in the environment.
The Committee recommends $97,000,000 for Earth and
Environmental Systems Modeling and directs the Department to
expend appropriated funds for earth system modeling, and
regional and global model analysis. The Committee further
directs the Department to make land-energy interactions, land
biogeochemistry, uncertainty quantification, and model
evaluation (e.g., ILAMB) a priority within the regional and
global modeling activities, and continue to support performance
optimization of coupled systems for execution on high
performance and exascale systems. The Committee recommends
$15,000,000 to support the exascale computing initiative.
Within available funds, not less than $133,500,000 is
recommended for Facilities and Infrastructure in the Earth and
Environmental Systems Sciences program, including $45,000,000
for the Environmental Molecular Sciences Laboratory, and
$68,000,000 for the Atmospheric Radiation Measurement [ARM]
User Facility. The Committee also recommends an additional
$17,500,000 to replace the ARM mobile unit. The Committee
supports the Department's proposal to initiate a terrestrial-
aquatic interfaces pilot project and encourages the Department
to explore as part of this pilot the resilience of ecosystems
in coastal regions in response to changing environments and
extreme weather events.
The Committee encourages the Department to increase its
funding for academia to perform independent evaluations of
climate models using existing data sets and peer-reviewed
publications of climate-scale processes to determine various
models' ability to reproduce the actual climate.
FUSION ENERGY SCIENCES
The Committee recommends $425,000,000 for Fusion Energy
Sciences.
U.S. Contribution to ITER.--The Committee recommends
$122,000,000 for the in-kind contributions and related support
activities of the International Thermonuclear Experimental
Reactor [ITER] project. The Committee does not recommended
funding for the cash contribution.
The Committee recommends not less than $7,000,000 for the
Material Plasma Exposure eXperiment and not less than
$92,500,000 for DIII-D.
The Committee directs the Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory
Committee to review establishing a reactor concepts research,
development, and deployment activity. Within 180 days after
enactment of this act, the Department is directed to brief the
Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress on a
recommendation, which if supported, will include a technical
plan, program and eligibility requirements, and funding profile
for future fiscal years.
HIGH ENERGY PHYSICS
The Committee recommends $1,010,000,000 for High Energy
Physics. The Committee strongly supports the Department's
efforts to advance the recommendations of the Particle Physics
Project Prioritization Panel Report [P5], which established
clear priorities for the domestic particle physics program.
The Committee recommends $7,500,000 for the Dark Energy
Spectroscopic Instrument; $14,450,000 for the G2 Dark Matter
Experiment LUX-ZEPLIN; and $10,000,000 for the Facility for
Advanced Accelerator Experimental Tests II. The Committee notes
that fabrication of the Large Synoptic Survey Telescope Camera
will be complete with fiscal year 2018 funding and recommends
$6,250,000 for ongoing efforts for commissioning and initial
operation of the camera.
In accordance with the P5, the Committee strongly urges the
Department to maintain a balanced portfolio of small-, medium-
and large-scale experiments, and to ensure adequate funding for
the basic research program at universities and the national
laboratories. In particular, in addition to the support for the
Long Baseline Neutrino Facility to study neutrino physics, the
Committee urges the Department to support the P5 recommendation
for a next-generation Stage 4 Cosmic Microwave Background
experiment for precision studies of the early universe.
Four years into executing the P5, the Committee commends
the Office of Science and the high energy physics community for
achieving significant accomplishments and meeting the
milestones and goals set forth in the strategic plan, including
advancing the high-luminosity accelerator and detector upgrades
for the Large Hadron Collider, construction of the Long
Baseline Neutrino Facility/Deep Underground Neutrino
Experiment, completing the construction of second generation
dark matter and dark energy experiments, operating the world's
highest power beams for neutrino physics, building a successful
prototype of the strongest accelerator magnet ever built, and
discovering new configurations of matter. The Committee
encourages the Department and the high energy physics community
to continue to provide progress reports on meeting P5 goals.
The Committee recommends $145,000,000 to continue construction
of the Long Baseline Neutrino Facility/Deep Underground
Neutrino Experiment, consistent with the Department's project
cost profile, and $35,000,000 for the PIP-II accelerator
upgrade.
A recent National Academies study, Opportunities in Intense
Ultrafast Lasers, Towards the Brightest Light, highlighted the
importance of investing in high-intensity laser technology to
maintain U.S. leadership and open up new frontiers of science.
To help advance this important area of research, the Committee
directs the Department to provide a plan within 90 days after
enactment of this act that responds to the recommendations of
this study concerning this important national capability.
NUCLEAR PHYSICS
The Committee recommends $710,000,000 for Nuclear Physics,
and strongly supports the Long Range Plan for Nuclear Science
released in October 2015 to address important scientific
questions with modest or constrained growth in the nuclear
science budgets, while still maintaining a strong, vital and
world-leading program.
Within available funds, the Committee recommends
$75,000,000 for the Facility for Rare Isotope Beams [FRIB], and
encourages the Department to work with Michigan State
University to commence early operations at FRIB. The Committee
also recommends $11,500,000 for the Stable Isotope Production
Facility to provide increased domestic capacity for production
of critically needed enriched stable isotopes for research,
defense, and industry, and reduce the Nation's dependence on
foreign supplies. The Committee also recommends $6,600,000 for
the Gamma-Ray Energy Tracking Array, which will enable
advanced, high resolution gamma ray detection capabilities for
FRIB.
The Committee further recommends optimal operations at the
Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider, Continuous Electron Beam
Accelerator Facility, the Argonne Tandem Linac Accelerator
System, and the Brookhaven Linac Isotope Producer Facility.
WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT FOR TEACHERS AND SCIENTISTS
The Committee recommends $24,500,000 for Workforce
Development for Teachers and Scientists. Within available
funds, the Committee recommends $11,300,000 for the Science
Undergraduate Laboratory Internship; $1,000,000 for the
Community College Institute of Science and Technology;
$4,500,000 for the Graduate Student Research Program;
$1,200,000 for the Albert Einstein Distinguished Educator
Fellowship; $2,900,000 for the National Science Bowl; $750,000
for Technology Development and Online Application; $600,000 for
Evaluation Studies; $500,000 for Outreach; and $50,000 for
Laboratory Equipment Donation Program.
SCIENCE LABORATORIES INFRASTRUCTURE
The Committee recommends $302,100,000 for Science
Laboratories Infrastructure.
Within these funds, the Committee recommends $26,000,000
for nuclear operations at Oak Ridge National Laboratory. In
future budget requests, the Committee directs the Office of
Science to work with the Office of Nuclear Energy to
demonstrate a commitment to operations and maintenance of
nuclear facilities at Oak Ridge National Laboratory that
support multiple critical missions.
Advanced Research Projects Agency--Energy
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $353,314,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................................
Committee recommendation................................ 375,000,000
The Committee recommends $375,000,000 for the Advanced
Research Projects Agency--Energy [ARPA-E], an increase of
$375,000,000 above the budget request. Within available funds,
the Committee recommends $33,250,000 for program direction.
ARPA-E was established by the America COMPETES Act of 2007
following a recommendation by the National Academies of
Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in the Rising Above the
Gathering Storm report. Since receiving its first funding in
fiscal year 2009, ARPA-E continues to catalyze and support the
development of transformational, high-impact energy
technologies to ensure the Nation's economic and energy
security and technological leadership. Project sponsors
continue to form strategic partnerships and new companies, as
well as secure private sector funding to help move ARPA-E
technologies closer to the market.
The Committee definitively rejects the short-sighted
proposal to terminate ARPA-E, and instead increases investment
in this transformational program and directs the Department to
continue to spend funds provided on research and development
and program direction. The Department shall not use any
appropriated funds to plan or execute the termination of ARPA-
E.
Innovative Technology Loan Guarantee Program
ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES
GROSS APPROPRIATION
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $33,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 10,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 33,000,000
OFFSETTING COLLECTIONS
Appropriations, 2018.................................... -$10,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... -15,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ -15,000,000
NET APPROPRIATION
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $23,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... -5,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 18,000,000
The Committee recommends $33,000,000 in funding for the
Loan Guarantee Program, an increase of $23,000,000 above the
budget request. This funding is offset by $15,000,000 in
collections from loan guarantee applicants, for a net
appropriation of $18,000,000. An additional $44,000,000 is
credited to the bill as an adjustment from negative subsidies
associated with this program. No funds recommended under this
heading may be used to plan, develop, implement or pursue the
elimination of the Title XVII Innovative Technologies Loan
Program.
Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Loan Program
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $5,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 1,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 5,000,000
The Committee recommends $5,000,000 for the Advanced
Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Loan Program, an increase of
$4,000,000 above the budget request.
Tribal Energy Loan Guarantee Program
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $1,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... -8,500,000
Committee recommendation................................ 1,000,000
The Committee recommends $1,000,000 for the Tribal Energy
Loan Guarantee Program, an increase of $9,500,000 above the
budget request.
Office of Indian Energy Policy and Programs
Appropriations, 2018....................................................
Budget estimate, 2019...................................................
Committee recommendation................................ $18,000,000
The Committee recommends $18,000,000 for the Office of
Indian Energy Policy and Programs. The activities of this
office have previously been funded in the Departmental
Administration account.
Departmental Administration
(GROSS)
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $285,652,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 235,534,000
Committee recommendation................................ 266,000,000
(MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES)
Appropriations, 2018.................................... -$96,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... -96,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ -96,000,000
NET APPROPRIATION
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $189,652,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 139,534,000
Committee recommendation................................ 170,000,000
The Committee recommends $266,000,000 in funding for
Departmental Administration. This funding is offset by
$96,000,000 in revenue for a net appropriation of $170,000,000.
The Committee has reduced the number of control points in
this account to provide flexibility to the Department in its
management and funding of its support functions. The Department
is directed to continue to submit its budget request for this
account in its current structure. The Other Departmental
Administration activity includes Technology Transition
Management, Chief Human Capital Officer, Chief Information
Officer, Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business
Utilization, General Counsel, Energy Policy and Systems
Analysis, Technology Transitions, International Affairs, Public
Affairs, Economic Impact and Diversity, and Office of Energy
Jobs Development. The Office of Indian Energy Policy and
Programs is funded in a separate account.
Within International Affairs, the Committee recommends
$2,000,000 for the Israel Binational Industrial Research and
Development [BIRD] Foundation and $4,000,000 to continue the
U.S.-Israel Center of Excellence in Energy Engineering and
Water Technology as authorized by the United States-Israel
Strategic Partnership Act. This joint research and development
center between the U.S. and Israel shall focus on collaborative
research initiatives among universities, research institutions,
and industry partners that could include hydrocarbon extraction
and processing, energy infrastructure and policies, process
water treatment, alternative energy sources, and impacts on
coastal communities. Funding provided shall be matched with
Israeli government and industry funding. The Department is
directed to expeditiously obligate funding provided in fiscal
year 2018 and provide to the Committees on Appropriations of
both Houses of Congress a briefing on implementation and
management. The Committee directs the Department to ensure the
center is cost-shared with Israel and non-federal partners.
Technology Transfer.--Within the amount recommended for
Other Departmental Administration, the Committee recommends
$8,505,000 for the Office of Technology Transition. In awarding
funding from the Technology Commercialization Fund, the
Department shall assure cost match with private partners is in
accordance with cost sharing in section 988 of the Energy
Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 16352).
Small Refinery Exemption.--The Department is directed to
continue to follow the direction included in the Energy and
Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act,
2018, under this heading.
Office of the Inspector General
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $49,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 51,330,000
Committee recommendation................................ 51,330,000
The Committee recommends $51,330,000 for the Office of the
Inspector General, the same as the request.
ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES
NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
The Committee recommendation for the National Nuclear
Security Administration [NNSA] continues funding for
recapitalization of our nuclear weapons infrastructure, while
modernizing and maintaining a safe, secure, and credible
nuclear deterrent without the need for underground testing.
This is among our most important national security priorities.
At the same time, the Committee supports continuing
important efforts to secure and permanently eliminate remaining
stockpiles of nuclear and radiological materials overseas and
in the United States that could be used for nuclear or
radiological weapons. In addition, the Committee supports Naval
Reactors and the important role they play in enabling the
Navy's nuclear fleet.
The NNSA is a semi-autonomous agency within the Department.
The NNSA Act clearly lays out the functions of the NNSA, and
gives the Administrator authority over, and responsibility for,
those functions. No funds shall be used to reorganize,
reclassify, or study combining any of those functions with the
Department. Funds may be used to evaluate any other function
not specifically listed as an NNSA function in the NNSA Act,
such as a chief scientist or office of policy.
INTEGRATED UNIVERSITY PROGRAM
The Committee directs the Secretary to carry out the
requirements of 42 U.S.C. 16274a in support of university
research and development in areas relevant to the NNSA's
mission. Within available funds, the Committee recommends not
less than $5,000,000 for the Integrated University Program to
cultivate the next generation of leaders in nonproliferation,
nuclear security, and international security. Together with
funds from the Office of Nuclear Energy and the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, this program ensures highly qualified
nuclear specialists will be available to meet national needs.
The Committee directs the Department to request funding for
this program in future budget years. Funding for this program
shall not come from prior year funds.
In addition to the Integrated University Program within
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation, the NNSA manages several
university-related programs, ranging from fellowships and
scholarships to university research. The NNSA has not been able
to provide a clear accounting of these various programs, and is
directed to provide a report annually with the budget request
that lists all of the university programs requested, the
recommended funding level, and the value that program provides
the NNSA.
PROJECT MANAGEMENT
The Committee is concerned about the NNSA's ability to
properly estimate costs and timelines for large projects. The
NNSA is encouraged to assess current performance on projects
costing more than $750,000,000, and make appropriate project
management changes. The Committee encourages the NNSA to
identify problems in cost and schedule estimates early, and
provide updated information to the Committees on Appropriations
of both Houses of Congress in a timely manner.
Weapons Activities
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $10,642,138,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 11,017,078,000
Committee recommendation................................ 10,850,000,000
The Committee recommends $10,850,000,000 for Weapons
Activities, a decrease of $167,078,000 below the budget
request, to ensure the safety, security, reliability, and
effectiveness of the Nation's nuclear weapons stockpile without
the need for nuclear testing.
DIRECTED STOCKPILE WORK
The Committee recommends $4,700,501,000 for Directed
Stockpile Work.
Life Extension Programs.--The Committee recommends
$1,919,988,000 for Life Extension Programs [LEPs] and Major
Alterations, which fully funds all LEPs and major alterations
in the budget request, consistent with the plan of record
approved by the Nuclear Weapons Council. The NNSA needs to
ensure that LEPs are completed on time and on budget to prevent
impact on other high priorities, such as modernizing aging
infrastructure, critical nonproliferation activities to combat
nuclear terrorism, and naval nuclear propulsion.
Weapons Dismantlement and Disposition.--The Committee
recommends $56,000,000 for the dismantlement of retired nuclear
weapons removed from the stockpile.
Strategic Materials.--The Committee supports the budget
request for strategic materials, including management of
existing material stockpiles and methods to replenish the
supply needed for our national security programs. As the
Department progresses through the ongoing warhead life
extension programs, it will require the necessary strategic
materials to meet the stockpile demands. The NNSA is encouraged
to explore all options, including leveraging qualified
industrial partners, to ensure it can maintain a consistent
supply of purified uranium metal and other strategic materials.
The Committee continues to support the Nuclear Weapons
Council's program of record for plutonium pit production to
meet the Fiscal Year 2015 National Defense Authorization Act
requirement of 30 pits per year at Los Alamos National
Laboratory by 2026.
Within available funds, NNSA is directed to contract with a
third-party federally-Funded Research and Development
Corporation to conduct an independent assessment of the NNSA's
decision to conduct pit production operations at two sites.
NNSA shall identify and execute a contract with an independent
FFRDC, not directly involved in plutonium pit production, not
later than 60 days after enactment of this a act. NNSA shall
not proceed with conceptual design activities for the recently
announced preferred alternative until an FFRDC is under
contract. The assessment shall include an analysis of the four
options evaluated in the recent Plutonium Pit Production
Engineering Assessment, all identified risks, engineering
requirements, workforce development requirements, and other
factors considered. The FFRDC shall submit its report to the
Committees on Appropriations of both the Houses of Congress not
later than 210 days after enactment of this act.
Domestic Uranium Enrichment.--The Department's approved
Mission Need Statement [MNS] for Domestic Uranium Enrichment
states that in 2014-2015, the American Centrifuge Plant had
successfully completed its mission of providing reliability and
operational data. The Department's research and development on
small centrifuges has not yet reached that level of maturity.
The MNS also stated that the cost range to enrich uranium using
AC-100 would cost approximately twice as much as using small
centrifuges. The Committee is concerned that the Department
lacks a credible plan to obtain adequate data on small
centrifuge operations to complete the Analysis of Alternatives
for uranium enrichment as scheduled. The Committee recommends
$50,000,000 for Domestic Uranium Enrichment, including not more
than $5,000,000 for research, development, and demonstration of
AC-100 and not less than $45,000,000 for research, development
and demonstration of small centrifuges. No funds are
recommended for uranium downblending within this account.
Tritium Sustainment.--The Committee recommends $290,275,000
for tritium sustainment, including $85,000,000 to downblend
uranium for tritium production.
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TECHNOLOGY, AND ENGINEERING
The Committee recommends $2,042,289,000 for Research,
Development, Technology, and Engineering.
Science.--The Committee directs the Administrator to enter
into a contract with the group known as JASON for a study to
assess the efforts of the NNSA to understand plutonium aging
and the lifetime of plutonium pits in nuclear weapons. The
Administrator shall make available all information that is
necessary to successfully complete a meaningful study on a
timely basis. Not later than 18 months after the date of
enactment of this act, the Administrator shall submit to
Congress a report on the findings of the study. The report
shall include recommendations of the study for improving the
knowledge, understanding, and application of the fundamental
and applied sciences related to the study of plutonium aging
and pit lifetimes, an estimate of minimum and likely lifetimes
for pits in current warheads, and the feasibility of reusing
pits in modified nuclear weapons. The report shall be submitted
in unclassified form but may include a classified annex.
Academic Alliances and Partnerships.--The Committee
recognizes the importance of the Academic Alliances and
Partnerships program in supporting fundamental science and
technology research at universities that support stockpile
stewardship, the development of the next generation of highly-
trained workforce, and the maintenance of a strong network of
independent technical peers. The Committee is also aware of the
expertise provided to the NNSA by academic alliances and the
centers of excellence program. The Committee encourages the
NNSA to fund new centers of excellence, especially in the field
of materials under extreme conditions research. The Committee
recommends $53,364,000. Within this amount, not less than
$20,000,000 is recommended for the Minority Serving Institution
Partnership Program, within which not less than $2,000,000 is
recommended for Tribal Colleges and Universities.
Engineering.--The Committee recommends $22,500,000 to
complete the recapitalization of the Microsystems and
Engineering Sciences Applications silicon fabrication facility,
consistent with the budget request. The Committee also supports
increased investment in Enhanced Surety in recognition of new
threats and the challenges maintaining readiness on aging
systems. Within the available funding, $5,000,000 is
recommended for next-generation technology development for
warhead system certification and the protection against theft/
loss and terrorism incident.
Inertial Confinement Fusion Ignition and High-Yield.--The
Committee finds that the Inertial Confinement Fusion and High
Yield [ICF] program continues to be a critical and essential
component of nuclear stockpile certification without
underground nuclear weapons testing, maintaining U.S.
leadership in high energy density physics and laser
technologies, and developing the next-generation workforce.
Therefore, the Committee recommends $544,934,000 for the ICF
program. Within available funds, the Committee recommends
$344,000,000 for inertial confinement fusion activities at the
National Ignition Facility, $63,100,000 is recommended for
Sandia National Laboratory's Z facility, and $80,000,000 is
recommended for the University of Rochester's Omega facility.
Within available funds for facility operations and other
amounts, the Committee recommends not less than $30,000,000 for
target research, development, and production. To ensure a
robust, diverse, and competitive vendor base for targets, the
Committee directs the NNSA to compete as much scope as
practicable and limit sole-source contracts to $15,000,000 or
less. The Committee further encourages continued research by
the NNSA in High Energy Density Plasmas and recognizes the
partnerships between the laboratories and research universities
to address the critical need for skilled graduates to replace
an aging workforce at our NNSA laboratories.
Advanced Simulation and Computing.--The Committee
recommends $703,404,000 for advanced simulation and computing.
Within available funds, the Committee recommends not less than
$163,000,000 for activities associated with the exascale
initiative, such as advanced system architecture design
contracts with vendors and advanced weapons code development to
effectively use new high performance computing platforms.
Within funds provided, the Committee recommends up to
$13,000,000 for work on integration of artificial intelligence
approaches into mechanistic modeling and prediction.
Advanced Manufacturing Development.--The Committee
recommends $96,838,000 for Advanced Manufacturing Development.
Within available funds, $35,914,000 is recommended for Process
Technology Development, including $5,000,000 to modernize and
upgrade legacy applications at weapons production facilities to
improve manufacturing and safety.
INFRASTRUCTURE AND OPERATIONS
The Committee recommends $2,749,048,000 for Infrastructure
and Operations.
Project 06-D-141, Uranium Processing Facility, Y-12, Oak
Ridge, Tennessee.--The Committee recommends $703,000,000 to
continue construction activities of the five remaining
subprojects of the Uranium Processing Facility, including the
Main Process Building and the Salvage and Accountability
Building. The Committee notes that the designs for these
nuclear facilities have reached the 90 percent completion
milestone and the NNSA Administrator has approved the cost and
schedule baselines for both buildings.
The Committee supports the ongoing effort to replace
existing enriched uranium capabilities currently residing in
Building 9212 by 2025 for not more than $6,500,000,000 and the
strategy of breaking the project into more manageable
subprojects. This practice is specifically permitted by DOE
Order 413.3B, and is a practical approach for any project of
this magnitude.
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $1,999,219,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 1,862,825,000
Committee recommendation................................ 1,902,000,000
The Committee recommends $1,902,000,000 for Defense Nuclear
Nonproliferation, an increase of $39,175,000 above the budget
request.
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation provides a vitally
important component of our national security--preventing
nuclear materials and weapons from falling into the wrong
hands, including non-weapons nations, terrorist organizations,
and other non-state entities. This mission is challenged by an
increasingly dangerous world with emerging and evolving
threats, in addition to the proliferation of technologies that
simplify production, manufacturing, and design of nuclear
materials and weapons. The Committee recognizes the importance
of bilateral and multilateral agreements and organizations in
detecting, intercepting, and deterring nuclear and radiological
threats. The Committee urges the full use of these partnerships
to further strengthen U.S. and global security. Within
available funds, the Committee recommends up to $18,000,000 to
partner with interested State or local governments to improve
capabilities to train first-responders, and other experts in
nuclear operations, safeguards, cyber, and emergency
operations.
To preserve and advance uranium and engineering expertise
for purposes of national security and nonproliferation, the
Committee encourages the ongoing collaboration between the
Department's Office of Intelligence and the Defense Nuclear
Nonproliferation program. Further, as the pathways to
proliferation increase, it is vital to maintain the skilled
workforce and unique infrastructure to detect nuclear
proliferation and support policymakers in the future. The
Department is directed to provide a report to the Committees on
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress within 90 days after
enactment of this act that provides a plan to maintain the
necessary technical competencies and infrastructure. The
Department is directed to coordinate with other government
agencies and non-government entities to ensure it addresses the
broad spectrum of nonproliferation needs.
Domestic Radiological Security.--The Committee recommends
$115,433,000 for Domestic Radiological Security, including not
less than $25,000,000 for the Cesium Irradiator Replacement
Program.
Nonproliferation and Arms Control.--The Committee
recommends $129,703,000 for Nonproliferation and Arms Control
activities. Within available funds, the Committee recommends
not less than $3,000,000 for international cooperation between
governmental and non-governmental organizations at the national
and sub-national levels to implement robust export control
protocols.
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Research and
Development.--The Committee recommends $487,270,000 for Defense
Nuclear Nonproliferation Research and Development. The
Committee supports a robust research and development capability
to support nonproliferation initiatives. Proliferation of
illicit nuclear materials and weapons continues to be a high-
consequence threat, and our ability to detect the production
and movement of these materials is vitally important. Research
and development in this area is especially important. The
Committee recommendation supports continued research and
development of novel enrichment technologies to support
nonproliferation goals, and recommends $7,500,000 for this
purpose. The Committee also supports exploration and
development of material disposal technologies, and recommends
up to $10,000,000 for this purpose.
Low Enriched Uranium for Naval Applications.--Within
available funds for Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Research
and Development, the Committee recommends $10,000,000 for
Advanced Low Enriched Uranium Fuel Research and Development for
the national laboratories to develop low-enriched fuels that
could replace highly enriched uranium for naval applications.
Consistent with section 7319 of title 10, United States Code,
this funding is recommended within the Defense Nuclear
Nonproliferation account. This work shall be managed within
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation.
Seismic Research Instruments.--Several U.S. Government
agencies reduce the costs of seismic research by utilizing
shared-use instruments instead of owning, operating, and
maintaining their own equipment. The Committee directs that
within 180 days after enactment of this act, the NNSA shall
submit a report to Committees on Appropriations of both Houses
of Congress on the cost-effectiveness of establishing an
agreement between the Department and one or more instrument
centers to maintain and provide shared use of any instruments
the Department acquires, rather than the Department doing so
internally.
MOX Construction.--The Committee recommends $220,000,000
for closeout costs associated with the termination of MOX Fuel
Fabrication Facility construction, consistent with the budget
request and the Secretary's waiver to terminate the project.
Use of Prior Year Funds.--The Committee recommendation
assumes the use of $19,000,000 in prior year funds as
recommended in the budget request, and the use of $55,000,000
in prior year funds from Nonproliferation Construction.
Naval Reactors
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $1,620,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 1,788,618,000
Committee recommendation................................ 1,620,000,000
The Committee recommends $1,620,000,000 for Naval Reactors,
a decrease of $168,618,000 below the budget request. The
Committee's recommendation fully funds important national
priorities, including the Columbia-class replacement submarine
design and the prototype refueling. Naval Reactors currently
relies on high-enriched uranium from weapons that have been
removed from the stockpile to fuel the Navy's aircraft carriers
and submarines. The Committee encourages Naval Reactors to work
with the NNSA to ensure there is a long-term plan that meets
the Navy's needs for high-enriched uranium.
COLUMBIA-CLASS REACTOR SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT
The Committee recommends $138,000,000 for Columbia-Class
Reactor Systems Development. Columbia-class submarines must be
delivered on time to maintain our survivable deterrent. The
Committee directs Naval Reactors to provide the report in the
Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 2018, on technical risks to delivering the
lead submarine on time, and mitigation strategies for those
risks.
NAVAL REACTORS DEVELOPMENT
The Committee recommends $475,000,000 for Naval Reactors
Development. Within the available funds, the Committee
recommends $83,000,000 for the Advanced Test Reactor and
$2,000,000 for planning, preparation, and shipments of
unirradiated or irradiated material to support a pilot project
on ZIRCEX.
CONSTRUCTION
The Committee recommends $233,194,000 for Construction.
Within available funds, the Committee recommends $209,000,000
for the Spent Fuel Handling Facility in Idaho, $13,200,000 for
the Fire System Upgrade at Bettis, and $10,994,000 to replace
an overhead piping utility distribution system at the KS site.
Federal Salaries And Expenses
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $407,595,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 422,529,000
Committee recommendation................................ 408,000,000
The Committee recommends $408,000,000 for Federal Salaries
and Expenses, a decrease of $14,529,000 below the budget
request.
Defense Environmental Cleanup
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $5,988,048,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 5,630,217,000
Committee recommendation................................ 5,988,000,000
The Committee recommendation for Defense Environmental
Cleanup is $5,988,000,000, an increase of $357,783,000 above
the budget request. Within available funds, the Department is
directed to fund the hazardous waste worker training program at
$10,000,000.
Future Budget Requests.--The Committee directs the
Department to include out-year funding projections in the
annual budget request for Environmental Management, and an
estimate of the total cost and time to complete each site.
Richland.--As a signatory to the Tri-Party Agreement, the
Department is required to meet specific compliance milestones
toward the cleanup of the Hanford site. Among other things, the
Department committed to provide the funding necessary to enable
full compliance with its cleanup milestones. Unfortunately, if
the Department's fiscal year 2019 budget request were enacted
without change, future fiscal year Tri-Party Agreement
milestones could be at risk, threatening high-risk cleanup
projects near the City of Richland, Washington and the
economically and environmentally important Columbia River. The
Committee recognizes that significant progress has been made at
the Hanford Site. However, because the Department's budget
request could slow or halt critical cleanup work and threaten
the Department's compliance with its legal obligations under
the Tri-Party Agreement, the Committee recommends $838,171,000
for Richland Operations. Additional funding is recommended for
cleanup of the 300-296 waste site under the 324 Building,
interim stabilization of PUREX Tunnel #2, risk reduction
activities associated with legacy waste sites, K-West facility
cleanup and deactivation, site-wide infrastructure, and
community and regulatory support. The Committee recommends no
funding for the Department to carry out activities relating to
single-shell tank stabilization nor activities in the Office of
River Protection's tank farms within this control point.
Within available funds, the Department recommends
$8,5000,000 for the Hazardous Materials Management and
Emergency Response facilities. Further, within available funds,
the Department is directed to support the recently established
Hanford Workforce Engagement Center to provide education and
advocacy to current and former Hanford employees on all
available Federal and State compensation programs, and to
identify if a capability to resolve disputes and concerns can
be integrated into the Hanford Workforce Engagement Center.
Funding for maintenance and public safety efforts at B Reactor
in the Manhattan Project National Historical Park is
recommended within the Non-Defense Environmental Cleanup
account.
Oak Ridge Reservation.--The Committee recommends
$410,000,000 for the Oak Ridge Reservation, including
$10,000,000 to continue preliminary design of a new landfill.
The existing on-site waste disposal facility is expected to
reach capacity before all cleanup activities are completed. The
new landfill needs to be completed to ensure that there is no
interruption of cleanup activities. Additional funds above the
budget request are recommended to address the growing backlog
of deferred maintenance associated with excess contaminated
facilities, several of which are on the Department's list of
high-risk facilities, and to focus efforts at reducing threats
to worker safety and health. Efforts should also be focused on
cleanup of facilities needed for other purposes, such as hot
cells, reactors, and other excess facilities located in the
central campus at Oak Ridge National Laboratory.
U-233 Disposition Program.--The Committee recommends
$52,300,000 for the disposition of material in Building 3019.
Removal of legacy material from this building, an aging
facility in the heart of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory
central campus, must remain a high priority for the Department.
Removal of the Uranium 233 will enable the overall security
posture at the laboratory to be relaxed, which will reduce
costs and eliminate nuclear safety issues, and make the campus
more conducive to collaborative science. The Committee
encourages the Department to seek opportunities to expedite the
disposition of material in Building 3019, including public-
private partnerships that may reduce the overall cost of
cleanup. At the same time, the Department shall consider direct
disposal of remaining material that may not be suitable to
processing.
Mercury Treatment Facility.--The Committee recommends
$76,000,000 for construction of the Outfall 200 Mercury
Treatment Facility. Remediation of mercury contamination at the
Oak Ridge Reservation is an important precursor to full site
remediation. Reducing the mercury being released into the East
Fork of Poplar Creek continues to be among the highest
priorities for the Environmental Management program.
Office of River Protection.--The Committee recommends
$1,573,000,000 for the Office of River Protection. Funds above
the budget request are recommended to resume engineering,
procurement, and design work on the High-Level Waste Treatment
Facility, to ensure compliance with the 2016 Consent Decree and
Tri-Party Agreement milestones, and to continue tank waste
retrievals. Funds that support the Waste Treatment Plant
project are recommended separately for: (1) Low-Activity Waste
Treatment Facility, Analytical Laboratory, and Balance of
Facilities; (2) High-Level Waste Treatment Facility; (3) Pre-
Treatment Facility; and (4) Low Activity Waste Pretreatment
System. The Committee recommends no funding for the Department
to carry out activities relating to the test bed initiative for
low activity waste disposition. The Committee is aware of
efforts to remove high-curie constituents from high-level waste
tanks to facilitate low-activity waste vitrification through
the Direct Feed Low Activity Waste concept and meet consent
decree requirements. Funding is provided to install and test
one tank-side treatment device. The Department shall not
proceed with expansion of this approach until it reports to the
Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress on how
this approach will be integrated with existing and planned
capital facilities, how lifecycle cost compare to other
approaches, strategy for obtaining State permits, and plans for
ancilliary waste streams. The Department shall report to the
Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress before
moving ahead with any plans to place the High Level Waste
Treatment Facility or the Pretreatment Facility into
preservation mode for an extended period of time.
The Committee recognizes the Department's efforts to
improve working conditions in the tank farms and to address
chemical vapor exposures by implementing recommendations from
the 2014 Hanford Tank Vapor Assessment Report. The Committee is
aware of three subsequent reviews conducted by the Department's
Office of the Inspector General and Office of Enterprise
Assessments, and the National Institute for Occupational Safety
and Health. Within available funds in the Tank Farms Activities
control point, the Department is directed to continue ongoing
work to address chemical vapor exposures, implement
recommendations from all reviews, and maintain a safe work
environment for Hanford employees.
Savannah River Site.--The Committee recommends
$1,400,000,000 for the Savannah River site. Within available
funds, $3,000,000 is for disposition of spent fuel from the
High Flux Isotope Reactor. The Committee remains concerned
about the coordination among the Office of Environmental
Management, the NNSA, and the Office of Management and Budget
when planning for retiree pension payments at the Savannah
River Site. The Department is directed to provide the report
required in the Energy and Water Development and Related
Agencies Appropriations Act, 2018 on retiree pension payments
as soon as possible.
Waste Isolation Pilot Plant.--The Department proposes to
dispose of 34 metric tons of surplus plutonium at the Waste
Isolation Pilot Plant [WIPP] in New Mexico. The Department is
directed to work cooperatively with the State of New Mexico,
recognizing the limits in the Land Withdrawal Act and New
Mexico's status as an independent regulator of the WIPP
facility. Further, no later than February 1, 2019, the
Department shall submit to the Committees on Appropriations of
both Houses of Congress, a plan for obtaining all necessary
final state and Federal permits; acquiring independent
scientific and technical review of dilute and dispose processes
and waste forms to ensure compliance with waste acceptance
criteria; defining any legislative changes necessary to
accommodate this material and the existing WIPP waste
inventory; and outlining any necessary design and construction
modifications to the current facility, including cost and
schedule impacts of any modifications needed to WIPP facilities
or for developing additional repositories.
Technology Development and Demonstration.--The Committee
recommends $28,954,000 for Technology Development and
Demonstration. The Committee supports the Department's efforts
to expand technology development and demonstration to address
its long-term and technically complex cleanup challenges.
Within the amount recommended, not less than $5,000,000 is
recommended for work on qualification, testing and research to
advance the state-of-the-art on containment ventilation
systems. Further, the Department is directed to take the
necessary steps to implement and competitively award a
cooperative university affiliated research center for that
purpose.
Within available funds provided, not less than $5,000,000
is recommended to fund the existing cooperative agreement with
the Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder
Participation [CRESP] and up to $5,000,000 is recommended for
research and development of robotics to enhance worker safety.
Other Defense Activities
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $840,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 853,300,000
Committee recommendation................................ 840,000,000
The Committee recommends $840,000,000 for Other Defense
Activities, a decrease of $13,300,000 from the budget request.
Within available funds, the Committee recommends $254,378,000
for Specialized Security Activities. Within the available funds
for Environment, Health and Safety, the Committee recommends
not less than $1,000,000 for the Epidemiologic Study of One
Million U.S. Radiation Workers and Veterans, which was
originally approved by the Office of Science in 2012.
POWER MARKETING ADMINISTRATIONS
No funds are recommended to divest transmission assets of
the Power Marketing Administrations [PMA]. The Committee
reminds the Department of the prohibition on studying transfer
of PMA assets in Public Law 99-349.
The Committee understands the Department has used existing
authorities to reorganize the reporting structure for the Power
Marketing Administrations [PMAs), shifting responsibilities
from the Deputy Secretary of Energy to the Assistant Secretary
of the Office of Electricity. While the Committee understands
the expertise of the Office of Electricity and recognizes the
already existing relationship between PMAs and the Office of
Electricity, the Committee remains concerned with this
unnecessary change and urges the Department to continue the
long-standing practice of the PMA's organizational reporting to
the Deputy Secretary of Energy.
The bill includes reductions of $16,000,000 and $44,000,000
to the annual expense requests for Southwestern Power
Administration and Western Area Power Administration,
respectively, to account for the Congressional Budget Office's
[CBO] initial estimate of collections assumed in the budget
request. CBO inadvertently misreported its estimate of annual
expense collections associated with the level of funding for
administrative expenses proposed in the fiscal year 2019
President's request by approximately $60,000,000 (in the
aggregate), but the oversight was not discovered until after
the House Committee on Appropriations had reported its version
of the fiscal year 2019 Energy and Water Development
appropriations bill and, therefore, could not be corrected
prior to the Senate Committee on Appropriations taking action
on this bill. CBO has indicated that it will adjust its
estimate of the annual expense collection estimate prior to the
conference between the House and Senate. Assuming that the
Committee provides the requested level for annual expenses in
the conference, the updated collection estimates will be at or
around the levels in the budget request. The Committee has
included additional lines in the detail table accompanying
Title III of this report to show these adjustments.
Additionally, CBO has continued to raise questions about
the current receipt authority provided in this and prior year
appropriations acts to create carryover of unobligated balances
for purchase power and wheeling expenditures [PPW]. Since the
scoring for PPW receipts has historically equaled expenses as a
result of a 2001 scoring agreement, the Committee continues to
be unable to recommend the full budget request for PPW expenses
for the Southeastern Power Administration, Southwestern Power
Administration, or Western Area Power Administration due to CBO
scoring. The Committee recommends the full amount for PPW
expenses that CBO has estimated will be spent for those
purposes in fiscal year 2019, which is approximately
$200,000,000 lower (in the aggregate) than the budget request.
The Committee will continue to work to resolve the differences
in the CBO and administration estimates for PPW expenses.
Operations and Maintenance, Southwestern Power Administration
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $11,400,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 26,400,000
Committee recommendation................................ 10,400,000
The Committee recommends a net appropriation of $10,400,000
for the Southwestern Power Administration.
Construction, Rehabilitation, Operations and Maintenance, Western Area
Power Administration
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $93,372,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 132,372,000
Committee recommendation................................ 89,372,000
The Committee recommends a net appropriation of $89,372,000
for the Western Area Power Administration.
Falcon and Amistad Operating and Maintenance Fund
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $228,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 228,000
Committee recommendation................................ 228,000
The Committee recommends a net appropriation of $228,000
for the Falcon and Amistad Operating and Maintenance Fund.
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $367,600,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 369,900,000
Committee recommendation................................ 369,900,000
REVENUES APPLIED
Appropriations, 2018.................................... -$367,600,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... -369,900,000
Committee recommendation................................ -369,900,000
The Committee recommends a net appropriation of $0 for the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [FERC]. California
recently experienced one of its worst fire seasons in modern
history, resulting in severe challenges to the well-being of
utilities and the electric system in that State. The Committee
is concerned that the safe, reliable, and affordable delivery
of electricity to consumers could be compromised by the
increasing frequency and severity of natural disasters due to
climate change--including hurricanes, floods, and wildfires. As
FERC reviews way to improve the resilience of the electric
transmission system, the Committee directs FERC to include the
evaluation of just and reasonable cost-recovery mechanisms for
the development of resilient infrastructure and system repair
and restoration, as well as practices to better prepare the
Nation's bulk power system for natural disasters. FERC shall
study the impacts and effects of strict liability doctrines on
utilities' ability to invest in the reliability and resilience
of transmission systems. FERC is directed to report its
findings and recommendations to the Committees on
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress, not later than 90
days after the enactment of this act.
The Committee encourages FERC to prioritize meaningful
opportunities for public engagement and coordination with State
and local governments in the Federal permitting and review
processes of energy infrastructure proposals. Specifically,
review processes should remain transparent and consistent, and
ensure the health, safety, and security of the environment and
each affected community.
Oroville Dam.--FERC is directed to brief the Committees on
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress on its response to
the recommendations of the external independent panel reviewing
FERC's dam safety practices in light of the 2017 incident at
Oroville Dam in California within 60 days of receiving the
external independent panel's report.
FERC shall require the licensee of Oroville Dam to request
the United States Society on Dams to nominate independent
consultants to prepare a level 2 risk analysis, consistent with
the Commission's guidelines, for use in conducting the next
Part 12 safety review of Oroville Dam, currently scheduled for
2019. FERC shall ensure the independence of the nominated
consultants from the licensee.
The Committee encourages FERC to prioritize meaningful
opportunities for public engagement and coordination with State
and local governments in the Federal permitting and review
processes of energy infrastructure proposals. Specifically,
review processes should remain transparent and consistent, and
ensure the health, safety, and security of the environment and
each affected community.
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[In thousands of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Committee recommendation
compared to--
2018 Budget estimate Committee ---------------------------------
Appropriations recommendation 2018
Appropriations Budget estimate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ENERGY PROGRAMS
ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE ENERGY
Sustainable Transportation:
Vehicle technologies........................................... 337,500 68,500 337,500 ............... +269,000
Bioenergy technologies......................................... 221,545 37,000 215,000 -6,545 +178,000
Hydrogen and fuel cell technologies............................ 115,000 58,000 115,000 ............... +57,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Sustainable Transportation......................... 674,045 163,500 667,500 -6,545 +504,000
Renewable Energy:
Solar energy................................................... 241,600 67,000 239,500 -2,100 +172,500
Wind energy.................................................... 92,000 33,000 80,000 -12,000 +47,000
Water power.................................................... 105,000 45,000 105,000 ............... +60,000
Geothermal technologies........................................ 80,906 30,000 85,000 +4,094 +55,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Renewable Energy................................... 519,506 175,000 509,500 -10,006 +334,500
Energy Efficiency:
Advanced manufacturing......................................... 305,000 75,000 311,000 +6,000 +236,000
Building technologies.......................................... 220,727 57,000 225,000 +4,273 +168,000
Federal energy management program.............................. 27,000 10,000 31,000 +4,000 +21,000
Weatherization and Intergovernmental Programs:
Weatherization:
Weatherization assistance program...................... 248,000 ............... 248,000 ............... +248,000
Training and technical assistance...................... 3,000 ............... 3,000 ............... +3,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Weatherization............................. 251,000 ............... 251,000 ............... +251,000
State Energy Program Grants.................................... 55,000 ............... 55,000 ............... +55,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Weatherization and Intergovernmental Program....... 306,000 ............... 306,000 ............... +306,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Energy Efficiency.................................. 858,727 142,000 873,000 +14,273 +731,000
Corporate Support:
Facilities and infrastructure:
National Renewable Energy Laboratory [NREL]................ 92,000 90,000 97,000 +5,000 +7,000
Program direction.............................................. 162,500 125,110 162,500 ............... +37,390
Strategic programs............................................. 15,000 ............... 12,500 -2,500 +12,500
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Corporate Support.................................. 269,500 215,110 272,000 +2,500 +56,890
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Energy efficiency and renewable energy............. 2,321,778 695,610 2,322,000 +222 +1,626,390
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE ENERGY................ 2,321,778 695,610 2,322,000 +222 +1,626,390
====================================================================================
ELECTRICITY DELIVERY AND ENERGY RELIABILITY
Research and development:
Transmission Reliability....................................... 39,000 ............... ............... -39,000 ...............
Resilient Distribution Systems................................. 38,000 ............... ............... -38,000 ...............
Cyber security for energy delivery systems..................... 75,829 ............... ............... -75,829 ...............
Energy storage................................................. 41,000 ............... ............... -41,000 ...............
Transformer resilience and advanced components................. 7,000 ............... ............... -7,000 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Research and development........................... 200,829 ............... ............... -200,829 ...............
Transmission Permitting and Technical Assistance................... 7,000 ............... ............... -7,000 ...............
Infrastructure security and energy restoration..................... 12,000 ............... ............... -12,000 ...............
Program direction.................................................. 28,500 ............... ............... -28,500 ...............
Reliability.................................................... 248,329 ............... ............... -248,329 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, ELECTRICITY DELIVERY AND ENERGY RELIABILITY........... 248,329 ............... ............... -248,329 ...............
====================================================================================
CYBERSECURITY, ENERGY SECURITY, AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
Research and development:
Cybersecurity for energy delivery systems...................... ............... 70,000 80,829 +80,829 +10,829
Transmission reliability....................................... ............... ............... 39,000 +39,000 +39,000
Resilient distribution systems................................. ............... ............... 38,671 +38,671 +38,671
Energy storage................................................. ............... ............... 41,000 +41,000 +41,000
Transformer resilience and advanced components................. ............... ............... 7,000 +7,000 +7,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Research and development........................... ............... 70,000 206,500 +206,500 +136,500
Transmission permitting and technical assistance................... ............... ............... 7,000 +7,000 +7,000
Infrastructure security and energy restoration..................... ............... 18,000 18,000 +18,000 ...............
Program direction.................................................. ............... 7,800 28,500 +28,500 +20,700
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, CYBERSECURITY, ENERGY SECURITY, AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE ............... 95,800 260,000 +260,000 +164,200
====================================================================================
ELECTRICITY DELIVERY
Transmission reliability........................................... ............... 13,000 ............... ............... -13,000
Resilient distribution systems..................................... ............... 10,000 ............... ............... -10,000
Energy storage..................................................... ............... 8,000 ............... ............... -8,000
Transformer resilience and advanced components..................... ............... 5,000 ............... ............... -5,000
Transmission permitting and technical assistance................... ............... 6,000 ............... ............... -6,000
Program direction.................................................. ............... 19,309 ............... ............... -19,309
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, ELECTRICITY DELIVERY.................................. ............... 61,309 ............... ............... -61,309
====================================================================================
NUCLEAR ENERGY
Research and development:
Integrated university program.................................. 5,000 ............... 5,000 ............... +5,000
STEP R&D....................................................... 5,000 ............... ............... -5,000 ...............
Nuclear energy enabling technologies........................... 159,000 116,000 149,200 -9,800 +33,200
Reactor concepts RD&D.......................................... 237,000 163,000 302,000 +65,000 +139,000
Fuel cycle research and development............................ 260,056 60,000 267,300 +7,244 +207,300
International nuclear energy cooperation....................... 3,000 2,500 2,500 -500 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Research and development........................... 669,056 341,500 726,000 +56,944 +384,500
Infrastructure:
Radiological facilities management:
Space and defense infrastructure........................... 20,000 ............... 20,000 ............... +20,000
Research reactor infrastructure............................ 9,000 9,000 9,000 ............... ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Radiological facilities management............. 29,000 9,000 29,000 ............... +20,000
INL facilities management:
INL operations and infrastructure.......................... 288,000 204,000 238,000 -50,000 +34,000
Construction:
16-E-200 Sample preparation laboratory................. 6,000 ............... ............... -6,000 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, INL facilities management.................. 294,000 204,000 238,000 -56,000 +34,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Infrastructure............................. 323,000 213,000 267,000 -56,000 +54,000
Idaho sitewide safeguards and security............................. 133,000 136,090 133,000 ............... -3,090
Program direction.................................................. 80,000 66,500 80,000 ............... +13,500
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, NUCLEAR ENERGY........................................ 1,205,056 757,090 1,206,000 +944 +448,910
====================================================================================
FOSSIL ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
Coal CCS and Power Systems:
Carbon Capture................................................. 100,671 20,000 104,015 +3,344 +84,015
Carbon Storage................................................. 98,096 20,000 103,015 +4,919 +83,015
Advanced Energy Systems........................................ 112,000 135,000 116,000 +4,000 -19,000
Cross Cutting Research......................................... 58,350 78,300 61,000 +2,650 -17,300
NETL Coal Research and Development............................. 53,000 65,000 54,000 +1,000 -11,000
STEP (Supercritical CO2)....................................... 24,000 25,000 25,000 +1,000 ...............
Transformational Coal Pilots................................... 35,000 ............... ............... -35,000 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Coal CCS and Power Systems......................... 481,117 343,300 463,030 -18,087 +119,730
Natural Gas Technologies:
Research....................................................... 50,000 5,500 53,200 +3,200 +47,700
Unconventional fossil energy technologies from petroleum--oil 40,000 14,000 54,000 +14,000 +40,000
technologies......................................................
Program direction.................................................. 60,000 61,070 61,070 +1,070 ...............
Special recruitment programs....................................... 700 200 700 ............... +500
NETL Research and Operations....................................... 50,000 40,000 50,000 ............... +10,000
NETL Infrastructure................................................ 45,000 38,000 45,000 ............... +7,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, FOSSIL ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT................ 726,817 502,070 727,000 +183 +224,930
====================================================================================
Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves............................. 20,200 20,550 20,550 +350 ...............
Use of prior year balances......................................... -15,300 -10,550 -10,550 +4,750 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, NAVAL PETROLEUM AND OIL SHALE RESERVES................ 4,900 10,000 10,000 +5,100 ...............
====================================================================================
STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE
Strategic Petroleum Reserve........................................ 252,000 175,105 175,105 -76,895 ...............
Sale of crude oil.................................................. -350,000 -300,000 -350,000 ............... -50,000
Use of sale proceeds............................................... 350,000 ............... 350,000 ............... +350,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE........................... 252,000 -124,895 175,105 -76,895 +300,000
====================================================================================
SPR PETROLEUM ACCOUNT
SPR Petroleum Account.............................................. 8,400 ............... 8,400 ............... +8,400
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, SPR PETROLEUM ACCOUNT................................. 8,400 ............... 8,400 ............... +8,400
====================================================================================
NORTHEAST HOME HEATING OIL RESERVE
Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve................................. 10,000 10,000 10,000 ............... ...............
Use of prior year balances......................................... -3,500 ............... ............... +3,500 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, NORTHEAST HOME HEATING OIL RESERVE.................... 6,500 10,000 10,000 +3,500 ...............
====================================================================================
ENERGY INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION.................................. 125,000 115,035 125,000 ............... +9,965
====================================================================================
NON-DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP
Fast Flux Test Reactor Facility (WA)............................... 2,240 2,240 2,240 ............... ...............
Gaseous Diffusion Plants........................................... 101,304 100,575 102,000 +696 +1,425
Small sites........................................................ 119,856 55,031 174,000 +54,144 +118,969
West Valley Demonstration Project.................................. 75,000 60,554 75,000 ............... +14,446
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, NON-DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP..................... 298,400 218,400 353,240 +54,840 +134,840
====================================================================================
URANIUM ENRICHMENT DECONTAMINATION AND DECOMMISSIONING FUND
Oak Ridge.......................................................... 194,673 151,039 195,000 +327 +43,961
Nuclear facility D&D, Paducah...................................... 205,530 202,581 206,000 +470 +3,419
Portsmouth:
Nuclear facility D&D, Portsmouth............................... 342,389 306,931 366,931 +24,542 +60,000
Construction:
15-U-408 On-site waste disposal facility, Portsmouth....... 38,882 41,168 41,168 +2,286 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Portsmouth......................................... 381,271 348,099 408,099 +26,828 +60,000
Pension and community and regulatory support....................... 22,794 21,030 21,030 -1,764 ...............
Title X uranium/thorium reimbursement program...................... 35,732 30,000 10,689 -25,043 -19,311
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, URANIUM ENRICHMENT DECONTAMINATION AND DECOMMISSIONING 840,000 752,749 840,818 +818 +88,069
FUND........................................................
====================================================================================
SCIENCE
Advanced scientific computing research............................. 605,000 666,304 747,294 +142,294 +80,990
Construction:
17-SC-20 SC Exascale Computing Project......................... 205,000 232,706 232,706 +27,706 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Advanced scientific computing research............. 810,000 899,010 980,000 +170,000 +80,990
Basic energy sciences:
Research....................................................... 1,744,900 1,635,700 1,751,100 +6,200 +115,400
Construction:
13-SC-10 LINAC coherent light source II, SLAC.............. 192,100 139,300 139,300 -52,800 ...............
18-SC-10 APS Upgrade, ANL.................................. 93,000 60,000 140,000 +47,000 +80,000
18-SC-11 Spallation Neutron Source Proton Power Upgrade 36,000 ............... 70,000 +34,000 +70,000
(PPU), ORNL...............................................
18-SC-12 Advanced Light Source Upgrade (ALS-U), LBNL....... 16,000 10,000 50,000 +34,000 +40,000
18-SC-13 LINAC coherent light source II HE, SLAC........... 8,000 5,000 28,000 +20,000 +23,000
19-SC-14 Second Target Station, ORNL....................... ............... ............... 15,000 +15,000 +15,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Construction................................... 345,100 214,300 442,300 +97,200 +228,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Basic energy sciences.......................... 2,090,000 1,850,000 2,193,400 +103,400 +343,400
Biological and environmental research.............................. 673,000 500,000 715,000 +42,000 +215,000
Fusion energy sciences:
Research....................................................... 410,111 265,000 303,000 -107,111 +38,000
Construction:
14-SC-60 ITER.............................................. 122,000 75,000 122,000 ............... +47,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Fusion energy sciences............................. 532,111 340,000 425,000 -107,111 +85,000
High energy physics:
Research....................................................... 767,600 627,000 800,000 +32,400 +173,000
Construction:
11-SC-40 Long baseline neutrino facility / deep underground 95,000 113,000 145,000 +50,000 +32,000
neutrino experiment, FNAL.................................
11-SC-41 Muon to electron conversion experiment, FNAL...... 44,400 30,000 30,000 -14,400 ...............
18-SC-42 PIP-II, FNAL...................................... 1,000 ............... 35,000 +34,000 +35,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Construction................................... 140,400 143,000 210,000 +69,600 +67,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, High energy physics............................ 908,000 770,000 1,010,000 +102,000 +240,000
Nuclear physics:
Operations and maintenance..................................... 586,800 525,000 635,000 +48,200 +110,000
Construction:
14-SC-50 Facility for rare isotope beams, Michigan State 97,200 75,000 75,000 -22,200 ...............
University................................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Nuclear physics................................ 684,000 600,000 710,000 +26,000 +110,000
Workforce development for teachers and scientists.................. 19,500 19,000 24,500 +5,000 +5,500
Science laboratories infrastructure:
Infrastructure support:
Payment in lieu of taxes................................... 1,713 1,513 1,713 ............... +200
Oak Ridge landlord......................................... 6,382 6,434 6,434 +52 ...............
Facilities and infrastructure.............................. 70,347 30,724 48,253 -22,094 +17,529
Oak Ridge nuclear operations............................... 26,000 10,000 26,000 ............... +16,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Infrastructure support......................... 104,442 48,671 82,400 -22,042 +33,729
Construction:
19-SC-71 Science User Support Center, BNL.................. ............... 2,000 10,000 +10,000 +8,000
19-SC-72 Electrical Capacity and Distribution Capability, ............... 20,000 60,000 +60,000 +40,000
ANL.......................................................
18-SC-71 Energy Sciences Capability, PNNL.................. 20,000 4,000 35,000 +15,000 +31,000
17-SC-71 Integrated Engineering Research Center, FNAL...... 20,000 5,000 32,500 +12,500 +27,500
17-SC-73 Core Facility Revitalization, BNL................. 30,000 13,632 42,200 +12,200 +28,568
15-SC-78 Integrative genomics building, LBNL............... 38,350 13,549 ............... -38,350 -13,549
15-SC-76 Materials design laboratory, ANL.................. 44,500 20,000 ............... -44,500 -20,000
19-SC-73 Translational Research Capability, ORNL........... ............... ............... 35,000 +35,000 +35,000
19-SC-74 BioEPIC Building, LBNL............................ ............... ............... 2,000 +2,000 +2,000
19-SC-75 CEBAF Renovation and Expansion, TJNAF............. ............... ............... 1,000 +1,000 +1,000
19-SC-76 Craft Resources Support Facility, ORNL............ ............... ............... 1,000 +1,000 +1,000
19-SC-77 Large Scale Collaboration Center, SLAC............ ............... ............... 1,000 +1,000 +1,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Construction:...................................... 152,850 78,181 219,700 +66,850 +141,519
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Science laboratories infrastructure................ 257,292 126,852 302,100 +44,808 +175,248
Safeguards and security............................................ 103,000 106,110 106,000 +3,000 -110
Science program direction.......................................... 183,000 180,000 184,000 +1,000 +4,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, SCIENCE............................................... 6,259,903 5,390,972 6,650,000 +390,097 +1,259,028
====================================================================================
NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL............................................. ............... 90,000 ............... ............... -90,000
ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY-ENERGY
ARPA-E projects.................................................... 324,064 ............... 341,750 +17,686 +341,750
Program direction.................................................. 29,250 ............... 33,250 +4,000 +33,250
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY-ENERGY.............. 353,314 ............... 375,000 +21,686 +375,000
====================================================================================
TITLE 17--INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY LOAN GUARANTEE PROGRAM
Administrative expenses............................................ 33,000 10,000 33,000 ............... +23,000
Offsetting collection.............................................. -10,000 -15,000 -15,000 -5,000 ...............
Rescission......................................................... ............... -240,000 ............... ............... +240,000
Title 17 negative subsidy.......................................... 15,000 -44,000 -44,000 -59,000 ...............
Rescission of emergency funding.................................... ............... -383,433 ............... ............... +383,433
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, TITLE 17--INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY LOAN GUARANTEE PROGRAM 38,000 -672,433 -26,000 -64,000 +646,433
====================================================================================
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY VEHICLES MANUFACTURING LOAN PROGRAM
Administrative expenses............................................ 5,000 1,000 5,000 ............... +4,000
Rescission of emergency funding.................................... ............... -4,300,000 ............... ............... +4,300,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY VEHICLES MANUFACTURING LOAN 5,000 -4,299,000 5,000 ............... +4,304,000
PROGRAM.....................................................
====================================================================================
TRIBAL ENERGY LOAN GUARANTEE PROGRAM
Administrative expenses............................................ 1,000 ............... 1,000 ............... +1,000
Rescission......................................................... ............... -8,500 ............... ............... +8,500
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, TRIBAL ENERGY LOAN GUARANTEE PROGRAM.................. 1,000 -8,500 1,000 ............... +9,500
====================================================================================
OFFICE OF INDIAN ENERGY POLICY AND PROGRAMS
Administrative Expenses............................................ ............... ............... 13,200 +13,200 +13,200
Program Direction.................................................. ............... ............... 4,800 +4,800 +4,800
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, OFFICE OF INDIAN ENERGY POLICY AND PROGRAMS........... ............... ............... 18,000 +18,000 +18,000
====================================================================================
DEPARTMENTAL ADMINISTRATION
Administrative operations:
Salaries and expenses:
Office of the Secretary:
Program direction.......................................... 5,300 5,395 5,395 +95 ...............
Chief Financial Officer.................................... 48,484 48,912 48,912 +428 ...............
Chief Information Officer.................................. 126,274 96,793 131,593 +5,319 +34,800
Office of Indian energy policy and programs................ 18,000 10,005 ............... -18,000 -10,005
Congressional and intergovernmental affairs................ 6,200 6,212 4,212 -1,988 -2,000
Economic impact and diversity.............................. 10,169 10,005 10,005 -164 ...............
Other Departmental Administration.......................... 174,225 173,901 168,883 -5,342 -5,018
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Salaries and expenses.......................... 388,652 351,223 369,000 -19,652 +17,777
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Administrative operations...................... 388,652 351,223 369,000 -19,652 +17,777
Strategic partnership projects................................. 40,000 40,000 40,000 ............... ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Departmental administration........................ 428,652 391,223 409,000 -19,652 +17,777
Use of prior-year balances......................................... ............... -2,000 ............... ............... +2,000
Funding from other defense activities.............................. -143,000 -153,689 -143,000 ............... +10,689
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Departmental administration (gross)................... 285,652 235,534 266,000 -19,652 +30,466
Miscellaneous revenues............................................. -96,000 -96,000 -96,000 ............... ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, DEPARTMENTAL ADMINISTRATION (net)..................... 189,652 139,534 170,000 -19,652 +30,466
====================================================================================
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL.................................... 49,000 51,330 51,330 +2,330 ...............
====================================================================================
TOTAL, ENERGY PROGRAMS....................................... 12,933,049 3,785,071 13,281,893 +348,844 +9,496,822
====================================================================================
ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES
NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
WEAPONS ACTIVITIES
Directed stockpile work:
Life Extension Programs and Major Alterations:
B61 Life extension program................................. 788,572 794,049 794,049 +5,477 ...............
W76-1 Life extension program............................... 224,134 48,888 48,888 -175,246 ...............
W88 Alteration program..................................... 332,292 304,285 304,285 -28,007 ...............
W80-4 Life extension program............................... 399,090 654,766 654,766 +255,676 ...............
IW-1....................................................... ............... 53,000 53,000 +53,000 ...............
W76-2 Modification program................................. ............... 65,000 65,000 +65,000 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Life Extension Programs and Major Alterations.. 1,744,088 1,919,988 1,919,988 +175,900 ...............
Stockpile systems:
B61 Stockpile systems...................................... 59,729 64,547 64,547 +4,818 ...............
W76 Stockpile systems...................................... 51,400 94,300 94,300 +42,900 ...............
W78 Stockpile systems...................................... 60,100 81,329 81,329 +21,229 ...............
W80 Stockpile systems...................................... 80,087 80,204 80,204 +117 ...............
B83 Stockpile systems...................................... 35,762 35,082 35,082 -680 ...............
W87 Stockpile systems...................................... 83,200 83,107 83,107 -93 ...............
W88 Stockpile systems...................................... 131,576 180,913 180,913 +49,337 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Stockpile systems.............................. 501,854 619,482 619,482 +117,628 ...............
Weapons dismantlement and disposition.......................... 56,000 56,000 56,000 ............... ...............
Stockpile services:
Production support......................................... 485,400 512,916 512,916 +27,516 ...............
Research and Development support........................... 31,150 38,129 38,129 +6,979 ...............
R and D certification and safety........................... 196,840 216,582 216,582 +19,742 ...............
Management, technology, and production..................... 285,400 300,736 300,736 +15,336 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Stockpile systems.............................. 998,790 1,068,363 1,068,363 +69,573 ...............
Strategic materials:
Domestic uranium enrichment................................ 60,000 100,704 50,000 -10,000 -50,704
Uranium sustainment........................................ 24,000 87,182 87,182 +63,182 ...............
Plutonium sustainment...................................... 210,367 361,282 361,282 +150,915 ...............
Tritium sustainment........................................ 198,152 205,275 290,275 +92,123 +85,000
Lithium sustainment........................................ ............... 29,135 29,135 +29,135 ...............
Strategic materials sustainment............................ 216,196 218,794 218,794 +2,598 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Strategic materials:........................... 708,715 1,002,372 1,036,668 +327,953 +34,296
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Directed stockpile work............................ 4,009,447 4,666,205 4,700,501 +691,054 +34,296
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E):
Science:
Advanced certification..................................... 57,710 57,710 57,710 ............... ...............
Primary assessment technologies............................ 89,313 95,057 89,313 ............... -5,744
Dynamic materials properties............................... 120,000 131,000 120,000 ............... -11,000
Advanced radiography....................................... 37,600 32,544 32,544 -5,056 ...............
Secondary assessment technologies.......................... 76,833 77,553 77,553 +720 ...............
Academic alliances and partnerships........................ 52,963 53,364 53,364 +401 ...............
Enhanced capabilities for subcritical experiments.......... 40,105 117,632 80,000 +39,895 -37,632
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Science........................................ 474,524 564,860 510,484 +35,960 -54,376
Engineering:
Enhanced surety............................................ 39,717 43,226 43,226 +3,509 ...............
Weapons system engineering assessment technology........... 23,029 27,536 23,029 ............... -4,507
Nuclear survivability...................................... 45,230 48,230 45,230 ............... -3,000
Enhanced surveillance...................................... 45,147 58,375 45,147 ............... -13,228
Stockpile responsiveness................................... 30,000 34,000 30,000 ............... -4,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Engineering.................................... 183,123 211,367 186,632 +3,509 -24,735
Inertial confinement fusion ignition and high yield:
Ignition................................................... 79,575 22,434 79,575 ............... +57,141
Support of other stockpile programs........................ 23,565 17,397 23,565 ............... +6,168
Diagnostics, cryogenics and experimental support........... 77,915 51,453 77,915 ............... +26,462
Pulsed power inertial confinement fusion................... 7,596 8,310 7,596 ............... -714
Joint program in high energy density laboratory plasmas.... 9,492 ............... 9,492 ............... +9,492
Facility operations and target production.................. 346,791 319,333 346,791 ............... +27,458
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Inertial confinement fusion ignition and high 544,934 418,927 544,934 ............... +126,007
yield...................................................
Advanced simulation and computing:
Advanced simulation and computing.......................... 721,244 656,401 656,401 -64,843 ...............
Construction:
18-D-670 Exascale class computer cooling equipment, 22,000 24,000 24,000 +2,000 ...............
LANL..................................................
18-D-620 Exascale computing facility modernization 3,000 23,000 23,000 +20,000 ...............
project, LLNL.........................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Construction............................. 25,000 47,000 47,000 +22,000 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Advanced simulation, Computing and 746,244 703,401 703,401 -42,843 ...............
Construction......................................
Advanced manufacturing development:
Additive manfacturing.......................................... 12,000 17,447 17,447 +5,447 ...............
Component manufacturing development............................ 38,644 48,477 43,477 +4,833 -5,000
Process technology development................................. 34,896 30,914 35,914 +1,018 +5,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Advanced manufacturing development................. 85,540 96,838 96,838 +11,298 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Research, Development, Test and Evaluation 2,034,365 1,995,393 2,042,289 +7,924 +46,896
(RDT&E).................................................
Infrastructure and Operations:
Operations of facilities....................................... 848,470 891,000 874,000 +25,530 -17,000
Safety and environmental operations............................ 110,000 115,000 110,000 ............... -5,000
Maintenance and repair of facilities........................... 515,138 365,000 250,000 -265,138 -115,000
Recapitalization:
Infrastructure and safety.................................. 482,661 431,631 320,000 -162,661 -111,631
Capability based investments............................... 130,000 109,057 105,000 -25,000 -4,057
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Recapitalization............................... 612,661 540,688 425,000 -187,661 -115,688
Construction:
19-D-125 Plutonium infrastructure recapitalization, LANL... ............... ............... ............... ............... ...............
19-D-670 138kV Power Transmission System Replacement, NNSS. ............... 6,000 ............... ............... -6,000
18-D-680 Material staging facility, PX..................... 5,200 ............... 10,418 +5,218 +10,418
18-D-660 Fire station, Y-12................................ 28,000 ............... ............... -28,000 ...............
18-D-650 Tritium production capability, SRS................ ............... 27,000 27,000 +27,000 ...............
18-D-690 Lithium production capability, Y-12............... 5,000 19,000 19,000 +14,000 ...............
17-D-640 U1a complex enhancements project, NNSA............ 22,100 53,000 53,000 +30,900 ...............
17-D-630 Electrical distribution system, LLNL.............. 6,000 ............... ............... -6,000 ...............
16-D-515 Albuquerque Complex project....................... 98,000 47,953 47,953 -50,047 ...............
15-D-613 Emergency Operations Center, Y-12................. 7,000 ............... ............... -7,000 ...............
07-D-220 Radioactive liquid waste treatment facility, LANL. 2,100 ............... ............... -2,100 ...............
07-D-220-04 TRU liquid waste facility, LANL................ 17,895 ............... ............... -17,895 ...............
06-D-141 Uranium Processing Facility, Y-12................. 663,000 703,000 703,000 +40,000 ...............
Chemistry and metallurgy replacement:
04-D-125 Chemistry and metallurgy replacement project, LANL ............... 235,095 235,095 +235,095 ...............
04-D-125-04 RLUOB equipment installation, phase 2.......... 127,025 ............... ............... -127,025 ...............
04-D-125-05 PF-4 equipment installation.................... 50,214 ............... ............... -50,214 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Chemistry and metallurgy replacement........... 177,239 235,095 235,095 +57,856 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Construction................................... 1,031,534 1,091,048 1,095,466 +63,932 +4,418
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Infrastructure and Operations...................... 3,117,803 3,002,736 2,754,466 -363,337 -248,270
Secure transportation asset:
Operations and equipment....................................... 185,568 176,617 176,617 -8,951 ...............
Program direction.............................................. 105,600 102,022 102,022 -3,578 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Secure transportation asset........................ 291,168 278,639 278,639 -12,529 ...............
Defense nuclear security:
Defense nuclear security....................................... 686,977 690,638 690,638 +3,661 ...............
Security improvements program.................................. 30,000 ............... ............... -30,000 ...............
Construction:
17-D-710 West end protected area reduction project, Y-12... 53,600 ............... ............... -53,600 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Defense nuclear security....................... 770,577 690,638 690,638 -79,939 ...............
Information technology and cyber security.......................... 186,728 221,175 221,175 +34,447 ...............
Legacy contractor pensions......................................... 232,050 162,292 162,292 -69,758 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, WEAPONS ACTIVITIES.................................... 10,642,138 11,017,078 10,850,000 +207,862 -167,078
====================================================================================
DEFENSE NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION
Global material security:
International nuclear security................................. 46,339 46,339 46,339 ............... ...............
Domestic radiologic security................................... 110,433 90,764 115,433 +5,000 +24,669
International radiologic security.............................. 78,907 59,576 78,907 ............... +19,331
Nuclear smuggling detection.................................... 154,429 140,429 154,429 ............... +14,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Global material security........................... 390,108 337,108 395,108 +5,000 +58,000
Material management and minimization:
Conversion..................................................... ............... 98,300 88,300 +88,300 -10,000
Nuclear material removal....................................... 32,925 32,925 32,925 ............... ...............
Material disposition........................................... 183,669 200,869 200,869 +17,200 ...............
Laboratory and partnership support............................. 92,000 ............... 15,000 -77,000 +15,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Material management and minimization............... 308,594 332,094 337,094 +28,500 +5,000
Nonproliferation and arms control.................................. 134,703 129,703 129,703 -5,000 ...............
Defense nuclear nonproliferation R&D:
Proliferation detection........................................ 278,255 273,200 281,521 +3,266 +8,321
Nuclear detonation detection................................... 195,749 182,895 195,749 ............... +12,854
Nonproliferation fuels development............................. 82,500 ............... 10,000 -72,500 +10,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Defense nuclear nonproliferation R&D............... 556,504 456,095 487,270 -69,234 +31,175
Nonproliferation construction:
99-D-143 Mixed Oxide (MOX) Fuel Fabrication Facility, SRS...... 335,000 220,000 220,000 -115,000 ...............
18-D-150 Surplus plutonium disposition project, SRS............ ............... 59,000 59,000 +59,000 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Nonproliferation construction...................... 335,000 279,000 279,000 -56,000 ...............
Legacy contractor pensions......................................... 40,950 28,640 28,640 -12,310 ...............
Nuclear counterterrorism and incident response..................... 282,360 319,185 319,185 +36,825 ...............
Use of prior-year balances......................................... ............... -19,000 -74,000 -74,000 -55,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation................... 2,048,219 1,862,825 1,902,000 -146,219 +39,175
Rescission......................................................... -49,000 ............... ............... +49,000 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, DEFENSE NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION...................... 1,999,219 1,862,825 1,902,000 -97,219 +39,175
====================================================================================
NAVAL REACTORS
Columbia-class reactor systems development......................... 156,700 138,000 138,000 -18,700 ...............
Naval reactors development......................................... 473,065 514,951 475,000 +1,935 -39,951
S8G Prototype refueling............................................ 250,000 250,000 200,000 -50,000 -50,000
Naval reactors operations and infrastructure....................... 466,884 525,764 525,764 +58,880 ...............
Construction:
19-D-930 KS Overhead Piping.................................... ............... 10,994 10,994 +10,994 ...............
17-D-911 BL Fire System Upgrade................................ ............... 13,200 13,200 +13,200 ...............
15-D-904 NRF Overpack Storage Expansion 3...................... 13,700 ............... ............... -13,700 ...............
15-D-903 KL Fire System Upgrade................................ 15,000 ............... ............... -15,000 ...............
14-D-901 Spent fuel handling recapitalization project, NRF..... 197,000 287,000 209,000 +12,000 -78,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Construction....................................... 225,700 311,194 233,194 +7,494 -78,000
Program direction.................................................. 47,651 48,709 48,042 +391 -667
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, NAVAL REACTORS........................................ 1,620,000 1,788,618 1,620,000 ............... -168,618
====================================================================================
FEDERAL SALARIES AND EXPENSES...................................... 407,595 422,529 408,000 +405 -14,529
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION.............. 14,668,952 15,091,050 14,780,000 +111,048 -311,050
====================================================================================
DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP
Closure sites administration....................................... 4,889 4,889 4,889 ............... ...............
Richland:
River corridor and other cleanup operations.................... 183,692 89,577 209,577 +25,885 +120,000
Central plateau remediation.................................... 662,879 562,473 618,473 -44,406 +56,000
RL Community and regulatory support............................ 10,121 5,121 10,121 ............... +5,000
RL Excess facilities D&D....................................... ............... ............... ............... ............... ...............
Construction:
18-D-404 WESF Modifications and capsule storage............ 6,500 1,000 ............... -6,500 -1,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Richland....................................... 863,192 658,171 838,171 -25,021 +180,000
Idaho National Laboratory:
Idaho cleanup and waste disposition............................ 420,000 346,026 346,026 -73,974 ...............
Idaho community and regulatory support......................... 4,071 3,200 3,200 -871 ...............
ID Excess facilities D&D....................................... 10,000 ............... ............... -10,000 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Idaho National Laboratory.......................... 434,071 349,226 349,226 -84,845 ...............
NNSA sites and Nevada offsites:
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory......................... 1,175 1,704 1,704 +529 ...............
Separations Process Research Unit.............................. 4,800 15,000 15,000 +10,200 ...............
Nevada......................................................... 60,136 60,136 60,136 ............... ...............
Sandia National Laboratory..................................... 2,600 2,600 2,600 ............... ...............
Los Alamos National Laboratory................................. 220,000 191,629 220,000 ............... +28,371
LLNL Excess facilities D&D..................................... 100,000 ............... 50,000 -50,000 +50,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, NNSA sites and Nevada offsites..................... 388,711 271,069 349,440 -39,271 +78,371
Oak Ridge Reservation:
OR Nuclear facility D&D........................................ 118,203 90,221 189,000 +70,797 +98,779
U233 disposition program....................................... 50,311 45,000 52,300 +1,989 +7,300
OR Cleanup and disposition..................................... 71,000 67,000 74,000 +3,000 +7,000
Construction:
17-D-401 On-site waste disposal facility................... 10,000 5,000 10,000 ............... +5,000
14-D-403 Outfall 200 mercury treatment facility............ 17,100 11,274 76,000 +58,900 +64,726
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Construction................................... 27,100 16,274 86,000 +58,900 +69,726
OR Community & regulatory support.............................. 5,605 4,711 5,700 +95 +989
OR Technology development and deployment....................... 3,000 3,000 3,000 ............... ...............
OR Excess facilities D&D....................................... 125,000 ............... ............... -125,000 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Oak Ridge Reservation.............................. 400,219 226,206 410,000 +9,781 +183,794
Office of River Protection:
Waste treatment and immobilization plant commissioning......... 8,000 15,000 15,000 +7,000 ...............
Rad liquid tank waste stabilization and disposition............ 719,000 677,460 771,947 +52,947 +94,487
Construction:
15-D-409 Low activity waste pretreatment system............ 93,000 56,053 56,053 -36,947 ...............
01-D-16 A-D Waste treatment and immobilization plant....... ............... 675,000 655,000 +655,000 -20,000
18-D-16 Waste treatment and immobilization plant--LBL/ 630,000 ............... ............... -630,000 ...............
Direct feed LAW...........................................
01-D-16 D High-level waste facility........................ 75,000 ............... 60,000 -15,000 +60,000
01-D-16 E Pretreatment facility............................ 35,000 15,000 15,000 -20,000 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Construction....................................... 833,000 746,053 786,053 -46,947 +40,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Office of River Protection......................... 1,560,000 1,438,513 1,573,000 +13,000 +134,487
Savannah River Site:
SR Site risk management operations............................. 482,960 517,436 517,436 +34,476 ...............
SR Community and regulatory support............................ 11,249 4,749 4,749 -6,500 ...............
SR Radioactive liquid tank waste stabilization and disposition. 637,105 805,686 732,863 +95,758 -72,823
Construction:
19-D-701 SR Security system replacement.................... ............... ............... ............... ............... ...............
18-D-402 Saltstone disposal unit #8/9...................... 500 37,450 37,450 +36,950 ...............
18-D-402 Emergency Operations Center Replacement, SR....... 500 1,259 1,259 +759 ...............
17-D-402 Saltstone disposal Unit #7, SRS................... 30,000 41,243 41,243 +11,243 ...............
05-D-405 Salt waste processing facility, SRS............... 150,000 65,000 65,000 -85,000 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Construction................................... 181,000 144,952 144,952 -36,048 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Savannah River Site............................ 1,312,314 1,472,823 1,400,000 +87,686 -72,823
Waste Isolation Pilot Plant:
Waste Isolation Pilot Plant.................................... 270,971 311,695 311,695 +40,724 ...............
Construction:
15-D-411 Safety significant confinement ventilation system, 86,000 84,212 84,212 -1,788 ...............
WIPP......................................................
15-D-412 Exhaust shaft, WIPP............................... 19,600 1,000 1,000 -18,600 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant.................... 376,571 396,907 396,907 +20,336 ...............
Program direction.................................................. 300,000 300,000 300,000 ............... ...............
Program support.................................................... 14,979 12,979 12,979 -2,000 ...............
Safeguards and Security............................................ 298,102 324,434 324,434 +26,332 ...............
Technology development............................................. 35,000 25,000 28,954 -6,046 +3,954
Excess facilities.................................................. ............... 150,000 ............... ............... -150,000
Use of prior year balances......................................... ............... ............... ............... ............... ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP......................... 5,988,048 5,630,217 5,988,000 -48 +357,783
====================================================================================
OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES
Environment, health, safety and security:
Environment, health, safety and security....................... 130,693 135,194 132,583 +1,890 -2,611
Program direction.............................................. 68,253 70,653 70,653 +2,400 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Environment, Health, safety and security........... 198,946 205,847 203,236 +4,290 -2,611
Independent enterprise assessments:
Independent enterprise assessments............................. 24,068 24,068 24,068 ............... ...............
Program direction.............................................. 50,863 52,702 52,702 +1,839 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Independent enterprise assessments................. 74,931 76,770 76,770 +1,839 ...............
Specialized security activities.................................... 262,912 254,378 254,378 -8,534 ...............
Office of Legacy Management:
Legacy management.............................................. 137,674 140,575 140,575 +2,901 ...............
Program direction.............................................. 16,932 18,302 18,302 +1,370 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Office of Legacy Management........................ 154,606 158,877 158,877 +4,271 ...............
Defense related administrative support............................. 143,000 153,689 143,000 ............... -10,689
Office of hearings and appeals..................................... 5,605 5,739 5,739 +134 ...............
Use of prior year balances......................................... ............... -2,000 -2,000 -2,000 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES.............................. 840,000 853,300 840,000 ............... -13,300
====================================================================================
DEFENSE NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL..................................... ............... 30,000 ............... ............... -30,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES...................... 21,497,000 21,604,567 21,608,000 +111,000 +3,433
====================================================================================
POWER MARKETING ADMINISTRATIONS\1\
SOUTHEASTERN POWER ADMINISTRATION
Operation and maintenance:
Purchase power and wheeling.................................... 66,070 73,184 73,184 +7,114 ...............
Program direction.............................................. 6,379 6,500 6,500 +121 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Operation and maintenance.......................... 72,449 79,684 79,684 +7,235 ...............
Less alternative financing [PPW]............................... -15,070 -13,824 -13,824 +1,246 ...............
Offsetting collections (for PPW)............................... -51,000 -59,360 -59,360 -8,360 ...............
Offsetting collections (PD).................................... -6,379 -6,500 -6,500 -121 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, SOUTHEASTERN POWER ADMINISTRATION..................... ............... ............... ............... ............... ...............
====================================================================================
SOUTHWESTERN POWER ADMINISTRATION
Operation and maintenance:
Operating expenses............................................. 16,680 17,006 17,006 +326 ...............
Purchase power and wheeling.................................... 50,000 93,000 93,000 +43,000 ...............
Program direction.............................................. 31,335 32,995 32,995 +1,660 ...............
Construction................................................... 14,932 16,875 16,875 +1,943 ...............
Reduction due to CBO initial estimates of collections.......... ............... ............... -16,000 -16,000 -16,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Operation and maintenance.......................... 112,947 159,876 143,876 +30,929 -16,000
Less alternative financing (for O&M)........................... -9,042 -8,894 -8,894 +148 ...............
Less alternative financing (for PPW)........................... -10,000 -10,000 -10,000 ............... ...............
Less alternative financing (Const)............................. -9,417 -12,180 -12,180 -2,763 ...............
Offsetting collections (PD).................................... -16,035 -29,695 -29,695 -13,660 ...............
Offsetting collections (for O&M)............................... -2,853 -5,707 -5,707 -2,854 ...............
Offsetting collections (for PPW)............................... -40,000 -83,000 -83,000 -43,000 ...............
Use of prior year balances..................................... -14,200 ............... ............... +14,200 ...............
Southwestern Power Administration CBO initial estimates of ............... 16,000 16,000 +16,000 ...............
collections...................................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, SOUTHWESTERN POWER ADMINISTRATION..................... 11,400 26,400 10,400 -1,000 -16,000
====================================================================================
WESTERN AREA POWER ADMINISTRATION
Operation and maintenance:
Construction and rehabilitation................................ 52,272 32,632 32,632 -19,640 ...............
Operation and maintenance...................................... 72,407 77,056 77,056 +4,649 ...............
Purchase power and wheeling.................................... 498,072 567,362 567,362 +69,290 ...............
Program direction.............................................. 235,722 238,483 238,483 +2,761 ...............
Reduction due to CBO initial estimates of collections.......... ............... ............... -43,000 -43,000 -43,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Operation and maintenance.......................... 858,473 915,533 872,533 +14,060 -43,000
Less alternative financing (for O&M)............................... -5,068 -7,758 -7,758 -2,690 ...............
Less alternative financing (for Construction)...................... -40,500 -27,077 -27,077 +13,423 ...............
Less alternative financing (for Program Dir.)...................... -38,398 -39,136 -39,136 -738 ...............
Less alternative financing (for PPW)............................... -289,072 -260,954 -260,954 +28,118 ...............
Offsetting collections (for program direction)..................... -116,050 -150,761 -150,761 -34,711 ...............
Offsetting collections (for O&M)................................... -13,854 -25,009 -25,009 -11,155 ...............
Offsetting collections (Public Law 108-477, Public Law 109-103).... -209,000 -306,408 -306,408 -97,408 ...............
Offsetting collections (Public Law 98-381)......................... -9,306 -9,058 -9,058 +248 ...............
Use of prior-year balances......................................... -43,853 ............... ............... +43,853 ...............
Western Area Power Administration CBO initial estimates of ............... 43,000 43,000 +43,000 ...............
collections.......................................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, WESTERN AREA POWER ADMINISTRATION..................... 93,372 132,372 89,372 -4,000 -43,000
====================================================================================
FALCON AND AMISTAD OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE FUND
Operation and maintenance.......................................... 5,048 5,329 5,329 +281 ...............
Offsetting collections............................................. -3,948 -4,979 -4,979 -1,031 ...............
Less alternative financing......................................... -872 -122 -122 +750 ...............
CBO estimate for third party financing............................. 872 122 122 -750 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, FALCON AND AMISTAD OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE FUND..... 1,100 350 350 -750 ...............
====================================================================================
TOTAL, POWER MARKETING ADMINISTRATIONS....................... 105,872 159,122 100,122 -5,750 -59,000
====================================================================================
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission............................... 367,600 369,900 369,900 +2,300 ...............
FERC revenues...................................................... -367,600 -369,900 -369,900 -2,300 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION.................. ............... ............... ............... ............... ...............
====================================================================================
General Provisions
Title III Rescissions:
Northeast gasoline supply reserve sale......................... ............... -71,000 ............... ............... +71,000
Strategic Petroleum Reserve crude oil sale..................... ............... -15,000 ............... ............... +15,000
Strategic Petroleum Reserve use of sale proceeds............... ............... 15,000 ............... ............... -15,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, General Provisions.................................... ............... -71,000 ............... ............... +71,000
====================================================================================
GRAND TOTAL, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY............................ 34,535,921 25,477,760 34,990,015 +454,094 +9,512,255
(Appropriations)..................................... (34,584,921) (30,409,693) (34,990,015) (+405,094) (+4,580,322)
(Rescissions)........................................ (-49,000) (-248,500) ............... (+49,000) (+248,500)
(Rescissions of emergency funding)................... ............... (-4,683,433) ............... ............... (+4,683,433)
====================================================================================
SUMMARY OF ACCOUNTS
Energy efficiency and renewable energy............................. 2,321,778 695,610 2,322,000 +222 +1,626,390
Electricity delivery and energy reliability........................ 248,329 ............... ............... -248,329 ...............
Cybersecurity, Energy Security, and Emergency Response............. ............... 95,800 260,000 +260,000 +164,200
Electricity delivery............................................... ............... 61,309 ............... ............... -61,309
Nuclear energy..................................................... 1,205,056 757,090 1,206,000 +944 +448,910
Fossil Energy Research and Development............................. 726,817 502,070 727,000 +183 +224,930
Naval Petroleum & Oil Shale Reserves............................... 4,900 10,000 10,000 +5,100 ...............
Strategic petroleum reserve........................................ 252,000 -124,895 175,105 -76,895 +300,000
SPR Petroleum Account.............................................. 8,400 ............... 8,400 ............... +8,400
Northeast home heating oil reserve................................. 6,500 10,000 10,000 +3,500 ...............
Energy Information Administration.................................. 125,000 115,035 125,000 ............... +9,965
Non-Defense Environmental Cleanup.................................. 298,400 218,400 353,240 +54,840 +134,840
Uranium enrichment D&D fund........................................ 840,000 752,749 840,818 +818 +88,069
Science............................................................ 6,259,903 5,390,972 6,650,000 +390,097 +1,259,028
Nuclear Waste Disposal............................................. ............... 90,000 ............... ............... -90,000
Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy........................... 353,314 ............... 375,000 +21,686 +375,000
Title 17 Innovative technology loan guarantee program.............. 38,000 -672,433 -26,000 -64,000 +646,433
Advanced technology vehicles manufacturing loan pgm................ 5,000 -4,299,000 5,000 ............... +4,304,000
Tribal Energy Loan Guarantee program............................... 1,000 -8,500 1,000 ............... +9,500
Office of Indian Energy Policy and Programs........................ ............... ............... 18,000 +18,000 +18,000
Departmental administration........................................ 189,652 139,534 170,000 -19,652 +30,466
Office of the Inspector General.................................... 49,000 51,330 51,330 +2,330 ...............
Atomic energy defense activities:
National Nuclear Security Administration:
Weapons activities......................................... 10,642,138 11,017,078 10,850,000 +207,862 -167,078
Defense nuclear nonproliferation........................... 1,999,219 1,862,825 1,902,000 -97,219 +39,175
Naval reactors............................................. 1,620,000 1,788,618 1,620,000 ............... -168,618
Federal Salaries and Expenses.............................. 407,595 422,529 408,000 +405 -14,529
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, National Nuclear Security Admin................ 14,668,952 15,091,050 14,780,000 +111,048 -311,050
Defense environmental cleanup.................................. 5,988,048 5,630,217 5,988,000 -48 +357,783
Other defense activities....................................... 840,000 853,300 840,000 ............... -13,300
Defense nuclear waste disposal................................. ............... 30,000 ............... ............... -30,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Atomic Energy Defense Activities...................... 21,497,000 21,604,567 21,608,000 +111,000 +3,433
Power marketing administrations\1\:
Southeastern Power Administration.............................. ............... ............... ............... ............... ...............
Southwestern Power Administration.............................. 11,400 26,400 10,400 -1,000 -16,000
Western Area Power Administration.............................. 93,372 132,372 89,372 -4,000 -43,000
Falcon and Amistad operating and maintenance fund.............. 1,100 350 350 -750 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Power Marketing Administrations....................... 105,872 159,122 100,122 -5,750 -59,000
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission:
Salaries and expenses.......................................... 367,600 369,900 369,900 +2,300 ...............
Revenues....................................................... -367,600 -369,900 -369,900 -2,300 ...............
General Provisions................................................. ............... -71,000 ............... ............... +71,000
Strategic Petroleum Reserve crude oil sale......................... ............... -15,000 ............... ............... +15,000
Strategic Petroleum Reserve use of sale proceeds................... ............... 15,000 ............... ............... -15,000
====================================================================================
Total Summary of Accounts, Department of Energy.............. 34,535,921 25,477,760 34,990,015 +454,094 +9,512,255
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Totals include alternative financing costs, reimbursable agreement funding, and power purchase and wheeling expenditures. Offsetting collection
totals reflect funds collected for annual expenses, including power purchase and wheeling.
GENERAL PROVISIONS--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Section 301. The bill includes a provision related to
reprogramming.
Section 302. The bill includes a provision to authorize
intelligence activities pending enactment of the fiscal year
2019 Intelligence Authorization Act.
Section 303. The bill includes a provision related to
independent cost estimates.
Section 304. The bill includes a provision concerning a
pilot program for consolidated storage of spent nuclear fuel.
TITLE IV
INDEPENDENT AGENCIES
The budget request proposes to eliminate the Delta Regional
Authority, Denali Commission, and Northern Border Regional
Commission. The budget requests funding to conduct closeout of
the agencies in fiscal year 2019. The Committee strongly
opposes the termination of these agencies, and recommends
funding to continue their activities. The Administration shall
continue all activities funded by this act, as well as follow
directive language included in this report. No funds shall be
used for the planning of or implementation of termination of
these agencies.
Appalachian Regional Commission
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $155,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 152,000,000
Committee recommendation................................ 155,000,000
The Committee recommends $155,000,000 for the Appalachian
Regional Commission [ARC], an increase of $3,000,000 above the
budget request. Established in 1965, the Appalachian Regional
Commission is an economic development agency composed of 13
Appalachian States and a Federal co-chair appointed by the
President. Within available funding, $73,000,000 is recommended
for base funds.
Further, not less than $16,000,000 shall be for a program
of industrial site and workforce development in Southern and
South Central Appalachia, focused primarily on the automotive
supplier sector and the aviation sector. Up to $13,500,000 of
that amount is recommended for activities in Southern
Appalachia. The funds shall be distributed to States that have
distressed counties in Southern and South Central Appalachia
using the ARC Area Development Formula.
Within available funding, the Committee recommends
$16,000,000 for a program of basic infrastructure improvements
in distressed counties in Central Appalachia. Funds shall be
distributed according to ARC's distressed counties formula and
shall be in addition to the regular allocation to distressed
counties.
Within available funds, the Committee recommends
$50,000,000 for the POWER Initiative to support communities,
primarily in Appalachia, that have been adversely impacted by
the closure of coal-powered generating plants and a declining
coal industry by providing resources for economic
diversification, job creation, job training, and other
employment services.
The Committee recognizes that the headquarters of the Delta
Regional Authority, the Denali Commission, and the Northern
Border Regional Commission are each headquartered in their
respective regions. However, the Appalachian Regional
Commission is headquartered in Washington, D.C. Headquartering
regional commissions within the region affected is a sensible
approach to ensure that the commissions are housed in more
affordable locations than the District of Columbia, thereby
reducing administrative overhead and making the commissions
closer and more accountable to the people the commissions were
designed to serve. Accordingly, the Committee directs the
Appalachian Regional Commission, not later than 180 days after
the enactment of this act, to provide the Committees on
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress with a report that
examines the feasibility of relocating the Appalachian Regional
Commission to within the Appalachian region, including any
potential long-term cost savings that could be accomplished.
The Committee believes that if the Appalachian Regional
Commission is going to move, it should move to the State of
West Virginia.
Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $31,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 31,243,000
Committee recommendation................................ 31,000,000
The Committee recommends $31,000,000 for the Defense
Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, a decrease of $243,000 below
the budget request. Congress permanently authorized the
Inspector General for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to
serve as the Inspector General for the Defense Nuclear
Facilities Safety Board. The Committee recommendation includes
$1,103,000 within the Office of Inspector General of the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission to perform these services.
Delta Regional Authority
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $25,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 2,500,000
Committee recommendation................................ 25,000,000
The Committee recommends $25,000,000 for the Delta Regional
Authority [DRA], an increase of $22,500,000 above the budget
request. DRA is a Federal-State partnership that is designed to
assist the eight-State Mississippi Delta Region in developing
basic infrastructure, transportation, skill training, and
opportunities for economic development for distressed counties
and parishes. Within available funds, not less than $10,000,000
is recommended for flood control, basic public infrastructure
development and transportation improvements, which shall be
allocated separate from the State formula funding method. The
Committee does not include a statutory waiver with regard to
DRA's priority of funding, and directs DRA to focus on
activities relating to basic public infrastructure and
transportation infrastructure before allocating funding toward
other priority areas.
Denali Commission
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $30,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 7,300,000
Committee recommendation................................ 15,000,000
The Committee recommends $15,000,000 for the Denali
Commission, an increase of $7,700,000 above the budget request.
The Denali Commission is a Federal-State partnership
responsible for promoting infrastructure development, job
training, and other economic support services in rural areas
throughout Alaska.
Northern Border Regional Commission
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $15,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 850,000
Committee recommendation................................ 20,000,000
The Committee recommends $20,000,000 for the Northern
Border Regional Commission, an increase of $19,150,000 above
the budget request. Within available funds, no less than
$4,000,000 is recommended for initiatives that seek to address
the decline in forest-based economies throughout the region.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $909,137,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 958,050,000
Committee recommendation................................ 898,350,000
REVENUES
Appropriations, 2018.................................... -$779,768,032
Budget estimate, 2019................................... -805,018,500
Committee recommendation................................ -794,218,500
NET APPROPRIATION
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $129,300,892
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 153,031,500
Committee recommendation................................ 104,131,500
The Committee recommends $898,350,000 for the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission [Commission], a decrease of $59,700,000
below the budget request. The Committee's recommendation
requires the use of $20,000,000 of unobligated balances from
prior year appropriations. This amount is offset by estimated
revenues of $794,218,500, resulting in a net appropriation of
$104,131,500. In developing this recommendation, the Committee
has consulted with the Commission to ensure it maintains its
gold-standard health and safety mission while reducing low-
priority work.
Budget Execution Plan.--The Commission is directed to
provide the Committee with a specific budget execution plan not
later than 30 days after the enactment of this act. This plan
shall provide details at the product line level within each of
the control points, as applicable, included in the table after
the Office of Inspector General heading below.
Budget Control Points.--The recommendation includes budget
control points for fiscal year 2019 to ensure the Commission's
budget execution follows congressional intent. These budget
control points are included in the table following the heading
of Office of Inspector General. As it did for fiscal year 2018,
the Committee includes statutory language incorporating the
control points by reference into law, and notes that any
breaches are subject to the reporting requirements and remedies
of the Antideficiency Act contained in title 31 of the United
States Code.
Reprogramming Authority.--Section 402 continues
reprogramming authority included in the Energy and Water
Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2018, for
the Commission between the budget control points, subject to
prior congressional approval, with a provision made for
emergency circumstances. This reprogramming authority
supersedes the Commission's existing guidance on internal
reprogrammings.
Unobligated Balances from Prior Appropriations.--The
Committee notes that the Commission carries unobligated
balances from appropriations received prior to fiscal year
2019. The Committee's recommendation requires the use of
$20,000,000 of these balances, derived from fee-based
activities. Because the Commission has already collected fees
corresponding to these activities in prior years, the Committee
does not include these funds within the fee base calculation
for determining authorized revenues, and does not provide
authority to collect additional offsetting receipts for their
use. The Committee notes that any remaining unobligated
balances carried forward from prior years are subject to the
reprogramming guidelines in section 402, and shall only be used
to supplement appropriations consistent with those guidelines.
Integrated University Program.--The Committee recommends
$15,000,000 for the Integrated University Program, of which not
less than $5,000,000 is for grants to support research projects
that do not align with programmatic missions but are critical
to maintaining the discipline of nuclear science.
Reporting Requirement.--The Committee directs the
Commission to continue the reporting required in the
explanatory statement for the Energy and Water Development and
Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2018, relating to progress
against the Commission's licensing goals and right-sizing
commitments.
Rulemaking.--The Committee directs the Commission to
provide in its annual budget request and the semi-annual report
to Congress on licensing and regulatory activities a list of
all rulemaking activities planned, to include their priority
and schedule.
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL
GROSS APPROPRIATION
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $12,859,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 12,609,000
Committee recommendation................................ 12,609,000
REVENUES
Appropriations, 2018.................................... -$10,555,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... -10,355,400
Committee recommendation................................ -10,355,400
NET APPROPRIATION
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $2,304,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 2,253,600
Committee recommendation................................ 2,253,600
The Committee recommends $12,609,000 for the Office of
Inspector General, the same as the budget request, which is
offset by revenues estimated at $10,355,400, for a net
appropriation of $2,253,600. The Office of Inspector General
serves both the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Defense
Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, and the recommendation
includes $1,103,000 for that purpose, which is not available
from fee revenues.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Committee
Committee recommendation
Item Budget estimate recommendation compared to
budget estimate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SALARIES AND EXPENSES..................................... 958,050 ................ -958,050
NUCLEAR REACTOR SAFETY................................ ................ 469,767 +469,767
NUCLEAR MATERIALS AND WASTE SAFETY.................... ................ 108,609 +108,609
DECOMMISSIONING AND LOW-LEVEL WASTE................... ................ 25,393 +25,393
CORPORATE SUPPORT..................................... ................ 299,581 +299,581
INTEGRATED UNIVERSITY PROGRAM......................... ................ 15,000 +15,000
-----------------------------------------------------
Subtotal............................................ 958,050 918,350 -39,700
USE OF PRIOR YEAR BALANCES...................... ................ -20,000 -20,000
-----------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, SALARIES AND EXPENSES.................. 958,050 898,350 -59,700
=====================================================
REVENUES.................................................. -805,019 -794,219 -10,800
-----------------------------------------------------
Subtotal............................................ 153,032 104,132 -48,900
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL:
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL........................... 12,609 12,609 ................
REVENUES.............................................. -10,355 -10,355 ................
-----------------------------------------------------
Subtotal............................................ 2,254 2,254 ................
-----------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION................ 155,285 106,385 -48,900
APPROPRIATIONS.................................. (155,285) (106,385) (-48,900)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board
Appropriations, 2018.................................... $3,600,000
Budget estimate, 2019................................... 3,600,000
Committee recommendation................................ 3,600,000
The Committee recommends $3,600,000 for the Nuclear Waste
Technical Review Board to be derived from the Nuclear Waste
Fund, the same as the budget request.
GENERAL PROVISIONS
Section 401. The bill includes a provision regarding
Congressional requests for information.
Section 402. The bill includes a provision regarding
reprogramming.
TITLE V
GENERAL PROVISIONS
The following list of general provisions is recommended by
the Committee:
Section 501. The bill includes a provision regarding
influencing congressional action.
Section 502. The bill includes a provision regarding
transfer authority.
Section 503. The bill includes a provision regarding
requirements for computer networks.
Program, Project, and Activity
In fiscal year 2019, for purposes of the Balanced Budget
and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Public Law 99-177),
as amended, the following information provides the definition
of the term ``program, project or activity'' for departments
and agencies under the jurisdiction of the Energy and Water
Development and Related Agencies Appropriation Act. The term
``program, project or activity'' shall include the most
specific level of budget items identified in the Energy and
Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill,
2019 and the report accompanying the bill.
If a sequestration order is necessary, in implementing the
Presidential order, departments and agencies shall apply any
percentage reduction required for fiscal year 2019 pursuant to
the provisions of Public Law 99-177 to all items specified in
the report accompanying the bill by the Senate Committee on
Appropriations in support of the fiscal year 2019 budget
estimates as modified by congressional action.
COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7, RULE XVI, OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE
SENATE
Paragraph 7 of rule XVI requires Committee reports on
general appropriations bills to identify each Committee
amendment to the House bill ``which proposes an item of
appropriation which is not made to carry out the provisions of
an existing law, a treaty stipulation, or an act or resolution
previously passed by the Senate during that session.''
The Committee is filing an original bill, which is not
covered under this rule, but reports this information in the
spirit of full disclosure.
The Committee recommends funding for the following programs
or activities which currently lack authorization for fiscal
year 2019:
APPROPRIATIONS NOT AUTHORIZED BY LAW--FISCAL YEAR 2019
[Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation
Last Year of Authorization in Last Year Net
Agency/Program Authorization Level of Appropriation
Authorization in this Bill
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Corps FUSRAP....................................... \1\ ............. ............. 120,000
EERE Program Direction............................. 2006 110,500 164,198 162,500
EERE Weatherization Activities..................... 2012 1,400,000 68,000 251,000
EERE State Energy Programs......................... 2012 125,000 50,000 55,000
EERE Marine and Hydrokinetic R&D................... 2012 50,000 34,000 70,000
Nuclear Energy..................................... 2009 495,000 792,000 1,206,000
Nuclear Energy Infrastructure and Facilities....... 2009 145,000 245,000 267,000
Fossil Energy...................................... 2009 641,000 727,320 727,000
Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves............. 2014 20,000 20,000 10,000
Strategic Petroleum Reserve........................ 2003 not specified 172,856 175,105
Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve................. 2003 not specified 6,000 10,000
Energy Information Administration.................. 1984 not specified 55,870 125,000
Office of Science.................................. 2013 6,007,000 4,876,000 6,650,000
Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing Program.. 2012 not specified 6,000 5,000
Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy........... 2013 312,000 265,000 375,000
Non-Defense Environmental Cleanup:
West Valley Demonstration...................... 1981 5,000 5,000 75,000
Departmental Administration........................ 1984 246,963 185,682 170,000
Atomic Energy Defense Activities:
National Nuclear Security Administration:
Weapons Activities......................... 2018 10,377,475 10,642,138 10,850,000
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation........... 2018 1,883,310 1,999,219 1,902,000
Naval Reactors............................. 2018 1,431,551 1,620,000 1,620,000
Federal Salaries and Expenses.............. 2018 407,551 407,595 408,000
Defense Environmental Cleanup...................... 2018 5,440,106 5,988,048 5,988,000
Other Defense Activities........................... 2018 816,000 840,000 840,000
Power Marketing Administrations:
Southwestern................................... 1984 40,254 36,229 10,400
Western Area................................... 1984 259,700 194,630 89,372
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission............... 1984 not specified 29,582 ..............
Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board............ 2018 30,600 31,000 31,000
Nuclear Regulatory Commission...................... 1985 460,000 448,200 104,132
Delta Regional Authority........................... 2018 30,000 25,000 25,000
Northern Border Regional Commission................ 2018 30,000 15,000 20,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Program was initiated in 1972 and has never received a separate authorization.
COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7(c), RULE XXVI, OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE
SENATE
Pursuant to paragraph 7(c) of rule XXVI, on May 24, 2018,
the Committee ordered favorably reported a bill (S. 2975)
making appropriations for energy and water development and
related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2019,
and for other purposes, provided, that the bill be subject to
amendment and that the bill be consistent with its budget
allocation, and provided that the Chairman of the Committee or
his designee be authorized to offer the substance of the
original bill as a Committee amendment in the nature of a
substitute to the House companion measure, by a recorded vote
of 30-1, a quorum being present. The vote was as follows:
Yeas Nays
Chairman Shelby Mr. Graham
Mr. McConnell
Mr. Alexander
Ms. Collins
Ms. Murkowski
Mr. Blunt
Mr. Moran
Mr. Hoeven
Mr. Boozman
Mrs. Capito
Mr. Lankford
Mr. Daines
Mr. Kennedy
Mr. Rubio
Mrs. Hyde-Smith
Mr. Leahy
Mrs. Murray
Mrs. Feinstein
Mr. Durbin
Mr. Reed
Mr. Tester
Mr. Udall
Mrs. Shaheen
Mr. Merkley
Mr. Coons
Mr. Schatz
Ms. Baldwin
Mr. Murphy
Mr. Manchin
Mr. Van Hollen
COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 12, RULE XXVI, OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE
SENATE
Paragraph 12 of rule XXVI requires that Committee reports
on a bill or joint resolution repealing or amending any statute
or part of any statute include ``(a) the text of the statute or
part thereof which is proposed to be repealed; and (b) a
comparative print of that part of the bill or joint resolution
making the amendment and of the statute or part thereof
proposed to be amended, showing by stricken-through type and
italics, parallel columns, or other appropriate typographical
devices the omissions and insertions which would be made by the
bill or joint resolution if enacted in the form recommended by
the Committee.''
In compliance with this rule, no changes to existing law
are displayed because this bill proposes no changes.
------
BUDGETARY IMPACT OF BILL
PREPARED IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE PURSUANT TO SEC. 308(A), PUBLIC LAW 93-344, AS
AMENDED
[In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget authority Outlays
---------------------------------------------------
Committee Amount in Committee Amount in
allocation bill allocation bill
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comparison of amounts in the bill with the subcommittee
allocation for 2019: Subcommittee on Energy and Water
Development:
Mandatory............................................... ........... ........... ........... ...........
Discretionary........................................... 43,766 43,766 43,842 \1\43,842
Security............................................ 21,892 21,892 NA NA
Nonsecurity......................................... 21,874 21,874 NA NA
Projection of outlays associated with the recommendation:
2019.................................................... ........... ........... ........... \2\25,518
2020.................................................... ........... ........... ........... 12,393
2021.................................................... ........... ........... ........... 4,189
2022.................................................... ........... ........... ........... 969
2023 and future years................................... ........... ........... ........... 596
Financial assistance to State and local governments for 2019 NA 180 NA ...........
.......\2\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority.
\2\Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority.
NA: Not applicable.
COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2018 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL
YEAR 2019
[In thousands of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate Committee recommendation
compared with (+ or -)
Item 2018 Budget estimate Committee ---------------------------------
appropriation recommendation 2018
appropriation Budget estimate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE--CIVIL
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
Corps of Engineers--Civil
Investigations..................................................... 123,000 82,000 123,000 ............... +41,000
Construction....................................................... 2,085,000 871,733 2,161,000 +76,000 +1,289,267
Mississippi River and Tributaries.................................. 425,000 244,735 350,000 -75,000 +105,265
Operation and Maintenance.......................................... 3,630,000 2,076,733 3,740,000 +110,000 +1,663,267
Regulatory Program................................................. 200,000 200,000 200,000 ............... ...............
Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP)........... 139,000 120,000 120,000 -19,000 ...............
Flood Control and Coastal Emergencies.............................. 35,000 27,000 35,000 ............... +8,000
Expenses........................................................... 185,000 187,000 193,000 +8,000 +6,000
Office of Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works)............ 5,000 5,000 5,000 ............... ...............
Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund...................................... ............... 965,132 ............... ............... -965,132
Inland Waterways Trust Fund........................................ ............... 5,250 ............... ............... -5,250
====================================================================================
Total, title I, Department of Defense--Civil................. 6,827,000 4,784,583 6,927,000 +100,000 +2,142,417
====================================================================================
TITLE II--DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Central Utah Project
Central Utah Project Completion Account............................ 10,500 7,983 15,000 +4,500 +7,017
Bureau of Reclamation
Water and Related Resources........................................ 1,332,124 891,017 1,382,000 +49,876 +490,983
Central Valley Project Restoration Fund............................ 41,376 62,008 62,008 +20,632 ...............
Central Valley Project collections............................. -41,376 -62,008 -62,008 -20,632 ...............
Subtotal..................................................... ............... ............... ............... ............... ...............
California Bay-Delta Restoration................................... 37,000 35,000 35,000 -2,000 ...............
Policy and Administration.......................................... 59,000 61,000 61,000 +2,000 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Bureau of Reclamation................................. 1,428,124 987,017 1,478,000 +49,876 +490,983
====================================================================================
Total, title II, Department of the Interior.................. 1,438,624 995,000 1,493,000 +54,376 +498,000
====================================================================================
TITLE III--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Energy Programs
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy............................. 2,321,778 695,610 2,322,000 +222 +1,626,390
Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability........................ 248,329 ............... ............... -248,329 ...............
Cybersecurity, Energy Security, and Emergency Response............. ............... 95,800 260,000 +260,000 +164,200
Electricity Delivery............................................... ............... 61,309 ............... ............... -61,309
Nuclear Energy..................................................... 1,072,056 621,000 1,073,000 +944 +452,000
Defense function............................................... 133,000 136,090 133,000 ............... -3,090
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 1,205,056 757,090 1,206,000 +944 +448,910
Fossil Energy Research and Development............................. 726,817 502,070 727,000 +183 +224,930
Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves............................. 4,900 10,000 10,000 +5,100 ...............
Strategic Petroleum Reserve........................................ 252,000 175,105 175,105 -76,895 ...............
Sale of crude oil.............................................. -350,000 -300,000 -350,000 ............... -50,000
Use of sale proceeds........................................... 350,000 ............... 350,000 ............... +350,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 252,000 -124,895 175,105 -76,895 +300,000
SPR petroleum account.............................................. 8,400 ............... 8,400 ............... +8,400
Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve................................. 6,500 10,000 10,000 +3,500 ...............
Energy Information Administration.................................. 125,000 115,035 125,000 ............... +9,965
Non-defense Environmental Cleanup.................................. 298,400 218,400 353,240 +54,840 +134,840
Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning Fund........ 840,000 752,749 840,818 +818 +88,069
Science............................................................ 6,259,903 5,390,972 6,650,000 +390,097 +1,259,028
Nuclear Waste Disposal............................................. ............... 90,000 ............... ............... -90,000
Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy........................... 353,314 ............... 375,000 +21,686 +375,000
Title 17 Innovative Technology Loan Guarantee Program.............. 33,000 10,000 33,000 ............... +23,000
Offsetting collection.......................................... -10,000 -15,000 -15,000 -5,000 ...............
Rescission..................................................... ............... -240,000 ............... ............... +240,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 23,000 -245,000 18,000 -5,000 +263,000
Title 17 negative subsidy...................................... -15,000 -44,000 -44,000 -29,000 ...............
Rescission of emergency funding................................ ............... -383,433 ............... ............... +383,433
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 8,000 -672,433 -26,000 -34,000 +646,433
Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Loans program........... 5,000 1,000 5,000 ............... +4,000
Rescission of emergency funding................................ ............... -4,300,000 ............... ............... +4,300,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 5,000 -4,299,000 5,000 ............... +4,304,000
Tribal Energy Loan Guarantee Program............................... 1,000 ............... 1,000 ............... +1,000
Rescission..................................................... ............... -8,500 ............... ............... +8,500
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 1,000 -8,500 1,000 ............... +9,500
Office of Indian Energy Policy and Programs........................ ............... ............... 18,000 +18,000 +18,000
Departmental Administration........................................ 285,652 235,534 266,000 -19,652 +30,466
Miscellaneous revenues......................................... -96,000 -96,000 -96,000 ............... ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Net appropriation.......................................... 189,652 139,534 170,000 -19,652 +30,466
Office of the Inspector General.................................... 49,000 51,330 51,330 +2,330 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Energy programs....................................... 12,903,049 3,785,071 13,281,893 +378,844 +9,496,822
====================================================================================
Atomic Energy Defense Activities
National Nuclear Security Administration
Weapons Activities................................................. 10,642,138 11,017,078 10,850,000 +207,862 -167,078
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation................................... 2,048,219 1,862,825 1,902,000 -146,219 +39,175
Rescission..................................................... -49,000 ............... ............... +49,000 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 1,999,219 1,862,825 1,902,000 -97,219 +39,175
Naval Reactors..................................................... 1,620,000 1,788,618 1,620,000 ............... -168,618
Federal Salaries and Expenses...................................... 407,595 422,529 408,000 +405 -14,529
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, National Nuclear Security Administration.............. 14,668,952 15,091,050 14,780,000 +111,048 -311,050
====================================================================================
Environmental and Other Defense Activities
Defense Environmental Cleanup...................................... 5,988,048 5,630,217 5,988,000 -48 +357,783
Other Defense Activities........................................... 840,000 853,300 840,000 ............... -13,300
Defense nuclear waste disposal..................................... ............... 30,000 ............... ............... -30,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Environmental and Other Defense Activities............ 6,828,048 6,513,517 6,828,000 -48 +314,483
====================================================================================
Total, Atomic Energy Defense Activities...................... 21,497,000 21,604,567 21,608,000 +111,000 +3,433
====================================================================================
Power Marketing Administrations\1\
Operation and maintenance, Southeastern Power Administration....... 6,379 6,500 6,500 +121 ...............
Offsetting collections......................................... -6,379 -6,500 -6,500 -121 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... ............... ............... ............... ............... ...............
Operation and maintenance, Southwestern Power Administration....... 30,288 45,802 45,802 +15,514 ...............
Reduction due to CBO initial estimates of collections for ............... ............... -16,000 -16,000 -16,000
annual expenses...............................................
Offsetting collections......................................... -18,888 -35,402 -35,402 -16,514 ...............
Southwestern Power Administration CBO initial estimates of ............... 16,000 16,000 +16,000 ...............
collections for annual expenses...............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 11,400 26,400 10,400 -1,000 -16,000
Construction, Rehabilitation, Operation and Maintenance, Western 223,276 265,142 265,142 +41,866 ...............
Area Power Administration.........................................
Reduction due to CBO initial estimates of collections for ............... ............... -43,000 -43,000 -43,000
annual expenses...............................................
Offsetting collections......................................... -129,904 -175,770 -175,770 -45,866 ...............
Western Area Power Administration CBO initial estimates of ............... 43,000 43,000 +43,000 ...............
collections for annual expenses...............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 93,372 132,372 89,372 -4,000 -43,000
Falcon and Amistad Operating and Maintenance Fund.................. 4,176 5,207 5,207 +1,031 ...............
Offsetting collections......................................... -3,948 -4,979 -4,979 -1,031 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 228 228 228 ............... ...............
CBO estimate for 3rd party financing........................... 872 122 122 -750 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 1,100 350 350 -750 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Power Marketing Administrations....................... 105,872 159,122 100,122 -5,750 -59,000
====================================================================================
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Salaries and expenses.............................................. 367,600 369,900 369,900 +2,300 ...............
Revenues applied................................................... -367,600 -369,900 -369,900 -2,300 ...............
General Provisions
Title III Rescissions:
Northeast gasoline supply reserve sale......................... ............... -71,000 ............... ............... +71,000
Strategic Petroleum Reserve crude oil sale..................... ............... -15,000 ............... ............... +15,000
Strategic Petroleum Reserve use of sale proceeds............... ............... 15,000 ............... ............... -15,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, General Provisions.................................... ............... -71,000 ............... ............... +71,000
====================================================================================
Total, title III, Department of Energy....................... 34,505,921 25,477,760 34,990,015 +484,094 +9,512,255
Appropriations........................................... (34,554,921) (30,409,693) (34,990,015) (+435,094) (+4,580,322)
Rescissions.............................................. (-49,000) (-248,500) ............... (+49,000) (+248,500)
====================================================================================
TITLE IV--INDEPENDENT AGENCIES
Appalachian Regional Commission.................................... 155,000 152,000 155,000 ............... +3,000
Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board............................ 31,000 31,243 31,000 ............... -243
Delta Regional Authority........................................... 25,000 2,500 25,000 ............... +22,500
Denali Commission.................................................. 30,000 7,300 15,000 -15,000 +7,700
Northern Border Regional Commission................................ 15,000 850 20,000 +5,000 +19,150
Southeast Crescent Regional Commission............................. 250 ............... ............... -250 ...............
Nuclear Regulatory Commission:
Salaries and expenses.......................................... 909,137 958,050 898,350 -10,787 -59,700
Revenues....................................................... -779,768 -805,019 -794,219 -14,451 +10,800
Rescission..................................................... -68 ............... ............... +68 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 129,301 153,031 104,131 -25,170 -48,900
Office of Inspector General.................................... 12,859 12,609 12,609 -250 ...............
Revenues....................................................... -10,555 -10,355 -10,355 +200 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal..................................................... 2,304 2,254 2,254 -50 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Nuclear Regulatory Commission......................... 131,605 155,285 106,385 -25,220 -48,900
Appropriations........................................... (131,673) (155,285) (106,385) (-25,288) (-48,900)
Rescissions.............................................. (-68) ............... ............... (+68) ...............
====================================================================================
Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board............................... 3,600 3,600 3,600 ............... ...............
====================================================================================
Total, title IV, Independent agencies........................ 391,455 352,778 355,985 -35,470 +3,207
====================================================================================
OTHER APPROPRIATIONS
SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR DISASTER RELIEF REQUIREMENTS
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE--CIVIL
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
Corps of Engineers--Civil
Investigations (Public Law 115-123) (emergency).................... 135,000 ............... ............... -135,000 ...............
Construction (Public Law 115-123) (emergency)...................... 15,055,000 ............... ............... -15,055,000 ...............
Mississippi River and Tributaries (Public Law 115-123) (emergency). 770,000 ............... ............... -770,000 ...............
Operations and Maintenance (Public Law 115-123) (emergency)........ 608,000 ............... ............... -608,000 ...............
Flood Control and Coastal Emergencies (Public Law 115-123) 810,000 ............... ............... -810,000 ...............
(emergency).......................................................
Expenses (Public Law 115-123) (emergency).......................... 20,000 ............... ............... -20,000 ...............
Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability (Public Law 115-123) 13,000 ............... ............... -13,000 ...............
(emergency).......................................................
Strategic Petroleum Reserve (Public Law 115-123) (emergency)....... 8,716 ............... ............... -8,716 ...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Other Appropriations.................................. 17,419,716 ............... ............... -17,419,716 ...............
====================================================================================
Grand total.................................................. 60,582,716 31,610,121 43,766,000 -16,816,716 +12,155,879
Appropriations........................................... (43,212,068) (36,542,054) (43,766,000) (+553,932) (+7,223,946)
Emergency appropriations................................. (17,419,716) ............... ............... (-17,419,716) ...............
Rescissions.............................................. (-49,068) (-248,500) ............... (+49,068) (+248,500)
Rescissions of emergency appropriations.................. ............... (-4,683,433) ............... ............... (+4,683,433)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Totals adjusted to net out alternative financing costs, reimbursable agreement funding, and power purchase and wheeling expenditures. Offsetting
collection totals only reflect funds collected for annual expenses, excluding power purchase wheeling.
[all]