26–261 

115TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 115–230 

ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS 

JULY 17, 2017.—Committed to the Whole House on the State of the Union and 

ordered to be printed 

Mr. SIMPSON, from the Committee on Appropriations, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

together with 

ADDITIONAL VIEWS 

[To accompany H.R. 3266] 

The Committee on Appropriations submits the following report in 

explanation of the accompanying bill making appropriations for energy and water development for the fiscal year ending September 

30, 2018, and for other purposes. 

INDEX TO BILL AND REPORT 

Page Number 

Bill Report 

Introduction ................................................................................................ ........ 5 

I. Department of Defense—Civil: 2 11 

Corps of Engineers—Civil .................................................................. 2 11 

Investigations ............................................................................... 2 18 

Construction ................................................................................. 3 25 

Mississippi River and Tributaries .............................................. 5 31 

Operation and Maintenance ....................................................... 5 34 

Regulatory Program ..................................................................... 7 58 

Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program ................... 7 59 

Flood Control and Coastal Emergencies .................................... 7 59 

Expenses ....................................................................................... 7 59 

Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works) 8 60 

General Provisions .............................................................................. 9 61 

II. Department of the Interior: 14 61 

Central Utah Project ........................................................................... 14 61 

Central Utah Project Completion Account ................................ 14 61 

Bureau of Reclamation: ...................................................................... 14 62 

2 

Page Number 

Bill Report 

Water and Related Resources ..................................................... 15 63 

Central Valley Project Restoration Fund ................................... 16 73 

California Bay-Delta Restoration ............................................... 17 74 

Policy and Administration .......................................................... 17 74 

General Provisions .............................................................................. 18 75 

III. Department of Energy: 21 75 

Introduction ......................................................................................... ........ 75 

Committee Recommendations ............................................................ ........ 75 

Energy Programs: 21 80 

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy ................................. 21 80 

Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability ............................... 22 86 

Nuclear Energy ............................................................................ 22 87 

Fossil Energy Research and Development ................................. 23 88 

Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves .................................. 23 91 

Strategic Petroleum Reserve ....................................................... 24 91 

Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve ........................................ 24 92 

Energy Information Administration ........................................... 25 92 

Non-Defense Environmental Cleanup ........................................ 25 92 

Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning 

Fund .......................................................................................... 25 93 

Science .......................................................................................... 26 93 

Nuclear Waste Disposal .............................................................. 26 97 

Title 17 Innovative Technology Loan Guarantee Program ...... 29 97 

Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Loan Program 30 98 

Tribal Energy Loan Guarantee Program ................................... 31 98 

Departmental Administration ..................................................... 31 98 

Office of the Inspector General ................................................... 32 100 

Atomic Energy Defense Activities: 32 100 

National Nuclear Security Administration: 32 101 

Weapons Activities ....................................................................... 32 101 

Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation .............................................. 33 106 

Naval Reactors ............................................................................. 34 109 

Federal Salaries and Expenses ................................................... 34 109 

Environmental and Other Defense Activities: 34 110 

Defense Environmental Cleanup ................................................ 34 110 

Other Defense Activities ............................................................. 35 112 

Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal ................................................ 35 113 

Power Marketing Administrations: 36 113 

Bonneville Power Administration ............................................... 36 114 

Southeastern Power Administration .......................................... 36 114 

Southwestern Power Administration ......................................... 37 115 

Western Area Power Administration ......................................... 39 115 

Falcon and Amistad Operating and Maintenance Fund .......... 40 115 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ........................................... 42 116 

Committee Recommendation .............................................................. ........ 116 

General Provisions .............................................................................. 43 150 

IV. Independent Agencies: 51 151 

Appalachian Regional Commission ................................................... 51 151 

Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board ........................................... 51 151 

Delta Regional Authority ................................................................... 52 152 

Denali Commission ............................................................................. 52 152 

Northern Border Regional Commission ............................................ 53 152 

Southeast Crescent Regional Commission ........................................ 53 153 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission ....................................................... 53 153 

Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board ........................................... 56 156 

General Provisions .............................................................................. 56 156 

V. General Provisions 58 156 

House of Representatives Report Requirements ..................................... ........ 157 

Additional Views ........................................................................................ ........ 181 

3 

SUMMARY OF ESTIMATES AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee has considered budget estimates, which are contained in the Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 

2018. The following table summarizes appropriations for fiscal year 

2017, the budget estimates, and amounts recommended in the bill 

for fiscal year 2018. 


Insert graphic folio 4 here HR230.001

Title I, 

Title II, 

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR 2017 

AND BUDGET REQUESTS AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR 2018 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Department of Defense - Civil .............. 

Department of the Interior ........ : ........ 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

6,037,764 

1,317,000 

FY 2018 

Request 

5,002,000 

1,106,376 

Bill 

6' 157' 764 

1 '238' 149 

Title III, Department of Energy ....................... 30,746,009 27,870,597 29,888,401 

Title IV, Independent Agencies ....................... 349,227 209,542 357,062 

Bill vs. B

Enacted 

+120,000 +1 ,1

-78,851 +1

-857,608 +2,0

+7,835 +1

~~------ ~-- -~ ~~-- .......... ______ ...... 

- -~ -··----- ____ .. - __ .,,. _

Subtotal ........................................ 38,450,000 34,188,515 37,641,376 -808,624 +3,4

Scorekeeping adjustments ...................... -679,000 132,624 -79,376 +599,624 -2

-------------

~--------·---

------··------

.. 

----------·--

_______ 

Grand total for the bill .................... 37,771,000 34 '321 '139 37,562,000 -209,000 +3,2
5 

INTRODUCTION 

The Energy and Water Development Appropriations bill for fiscal 

year 2018 totals $37,562,000,000, $209,000,000 below the amount 

appropriated in fiscal year 2017 and $3,240,861,000 above the 

budget request. Total defense funding is $20,456,000,000, 

$500,000,000 above the amount appropriated in fiscal year 2017 

and $139,298,000 below the budget request. Total non-defense 

funding is $17,106,000,000, $709,000,000 below the amount appropriated in fiscal year 2017 and $3,380,159,000 above the budget request. 

Title I of the bill provides $6,157,764,000 for the Civil Works programs of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, $120,000,000 above 

fiscal year 2017 and $1,155,764,000 above the budget request. 

Total funding for activities eligible for reimbursement from the 

Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund is estimated at $1,340,000,000, 

which is an increase of $40,000,000 above fiscal year 2017 and 

$375,000,000 above the budget request. The bill makes use of all 

estimated annual revenues from the Inland Waterways Trust 

Fund. 

Title II provides $1,238,149,000 for the Department of the Interior and the Bureau of Reclamation, $78,851,000 below fiscal year 

2017 and $131,773,000 above the budget request. The Committee 

recommends $1,229,166,000 for the Bureau of Reclamation, 

$77,334,000 below fiscal year 2017 and $131,773,000 above the 

budget request. The Committee recommends $8,983,000 for the 

Central Utah Project, $1,517,000 below fiscal year 2017 and the 

same as the budget request. 

Title III provides $29,888,401,000 for the Department of Energy, 

$857,608,000 below fiscal year 2017 and $2,017,804,000 above the 

budget request. Funding for the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), which includes nuclear weapons activities, defense nuclear nonproliferation, naval reactors, and federal salaries 

and expenses, is $13,914,400,000, $976,148,000 above fiscal year 

2017 and $16,600,000 below the budget request. 

Funding for energy programs within the Department of Energy, 

which includes basic science research and the applied energy programs, is $9,609,001,000, $1,674,689,000 below fiscal year 2017 

and $2,098,102,000 above the budget request. The Committee recommends $5,392,000,000 for the Office of Science, $1,103,908,000 

for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, $969,000,000 for Nuclear Energy, and $634,600,000 for Fossil Energy. No funds are 

provided for the Advanced Research Projects Agency—Energy. 

Environmental management activities—non-defense environmental cleanup, uranium enrichment decontamination and decommissioning, and defense environmental cleanup—are funded at 

$6,395,400,000, $24,600,000 below fiscal year 2017 and 

$112,935,000 below the budget request. 

The net amount appropriated for the Power Marketing Administrations is provided at the requested levels. Title IV provides $357,062,000 for several Independent Agencies, $7,835,000 above fiscal year 2017 and $147,520,000 above the 

budget request. Net funding for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is $161,612,000, $49,107,000 above fiscal year 2017 and 

$23,580,000 above the budget request. 

6 

OVERVIEW OF THE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation prioritizes the most critical inherently federal responsibilities of this bill: the national defense, 

the maintenance of our nation’s waterways, and ensuring the resilience and security of our electricity infrastructure. Strong support 

is included for basic science programs, which provide the foundation for the new energy technologies that are vital to maintaining 

our global competitiveness and ensuring our country’s long-term 

prosperity, but that are often too high-risk to receive the attention 

of the private sector. In contrast, the recommendation provides limited resources for the applied energy research and development activities with the greatest opportunity for private sector backing. 

The recommendation also recognizes the importance of the federal 

government’s responsibility to dispose of nuclear waste and clean 

up the legacy of five decades of nuclear weapons production and 

government-sponsored nuclear energy research. 

NATIONAL DEFENSE PROGRAMS

As in previous years, the Committee considers the national defense programs run by the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) to be the Department of Energy’s top priority. The recommendation strongly supports the Department’s proposals to 

modernize the nuclear weapons stockpile, increase investment in 

the NNSA’s infrastructure, prevent the proliferation of nuclear materials, and provide for the needs of the naval nuclear propulsion 

program. 

INVESTMENTS IN INFRASTRUCTURE

The water resource infrastructure funded by the recommendation 

is a critical component of ensuring a robust national economy and 

of supporting American competitiveness in international markets. 

The Corps is responsible for keeping our federal waterways open 

for business. The Corps also has been instrumental in reducing the 

risk of flooding for public safety, businesses, and much of this country’s food-producing lands. The Bureau of Reclamation supplies reliable water to approximately ten percent of the country’s population and to much of its fertile agricultural lands. Both agencies 

make significant contributions to national electricity production 

through hydropower facilities. 

The U.S. marine transportation industry supports 

$2,000,000,000,000 in commerce and creates employment for more 

than 13 million people. As the agency responsible for our nation’s 

federal waterways, the Corps maintains 1,067 harbors and 25,000 

miles of commercial channels serving 40 states. The maintenance 

of these commercial waterways is directly tied to the ability of this 

country to ship its manufactured and bulk products, as well as to 

compete with the ports of neighboring countries for the business of 

ships arriving from around the world. As a primary supporter of 

America’s waterway infrastructure, the Corps is ensuring that the 

nation has the tools to maintain a competitive edge in the global 

market. This recommendation makes key changes to the budget request to ensure that the Corps has the resources to continue to 

support America’s shipping infrastructure. 

7 

The flood protection infrastructure that the Corps builds or 

maintains reduces the risk of flooding to people, businesses, and 

other public infrastructure investments. In fact, the average annual damages prevented by Corps projects over fiscal years 2007– 

2016 was $67,600,000,000. Between 1928 and 2016, each inflationadjusted dollar invested in these projects prevented $8.91 in damages. The properties and investments protected by the Corps infrastructure would often be flooded without that infrastructure, destroying homes, businesses, and many valuable acres of cropland. 

The Bureau of Reclamation’s water infrastructure is a critical 

component of the agricultural productivity of this country. These 

facilities deliver water to one of every five western farmers resulting in approximately 10 million acres of irrigated land that produces 60 percent of the nation’s vegetables and 25 percent of its 

fruits and nuts. Additionally, these facilities deliver water to more 

than 31 million people for municipal, rural, and industrial uses. 

Without these dams and water supply facilities, American agricultural producers in the West would not be able to access reliable, 

safe water for their families and their businesses and many municipal and industrial users would face critical water shortages. 

The Corps and Reclamation are the nation’s largest and second 

largest producers of hydropower, respectively. Combined these federal hydropower facilities generate approximately 115 billion kilowatt-hours annually. Gross revenues from the sale of this power 

reach nearly $6,000,000,000 annually. 

NATIONAL ENERGY POLICY

The Department of Energy and its National Laboratory system 

have helped to lay the foundation for the technological advances 

driving the energy market today. Production breakthroughs for 

every energy generation source can trace their origins back to research and development supported by the Department. As the energy market continues to change, the Department’s support for 

foundational research and development in all energy sources remains critical. The President’s 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 is appreciative of the Department’s 

efforts to focus on early stage research and development and begins 

a gradual approach to achieve this goal. 

The Committee provides funding in support of an all of the above 

energy strategy designed to take advantage and utilize all sources 

of American-made energy. Funding for fossil and nuclear sources, 

which provide 84 percent of all electricity generated in the nation, 

is targeted to ensure the safe and efficient use of the nation’s critical baseload energy generation sources. Funding for renewable energy sources, which provide 15 percent of the nation’s electricity, 

supports continued investments in research and development to advance technological innovations. This strategy provides the correct 

balance to enable full use of our nation’s abundant fossil resources 

while laying the foundation for developing future energy sources. 

The success of these innovations depends on a reliable and resilient electric grid infrastructure. The nation’s electric grid was built 

to handle a different energy reality than the one we face today. 

Weather events, cyberattacks, and an increasing diversity of energy 

8 

sources must be addressed to guarantee the continued operation of 

the electric grid. The Committee provides strong support to ensure 

the nation’s electric grid remains secure. 

The Committee continues its long-standing support for the investment of taxpayer funds across the spectrum of all energy technologies. A national energy policy can only be successful if it maintains stability while planning for long-term strategic goals of energy security, independence, and prosperity for the nation. The 

Committee makes strategic choices, recommending a balanced approach to advancing research and development in all energy technologies and supporting a robust electric grid. 

CONGRESSIONAL DIRECTION

Program, Project, or Activity.—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 Act, 2018 and the Committee report accompanying 

this Act. 

Performance Measures.—The Committee directs each of the agencies funded by this Act to comply with title 31 of the United States 

Code including the development of their organizational priority 

goals and outcomes such as performance outcome measures, output 

measures, efficiency measures, and customer service measures. 

Offsetting Collections.—The Committee directs each of the agencies funded by this Act to continue to report any funds derived by 

the agency from non-federal sources, including user charges and 

fines that are authorized by law, to be retained and used by the 

agency or credited as an graphic in annual budget submissions. 

Regional Councils.—The Committee encourages all federal agencies to consider including regional councils and councils of government as eligible entities in competitions for federal funding when 

local governments or non-profit agencies are eligible. 

Digital Accountability and Transparency Act.—The Committee 

supports the requirements of the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 2014 as identified in the budget request. 

COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT INITIATIVES

The highest priority mission of any federal agency is to be an effective steward of taxpayer dollars. Any waste, fraud, or abuse of 

taxpayer dollars is unacceptable. The Committee uses hearings, reviews by the Government Accountability Office, the Committee on 

Appropriations’ Surveys and Investigations staff, and its annual 

appropriations Act, including the accompanying report, to promote 

strong oversight of the agencies under its jurisdiction, with an emphasis on the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Bureau of Reclamation, and the Department of Energy. 

The recommendation continues the Committee’s responsibility to 

conduct in-depth oversight into all activities funded in this bill. 

Each agency shall designate a specific point of contact to track each 

report required in the bill and ensure its timely production and delivery. 

A summary of the major oversight efforts in the bill is provided 

below: 

9 

Agency/Account Requirement 

Energy and Water .................................................... Direction on performance measures 

Army Corps of Engineers ......................................... Direction on projects under the larger capital program 

Army Corps of Engineers ......................................... Direction on Principles and Guidelines 

Army Corps of Engineers ......................................... Guidance on ratings systems for allocating additional funds 

Army Corps of Engineers ......................................... Direction on 2018 work plan submission 

Army Corps of Engineers ......................................... Direction on new starts 

Army Corps of Engineers ......................................... Direction on work related to Asian Carp 

Army Corps of Engineers/Investigations ................. Direction on management of the planning program 

Army Corps of Engineers/Investigations ................. Guidance on specific studies 

Army Corps of Engineers/Investigations ................. Guidance on allocating additional funding 

Army Corps of Engineers/Investigations ................. Notification requirement for transfer of certain facilities 

Army Corps of Engineers/Investigations ................. Report on SMART planning 

Army Corps of Engineers/Construction ................... Guidance on allocating additional funding 

Army Corps of Engineers/Construction ................... Direction on management of the Continuing Authorities Program 

Army Corps of Engineers/Mississippi River ............ Guidance on allocating additional funding 

Army Corps of Engineers/Mississippi River ............ Direction on Mississippi River Commission costs 

Army Corps of Engineers/Operation and Maintenance.Guidance on allocating additional funding 

Army Corps of Engineers/Operation and Maintenance.Report on section 408 reviews 

Army Corps of Engineers/FUSRAP ........................... Guidance on investigation and study at former Sylvania site 

Army Corps of Engineers/Expenses ......................... Direction on alternative financing 

Army Corps of Engineers/General Provisions .......... Reprogramming requirements 

Army Corps of Engineers/General Provisions .......... Restriction on use of continuing contracts 

Army Corps of Engineers/General Provisions .......... Restriction on requiring permits for the discharge of dredged or fill 

material for certain agricultural activities 

Army Corps of Engineers/General Provisions .......... Authority on revising federal jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act 

Bureau of Reclamation/Water and Related Resources.Direction on Mni Wiconi Project 

Bureau of Reclamation/Water and Related Resources.Guidance on allocating additional funding 

Bureau of Reclamation/General Provisions ............. Reprogramming requirements 

Department of Energy ............................................. Guidance on prior-year balances 

Department of Energy ............................................. Report on cost audit coverage 

Department of Energy ............................................. Guidance on ARPA–E 

Department of Energy ............................................. Report on alleviation of poverty 

Department of Energy ............................................. Direction on workplace diversity 

Department of Energy ............................................. Direction on Public Access Plan 

Department of Energy ............................................. Direction on implementing a cybersecurity plan 

Department of Energy ............................................. Direction on educational activities 

Department of Energy ............................................. Direction on commonly recycled paper 

Department of Energy/Energy Efficiency ................. Report on zero emissions energy credit 

Department of Energy/Energy Efficiency ................. Direction on Clean Cities program 

Department of Energy/Energy Efficiency ................. Report on waste-to-energy research and development activities 

Department of Energy/Fossil ................................... Direction on NETL budget accounts restructuring 

Department of Energy/Fossil ................................... Direction on coal research and development 

Department of Energy/Fossil ................................... Direction on crude oil by rail 

Department of Energy/Fossil ................................... Direction on NETL sites 

Department of Energy/Non-Defense Cleanup .......... Report on Oak Ridge activities 

Department of Energy/UED&D ................................. Report on uranium transfers 

Department of Energy/Science ................................ Report on solar fuels research initiative strategic plan 

Department of Energy/Science ................................ Report on exascale deployment plan 

Department of Energy/Nuclear/Waste Disposal ...... Direction on Yucca Mountain licensing process 

Department of Energy/Departmental Administration.Direction on renewable fuel standards 

Department of Energy/Weapons .............................. Direction on nuclear modernization affordability 

Department of Energy/Weapons .............................. Plan to reduce overhead costs of NNSA sites 

Department of Energy/Weapons .............................. Report on W80–4 alternatives 

Department of Energy/Weapons .............................. Report on milestones for ignition 

Department of Energy/Weapons .............................. Direction on footpring reduction of Albuquerque Complex 

Department of Energy/Weapons .............................. Report on vacating legacy plutonium facilities 

Department of Energy/Weapons .............................. Reporting on WEPAR project 

Department of Energy/Nonproliferation ................... Guidance on new nonproliferation projects in Russia 

Department of Energy/Nonproliferation ................... Report on commercial nuclear fuel reprocessing 

Department of Energy/Nonproliferation ................... Report on transfer of EM nuclear material management facilities 

Department of Energy/Nonproliferation ................... Prohibition on use of MOX funds 

Department of Energy/Nonproliferation ................... Guidance on consideration of MOX alternative 

10 

Agency/Account Requirement 

Department of Energy/Nonproliferation ................... Report on removal of plutonium from South Carolina 

Department of Energy/Defense Cleanup ................. Establishment of new budget control points 

Department of Energy/Defense Cleanup ................. Direction on budgeting for the Waste Treatment Plant 

Department of Energy/Defense Cleanup ................. Report on national transuranic waste processing center 

Department of Energy/Defense Cleanup ................. Report on Office of River Protection site office 

Department of Energy/Defense Cleanup ................. Report on WIPP ground control metrics 

Department of Energy/Defense Cleanup ................. Guidance on headquarters planning and budgeting systems 

Department of Energy/Other Defense Activities ...... Direction on consolidation of safety and security costs 

Department of Energy/Power Marketing Administrations.Direction on provision of information 

Department of Energy/General Provisions ............... Reprogramming requirements 

Department of Energy/General Provisions ............... Requirement for oversight of high hazard nuclear facilities construction 

Department of Energy/General Provisions ............... Prohibition on funds without independent cost estimates 

Department of Energy/General Provisions ............... Restriction of certain activities in the Russian Federation 

Department of Energy/General Provisions ............... Requirements for releases from Strategic Petroleum Reserve 

Department of Energy/General Provisions ............... Guidance on Strategic Petroleum Reserve activities 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission ............................. Establishment reprogramming control points 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission ............................. Guidance on reporting of salaries and expenses 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission ............................. Report on agency structure and manning 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission ............................. Report on use of risk assessment tools 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission ............................. Direction on rulemaking process and activities 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission ............................. Guidance on transition to digital systems 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission ............................. Direction on preparation for license renewal applications 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission ............................. Report on licensing goals and right-sizing commitments 

Independent Agencies/General Provisions ............... Requirement for NRC to comply with Congressional requests 

Independent Agencies/General Provisions ............... Reprogramming requirements for the NRC 

General Provisions ................................................... Prohibition on funds to influence congressional action 

General Provisions ................................................... Consolidation of transfer authorities 

General Provisions ................................................... Prohibition of funds in contravention of Executive Order 12898 

General Provisions ................................................... Prohibition of funds for computer networks that don’t block 

General Provisions ................................................... Prohibition of funds to further implement EO 13547 

General Provisions ................................................... Prohibition of funds to remove or close federally owned or operated 

General Provisions ................................................... Prohibition of funds to close Yucca Mountain application 

11 

TITLE I—CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CIVIL 

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CIVIL

INTRODUCTION

The Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act funds 

the Civil Works missions of the Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). 

This program is responsible for activities in support of coastal and 

inland navigation, flood and coastal storm damage reduction, environmental protection and restoration, hydropower, recreation, 

water supply, and disaster preparedness and response. The Corps 

also performs regulatory oversight of navigable waters. Approximately 22,000 civilians and almost 300 military personnel located 

in eight Division offices and 38 District offices work to carry out 

the Civil Works program. 

DEEP-DRAFT NAVIGATION

The Committee remains mindful of the evolving infrastructure 

needs of the nation’s ports. Meeting these needs—including deeper 

drafts to accommodate the move towards larger ships—will be essential if the nation is to remain competitive in international markets and to continue advancing economic development and job creation domestically. 

Investigations and construction of port projects, including the 

deepening of existing projects, are cost shared between the federal 

government and non-federal sponsors, often local or regional port 

authorities. The operation and maintenance of these projects are 

federal responsibilities and are funded as reimbursements from the 

Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund (HMTF), which is supported by 

an ad valorem tax on the value of imported and domestic cargo. 

Expenditures from the trust fund are subject to annual appropriations. The balance in the HMTF at the beginning of fiscal year 

2018 is estimated to be approximately $9,000,000,000. 

The Water Resources Reform and Development Act (WRRDA) of 

2014 included target annual appropriations levels for use of HMTF 

receipts and the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 

2016 amended those levels. The Committee remains committed to 

providing the maximum practicable amount of funding for HMTFreimbursable activities consistent with annual allocations and after 

evaluating funding requirements for other priority activities within 

the Civil Works program. 

For fiscal year 2018, the Committee provides an estimated 

$1,340,000,000 for HMTF-related activities, $40,000,000 more than 

fiscal year 2017, $375,000,000 above the budget request, and the 

same as the annual target. This funding should allow the Corps to 

make significant progress on the backlog of dredging needs. 

INLAND WATERWAYS SYSTEM

The nation’s inland waterways system—consisting of approximately 12,000 miles of commercially navigable channels and 239 

lock chambers—also is essential to supporting the national economy. Freight transported on the inland waterways system includes 

a significant portion of the nation’s grain exports, domestic petroVerDate Sep 11 2014 11:46 Jul 18, 2017 Jkt 026261 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR230.XXX HR230
12 

leum and petroleum products, and coal used in electricity generation. Much of the physical infrastructure of the system is aging, 

however, and in need of improvements. For example, commercial 

navigation locks typically have a design life of 50 years, yet nearly 

60 percent of these locks in the United States are more than 50 

years old, with the average age at almost 60 years old. 

Capital improvements to the inland waterways system generally 

are funded 50 percent from the General Treasury and 50 percent 

from the Inland Waterways Trust Fund (IWTF), while operation 

and maintenance costs are funded 100 percent from the General 

Treasury. The IWTF is supported by a tax on barge fuel. 

In recent years, the increasing rehabilitation and reconstruction 

needs and the escalating costs of those projects have far outstripped available revenues in the IWTF. Two statutory changes 

enacted in fiscal year 2015, however, will lead to the availability 

of additional revenues to stand as the required cost share for some 

additional work on the inland waterways system. These changes 

were the reduction in the portion of the costs of the Olmsted Locks 

and Dam project that is to be derived from the IWTF to 15 percent 

and the increase in the fuel tax to $0.29 per gallon from $0.20 per 

gallon. 

The Corps is directed to take the preparatory steps necessary to 

ensure that new construction projects can be initiated as soon as 

can be supported under the larger capital program (i.e., as ongoing 

projects approach completion). For fiscal year 2018, the Committee 

provides appropriations making use of all estimated annual revenues from the IWTF. The final program level will depend on 

project-specific allocations to be made by the Corps, but will be at 

least $332,500,000. The Committee also allocates $25,000,000 

above the budget request for additional operation and maintenance 

activities on the inland waterways. 

PRINCIPLES AND REQUIREMENTS

Concerns persist that the effort to update the Water Resources 

Principles and Guidelines did not proceed consistent with the language or intent of section 2031 of the Water Resources Development Act of 2007. No funds provided to the Corps of Engineers 

shall be used to develop or implement rules or guidance to support 

implementation of the final Principles and Requirements for Federal Investments in Water Resources released in March 2013 or the 

final Interagency Guidelines released in December 2014. The Corps 

shall continue to use the document dated March 10, 1983, and entitled ‘‘Economic and Environmental Principles and Guidelines for 

Water and Related Land Resources Implementation Studies’’ during the fiscal year period covered by the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act for 2018. 

FIVE-YEAR COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING

Historically, the Committee has encouraged the Administration 

to provide five-year investment plans for all the agencies within 

the Energy and Water Development jurisdiction, particularly the 

Corps. The five-year plan should be based on realistic assumptions 

of project funding needs. It is the Committee’s expectation that 

once projects have been initiated, the Administration will request 

responsible annual funding levels for them through completion. 

13 

The executive branch has traditionally been unwilling to project 

five-year horizons for projects it has not previously supported 

through the budget process. Comprehensive planning is important 

for understanding future requirements of projects that have been 

supported through the appropriations process, as well. While this 

unwillingness to have a dialogue regarding additional investment 

might be reasonable under circumstances where there is no likelihood of increased resources, the Congress consistently has supported additional investment in the nation’s water resource infrastructure. The uncertainty caused by year-to-year federal planning 

leaves too many non-federal sponsors unable to make informed decisions regarding local funding. 

It would be beneficial for the Congress, the Administration, and 

project partners to have a comprehensive plan to outline requirements for all projects that have received an appropriation to date 

or are proposed to begin receiving funding this year. The Committee welcomes a dialogue with the new Administration to reach 

a mutually agreeable way to comprehensively plan for all initiated 

projects. 

FORMAT OF FUNDING PRIORITIES

Traditionally, the President requested and the Congress appropriated funds for the Civil Works program on a project-level basis. 

Taken together, however, these funding decisions indicated programmatic priorities and policy preferences. As with non-projectbased programs, the Congress at times disagreed with the priorities stated in the President’s budget request and made its priorities known in appropriations bills. Final federal government priorities were established in Acts passed by both chambers of the Congress and signed by the President. 

Since the 112th Congress, congressional earmarks, as defined in 

House rule XXI, have been prohibited. That definition encompasses 

project-level funding not requested by the President. As a result, 

the Committee reviewed the historical format of appropriations for 

the Corps to see if there was a more transparent way to highlight 

programmatic priorities without abandoning congressional oversight responsibilities. The fiscal year 2012 Act included a modification to the format used in previous years, and that format is continued for fiscal year 2018. As in previous years, the Committee 

lists in report tables the studies, projects, and activities within 

each account requested by the President along with the Committeerecommended funding level. To advance its programmatic priorities, the Committee has included additional funding for certain 

categories of projects. Project-specific allocations within these categories will be determined by the Corps based on further direction 

provided in this report. 

ADDITIONAL FUNDING

Although it represents the highest level of funding requested 

since fiscal year 2010, the fiscal year 2018 budget request 

underfunds the Civil Works program of the Corps of Engineers. 

The recommendation, however, includes funding in addition to the 

budget request to ensure continued improvements to our national 

economy, public safety, and environmental health that result from 

water resources projects. This funding is for additional work that 

14 

either was not included in the budget request or was inadequately 

budgeted. 

The Corps again is directed to develop ratings systems for use in 

evaluating studies and projects for allocation of the additional 

funding provided in this title. These evaluation systems may be, 

but are not required to be, individualized for each account, category, or subcategory. Voluntary funding in excess of legally required cost shares for studies and projects is acceptable, but shall 

not be used as a criterion for allocating the additional funding provided in this bill or for the selection of new starts. Each study and 

project eligible for funding shall be evaluated under the applicable 

ratings system. A study or project may not be excluded from evaluation for being ‘‘inconsistent with Administration policy.’’ The 

Corps retains complete control over the methodology of these ratings systems. The executive branch retains complete discretion 

over project-specific allocation decisions within the additional funds 

provided, subject to only the direction here and under the heading 

‘‘Additional Funding’’ or ‘‘Additional Funding for Ongoing Work’’ 

within each of the Investigations, Construction, Mississippi River 

and Tributaries, and Operation and Maintenance accounts. 

The Administration is reminded that these funds are in addition 

to the budget request, and Administration budget metrics shall not 

be a reason to disqualify a study or project from being funded. It 

is expected that all of the additional funding provided will be allocated to specific programs, projects, or activities. The focus of the 

allocation process shall favor the obligation, rather than expenditure, of funds. With the significant backlog of work in the Corps’ 

inventory, there is no reason for funds provided above the budget 

request to remain unallocated. 

A project or study shall be eligible for additional funding within 

the Investigations, Construction, and Mississippi River and Tributaries accounts if: (1) it has received funding, other than through 

a reprogramming, in at least one of the previous three fiscal years; 

(2) it was previously funded and could reach a significant milestone, complete a discrete element of work, or produce significant 

outputs in fiscal year 2018; or (3) as appropriate, it is selected as 

one of the new starts allowed in accordance with this Act and the 

additional direction provided below. Projects with executed Advanced Project Partnership Agreements, or similar agreements, 

shall be eligible for additional funding provided in this bill. None 

of the additional funding in any account may be used for any item 

where funding was specifically denied or for projects in the Continuing Authorities Program. Funds shall be allocated consistent 

with statutory cost share requirements. 

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. The 

list of subcategories is not meant to be exhaustive. 

The Committee is concerned that the fiscal year 2017 work plan 

allocated Operation and Maintenance funding to some activities 

historically funded in the Construction account. Any shift in funding between accounts should be proposed in a budget request and 

addressed through the appropriations process. The Committee develops funding levels for accounts and additional funding categories 

15 

based on its assessment of the scope of activities that can be advanced within each account and category. Shifting activities between accounts or categories after these funding level decisions are 

made is a gross misuse of the flexibility inherent in the work plan 

process. For fiscal year 2018, the Corps shall evaluate all studies 

and projects only within accounts and categories consistent with 

previous congressional funding. 

Work Plan.—Not later than 60 days after the enactment of this 

Act, the Corps shall provide to the Committees on Appropriations 

of both Houses of Congress a work plan including the following information: (1) a detailed description of the ratings 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 

(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 

2018 and the specific reasons each study or project was considered 

as being less competitive for an allocation of funds. 

New Starts.—The recommendation includes six new study starts 

and up to two new construction starts to be distributed across the 

three main mission areas of the Corps. Of the new study starts, 

one shall be for a navigation study, one shall be for a flood and 

storm damage reduction study, three shall be for additional navigation or flood and storm damage reduction studies, and one shall be 

for an environmental restoration study. The new construction 

starts shall be for navigation, flood and storm damage reduction, 

or environmental restoration projects. No funding shall be used to 

initiate new studies, programs, projects, or activities in the Mississippi River and Tributaries or Operation and Maintenance accounts. 

The Corps is directed to propose a single group of new starts as 

a part of the work plan. The Corps may not change or substitute 

the new starts selected once the work plan has been provided to 

the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress. 

Each new start shall be funded from the appropriate additional 

funding line item. Any project for which the new start requirements are not met by the end of fiscal year 2018 shall be treated 

as if the project had not been selected as a new start; such a 

project shall be required to compete again for new start funding in 

future years. 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. 

There continues to be confusion regarding the executive branch’s 

policies and guidelines regarding which studies and projects require new start designations. Therefore, the Corps is directed to notify the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress 

at least 7 days prior to the execution of an agreement for construction of any project except environmental infrastructure projects and 

projects under the Continuing Authorities Program. Additionally, 

the recommendation reiterates and clarifies previous congressional 

direction as follows. Neither study nor construction activities related to individual projects authorized under section 1037 of the 

Water Resources Reform and Development Act (WRRDA) of 2014 

16 

shall require a new start or new investment decision; these activities shall be considered ongoing work. No new start or new investment decision shall be required when moving from feasibility to 

preconstruction engineering and design (PED). A new start designation shall be required to initiate construction of individuallyauthorized projects funded within programmatic line items. No new 

start or new investment decision shall be required to initiate work 

on a separable element of a project when construction of one or 

more separable elements of that project was initiated previously; it 

shall be considered ongoing work. 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. 

In addition to the priority factors used to allocate all additional 

funding provided in the Investigations account, the Corps should 

give careful consideration to the out-year budget impacts of the 

studies selected and to whether there appears to be an identifiable 

local sponsor that will be ready and able to provide, in a timely 

manner, the necessary cost share for the feasibility and PED 

phases. The Corps is reminded that the flood and storm damage reduction mission area can include instances where non-federal sponsors are seeking assistance with flood control and unauthorized discharges from permitted wastewater treatment facilities and that 

the navigation mission area includes work in remote and subsistence harbor areas. 

In addition to the priority factors used to allocate all additional 

funding provided in the Construction account, the Corps also shall 

consider the out-year budget impacts of the selected new starts; 

legal requirements, including responsibilities to Tribes; and the 

cost sharing sponsor’s ability and willingness to promptly provide 

the cash contribution (if any), as well as required lands, easements, 

rights-of-way, relocations, and disposal areas. When considering 

new construction starts, only those that can execute a project cost 

sharing agreement not later than August 31, 2018, shall be selected. 

To ensure that the new construction starts are affordable and 

will not unduly delay completion of any ongoing projects, the Secretary is required to submit to the Committees on Appropriations 

of both Houses of Congress a realistic out-year budget scenario 

prior to issuing a work allowance for a new start. It is understood 

that specific budget decisions are made on an annual basis and 

that this scenario is neither a request for nor a guarantee of future 

funding for any project. Nonetheless, this scenario shall include an 

estimate of annual funding for each new start utilizing a realistic 

funding scenario through completion of the project, as well as the 

specific impacts of that estimated funding on the ability of the 

Corps to make continued progress on each previously funded construction project (including impacts to the optimum timeline and 

funding requirements of the ongoing projects) and on the ability to 

consider initiating new projects in the future. The scenario shall 

assume a Construction account funding level at the average of the 

past three budget requests. 

ASIAN CARP

The recommendation funds the request for the existing electric 

barriers in the Chicago Area Waterway System. The Corps is diVerDate Sep 11 2014 11:46 Jul 18, 2017 Jkt 026261 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR230.XXX HR230
17 

rected to analyze the most recent information regarding the presence of Asian Carp in close proximity to Lake Michigan and any 

other Great Lake to determine if any emergency or additional actions are warranted, including increasing the existing barriers’ efficiency and efficacy. The Corps shall complete this analysis not later 

than 45 days after the enactment of this Act. Upon completion of 

this analysis, the Corps shall report to the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress on the conclusions, including 

whether any additional authorization is required. Additionally, the 

Corps is encouraged to consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, the U.S. Coast Guard, the State of Illinois, and other members of the Asian Carp Regional Coordinating Committee to evaluate whether navigation protocols would be beneficial or effective in 

reducing the risk of vessels inadvertently transporting aquatic nuisance species, including Asian Carp, through the Electric Dispersal 

Barrier near Romeoville, Illinois, and locks and dams in the Illinois 

River. 

The Corps is expected to release the draft Great Lakes and Mississippi River Interbasin Study (GLMRIS) Brandon Road Study 

consistent with the urgency of its previous actions. The Corps shall 

adhere to a public and agency review process that is open and 

transparent. The Corps is directed to provide to the Committees on 

Appropriations of both Houses of Congress semi-annual updates on 

the progress and status of efforts to prevent the further spread of 

the carp as well as the location and density of Asian Carp populations. The Corps is further directed to work with other appropriate federal entities to develop and submit to the Committees as 

soon as practicable a concise report with graphics and maps detailing the geographic migration of Asian Carp up the Mississippi 

River from 2000 to the present. 

AGING WATERWAY INFRASTRUCTURE

The Committee recognizes the extraordinary implications to the 

local, regional, and national economy, as well as national security 

due to aging waterway infrastructure. The Committee urges the 

Corps to complete feasibility studies for ongoing deep draft lock 

modernization or replacement projects. In these studies, the Corps 

is encouraged to include national and regional economic analyses, 

taking into account the unique movement of the commodities and 

the value-added in the supply chain. 

CONGRESSIONAL DIRECTION AND REPROGRAMMING

To ensure that the expenditure of funds in fiscal year 2018 is 

consistent with congressional direction, to minimize the movement 

of funds, and to improve overall budget execution, the bill carries 

a legislative provision outlining the circumstances under which the 

Corps may reprogram funds. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $6,157,764,000 for the Corps, 

$120,000,000 above fiscal year 2017 and $1,155,764,000 above the 

budget request. 

18 

A table summarizing the fiscal year 2017 enacted appropriation, 

the fiscal year 2018 budget request, and the Committee-recommended levels is provided below: 

(Dollars in thousands) 

Account FY 2017 enacted FY 2018 request Cmte. rec. 

Investigations .............................................................................................. $121,000 $86,000 $105,000 

Construction ................................................................................................ 1,876,000 1,020,000 1,697,000 

Mississippi River and tributaries ............................................................... 362,000 253,000 301,000 

Operation and maintenance ....................................................................... 3,149,000 3,100,000 3,519,000 

Regulatory program .................................................................................... 200,000 200,000 200,000 

FUSRAP ........................................................................................................ 112,000 118,000 118,000 

Flood control and coastal emergencies ...................................................... 32,000 35,000 32,000 

Expenses ..................................................................................................... 181,000 185,000 181,000 

Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works .................. 4,764 5,000 4,764 

Total, Corps of Engineers—Civil ....................................................... 6,037,764 5,002,000 6,157,764 

INVESTIGATIONS

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $121,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 86,000,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 105,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... ¥16,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ +19,000,000 

This appropriation funds studies to determine the need for, the 

engineering and economic feasibility of, and the environmental and 

social suitability of solutions to water and related land resource 

problems; preconstruction engineering and design; data collection; 

interagency coordination; and research. 

The past several budget requests have proposed significant reductions in funding within the Investigations account, with particularly steep reductions in the amount of work to be done on individual feasibility studies and preconstruction engineering and design projects. The Committee is concerned that the Corps has not 

adequately planned for any changes that may be necessary as a result. The Corps is directed to develop a comprehensive plan for 

managing an efficient planning program designed to maintain core 

planning competencies. The Corps shall be prepared to brief the 

Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress not later 

than 180 days after the enactment of this Act on the final plan. 

The budget request for this account and the approved Committee 

allowance are shown on the following table: 

19 


Insert graphic folio 20 here 23912A.003

VILLAGE CREEK, AL 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS -INVESTIGATIONS 

(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) 

ALABAMA 

ALASKA 

KOTZEBUE SMALL BOAT HARBOR, AK 

LOWELL CREEK TUNNEL FLOOD DIVERSION, AK 

SAINT GEORGE HARBOR IMPROVEMENT, AK 

UNALASKA (DUTCH) HARBOR, AK 

ARIZONA 

LITTLE COLORADO RIVER (WINSLOW), AZ 

LOWER SANTA CRUZ RIVER, AZ 

THREE RIVERS, AR 

ALISO CREEK MAINSTEM, CA 

CORTE MADERA CREEK, CA 

ARKANSAS 

CALIFORNIA 

DRY CREEK (WARM SPRINGS) RESTORATION, CA 

EAST SAN PEDRO BAY ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, CA 

PORT OF LONG BEACH NAV IMP, CA 

SACRAMENTO RIVER BANK PROTECTION (PHASE 3), CA 

YUBA RIVER FISH PASSAGE, CA 

COMMONWEALTH NORTHERN MARIANAS 

ROTA HARBOR MODIFICATIONS, CNMI 

TINIAN HARBOR MODIFICATIONS, CNMI 

DELAWARE 

DELAWARE INLAND BAYS AND DELAWARE BAY COAST, DE 

PROCTOR CREEK, GA 

SWEETWATER CREEK, GA 

GEORGIA 

BUDGET HOUSE 

REQUEST RECOMMENDED 

288 288 

370 370 

950 950 

362 362 

950 950 

414 414 

250 250 

270 270 

100 100 

682 682 

260 260 

194 194 

327 327 

482 482 

819 819 

513 513 

514 514 

700 700 

450 450 

750 750 
20 


Insert graphic folio 21 here 23912A.004

CORPS OF ENGINEERS -INVESTIGATIONS 

(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) 

BUDGET HOUSE 

REQUEST RECOMMENDED 

ILLINOIS 

DU PAGE RIVER, IL 300 300 

INTERBASIN CONTROL OF GREAT LAKES-MISSISSIPPI RIVER AQUATIC NUISANCE 

SPECIES, IL, IN, OH & WI 1,850 1,850 

IOWA 

GRAND RIVER BASIN, lA & MO 1,000 1,000 

MARYLAND 

CITY OF BALTIMORE, MD 200 200 

NEW JERSEY 

NEW JERSEY BACK BAYS, NJ 449 449 

NEW MEXICO 

ESPANOLA VALLEY, RIO GRANDE AND TRIBUTARIES, NM 65 65 

NEW YORK 

HUDSON RIVER HABITAT RESTORATION, NY 800 800 

NORTH DAKOTA 

SOURIS RIVER, ND 400 400 

OKLAHOMA 

ARKANSAS RIVER CORRIDOR, OK 235 23S 

OREGON 

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 20241MPLEMENTATION, OR & WA 9,500 9,500 

PUERTO RICO 

SAN JUAN HARBOR CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT, PR 400 400 

RHODE ISLAND 

RHODE ISLAND COASTLINE, Rl 300 300 
21 


Insert graphic folio 22 here 23912A.005

CORPS OF ENGINEERS- INVESTIGATIONS 

(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) 

TEXAS 

COASTAL TEXAS PROTECTION AND RESTORATION STUDY, TX 

GIWW- BRAZOS RIVER FLOODGATES & COLORADO RIVER LOCK, TX 

HOUSTON SHIP CHANNEL, TX 

JEFFERSON COUNTY SHORE PROTECTION, TX 

MATAGORDA SHIP CHANNEL, TX 

RESACAS AT BROWNSVILLE, TX 

VIRGINIA 

ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AT NORTH LANDING, 

VA 

CITY OF NORFOLK, VA 

SUBTOTAL, PROJECTS LISTED UNDER STATES 

REMAINING ITEMS 

ADDITIONAL FUNDING 

FLOOD AND STORM DAMAGE REDUCTION 

FLOOD CONTROL 

SHORE PROTECTION 

NAVIGATION 

COASTAL AND DEEP-DRAFT 

INLAND 

OTHER AUTHORIZED PROJECT PURPOSES 

ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION OR COMPLIANCE 

COORDINATION STUDIES WITH OTHER AGENCIES 

ACCESS TO WATER DATA 

COMMITTEE ON MARINE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS 

OTHER COORDINATION PROGRAMS 

COORDINATION WITH OTHER WATER RESOURCE AGENCIES 

INTERAGENCY AND INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT 

INTERAGENCY WATER RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT 

INVENTORY OF DAMS 

SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS 

FERC LICENSING 

PLANNING ASSISTANCE TO STATES 

COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA 

AUTOMATED INFORMATION SYSTEMS SUPPORTTRI-CADD 

COASTAL FIELD DATA COLLECTION 

ENVIRONMENTAL DATA STUDIES 

FLOOD DAMAGE DATA 

FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT SERVICES 

HYDROLOGIC STUDIES 

INTERNATIONAL WATER STUDIES 

BUDGET 

REQUEST 

2,175 

900 

1,500 

516 

800 

251 

600 

700 

32,586 

360 

50 

400 

400 

100 

400 

1,000 

100 

5,000 

250 

1,000 

80 

230 

15,000 

500 

125 

HOUSE 

RECOMMENDED 

2,175 

900 

1,500 

516 

800 

251 

600 

700 

32,586 

1,750 

2,250 

1,500 

2,500 

2,500 

2,500 

2,000 

1,000 

360 

50 

400 

400 

100 

400 

1,000 

100 

6,000 

250 

1,000 

80 

230 

15,000 

500 

125 
22 


Insert graphic folio 23 here 23912A.006

PRECIPITATION STUDIES 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS INVESTIGATIONS 

(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) 

REMOTE SENSING/GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM SUPPORT 

SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL INFORMATION CENTERS 

STREAM GAGING 

TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS 

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT 

OTHER- MISCELLANEOUS 

DISPOSITION OF COMPLETED PROJECTS 

NATIONAL FLOOD RISK MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 

NATIONAL SHORELINE MANAGEMENT STUDY 

PLANNING SUPPORT PROGRAM 

TRIBAL PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM 

SUBTOTAL, REMAINING ITEMS 

TOTAL, INVESTIGATIONS 

BUDGET HOUSE 

REQUEST RECOMMENDED 

200 200 

7S 75 

50 50 

550 550 

1,000 1,000 

16,145 17,644 

1,000 1,000 

5,000 5,000 

400 400 

3,500 3,500 

500 1,000 

53,415 72,414 

86,001 105,000 
23 

Mid-Chesapeake Bay Island Project (James and Barren Islands), 

Maryland.—The Committee understands that the Corps must complete and approve its Baltimore Harbor and Channels Dredged Material Management Plan Update prior to budgeting for the MidChesapeake Bay Island Project (James and Barren Islands). The 

Corps is encouraged to complete the Plan Update expeditiously. 

Passaic River Basin Mainstem, New Jersey.—The Committee is 

aware that flooding has long been a problem in the Passaic River 

Basin. The Committee encourages the Corps to continue to work in 

coordination with the non-federal sponsor on plans to reduce flooding in the basin, including the reevaluation of the Passaic River 

Basin Mainstem project. 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. 

Peckman River, New Jersey.—The Committee is aware of repeated delays with the Peckman River Feasibility Study. The 

Corps is directed to provide to the Committee quarterly briefings 

on the current schedule to bring this study to completion, with the 

first briefing to occur not later than 30 days after the enactment 

of this Act. 

Chacon Creek, Texas.—The Corps has multiple authorities to provide technical assistance to non-federal entities. The Committee encourages the Corps to review these authorities to identify opportunities to help advance the Chacon Creek, Texas, study, for which 

the Corps executed a feasibility cost sharing agreement in 2004. 

Additional Funding.—The Corps is expected to allocate the additional funding provided in this account primarily to specific feasibility and PED phases, rather than to Remaining Items line items 

as had been the case in previous work plans. The activities funded 

under Remaining Items address core agency competencies, which 

means the budget request should reflect sufficient funding. When 

allocating the additional funding provided in this account, the 

Corps shall consider giving priority to 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 that protect life and property; or are for projects to address legal requirements. The Corps 

shall use these funds for additional work in both the feasibility and 

PED phases. The recommendation includes sufficient additional 

funding to undertake a significant amount of feasibility and PED 

work. The Administration is reminded that a project study is not 

complete until the PED phase is complete. 

Research and Development.—Within the funding provided, the 

Corps is encouraged to advance work to evaluate conservation 

methods to restore riverine ecosystems and to expand environmental monitoring and modeling. 

Research and Development, Partnerships.—The Corps is an instrumental partner in controlling aquatic nuisance species in our 

nation’s waterways, including the Columbia River Basin with 

twelve listed salmon and steelhead species and more than 

$3,000,000,000 of goods transported for delivery around the world. 

The Committee recognizes the economic and environmental benefits of the Columbia River Basin and urges the Corps to utilize 

24 

local and regional research partners, as appropriate, to address this 

serious issue. 

Disposition of Completed Projects.—The Corps shall notify the 

Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress not less 

than 7 days prior to execution of a transfer of any Corps facilities 

that closed as a result of Public Law 113–121. 

Water Resources Priorities Study.—No funding shall be used for 

this study. 

Impacts on Oyster Reefs.—The Committee supports Corps efforts, 

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. 

Levee Improvements.—Where Corps-owned levees are hydraulically tied to community-owned levees, particularly where FEMA 

levee accreditation is a concern, the Corps is encouraged to cooperate with non-federal sponsors on ways to implement necessary improvements to the federal project. 

Flood Control and Wastewater Treatment Facilities.—In fiscal 

year 2017, the Corps was directed to provide a briefing regarding 

activities to address concerns about flooding and wastewater treatment facilities. The Committee may have additional direction after 

that briefing occurs. 

SMART Planning.—The Committee has heard concerns that the 

Corps is not adequately adhering to its three-year SMART planning criteria. These criteria were established to ensure the Corps 

was completing feasibility studies in a timely manner. Not later 

than 120 days after the enactment of this Act, the Corps shall provide to the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress a report outlining the status of all studies subject to the 

three-year SMART planning criteria. The report shall include, for 

any studies the Corps does not expect to complete within three 

years, a plan for completing the study or an explanation of why the 

study should not be considered under the three-year SMART planning criteria, as well as an accounting of non-federal funds expended to date. 

Value of Agricultural Land.—The Committee has heard concerns 

that the Corps is not accurately estimating the total cost of potential damages when calculating a project’s benefit-cost ratio. While 

health and safety are vital to these calculations, the Corps has 

statutory authority to include other economic factors. Some nonfederal sponsors believe the Corps has undervalued agricultural 

land by failing to account for the value of future crops that cannot 

be harvested and environmental mitigation practices that prevent 

food safety issues following contamination by floodwaters, particularly with respect to high value fruits and vegetables that are often 

sold directly to consumers or to organic production, which relies on 

producers meeting various environmental standards. 

25 

CONSTRUCTION

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $1,876,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 1,020,000,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 1,697,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... ¥179,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ +677,000,000 

This appropriation funds construction, major rehabilitation, and 

related activities for water resource projects whose principal purpose is to provide commercial navigation, flood and storm damage 

reduction, or aquatic ecosystem restoration benefits to the nation. 

Portions of this account are funded from the Harbor Maintenance 

Trust Fund and the Inland Waterways Trust Fund. 

The budget request for this account and the approved Committee 

allowance are shown on the following table: 

26 


Insert graphic folio 26 here 23912A.007

CORPS OF ENGINEERS- CONSTRUCTION 

(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) 

CALIFORNIA 

AMERICAN RIVER COMMON FEATURES, NATOMA$ BASIN,CA 

AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED (FOLSOM DAM RAISE), CA 

HAMILTON CITY, CA 

ISABELLA LAKE, CA (DAM SAFETY) 

SACRAMENTO RIVER BANK PROTECTION PROJECT, CA 

SANTA ANA RIVER MAINSTEM, CA 

YUBA RIVER BASIN, CA 

FLORIDA 

HERBERT HOOVER DIKE, FL (SEEPAGE CONTROL) 

SOUTH FLORIDA ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, FL 

GEORGIA 

SAVANNAH HARBOR EXPANSION, GA 

ILLINOIS 

OLMSTED LOCKS AND DAM, OHIO RIVER, IL & KY 

UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER RESTORATION, IL, lA, MN, MO & WI 

IOWA 

MISSOURI RIVER FISH AND WILDLIFE RECOVERY, lA, KS, MO, MT, NE, ND & SD 

KENTUCKY 

ROUGH RIVER LAKE, KY 

MARYLAND 

POPLAR ISLAND, MD 

MASSACHUSETTS 

BOSTON HARBOR DEEP DRAFT IMPROVEMENTS, MA 

NEW JERSEY 

RARITAN RIVER BASIN, GREEN BROOK SUB-BASIN, NJ 

OREGON 

COLUMBIA RIVER AT THE MOUTH, OR & WA 

BUDGET HOUSE 

REQUEST RECOMMENDED 

20,550 20,550 

5,775 5,775 

8,325 8,325 

58,000 58,000 

2,780 2,780 

40,000 40,000 

12,400 12,400 

82,000 82,000 

76,500 76,500 

50,060 50,060 

175,000 175,000 

33,170 33,170 

30,000 30,000 

25,000 25,000 

36,250 36,250 

58,000 58,000 

20,000 20,000 

22,000 22,000 
27 


Insert graphic folio 27 here 23912A.008

CORPS OF ENGINEERS- CONSTRUCTION 

(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) 

PENNSYLVANIA 

EAST BRANCH CLARION RIVER LAKE, PA 

TENNESSEE 

CENTER HILL LAKE, TN 

TEXAS 

BUFFALO BAYOU AND TRIBUTARIES, TX 

WASHINGTON 

COLUMBIA RIVER FISH MITIGATION, WA, OR & ID (CRFM) 

MUD MOUNTAIN DAM, WA 

WEST VIRGINIA 

BLUESTONE LAKE, WV 

SUBTOTAL, PROJECTS LISTED UNDER STATES 

REMAINING ITEMS 

ADDITIONAL FUNDING 

FLOOD AND STORM DAMAGE REDUCTION 

FLOOD CONTROL 

SHORE PROTECTION 

NAVIGATION 

INLAND WATERWAYS TRUST FUND REVENUES 

OTHER AUTHORIZED PROJECT PURPOSES 

ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION OR COMPLIANCE 

ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE 

AQUATIC PLANT CONTROL PROGRAM 

CONTINUING AUTHORITIES PROGRAM 

AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION (SECTION 206) 

BENEFICIAL USES DREDGED MATERIAL (SECTION 204) 

EMERGENCY STREAMBANK AND SHORELINE PROTECTION (SECTION 14) 

FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS (SECTION 205) 

MITIGATION OF SHORE DAMAGES (SECTION 111) 

NAVIGATION PROGRAM (SECTION 107) 

PROJECT MODIFICATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT 

(SECTION 1135) 

SHORE PROTECTION (SECTION 103) 

DAM SAFETY AND SEEPAGE/STABILITY CORRECTION PROGRAM 

EMPLOYEES' COMPENSATION 

BUDGET HOUSE 

REQUEST RECOMMENDED 

SO,lOO S0,100 

28,930 28,930 

16,500 16,500 

70,000 70,000 

33,600 33,600 

4,425 4,42S 

959,365 959,365 

114,500 

175,000 

75,000 

160,7SO 

78,750 

25,000 

15,000 

10,000 

5,000 

6,500 6,500 

500 soo 

3,000 

1,000 8,000 

500 

7,000 

1,000 1,000 

500 

34,300 34,300 

17,000 17,000 
28 


Insert graphic folio 28 here 23912A.009

CORPS OF ENGINEERS- CONSTRUCTION 

(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) 

INLAND WATERWAYS USERS BOARD- BOARD EXPENSE 

INLAND WATERWAYS USERS BOARD- CORPS EXPENSE 

SUBTOTAL, REMAINING ITEMS 

TOTAL, CONSTRUCTION 

BUDGET 

REQUEST 

60 

275 

60,635 

1,020,000 

HOUSE 

RECOMMENDED 

60 

275 

737,635 

1,697,000 
29 

Success Dam, California.—In fiscal years 2016 and 2017, the 

Committee raised the importance of the Corps moving expeditiously on this project to increase the reservoir capacity and complete the necessary safety reviews of the dam. Final resolution of 

the safety status of the dam is required in order for the reservoir 

to be enlarged. The Committee is aware that the Senior Oversight 

Group review of the dam safety analysis is scheduled for March 

2018. The Committee strongly urges the Corps to complete the 

safety assessment of the dam by this time as detailed in House Report 114–532 and continue to expeditiously move ahead with the 

enlargement project, as detailed in House Report 114–91. 

Chesapeake Bay Oyster Recovery, Maryland and Virginia.—The 

Committee urges the Corps to consider species selection for disease 

resistance and survivability as part of oyster recovery in the Chesapeake Bay and to support development of substrate as a substitute 

for oyster shell, including competitively awarded contracts for research and development, as appropriate. 

New Jersey and New York Harbor Deepening Project.—The Committee is encouraged by the work of the Corps and its local partners to bring the construction of the New Jersey and New York 

Harbor Deepening Project to completion. This project of national 

significance is an example of how the Corps and its partners can 

work together to enhance our national economy. 

Can ̃ o Martı ́n Pen ̃a, Puerto Rico.—The Committee notes the 

progress achieved in recent years to advance the Can ̃ o Martı ́n Pen ̃ a 

environmental restoration project in San Juan, Puerto Rico. A recent report indicated that this project can provide a significant return on investment in terms of improving the economy, protecting 

public health, and restoring the natural environment in Puerto 

Rico. The Corps is encouraged to include appropriate funding in future budget requests. 

Additional Funding.—The recommendation includes additional 

funds for projects and activities to enhance the nation’s economic 

growth and international competitiveness. Of the additional funds 

provided in this account, the Corps shall allocate not less than 

$12,450,000 to projects with riverfront development components. Of 

the additional funding provided in this account for flood and storm 

damage reduction and flood control, the Corps shall allocate not 

less than $18,000,000 to additional nonstructural flood control 

projects. Of the additional funds provided in this account for flood 

and storm damage reduction, navigation, and other authorized 

project purposes, the Corps shall allocate not less than $10,000,000 

to authorized reimbursements for projects with executed project cooperation agreements and that have completed construction or 

where non-federal sponsors intend to use the funds for additional 

water resources development activities. Of the additional funding 

provided in this account for flood and storm damage reduction and 

flood control, the Corps shall allocate not less than $13,900,000 to 

continue construction of projects that principally include improvements to rainfall drainage systems that address flood damages. 

The Corps is reminded that dam safety projects authorized under 

section 5003 of the Water Resources Development Act of 2007 are 

eligible to compete for the additional funding provided in this account. 

30 

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: 

1. benefits of the funded work to the national economy; 

2. extent to which the work will enhance national, regional, 

or local economic development; 

3. number of jobs created directly by the funded activity; 

4. ability to obligate the funds allocated within the fiscal 

year, including consideration of the ability of the non-federal 

sponsor to provide any required cost share; 

5. ability to complete the project, separable element, or 

project phase with the funds allocated; 

6. for flood and storm damage reduction projects (including 

authorized nonstructural measures and periodic beach renourishments), 

a. population, economic activity, or public infrastructure 

at risk, as appropriate; and 

b. the severity of risk of flooding or the frequency with 

which an area has experienced flooding; 

7. 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; 

8. 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; 

9. for projects cost shared with the Inland Waterways Trust 

Fund (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; 

10. for other authorized project purposes and environmental 

restoration or compliance projects, to include the beneficial use 

of dredged material; and 

11. for environmental infrastructure, projects with the greater economic impact, projects in rural communities, projects in 

communities with significant shoreline and instances of runoff, 

projects in or that benefit counties or parishes with high poverty rates, and projects in financially distressed municipalities. 

The recommendation provides funds making use of all estimated 

annual revenues in the IWTF. The Corps shall allocate all funds 

provided 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. 

Aquatic Plant Control Program.—Funding is provided for 

watercraft inspection stations, as authorized by section 1039 of the 

Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014, and related 

monitoring. 

Continuing Authorities Program (CAP).—The Committee continues to support all sections of the Continuing Authorities Program. Funding is provided for eight CAP sections at a total of 

$27,000,000, an increase of $18,000,000 above the budget request, 

which proposed funding for only four sections. This program proVerDate Sep 11 2014 11:46 Jul 18, 2017 Jkt 026261 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR230.XXX HR230
31 

vides a useful tool for the Corps to undertake small localized 

projects without the lengthy study and authorization process typical of larger Corps projects. Within the Continuing Authorities 

Program and to the extent authorized by section 1150 of the WIIN 

Act, the Corps is encouraged to consider projects in regions comprised of cities whose historic flooding has been caused predominantly by winter snowmelt and ice floes. The management of the 

Continuing Authorities Program should continue consistent with 

direction provided in previous fiscal years. 

Energy Ports.—The Committee recognizes that increases in domestic energy production and the repeal of the oil export ban have 

resulted in increased maritime transport of energy commodities. 

The Corps is encouraged to consider these developments and national energy priorities in supporting authorized projects at energy 

transfer ports. 

MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $362,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 253,000,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 301,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... ¥61,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ +48,000,000 

This appropriation funds planning, construction, and operation 

and maintenance activities associated with projects to reduce flood 

damage in the lower Mississippi River alluvial valley below Cape 

Girardeau, Missouri. 

The budget request for this account and the approved Committee 

allowance are shown on the following table: 

32 


Insert graphic folio 31 here 23912A.010

CORPS OF ENGINEERS MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES 

(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) 

BUDGET HOUSE 

REQUEST RECOMMENDED 

CONSTRUCTION 

CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO & TN 80,111 80,111 

MISSISSIPPI RIVER LEVEES, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO & TN 25,750 25,750 

ATCHAFALA VA BASIN, LA 1,500 1,500 

ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, FLOODWAY SYSTEM, LA 650 650 

OPERATION & MAINTENANCE 

CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO & TN 58,894 58,894 

HELENA HARBOR, PHILLIPS COUNTY, AR 915 915 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AR 421 421 

LOWER ARKANSAS RIVER, NORTH BANK, AR 235 235 

LOWER ARKANSAS RIVER, SOUTH BANK, AR 158 1S8 

MISSISSIPPI RIVER LEVEES, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO & TN 9,917 9,917 

ST FRANCIS BASIN, AR & MO 5,900 5,900 

TENSAS BASIN, BOEUF AND TENSAS RIVERS, AR & LA 1,987 1,987 

WHITE RIVER BACKWATER, AR 900 900 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IL 27 27 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, KY 20 20 

ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, LA 13,639 13,639 

ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, FLOODWAY SYSTEM, LA 1,807 1,807 

BATON ROUGE HARBOR, DEVIL SWAMP, LA 543 543 

BAYOU COCODRIE AND TRIBUTARIES, LA 36 36 

BONNET CARRE, LA 1,960 1,960 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, LA 725 725 

LOWER RED RIVER, SOUTH BANK LEVEES, LA 398 398 

MISSISSIPPI DELTA REGION, LA 381 381 

OLD RIVER, LA 6,384 6,384 

TENSAS BASIN, RED RIVER BACKWATER, LA 2,608 2,608 

GREENVILLE HARBOR, MS 1,000 1,000 

INSPECTION Of COMPLETED WORKS, MS 180 180 

VICKSBURG HARBOR, MS 750 750 

YAZOO BASIN, ARKABUTLA LAKE, MS 5,610 5,610 

YAZOO BASIN, BIG SUNFLOWER RIVER, MS 135 135 

YAZOO BASIN, ENID LAKE, MS 5,145 5,145 

YAZOO BASIN, GREENWOOD, MS 644 644 

YAZOO BASIN, GRENADA LAKE, MS 4,794 4,794 

YAZOO BASIN, MAIN STEM, MS 943 943 

YAZOO BASIN, SARDIS LAKE, MS 5,901 5,901 

YAZOO BASIN, TRIBUTARIES, MS 773 773 

YAZOO BASIN, WILL M WHIITINGTON AUX CHAN, MS 307 307 

YAZOO BASIN, YAZOO BACKWATER AREA, M5 369 369 

YAZOO BASIN, YAZOO CITY, MS 584 584 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MO 165 165 

WAPPAPELLO LAKE, MO 4,206 4,206 
33 


Insert graphic folio 32 here 23912A.011

CORPS OF ENGINEERS- MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES 

(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) 

BUDGET 

REQUEST 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, TN 

MEMPHIS HARBOR, MCKELLAR LAKE, TN 

SUBTOTAL, PROJECTS LISTED UNDER STATES 

REMAINING ITEMS 

ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR ONGOING WORK 

DREDGING 

FLOOD CONTROL 

OTHER AUTHORIZED PROJECT PURPOSES 

COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA (INVESTIGATIONS) 

MAPPING (MAINTENANCE) 

MISSISSIPPI RIVER COMMISSION 

SUBTOTAL, REMAINING ITEMS 

TOTAL, MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES 

33 

1,666 

249,071 

2,700 

1,139 

90 

3,929 

253,000 

HOUSE 

RECOMMENDED 

33 

1,666 

249,071 

3,090 

32,000 

13,000 

2,700 

1,139 

51,929 

301,000 
34 

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 continues to fund these activities as separate line items. 

Additional Funding for Ongoing Work.—When allocating the additional funding provided 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 are for 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. 

Mississippi River Commission.—No funding is provided for this 

new line item. The Corps is directed to continue funding the costs 

of the commission from within the funds provided for activities 

within the Mississippi River and Tributaries project. 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $3,149,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 3,100,000,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 3,519,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... +370,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ +419,000,000 

This appropriation funds operation, maintenance, and related activities at water resource projects the Corps operates and maintains. Work to be accomplished consists of dredging, repair, and operation of structures and other facilities as authorized in various 

River and Harbor, Flood Control, and Water Resources Development Acts. Related activities include aquatic plant control, monitoring of completed projects, removal of sunken vessels, and the 

collection of domestic, waterborne commerce statistics. Portions of 

this account are financed through the Harbor Maintenance Trust 

Fund. 

The budget request for this account and the approved Committee 

allowance are shown on the following table: 

35 


Insert graphic folio 34 here 23912A.012

ALABAMA RIVER LAKES, AL 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS- OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 

(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) 

ALABAMA 

BLACK WARRIOR AND TOMBIGBEE RIVERS, AL 

GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, AL 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AL 

MOBILE HARBOR, AL 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, AL 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, AL 

TENNESSEE- TOM BIGBEE WATERWAY WILDLIFE MITIGATION, AL & MS 

TENNESSEE- TOM BIGBEE WATERWAY, AL & MS 

WALTER F GEORGE LOCK AND DAM, AL & GA 

WATER/ENVIRONMENTAL CERTIFICATION, AL 

ANCHORAGE HARBOR, AK 

CHENA RIVER LAKES, AK 

CHIGNIK HARBOR, AK 

DILLINGHAM HARBOR, AK 

DOUGLAS HARBOR, AK 

HOMER HARBOR, AK 

ALASKA 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AK 

NINILCHIK HARBOR, AK 

NOME HARBOR, AK 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, AK 

ARIZONA 

ALAMO LAKE, AZ 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, Al 

PAINTED ROCK DAM, AZ 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, AZ 

WHITLOW RANCH DAM, AZ 

ARKANSAS 

BEAVER LAKE, AR 

BLAKELY MT DAM, LAKE OUACHITA, AR 

BLUE MOUNTAIN LAKE, AR 

BULL SHOALS LAKE, AR 

DEGRAY LAKE, AR 

DE QUEEN LAKE, AR 

DIERKS LAKE, AR 

GILLHAM LAKE, AR 

GREERS FERRY LAKE, AR 

HELENA HARBOR, AR 

BUDGET HOUSE 

REQUEST RECOMMENDED 

15,392 15,392 

27,217 27,217 

6,534 6,534 

210 210 

24.450 24,450 

149 149 

83 83 

1,751 1,751 

29.499 29,499 

9,653 9,653 

80 80 

10,260 10,260 

8,038 8,038 

150 150 

850 850 

300 300 

600 600 

200 200 

550 550 

2,365 2,365 

750 750 

2,027 2,027 

85 85 

1,139 1,139 

102 102 

784 784 

8,907 8,907 

7,803 7,803 

1,883 1,883 

11,427 11,427 

7,060 7,060 

1,708 1,708 

1,778 1,778 

1,527 1,527 

8,016 8,016 

15 15 
36 


Insert graphic folio 35 here 23912A.013

CORPS OF ENGINEERS- OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 

(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AR 

MCClEllAN-KERR ARKANSAS RIVER NAVIGATION SYSTEM, AR 

MillWOOD LAKE, AR 

NARROWS DAM, lAKE GREESON, AR 

NIMROD lAKE, AR 

NORFORK LAKE, AR 

OSCEOLA HARBOR, AR 

OUACHITA AND BLACK RIVERS, AR & LA 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, AR 

WHITE RIVER, AR 

YELLOW BEND PORT, AR 

CALIFORNIA 

BlACK BUTTE lAKE, CA 

BUCHANAN DAM, HV EASTMAN lAKE, CA 

CHANNEL ISLANDS HARBOR, CA 

COYOTE VALLEY DAM, lAKE MENDOCINO, CA 

DRY CREEK (WARM SPRINGS) lAKE AND CHANNEL, CA 

FARMINGTON DAM, CA 

HIDDEN DAM, HENSLEY lAKE, CA 

HUMBOLDT HARBOR AND BAY, CA 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, CA 

ISABELLA LAKE, CA 

LOS ANGELES- LONG BEACH HARBORS, CA 

LOS ANGELES COUNTY DRAINAGE AREA, CA 

MERCED COUNTY STREAMS, CA 

MOJAVE RIVER DAM, CA 

MORRO BAY HARBOR, CA 

NEW HOGAN lAKE, CA 

NEW MELONES lAKE, DOWNSTREAM CHANNEL, CA 

OAKLAND HARBOR (50 FOOT PROJECT), CA 

OCEANSIDE HARBOR, CA 

PINE FlAT lAKE, CA 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, CA 

RICHMOND HARBOR, CA 

SACRAMENTO RIVER (30 FOOT PROJECT), CA 

SACRAMENTO RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES (DEBRIS CONTROL), CA 

SACRAMENTO RIVER SHALLOW DRAFT CHANNEL, CA 

SAN FRANCISCO BAY DELTA MODEL STRUCTURE, CA 

SAN FRANCISCO BAY LONG TERM MANAGEMENT STRATEGY, CA 

SAN FRANCISCO HARBOR AND BAY, CA (DRIFT REMOVAL) 

SAN FRANCISCO HARBOR, CA 

SAN JOAQUIN RIVER, PORT OF STOCKTON, CA 

SAN PABLO BAY AND MARE ISLAND STRAIT, CA 

SANTA ANA RIVER BASIN, CA 

SANTA BARBARA HARBOR, CA 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, CA 

BUDGET HOUSE 

REQUEST RECOMMENDED 

458 458 

47,467 47,467 

7,362 7,362 

5,908 5,908 

2,068 2,068 

9,549 9,549 

515 515 

10,548 10,548 

1 1 

25 25 

115 115 

2,905 2,905 

2,318 2,318 

6,400 6,400 

3,841 3,841 

6,470 6,470 

617 617 

2,518 2,518 

5,500 5,500 

3,962 3,962 

3,538 3,S38 

4,470 4,470 

17,982 17,982 

810 810 

1,305 1,305 

2,200 2,200 

3,262 3,262 

2,517 2,517 

17,993 17,993 

2,350 2,350 

10,075 10,075 

1,433 1,433 

10,800 10,800 

1,200 1,200 

1,725 1,725 

175 175 

1,565 1,565 

600 600 

3,500 3,500 

3,700 3,700 

3,225 3,225 

5,075 5,075 

5,579 5,579 

3,080 3,080 

1,391 1,391 
37 


Insert graphic folio 36 here 23912A.014

SUCCESS lAKE, CA 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS~ OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 

(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) 

SUISUN BAY CHANNEL, CA 

TERMINUS DAM, lAKE KAWEAH, CA 

VENTURA HARBOR, CA 

YUBA RIVER, CA 

BEAR CREEK lAKE, CO 

CHATFIELD lAKE, CO 

CHERRY CREEK lAKE, CO 

COLORADO 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, CO 

JOHN MARTIN RESERVOIR, CO 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, CO 

TRINIDAD lAKE, CO 

BlACK ROCK lAKE, CT 

COLEBROOK RIVER lAKE, CT 

GREENWICH HARBOR, CT 

HANCOCK BROOK lAKE, CT 

HOP BROOK lAKE, CT 

CONNECTICUT 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, CT 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, CT 

MANSFIELD HOLLOW lAKE, CT 

NORTHFIELD BROOK lAKE, CT 

PATCHOGUE RIVER, CT 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, CT 

STAMFORD HURRICANE BARRIER, CT 

THOMASTON DAM, CT 

WEST THOMPSON LAKE, CT 

DELAWARE 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, DE 

INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, DElAWARE RIVER TO CHESAPEAKE BAY, DE & MD 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, DE 

WILMINGTON HARBOR, DE 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, DC 

POTOMAC AND ANACOSTIA RIVERS, DC (DRIFT REMOVAL) 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, DC 

WASHINGTON HARBOR, DC 

BUDGET HOUSE 

REQUEST RECOMMENDED 

3,454 3,454 

7,800 7,800 

5,950 5,950 

5,163 5,163 

1,519 1,519 

476 476 

2,105 2,105 

1,155 1,155 

352 352 

9,216 9,216 

646 646 

5,155 5,155 

815 815 

1,237 1,237 

300 300 

731 731 

1,562 1,562 

10 10 

461 461 

1,461 1,461 

730 730 

400 400 

850 850 

784 784 

1,892 1,892 

1,033 1,033 

65 65 

15,585 15,585 

200 200 

8,085 8,085 

76 76 

875 875 

25 25 

25 25 
38 


Insert graphic folio 37 here 23912A.015

CORPS OF ENGINEERS- OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 

(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) 

FLORIDA 

ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY (AIWW), FL 

CALOOSAHATCHEE RIVER TO ANCLOTE, FL 

CANAVERAL HARBOR, FL 

CENTRAL & SOUTHERN FLORIDA, FL 

ESCAMBIA AND CONECUH RIVERS, FL & AL 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, FL 

INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, CALOOSAHATCHEE R TO ANCLOTE R, FL 

INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, JACKSONVILLE TO MIAMI, FL 

JACKSONVILLE HARBOR, FL 

JIM WOODRUFF LOCK AND DAM, LAKE SEMINOLE, FL, AL & GA 

MANATEE HARBOR, FL 

MIAMI HARBOR, FL 

OKEECHOBEE WATERWAY, FL 

PALM BEACH HARBOR, FL 

PANAMA CITY HARBOR, FL 

PENSACOLA HARBOR, FL 

PORT EVERGLADES HARBOR, FL 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, FL 

REMOVAL OF AQUATIC GROWTH, FL 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, FL 

TAMPA HARBOR, FL 

WATER/ENVIRONMENTAL CERTIFICATION, FL 

GEORGIA 

ALLATOONA LAKE, GA 

APALACHICOLA, CHATIAHOOCHEE AND FLINT RIVERS, GA, AL & FL 

ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, GA 

BRUNSWICK HARBOR, GA 

BUFORD DAM AND LAKE SIDNEY LANIER, GA 

CARTERS DAM AND LAKE, GA 

HARTWELL LAKE, GA & SC 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, GA 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, GA 

J STROM THURMOND LAKE, GA & SC 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, GA 

RICHARD B RUSSELL DAM AND LAKE, GA & SC 

SAVANNAH HARBOR, GA 

SAVANNAH RIVER BELOW AUGUSTA, GA 

WEST POINT DAM AND LAKE, GA & AL 

BARBERS POINT HARBOR, HI 

HILO HARBOR, HI 

HAWAII 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, HI 

BUDGET HOUSE 

REQUEST RECOMMENDED 

2,224 2,224 

52 52 

1,470 1,470 

24,858 24,858 

55 55 

958 958 

50 50 

3,560 3,560 

7,690 7,690 

6,874 6,874 

900 900 

100 100 

2,692 2,692 

4,000 4,000 

1,890 1,890 

34 34 

420 420 

1,375 1,375 

3,259 3,259 

99 99 

8,290 8,290 

170 170 

10,464 10,464 

1,845 1,845 

181 181 

4,528 4,528 

11,165 11,165 

8,587 8,587 

12,752 12,752 

15 15 

277 277 

12,002 12,002 

100 100 

9,003 9,003 

33,436 33,436 

137 137 

12,147 12,147 

269 269 

551 551 

698 698 
39 


Insert graphic folio 38 here 23912A.016

CORPS OF ENGINEERS- OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 

(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) 

NAWILIWILI HARBOR, HI 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, HI 

IDAHO 

ALBEN I FALLS DAM, ID 

DWORSHAK DAM AND RESERVOIR, ID 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, ID 

LUCKY PEAK LAKE, ID 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, ID 

ILLINOIS 

CALUMET HARBOR AND RIVER, IL & IN 

CARLYLE LAKE, I L 

CHICAGO HARBOR, IL 

CHICAGO RIVER, IL 

CHICAGO SANITARY AND SHIP CANAL DISPERSAL BARRIER, IL 

FARM CREEK RESERVOIRS, IL 

ILLINOIS WATERWAY (MVR PORTION), IL & IN 

ILLINOIS WATERWAY (MVS PORTION), IL & IN 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, IL 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IL 

KASKASKIA RIVER NAVIGATION, IL 

LAKE MICHIGAN DIVERSION, IL 

LAKE SHELBYVILLE, IL 

MISSISSIPPI RIVER BETWEEN MISSOURI RIVER AND MINNEAPOLIS (MVR 

PORTION), IL 

MISSISSIPPI RIVER BETWEEN MISSOURI RIVER AND MINNEAPOLIS (MVS 

PORTION), IL 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, IL 

REND LAKE, IL 

SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, IL 

WAUKEGAN HARBOR, IL 

BROOKVILLE LAKE, IN 

BURNS WATERWAY HARBOR, IN 

CAGLE$ MILL LAKE, IN 

CECIL M HARDEN LAKE, IN 

INDIANA HARBOR, IN 

INDIANA 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IN 

J EDWARD ROUSH LAKE, IN 

MISSISSINEWA LAKE, IN 

MONROE LAKE, IN 

PATOKA LAKE, IN 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, IN 

BUDGET HOUSE 

REQUEST RECOMMENDED 

4,815 4,815 

752 752 

1,459 1,459 

4,795 4,795 

337 337 

3,698 3,698 

627 627 

3,808 3,808 

6,748 6,748 

3,020 3,020 

593 593 

16,700 16,700 

529 529 

48,384 48,384 

1,958 1,958 

55 55 

1,654 1,654 

4,889 4,889 

1,100 1,100 

8,835 8,835 

93,953 93,953 

43,900 43,900 

104 104 

7,593 7,593 

738 738 

2,000 2,000 

1,216 1,216 

3,649 3,649 

1,089 1,089 

1,047 1,047 

11,564 11,564 

1,187 1,187 

1,084 1,084 

1,110 1,110 

1,144 1,144 

1,153 1,153 

185 185 
40 


Insert graphic folio 39 here 23912A.017

SALAMONIE LAKE, IN 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS- OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 

(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) 

SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, IN 

IOWA 

CORALVILLE LAKE, lA 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAl PROJECTS, lA 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, lA 

MISSOURI RIVER SIOUX CITY TO THE MOUTH, lA, KS, MO & NE 

MISSOURI RIVER FISH AND WILDLIFE RECOVERY, lA, KS, MO, MT, NE, ND & SD 

RATHBUN LAKE, lA 

RED ROCK DAM AND LAKE RED ROCK, lA 

SAYLORVILLE LAKE, lA 

CliNTON LAKE, KS 

COUNCIL GROVE LAKE, KS 

El DORADO LAKE, KS 

ElK CITY LAKE, KS 

FAll RIVER LAKE, KS 

HILLSDALE LAKE, KS 

KANSAS 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, KS 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, KS 

JOHN REDMOND DAM AND RESERVOIR, KS 

KANOPOLIS LAKE, KS 

MARION LAKE, KS 

MELVERN LAKE, KS 

MILFORD LAKE, KS 

PEARSON- SKUBITZ BIG HILL LAKE, KS 

PERRY lAKE, KS 

POMONA LAKE, KS 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, KS 

TORONTO LAKE, KS 

TUTTLE CREEK LAKE, KS 

WILSON LAKE, KS 

KENTUCKY 

BARKLEY DAM AND LAKE BARKLEY, KY & TN 

BARREN RIVER LAKE, KY 

BIG SANDY HARBOR, KY 

BUCKHORN LAKE, KY 

CARR CREEK LAKE, KY 

CAVE RUN LAKE, KY 

DEWEY LAKE, KY 

ELVIS STAHR (HICKMAN) HARBOR, KY 

FALLS OF THE OHIO NATIONAL WILDLIFE, KY & IN 

BUDGET HOUSE 

REQUEST RECOMMENDED 

1,091 1,091 

149 149 

9,915 9,915 

6 6 

868 868 

8,964 8,964 

2,547 2,547 

2,788 2,788 

7,095 7,095 

19,223 19,223 

3,662 3,662 

1,743 1,743 

981 981 

1,547 1,547 

1,619 1,619 

1,076 1,076 

11 11 

1,218 1,218 

1,890 1,890 

3,185 3,185 

2,251 2,251 

2,714 2,714 

2,367 2,367 

3,799 3,799 

3,227 3,227 

2,871 2,871 

369 369 

926 926 

3,975 3,975 

1,766 1,766 

12,247 12,247 

3,233 3,233 

1,865 1,865 

1,820 1,820 

1,850 1,850 

962 962 

1,920 1,920 

915 915 

43 43 
41 


Insert graphic folio 40 here 23912A.018

CORPS OF ENGINEERS- OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 

(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) 

FISHTRAP LAKE, KY 

GRAYSON LAKE, KY 

GREEN AND BARREN RIVERS, KY 

GREEN RIVER LAKE, KY 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, KY 

KENTUCKY RIVER, KY 

LAUREL RIVER LAKE, KY 

MARTINS FORK LAKE, KY 

MIDDLESBORO CUMBERLAND RIVER BASIN, KY 

NOLIN LAKE, KY 

OHIO RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS, KY, ll, IN & OH 

OHIO RIVER OPEN CHANNEL WORK, KY, IL, IN & OH 

PAINTSVILLE LAKE, KY 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, KY 

ROUGH RIVER LAKE, KY 

TAYLORSVIllE LAKE, KY 

WOLF CREEK DAM, LAKE CUMBERLAND, KY 

YATESVILLE LAKE, KY 

LOUISIANA 

ATCHAFALAYA RIVER AND BAYOUS CHENE, BOEUF & BLACK, LA 

BARATARIA BAY WATERWAY, LA 

BAYOU BODCAU RESERVOIR, LA 

BAYOU LAFOURCHE AND LAFOURCHE JUMP WATERWAY, LA 

BAYOU PIERRE, LA 

BAYOU SEGNETTE WATERWAY, LA 

BAYOU TECHE AND VERMILION RIVER, LA 

BAYOU TECHE, LA 

CADDO LAKE, LA 

CALCASIEU RIVER AND PASS, LA 

FRESHWATER BAYOU, LA 

GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, LA 

HOUMA NAVIGATION CANAL, LA 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, LA 

J BENNETT JOHNSTON WATERWAY, LA 

LAKE PROVIDENCE HARBOR, LA 

MADISON PARISH PORT, LA 

MERMENTAU RIVER, LA 

MISSISSIPPI RIVER OUTLETS AT VENICE, LA 

MISSISSIPPI RIVER, BATON ROUGE TO THE GULF OF MEXICO, LA 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, LA 

REMOVAL OF AQUATIC GROWTH, LA 

WALLACE LAKE, LA 

WATERWAY FROM EMPIRE TO THE GULF, LA 

WATERWAY FROM INTRACOASTAl WATERWAY TO BAYOU DULAC, LA 

BUDGET HOUSE 

REQUEST RECOMMENDED 

2,190 2,190 

1,972 1,972 

3,420 3,420 

2,917 2,917 

1,271 1,271 

10 10 

2,699 2,699 

1,496 1,496 

264 264 

2,880 2,880 

47,331 47,331 

5,800 5,800 

1,382 1,382 

4,300 4,300 

1,099 1,099 

11,613 11,613 

1,574 1,574 

6,645 6,645 

100 100 

1,512 1,512 

769 769 

42 42 

20 20 

12 12 

50 50 

198 198 

20,759 20,759 

1,424 1,424 

26,871 26,871 

979 979 

866 866 

12,288 12,288 

12 12 

150 150 

1,246 1,246 

1,449 1,449 

83,846 83,846 

54 54 

200 200 

213 213 

8 8 

22 22 
42 


Insert graphic folio 41 here 23912A.019

CORPS OF ENGINEERS- OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 

(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) 

MAINE 

DISPOSAL AREA MONITORING, ME 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, ME 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, ME 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, ME 

SACO RIVER, ME 

SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, ME 

WELLS HARBOR, ME 

YORK HARBOR, ME 

MARYLAND 

BALTIMORE HARBOR AND CHANNELS (SO FOOT), MD 

BALTIMORE HARBOR, MD (DRIFT REMOVAL) 

CUMBERLAND, MD AND RIDGELEY, WV 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MD 

JENNINGS RANDOLPH LAKE, MD & WV 

KNAPP$ NARROWS, MD 

OCEAN CITY HARBOR AND INLET AND SINEPUXENT BAY, MD 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MD 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, MD 

WICOMICO RIVER, MD 

MASSACHUSETTS 

BARRE FALLS DAM, MA 

BIRCH HILL DAM, MA 

BUFFUMVILLE LAKE, MA 

CAPE COD CANAL, MA 

CHARLES RIVER NATURAL VALLEY STORAGE AREA, MA 

CONANT BROOK LAKE, MA 

EAST BRIMFIELD LAKE, MA 

HODGES VILLAGE DAM, MA 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, MA 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MA 

KNIGHTVILLE DAM, MA 

LITTLEVILLE LAKE, MA 

NEW BEDFORD FAIRHAVEN AND ACUSHNET HURRICANE BARRIER, MA 

NEWBURYPORT HARBOR, MA 

PLYMOUTH HARBOR, MA 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MA 

TULLY LAKE, MA 

WEST HILL DAM, MA 

WESTVILLE LAKE, MA 

BUDGET HOUSE 

REQUEST RECOMMENDED 

1,050 1,050 

5 5 

95 95 

1,000 1,000 

4,200 4,200 

30 30 

400 400 

2,500 2,500 

25,557 25,557 

325 325 

171 171 

196 196 

3,700 3,700 

2,300 2,300 

250 250 

450 450 

78 78 

2,000 2,000 

579 579 

841 841 

933 933 

13,753 13,753 

353 353 

495 495 

986 986 

845 845 

20 20 

307 307 

1,054 1,054 

991 991 

1,302 1,302 

200 200 

500 500 

1,000 1,000 

1,145 1,145 

781 781 

1,070 1,070 
43 


Insert graphic folio 42 here 23912A.020

CORPS OF ENGINEERS- OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 

{AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) 

CHANNELS IN LAKE STCLAIR, Ml 

DETROIT RIVER, Ml 

GRAND HAVEN HARBOR, Ml 

HOLLAND HARBOR, Ml 

INLAND ROUTE, Ml 

MICHIGAN 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, Ml 

KEWEENAW WATERWAY, Ml 

MANISTEE HARBOR, Ml 

MONROE HARBOR, Ml 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, Ml 

SAGINAW RIVER, Ml 

SEBEWAING RIVER, Ml 

STCLAIR RIVER, Ml 

ST JOSEPH HARBOR, Ml 

ST MARYS RIVER, Ml 

SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, Ml 

MINNESOTA 

BIGSTONE LAKE- WHETSTONE RIVER, MN & SD 

DULUTH- SUPERIOR HARBOR, MN & WI 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MN 

LAC QUI PARLE LAKES, MINNESOTA RIVER, MN 

MINNESOTA RIVER, MN 

MISSISSIPPI RIVER BETWEEN MISSOURI RIVER AND MINNEAPOLIS {MVP 

PORTION), MN 

ORWELL LAKE, MN 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MN 

RED LAKE RESERVOIR, MN 

RESERVOIRS AT HEADWATERS OF MISSISSIPPI RIVER, MN 

SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, MN 

CLAIBORNE COUNTY PORT, MS 

EAST FORK, TOMBIGBEE RIVER, MS 

GULFPORT HARBOR, MS 

MISSISSIPPI 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MS 

MOUTH OF YAZOO RIVER, MS 

OKATIBBEE LAKE, MS 

PASCAGOULA HARBOR, MS 

PEARL RIVER, MS & LA 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MS 

ROSEDALE HARBOR, MS 

WATER/ENVIRONMENTAL CERTIFICATION, MS 

YAZOO RIVER, MS 

BUDGET HOUSE 

REQUEST RECOMMENDED 

185 185 

5,344 5,344 

1,112 1,112 

1,600 1,600 

50 50 

222 222 

12 12 

663 663 

650 650 

746 746 

4,044 4,044 

54 54 

699 699 

765 765 

38,440 38,440 

2,912 2,912 

290 290 

7,594 7,594 

401 401 

1,115 1,115 

263 263 

84,535 84,535 

592 S92 

96 96 

181 181 

4,924 4,924 

509 509 

285 285 

6,350 6,350 

86 86 

30 30 

2,095 2,095 

5,116 5,116 

150 150 

151 151 

8 8 

40 40 

19 19 
44 


Insert graphic folio 43 here 23912A.021

CORPS OF ENGINEERS- OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 

(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) 

MISSOURI 

CARUTHERSVILLE HARBOR, MO 

ClARENCE CANNON DAM AND MARK TWAIN LAKE, MO 

CLEARWATER lAKE, MO 

HARRY S TRUMAN DAM AND RESERVOIR, MO 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, MO 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MO 

UTILE BLUE RIVER lAKES, MO 

LONG BRANCH lAKE, MO 

MISSISSIPPI RIVER BETWEEN THE OHIO AND MISSOURI RIVERS (REG WORKS), MO 

NEW MADRID COUNTY HARBOR, MO 

NEW MADRID HARBOR, MO (MILE 889) 

POMME DE TERRE LAKE, MO 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MO 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, MO 

SMITHVILLE lAKE, MO 

SOUTHEAST MISSOURI PORT, MISSISSIPPI RIVER, MO 

STOCKTON lAKE, MO 

TABLE ROCK lAKE, MO & AR 

MONTANA 

FT PECK DAM AND lAKE, MT 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MT 

LIBBY DAM, MT 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, MT 

NEBRASKA 

GAVIN$ POINT DAM, LEWIS AND ClARK lAKE, NE & SD 

HARLAN COUNTY LAKE, NE 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, NE 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NE 

MISSOURI RIVER- KENSLERS BEND, NE TO SIOUX CITY, lA 

PAPILLION CREEK, NE 

SALT CREEKS AND TRIBUTARIES, NE 

NEVADA 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NV 

MARTIS CREEK lAKE, NV & CA 

PINE AND MATHEWS CANYONS lAKES, NV 

NEW HAMPSHIRE 

BlACKWATER DAM, NH 

EDWARD MACDOWELL LAKE, NH 

BUDGET HOUSE 

REQUEST RECOMMENDED 

815 

6,994 

4,348 

19,617 

2 

1,305 

1,114 

1,443 

29,948 

10 

15 

3,406 

1 

169 

1,799 

9 

5,754 

10,354 

6,035 

232 

2,726 

121 

11,311 

2,483 

3 

932 

96 

1,000 

1,546 

68 

1,342 

387 

935 

846 

815 

6,994 

4,348 

19,617 

2 

1,305 

1,114 

1,443 

29,948 

10 

15 

3,406 

169 

1,799 

9 

5,754 

10,354 

6,035 

232 

2,726 

121 

11,311 

2,483 

3 

932 

96 

1,000 

1,546 

68 

1,342 

387 

935 

846 
45 


Insert graphic folio 44 here 23912A.022

CORPS OF ENGINEERS- OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 

(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) 

FRANKliN FALLS DAM, NH 

HOPKINTON- EVERETI LAKES, NH 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NH 

OTIER BROOK LAKE, NH 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NH 

SURRY MOUNTAIN LAKE, NH 

ABSECON INLET, NJ 

BARNEGATINLE~NJ 

CAPE MAY INLET, NJ 

COLD SPRING INLET, NJ 

DELAWARE RIVER AT CAMDEN, NJ 

NEW JERSEY 

DELAWARE RIVER, PHILADELPHIA TO THE SEA, NJ, PA & DE 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, NJ 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NJ 

MANASQUAN RIVER, NJ 

NEW JERSEY INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, NJ 

NEWARK BAY, HACKENSACK AND PASSAIC RIVERS, NJ 

PASSAIC RIVER FLOOD WARNING SYSTEMS, NJ 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NJ 

RARITAN RIVER TO ARTHUR KILL CUT-OFF, NJ 

RARITAN RIVER, NJ 

SANDY HOOK BAY AT LEONARD, NJ 

SHARK RIVER, NJ 

SHOAL HARBOR AND COMPTON CREEK, NJ 

SHREWSBURY RIVER, MAIN CHANNEL, NJ 

ABIQUIU DAM, NM 

COCHITI LAKE, NM 

CONCHAS LAKE, NM 

GAliSTEO DAM, NM 

NEW MEXICO 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NM 

JEMEZ CANYON DAM, NM 

MIDDLE RIO GRANDE ENDANGERED SPECIES COLLABORATIVE PROGRAM, NM 

SANTA ROSA DAM AND LAKE, NM 

SCHEDUliNG RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, NM 

TWO RIVERS DAM, NM 

UPPER RIO GRANDE WATER OPERATIONS MODEL STUDY, NM 

ALMOND LAKE, NY 

ARKPORT DAM, NY 

NEW YORK 

BAY RIDGE AND RED HOOK CHANNELS, NY 

BUDGET HOUSE 

REQUEST RECOMMENDED 

1,664 1,664 

2,149 2,149 

60 60 

1,689 1,689 

300 300 

1,191 1,191 

17S 175 

450 450 

200 200 

380 380 

15 15 

27,370 27,370 

15 15 

427 427 

435 435 

980 980 

25,300 25,300 

605 605 

2,017 2,017 

100 100 

220 220 

10 10 

990 990 

10 10 

10 10 

3,437 3,437 

3,178 3,178 

5,769 5,769 

900 900 

652 652 

753 753 

2,500 2,500 

1,583 1,583 

383 383 

592 592 

1,300 1,300 

488 488 

345 345 

50 50 
46 


Insert graphic folio 45 here 23912A.023

CORPS OF ENGINEERS- OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 

(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) 

BLACK ROCK CHANNEL AND TONAWANDA HARBOR, NY 

BRONX RIVER, NY 

BROWNS CREEK, NY 

BUFFALO HARBOR, NY 

BUTTERMILK CHANNEL, NY 

EAST RIVER, NY 

EAST ROCKAWAY INLET, NY 

EAST SIDNEY LAKE, NY 

EASTCHESTER CREEK, NY 

FIRE ISLAND INLET TO JONES INLET, NY 

GLEN COVE CREEK, NY 

GREAT KILLS HARBOR, NY 

GREAT SOUTH BAY, NY 

HUDSON RIVER CHANNEL, NY 

HUDSON RIVER, NY (MAl NT) 

HUDSON RIVER, NY (0 & C) 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NY 

JAMAICA BAY, NY 

JONES INLET, NY 

LAKE MONTAUK HARBOR, NY 

LONG ISLAND INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, NY 

MATTITUCK HARBOR, NY 

MORICHES INLET, NY 

MOUNT MORRIS DAM, NY 

NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY CHANNELS, NY 

NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY HARBOR, NY & NJ 

NEW YORK HARBOR, NY 

NEW YORK HARBOR, NY & NJ (DRIFT REMOVAL) 

NEW YORK HARBOR, NY (PREVENTION OF OBSTRUCTIVE DEPOSITS) 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NY 

SHINNECOCK INLET, NY 

SOUTHERN NEW YORK FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS, NY 

SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, NY 

WESTCHESTER CREEK, NY 

WHITNEY POINT LAKE, NY 

NORTH CAROLINA 

ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, NC 

B EVERETT JORDAN DAM AND LAKE, NC 

CAPE FEAR RIVER ABOVE WILMINGTON, NC 

FALLS LAKE, NC 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NC 

MANTEO (SHALLOWBAG) BAY, NC 

MASONBORO INLET AND CONNECTING CHANNELS, NC 

MOREHEAD CITY HARBOR, NC 

NEW RIVER INLET, NC 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NC 

BUDGET HOUSE 

REQUEST RECOMMENDED 

1,834 1,834 

100 100 

30 30 

2,500 2,500 

50 50 

100 100 

100 100 

797 797 

10 10 

50 50 

20 20 

50 50 

50 50 

250 250 

6,900 6,900 

2,450 2,450 

1,351 1,351 

250 250 

420 420 

250 250 

270 270 

20 20 

150 150 

3,892 3,892 

400 400 

760 760 

7,743 7,743 

9,850 9,850 

1,300 1,300 

2,323 2,323 

150 150 

726 726 

610 610 

10 10 

960 960 

2,812 2,812 

2,385 2,385 

462 462 

2,494 2,494 

205 205 

4,790 4,790 

50 50 

5,570 5,570 

250 250 

700 700 
47 


Insert graphic folio 46 here 23912A.024

CORPS OF ENGINEERS OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 

(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) 

ROLLINSON CHANNEl, NC 

SILVER lAKE HARBOR, NC 

W KERR SCOTI DAM AND RESERVOIR, NC 

WILMINGTON HARBOR, NC 

NORTH DAKOTA 

BOWMAN HALEY, ND 

GARRISON DAM, lAKE SAKAKAWEA, NO 

HOMME lAKE, NO 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, ND 

lAKE ASHTABULA AND BAlDHilL DAM, ND 

PIPESTEM lAKE, ND 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, ND 

SOURIS RIVER, ND 

SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, ND 

AlUM CREEK lAKE, OH 

BERLIN lAKE, OH 

CAESAR CREEK lAKE, OH 

ClARENCE J BROWN DAM, OH 

CLEVELAND HARBOR, OH 

CONNEAUT HARBOR, OH 

DEER CREEK lAKE, OH 

DELAWARE lAKE, OH 

DillON lAKE, OH 

FAIRPORT HARBOR, OH 

OHIO 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, OH 

MASSILLON lOCAl PROTECTION PROJECT, OH 

MICHAEl J KIRWAN DAM AND RESERVOIR, OH 

MOSQUITO CREEK lAKE, OH 

MUSKINGUM RIVER lAKES, OH 

NORTH BRANCH KOKOSING RIVER lAKE, OH 

OHIO-MISSISSIPPI FlOOD CONTROl, OH 

PAINT CREEK lAKE, OH 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, OH 

ROSEVIllE lOCAl PROTECTION PROJECT, OH 

SANDUSKY HARBOR, OH 

SURVEillANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, OH 

TOLEDO HARBOR, OH 

TOM JENKINS DAM, OH 

WEST FORK OF MILL CREEK lAKE, OH 

WILLIAM H HARSHA lAKE, OH 

BUDGET HOUSE 

REQUEST RECOMMENDED 

1,000 1,000 

500 500 

3,363 3,363 

14,739 14,739 

249 249 

19,938 19,938 

338 338 

374 374 

1,747 1,747 

716 716 

121 121 

1,584 1,584 

82 82 

1,592 1,592 

3,093 3,093 

2,31S 2,315 

1,324 1,324 

6,200 6,200 

2,800 2,800 

2,231 2,231 

1,535 1,535 

1,489 1,489 

1,150 1,150 

874 874 

89 89 

2,243 2,243 

1,216 1,216 

11,836 11,836 

705 705 

1,818 1,818 

1,459 1,459 

305 305 

35 35 

1,650 1,650 

255 255 

6,102 6,102 

798 798 

770 770 

1,281 1,281 
48 


Insert graphic folio 47 here 23912A.025

ARCADIA LAKE, OK 

BIRCH LAKE, OK 

BROKEN BOW LAKE, OK 

CANTON LAKE, OK 

COPAN LAKE, OK 

EUFAULA LAKE, OK 

FORT GIBSON LAKE, OK 

FORT SUPPLY LAKE, OK 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS- OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 

(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) 

OKLAHOMA 

GREAT SALT PLAINS LAKE, OK 

HEYBURN LAKE, OK 

HUGO LAKE, OK 

HULAH LAKE, OK 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, OK 

KAW LAKE, OK 

KEYSTONE LAKE, OK 

MCCLELLAN-KERR ARKANSAS RIVER NAVIGATION SYSTEM, OK 

OOLOGAH LAKE, OK 

OPTIMA LAKE, OK 

PENSACOLA RESERVOIR, LAKE OF THE CHEROKEES, OK 

PINE CREEK LAKE, OK 

SARDIS LAKE, OK 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, OK 

SKIATOOK LAKE, OK 

TEN KILLER FERRY LAKE, OK 

WAURIKA LAKE, OK 

WISTER LAKE, OK 

OREGON 

APPLEGATE LAKE, OR 

BLUE RIVER LAKE, OR 

BONNEVILLE LOCK AND DAM, OR & WA 

CHETCO RIVER, OR 

COLUMBIA RIVER AT THE MOUTH, OR & WA 

COOS BAY, OR 

COTTAGE GROVE LAKE, OR 

COUGAR LAKE, OR 

DETROIT LAKE, OR 

DORENA LAKE, OR 

ELK CREEK LAKE, OR 

FALL CREEK LAKE, OR 

FERN RIDGE LAKE, OR 

GREEN PETER- FOSTER LAKES, OR 

HILLS CREEK LAKE, OR 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, OR 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, OR 

BUDGET HOUSE 

REQUEST RECOMMENDED 

724 724 

3,450 3,450 

7,427 7,427 

2,148 2,148 

2,556 2,556 

18,621 18,621 

5,974 5,974 

1,306 1,306 

360 360 

747 747 

1,622 1,622 

907 907 

239 239 

2,398 2,398 

5,073 5,073 

29,364 29,364 

2,811 2,811 

61 61 

165 16S 

1,439 1,439 

2,245 2,245 

1,200 1,200 

1,999 1,999 

4,881 4,881 

1,630 1,630 

781 781 

1,058 1,058 

1,152 1,152 

10,041 10,041 

809 809 

24,131 24,131 

7,655 7,655 

2,247 2,247 

2,160 2,160 

5,510 5,510 

2,337 2,337 

359 359 

1,527 1,527 

2,231 2,231 

2,115 2,115 

1,177 1,177 

60 60 

1,082 1,082 
49 


Insert graphic folio 48 here 23912A.026

CORPS OF ENGINEERS- OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 

(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) 

JOHN DAY LOCK AND DAM, OR & WA 

LOOKOUT POINT LAKE, OR 

LOST CREEK LAKE, OR 

MCNARY LOCK AND DAM, OR & WA 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, OR 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, OR 

SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, OR 

UMPQUA RIVER, OR 

WILLAMETTE RIVER AT WILLAMETTE FALLS, OR 

WILLAMETTE RIVER BANK PROTECTION, OR 

WILLOW CREEK LAKE, OR 

YAQUINA BAY AND HARBOR, OR 

ALLEGHENY RIVER, PA 

ALVIN R BUSH DAM, PA 

AYLESWORTH CREEK LAKE, PA 

BEL T2VILLE LAKE, PA 

BLUE MARSH LAKE, PA 

CONEMAUGH RIVER LAKE, PA 

COWANESQUE LAKE, PA 

CROOKED CREEK LAKE, PA 

CURWENSVILLE LAKE, PA 

PENNSYLVANIA 

DELAWARE RIVER, PHILADELPHIA, PA TO TRENTON, NJ 

EAST BRANCH CLARION RIVER LAKE, PA 

FOSTER JOSEPH SAYERS DAM, PA 

FRANCIS E WALTER DAM, PA 

GENERAL EDGAR JADWIN DAM AND RESERVOIR, PA 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, PA 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, PA 

JOHNSTOWN, PA 

KINZUA DAM AND ALLEGHENY RESERVOIR, PA 

LOYALHANNA LAKE, PA 

MAHON lNG CREEK LAKE, PA 

MONONGAHELA RIVER, PA 

OHIO RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS, PA, OH & WV 

OHIO RIVER OPEN CHANNEL WORK, PA, OH & WV 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, PA 

PROMPTON LAKE, PA 

PUNXSUTAWNEY,PA 

RAYSTOWN LAKE, PA 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, PA 

SHENANGO RIVER LAKE, PA 

STILLWATER LAKE, PA 

SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, PA 

TIOGA- HAMMOND LAKES, PA 

TIONESTA LAKE, PA 

BUDGET HOUSE 

REQUEST RECOMMENDED 

S,262 5,262 

1,842 1,842 

3,695 3,695 

13,042 13,042 

400 400 

98 98 

525 525 

921 921 

64 64 

200 200 

1,299 1,299 

3,096 3,096 

12,043 12,043 

970 970 

624 624 

1,305 1,305 

3,090 3,090 

1,345 1,345 

2,956 2,956 

1,777 1,777 

900 900 

4,980 4,980 

1,399 1,399 

2,537 2,537 

875 875 

395 395 

10 10 

1,117 1,117 

46 46 

1,770 1,770 

4,649 4,649 

1,291 1,291 

16,759 16,759 

39,511 39,511 

800 800 

170 170 

985 985 

15 15 

22,030 22,030 

37 37 

2,464 2,464 

843 843 

105 105 

3,084 3,084 

2,398 2,398 
50 


Insert graphic folio 49 here 23912A.027

CORPS OF ENGINEERS- OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 

(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) 

UNION CITY LAKE, PA 

WOODCOCK CREEK LAKE, PA 

YORK INDIAN ROCK DAM, PA 

YOUGHIOGHENY RIVER LAKE, PA & MD 

PUERTO RICO 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, PR 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, PR 

SAN JUAN HARBOR, PR 

RHODE ISLAND 

FOX POINT BARRIER, NARRANGANSETT BAY, Rl 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, Rl 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, Rl 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, Rl 

WOONSOCKET, Rl 

SOUTH CAROLINA 

ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, SC 

CHARLESTON HARBOR, SC 

COOPER RIVER, CHARLESTON HARBOR, SC 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, SC 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, SC 

SOUTH DAKOTA 

BIG BEND DAM, LAKE SHARPE, SD 

COLD BROOK LAKE, SD 

COTTONWOOD SPRINGS LAKE, SD 

FORT RANDALL DAM, LAKE FRANCIS CASE, SD 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, SD 

LAKE TRAVERSE, SD & MN 

OAHE DAM, LAKE OAHE, SD & ND 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, SD 

TENNESSEE 

CENTER HILL LAKE, TN 

CHEATHAM LOCK AND DAM, TN 

CHICKAMAUGA LOCK, TENNESSEE RIVER, TN 

CORDELL HULL DAM AND RESERVOIR, TN 

DALE HOLLOW LAKE, TN 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, TN 

J PERCY PRIEST DAM AND RESERVOIR, TN 

NORTHWEST TENNESSEE REGIONAL HARBOR, LAKE COUNTY, TN 

BUDGET 

REQUEST 

471 

1,015 

16,952 

2,708 

228 

150 

100 

2,816 

25 

45 

300 

402 

200 

16,110 

5,007 

65 

875 

10,467 

370 

226 

12,576 

279 

693 

13,829 

102 

10,347 

8,243 

6,067 

7,702 

9,071 

334 

5,592 

10 

HOUSE 

RECOMMENDED 

471 

1,015 

16,952 

2,708 

228 

150 

100 

2,816 

25 

45 

300 

402 

200 

16,110 

5,007 

65 

875 

10,467 

370 

226 

12,576 

279 

693 

13,829 

102 

10,347 

8,243 

6,067 

7,702 

9,071 

334 

5,592 

10 
51 


Insert graphic folio 50 here 23912A.028

CORPS OF ENGINEERS- OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 

(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) 

OLD HICKORY LOCK AND DAM, TN 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, TN 

TENNESSEE RIVER, TN 

WOLF RIVER HARBOR, TN 

AQUILLA LAKE, TX 

TEXAS 

ARKANSAS- RED RIVER BASINS CHLORIDE CONTROL- AREA VIII, TX 

BARDWELL LAKE, TX 

BELTON LAKE, TX 

BENBROOK LAKE, TX 

BRA20S ISLAND HARBOR, TX 

BUFFALO BAYOU AND TRIBUTARIES, TX 

CANYON LAKE, TX 

CHANNEL TO HARLINGEN, TX 

CHANNEL TO PORT BOLIVAR, TX 

CORPUS CHRISTl SHIP CHANNEL, TX 

DENISON DAM, LAKE TEXOMA, TX 

ESTELLINE SPRINGS EXPERIMENTAL PROJECT, TX 

FERRELL$ BRIDGE DAM, LAKE 0' THE PINES, TX 

FREEPORT HARBOR, TX 

GALVESTON HARBOR AND CHANNEL, TX 

GIWW, CHANNEL TO VICTORIA, TX 

GRANGER DAM AND LAKE, TX 

GRAPEVINE LAKE, TX 

GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, TX 

HORDS CREEK LAKE, TX 

HOUSTON SHIP CHANNEL, TX 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, TX 

JIM CHAPMAN LAKE, TX 

JOE POOL LAKE, TX 

LAKE KEMP, TX 

LAVON LAKE, TX 

LEWISVILLE DAM, TX 

MATAGORDA SHIP CHANNEL, TX 

NAVARRO MILLS LAKE, TX 

NORTH SAN GABRIEL DAM AND LAKE GEORGETOWN, TX 

0 C FISHER DAM AND LAKE, TX 

PAT MAYSE LAKE, TX 

PROCTOR LAKE, TX 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, TX 

RAY ROBERTS LAKE, TX 

SABINE- NECHES WATERWAY, TX 

SAM RAYBURN DAM AND RESERVOIR, TX 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, TX 

SOMERVILLE LAKE, TX 

STILLHOUSE HOLLOW DAM, TX 

BUDGET HOUSE 

REQUEST RECOMMENDED 

10,326 10,326 

1 1 

22,578 22,578 

1,385 1,385 

1,080 1,080 

1,794 1,794 

3,236 3,236 

4,655 4,655 

3,368 3,368 

2,700 2,700 

2,818 2,818 

3,449 3,449 

2,400 2,400 

50 50 

10,800 10,800 

8,581 8,581 

35 35 

4,041 4,041 

5,600 5,600 

5,000 5,000 

3,500 3,500 

2,311 2,311 

4,294 4,294 

34,094 34,094 

2,036 2,036 

31,300 31,300 

1,587 1,587 

1,975 1,975 

2,248 2,248 

291 291 

3,766 3,766 

4,614 4,614 

5,900 5,900 

2,546 2,546 

2,558 2,558 

1,091 1,091 

1,234 1,234 

2,392 2,392 

323 323 

2,091 2,091 

7,725 7,725 

7,415 7,415 

332 332 

4,159 4,159 

5,068 5,068 
52 


Insert graphic folio 51 here 23912A.029

CORPS OF ENGINEERS- OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 

(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) 

TEXAS CITY SHIP CHANNEL, TX 

TOWN BLUFF DAM, B A STEINHAGEN LAKE, TX 

WACO LAKE, TX 

WALLISVILLE LAKE, TX 

WHITNEY LAKE, TX 

WRIGHT PATMAN DAM AND LAKE, TX 

UTAH 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, UT 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, UT 

BALL MOUNTAIN, VT 

GORDONS LANDING, VT 

VERMONT 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, VT 

NARROWS OF LAKE CHAMPLAIN, VT & NY 

NORTH HARTLAND LAKE, VT 

NORTH SPRINGFIELD LAKE, VT 

TOWNSHEND LAKE, VT 

UNION VILLAGE DAM, VT 

VIRGIN ISLANDS 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, VI 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, VI 

VIRGINIA 

ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY ACC, VA 

ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY- DSC, VA 

CHINCOTEAGUE HARBOR OF REFUGE, VA 

CHINCOTEAGUE INLET, VA 

GATHRIGHT DAM AND LAKE MOOMAW, VA 

HAMPTON ROADS, NORFOLK & NEWPORT NEWS HARBOR, VA (DRIFT REMOVAL) 

HAMPTON ROADS, VA (PREVENTION OF OBSTRUCTIVE DEPOSITS) 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, VA 

JAMES RIVER CHANNEL, VA 

JOHN H KERR LAKE, VA & NC 

JOHN W FLANNAGAN DAM AND RESERVOIR, VA 

LYNNHAVEN INLET, VA 

NORFOLK HARBOR, VA 

NORTH FORK OF POUND RIVER LAKE, VA 

PHILPOTT LAKE, VA 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, VA 

RUDEE INLET, VA 

BUDGET 

REQUEST 

50 

4,754 

6,956 

2,806 

5,722 

3,958 

24 

554 

1,019 

250 

172 

50 

1,311 

936 

1,900 

1,495 

24 

100 

3,627 

1,852 

65 

566 

2,347 

1,470 

170 

364 

2,729 

16,229 

3,443 

600 

9,421 

590 

4,871 

1,195 

520 

HOUSE 

RECOMMENDED 

50 

4,754 

6,956 

2,806 

5,722 

3,958 

24 

554 

1,019 

250 

172 

so 

1,311 

936 

1,900 

1,495 

24 

100 

3,627 

1,852 

65 

566 

2,347 

1,470 

170 

364 

2,729 

16,229 

3,443 

600 

9,421 

590 

4,871 

1,195 

520 
53 


Insert graphic folio 52 here 23912A.030

CORPS OF ENGINEERS OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 

{AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) 

WASHINGTON 

CHIEF JOSEPH DAM, WA 

COLUMBIA AND LOWER WILLAMETTE RIVERS BELOW VANCOUVER, WA & 

PORTLAND, OR 

COLUMBIA RIVER AT BAKER BAY, WA & OR 

COLUMBIA RIVER BETWEEN VANCOUVER, WA AND THE DALLES, OR 

COLUMBIA RIVER FISH MITIGATION, WA, OR & ID {CRFM) 

EVERETT HARBOR AND SNOHOMISH RIVER, WA 

GRAYS HARBOR, WA 

HOWARD HANSON DAM, WA 

ICE HARBOR LOCK AND DAM, WA 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, WA 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WA 

LAKE WASHINGTON SHIP CANAL, WA 

LITTLE GOOSE LOCK AND DAM, WA 

LOWER GRANITE LOCK AND DAM, WA 

LOWER MONUMENTAL LOCK AND DAM, WA 

MILL CREEK LAKE, WA 

MOUNT SAINT HELENS SEDIMENT CONTROL, WA 

MUD MOUNTAIN DAM, WA 

PORT TOWNSEND, WA 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, WA 

PUGET SOUND AND TRIBUTARY WATERS, WA 

QUILLAYUTE RIVER, WA 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, WA 

SEATTLE HARBOR, WA 

STILLAGUAMISH RIVER, WA 

SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, WA 

SWINOMISH CHANNEL, WA 

TACOMA HARBOR, WA 

TACOMA, PUYALLUP RIVER, WA 

THE DALLES LOCK AND DAM, WA & OR 

WEST VIRGINIA 

BEECH FORK LAKE, WV 

BLUESTONE LAKE, WV 

BURNSVILLE LAKE, WV 

EAST LYNN LAKE, WV 

ELKINS, WV 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WV 

KANAWHA RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS, WV 

OHIO RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS, WV, KY & OH 

OHIO RIVER OPEN CHANNEL WORK, WV, KY & OH 

R D BAILEY LAKE, WV 

STONEWALLJACKSON LAKE, WV 

BUDGET HOUSE 

REQUEST RECOMMENDED 

636 636 

46,767 46,767 

1,809 1,809 

1,246 1,246 

1,907 1,907 

2,281 2,281 

11,710 11,710 

3,819 3,819 

5,510 5,510 

70 70 

1,057 1,057 

9,870 9,870 

2,836 2,836 

4,532 4,532 

3,636 3,636 

4,492 4,492 

268 268 

4,962 4,962 

3 3 

779 779 

1,913 1,913 

283 283 

425 425 

389 389 

303 303 

64 64 

1,S28 1,528 

5 5 

226 226 

3,776 3,776 

1,846 1,846 

2,283 2,283 

2,495 2,495 

2,347 2,347 

15 15 

463 463 

13,249 13,249 

26,835 26,835 

2,724 2,724 

2,636 2,636 

1,265 1,265 
54 


Insert graphic folio 53 here 23912A.031

SUMMERSVILLE LAKE, WV 

SUTTON LAKE, WV 

TYGART LAKE, WV 

EAU GALLE RIVER LAKE, WI 

FOX RIVER, WI 

GREEN BAY HARBOR, WI 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS- OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 

(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) 

WISCONSIN 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WI 

KEWAUNEE HARBOR, WI 

MILWAUKEE HARBOR, WI 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, WI 

SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, WI 

WYOMING 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, WY 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WY 

JACKSON HOLE LEVEES, WY 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, WY 

BUDGET 

REQUEST 

2,453 

2,440 

3,283 

2,199 

5,758 

3,911 

55 

12 

1,280 

321 

596 

10 

80 

1,814 

80 

SUBTOTAL, PROJECTS LISTED UNDER STATES 2,936,258 

REMAINING ITEMS 

ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR ONGOING WORK 

NAVIGATION MAINTENANCE 

DEEP-DRAFT HARBOR AND CHANNEL 

DONOR AND ENERGY TRANSFER PORTS 

INLAND WATERWAYS 

SMALL, REMOTE, OR SUBSISTENCE NAVIGATION 

OTHER AUTHORIZED PROJECT PURPOSES 

AQUATIC NUISANCE CONTROL RESEARCH 

ASSET MANAGEMENT/FACILITIES AND EQUIP MAINT (FEM) 

BUDGET MANAGEMENT SUPPORT FOR O&M BUSINESS PROGRAMS 

STEWARDSHIP SUPPORT PROGRAM 

PERFORMANCE-BASED BUDGETING SUPPORT PROGRAM 

RECREATION MANAGEMENT SUPPORT PROGRAM 

OPTIMIZATION TOOLS FOR NAVIGATION 

CIVIL WORKS WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (CWWMS) 

COASTAL INLET RESEARCH PROGRAM 

COASTAL OCEAN DATA SYSTEM (COOS) 

CULTURAL RESOURCES--- (NAGPRA/CURATION) 

DREDGE MCFARLAND READY RESERVE 

DREDGE WHEELER READY RESERVE 

DREDGING DATA AND LOCK PERFORMANCE MONITORING SYSTEM 

DREDGING OPERATIONS AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH (DOER) 

675 

3,650 

900 

4,200 

1,550 

322 

10,000 

2,700 

2,500 

1,000 

11,690 

15,000 

1,120 

6,450 

HOUSE 

RECOMMENDED 

2,453 

2,440 

3,283 

2,199 

5,758 

3,911 

55 

12 

1,280 

321 

596 

10 

80 

1,814 

80 

2,936,258 

8,400 

334,400 

10,000 

25,000 

20,000 

10,000 

675 

3,650 

900 

4,200 

1,550 

322 

10,000 

2,700 

6,000 

1,000 

11,690 

15,000 

1,120 

6,450 
55 


Insert graphic folio 54 here 23912A.032

CORPS OF ENGINEERS- OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 

(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) 

DRED-GtNG OPERATIONS TECHNICAL SUPPORT PROGRAM (DOTS) 

EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS REDUCTION PROGRAM 

FACILITY PROTECTION 

FISH & WILDLIFE OPERATING FISH HATCHERY REIMBURSEMENT 

HARBOR MAINTENANCE FEE DATA COLLECTION 

INLAND WATERWAY NAVIGATION CHARTS 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED FEDERAL FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS 

MONITORING OF COMPLETED NAVIGATION PROJECTS 

NATIONAL COASTAL MAPPING PROGRAM 

NATIONAL DAM SAFETY PROGRAM (PORTFOLIO RISK ASSESSMENT) 

NATIONAL EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS PROGRAM (NEPP) 

NATIONAL (LEVEE) FLOOD INVENTORY 

NATIONAL (MULTIPLE PROJECT) NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES 

NATIONAL PORTFOLIO ASSESSMENT FOR REALLOCATIONS 

REGIONAL SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 

REVIEW OF NON-FEDERAL ALTERATIONS OF CIVIL WORKS PROJECTS (SECTION 

408) 

SUSTAINABLE RIVERS PROGRAM (SRP) 

VETERAN'S CURATION PROGRAM AND COLLECTIONS MANAGEMENT 

WATERBORNE COMMERCE STATISTICS 

WATER OPERATIONS TECHNICAL SUPPORT (WOTS) 

SUBTOTAL, REMAINING ITEMS 

BUDGET 

REQUEST 

2,820 

300 

4,500 

5,400 

795 

4,500 

20,000 

3,300 

6,300 

10,000 

5,500 

10,000 

3,700 

800 

3,500 

8,500 

400 

6,500 

4,670 

500 

163,742 

TOTAL, OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 3,100,000 

HOUSE 

RECOMMENDED 

2,820 

300 

4,500 

5,400 

795 

4,500 

20,000 

6,000 

6,300 

10,000 

5,500 

10,000 

3,700 

800 

3,500 

8,500 

400 

6,500 

4,670 

5,500 

582,742 

3,519,000 
56 

Los Angeles County Drainage Area, California.—The Committee 

directs the Corps to evaluate methods where the Los Angeles County Flood Control District might assume a greater role in the operation and maintenance of Corps infrastructure. The Committee 

also directs the Corps to report if an increased role by the District 

can more effectively utilize budgeted funds to reduce flood risk and 

increase stormwater capture, which would provide a more sustainable local source of water. 

Santa Ana River, California.—The Committee is aware that the 

planned residential and commercial development project in Rialto, 

California, may involve modification of a portion of the Lytle and 

Cajon Creeks channel improvement project. The Corps is directed 

to conduct any necessary reviews in an efficient manner, including 

conducting concurrent, rather than consecutive, reviews to the 

greatest extent possible. 

Waco Lake, Texas.—The Committee has heard concerns that repairs are needed to a local public road due to slope instability 

issues at the Corps project. The Corps is encouraged to work with 

local officials to determine whether issues at the Corps project are 

the cause of damages to the public road and what authorities and 

funding sources may be available to assist the local community in 

repairing the road. 

Additional Funding for Ongoing Work.—When allocating the additional funding provided in this account, the Corps shall consider 

giving priority to the following: 

1. ability to complete ongoing work maintaining authorized 

depths and widths of harbors and shipping channels, including 

where contaminated sediments are present; 

2. ability to address critical maintenance backlog; 

3. presence of the U.S. Coast Guard; 

4. extent to which the work will enhance national, regional, 

or local economic development, including domestic manufacturing capacity; 

5. extent to which the work will promote job growth or international competitiveness; 

6. number of jobs created directly by the funded activity; 

7. ability to obligate the funds allocated within the fiscal 

year; 

8. ability to complete the project, separable element, project 

phase, or useful increment of work within the funds allocated; 

9. the risk of imminent failure or closure of the facility; and 

10. for harbor maintenance activities, 

a. total tonnage handled; 

b. total exports; 

c. total imports; 

d. dollar value of cargo handled; 

e. energy infrastructure and national security needs 

served; 

f. designation as strategic seaports; 

g. lack of alternative means of freight movement; and 

h. savings over alternative means of freight movement. 

Additional funding provided for donor ports and energy transfer 

ports shall be allocated in accordance with 33 U.S.C. 2238c. The 

Corps is encouraged to include funding for this program in future 

budget requests. 

57 

Monitoring of Completed Navigation Projects.—Funding in addition to the budget request is included to support the structural 

health monitoring program to facilitate research to maximize operations, enhance efficiency, and protect asset life through catastrophic failure mitigation. The Corps is encouraged to also consider the need for additional work on the evaluation of grouted 

trunnion rods and the validation of technologies such as protective 

coatings. 

Review of Non-Federal Alterations of Civil Works Projects (Section 408).—The Committee has heard concerns about the Corps’ implementation of reviews under section 408 (33 U.S.C. 408), particularly with respect to operation and maintenance of levee systems. 

The Corps shall be prepared to brief the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress not later than 90 days after the 

enactment of this Act on execution of this line item. The briefing 

shall include an explanation of the section 408 authority, including 

how it compares or conflicts with other relevant authorities; the 

scope of projects subject to section 408 reviews; the process used to 

establish the current process; any efforts or mechanisms for adjusting the review to the degree of modifications sought; and a funding 

history and funding projections, as well as a justification for the fiscal year 2018 budget request. 

Water Operations Technical Support (WOTS).—Funding in addition to the budget request is included to continue research into atmospheric rivers first funded in fiscal year 2015. 

Emerging Harbor Projects.—The recommendation includes funding for individual projects defined as emerging harbor projects (in 

section 210(f)(2) of the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) 

of 1986) that exceeds the funding levels envisioned in section 

210(c)(3) and 210(d)(1)(B)(ii) of WRDA 1986. 

Great Lakes Navigation System.—The recommendation includes 

funding for individual projects within this System that exceeds the 

funding level envisioned in section 210(d)(1)(B)(ii) of WRDA 1986. 

Hydrilla.—The Committee recognizes that the uncontrolled 

growth of hydrilla at Corps water resource projects in the United 

States continues to pose a variety of environmental, health, safety, 

and economic problems. The Corps is encouraged to develop a regional hydrilla control strategy for the South Atlantic Division. 

Shoreline Management Policy.—The Committee is aware of concerns regarding the new shoreline management policy for Corps 

reservoirs within the South Atlantic Division. The Corps is encouraged to continue working with affected local communities and 

stakeholders to address these concerns, including the use of nonpotable water from reservoirs. 

Hydropower.—The Committee recognizes hydropower is an important resource for the energy requirements of our states and 

local communities. In some areas, such as the Summersville Dam 

in West Virginia, the Corps works with non-federal partners to provide reliable and affordable energy for the surrounding community. 

The Committee encourages the Corps to review options for expanded non-federal hydropower at appropriate sites throughout the 

nation. The Committee anticipates that this would include evaluations of seasonal pool levels and an assessment of the impact of expanding hydropower on safety and operations for the region. 

58 

Beneficial Use of Dredged Material.—The Corps is encouraged to 

promptly issue implementation guidance for the pilot program authorized in section 1122 of the WIIN Act. 

REGULATORY PROGRAM

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $200,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 200,000,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 200,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... – – – 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ – – – 

This appropriation provides funds to administer laws pertaining 

to the regulation of activities affecting U.S. waters, including wetlands, in accordance with the Rivers and Harbors Appropriation 

Act of 1899, the Clean Water Act, and the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972. Appropriated funds are used 

to review and process permit applications, ensure compliance on 

permitted sites, protect important aquatic resources, and support 

watershed planning efforts in sensitive environmental areas in cooperation with states and local communities. 

The Committee encourages the Corps to adhere to established 

regulatory policies and guidance with respect to permits issued 

under section 404 of the Clean Water Act and to refrain from imposing additional requirements on permit applicants. 

Public Safety Projects.—The Committee continues to hear that 

public safety infrastructure projects have been delayed due to excessive and repeated reviews. Many communities depend on these 

projects to protect their residents from natural disasters. Considering the risk to life and other damages that these disasters inflict 

upon communities, it is in the public interest to have local governments mitigate for this harm. Therefore, the Committee encourages 

the Corps to give the public safety aspects of a project sufficient 

and appropriate consideration when reviewing permit applications. 

Shellfish Aquaculture Activities.—The Committee recognizes the 

significant effort undertaken by the Seattle District and the Northwest Division to re-verify 861 pending project applications submitted by shellfish growers in Washington state under the 2012 

Nationwide Permit (NWP) 48 before this permit expired in March 

2017. Recognizing that these permits will remain valid for only one 

calendar year, the Committee directs the Seattle District, the 

Northwest Division, and Army Corps Headquarters to implement a 

streamlined and efficient process to re-issue these permits under 

the 2017 NWP 48. 

Programmatic Consultations.—The Committee is concerned that 

Endangered Species Act consultation times are causing permit reviews to be delayed. In order to reduce permit delays, the Seattle 

District shall implement programmatic consultations, also known 

as Standard Local Operating Procedures for Endangered Species 

(SLOPES), to the maximum extent possible. 

59 

FORMERLY UTILIZED SITES REMEDIAL ACTION PROGRAM

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $112,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 118,000,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 118,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... +6,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ – – – 

This appropriation funds the cleanup of certain low-level radioactive materials and mixed wastes located at sites contaminated as 

a result of the nation’s early efforts to develop atomic weapons. 

The Congress transferred the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial 

Action Program (FUSRAP) from the Department of Energy to the 

Corps in fiscal year 1998. In appropriating FUSRAP funds to the 

Corps, the Committee intended to transfer only the responsibility 

for administration and execution of cleanup activities at FUSRAP 

sites where the Department had not completed cleanup. The Committee did not transfer to the Corps ownership of and accountability for real property interests, which remain with the Department. The Committee expects the Department to continue to provide its institutional knowledge and expertise to ensure the success 

of this program and to serve the nation and the affected communities. 

The Committee continues to support the prioritization of sites, 

especially those that are nearing completion. Within the funds provided in accordance with the budget request, the Corps is directed 

to complete the Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study of the 

former Sylvania nuclear fuel site at Hicksville, New York, and, as 

appropriate, to proceed expeditiously to a Record of Decision and 

initiation of any necessary remediation in accordance with the 

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). 

FLOOD CONTROL AND COASTAL EMERGENCIES

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $32,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 35,000,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 32,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... – – – 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ ¥3,000,000 

This appropriation funds planning, training, and other measures 

that ensure the readiness of the Corps to respond to floods, hurricanes, and other natural disasters, and to support emergency operations in response to such natural disasters, including advance 

measures, flood fighting, emergency operations, the provision of potable water on an emergency basis, and the repair of certain flood 

and storm damage reduction projects. 

EXPENSES

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $181,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 185,000,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 181,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... – – – 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ ¥4,000,000 

60 

This appropriation funds the executive direction and management of the Office of the Chief of Engineers, the Division Offices, 

and certain research and statistical functions of the Corps. 

Alternative financing.—The Committee remains supportive of 

public-private partnerships (P3) and other alternative financing 

mechanisms. These arrangements have the potential to be project 

delivery tools to help sustain the performance of existing infrastructure and construct new infrastructure more quickly. In fiscal 

year 2016, the Corps was directed to develop a policy on how proposals for public-private partnerships will be considered by the 

Corps and how these partnerships will be incorporated into the 

budget policy. A policy will allow interested non-federal sponsors 

equal opportunity to develop proposals for the Corps to review 

under established guidelines. To date, the Corps has not developed 

a policy. Therefore, due to the concerns in previous fiscal years and 

until such time as a comprehensive policy is established and provided to the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress, the Corps shall discontinue all work on project-specific public-private partnerships beyond the P3 project selected as a new 

start in fiscal year 2016. 

The Committee reminds the Corps of the Committee’s longstanding concerns that federal funding decisions not be biased by 

non-federal decisions to construct projects in advance of federal 

funding or to provide funding in excess of legally required cost 

shares. Unfortunately, the fiscal year 2017 work plan rating system stated that increased contributions from non-federal sponsors 

was one of the criteria used to determine the new construction 

starts. The Committee has included language under the heading 

‘‘Additional Funding’’ in the front matter of this title prohibiting 

the Corps from using such a criterion in fiscal year 2018. The 

Corps is directed to consider and address such equity concerns in 

any policy on alternative financing mechanisms being developed. 

Surplus Water.—The Committee urges the Corps to consider 

adoption of the alternative definition of ‘‘surplus water’’ excluding 

‘‘natural flows’’ from stored water in the Missouri River mainstem 

reservoirs in its proposed rule entitled ‘‘Use of U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers Reservoir Projects for Domestic, Municipal & Industrial 

Water Supply’’ (82 F.R. 9555). 

OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE ARMY FOR CIVIL WORKS

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $4,764,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 5,000,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 4,764,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... – – – 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ ¥236,000 

The Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works oversees the 

Civil Works budget and policy, whereas the Corps’ executive direction and management of the Civil Works program are funded from 

the Expenses account. 

The recommendation includes legislative language restricting the 

availability of 75 percent of the funding provided in this account 

until such time as at least 95 percent of the additional funding provided in each account has been allocated to specific programs, 

projects, or activities. This restriction shall not affect the roles and 

responsibilities established in previous fiscal years of the Office of 

61 

the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works, the Corps 

headquarters, the Corps field operating agencies, or any other executive branch agency. 

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, such as budget justification materials, is vital in order 

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 this same sensitivity and 

are critical to the budget process. The Administration needs to ensure timely and complete responses to these inquiries. 

GENERAL PROVISIONS—CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CIVIL 

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

The bill continues a provision that prohibits the obligation or expenditure of funds through a reprogramming of funds in this title 

except in certain circumstances. 

The bill continues a provision prohibiting the use of funds in this 

Act to carry out any contract that commits funds beyond the 

amounts appropriated for that program, project, or activity. 

The bill continues a provision authorizing the transfer of funds 

to the Fish and Wildlife Service to mitigate for fisheries lost due 

to Corps of Engineers projects. 

The bill includes a provision regarding certain dredged material 

disposal activities. 

The bill includes a provision regarding acquisitions. 

The bill includes a provision regarding reallocations at a project. 

The bill includes a provision prohibiting the use of funds to require permits for the discharge of dredged or fill material for certain agriculture activities. 

The bill includes a provision regarding a rule under the Clean 

Water Act. 

The bill contains a provision allowing the possession of firearms 

at water resources development projects under certain circumstances. 

TITLE II—DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

CENTRAL UTAH PROJECT

CENTRAL UTAH PROJECT COMPLETION ACCOUNT

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $10,500,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 8,983,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 8,983,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... ¥1,517,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ – – – 

The Central Utah Project Completion Act (CUPCA) (titles II–VI 

of P.L. 102–575) provides for the completion of the Central Utah 

Project by the Central Utah Water Conservancy District. The Act 

also authorizes the appropriation of funds for fish, wildlife, and 

recreation mitigation and conservation; establishes an account in 

62 

the Treasury for the deposit of these funds and of other contributions for mitigation and conservation activities; and establishes a 

Utah Reclamation Mitigation and Conservation Commission to administer funds in that account. The Act further assigns responsibilities for carrying out the Act to the Secretary of the Interior and 

prohibits delegation of those responsibilities to the Bureau of Reclamation. 

The Committee recommendation includes a total of $8,983,000 

for the Central Utah Project Completion Account, which includes 

$6,635,000 for Central Utah Project construction, $898,000 for 

transfer to the Utah Reclamation Mitigation and Conservation Account for use by the Utah Reclamation Mitigation and Conservation Commission, and $1,450,000 for necessary expenses of the Secretary of the Interior. 

BUREAU OF RECLAMATION

INTRODUCTION

The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) is to 

manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of 

the American public. Since its establishment by the Reclamation 

Act of 1902, the Bureau of Reclamation has developed water supply 

facilities that have contributed to sustained economic growth and 

an enhanced quality of life in the western states. Lands and communities served by Reclamation projects have been developed to 

meet agricultural, tribal, urban, and industrial needs. Reclamation 

continues to develop authorized facilities to store and convey new 

water supplies and is the largest supplier and manager of water in 

the 17 western states. Reclamation maintains 338 reservoirs with 

the capacity to store 245 million acre-feet of water. 

As Reclamation’s large impoundments and appurtenant facilities 

reach their design life, the projected cost of operating, maintaining, 

and rehabilitating Reclamation infrastructure continues to grow, 

yet Reclamation has not budgeted funding sufficient to implement 

a comprehensive program to reduce its maintenance backlog. At 

the same time, Reclamation is increasingly relied upon to provide 

water supply to federally-recognized Indian Tribes through water 

settlements, rural communities through its Title I Rural Water 

Program, and municipalities through its Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program. Balancing these competing priorities will 

be challenging and requires active participation and leadership on 

the part of Reclamation and its technical staff. 

FISCAL YEAR 2018 BUDGET REQUEST AND COMMITTEE

RECOMMENDATION

The fiscal year 2018 budget request for the Bureau of Reclamation totals $1,097,393,000. The Committee recommendation totals 

$1,229,166,000, $77,334,000 below fiscal year 2017 and 

$131,773,000 above the budget request. 

A table summarizing the fiscal year 2017 enacted appropriation, 

the fiscal year 2018 budget request, and the Committee recommendation is provided below: 

63 

(Dollars in thousands) 

Account FY 2017 enacted FY 2018 request Cmte rec. 

Water and Related Resources .................................................................... $1,155,894 $960,017 $1,091,790 

Central Valley Project Restoration Fund ..................................................... 55,606 41,376 41,376 

California Bay-Delta Restoration ................................................................ 36,000 37,000 37,000 

Policy and Administration ........................................................................... 59,000 59,000 59,000 

Total, Bureau of Reclamation ............................................................ 1,306,500 1,097,393 1,229,166 

WATER AND RELATED RESOURCES

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $1,155,894,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 960,017,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 1,091,790,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... ¥64,104,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ +131,773,000 

The Water and Related Resources account supports the development, construction, 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 levels of benefits, to protect public safety, 

and to conduct studies on ways to improve the use of water and 

related natural resources. 

The budget request for this account and the approved Committee 

allowance are shown on the following table: 


Insert offset folio 63 here 23912A.034

WATER AND RELATED RESOURCES 

(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) 

BUDGET REQUEST HOUSE RECOMMENDED 

RESOURCES FACILITIES RESOURCES FACILITIES 

MANAGEMENT OM&R TOTAL MANAGEMENT OM&R 

ARIZONA 

AK CHIN INDIAN WATER RIGHTS SETTLEMENT ACT PROJECT --- 16,200 16,200 ... 16,200 

COLORADO RIVER BASIN- CENTRAL ARIZONA PROJECT 6,272 648 6,920 6,272 648 

COLORADO RIVER FRONT WORK AND LEVEE SYSTEM 2,303 ··- 2,303 2,303 ·-- 

SALT RIVER PROJECT 649 250 899 649 250 

SAN CARLOS APACHE TRIBE WATER SETTLEMENT ACT PROJECT 1,550 ·-- 1,550 1,550 ··- 

YUMA AREA PROJECTS 1,332 23,032 24,364 1,332 23,032 

CALIFORNIA 

CACHUMA PROJECT 747 874 1,621 747 874 

CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT: 

AMERICAN RIVER DIVISION, FOLSOM DAM UNIT/MORMON ISLAND 1,577 9,138 10,715 1,577 9,138 

AUBURN-FOLSOM SOUTH UNIT 35 2,184 2,219 35 2,184 

DELTA DIVISION 6,308 6,520 12,828 6,308 6,520 

EAST SIDE DIVISION 1,290 2,772 4,062 1,290 2,772 

FRIANT DIVISION 1,649 3,301 4,950 1,649 3,301 

SAN JOAQUIN RIVER RESTORATION SETTLEMENT 34,000 ... 34,000 

MISCELLANEOUS PROJECT PROGRAMS 8,771 400 9,171 8,771 400 

REPLACEMENTS, ADDITIONS, AND EXTRAORDINARY MAl NT. PROGRAM --- 17,444 17,444 ... 17,444 

SACRAMENTO RIVER DIVISION 1,307 595 1,902 1,307 595 

SAN FELIPE DIVISION 232 75 307 232 75 

SAN JOAQUIN DIVISION 52 52 52 

SHASTA DIVISION 720 9,007 9,727 720 9,007 

TRINITY RIVER DIVISION 12,309 5,177 17,486 12,309 5,177 

WATER AND POWER OPERATIONS 5,989 10,793 16,782 5,989 10,793 

WEST SAN JOAQUIN DIVISION, SAN LUIS UNIT 3,357 6,026 9,383 3,357 6,026 

ORLAND PROJECT ... 930 930 ... 930 

SALTON SEA RESEARCH PROJECT 300 ... 300 300 . .. 

Insert offset folio 64 here 23912A.035

WATER AND RELATED RESOURCES 

(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) 

BUDGET REQUEST HOUSE RECOMMENDED 

RESOURCES FACILITIES RESOURCES FACILITIES 

MANAGEMENT OM&R TOTAL MANAGEMENT OM&R 

SOLANO PROJECT 1,329 2,367 3,696 1,329 2,367 

VENTURA RIVER PROJECT 313 33 346 313 33 

COLORADO 

ANIMAS-LA PLATA PROJECT 941 3,004 3,945 941 3,004 

ARMEL UNIT, P-SMBP 5 1,738 1,743 5 1,738 

COLLBRAN PROJECT 247 1,984 2,231 247 1,984 COLORADO-BIG THOMPSON PROJECT 726 13,372 14,098 726 13,372 

FRUITGROWERS DAM PROJECT 93 131 224 93 131 

FRYING PAN-ARKANSAS PROJECT 167 10,091 10,258 167 10,091 FRYING PAN-ARKANSAS PROJECT- ARKANSAS VALLEY CONDUIT 3,000 --- 3,000 3,000 --- 

GRAND VALLEY UNIT, CRBSCP, TITLE II 486 1,809 2,295 486 1,809 

LEADVILLE/ARKANSAS RIVER RECOVERY PROJECT --- 1,935 1,935 1,935 MANCOS PROJECT 76 240 316 76 240 NARRROWS UNIT, P-SMBP --- 38 38 38 

PARADOX VALLEY UNIT, CRBSCP, TITLE II 389 3,003 3,392 389 3,003 

PINE RIVER PROJECT 141 432 573 141 432 

SAN LUIS VALLEY PROJECT, CLOSED BASIN 301 3,219 3,520 301 3,219 SAN LOUIS VALLEY PROJECT, CONEJOS DIVISION 16 34 so 16 34 

UNCOMPAHGRE PROJECT 728 163 891 728 163 

UPPER COLORADO RIVER OPERATIONS PROGRAM 1,570 --- 1,570 1,570 --- 

IDAHO 

BOISE AREA PROJECTS 3,383 4,522 7,905 3,383 4,522 

COLUMBIA AND SNAKE RIVER SALMON RECOVERY PROJECT 19,000 --- 19,000 19,000 --- 

LEWISTON ORCHARDS PROJECT 1,400 27 1,427 1,400 27 MINIDOKA AREA PROJECTS 2,442 2,438 4,880 2,442 2,438 PRESTON BENCH PROJECT 17 8 25 17 8 

Insert offset folio 65 here 23912A.036

WATER AND RELATED RESOURCES 

(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) 

BUDGET REQUEST HOUSE RECOMMENDED 

RESOURCES FACILITIES RESOURCES FACILITIES 

MANAGEMENT OM&R TOTAL MANAGEMENT OM&R 

KANSAS 

ALMENA UNIT, P-SMBP 43 480 523 43 480 

BOSTWICK UNIT, P-SMBP 370 884 1,254 370 884 

CEDAR BLUFF UNIT, P-SMBP 40 552 592 40 552 

GLEN ELDER UNIT, P-SMBP 65 2,581 2,646 65 2,581 

KANSAS RIVER UNIT, P-SMBP --- 102 102 --- 102 KIRWIN UNIT, P-SMBP 37 461 498 37 461 

WEBSTER UNIT, P-5MBP 15 500 515 15 500 

WICHITA PROJECT- CHENEY DIVISION 98 391 489 98 391 

MONTANA 

CANYON FERRY UNIT, P-SMBP 249 5,047 5,296 249 5,047 

EAST BENCH UNIT, P-SMBP 205 675 880 205 675 FORT PECK RESERVATION/ DRY PRAIRIE RURAL WATER SYSTEM 6,000 6,000 6,000 --- HELENA VALLEY UNIT, P-SMBP 19 165 184 19 165 

HUNGRY HORSE PROJECT --- 453 453 --- 453 

HUNTLEY PROJECT 12 46 58 12 46 

LOWER MARIAS UNIT, P-SMBP 103 1,507 1,610 103 1,507 

LOWER YELLOWSTONE PROJECT 716 16 732 716 16 

MILK RIVER PROJECT 553 2,951 3,504 553 2,951 MISSOURI BASIN O&M, P-SMBP 1,045 167 1,212 1,045 167 

ROCKY BOYS/NORTH CENTRAL MT RURAL WATER SYSTEM 4,850 4,850 4,850 --- 

SUN RIVER PROJECT 154 283 437 154 283 

YELLOWTAIL UNIT, P-SMBP 22 8,021 8,043 22 8,021 

NEBRASKA 

AINSWORTH UNIT, P-SMBP 71 98 169 71 98 

FRENCHMAN-CAMBRIDGE UNIT, P-SMBP 326 1,860 2,186 326 1,860 

Insert offset folio 66 here 23912A.037

WATER AND RELATED RESOURCES 

(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) 

BUDGET REQUEST HOUSE RECOMMENDED 

RESOURCES FACILITIES RESOURCES FACILITIES 

MANAGEMENT OM&R TOTAL MANAGEMENT OM&R 

MIRAGE FLATS PROJECT 13 93 106 13 93 

NORTH LOUP UNIT, P-SMBP 90 124 214 90 124 

NEVADA 

LAHONTAN BASIN PROJECT 4,992 4,859 9,851 4,992 4,859 

LAKE TAHOE REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM 115 --- 115 115 --- 

LAKE MEAD /LAS VEGAS WASH PROGRAM 700 700 700 --- 

NEW MEXICO 

CARLSBAD PROJECT 2,790 1,339 4,129 2,790 1,339 

EASTERN NEW MEXICO RURAL WATER SUPPLY 1,875 1,875 1,875 --- 

MIDDLE RIO GRANDE PROJECT 12,682 11,836 24,518 12,682 11,836 

RIO GRANDE PROJECT 1,906 4,750 6,656 1,906 4,750 

RIO GRANDE PUEBLOS PROJECT 1,000 --- 1,000 1,000 --- 

TUCUMCARI PROJECT 15 16 31 15 16 

NORTH DAKOTA 

DICKINSON UNIT, P-SMBP 214 435 649 214 435 

GARRISON DIVERSION UNIT, P-SMBP 13,235 12,934 26,169 13,235 12,934 

HEART BUTTE UNIT, P-SMBP 82 1,322 1,404 82 1,322 

OKLAHOMA 

ARBUCKLE PROJECT 67 174 241 67 174 

MCGEE CREEK PROJECT 188 802 990 188 802 

MOUNTAIN PARK PROJECT 53 617 670 53 617 

NORMAN PROJECT 71 301 372 71 301 

Insert offset folio 67 here 23912A.038

WATER AND RELATED RESOURCES 

(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) 

BUDGET REQUEST HOUSE RECOMMENDED 

RESOURCES FACILITIES RESOURCES FACILITIES 

MANAGEMENT OM&R TOTAL MANAGEMENT OM&R 

WASHITA BASIN PROJECT 58 554 612 58 554 

W.C. AUSTIN PROJECT 242 1,091 1,333 242 1,091 

OREGON 

CROOKED RIVER PROJECT 403 533 936 403 533 

DESCHUTES PROJECT 384 230 614 384 230 

EASTERN OREGON PROJECTS 533 213 746 533 213 

KLAMATH PROJECT 13,514 4,486 18,000 13,514 4,486 

ROGUE RIVER BASIN PROJECT, TALENT DIVISION 2,072 686 2,758 2,072 686 

TUALATIN PROJECT 201 218 419 201 218 

UMATILLA PROJECT 556 2,931 3,487 556 2,931 

SOUTH DAKOTA 

ANGOSTURA UNIT, P-SMBP 249 694 943 249 694 

BELLE FOURCHE UNIT, P-SMBP 271 730 1,001 271 730 

KEYHOLE UNIT, P-SMBP 198 610 808 198 610 

LEWIS AND CLARK RURAL WATER SYSTEM 3,650 3,650 3,650 

MID-DAKOTA RURAL WATER PROJECT --- 15 15 --- 15 

MNI WICONI PROJECT --- 13,475 13,475 --- 13,475 

OAHE UNIT, P-SMBP 37 73 110 37 73 

RAPID VALLEY PROJECT --- 71 71 71 

RAPID VALLEY UNIT, P-SMBP --- 200 200 --- 200 

SHADEHILL UNIT, P-SMBP 75 466 541 75 466 

TEXAS 

BALMORHEA PROJECT 37 13 50 37 13 

CANADIAN RIVER PROJECT 58 108 166 58 108 

LOWER RIO GRANDE WATER CONSERVATION PROGRAM 50 50 50 

Insert offset folio 68 here 23912A.039

WATER AND RELATED RESOURCES 

(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) 

BUDGET REQUEST HOUSE RECOMMENDED 

RESOURCES FACILITIES RESOURCES FACILITIES 

MANAGEMENT OM&R TOTAL MANAGEMENT OM&R 

NUECES RIVER PROJECT 107 803 910 107 803 

SAN ANGELO PROJECT 38 596 634 38 596 

UTAH 

HYRUM PROJECT 183 158 341 183 158 

MOON LAKE PROJECT 28 92 120 28 92 

NEWTON PROJECT 67 103 170 67 103 

OGDEN RIVER PROJECT 242 233 475 242 233 

PROVO RIVER PROJECT 1,224 718 1,942 1,224 718 

SANPETE PROJECT 73 10 83 73 10 

SCOFIELD PROJECT 304 81 38S 304 81 

STRAWBERRY VALLEY PROJECT 433 100 533 433 100 

WEBER BASIN PROJECT 1,047 860 1,907 1,047 860 

WEBER RIVER PROJECT 131 102 233 131 102 

WASHINGTON 

COLUMBIA BASIN PROJECT 3,961 9,414 13,375 3,961 9,414 

WASHINGTON AREA PROJECTS 445 63 508 445 63 

YAKIMA PROJECT 744 6,083 6,827 744 6,083 

YAKIMA RIVER BASIN WATER ENHANCEMENT PROJECT 17,136 ... 17,136 17,136 

WYOMING 

BOYSEN UNIT, P-SMBP 232 1,875 2,107 232 1,875 

BUFFALO BILL DAM DAM MODIFICATION, P·SMBP 32 2,731 2,763 32 2,731 

KENDRICK PROJECT 78 5,626 5,704 78 5,626 

NORTH PLATTE PROJECT 178 1,197 1,375 178 1,197 

NORTH PLATTE AREA, P-SMBP 97 5,266 5,363 97 5,266 

OWL CREEK UNIT, P-SMBP 6 93 99 6 93 

Insert offset folio 69 here 23912A.040

WATER AND RELATED RESOURCES 

(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) 

BUDGET REQUEST HOUSE RECOMMENDED 

RESOURCES FACILITIES RESOURCES FACILITIES 

MANAGEMENT OM&R TOTAL MANAGEMENT OM&R 

RIVERTON UNIT, P-SMBP 8 572 580 8 572 

SHOSHONE PROJECT 77 746 823 77 746 

SUBTOTAL, PROJECTS 232,059 297,715 529,774 198,0S9 297,715 

REGIONAL PROGRAMS 

ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR ONGOING WORK: 

RURAL WATER --- 43,805 --- 

WATER CONSERVATION AND DELIVERY --- --- --- 92,833 

ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION OR COMPLIANCE --- --- --- 5,000 

FACILITIES OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, AND REHABILITATION --- 4,000 

COLORADO RIVER BASIN SALINITY CONTROL PROJECT, TITLE I 250 15,203 15,453 250 15,203 COLORADO RIVER BASIN SALINITY CONTROL PROJECT, TITLE II 8,374 --- 8,374 8,374 COLORADO RIVER STORAGE PROJECT (CRSP), SECTION 5 4,1S3 6,485 10,638 4,153 6,485 COLORADO RIVER STORAGE PROJECT (CRSP), SECTION 8 2,770 --- 2,770 2,770 --- COLORADO RIVER WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 640 --- 640 640 

DAM SAFETY PROGRAM: 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR DAM SAFETY PROGRAM 1,300 1,300 --- 1,300 

INITIATE SAFETY OF DAMS CORRECTIVE ACTION 66,500 66,500 --- 66,500 

SAFETY EVALUATION OF EXISTING DAMS --- 20,284 20,284 --- 20,284 

EMERGENCY PLANNING & DISASTER RESPONSE PROGRAM --- 1,250 1,250 1,250 ENDANGERED SPECIES RECOVERY IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM 19,645 --- 19,645 19,645 --- 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION 1,844 --- 1,844 1,844 --- 

EXAMINATION OF EXISTING STRUCTURES --- 8,873 8,873 --- 8,873 

GENERAL PLANNING ACTIVITIES 2,124 --- 2,124 2,124 --- 

INDIAN WATER RIGHTS SETTLEMENTS: 

AAMODT LITIGATION SETTLEMENT 8,000 8,000 8,000 --- 

BLACKFEET SETTLEMENT 10,000 --· 10,000 10,000 --- 

CROW TRIBE RIGHTS 12,772 12,772 12,772 

NAVAJO GALLUP 67,772 25 67,797 67,772 25 

Insert offset folio 70 here 23912A.041

WATER AND RELATED RESOURCES 

(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) 

BUDGET REQUEST HOUSE RECOMMENDED 

RESOURCES FACILITIES RESOURCES FACILITIES 

MANAGEMENT OM&R TOTAL MANAGEMENT OM&R 

LAND RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 9,996 --- 9,996 9,996 --- 

LOWER COLORADO RIVER OPERATIONS PROGRAM 33,433 --- 33,433 33,433 --- 

MISCELLANEOUS FLOOD CONTROL OPERATIONS --- 927 927 --- 927 

NATIVE AMERICAN AFFAIRS PROGRAM 10,425 --- 10,425 10,425 --- 

NEGOTIATION & ADMINISTRATION OF WATER MARKETING 1,981 --- 1,981 1,981 --· 

OPERATION & PROGRAM MANAGEMENT 901 2,764 3,665 901 2,764 

POWER PROGRAM SERVICES 2,391 307 2,698 2,391 307 

PUBLIC ACCESS AND SAFETY PROGRAM 597 206 803 597 206 

RECLAMATION LAW ADMINISTRATION 2,173 --- 2,173 2,173 ·-- 

RECREATION & FISH & WILDLIFE PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION 6,497 --- 6,497 6,497 --- 

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT: 

DESALINATION AND WATER PURIFICATION PROGRAM 1,753 1,150 2,903 7,753 1,150 

SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM 11,065 -- 11,065 11,065 

SITE SECURITY ACTIVITIES ... 26,220 26,220 --- 26,220 

UNITED STATES/MEXICO BORDER ISSUES- TECHNICAL SUPPORT 90 --- 90 90 --- 

WATERSMART PROGRAM: 

WATERSMART GRANTS 23,365 --- 23,365 24,000 --- 

WATER CONSERVATION FIELD SERVICES PROGRAM 4,038 --- 4,038 4,038 --- 

COOPERATIVE WATERSHED MANAGEMENT 1,750 --- 1,750 1,750 --- 

BASIN STUDIES 5,200 --- 5,200 5,200 --- 

DROUGHT RESPONSE & COMPREHENSIVE DROUGHT PLANS 3,250 ... 3,250 3,250 --- 

TITLE XVI WATER RECLAMATION & REUSE PROGRAM 21,500 21,500 35,000 

SUBTOTAL, REGIONAL PROGRAMS 278,749 151,494 430,243 440,522 155,494 

TOTAL, WATER AND RELATED RESOURCES 510,808 449,209 960,017 638,581 453,209 
72 

Central Valley Project, San Luis Unit, California.—The Committee is aware that Reclamation and the Western Area Power Administration are evaluating the possible construction of a transmission line to directly serve the San Luis Unit from the Central 

Valley Project system as an alternative to receiving service under 

the California Independent System Operator’s Tariff. The agencies 

are encouraged to continue to work together and with the affected 

Central Valley Project water contractors to ensure the most efficient and cost-effective process for implementation. 

Tualatin Project, Scoggins Dam, Oregon.—The Committee sup- ports the budget request of $2,000,000 for Safety of Dams 

preconstruction activities at Scoggins Dam. Consistent with existing authorities, the Committee encourages Reclamation to evaluate 

alternatives, including new or supplementary works, to address 

dam safety modifications and increased conservation storage. Considering the high risk associated with Scoggins Dam, the Committee urges Reclamation to maintain an efficient schedule in fiscal 

year 2018. The Committee has been told that a replacement structure downstream could significantly reduce project costs for both 

the federal government and local stakeholders. 

Mni Wiconi Project, South Dakota.—Reclamation is directed to 

continue working with the Tribes and relevant federal agencies, 

such as the Department of Agriculture, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Indian Health Service, and the Department of Housing and Urban Development, to coordinate use of all existing authorities and funding sources to finish needed community system upgrades and connections, as well as 

any transfers of those systems, as quickly as possible. The Administration is encouraged to include appropriate funding for upgrades 

in future budget requests. 

Yakima River Basin Water Enhancement Project Integrated Plan, 

Washington.—The Committee is aware of the Integrated Plan that 

has been developed by the Yakima River Basin Water Enhancement Project Working Group, including the Bureau of Reclamation, 

to address water storage and water supply needs for agriculture, 

fish, and municipalities within the Yakima River Basin in Central 

Washington. The Committee is supportive of the Plan and encourages the Bureau to move forward on implementing authorized components of the Plan. 

Additional Funding for Water and Related Resources Work.—The 

recommendation includes funds in addition to the budget request 

for Water and Related Resources studies, projects, and activities. 

Priority in allocating these funds should 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. Of the additional funding provided under the heading 

‘‘Water Conservation and Delivery’’, $67,000,000 shall be for water 

storage projects as authorized in section 4007 of Public Law 114– 

322. Not later than 45 days after the enactment of this Act, Reclamation shall provide to the Committees on Appropriations of both 

Houses of Congress a report delineating how the additional funds 

73 

provided are to be distributed, in which phase the work is to be accomplished, and an explanation of the criteria and rankings used 

to justify each allocation. 

The fiscal year 2015–2017 Acts included additional funding for 

‘‘Western Drought Response’’. This broad category provided maximum flexibility for Reclamation to address the most immediate 

impacts of the historic drought conditions occurring at that time. 

It was always intended to be a temporary measure to address unusual circumstances. With the extreme drought conditions now 

over, and with the new authorities provided in the WIIN Act, Reclamation can return its focus to long-term solutions to long-term 

water supply issues. Therefore, the Committee has focused the additional funding provided within specific categories of activities. 

Research and Development: Desalination and Water Purification 

Program.—Of the funding provided for this program, $6,000,000 

shall be for desalination projects as authorized in section 4009(a) 

of Public Law 114–322. 

WaterSMART Program: Title XVI Water Reclamation & Reuse 

Program.—Of the funding provided for this program, $10,000,000 

shall be for water recycling and reuse projects as authorized in section 4009(c) of Public Law 114–322. 

Aquifer Recharge.—The Committee is aware that many states 

are exploring new methods of recharging aquifers for increased 

water storage and drought mitigation. The Committee expects the 

Bureau of Reclamation to work closely with project beneficiaries to 

identify and resolve any barriers to aquifer recharge projects when 

appropriate. 

Quagga and Zebra Mussels.—The Committee is aware of the environmental and economic threat posed by invasive quagga and 

zebra mussels. Mussel infestations at Reclamation reservoirs can 

increase significantly the costs of operation of dams, power plants, 

pumping plants, and other water infrastructure. Reclamation and 

its federal, state, and local partners have undertaken many varied 

actions to combat the spread of these species, including support for 

watercraft inspection and decontamination where appropriate. In 

fact, the fiscal year 2018 budget request includes an increase of 

$4,388,000 for this purpose. The Committee encourages Reclamation to continue its efforts in cooperation with its partners to prevent the spread of quagga and zebra mussels. 

CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT RESTORATION FUND

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $55,606,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 41,376,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 41,376,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... ¥14,230,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ – – – 

This fund was established to carry out the provisions of the Central Valley Project Improvement Act and to provide funding for 

habitat restoration, improvement and acquisition, and other fish 

and wildlife restoration activities in the Central Valley area of 

California. Resources are derived from donations, revenues from 

voluntary water transfers and tiered water pricing, and Friant Division surcharges. The account also is financed through additional 

mitigation and restoration payments collected on an annual basis 

from project beneficiaries. 

74 

Within available funds, the Committee provides funding for programs and activities according to the Administration’s request. The 

Committee notes that the decrease for this account in the budget 

request and recommendation is based on a three-year rolling average of collections, in accordance with the authorizing statute. 

Anadromous Fish Screen Program.—The Committee is encouraged by the progress being made to screen the high priority 

unscreened diversions on the Sacramento River under the Bureau 

of Reclamation’s Anadromous Fish Screen Program. The Committee encourages Reclamation to continue its focus on screening 

of the remaining high priority diversions from within funds made 

available under the Central Valley Project Restoration Fund in future budget requests. The Committee further encourages Reclamation to prioritize those fish screen and fish passage projects that 

will help improve the reliability of water supply deliveries in areas 

recently afflicted by severe drought. 

CALIFORNIA BAY-DELTA RESTORATION

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $36,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 37,000,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 37,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... +1,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ – – – 

The California Bay-Delta Restoration account funds the federal 

share of water supply and reliability improvements, ecosystem improvements, and other activities being developed for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and associated watersheds by a state 

and federal partnership (CALFED). Federal participation in this 

program was initially authorized in the California Bay-Delta Environmental and Water Security Act enacted in 1996. 

POLICY AND ADMINISTRATION

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $59,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 59,000,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 59,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... – – – 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ – – – 

The Policy and Administration account provides for the executive 

direction and management of all Reclamation activities, as performed by the Commissioner’s office in Washington, D.C.; the Technical Service Center in Denver, Colorado; and in five regional offices. The Denver 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. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISION

The bill includes an administrative provision allowing for the 

purchase of passenger motor vehicles. 

75 

GENERAL PROVISIONS—DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

The bill continues a provision regarding the circumstances in 

which the Bureau of Reclamation may reprogram funds. 

The bill continues a provision regarding the San Luis Unit and 

Kesterson Reservoir in California. 

The bill includes a provision regarding the San Joaquin River 

Restoration program. 

TITLE III—DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

INTRODUCTION 

Funds recommended in Title III provide for all Department of 

Energy (DOE) programs, including Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, Nuclear 

Energy, Fossil Energy Research and Development, Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves, the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, the 

Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve, the Energy Information Administration, Non-Defense Environmental Cleanup, the Uranium 

Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning Fund, Science, 

Nuclear Waste Disposal, Innovative Technology Loan Guarantee 

Program, Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing Loans Program, Tribal Energy Loan Guarantee Program, Departmental Administration, Office of the Inspector General, the National Nuclear 

Security Administration (Weapons Activities, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation, Naval Reactors, and Federal Salaries and Expenses), 

Defense Environmental Cleanup, Other Defense Activities, Defense 

Nuclear Waste Disposal, the Power Marketing Administrations, 

and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Department of Energy has requested a total budget of $27,870,597,000 in fiscal year 2018 to fund programs in its four 

primary mission areas: science, energy, environment, and national 

security. The Department of Energy budget request is 

$2,875,412,000 below fiscal year 2017. 

Advanced Research Projects Agency—Energy (ARPA—E).—The 

recommendation does not include funds for ARPA—E and directs 

that prior-year balances be used to conduct an orderly shutdown. 

CONGRESSIONAL DIRECTION

Article I, section 9 of the United States Constitution states ‘‘No 

money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in consequence of Appropriations made by law’’. 

The Committee continues the Department’s reprogramming authority in statute to ensure that the Department carries out its 

programs consistent with congressional direction. This reprogramming authority is established at the program, project, or activity 

level, whichever is the most specific level of budget items identified 

in this Act and the Committee report accompanying the Act. The 

Committee also prohibits new starts through the use of reprogramming and includes other direction to improve public oversight of 

the Department’s actions. In addition, the recommendation continues a general provision specifying which transfer authorities 

may be used for accounts funded by this Act. The Committee recVerDate Sep 11 2014 11:46 Jul 18, 2017 Jkt 026261 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR230.XXX HR230
76 

ommendation includes a new general provision for fiscal year 2018 

that establishes an absolute limit on the amount of funding that 

may be transferred from the Department’s accounts to the DOE 

working capital fund in aggregate, consistent with the authorities 

provided by section 653 of the Department of Energy Organization 

Act (42 U.S.C. 7263). 

United States-Israel Strategic Partnership.—The United StatesIsrael Strategic Partnership Act of 2014 (P.L. 113–296) authorized 

the Department to establish an energy research and development 

partnership with Israel. The recommendation includes up to 

$4,000,000 for the Department to explore activities to bring about 

this collaborative effort. These funds are in addition to the 

$2,000,000 provided for the U.S.-Israel energy cooperative agreement. 

FINANCIAL REPORTING AND MANAGEMENT

The Department still is not in compliance with its statutory requirement to submit to Congress, at the time that the President’s 

budget request is submitted, a future-years energy program that 

covers the fiscal year of the budget submission and the four succeeding years, as directed in the fiscal year 2012 Act. In addition, 

the Department has an outstanding requirement to submit a plan 

to become fully compliant with this requirement. 

Working Capital Fund.—The Committee recommends 

$267,901,000, the same as the amount estimated by the Department of Energy for transfers to the fund in fiscal year 2017, after 

accounting for the shift of CyberOne activities to Departmental Administration. 

Alleviation of Poverty.—In its fiscal year 2016 report, the Committee directed the Department to provide a report detailing all domestic and international projects and programs within its jurisdiction that contribute to the alleviation of poverty. The Department 

is reminded that the Committee continues to expect the report to 

be provided expeditiously. 

Workplace Diversity.—The Committee recognizes the importance 

of workplace diversity in the Department of Energy’s national laboratories. The Committee encourages the Department to continue 

to develop and broaden partnerships with minority serving institutions, including Hispanic Serving Institutions, Historically Black 

Colleges and Universities, Asian and Pacific Islander Serving Institutions, Predominantly Black Institutions, Tribal Colleges, and 

other Minority Serving Institutions. In particular, the Committee 

encourages programs involving undergraduate research experiences, high speed computing access, and education. The Committee 

notes that the fiscal year 2017 Act directed the Department to provide a detailed plan outlining efforts to recruit and retain diverse 

talent from the institutions mentioned above. The Committee looks 

forward to receiving the plan in a timely manner. 

Public Access Plan.—The Committee appreciates the Department 

issuing its Public Access Plan on July 24, 2014. The Committee 

urges the Department to continue efforts towards full implementation of the plan and expects an update on progress to be included 

in the fiscal year 2019 budget request. 

77 

MANAGEMENT OF SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL AND DEFENSE WASTE

The Committee fully supports the Administration’s position to 

move forward with Yucca Mountain. The Department, together 

with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), has repeatedly 

confirmed over the years that Yucca Mountain is a safe and secure 

location to permanently store the nation’s spent nuclear fuel and 

high-level radioactive waste. However, many more steps remain before Yucca Mountain begins to accept waste. The Department’s request restarts this process and brings the Department closer to fulfilling its legal obligation to take responsibility for storing the nation’s nuclear waste. 

To restart the adjudication of the Yucca Mountain license appli- cation, the Committee provides the requested levels of $90,000,000 

within Nuclear Waste Disposal, $30,000,000 within Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal, and $30,000,000 within the NRC. 

CYBERSECURITY

The Committee is concerned that the Department has not been 

effectively addressing cyber threats to its enterprise. The Department developed a cyber strategy in December 2015, but failed to 

create an implementation plan to carry out its policy, which creates 

uncertainty throughout the enterprise on how to properly deal with 

cyber threats and safeguard the Department’s assets. Not later 

than 180 days after the enactment of this Act, the Department 

shall develop an enterprise-wide cyber strategy implementation 

plan that includes the relevant resources, project plans, and specific performance metrics necessary to strengthen the Department’s 

cyber posture. To enhance the accountability for management of 

cyber resources, the Committee recommendation consolidates funding for cybersecurity that was previously funded within the DOE 

working capital fund with funding for cybersecurity under the Office of the Chief Information Officer within Departmental Administration. 

In addition to securing its own systems, the Department and our 

national laboratories play an important role in assuring the resiliency of the nation’s electric grid and energy infrastructure. The 

Committee recommendation provides targeted investments that 

will defend the U.S. energy sector against the evolving threat of 

cyber and other attacks, including $12,000,000 above the budget request in Other Defense Activities. 

COMMONLY RECYCLED PAPER

The Department 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. 

EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITIES

The Department is prohibited from funding fellowship and scholarship programs in fiscal year 2018 unless the programs were explicitly included in the budget justification or funded within this 

recommendation. Any new or ongoing programs that the DepartVerDate Sep 11 2014 11:46 Jul 18, 2017 Jkt 026261 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR230.XXX HR230
78 

ment chooses to fund in fiscal year 2019 must be detailed in the 

fiscal year 2019 budget justifications. This direction shall be followed in future fiscal years unless contradicted by the Committee. 

PAYMENTS IN LIEU OF TAXES

Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) is a program for discretionary 

financial assistance that DOE may provide that is subject to the 

availability of funds. While DOE may not make payments for most 

of the property in its possession, the Congress provided authorization for payments to specific properties acquired by the Atomic Energy Commission in the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. While that authority is broad to allow for special circumstances, the statute also 

provides clear direction that the Department shall be guided by the 

policy of not making payments in excess of the taxes that would 

have been payable for such property in the condition in which it 

was acquired, except in the case of special burdens. The formulas 

used by DOE to determine what payments it will make are not 

transparent, are not interpreted consistently across all sites, and 

no longer appear to be consistent with the intent of Congress as 

stated in the authorization language. Because of the inconsistencies, payments to individual recipients may be as little as $1,000 

or as much as $6,000,000. After an investigation of the program in 

the 1990s, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) substantiated claims from some communities that DOE’s policy was not 

being equitably applied and described how DOE had changed basic 

assumptions in how it would calculate payments on a case-by-case 

basis. 

Because the Department has deviated so substantially from its 

authorization basis over time, the Committee directs the Department to undertake a full overhaul of the program. After reasonable 

notice has been given in the Federal Register, DOE shall terminate 

all existing PILT agreements and enter into new PILT agreements 

that are consistent across all eligible sites and are in compliance 

with the requirement that payments are not made in excess of the 

taxes that would have been payable for such property in the condition in which it was originally acquired. Not later than 360 days 

after the enactment of this Act, the Department shall provide to 

the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress a report that describes the terms and payment amounts for each new 

PILT agreement and certifies that the terms of each agreement 

and calculations for payments are consistent across all eligible sites 

and with the statutory policy direction. 

The Committee further directs the Comptroller General to undertake an assessment of DOE’s PILT program to examine: (1) which 

communities have received payments and in what amounts; (2) 

how payment amounts were determined by DOE; (3) the extent to 

which agreements differ across sites; (4) the consistency of adjustments made to payments that reduce or increase amounts paid; 

and (5) whether DOE has made substantive changes to its payment 

policy or individual agreements since the issue was last examined 

by the GAO. 

PROJECT MANAGEMENT

The Department recently updated DOE Order 413.3B, its formal 

order on program and project management direction for the acquiVerDate Sep 11 2014 11:46 Jul 18, 2017 Jkt 026261 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR230.XXX HR230
79 

sition of capital assets, with the goal of improving its performance 

in delivering projects within the original performance baseline cost 

and schedule. Increasingly, DOE programs are making use of alternative project structures to award contracts for procurements and 

other construction activities in advance of formalizing the performance baseline for a project. The update fails to address procedures 

for carrying out these ‘‘subprojects’’, such as what actions should be 

performed at critical decision points of a ‘‘subproject’’ and how critical decision milestones for a ‘‘subproject’’ relate to requirements for 

the award of critical decision milestones as detailed in the DOE 

Order. The Department shall perform a comprehensive review of 

how its program offices are utilizing ‘‘subprojects’’ to execute 

project plans and shall update DOE Order 413.3B with appropriate 

procedures and guidelines that will help the Department meet its 

goal of removal from the GAO’s High Risk List for fraud, waste, 

and abuse. 

REPROGRAMMING AND TRANSFER GUIDELINES

The Committee requires the Department to inform the Committee promptly when a change in program execution and funding 

is required during the fiscal year. The Department’s reprogramming requirements are detailed in statute. To assist the Department in this effort, the following guidance is provided for programs 

and activities. 

Definition.—A reprogramming includes the reallocation of funds 

from one activity to another within an appropriation. The recommendation includes a general provision providing internal reprogramming authority to the Department, as long as no program, 

project, or activity is increased or decreased by more than 

$5,000,000 or 10 percent, whichever is less, compared to the levels 

in the table detailing the Committee’s recommendations for the Department’s various accounts. For construction projects, a reprogramming constitutes the reallocation of funds from one construction project to another project or a change of $2,000,000 or 10 

percent, whichever is less, in the scope of an approved project. 

Criteria for Reprogramming.—A reprogramming should be made 

only when an unforeseen situation arises, and then only if delay of 

the project or activity until the next fiscal year would result in a 

detrimental impact to an agency program or priority. A reprogramming may also be considered if the Department can show that significant cost savings can accrue by increasing funding for an activity. Mere convenience or preference should not be a factor for consideration. A reprogramming may not be employed to initiate new 

programs or to change program, project, or activity allocations specifically denied, limited, or increased by the Congress in the Act or 

report. 

Reporting and Approval Procedures.—In recognition of the security missions of the Department, the legislative guidelines allow 

the Secretary and the Administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration jointly to waive the reprogramming restriction 

by certifying to the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses 

of Congress that it is in the nation’s security interest to do so. The 

Department shall not deviate from the levels for activities specified 

in the report that are below the level of the detail table, except 

through the regular notification procedures of the Committee. No 

80 

funds may be added to programs for which funding has been denied. Any reallocation of new or prior-year budget authority or 

prior-year de-obligations, or any request to implement a reorganization that includes moving previous appropriations between appropriations accounts must be submitted to the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress in writing and may not be 

implemented prior to approval by the Committees. 

Transfers.—As in fiscal year 2017, funding actions into or out of 

accounts funded by this Act may only be made by transfer authorities provided by this or other appropriations Acts. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS 

The Committee’s recommendations for Department of Energy 

programs in fiscal year 2018 are described in the following sections. 

A detailed funding table is included at the end of this title. 

ENERGY PROGRAMS 

ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE ENERGY

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $2,090,200,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 636,149,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 1,103,908,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... ¥986,292,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ +467,759,000 

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) programs include research, development, demonstration, and deployment activities advancing energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies, as well as federal energy assistance programs. The EERE 

program is divided into three portfolios: sustainable transportation, 

renewable energy, and energy efficiency. The sustainable transportation portfolio, which consists of the vehicles, bioenergy, and hydrogen and fuel cell programs, advances the development of plugin electric and other alternative fuel vehicles, high-efficiency advanced combustion engines, and the replacement of oil with clean 

domestic transportation fuels. The renewable energy portfolio, 

which consists of the solar, wind, water, and geothermal programs, 

aims to develop innovative technologies to make renewable electricity generation cost competitive with traditional sources of energy. The energy efficiency portfolio, which consists of the advanced 

manufacturing, buildings, and federal energy assistance programs, 

seeks cost-effective solutions to reduce energy consumption in 

plants, buildings, and homes. 

The recommendation for EERE broadly reflects a gradual shift 

towards early stage research and development activities. However, 

where noted in the report, the Committee encourages a limited 

scope of deployment activities. 

The Committee encourages EERE to offer technical and other 

programmatic assistance to the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico to 

support investment in innovative technologies to effectively reduce 

power system emissions, efficiently treat wastewater, produce 

biofuels, and generate power from solid waste. 

The Committee recognizes the importance of the Department’s 

work on the Energy-Water Nexus and as part of that effort, the 

Committee encourages the Department to enter into an interVerDate Sep 11 2014 11:46 Jul 18, 2017 Jkt 026261 PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR230.XXX HR230
81 

departmental agreement with the Department of Agriculture for research that explores how to integrate ongoing research projects at 

the various DOE Labs and the Agricultural Research Service to develop affordable, deployable, energy- and water-efficient food production platforms, beginning in food-insecure communities across 

the country. By working together, DOE and the Department of Agriculture can bring respective strengths and resources to designing 

the most desirable low-cost and efficient production system. 

The Committee is aware of the significant benefits from the further development of electrochemical conversion of CO2 to syngas for 

renewable fuel production. The Department is encouraged to support the further development of renewable hydrocarbon fuels from 

low-cost waste CO2 and low-carbon renewable energy. 

Zero Emissions Energy Credit.—The Department, in consultation 

with the Energy Information Administration, shall provide to the 

Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress not later 

than 180 days after the enactment of this Act an analysis evaluating the effects of a Zero Emissions Energy Credit that replaces 

existing renewable energy subsidies, once they phase out, with a 

graduated tax credit that is apportioned based on the total emissions profile, including both airborne and solid waste byproduct 

emissions, of energy production sources. This analysis shall include: (1) estimated effects on utility rates paid by consumers in 

both rate-regulated and competitive access jurisdictions; (2) estimated impacts on the cost of zero-emissions-based purchased power 

agreements employed by investor-owned, cooperatively-owned, and 

municipal utilities; (3) estimated reductions in effective rates on 

the per-kilowatt-hour customer cost of qualifying sources, compared 

to current per-kilowatt-hour customer cost of those sources; (4) estimated impact on the need for state-implemented zero emissions 

credits being used to support existing baseload power sources; (5) 

predicted effects on federal government expenditures and revenues; 

and (6) estimated effects in driving the adoption and improvement 

of lower or zero emissions energy production technologies. 

Social Cost of Carbon.—The Department should not promulgate 

any regulations in fiscal year 2018 using the May 2013 estimates 

for the social cost of carbon until a new working group is convened. 

The working group should include the relevant agencies and affected stakeholders, re-examine the social cost of carbon using the 

best available science, and revise the estimates using an accurate 

discount rate and domestic estimate in accordance with E.O. 12866 

and OMB Circular A–4. To increase transparency, the working 

group should solicit public comment prior to finalizing any updates. 

SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORTATION

The Vehicle, Bioenergy, and Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technologies programs fund activities that can reduce American exposure to future high oil prices. Research into cutting-edge technologies that will increase the fuel economy of gasoline and diesel 

fuel vehicles—the vast majority of today’s fleet—will allow Americans to spend less on fuel while traveling the same distance. Research into next-generation automotive and fuel cell technologies 

that power vehicles with domestic energy sources such as natural 

gas, electricity, biofuels, and hydrogen can likewise dramatically 

lower the impact of future high gas prices on Americans. 

82 

Vehicle Technologies.—Within available funds, the recommendation includes $72,000,000 for Batteries and Electric Drive Technology, $25,000,000 for Energy Efficient Mobility Systems, and 

$20,000,000 to continue the SuperTruck II program to further improve the efficiency of heavy-duty class 8 long- and regional-haul 

vehicles. 

The Committee directs the Department to continue to support 

the Clean Cities program, including providing competitive grants to 

support alternative fuel, infrastructure, and vehicle deployment activities. When issuing competitive grants in support of these activities, the Department is encouraged to focus on awards that range 

from $500,000 to $1,000,000 each and include at least one Clean 

Cities coalition partner. The recommendation provides $2,500,000 

for Advance Vehicle Competitions to execute the fourth year of the 

four-year collegiate engineering competitions, EcoCar3. The Committee encourages the Department to support continued funding for 

research that allows the U.S. to continue its leadership role in advancing state-of-the-art transportation infrastructure, which is 

vital to economic development. 

Within available funds, the recommendation includes up to $15,000,000 for medium- and heavy-duty on-road natural gas engine research and development, including energy efficiency improvements, emission after-treatment technologies, fuel system enhancements, and new engine development. 

The Committee notes that the commercial off-road vehicle sector, 

including industrial, mining, and farm equipment, consumes over 

two quads of energy per year. The Department is encouraged to 

consider activities that promote technologies to reduce the energy 

consumption of commercial off-road vehicles and provides up to 

$10,000,000 to support this effort. 

Bioenergy Technologies.—Within available funds, $27,000,000 is 

for feedstock supply and logistics to address issues limiting production and conversion systems at large. No funding is provided for 

the joint initiative with the Navy and the Department of Agriculture to develop commercial diesel and jet biofuels production capacity for defense purposes. 

The Committee is appreciative of research the Bioenergy Technologies Office has supported regarding wet and gaseous waste 

streams in waste-to-energy projects. The Committee is interested in 

further research and development activities to support baseload 

power generation using municipal solid waste-to-energy technologies. The Department is directed to provide to the Committees 

on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress not later than 180 

days after the enactment of this Act a report on research and development activities that can improve the economic viability of municipal solid waste-to-energy facilities. 

Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technologies.—Within available funds, 

$2,000,000 is for the EERE share of the integrated hybrid energy 

systems work with the Office of Nuclear Energy and $7,000,000 is 

to enable integrated energy systems using high and low temperature electrolyzers with the intent of advancing the H2@Scale concept. 

The Committee recognizes the progress of the program and expresses continued support for stationary, vehicle, motive, and portable power applications of this technology. The Department is enVerDate Sep 11 2014 11:46 Jul 18, 2017 Jkt 026261 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR230.XXX HR230
83 

couraged to explore technologies that advance the storage and 

transportation fuel distribution, such as hydrogen compressors and 

carbon fiber tanks, and retail fueling systems. The Department is 

also encouraged to work with the Department of Transportation on 

supporting hydrogen fueling infrastructure. 

The Committee recognizes the need to support the development 

of alternative fueling infrastructure for U.S. consumers. Accordingly, the Department is encouraged to collaborate with the National Institute of Standards and Technology to allow accurate 

measurement of hydrogen at fueling stations. 

RENEWABLE ENERGY

The Solar Energy, Wind Energy, Water Power, and Geothermal 

Technologies programs fund applied research, development, and 

demonstration to reduce the cost of renewable energy to economically competitive levels. Research into innovative technologies, such 

as photovoltaic and concentrating solar technologies, offshore wind, 

hydropower, and ground heat, can expand energy production from 

our domestic resources and reduce our dependence on foreign oil. 

Solar Energy.—The Committee encourages the Department to research high efficiency thin-film photovoltaics and processes for 

high-speed, low-cost processing to produce stable materials on flexible substrates that can be used in residential and commercial 

power and be integrated into buildings, vehicles, and food production. Research programs are encouraged to include cooperation between industry and academia and to include advanced optical characterization that enables development of strong correlations between materials, cell optical properties, and the photovoltaic power 

performance of the working solar cells. 

The Committee also encourages the Department to find ways to 

expand access to solar energy to residences and businesses in lowincome communities. 

Wind Energy.—Within available funds, the recommendation pro- vides not less than $10,000,000 on LCOE reduction, domestic manufacturing, and lowering market barriers for distributed wind systems, including small wind for rural homes and farms. The Department may provide $1,000,000 for the Wind for Schools program. 

The Committee continues to support wind activities with large 

generation potential that rely on data required by federal agencies 

and technology innovations that would not be developed by the private sector alone. To this end, the Committee supports an emphasis on offshore wind technologies that address the unique opportunities and issues across the nation’s waterways, such as high 

winds, icing, and deep water. 

The Committee is aware of efforts by the Wind Technologies Office to work with U.S. industry to support the development of main 

shaft and gearbox bearing technologies. The Committee encourages 

the Department to collaborate with industry and to consider investment into the development of new technologies that advance critical bearing and gearbox technologies used in wind turbines. 

Water Power.—Within available funds, the recommendation provides $29,000,000 for marine and hydrokinetic technologies and 

$24,000,000 for conventional hydropower, of which $6,600,000 is for 

the purposes of section 242 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005. Within the funding provided for marine and hydrokinetic technologies, 

84 

the Department is directed to continue competitive solicitations for 

a balanced portfolio of industry-led research, development, and deployment of wave and current (ocean, wave, tidal, in-river) energy 

conversion components and systems. The Committee expects the 

Department to continue to support collaborations between the previously designated Marine Renewable Energy Centers and the National Laboratories, including personnel exchanges, to support research, development, and deployment of marine energy components 

and systems. 

The Committee appreciates the Department’s ongoing exploration of marine and hydrokinetic technologies research. In last 

year’s House Report, the Committee directed the Department to report on the past allocation of funds, including demonstrating diversity in possible public and private partnerships and diversity in regional locations for siting these new methods and technologies. The 

Committee looks forward to the results of this report. 

The Committee supports the Hydropower Technologies subprogram’s HydroNEXT Initiative, including efforts to address technology development challenges and critical environmental and market challenges, such as permitting new hydropower projects. 

ENERGY EFFICIENCY

The Advanced Manufacturing, Building Technologies, Federal 

Energy Management, and Weatherization and Intergovernmental 

programs advance cost-effective solutions to reduce energy consumption through increased efficiency. Research into cutting-edge 

technologies that enhance manufacturing processes; develop advanced materials; and reduce energy use in buildings, homes, and 

factories can serve the national interest by greatly reducing our energy needs, while also giving American manufacturers an advantage to compete in the global marketplace. 

Advanced Manufacturing.—Within available funds, the recommendation provides not less than $4,205,000 for improvements 

in the steel industry and $5,000,000 for transient kinetic analysis 

for scaling of industrial processes and developing new catalysis programs for industrial applications. 

The recommendation does not include funding for the Critical 

Materials Energy Innovation Hub, the Energy Water Desalination 

Hub, or the six Clean Energy Manufacturing Innovation (CEMI) 

Institutes. The Committee supports the request to phase out operations and directs an orderly shutdown at the Hubs and six CEMI 

institutes. However, in order to ensure the most promising early 

stage research and development efforts of the Hubs and CEMI institutes are continued, the Committee provides up to $15,000,000 

to support competitive awards for similar activities. 

The Committee recognizes the importance of the textile sector 

and believes that federal support for advanced textile research is 

essential to maintaining the competitiveness of the domestic textile 

and apparel industry. The Committee believes that advanced textile research can develop more sustainable manufacturing processes and technologies that will benefit producers, foster the reshoring of textile jobs to the United States, and reduce the global 

environmental impact of textile manufacturing. The Committee 

therefore encourages the Department to consider the need for competitively-funded advanced textile manufacturing process research. 

85 

In the fiscal year 2016 report, the Committee directed the Department to analyze the impact federal investment may have in 

strengthening the availability and usage of lithium, including lowsodium lithium metal. As the Committee awaits the results of this 

study, the Department is encouraged to explore ways in which 

these upcoming recommendations can increase U.S. domestic supply of lithium and low-sodium lithium metal. 

Building Technologies.—Within available funds, the recommendation includes up to $25,000,000 for transactive controls 

research and development and $25,000,000 for solid state lighting. 

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 is provided in addition to funds recommended for lighting research and 

development. 

Building energy consumption represents at least a 40 percent 

component of energy consumption in the U.S. Energy efficiency is 

thus a critical component of infrastructure development. The Committee recognizes the importance of the Transformation in Cities 

initiative for local government planning and encourages the Department to continue its support of the goals of the initiative. 

The Committee notes that natural gas plays an important role in 

meeting the energy needs of U.S. homes and commercial buildings. 

In particular, the Committee is aware of research opportunities related to the use of natural gas in water heating, space conditioning, 

furnace venting, and combined heat and power systems. The Committee encourages the Department to explore research and development that can advance future natural gas systems and appliances 

to meet consumer demand for high efficiency and environmentally 

friendly products. To continue these efforts, up to $4,000,000 is for 

research, development, and market transformation programs on energy efficiency efforts related to the direct use of natural gas in residential applications, including gas heat pump heating and water 

heating, on-site combined heat and power, and natural gas appliance venting. 

Weatherization and Intergovernmental Programs.—The Committee recommends $278,000,000 for Weatherization and Intergovernmental Programs. 

CORPORATE SUPPORT

The Program Direction, Strategic Programs, and Facilities and 

Infrastructure budgets provide the necessary resources for program 

and project management across all of EERE’s technology programs, 

for the adoption of technologies to market, and for the operation 

and upkeep of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. 

Strategic Programs.—Within available funds, $2,000,000 is to 

continue activities in support of the U.S.-Israel energy cooperative 

agreement. 

The Department is encouraged to work with two-year, public 

community and technical colleges on job training programs that 

lead to an industry-recognized credential in the energy workforce. 

86 

ELECTRICITY DELIVERY AND ENERGY RELIABILITY

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $230,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 120,000,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 218,500,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... ¥11,500,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ +98,500,000 

The Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability program advances technologies and provides operational support to increase 

the efficiency, resilience, and security of the nation’s electricity delivery system. The power grid employs aging technologies at a time 

when power demands, the deployment of new intermittent technologies, and rising security threats are imposing new stresses on 

the system. The Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability aims to develop a modern power grid by advancing cybersecurity technologies, intelligent and high-efficiency grid components, 

and energy storage systems. 

Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability Research and Development.—The Committee continues to support the Department’s research activities to ensure transmission reliability, but believes reliability and resiliency modeling, and the decisions taken by utility 

industry and emergency response planners, can be enacted through 

the use of advanced integrated analytical and decision-making 

tools. Within available funds for Transmission Reliability, 

$5,000,000 is for university, national laboratory, and industry research and development for competitively-awarded activities to develop multi-use integrated analytical and decision-making tools. 

Within available funds for Cybersecurity for Energy Delivery Systems, $9,000,000 is to continue development of the industry-scale 

electric grid test bed. 

The Committee notes the important role the National SCADA 

Testbed (NSTB) has played in enhancing power system cybersecurity. There remains a need for a capability to assess power system 

vulnerabilities, develop engineered solutions to mitigate them, 

share information and develop operational security training and 

best practices. Requested by its Section 9 entities, the Department, 

as the sector-specific agency, is encouraged to consider establishing 

an updated national laboratory NSTB capability to support its Section 9 and broader energy sector responsibilities. 

The Committee supports the strategic goals of the Grid Modernization Multi-year Program Plan and encourages the Department to continue implementation as in previous years. The Committee supports the Grid Modernization Laboratory Consortium 

leadership in a comprehensive, multi-disciplinary research and development program managed through a consortium of national laboratories, leveraging national laboratory assets and partnerships 

with non-federal entities. The Committee is pleased that the Department has undertaken peer review processes. 

The Committee encourages the Office of Electricity Delivery and 

Energy Reliability to continue to collaborate with the Office of 

Science and EERE on the energy storage portion of the Grid Modernization Multi-year Program Plan. The Department is also encouraged to consider opportunities to translate research between 

grid, vehicular, and other potential energy storage applications. Activities should be informed by priorities identified by the DepartVerDate Sep 11 2014 11:46 Jul 18, 2017 Jkt 026261 PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR230.XXX HR230
87 

ment, national laboratories, electric utilities, and other members of 

private industry. 

The Committee notes that the Department has previously supported energy storage integration projects. The Department is encouraged to continue investment of energy storage systems at grid 

relevant scales and maximize the value stream of these technologies. In addition, the Committee supports the Department’s ongoing efforts to improve electricity reliability and other grid integration initiatives. Accordingly, the Committee supports the Department’s grid integration demonstration modules and urges the 

Department to continue collaborating with industrial and academic 

partners and the national laboratories involved in the grid integration consortium as they explore the integration of renewables with 

energy storage technologies. 

NUCLEAR ENERGY

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $1,016,616,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 703,000,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 969,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... ¥47,616,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ +266,000,000 

Nuclear power generates approximately one-fifth of the nation’s 

electricity and will continue to be an important baseload energy 

source in the future. The Department of Energy’s Nuclear Energy 

(NE) program invests in research, development, and demonstration 

activities that develop the next generation of clean and safe reactors, further improve the safety of our current reactor fleet, and 

contribute to the nation’s long-term leadership in the global nuclear power industry. 

NUCLEAR ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

Nuclear Energy Enabling Technologies.—Within available funds, 

$47,000,000 is for Crosscutting Technology Development, of which 

$10,000,000 is for work on advanced sensors and instrumentation, 

$6,000,000 is for hybrid energy systems, and up to $30,000,000 is 

to support development of advanced reactor technologies and highpriority crosscutting research and development areas; $36,000,000 

is for the Nuclear Science User Facilities, of which $5,000,000 is for 

nuclear energy computation support; $34,200,000 is for Nuclear 

Energy Advanced Modeling and Simulation; and not less than 

$9,800,000 is for GAIN initiative activities. The recommendation 

does not include funds for the Energy Innovation Hub, but includes 

additional funding within Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling and 

Simulation for competitive awards to continue similar activities. 

Integrated University Program.—The Committee recommends 

$5,000,000 to continue the Integrated University Program, which is 

critical to ensuring the nation’s nuclear science and engineering 

workforce in future years. 

Reactor Concepts Research, Development, and Demonstration.— 

The recommendation includes $144,300,000 for Advanced Reactor 

Technologies, of which $60,000,000 is for a solicitation to support 

technical, first-of-its-kind engineering and design and regulatory 

development of next generation light water and non-light water reactor technologies, including small modular reactors. The DepartVerDate Sep 11 2014 11:46 Jul 18, 2017 Jkt 026261 PO 00000 Frm 00087 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR230.XXX HR230
88 

ment is encouraged to work with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to ensure appropriate component, system, and plant certification, regulation, and licensing support is provided to developers 

of next generation technologies as a part of these activities. The 

recommendation also includes $30,000,000 for fuel and graphite 

qualification and up to $5,000,000 for a MW-scale reactor study. 

The recommendation includes $35,000,000 for research and development to support efforts to develop a versatile fast test reactor. 

The Committee also supports the current fleet of reactors as they 

continue to ensure safe and reliable operations and includes 

$40,000,000 for the Light Water Reactor Sustainability program. 

The Department shall continue to work with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to ensure an adequate 

supply of plutonium-238 is available for future NASA space exploration missions. 

Fuel Cycle Research and Development.—Within available funds, 

the recommendation provides $71,000,000 for the Advanced Fuels 

Program, of which not less than $35,000,000 is for the accident tolerant fuels activity and $8,000,000 is for additional support of capability development of transient testing, including test design, 

modeling, and simulation; $24,000,000 for Material Recovery and 

Waste Form Development to maintain U.S. competency in the area 

of fuel cycle technologies; and $8,500,000 for Systems Analysis and 

Integration. 

The recommendation provides $45,000,000 to continue generic 

Used Nuclear Fuel Disposition research and development activities 

and notes that some previous activities supported by this account 

are now included within the funding provided to restart Yucca 

Mountain licensing activities. 

IDAHO FACILITIES MANAGEMENT

INL Operations and Infrastructure.—Within available funds, the 

recommendation includes $238,000,000 for INL Operations and Infrastructure to support the MFC and ATR Five Year Plan to increase reliability and sustainability. 

FOSSIL ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $668,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 280,000,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 634,600,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... ¥33,400,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ +354,600,000 

Fossil energy resources, such as coal, oil, and natural gas, generate approximately 65 percent of the nation’s electricity and will 

continue to provide for the majority of our needs for the foreseeable 

future. The Fossil Energy Research and Development program 

funds research, development, and demonstration activities to improve existing technologies and to develop next-generation systems 

in the full spectrum of fossil energy areas. At a time when fossil 

fuel power generation is expanding around the globe, the activities 

funded within this program advance our nation’s position as a leader in fossil energy technologies and ensure that we use the full extent of our domestic resources safely and efficiently. 

89 

The Committee notes that the budget request proposed a restructuring of the ‘‘NETL Research and Operations’’ and ‘‘NETL Infrastructure’’ accounts. That restructuring is not included, and the 

recommendation instead continues the budget structure from fiscal 

year 2017. 

COAL—CCS AND POWER SYSTEMS

The Department is directed to use funds within the coal program 

only for coal research and development, with the exception of the 

Supercritical Transformational Electric Power Generation Initiative, which has applications to all high-temperature fossil heat 

sources. 

The recommendation provides $25,000,000 to continue to support 

the solicitation for two large-scale pilots that focus on transformational coal technologies that represent a new way to convert 

energy to enable a step change in performance, efficiency, and the 

cost of electricity compared to today’s technologies. Such technologies include thermodynamic improvements in energy conversion and heat transfer, such as pressurized oxygen combustion and 

chemical looping, and improvements in carbon capture systems 

technology. In making the awards for large-scale pilots, the Department should prioritize entities that have previously received funding for these technologies at the lab and bench scale. 

The Committee also notes that the budget request recommends 

a significant restructuring of the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL). The Committee does not support the closure of any 

NETL sites and provides no funds to plan, develop, implement, or 

pursue the consolidation or closure of any of the NETL sites. 

The Committee supports the integrated carbon and energy management activities of NE and EERE and provides $2,000,000 for 

Hybrid Carbon Conversion activities within Fossil Energy. 

Carbon Storage.—The Department is encouraged to fund activities that promote the reuse of captured carbon from coal for the 

production of fuel and other valuable products. 

Advanced Energy Systems.—Within available funds, $8,000,000 

is for the Advanced Air Separation Program to continue activities 

improving advanced air separation technologies and $30,000,000 is 

for Solid Oxide Fuel Cells to focus on research and development to 

enable efficient, cost-effective electricity generation with minimal 

use of water and the use of abundant domestic coal and natural 

gas resources with near-zero atmospheric emissions of CO2 and 

pollutants. Moreover, central power generation applications of solid 

oxide fuel cells can be integrated with carbon capture and storage 

efforts to contribute to a secure energy future. The Committee encourages the Department to support field pilot programs to advance 

this technology to commercial success. The Committee urges the 

Department to fund research and development activities to improve 

the efficiency of gas turbines used in power generation systems, 

working cooperatively with industry, universities, and other appropriate parties. 

Crosscutting Research.—Within available funds, the recommendation provides $16,000,000 for Coal Utilization Science and 

$31,500,000 for Plant Optimization Technologies, of which 

$15,000,000 is for the Advanced Ultrasupercritical Program to fabricate, qualify, and develop domestic suppliers capable of producing 

90 

components from high temperature materials. The Committee encourages the Department to advance technologies that address 

near-term water needs to treat wastewater or other alternate water 

sources from operative coal power plants while generating excess 

electricity to offset water treatment costs. 

The Committee supports the Department’s Historically Black 

Colleges and Universities and Hispanic-Serving Institutions education and training program and recommends $1,000,000 to award 

research grants to qualifying universities and institutions. 

NETL Coal Research and Development.—The recommendation 

includes $15,000,000 for the Department to expand its external 

agency activities to develop and test commercially viable advanced 

separation technologies at proof-of-concept or pilot scale that can be 

deployed near term for the extraction and recovery of rare earth 

elements and minerals from U.S. coal and coal byproduct sources 

having the highest potential for success. The Committee encourages the Department to leverage the capabilities of outside applied 

researchers in implementing these activities. 

NATURAL GAS TECHNOLOGIES

Research.—Within available funds, the recommendation provides $7,000,000 for Environmentally Prudent Development and 

$5,200,000 for the Risk Based Data Management System. The Department is encouraged to explore technologies that curtail methane gas emissions from flaring and venting in shale formations. 

The Department is also encouraged to support funding research 

and development concerning technologies to convert flared and 

vented storage tank waste gas to electricity. 

UNCONVENTIONAL FOSSIL ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES

Prior investment in this area has led to the current shale gas 

revolution and continued research and development is vital for the 

efficient and sustainable development of this resource. 

The Committee encourages the Department to focus resources on 

university-based research in fundamental oil and gas research to 

explore improved oil recovery from unconventional reservoirs, enhanced oil recovery for conventional reservoirs, and safe and environmentally friendly deep water oil and gas technologies. 

The Committee also encourages the Department to support efforts to increase production of unconventional fossil fuels through 

advanced technology and modeling, including optimizing high resolution and time-lapse geophysical methods for improved resource 

detection and better rock characterization at the micro- and nanoscale. Additionally, the Department is encouraged to examine the 

feasibility of utilizing geothermal energy from produced fluids for 

in-field energy requirements. 

The Committee is pleased with the Department’s progress to 

date on studying the volatility of crude oil from the Bakken Shale 

in North Dakota and accurately assessing and characterizing volatility while transporting. The Committee directs the Department to 

continue this research in partnership with the Department of 

Transportation to improve the safety of crude oil transported by 

rail in this country. 

The Committee notes the fiscal year 2017 report directed the Department to issue a report on the feasibility of establishing an ethVerDate Sep 11 2014 11:46 Jul 18, 2017 Jkt 026261 PO 00000 Frm 00090 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR230.XXX HR230
91 

ane storage and distribution hub in the United States. The Committee expects this report to be delivered in a timely manner. 

NETL INFRASTRUCTURE

Within available funds, the recommendation provides $5,500,000 

for NETL’s Supercomputer, Joule. 

NAVAL PETROLEUM AND OIL SHALE RESERVES

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $14,950,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 4,900,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 4,900,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... ¥10,050,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ – – – 

The Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves no longer serve the 

national defense purpose envisioned in the early 1900’s, and consequently the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 

1996 required the sale of the Government’s interest in the Naval 

Petroleum Reserve 1 (NPR–1). To comply with this requirement, 

the Elk Hills field in California was sold to Occidental Petroleum 

Corporation in 1998. Following the sale of Elk Hills, the transfer 

of the oil shale reserves, and transfer of administrative jurisdiction 

and environmental remediation of the Naval Petroleum Reserve 2 

(NPR–2) to the Department of the Interior, the Department retained one Naval Petroleum Reserve property, the Naval Petroleum 

Reserve 3 (NPR–3) in Wyoming (Teapot Dome field). The Department issued a disposition plan for NPR–3 in June 2013 and began 

implementation of the plan in fiscal year 2014. Transfer of NPR– 

3 to a new owner occurred in fiscal year 2015. 

STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $223,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 180,000,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 252,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... +29,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ +72,000,000 

The mission of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve is to store petroleum to reduce the adverse economic impact of a major petroleum 

supply interruption to the U.S. and to carry out obligations under 

the international energy program. 

The recommendation includes funding to address facilities development and operations, including physical security and cavern integrity, and to maintain 1,000,000 barrels of gasoline blendstock in 

the Northeast Gasoline Supply Reserve. The recommendation includes legislative language to direct the Secretary to draw down 

and sell crude oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, with proceeds to be deposited into the Energy Security and Infrastructure 

Modernization Fund for use in carrying out the Life Extension II 

project. This drawdown and use of proceeds is in accordance with 

section 404 of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015. 

92 

NORTHEAST HOME HEATING OIL RESERVE

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $6,500,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 6,500,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 6,500,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... – – – 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ – – – 

The acquisition and storage of heating oil for the Northeast 

began in August 2000 when the Department of Energy, through 

the Strategic Petroleum Reserve account, awarded contracts for the 

lease of commercial storage facilities and acquisition of heating oil. 

The purpose of the reserve is to assure home heating oil supplies 

for the Northeastern States during times of very low inventories 

and significant threats to the immediate supply of heating oil. The 

Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve was established as a separate 

entity from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve on March 6, 2001. The 

reserve contains one million barrels of Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel 

(ULSD), which is the equivalent of three to four days of emergency 

stocks in the Northeast. 

ENERGY INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $122,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 118,000,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 118,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... ¥4,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ – – – 

The Energy Information Administration is a quasi-independent 

agency within the Department of Energy established to provide 

timely, objective, and accurate energy-related information to the 

Congress, the executive branch, state governments, industry, and 

the public. The Committee is appreciative of the Energy Information Administration’s efforts in establishing a National Oil and Gas 

Gateway. 

NON-DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $247,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 218,400,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 222,400,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... ¥24,600,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ +4,000,000 

Non-Defense Environmental Cleanup includes funds to manage 

and remediate sites used for civilian, energy research, and non-defense related activities. These past activities resulted in radioactive, hazardous, and mixed waste contamination that requires remediation, stabilization, or some other action. 

Small Sites.—Within Small Sites, $12,000,000 is for Idaho National Laboratory, including increases needed to complete security 

systems upgrades at the Fort Saint Vrain spent fuel storage installation that were deferred in fiscal year 2017. 

Oak Ridge Activities.—Since fiscal year 2015, Congress has provided support for a memorandum of agreement for historic preservation of the K–25 gaseous diffusion uranium enrichment facility 

in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Not later than 30 days after the enactment of this Act, the Department shall provide to the Committees 

93 

on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress a report that describes the Department’s plan, total cost, and proposed schedule for 

meeting the commitments made in its agreement. 

URANIUM ENRICHMENT DECONTAMINATION AND DECOMMISSIONING

FUND

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $768,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 752,749,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 768,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... – – – 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ +15,251,000 

The Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning Fund was established by the Energy Policy Act of 1992 to 

pay for the cleanup of gaseous diffusion plants at Portsmouth, 

Ohio; Paducah, Kentucky; and the East Tennessee Technology 

Park in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. 

Title X Uranium/Thorium Reimbursements.—The Committee 

recommends $32,959,000 to reimburse private licensees for the cost 

of cleaning up uranium and thorium processing sites in accordance 

with title X of the Energy Policy Act of 1992. The Committee expects the Department to reimburse licensees for all previous expenses including costs related to remediation, restoration, and 

oversight of these programs and to ensure all of the impacted communities are made whole. Fulfilling the obligation to fully reimburse licensees is important to the health and safety of the impacted communities. The Committee expects the Department of Energy to continue to provide sufficient resources within future budgets to reimburse licensees for approved claim balances in a timely 

manner and to avoid accumulating balances and liabilities. 

Uranium transfers.—Not later than 90 days after the enactment 

of this Act, the Department shall provide to the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress a report with recommendations to minimize the impact of uranium transfers on the domestic 

uranium mining, conversion, and enrichment industries, including 

any actions that would require new authority for the Department 

to implement. The report shall specify any new legal authorities 

necessary for the Department to contract directly with domestic 

uranium industries to introduce uranium into the market. 

SCIENCE

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $5,392,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 4,472,516,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 5,392,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... – – – 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ +919,484,000 

The Office of Science funds basic science research across national 

laboratories, universities, and other research institutions in support of American innovation and the Department’s energy-focused 

missions. Through research in physics, biology, chemistry, and 

other science disciplines, these activities expand scientific understanding and secure the nation’s leadership in energy innovation. 

The Office of Science is the nation’s largest supporter of basic research in the physical sciences. 

94 

The Science program office includes Advanced Scientific Computing Research, Basic Energy Sciences, Biological and Environmental Research, Fusion Energy Sciences, High Energy Physics, 

Nuclear Physics, Workforce Development for Teachers and Scientists, Science Laboratories Infrastructure, Safeguards and Security, and Program Direction. The Committee has placed a high priority on funding these activities in fiscal year 2018, given the private sector is not likely to fund research whose findings either have 

high non-commercial value or are not likely to be commercialized 

in the near or medium term. This work is vital to sustaining the 

scientific leadership of the United States and can provide the 

underpinnings for valuable intellectual property in the coming decades. 

The Department is directed to submit to the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress not later than 120 days 

after the enactment of this Act a solar fuels research initiative 

strategic plan. The 10-year plan should discuss research challenges 

and opportunities, program goals, and milestones to overcome scientific and technological impediments. The plan should also include 

a description of the planned coordination between the Office of 

Science and EERE 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 investments are sufficient to maintain U.S. leadership. 

ADVANCED SCIENTIFIC COMPUTING RESEARCH

The Advanced Scientific Computing Research program develops 

and hosts some of the world’s fastest computing and network capabilities to enable science and energy modeling, simulation, and research. 

Exascale Computing Project.—The recommendation includes 

$170,000,000 for exascale activities. 

High Performance Computing and Network Facilities.—In addition to the long-term exascale initiative, the Committee supports 

continued upgrade and operation of the Leadership Computing Facilities at Argonne and Oak Ridge national laboratories and of the 

High Performance Production Computing capabilities at Lawrence 

Berkeley National Laboratory. The recommendation includes 

$100,000,000 for the Argonne Leadership Computing Facility, 

$112,000,000 for the Oak Ridge Leadership Computing Facility, 

and $92,000,000 for the National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. Within 

available funds, the recommendation includes $65,000,000 to support necessary infrastructure upgrades and operations for ESnet. 

The Committee is concerned that the deployment plan for an 

exascale machine has undergone major changes without an appropriately defined cost and performance baseline. The Department is 

directed to provide to the Committees on Appropriations of both 

Houses of Congress not later than 90 days after the enactment of 

this Act an update to the exascale plan that includes a detailed 

cost and performance baseline, taking into account flat and slightly 

increasing funding assumptions, for the technological challenges remaining to be solved to deliver an exascale machine. 

95 

BASIC ENERGY SCIENCES

The Basic Energy Sciences program funds basic research in materials science, chemistry, geoscience, and bioscience. The science 

breakthroughs in this program enable a broad array of innovation 

in energy technologies and other industries critical to American 

economic competitiveness. 

Research.—The recommendation provides no funding for the continued operation of the Batteries and Energy Storage Innovation 

Hub and the Fuels from Sunlight Innovation Hub. However, the 

recommendation includes $10,000,000 for competitive awards that 

continue similar research activities previously supported by the 

Hubs. Within available funds, the Committee directs the continued 

support of all the nanoscience research centers and urges optimal 

operations for all the light sources. The recommendation includes 

$15,000,000 for the Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research, $489,109,000 for facilities operations of the nation’s 

light sources, $261,000,000 for facilities operations of the high flux 

neutron sources, and $122,272,000 for facilities operations of the 

nanoscale science research centers. 

BIOLOGICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH

The Biological and Environmental Research (BER) program supports advances in energy technologies and related science through 

research into complex biological and environmental systems. The 

Committee encourages the Department to give priority to optimizing the operation of BER user facilities and the programs that 

utilize them. 

The Committee continues to support the Department’s funding 

for academia to perform studies that include the collection and 

evaluation of atmospheric data from satellite observations obtained 

in cooperation with NASA. Satellite observations of the atmosphere, within the context of the Earth as a global system, provide 

information that is critical in the interpretation of earth-based observations. Additionally, the Department encourages cooperative 

research on this topic with the national laboratories and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 

The Committee notes that the Office of Biological and Environmental Research has pioneered research in fundamental genomic 

science of plants and microbes. The Committee urges the Department to build upon and leverage this expertise and to invest in scientific infrastructure needed to facilitate a deeper understanding of 

the fundamental principles governing microbiome establishment, 

function, and interactions in diverse environments, fostering a predictive understanding of how microbiomes interact with plants, 

control the availability of materials such as carbon, nutrients, and 

contaminants, and respond to changes in the environment. 

The recommendation includes $40,000,000, the same as the 

budget request, for the Bioenergy Research Centers selected from 

recompetition in fiscal year 2017. Additionally, the recommendation 

supports the operation of the Joint Genome Institute. 

96 

FUSION ENERGY SCIENCES

The Fusion Energy Sciences program supports basic research 

and experimentation aiming to harness nuclear fusion for energy 

production. 

University-led research helps further U.S. research in fusion energy and trains the next generation of scientists. In fiscal year 

2017, the Department was directed to summarize the fusion energy 

sciences program’s current collaborations with universities and report back to the Committee. The Committee looks forward to the 

results of this report. 

Research.—The Committee recommends $214,027,000 for burning plasma science foundations, $42,069,000 for burning plasma 

science long pulse, and $75,904,000 for discovery plasma science. 

Within available funds, the recommendation provides $17,500,000 

for High Energy Density Laboratory Plasmas and $17,000,000 for 

Scientific Discovery through Advanced Computing. 

Construction.—The Committee recommends $63,000,000 for the 

U.S. contribution to the ITER project. The Committee continues to 

believe the ITER project represents an important step forward for 

energy sciences and has the potential to revolutionize the current 

understanding of fusion energy. 

HIGH ENERGY PHYSICS

The High Energy Physics program supports fundamental research into the elementary constituents of matter and energy and 

ultimately into the nature of space and time. The program focuses 

on particle physics theory and experimentation in three areas: the 

energy frontier, which investigates new particles and fundamental 

forces through high-energy experimentation; the intensity frontier, 

which focuses on rare events to better understand our fundamental 

model of the universe’s elementary constituents; and the cosmic 

frontier, which investigates the nature of the universe and its form 

of matter and energy on cosmic scales. 

Research.—Within available funds, the recommendation provides 

$9,800,000 for the Large Synoptic Survey Telescope Camera and 

$29,500,000 for the dark energy and dark matter experiments. 

NUCLEAR PHYSICS

The Nuclear Physics program supports basic research into the 

fundamental particles that compose nuclear matter, how they 

interact, and how they combine to form the different types of matter observed in the universe today. 

Operations and Maintenance.—Within available funds, the Department is encouraged to fund optimal operations at Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility to support runtime at the 

12GeV Continuous Electron Beam Accelerator Facility and at 

Brookhaven National Laboratory to support runtime at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider. 

97 

NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $– – – 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 90,000,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 90,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... +90,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ – – – 

The Committee recommendation includes $90,000,000 for Nuclear Waste Disposal to continue the Department of Energy’s statutorily required activities for the Yucca Mountain license application. Within available funds, the Department is directed to reestablish its capability to respond to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

during the adjudicatory process and to otherwise fully support the 

Yucca Mountain licensing process. The recommendation includes 

support for affected units of local government that have formally 

consented to host Yucca Mountain. 

TITLE 17 INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY LOAN GUARANTEE PROGRAM

ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES 

(INCLUDING RESCISSIONS OF FUNDS)

GROSS APPROPRIATION

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $37,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 2,000,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 2,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... ¥35,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ – – – 

OFFSETTING COLLECTIONS

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $¥30,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... ¥2,000,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... ¥2,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... +28,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ – – – 

RESCISSION

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $– – – 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... ¥250,000,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... ¥411,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... ¥411,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ ¥161,000,000 

NET APPROPRIATION

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $7,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... ¥250,000,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... ¥411,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... ¥418,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ ¥161,000,000 

The Committee notes that the rescinded loan authority excludes 

authority used for conditional commitments made by October 1, 

2017. 

98 

ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY VEHICLES MANUFACTURING LOAN

PROGRAM

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $5,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 2,000,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 5,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... – – – 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ +3,000,000 

The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 established 

a direct loan program to support the development of advanced technology vehicles and associated components in the United States. 

The program provides loans to automobile and automobile part 

manufacturers for the cost of re-equipping, expanding, or establishing manufacturing facilities in the United States to produce advanced technology vehicles or qualified components, and for associated engineering integration costs. The funds provided support administrative operations only. 

TRIBAL ENERGY LOAN GUARANTEE PROGRAM

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $– – – 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... – – – 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 500,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... +500,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ +500,000 

The Energy Policy Act of 2005 established a loan guarantee program for energy development to provide or expand electricity on Indian land. The funds provided support administrative operations 

only. 

DEPARTMENTAL ADMINISTRATION

GROSS APPROPRIATION

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $246,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 241,652,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 281,693,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... +35,693,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ +40,041,000 

REVENUES

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $¥103,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... ¥96,000,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... ¥96,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... +7,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ – – – 

NET APPROPRIATION

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $143,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 145,652,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 185,693,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... +42,693,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ +40,041,000 

Funding recommended for Departmental Administration provides 

for general management and program support functions benefiting 

all elements of the Department of Energy, including the National 

99 

Nuclear Security Administration. The account funds a wide array 

of Headquarters activities not directly associated with the execution of specific programs. The recommendation includes six reprogramming control points in this account to provide flexibility in 

the management of support functions. Other Departmental Administration includes Management, Project Management Oversight 

and Assessments, Chief Human Capital Officer, Office of Technology Transitions, Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business 

Utilization, General Counsel, Energy Policy and Systems Analysis, 

International Affairs, and Public Affairs. The Department is directed to continue to submit a budget request that proposes a separate funding level for each of these activities. 

Economic Impact and Diversity.—The recommendation includes 

$10,169,000 for Economic Impact and Diversity, the same as fiscal 

year 2017 and $169,000 more than the budget request. 

Chief Information Officer.—The recommendation includes 

$126,274,000, including $91,443,000 as requested within Departmental Administration and $34,831,000 as requested for CyberOne 

activities within the DOE working capital fund. Within this 

amount, not less than $68,974,000 shall be for cybersecurity and 

secure information. To enhance the accountability for management 

of cyber resources, the Committee recommendation consolidates cybersecurity funding under the Office of the Chief Information Officer. 

Renewable Fuel Standard.—Under section 211(o)(9)(B) of the 

Clean Air Act, a small refinery may petition the Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator for an exemption from the 

Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) on the basis that the refinery experiences a disproportionate economic hardship under the RFS. 

When evaluating a petition, the Administrator consults with the 

Secretary of Energy to determine whether disproportionate economic hardship exists. According to the Department’s March 2011 

Small Refinery Exemption Study, disproportionate economic hardship must encompass two broad components: a high cost of compliance relative to the industry average disproportionate impacts and 

an effect sufficient to cause a significant impairment of the refinery 

operations viability. If the Secretary finds that either of these two 

components exists, the Committee directs the Secretary to recommend to the EPA Administrator at least a 50 percent waiver of 

RFS requirements for the petitioner. The Committee also directs 

the Secretary to score all of the metrics in the study and to score 

the metrics according to the 2011 study scoring criteria and not 

any later addendum to the study. The Secretary is directed to seek 

small refinery comment before making changes to its scoring 

metrics for small refinery petitions for RFS waivers and to notify 

the Committee prior to making any final changes to scoring 

metrics. Only the impact on the small refinery’s transportation fuel 

margins are pertinent to measuring RFS impacts on relative refining margins. The Committee notes that the conference report accompanying the Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010, addressed similar issues and directed the Secretary to redo an earlier study done to evaluate 

whether the RFS program imposes a disproportionate economic 

hardship on small refineries. In calling for the Secretary to redo 

the study, the conference report cited the lack of small refinery 

100 

input into the earlier study, concerns about regional RFS compliance cost disparities, small refinery dependence on the purchase of 

renewable fuel credits (RINs), and increasing RIN costs. Since 

then, the dramatic rise in RIN prices has amplified RFS compliance and competitive disparities, especially where unique regional 

factors exist, including high diesel production, no export access, 

and limited biodiesel infrastructure and production. In response to 

petitions in prior years, the Secretary determined that the RFS 

program would impose a disproportionate economic and structural 

impact on several small refineries. Despite this determination, the 

Secretary did not recommend, and EPA did not provide, any RFS 

relief because it determined the refineries were profitable enough 

to afford the cost of RFS compliance without substantially impacting their viability. The Committee reminds the Secretary that the 

RFS program may impose a disproportionate economic hardship on 

a small refinery even if the refinery makes enough profit to cover 

the cost of complying with the program. Small refinery profitability 

does not justify a disproportionate regulatory burden where Congress has explicitly given EPA authority, in consultation with the 

Secretary, to reduce or eliminate this burden. 

OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $44,424,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 49,000,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 49,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... +4,576,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ – – – 

The Office of the Inspector General performs agency-wide audit, 

inspection, and investigative functions to identify and correct management and administrative deficiencies that create conditions for 

existing or potential instances of fraud, waste, and mismanagement. The audit function provides financial and performance audits 

of programs and operations. The inspections function provides independent inspections and analyses of the effectiveness, efficiency, 

and economy of programs and operations. The investigative function provides for the detection and investigation of improper and illegal activities involving programs, personnel, and operations. 

To the extent possible, the Inspector General shall ensure the 

findings of its investigative reports are made available to the Committee and the public. Revised reports may be required in order to 

protect information that would otherwise limit distribution to Internal Official Use Only. 

ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES 

The Atomic Energy Defense Activities programs of the Department of Energy in the National Nuclear Security Administration 

(NNSA) consist of Weapons Activities, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation, Naval Reactors, and Federal Salaries and Expenses; 

outside of the NNSA, these include Defense Environmental Cleanup, Other Defense Activities, and Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal. 

Descriptions of each of these accounts are provided below. 

101 

NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION 

The Department of Energy is responsible for enhancing U.S. national security through the military application of nuclear technology and reducing the global danger from the proliferation of 

weapons of mass destruction. The NNSA, a semi-autonomous agency within the Department, carries out these responsibilities. Established in March 2000 pursuant to title 32 of the National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000, the NNSA is responsible 

for the management and operation of the nation’s nuclear weapons 

complex, naval reactors, and nuclear nonproliferation activities. The recommendation includes $13,914,400,000 for the NNSA, 

$976,148,000 above fiscal year 2017 and $16,600,000 below the 

budget request. 

WEAPONS ACTIVITIES

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $9,318,093,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 10,239,344,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 10,239,344,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... +921,251,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ – – – 

Weapons Activities ensures the safety, security, reliability, and 

effectiveness of the nation’s nuclear weapons stockpile without nuclear testing by providing funding to four main elements: Directed 

Stockpile Work; Research, Development, Technology and Engineering; Infrastructure and Operations; and Security. 

Affordability of Nuclear Modernization Programs.—To ensure 

that the nation’s existing nuclear weapons remain safe, reliable, 

and effective, the NNSA must modernize the nuclear weapons 

stockpile and its related infrastructure. As recommended by the 

Government Accountability Office (GAO), the NNSA is directed to 

include an assessment of the affordability of NNSA’s portfolio of 

modernization programs in future versions of its Stockpile Stewardship and Management Plan and options to bring its estimates 

of modernization funding needs into alignment with potential future budgets. 

Improving the Efficiency of NNSA Sites.—Over the past several 

years, the DOE Inspector General has identified issues with the 

management and oversight of the indirect cost pools at the NNSA 

sites, including the use of general and administrative funds to conduct research into laser inertial fusion energy, improper use of licensing and royalty funds for a National Geographic documentary, 

improper payments for consultants not attributed to any scope of 

work, and hundreds of millions in questioned, unresolved and potentially unallowable costs. Recently, the NNSA provided the Committee with a notification that it intended to perform an additional 

$76,800,000 in infrastructure projects that were previously unreported, are of limited benefit to the weapons program, and are over 

budget. These additional costs will ultimately be charged proportionally to all program activities at the laboratories via the indirect 

cost pools, including life extension programs whose costs are already trending upwards. The NNSA must take action to keep costs 

in line and complete its projects on time and on budget by reducing 

the proliferation of non-mission and administrative costs being 

charged to weapons programs at its nuclear weapons laboratories 

102 

and production sites. Not later than 120 days after the enactment 

of this Act, the NNSA shall provide to the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress a plan to reduce the rates of 

its overhead indirect cost pools at each site by at least five percent 

in aggregate by fiscal year 2020. 

Improving the Return on Infrastructure Investments.—The Committee is concerned that the NNSA’s prioritization, planning, and 

execution of its infrastructure activities does not adequately address the need to reduce the high maintenance and operating cost 

of its facilities or the need to control project scope to provide the 

best value to the taxpayer while still meeting requirements. The 

NNSA has not budgeted sufficiently for risk reduction in excess facilities or footprint reduction projects and appears to have abandoned its previous goals to reduce the footprint and operating costs 

of its Albuquerque Federal Complex. The NNSA has not moved forward with mature projects that would eliminate the need to maintain and upgrade security zones while improving site security postures, such as the West End Protected Area Reduction project at 

Y–12 or the Material Staging Facility at Pantex. Instead, the budget request proposes a new Tritium Production Capability Project to 

construct 30,000 square feet of new processing space at a high end 

cost of $16,633 per square foot, which would be the highest cost per 

square foot of any NNSA nuclear facility to date. Within infrastructure and operations and security, the Committee recommendation 

makes efforts, where possible, to improve efficiency, address the 

safety issues and risks posed by aging legacy facilities, and more 

effectively meet goals to modernize and upgrade the NNSA’s infrastructure. In addition, the Committee continues to place a strong 

emphasis on reducing the backlog of deferred maintenance. 

DIRECTED STOCKPILE WORK

Directed Stockpile Work includes all activities that directly support weapons in the nuclear stockpile, including maintenance, research, development, engineering, certification, dismantlement, and 

disposal activities. The Committee recommends $3,977,026,000 for 

Directed Stockpile Work, $668,999,000 above fiscal year 2017 and 

the same as the budget request. 

Life Extension Programs.—The recommendation provides full 

funding for the NNSA’s life extension programs, including the ongoing refurbishment efforts for the B61, W76, W88, and W80 warheads. 

W80–4 Life Extension Program.—The NNSA’s Office of Cost Estimating and Program Evaluation is directed to conduct a review on 

the alternatives analyzed for the W80–4 life extension program and 

report to the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress not later than 60 days after the enactment of this Act on 

whether the NNSA considered a wide range of alternatives that 

would meet requirements and whether accurate cost data regarding potential alternatives was available and utilized to inform decision-making. 

Strategic Materials.—A secure supply of beryllium is essential to 

ensuring the reliability of the U.S. nuclear stockpile. Government 

manufacturing of beryllium has become increasingly outdated and 

expensive. The Committee encourages the NNSA to investigate the 

feasibility of developing a new and efficient contractor-operated beVerDate Sep 11 2014 11:46 Jul 18, 2017 Jkt 026261 PO 00000 Frm 00102 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR230.XXX HR230
103 

ryllium and beryllium-oxide production capability that can supply 

NNSA needs more effectively and affordably. 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TECHNOLOGY, AND ENGINEERING

The NNSA’s Research, Development, Technology, and Engineering (RDT&E) activities focus on the development and maintenance 

of critical capabilities, tools, and processes that support sciencebased stockpile stewardship and continued certification of the 

stockpile in the absence of underground nuclear testing. For 

RDT&E, the Committee recommends $2,003,632,000, $161,402,000 

above fiscal year 2017 and $24,730,000 below the budget request. 

Science.—The recommendation supports the request to increase 

the number of subcritical experiments that are necessary to gather 

data and improve the physics-based computational models used for 

the annual assessment and certification of the nuclear weapons 

stockpile. 

Academic Alliances and Partnerships.—The recommendation includes $18,832,000 for the Minority Serving Institution Partnerships Program, including funding for Tribal Colleges and Universities. 

Inertial Confinement Fusion and High Yield.—The Committee 

recommends $522,959,000, of which $68,000,000 is for the OMEGA 

Laser Facility at the University of Rochester, $330,000,000 is for 

the National Ignition Facility (NIF), and $8,000,000 is for the 

Naval Research Laboratory. The NNSA has made little progress in 

achieving measurable results towards ignition over the past two 

years and does not plan to perform any assessments on its ability 

to achieve ignition until at least 2020. Not later than 120 days 

after the enactment of this Act, the NNSA shall provide to the 

Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress a plan 

with specific performance milestones for its experimental activities 

that covers a five-year period and that includes milestones to 

achieve ignition and to support other stockpile activities. 

Advanced Simulation and Computing.—Within the amounts for 

exascale, $12,000,000 is provided for research on advanced memory 

technology research to address exascale technical challenges. 

INFRASTRUCTURE AND OPERATIONS

Infrastructure and Operations provides funding for the operations, maintenance, and recapitalization of NNSA facilities and infrastructure. The Committee recommends $2,808,363,000 for Infrastructure and Operations, the same as fiscal year 2017 and 

$5,226,000 above the budget request. 

Operations of Facilities.—The recommendation includes 

$848,470,000 for Operations of Facilities. No funding is provided to 

prepare transuranic waste at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory for shipment to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). 

There is insufficient capacity to begin accepting newly-generated 

transuranic waste at WIPP due to the degraded status of its ventilation system. Newly-identified streams of transuranic wastes 

should not delay shipments that are already in the queue and that 

are required to meet cleanup commitments when alternatives may 

be available. The NNSA is directed to investigate alternatives for 

managing its newly-generated transuranic wastes, including storage and processing options available at other DOE sites, to meet 

104 

operating needs until such time as additional capacity at WIPP is 

available. 

Maintenance and Repair of Facilities.—The Committee recommends $395,000,000. Within this amount, not less than 

$10,000,000 shall be to address structural, electrical, and other 

maintenance deficiencies within the deteriorating Lithium Production Facility. 

Recapitalization.—The Committee recommends $545,359,000 to 

restore funding for the Infrastructure and Safety program to the 

fiscal year 2017 level. Of the additional amounts provided above 

the budget request, $43,000,000 is to support excess facility disposition at the Pantex Plant, Y–12 National Security Site, and 

other NNSA sites, including up to $9,000,000 to demolish facilities 

and utilities along the proposed new leg of the PIDAS at the Y– 

12 National Security Complex and up to $7,000,000 to support deinventory, risk reduction, and pre-demolition activities at Alpha 5 

and Beta-4 that must be accomplished before the NNSA can transfer those facilities to the Office of Environmental Management. 

18–D–650 Material Staging Facility, PX.—The Committee recommends $5,200,000 to advance plans to construct an underground 

facility for safe and efficient staging of weapons and weapons components that would enhance the site’s security posture and reduce 

the future recapitalization mortgage related to Zone 4 West and 

the associated PIDAS replacements. 

16–D–515 Albuquerque Complex Project, Albuquerque, NM.—The 

Committee recommends $18,000,000 to continue project engineering and design. Despite analyses it performed at the start of the 

project that concluded the NNSA would need 279,000 square feet 

of new office space to meet its needs, the project has grown in scope 

to a 333,000 square foot office complex since project funding was 

last provided by the Congress. None of the project funds may be 

available for construction until the NNSA can provide a design for 

new office space that will meet program mandates to reduce the 

footprint and achieve operating savings. 

06–D–141 Uranium Processing Facility (UPF), Y–12.—In its fiscal year 2017 budget request, the NNSA reported it would have a 

sufficient amount of the design completed to establish a baseline 

and begin construction for the Main Process Building, Salvage and 

Accountability Building, and the Process Support Facilities in the 

fourth quarter of fiscal year 2017. The fiscal year 2018 budget request indicates these activities have slipped into the second quarter 

of fiscal year 2018 and the NNSA’s cost estimates for design, equipment, and other construction activities have increased by 

$46,000,000, $33,000,000, and $409,000,000, respectively. To address these rising costs, the NNSA has redistributed $403,000,000, 

or 29 percent, of its project contingency funds that are budgeted to 

address unforeseen issues, and has proposed increasing funding 

$43,000,000 above the fiscal year 2018 estimates included in the 

fiscal year 2017 Future Years Nuclear Security Plan. The NNSA 

also does not have a certified and compliant earned value management system in place for the project, which is necessary to accurately track project performance. Given the trend in rising costs 

and slipping schedules before major facility construction has started, the Committee encourages the NNSA to put in place a valid 

performance tracking system and ensure that it sets a performance 

105 

baseline that adequately addresses project risks. Furthermore, the 

NNSA is encouraged to take management action to limit scope 

creep and reduce risks that would otherwise result in the NNSA 

exceeding the cost commitment of $6,500,000,000. The recommendation includes $620,000,000, full funding of the fiscal year 

2018 needs as reported in last year’s projections for the project, but 

defers funding requested to address project cost growth until a full 

independent cost estimate has been provided to the Committees on 

Appropriations of both Houses of Congress. 

04–D–125 Chemistry and Metallurgy Research (CMR) Replacement Project, LANL.—The Committee recommends $177,239,000. 

Funding for the CMR Replacement Project shall be limited to that 

of the original mission need for the project, that is, to relocate existing analytic chemistry and materials characterization capabilities from the legacy CMR facility, as directed in previous years. 

The Committee rejects the NNSA’s continued proposal to restructure this 15 year-old project into a rolling series of open ended 

‘‘subprojects’’ that have no clear scope and mission need associated 

with them. The NNSA has not resolved issues detailed by the GAO 

on setting clear parameters and requirements when structuring its 

plutonium recapitalization projects. The Committee is also concerned by the NNSA’s recently announced plans to continue to operate the deteriorating CMR building instead of meeting its prior 

commitments to vacate the facility by 2019, despite the risks posed 

by the facility’s location on a possible seismic fault. Not later than 

30 days after the enactment of this Act, the NNSA shall provide 

to the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress 

a plan for vacating this facility as soon as possible that is not dependent on the NNSA’s success in meeting pit production targets. 

SECURITY

Physical Security Improvement Program.—The Committee recommends $30,000,000 to modernize and upgrade physical security 

systems at the NNSA sites that are nearing the end of design life. 

The NNSA did not propose sufficient funding in its budget request 

to begin to address the substantial backlog of projects for security 

infrastructure and is behind on providing a plan mandated by the 

Congress to address the issue. 

17–D–710 West End Protected Area Reduction Project, Y–12.— 

The Committee recommends $23,400,000. The NNSA is directed to 

provide to the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of 

Congress quarterly updates on its progress in advancing the project 

until such time as the NNSA can demonstrate a commitment to 

move the project forward. 

LEGACY CONTRACTOR PENSIONS

The Committee provides $232,050,000 for payments into the legacy University of California contractor employee defined benefit 

pension plans. 

106 

DEFENSE NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION

(INCLUDING RESCISSION OF FUNDS)

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $1,902,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 1,842,310,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 1,825,461,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... ¥76,539,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ ¥16,849,000 

The Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation account provides funding 

to programs of the National Nuclear Security Administration that 

prevent, counter, and respond to global nuclear threats. The Committee recommendation rescinds $49,000,000 in unexpended prioryear balances, as requested. 

Nuclear Posture Review.—With a Nuclear Posture Review currently underway, the Committee encourages the Administration to 

address the importance of nonproliferation activities in U.S. nuclear strategy, including efforts to prevent nuclear terrorism, 

counter the proliferation of nuclear material and technologies, stop 

the attainment of nuclear weapons capabilities, and enhance strategic stability. 

Continuing U.S. Nonproliferation Activities in Russia.—The recommendation includes no new funds to enter into contracts and 

agreements with Russia in fiscal year 2018, the same as fiscal year 

2017 and the budget request. 

Commercial Nuclear Fuel Reprocessing.—In 1977, President Carter issued a policy statement prohibiting the commercial reprocessing and recycling of plutonium. DOE shall investigate the status of 

this policy and report to the Committees on Appropriations of both 

Houses of Congress on the impacts to the U.S. commercial nuclear 

power industry and whether it is in the U.S. national security interest to continue the policy. 

DEFENSE NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION

Funding for the Office of Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation is 

provided across five programmatic areas: Global Material Security, 

Material Management and Minimization, Nonproliferation and 

Arms Control, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation R&D, and Nonproliferation Construction. To preserve and advance science and 

engineering expertise in uranium for purposes of national security 

and nonproliferation, the Committee encourages the ongoing collaboration between the Office of Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation 

and the DOE Office of Intelligence and Counterintelligence. 

Global Material Security.—Within funds for domestic radiological 

materials, the recommendation includes up to $10,000,000 to expand the capacity of radiological security programs designed to replace cesium-137 chloride irradiation sources with alternate technologies that cannot be used in radiological dispersal devices. Replacing these cesium sources with safe alternatives provides permanent threat reduction and eliminates the need for the NNSA to 

assist in costly security upgrades to irradiator facilities. Within 

funds for Global Material Security, the recommendation includes 

$101,180,000 for Nuclear Smuggling Detection and Deterrence. 

Due to the delays in executing agreements with foreign nations, 

107 

the NNSA has sufficient prior-year balances to support fiscal year 

2018 needs. 

Material Management and Minimization.—Nuclear materials 

management plans at the Savannah River Site (SRS) indicate the 

site is planning to receive plutonium, uranium, and other nuclear 

materials for the next 15 years and that H-Canyon would, from fiscal years 2018 to 2024, process 40 metric tons of highly enriched 

uranium (HEU) to support the NNSA’s HEU downblending activities. By the end of 2017, nearly 75 percent of the number of fuel 

assemblies or items in L-Basin will be materials transported from 

foreign and domestic research reactors to reduce proliferation risks 

and prevent theft and diversion. Many of the countries from which 

the NNSA has transported materials are high income nations, including Sweden, Belgium, Italy, and Japan. While the NNSA has 

raised the cost share to these countries, the substantial costs of receiving, storing, processing, and final disposition are nevertheless 

being transferred onto DOE’s cleanup program. The EM budget is 

further burdened by the NNSA’s need to restart plutonium disposal 

operations at SRS in order to avoid fines for its failure to meet 

MOX milestones. Not later than 60 days after the enactment of 

this Act, the NNSA shall provide to the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress a report on the costs to establish 

an enduring program for the repatriation and elimination of international fuel cycle materials to further U.S. nonproliferation and 

other nuclear security goals through the maintenance, operation, 

and upgrade of facilities currently funded within Nuclear Material 

Management of the Defense Environmental Cleanup appropriation. 

Conversion.—The Committee recommends $27,400,000 for national laboratory support of domestic Mo-99 production using low 

enriched uranium (LEU) targets and international agreements for 

the conversion of research reactors to LEU fuels. Funds requested 

for the development of LEU fuels for U.S. and DOE-owned nuclear 

reactors are provided within Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation 

R&D, as in fiscal year 2017. The recommendation does not include 

$19,600,000 requested to support the final cost share amounts for 

Mo-99 projects since sufficient unencumbered prior-year funds 

exist. While the NNSA continues to request close-out of the domestic Mo-99 development program, the Committee encourages the 

NNSA to reconsider competitively awarding new cooperative agreements given the limited success of the NNSA’s program in establishing a secure domestic producer that does not use HEU. 

Material Disposition.—The Committee recommends $1,000,000 

for the Uranium Lease and Takeback Program. The recommendation does not include $24,000,000 requested to conduct additional 

planning activities for the dilute and dispose alternative to the construction of the Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication (MOX) facility. The 

Congress has already appropriated $20,000,000 in prior years to 

develop higher fidelity lifecycle cost estimates and is awaiting the 

results of those efforts. 

MOX Fuel Fabrication Facility.—The Committee recommends 

$340,000,000. The recommendation provides sufficient funding to 

sustain the current pace of construction on the MOX facility in fiscal year 2018 and prohibits the use of MOX funding to terminate 

the project while the Congress is considering an alternative approach for disposing of these materials. Within available funds, 

108 

$5,000,000 is provided for a federal owner’s agent to provide independent and external assistance to the NNSA in providing oversight to the contractor and to ensure efficient execution of the MOX 

project. 

18–D–150 Surplus Plutonium Disposition Project, SRS.—The recommendation includes no funds for this project. DOE does not yet 

have the legal or regulatory basis for diluting 34 metric tons of plutonium at Savannah River and disposing of that material in the 

Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). In addition, DOE is specifically 

prohibited by 50 U.S.C 2566 from transferring plutonium into 

South Carolina until MOX production objectives are met. The Committee will not consider this proposal as an alternative to MOX 

until the NNSA submits a substantive programmatic proposal that 

includes: (1) legislative modifications needed to the WIPP Land 

Withdrawal Act and to statutory requirements for the disposition 

of weapons-usable plutonium at the Savannah River Site; (2) safety 

and environmental analyses that demonstrate that the 34 metric 

tons can be safely disposed of at WIPP, as required by the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA); (3) detailed cost and schedule 

estimates that have been independently verified; and (4) a plan for 

negotiations with impacted states and the Russian Federation on 

modifications to the Plutonium Management Disposition Agreement if U.S. participation in the agreement is still in the interest 

of U.S. national security. 

18–D–150 Plutonium Removal Project, SRS.—The Committee 

recognizes the NNSA’s need to begin removing plutonium from the 

State of South Carolina and recommends $9,000,000 to dispose of 

up to 6 metric tons of plutonium that cannot be used for MOX fuel 

for which DOE has issued a record of decision and has obtained 

regulatory concurrence for disposal in WIPP. Not later than 30 

days after the enactment of this Act, the NNSA shall provide to the 

Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress a plan 

for removing from the State of South Carolina an amount of defense plutonium or defense plutonium materials equal to the 

amount of defense plutonium or defense plutonium materials transferred to the State after April 15, 2002. 

Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Research and Development 

(DNN R&D).—The Committee recommends $523,595,000. As in fiscal year 2017, the recommendation includes funds for LEU fuels 

development for U.S. high performance research reactors within 

DNN R&D to better align research and development-related activities with the resident expertise for managing a long term development program within the Office of Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation, and to respond to concerns detailed in a National Academies 

study regarding the complexity of technical issues that must be 

overcome to convert those reactors over the next 15 years. The 

amount for LEU fuels development also includes funding to develop 

LEU fuel for the TREAT reactor. 

NUCLEAR COUNTERTERRORISM AND INCIDENT RESPONSE

The NNSA’s Nuclear Counterterrorism and Incident Response 

programs respond to and mitigate nuclear and radiological incidents worldwide in order to defend the nation from the threat of 

nuclear terrorism. The Committee recommends $277,360,000. 

109 

LEGACY CONTRACTOR PENSIONS

The Committee provides $40,950,000 for payments into the legacy University of California contractor employee defined benefit 

pension plans. 

NAVAL REACTORS

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $1,420,120,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 1,479,751,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 1,486,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... +65,880,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ +6,249,000 

The Naval Reactors (NR) program is responsible for all aspects 

of naval nuclear propulsion from technology development through 

reactor operations to ultimate reactor plant disposal. The program 

provides for the design, development, testing, and evaluation of improved naval nuclear propulsion plants and reactor cores. The recommendation fully funds the request to develop the ColumbiaClass submarine, previously identified as the Ohio-replacement 

submarine, and to refuel the S8G prototype, which is closely linked 

to the Columbia-Class submarine. 

Infrastructure Reprioritization.—The Committee recommends a 

total of $619,382,000 to support infrastructure needs of Naval Reactors sites, an increase of $21,400,000 above fiscal year 2017 and 

$7,798,000 above the budget request. The recommendation 

reprioritizes infrastructure funds to prevent delays to plans to recapitalize NR’s aging spent fuel infrastructure. NR’s budget request does not adequately plan sufficient carryover to support the 

Idaho Spent Fuel Handling Recapitalization Project into fiscal year 

2019. Rather, the project plans would have drawn down contingency balances in fiscal year 2018 and added an unacceptable 

amount of risk to completing the project on time and within budget. The recommendation includes funding for environmental remediation and laboratory facility regulation and compliance activities 

within funding for Naval Reactors Operations and Infrastructure at 

the levels planned for those activities in the fiscal year 2017 Future 

Years Nuclear Security Plan. 

Naval Reactors Development.—Within amounts for Naval Reactors Development, $82,500,000 is provided for Advanced Test Reactor Operations. 

FEDERAL SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $390,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 418,595,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 412,595,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... +22,595,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ ¥6,000,000 

The Federal Salaries and Expenses account provides corporate 

planning and oversight for Defense Programs, Defense Nuclear 

Nonproliferation, and Naval Reactors, including the NNSA field offices in New Mexico, Nevada, and California. 

110 

ENVIRONMENTAL AND OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES 

DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $5,405,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 5,537,186,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 5,405,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... – – – 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ ¥132,186,000 

The Defense Environmental Cleanup account provides funding 

for identifying and reducing risks and managing waste at sites 

where the nation carried out defense-related nuclear research and 

production activities that resulted in radioactive, hazardous, and 

mixed waste contamination requiring remediation, stabilization, or 

some other cleanup action. 

The Office of Environmental Management (EM) continues to request changes to the congressional budget structure without obtaining concurrence in advance from the Congress on its proposals, 

despite specific direction to the contrary in prior years. In addition, 

the budget request proposes large increases in administrative-type 

activities and cuts to site cleanup funds. The recommendation restores cuts proposed to cleanup activities at Hanford, Idaho, Los 

Alamos, and Oak Ridge and redistributes costs within site funding 

totals for site-specific safeguards and security activities. The Committee recommendation for safeguards and security within each 

site includes full funding amounts requested for site-specific cyber 

security needs. Additionally, Savannah River shall continue to receive safeguard and security funds through the NNSA and EM indirect cost pools, as in previous years. The recommendation does 

not include an increase requested for the DOE working capital 

fund and funding is provided up to the level of and in the budget 

lines provided for these costs in fiscal year 2017. Closure and Other 

Sites Administration includes funding for administration costs, including safeguards and security costs, of other EM cleanup sites 

that are traditionally accounted for within Defense Environmental 

Cleanup. 

Excess Facilities.—The budget request proposed a new program 

line to allow for disposition of excess facilities, but the request did 

not propose a list of the facilities and cost estimates. The recommendation includes funding above the budget request for individual EM sites to accelerate known demolition projects and initiate new transfers to EM, including $35,000,000 within Oak Ridge 

Nuclear Facility D&D to support the demolition of the Y–12 Biology Complex, $30,000,000 within NNSA Sites and Nevada Off-sites 

for demolition of the B280 Pool Type Reactor at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, and up to $10,000,000 above the budget 

request within the Idaho Site to support the demolition of the 

EBR–II Reactor Dome. 

Closure and Other Administration Costs.—The recommendation 

includes funding requested for administration of DOE closure sites 

and administration of safeguards and security activities, including 

cybersecurity, for the West Valley Demonstration Project and the 

gaseous diffusion uranium enrichment sites. 

Waste Treatment Plant (WTP).—To demonstrate cleanup progress 

while the Department resolves safety-related design issues of the 

111 

WTP project, DOE is implementing an alternative direct feed approach for the project. However, the budget request provides no 

specific information regarding ultimate costs of the project or how 

the new project plans will meet new schedule milestones for direct 

feed, despite finalizing a new performance baseline to manage this 

scope. Rather, the budget request for construction activities is not 

transparent, appears to be set at an arbitrary amount, and is not 

reflective of actual project needs. The recommendation provides 

$643,000,000 under 18–D–16 Waste Treatment Plant LBL/Direct 

Feed Low Activity Waste to fully support planned baseline activities for direct feed, consistent with the funding plans of its recently 

completed performance baseline and $14,000,000 above the budget 

request. Other construction activities that support the Waste 

Treatment Plant project are provided separately, including funding 

for maintenance and design resolution of the High-Level Waste facility and the Pretreatment Facility and for construction of the Low 

Activity Waste Pretreatment System. The Department is directed 

to discontinue the practice of requesting an arbitrary $690,000,000 

under activities called the Waste Treatment Plant (WTP) project 

and to report full project details that reflect project execution plans 

in future budget requests. 

Hanford Site Management.—Congress directed the establishment 

of the Office of River Protection site office and set a termination 

date for September 30, 2019. The Department is directed to provide 

to the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress 

a report on the impacts for reaching the legislative sunset date of 

the Office of River Protection that includes an assessment of 

whether the Department can carry out its commitments to clean up 

the Hanford Site under the Tri-party Agreement with a single site 

office and whether consolidating the two site offices could streamline management, enhance accountability, and eliminate duplicative expenses. 

Idaho Site.—Within available funds for Idaho cleanup and waste disposition, $5,000,000 is for advanced retrieval and disposition 

techniques for remote handled mixed low-level radioactive waste. 

Not later than 60 days after the enactment of this Act, the Department shall provide to the Committees on Appropriations of both 

Houses of Congress a report on the feasibility and benefits of expanding the use of the Advanced Mixed Waste Treatment Facility 

to serve as a national or regional transuranic waste processing center. 

Oak Ridge Reservation Project Accelerations.—The recommendation includes $52,300,000 to expedite plans to dispose of U233 at 

the Oak Ridge Reservation, $17,100,000 for construction of the 

Outfall 200 Mercury Treatment Facility, and $10,000,000 for construction of the On-site Waste Disposal Facility. 

Savannah River Site.—Within available funds for Site Risk Management, the recommendation includes $159,978,000 for environmental cleanup activities to support compliance milestones and 

$3,000,000 to support the disposition of spent fuel from the High 

Flux Isotope Reactor. None of the funds provided within the Savannah River Site may be used to assume costs previously charged to 

the NNSA via the site’s indirect cost pools. 

Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP).—A recent report of the Office 

of Enterprise Assessments indicated that DOE performance metrics 

112 

for roof bolting and other rehabilitation activities are not adequate 

to provide measures for safe, effective ground control. Additionally, 

large portions of the underground are no longer considered safe for 

entry and must be permanently closed due to ineffective ground 

control measures over the last two years. Because DOE planned to 

use these areas for waste disposal, new areas must be mined to 

provide disposal capacity and the costs of full recovery continue to 

rise. Not later than 60 days after the enactment of this Act, the Department shall provide to the Committees on Appropriations of 

both Houses of Congress a plan for maintaining the underground 

with clear performance metrics for roof bolting and other ground 

control rehabilitation activities, including estimates of the funding 

requirements to fully support the plan. Metrics should distinguish 

activities needed to close out existing panels with those needed for 

maintenance of active waste disposal pathways, secondary areas, 

and new mining activities. 

Program Support.—The Committee is concerned about the antiquated state of EM headquarters planning and budgeting systems 

to analyze EM’s complex portfolio of projects. The Department is 

directed to update its strategic planning tools to utilize modern, dynamic software that permits real-time and strategic analysis of resource requirements, funding variances, regulatory requirements, 

and scope changes to better ensure taxpayers return on investments in the EM program. 

Technology Development.—Within funding for technology devel- opment and deployment, $4,000,000 is provided for the National 

Spent Nuclear Fuel Program to address issues related to storing, 

transporting, processing, and disposing of DOE-owned and managed spent nuclear fuel. The Committee encourages EM to conduct 

merit-based funding awards for technology development and to ensure the funds provided are competitively awarded and managed 

by DOE Headquarters to address long-term cleanup mission needs. 

OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $784,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 815,512,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 825,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... +41,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ +9,488,000 

The Other Defense Activities account provides funding for the 

Office of Environment, Health, Safety and Security; the Office of 

Independent Enterprise Assessments; the Office of Legacy Management; Specialized Security Activities; Defense Related Administrative Support; and the Office of Hearings and Appeals. 

Environment, Health, Safety and Security.—The recommendation 

includes no funding for processing security clearances of headquarters personnel that are not employees of the Office of Environment, Health, Safety and Security, consistent with congressional 

direction in the fiscal year 2017 Act. 

The Committee is concerned that the Office of Environment, 

Health, Safety and Security (EHSS) is funding assessments and 

technology development to upgrade security systems at non-defense 

facilities of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and the Power Marketing Administrations. Funding within EHSS is duplicative of 

113 

funds also provided for physical security in those program accounts, and the Department is directed to consolidate these costs 

within funds provided for physical security systems at program 

sites. 

DEFENSE NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $– – – 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 30,000,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 30,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... +30,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ – – – 

The Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal appropriation was established by the Congress for activities related to the disposal of defense high-level waste from the Department’s atomic energy defense activities in lieu of payment from the Department of Energy 

into the Nuclear Waste Fund. 

POWER MARKETING ADMINISTRATIONS 

Management of the federal power marketing functions was transferred from the Department of the Interior to the Department of 

Energy in the Department of Energy Organization Act of 1977 

(Public Law 95–91). These functions include the power marketing 

activities authorized under section 5 of the Flood Control Act of 

1944 and all other functions of the Bonneville Power Administration, the Southeastern Power Administration, the Southwestern 

Power Administration, and the power marketing functions of the 

Bureau of Reclamation that have been transferred to the Western 

Area Power Administration. 

All four power marketing administrations give preference in the 

sale of their power to publicly-owned and cooperatively-owned utilities. Operations of the Bonneville Power Administration are financed principally under the authority of the Federal Columbia 

River Transmission System Act (Public Law 93–454). Under this 

Act, the Bonneville Power Administration is authorized to use its 

revenues to finance the costs of its operations, maintenance, and 

capital construction, and to sell bonds to the Treasury if necessary 

to finance any additional capital program requirements. 

Beginning in fiscal year 2011, power revenues from the Southeastern, Southwestern, and Western Area Power Administrations, 

which were previously classified as mandatory offsetting receipts, 

were reclassified as discretionary offsetting collections to directly 

offset annual expenses. The capital expenses of Southwestern and 

Western Area Power Administrations are appropriated annually. 

Beginning this fiscal year, the Congressional Budget Office 

(CBO) changed its scoring of the power marketing administrations 

(PMAs). The change stemmed from information on execution of language regarding purchase power and wheeling expenses and offsetting collections included in this bill each year. To date, the PMAs 

have been extremely slow to provide additional financial information. To address the increased score in the short term, the recommendation reduces the maximum level for purchase power and 

wheeling below the budget request. The Committee directs the 

PMAs to provide all information requested by the Committee or 

114 

CBO, without exception, in order to accurately reflect expenditures 

and resolve scoring issues appropriately. 

BONNEVILLE POWER ADMINISTRATION FUND

The Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) is the Department 

of Energy’s marketing agency for electric power in the Pacific 

Northwest. Bonneville provides electricity to a 300,000 square mile 

service area in the Columbia River drainage basin. Bonneville markets the power from federal hydropower projects in the Northwest, 

as well as power from non-federal generating facilities in the region, and exchanges and markets surplus power with Canada and 

California. 

The Committee encourages the Corps of Engineers and Bureau 

of Reclamation to work with the BPA on efforts to drive down costs 

and promote BPA’s long-term competitiveness. Assuring BPA competitiveness is important not only for BPA’s operation, but to ensure Treasury repayment and assist the Corps and Reclamation in 

meeting their core functions (including navigation, flood control, 

water supply, and irrigation). The Committee is pleased that the 

operating agencies have taken important short-term steps on cost 

control and encourages efforts to make long-term improvements. 

The Committee encourages the Corps and Bureau to work with 

BPA to optimize investment in the federal hydropower system, including prioritization of investments, effective project management 

approaches such as efficient procurement of equipment and services, and ensuring the cost effectiveness of any proposed higher 

capital spending levels for hydropower facilities. In addition, the 

Committee urges the operating agencies to strongly consider matters such as: (1) a more flexible workforce and business-oriented organization; (2) increased reliance on system automation as appropriate; (3) strategies to get labor costs stable or reduced long term; 

and (4) further review of costs of conducting the new environmental 

impact statement for Columbia River System Operations to determine what costs are truly incremental. 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, SOUTHEASTERN POWER

ADMINISTRATION

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $– – – 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... – – – 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... – – – 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... – – – 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ – – – 

The Southeastern Power Administration (SEPA) markets hydroelectric power produced at 22 Corps Projects in 11 states in the 

southeast. Southeastern does not own or operate any transmission 

facilities, so it contracts to ‘‘wheel’’ its power using the existing 

transmission facilities of area utilities. 

115 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, SOUTHWESTERN POWER

ADMINISTRATION

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $11,057,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 11,400,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 11,400,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... +343,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ – – – 

The Southwestern Power Administration (SWPA) markets hydroelectric power produced at 24 Corps projects in the six-state area 

of Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Texas. 

SWPA operates and maintains 1,380 miles of transmission lines, 

along with supporting substations and communications sites. 

CONSTRUCTION, REHABILITATION, OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, WESTERN AREA POWER ADMINISTRATION

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $95,581,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 93,372,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 93,372,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... ¥2,209,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ – – – 

The Western Area Power Administration is responsible for marketing the electric power generated by the Bureau of Reclamation, 

the Corps, and the International Boundary and Water Commission. 

Western also operates and maintains a system of transmission 

lines nearly 17,000 miles long. Western provides electricity to 15 

western states over a service area of 1.3 million square miles. 

The Committee recommendation reduces the level for annual expenses by $35,410,000 below the budget request. This reduction reflects customer preference to fund the annual operation and maintenance program for the Parker-Davis and Intertie projects using 

Western’s prepayment authority, rather than Western’s net zero 

authority. 

FALCON AND AMISTAD OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE FUND

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $232,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 228,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 228,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... ¥4,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ – – – 

Falcon Dam and Amistad Dam are two international water 

projects located on the Rio Grande River between Texas and Mexico. Power generated by hydroelectric facilities at these two dams 

is sold to public utilities through the Western Area Power Administration. The Foreign Relations Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 

1994 and 1995 created the Falcon and Amistad Operating and 

Maintenance Fund to defray the costs of operation, maintenance, 

and emergency activities. The Fund is administered by the Western 

Area Power Administration for use by the Commissioner of the 

U.S. Section of the International Boundary and Water Commission. 

The budget request includes a proposal for authority to accept 

contributed funds in fiscal year 2018 for use in fulfilling duties associated with the Falcon and Amistad Dams. This authority would 

be equivalent to the authority used throughout the Western Area 

116 

Power Administration to secure alternative financing. The Committee includes this proposal. 

The Committee continues to hear concerns that additional infrastructure investments are necessary at these dams. Western is directed to coordinate with the International Boundary and Water 

Commission to determine a plan for addressing any needed improvements and brief the Committee not later than 90 days after 

the enactment of this Act on progress towards finalizing a plan. 

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $346,800,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 367,600,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 367,600,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... +20,800,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ – – – 

REVENUES

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $¥346,800,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... ¥367,600,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... ¥367,600,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... ¥20,800,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ – – – 

The Committee recommendation for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) is $367,600,000, the same as the budget 

request. Revenues for FERC are established at a rate equal to the 

budget authority, resulting in a net appropriation of $0. 

The Committee directs FERC to analyze electricity transmission 

investment incentives in rate treatments to determine ways to encourage efficient investment for critical infrastructure security. 

FERC shall report this analysis to the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress not later than 180 days after the 

enactment of this Act. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION 

The Committee’s detailed funding recommendations for programs 

in Title III are contained in the following table. 


Insert graphic folio 119 here HR230.002

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

(Amounts in thousands) 

ENERGY PROGRAMS 

ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE ENERGY 

Sustainable Transportation: 

Vehicle technologies ............................... . 

Bi oenergy technologies ............................. . 

Hydrogen and fuel cell technologies ................ . 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

306,959 

205,000 

101,000 

FY 2018 

Request 

82,000 

56,600 

45,000 

Bill vs. B

Bill Enacted 

125,000 -181 '959 +

90,000 -115,000 +

53,000 -48,000 

~------------

------------- -------------- -------------- -------

Subtotal, Sustainable Transportation ............. . 

Renewable Energy: 

Solar energy ....................................... . 

Wind energy ........................................ . 

Water power ........................................ . 

Geothermal technologies ............................ . 

Subtotal, Renewable Energy ....................... . 

Energy Efficiency: 

Advanced manufacturing ............................. . 

Building technologies ........................... . 

Federal energy management program .......... . 

Weatherization and intergovernmental: 

Weatherization: 

Weatherization assistance program ............ . 

612,959 183,600 268,000 -344,959 +

207,600 69,700 90,000 -117,600 +

90,000 31,700 31,753 -58,247 

84,000 20,400 53,000 -31 '000 +

69,500 12,500 15,000 -54,500 

------------- ------------- -------------- -------------- -------

451,100 

257,500 

199,141 

27,000 

225,000 

134,300 

82,000 

67,500 

10,000 

189,753 

102,000 

91,406 

10,000 

225,000 

-261,347 

-155,500 

-107,735 

-17,000 

+

+

+

+2

Insert graphic folio 120 here HR230.003

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Training and technical assistance ............ . 

Subtotal, Weatherization ......................... . 

State energy program grants ........................ . 

Subtotal, Weatherization and intergovernmental 

program ........................................ . 

Subtotal, Energy Efficiency .................. . 

Corporate Support: 

Facilities and infrastructure: 

National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) .... . 

Program direction .................................. . 

Strategic programs ................................. . 

Subtotal, Corporate Support .................... . 

Subtotal, Energy efficiency and renewable energy .. 

Use of Prior Year Balances ........................... . 

TOTAL, ENERGY EFFICENCY ANO RENEWABLE ENERGY ..... . 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

3,000 

228,000 

50,000 

278,000 

761 '641 

92,000 

153,500 

19,000 

264,500 

2,090,200 

2,090,200 

FY 2018 

Request 

159,500 

92,000 

125,849 

217' 849 

695,249 

-59' 100 

636,149 

Bill 

3,000 

228,000 

50,000 

278,000 

481,406 

92,000 

125,849 

6,000 

223,849 

1,163,008 

-59,100 

1,103,908 

Bill vs. B

Enacted 

+2

+

+2

-280,235 +3

-27,651 

-13,000 

-40' 651 

-927' 192 +4

-59,100 

-986,292 +4

Insert graphic folio 121 here HR230.004

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

(Amounts in thousands) 

ELECTRICITY DELIVERY AND ENERGY RELIABILITY 

Research and development: 

Transmission Reliability ........................... . 

Resilient Distribution Systems ..................... . 

Cyber security for energy delivery systems ......... . 

Energy storage ..................................... . 

Transformer resilience and advanced components ..... . 

Subtotal ....................................... . 

Transmission Permitting and Technical Assistance ..... . 

Infrastructure security and energy restoration ....... . 

Program direction .................................... . 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

36,000 

50,000 

62,000 

31,000 

6,000 

185,000 

7,500 

9,000 

28,500 

FY 2018 

Request 

13,000 

10,000 

42,000 

8,000 

5,000 

78,000 

6,000 

9,000 

27,000 

TOTAL, ELECTRICITY DELIVERY AND ENERGY RELIABILITY 230,000 120,000 

Bill 

36,000 

37,000 

65,000 

31,000 

6,000 

175,000 

7,000 

9,000 

27,500 

218,500 

Bill vs. 

Enacted 

-13,000 

+3,000 

-10,000 

-500 

-1 '000 

-11 '500 

B

+

+

+

+

+

+

============= ============= ============== ============== =======

NUCLEAR ENERGY 

Research and development: 

Integrated university program ...................... . 5,000 --- 5,000 --- 

STEP R&D ........................................... . 5,000 --- 5,000 --- 

Small modular reactor licensing technical support .. . 95,000 --- --- -95,000 

Nuclear energy enabling technologies ............... . 115,100 105,360 126 '700 +11,600 +

Reactor concepts RD&D .............................. . 132 '000 94,000 219,300 +87,300 +1

Fuel cycle research and development ............... . 207,500 88,500 154,500 -53,000 +

Insert graphic folio 122 here HR230.005

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

(Amounts in thousands) 

International nuclear energy cooperation ........... . 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

3,000 

FY 2018 

Request 

2,500 

Subtotal ....................................... . 562,600 290,360 

Infrastructure: 

Radiological facilities management: 

Space and defense infrastructure ....... . 10,000 ---

Research reactor infrastructure ................ . 7,000 9,000 

Bill vs. B

Bi 11 Enacted 

2,500 -500 

513,000 -49,600 +2

--- -10,000 

9,000 +2,000 ~~~---~----- -·---~~---•w~ ~----~-••••--• ----·-•••••••• ~-•••••

Subtotal ................................... . 

INL facilities management: 

INL operations and infrastructure .............. . 

Construction: 

16-E-200 Sample preparation laboratory ..... . 

Subtotal, INL facilities management. 

Subtotal, Infrastructure ........... . 

Idaho sitewide safeguards and security ............... . 

Program direction. , . , ................................ . 

Subtotal, Nuclear Energy ......................... . 

Use of prior-year balances ........................... . 

TOTAL, NUCLEAR ENERGY ............................ . 

17,000 9,000 9,000 -8,000 

231.713 198,140 238,000 +6,287 

6,000 6,000 6,000 

------------- ------------- --------------

--------------

237,713 204,140 244,000 +6,287 

------------- ------------- -------------- --------------

254,713 

129,303 

80,000 

1,026,616 

-10,000 

1,016,616 

213,140 

133.000 

66,500 

703,000 

703,000 

253,000 

133,000 

70,000 

969,000 

969,000 

-1.713 

+3,697 

-10,000 

-57,616 

+10,000 

-47,616 

+

+

+

+2

+2

Insert graphic folio 123 here HR230.006

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

(Amounts in thousands) 

FOSSIL ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT 

Coal CCS and power systems: 

Carbon capture ..................................... . 

Carbon storage .................................... , , 

Advanced energy systems ............................ . 

Cross cutting research ............................. . 

NETL coal research and development ................. . 

STEP (Supercritical C02) ........................... . 

Transformational coal pilots ....................... . 

Subtotal, CCS and power systems ................ . 

Natural Gas Technologies: 

Research ........................................... . 

Unconventional fossil energy technologies from 

petroleum - oil technologies ....................... . 

Program direction ................................... . 

Special recruitment programs ......................... . 

NETL Research and Operations ......................... . NETL Infrastructure .................................. . 

Subtotal, Fossil Energy Research and Development .. 

Use of prior year balances ........................... . 

Fossil Proviso ....................................... . 

TOTAL, FOSSIL ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ..... 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

101,000 

95,300 

105,000 

45,500 

53,000 

24,000 

423,800 

43,000 

21,000 

60 '000 

700 

43,000 40,500 

632,000 

-14.000 

50,000 

668.000 

FY 2018 

Request 

16,000 15,000 

46,000 

37,800 

50,000 

164,800 

5,500 

15,000 

65,205 

200 

44,577 

39,896 

335' 178 

-55' 178 

280,000 

Bi 1l 

95,000 

89,073 

103,000 

51,550 53,000 

24,000 25,000 

440,623 

28,200 20,000 

60,000 

700 

44,577 40,500 

634,600 634,600 

Bill vs. B

Enacted 

-6,000 +-6,227 +-2.000 +

+6,050 +

+

+25,000 +

...............

+16,823 +2

-14,800 +

-1 ,000 

+1. 577 

--------------

-------

+2,600 

+14,000 

-50,000 -33.400 

+2

+

+3

Insert graphic folio 124 here HR230.007

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

(Amounts in thousands) 

NAVAL PETROLEUM AND OIL SHALE RESERVES ............... . 

Use of prior year balances ........................... . 

TOTAL, NAVAL PETROLEUM AND OIL SHALE RESERVES. 

STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE 

STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE .................... . 

Sale of crude oi 1 .............................. . 

Use of sale proceeds ................................ .. 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

14,950 

14,950 

223,000 

-340,000 

340,000 

FY 2018 

Request 

20,200 

-15,300 

4,900 

180,000 

-350,000 

350,000 

Bi 11 

20 '200 

-15,300 

4' 900 

252,000 

-350,000 

350,000 

Bill vs. 

Enacted 

+5,250 

-15,300 

10,050 

+29,000 

10,000 

+10,000 

B

+

··----------- ------------- -------------- --------------

TOTAL, STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE ............... . 223,000 180,000 252 '000 +29,000 +

SPR PETROLEUM ACCOUNT 

SPR Petro 1 eum Account . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . --- 8, 400 

Sale of crude oil (Sec. 307).............. .... .... .... --- -- -8,400 -8,400 

Use of sale proceeds (Sec. 307)....................... --- --- 8,400 +8,400 

TOTAL, SPR PETROLEUM ACCOUNT ....................... . 8,400 

NORTHEAST HOME HEATING OIL RESERVE 

NORTHEAST HOME HEATING OIL RESERVE ................... . 10,500 10,000 10,000 -500 

Insert graphic folio 125 here HR230.008

Use of prior year balances .......................... . 

TOTAL, NORTHEAST HOME HEATING OIL RESERVE ....... . 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

(Amounts in thousands) 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

·4.000 

6,500 

FY 2018 

Request 

·3,500 

6.500 

Bill vs. B

Bill Enacted 

·3,500 +500 

6,500 

============= ============= ============== ============== =======

ENERGY INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION .................... . 

NON-DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP 

Fast Flux Test Reactor Facility (WA) ................. . 

Gaseous Diffusion Plants ............................. . 

Small sites .......................................... . 

West Valley Demonstration Project .................... . 

TOTAL, NON-DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP ......... . 

URANIUM ENRICHMENT DECONTAMINATION 

AND DECOMMISSIONING FUND 

Oak Ridge ............................................ . 

Paducah: 

Nuclear facility D&D, Paducah ...................... . 

Total , Paducah ................................. . 

122 '000 

2,240 

101,304 

77,043 

66,413 

247,000 

118,000 

2,240 

100,575 

55,000 

60,585 

218.400 

118,000 

2,240 

100,575 

55,000 

64,585 

222,400 

·4,000 

-729 

-22,043 

·1,828 

·24,600 

============= ============= ============== ============== =======

194,673 145,726 158,018 ·36,655 +

205,530 202.958 202,958 ·2,572 

205,530 202,958 202.958 ·2,572 

Insert graphic folio 126 here HR230.009

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Portsmouth: 

Nuclear facility 0&0, Portsmouth .......... . 

Construction: 

15-U-408 On-site waste disposal facility, 

Portsmouth ............................. . 

Total , Portsmouth ................................ . 

Pension and community and regulatory support ......... . 

Title X uranium/thorium reimbursement program ........ . 

Use of prior year balances ........................... . 

TOTAL, UEO&O FUND .............................. . 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

274 '000 

41 '168 

315,168 

22,953 

30,000 

-324 

768,000 

FY 2018 

Request 

312,389 

38,882 

351,271 

22,794 

30,000 

752,749 

Bi 11 

312,389 

38,882 

351 '271 

22,794 

32,959 

768,000 

Bill vs. 

Enacted 

+38,389 

-2,286 

+36,103 

-159 

+2,959 

+324 

B

+

============= ============= ============== ============== =======

SCIENCE 

Advanced scientific computing research ....... . 483,000 525,430 524,200 +41 ,200 

Construction: 

17-SC-20 SC Exascale Computing Project ........... . 164,000 196,580 170,000 +6,000 -

~---~ - - -W- ~--~- .. M~- ~MM --- ........ -- -- --- - -.. .. .. w .. - 

Subtotal, Advanced scientific computing 

research ................................... . 647,000 722,010 694,200 +47,200 -

Basic energy sciences: 

Re search .................................... . 1,681,500 1,352,400 1,612,400 -69,100 +2

Construction: 

13-SC-10 LINAC coherent light source II, SLAC ... 190,000 182' 100 192 '100 +2' 100 +

Insert graphic folio 127 here HR230.010

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

(Amounts in thousands) 

18-SC-10 APS Upgrade, ANL ...................... . 

Subtotal , Construction ..................... . 

Subtotal, Basic energy sciences .......... . 

Biological and environmental research ................ . 

Fusion energy sciences: 

Research ........................................... . 

Construction: 

14-SC-60 ITER ................................ . 

Subtotal, Fusion energy sciences ........... . 

High energy physics: 

Research ........................................... . 

Construction: 

11-SC-40 Long baseline neutrino facility I deep 

underground neutrino experiment, FNAL ........ . 

11-SC-41 Muon to electron conversion experiment, 

FNAL ......................................... . 

Subtota 1 , Construction ................... . 

Subtotal, High energy physics .................. . 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

FY 2018 

Request 

20,000 

Bi 11 

67,000 

Bill vs. B

Enacted 

+67,000 +

.. ~~--·~~---~ -~~·~-------- --~----------- .....................................................

190,000 202,100 259' 100 +69' 100 +

"'"'"'"'"'"'w"'"'"'"'"'"' "'"'"'"'"'"'"'"'"'"'"'"'"' 

"'"'"'"'"'•~------- .......... .,.,.,.,.,.,.,.., ... ., "'"'"'"'"'"'"'

1,871,500 1,554,500 1,871,500 --- +3

612,000 348,950 582,000 -30,000 +2

330,000 246,940 332,000 +2,000 +

50,000 63,000 63,000 +13,000 

-------------

------------- -------------- -------------- -------

380,000 309,940 395,000 +15,000 +

731,500 573,400 700,600 -30,900 +1

50,000 54,900 80,000 +30,000 +

43,500 44,400 44,400 +900 

------------- ----- - ----- ------ ------- ------ -- ---- -------

93,500 99,300 124,400 +30,900 +

------------- ------------- -------------- -------------- -------

825,000 672,700 825,000 --- +1

Insert graphic folio 128 here HR230.011

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Nuclear physics: 

Operations and maintenance ......................... . 

Construction: 

14-SC-50 Facility for rare isotope beams, 

Michigan State University .................. . 

Subtotal, Nuclear physics ................ . 

Workforce development for teachers and scientists ..... 

Science laboratories infrastructure: 

Infrastructure support: 

Payment in lieu of taxes ...................... . 

Oak Ridge landlord ............................. . 

Facilities and infrastructure .................. . 

Oak Ridge nuclear operations ................... . 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

522,000 

100,000 

622,000 

19,500 

1 '764 

6' 182 

32,603 

26,000 

FY 2018 

Request 

422,700 

80,000 

502,700 

14,000 

1,713 

6,082 

5' 105 

10,000 

Bill vs. 

Bill Enacted 

522,000 

97,200 -2,800 

619,200 -2,800 

19,500 

1 '713 -51 

6,082 -100 

30,000 -2,603 

10,000 -16,000 

------------- ------------- -------------- --------------

Subtotal ................................... . 

Construction: 

18-SC-71 Energy Science Capability, PNNL ......... . 

17-SC-71 Integrated Engineering Research Center, 

FNAL ........................................... . 

17 SC-73 Core Facility Revitalization, BNL. ...... . 

15-SC-78 Integrative genomics building, LBNL ..... . 

15-SC-77 Photon science laboratory building, SLAG. 

66,549 

2,500 

1 '800 

19,561 

20,000 

22,900 

1 ,000 

1 ,500 

1 '500 

24,800 

47,795 -18,754 

1 ,000 +1,000 

5,000 +2,500 

2,505 +705 

24.800 +5,239 

-20,000 

B

+

+

+1

+

+

Insert graphic folio 129 here HR230.012

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

(Amounts in thousands) 

15-SC-76 Materials design laboratory, ANL ........ . 

Subtotal ................................. . 

Subtotal, Science laboratories infrastructure ... 

Safeguards and security .............................. . 

Science program direction .................... . 

TOTAL, SCIENCE............ . .................. . 

NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... . 

ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY-ENERGY 

ARPA-E projects ...................................... . 

Program direction .................................... . 

Subtotal , ARPA-E ................................. . 

Use of prior year balances .......................... .. 

Rescission ........................................... . 

TOTAL, ARPA-E .................................... . 

TITLE 17 - INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY LOAN GUARANTEE PGM 

Administrative expenses .............................. . 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

19,590 

FY 2018 

Request 

24,500 

Bi 11 

24,500 

Bill vs. B

Enacted 

+4,910 

------------- ------------- --------------

...........................................

63' 451 53,300 57,805 -5,646 

------------- ------------- -·------------

............................ 

-------

130,000 

103,000 

182,000 

5,392,000 

76,200 

103,000 

168,516 

4,472,516 

105,600 

103,000 

177,000 

5,392,000 

-24,400 +

-5,000 

+9

============= ============= ============== ============== =======

276,750 

29,250 

306,000 

306,000 

37.000 

90,000 

65,000 

65,000 

-45,000 

-46,367 

-26,367 

2.000 

90,000 

2,000 

+90,000 

-276,750 

-29,250 

-306,000 

-306,000 

-35,000 

-

-

+

+

+

Insert graphic folio 130 here HR230.013

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Offsetting collection ................................ . 

Rescission ........................................... . 

TOTAL, TITLE 17 - INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY LOAN 

GUARANTEE PROGRAM ............................ . 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

-30.000 

7,000 

FY 2018 

Request 

-2,000 

-250,000 

-250,000 

Bill 

-2,000 

-411,000 

-411 ,DOO 

Bill vs. 

Enacted 

+28,000 

-411,000 

-418,000 

B

-1

-1

============= ============= ============== ============== =======

ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY VEHICLES MANUFACTURING LOAN PGM 

Admi ni strati ve expenses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ . 

TOTAL, ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY VEHICLES 

MANUFACTURING LOAN PROGRAM ................... . 

TRIBAL ENERGY LOAN GUARANTEE PROGRAM ................. . 

Rescission ........................................... . 

TOTAL, TRIBAL ENERGY LOAN GUARANTEE PROGRAM ..... 

DEPARTMENTAL ADMINISTRATION 

Administrative operations: 

Salaries and expenses: 

Office of the Secretary: 

Program direction ........................... . 

Chief Financial Officer ..................... . 

Chief Information Officer ...................... . 

Office of Indian energy policy and programs .... . 

5,000 

5,000 

9,000 

-9,000 

5,089 

49,242 

74,492 

16,000 

2,000 

2,000 

5,300 

48,484 

91,443 

10,000 

5,000 

5,000 

500 

500 

5,300 

48,484 

126' 264 

16,000 

-8,500 

+9,000 

+500 

+211 

-758 

+51' 772 

+

Insert graphic folio 131 here HR230.014

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Congressional and intergovernmental affairs .... . 

Economic impact and diversity .................. . 

Other Departmental Administration .............. . 

Subtotal, Salaries and expenses .............. . 

Subtotal, Administrative operations ........ . 

Strategic partnership projects ..................... . 

Subtotal, Departmental administration .......... . 

Use of prior-year balances .......................... . 

Funding from other defense activities ................ . 

Total, Departmental administration (gross) ..... . 

Miscellaneous revenues ............................... . 

TOTAL, DEPARTMENTAL ADMINISTRATION (net) ..... . 

OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Office of the inspector general .................. . 

TOTAL, ENERGY PROGRAMS ......................... . 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

6,200 

10' 169 

185' 134 

FY 2018 

Request 

6,200 

10' 000 

173' 225 

Bi 11 

6,200 

10' 169 

172,276 

Bill vs. B

Enacted 

--- 

-12,858 

------------- ------------- -------------- -------------- -------

346,326 344,652 384,693 +38,367 +

------------- ------------- ------·------- -------------· -------

346,326 344,652 384,693 +38,367 +

40,000 40,000 40,000 

------------- -----------·- -----------·-- -------------· -------

386,326 384,652 

-20,610 

-119,716 -143,000 

246,000 241,652 

-103 '000 -96,000 

143,000 145,652 

424,693 

-143,000 

281,693 

-96,000 

185,693 

+38,367 

+20,610 

-23,284 

+35,693 

+7,000 

+42,693 

+

+

+

~============ 

============= ============== ============== =======

44,424 49,000 49,000 +4,576 

============= ============= ============== ============== =======

11 '283 '690 7,510,899 9,609,001 -1,674,689 +2,0

Insert graphic folio 132 here HR230.015

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

(Amounts in thousands) 

ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES 

NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION 

WEAPONS ACTIVITIES 

Directed stockpile work: 

B61 Life extension program ......................... . 

W76 Life extension program ......................... . 

W88 Alteration program ............................. . 

W80-4 Life extension program ....................... . 

Stockpile systems: 

B61 Stockpi 1 e systems .......................... . 

W76 Stockpile systems .......................... . 

W78 Stockpile systems .......................... . 

W80 Stockpile systems .......................... . 

B83 Stockpi 1 e systems .......................... . 

W87 Stockpile systems .......................... . 

W88 Stockpile systems .......................... . 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

616,079 

222,880 

281 '129 

220,253 

57,313 

38,604 

56,413 

64,631 

41,659 

81,982 

103,074 

FY 2018 

Request 

788,572 

224,134 

332,292 

399,090 

59,729 

51,400 

60,100 

80,087 

35,762 

83,200 

131,576 

Bi 11 

788,572 

224' 134 

332,292 

399,090 

59,729 

51,400 

60 '100 

80,087 

35,762 

83,200 

131 '576 

Bill vs. 

Enacted 

+172,493 

+1,254 

+51,163 

+178,837 

+2,416 

+12,796 

+3,687 

+15,456 

-5,897 

+1,218 

+28,502 

B

------------- ------------- -------------- -------------- -------

Subtotal ................................... . 443,676 501,854 501,854 +58,178 

Weapons dismantlement and disposition ............... 56,000 52,000 52,000 -4,000 

Stockpile services: 

Production support .............................. 447,527 470,400 470,400 +22,873 

Research and Development support ................ 34' 187 31 '150 31 '150 -3,037 

Rand D certification and safety ................ 156,481 196,840 196,840 +40,359 

Insert graphic folio 133 here HR230.016

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Management, technology, and production .... ,, .... 

Subtotal ................................... . 

Strategic materials: 

Uranium sustainment ..................... . 

Plutonium sustainment ........................... . 

Tritium sustainment .............................. . 

Domestic uranium enrichment ..................... .. 

Strategic materials sustainment .................. . 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

251,978 

890,173 

20,988 

184,970 

109,787 

50,000 

212,092 

FY 2018 

Request 

285,400 

983,790 

20,579 

210,367 

198,152 

60,000 

206 '196 

Bill vs. B

Bi 11 Enacted 

285,400 +33,422 

983,790 +93,617 

20,579 -409 

210,367 +25,397 

198' 152 +88,365 

60,000 +10,000 

206' 196 -5,896 

------------- ------------- -------------- -------------- -------

Subtotal ....................................... . 577,837 695,294 695,294 +117,457 

Subtotal, Directed stockpile work ............ . 3,308,027 3,977,026 3,977,026 +668,999 

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E): 

Science: 

Advanced certification ......................... . 60,000 57,710 57,710 -2,290 

Primary assessment technologies ................ . 99,000 89,313 89,313 -9,687 

Dynamic materials properties ................... . 106,000 122,347 122,347 +16,347 

Advanced radiography ........................... . 45,700 37,600 37,600 -8,100 

Secondary assessment technologies .............. . 76,000 76,833 74,833 -1 '167 

Academic alliances and partnerships ............ . 49,800 52,963 52,963 +3' 163 

Enhanced capabilities for subcritical 

experiments .................................. . 50,755 38,000 +38,000 -

------------- ------------- -------------- -------------- -------

Subtotal ................................... . 436,500 487,521 472,766 +36,266 -

Insert graphic folio 134 here HR230.017

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Engineering: 

Enhanced surety ................................ . 

Weapons system engineering assessment technology 

Nuclear survivability .......................... . 

Enhanced survei 11 ance .......................... . 

Stockpile responsiveness ....................... . 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

37' 196 

16,958 

36' 100 

42,228 

FY 2018 

Request 

39' 717 

23,029 

45,230 

45,147 

40,000 

Bill vs. B

Bi 11 Enacted 

39' 711 +2 '521 

23,029 +6' 071 

45,230 +9' 130 

45' 147 +2,919 

40,000 +40,000 

~------------

-----~-------

-------------- -------------- -------

Subtotal ............................... . 132,482 193,123 193,123 +60,641 

Inertial confinement fusion ignition and 

high yield: 

Ignition ..................................... . 77,932 79,575 77,932 ... 

Support of other stockpile programs .......... . 23,363 23,565 23,363 . -- 

Diagnostics, cryogenics and experimental 

support .................................... . 64' 196 77,915 64' 196 . -- -

Pulsed power inertial confinement fusion ..... . 5,616 7' 596 5,616 . - 

Joint program in high energy density 

1 aboratory plasmas ......................... . 9,492 9,492 9,492 

Facility operations and target production .... . 342,360 334,791 342,360 . -. 

------------- ------------- -------------- -------------- -------

Subtotal ................................. . 522,959 532,934 522,959 --- 

Advanced simulation and computing .................. . 663,184 709,244 709,244 +46,060 

Construction: 

18-D-670 Exascale class computer cooling 

equipment, LLNL ................................ . 22,000 22,000 +22,000 

18-D-620 Exascale computing facility modernization 

project ........................................ . 3,000 3,000 +3,000 

Insert graphic folio 135 here HR230.018

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Advanced manufacturing development: 

Additive manfacturing .............................. . 

Component manufacturing development ............... . 

Process technology development ..................... . 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

12,000 

46,583 

28,522 

FY 2018 

Request 

12,000 

38,644 

29,896 

Bill vs. B

Bill Enacted 

12,000 

38,644 -7,939 

29,896 +1,374 

~--~---•••••-

•••----------

--•w••-~------

~------------w ____ ,..,..,. 

Subtotal ......................................... . 87' 105 80,540 80,540 -6,565 

Subtotal, ROT&E ................................ . 1,842,230 2,028,362 2,003,632 +161,402 -

Infrastructure and Operations (formerly RTBF): 

Operations of facilities ........................... . 824,000 868,000 848,470 +24,470 -

Safety and environmental operations ...... . 110,000 116,000 116,000 +6,000 

Maintenance and repair of facilities ............... . 324,000 360,000 395,000 +71,000 +

Recapitalization: 

Infrastructure and safety .......................... . 430,509 312,492 430,509 --- +1

Capability based investments ....................... . 112,639 114,850 114,850 +2,211 

Bannister federal complex disposition .............. . 200,000 - - --- -200,000 

---

.. 

------ --- ---.. --- """'--- .. - --- .. -----.. - ---- .. -----.

Subtotal, Recapitalization ....................... . 743 '148 427,342 545,359 -197,789 +

Construction: 

18-D-650 Material staging facility, PX ........... . 5,200 +5,200 

18·0-660 Fire station, Y-12 ...................... . 28,000 28,000 +28,000 

18-D-650 Tritium production capability, SRS ...... . 6,800 --- --- 

17-D-125 RLUOB reconfiguration project, LANL ..... . 1 '000 --. --- -1,000 

17-D-126 PF-4 reconfiguration project, LANL ...... . 8,000 --- --- -8,000 

17-D-640 U1a complex enhancements project, NNSA .. . 11 '500 22' 100 22' 100 +10,600 

Insert graphic folio 136 here HR230.019

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

(Amounts in thousands) 

17-D-630 Electrical distribution system, LLNL .... . 

16-D-515 Albuquerque Complex project ............. . 

15-D-613 Emergency Operations Center, Y-12 ....... . 

15-D-302 TA-55 Reinvestment project III, LANL ... . 

07-D-220 Radioactive liquid waste treatment 

facility, LANL.... .. .. .. .. .. . .. .............. .. 

07-0-220-04 TRU liquid waste facility, 

LANL ................. · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 

06-D-141 Uranium Processing Facility, Y-12 ....... . 

Chemistry and metallurgy replacement (CMRR): 

04-D-125 Chemistry and metallurgy replacement 

project , LANL .................................. . 

04-D-125-04 RLUOB equipment installation, phase 2. 

04-D-125-05 PF-4 equipment installation .......... . 

Subtotal, CMRR ................................. . 

Subtotal, Construction ....................... . 

Subtotal, Infrastructure and Operations ..... 

Secure transportation asset: 

Operations and equipment ......................... . 

Program direction ................................ . 

Subtotal, Secure transportation asset ........ . 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

25,000 

15,047 

2' 000 

2,000 

17,053 

575,000 

75,000 

75,615 

FY 2018 

Request 

6,000 

98,000 

7,000 

---

2' 100 

17' 895 

663,000 

180,900 

---

---

Bi 11 

6,000 

18,000 

7,000 

---

2' 100 

17,895 

620,000 

---

127,025 

50,214 

Bill vs. B

Enacted 

-19,000 

+2,953 -

+5,000 

-2,000 

+2, 100 

+842 

+45,000 -

--- -1

+52,025 +1

-25,401 +

-~~~-

... ~MW~MW .. WWWWWW~--~M~W 

w .. WWWWwwWWWWWW ...... WWWWww ..... WWWw w .. WWWWw

150,615 180,900 177' 239 +26,624 

------------- ----------·-- -------------- -------------- -------

807,215 1,031,795 903,534 +96,319 -1

------------- ------------- -------------- ---------·---- .......... __

2,808,363 2,803,137 2,808,363 --- 

151.771 219,464 185,568 +33,797 -

97,118 105,600 105,600 +8,482 

-------·-----

.......................... 

---·---------- -----------·-- -------

248,889 325,064 291 ,168 +42,279 -

Insert graphic folio 137 here HR230.020

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Defense nuclear security: 

Defense nuclear security ........................... . 

Security improvements program ...................... . 

Construction: 

17-D-710 West end protected area reduction 

project , Y- 12 ............................ . 

14-D-710 Device assembly facility argus 

installation project, NV ....................... . 

Subtotal, Defense nuclear security ......... . 

Information technology and cyber security ............ . 

Legacy contractor pensions ........................... . 

Subtotal, Weapons Activities ....................... . 

Rescission ........................................... . 

Budget amendment rescission .......................... . 

TOTAL, WEAPONS ACTIVITIES ........................ . 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

670,000 

2,500 

13,000 

685,500 

176,592 

248,492 

9,318,093 

-64,126 

-8,400 

9,245,567 

FY 2018 

Request 

686,977 

686,977 

186,728 

232,050 

10,239,344 

10,239,344 

Bi 11 

686,977 

30,000 

23,400 

740,377 

186,728 

232,050 

10,239,344 

10,239,344 

Bill vs. 

Enacted 

+16,977 

+30,000 

+20,900 

-13,000 

+54,877 

+10,136 

-16,442 

+921 . 251 

+64' 126 

+8,400 

+993,777 

B

+

+

+

============= ============= ============== ============== =======

DEFENSE NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION 

Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Programs: 

Global material security: 

International nuclear security ..................... . 

Domestic radiologic security ....................... . 

66,027 

87' 199 

46,339 

85,764 

46,339 

85,764 

-19' 688 

-1,435 

Insert graphic folio 138 here HR230.021

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

(Amounts in thousands) 

International radiologic security .................. . 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

68,907 

FY 2018 

Request 

60,576 

Nuclear smuggling detection ........................ . 144,975 144,429 

Bi 11 

60,576 

101,180 

Bill vs. B

Enacted 

-8,331 

-43,795 -

-------·----- ------------- --------------

............................ 

-------

Subtotal, Global material security ............... . 

Material management and minimization: 

Conversion ......................................... . 

Nuclear material removal ........................... . 

Material disposition ............................... . 

Subtotal, Material management and minimization .... 

Nonproliferation and arms control .................... . 

Defense nuclear nonproliferation R&D: 

Defense nuclear nonproliferation R&D ............... . 

Proliferation detection ............................ . 

Nuclear detonation detection ....................... . 

LEU fuels development .............................. . 

Subtotal, Defense nuclear nonproliferation R&D .... 

Nonproliferation construction: 

99-D-143 Mixed Oxide (MOX) Fuel Fabrication 

Facility, SRS .............................. . 

18-D-150 Surplus plutonium disposition 

project , SRS ............................... . 

367' 108 337' 108 293,859 -73,249 -

75,615 125,500 27,400 -48,215 -

68,902 32,925 32,925 -35,977 

143,833 173' 669 150,669 +6,836 -

------------- ------------- -------------- -------------- -------

288,350 332,094 

124,703 129,703 

469,750 446,095 

469,750 446,095 

335,000 270,000 

9,000 

210,994 

129,703 

263,200 

182,895 

77,500 

523,595 

340,000 

-77,356 

+5,000 

-469,750 

+263,200 

+182,895 

+77,500 

+53,845 

+5,000 

-1

-4

+2

+1

+

+

+

Insert graphic folio 139 here HR230.022

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

(Amounts in thousands) 

18-D-150 Plutonium removal project, SRS ...... . 

Subtotal, Nonproliferation construction ..... 

Legacy contractor pensions ........................... . 

Nuclear counterterrorism and incident response ....... . 

Use of prior-year balances ......................... .. 

Subtotal, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation ......... . 

Rescission ........................................... . 

TOTAL, DEFENSE NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION .......... . 

NAVAL REACTORS 

Naval reactors development ........................... . 

Columbia-class reactor systems development ........... . 

SSG Prototype refueling .............................. . 

Naval reactors operations and infrastructure ......... . 

Construction: 

17- D-911 BL Fire System Upgrade .................... . 

15-D-904 NRF Overpack Storage Expansion 3 .......... . 

15-D-903 KL Fire System Upgrade .................. . 

15-D-902 KS Engineroom team trainer facility ....... . 

14-D-901 Spent fuel handling recapitalization 

project, NRF ..................................... . 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

335,000 

83,208 

271,881 

-38,000 

1,902,000 

-19. 128 

1,882,872 

440,338 

213,700 

124,000 

449,682 

1,400 

700 

33,300 

100.000 

FY 2018 

Request 

279.000 

40,950 

277,360 

1, 842,310 

-49,000 

1,793,310 

473,267 

156,700 

190,000 

466,884 

13,700 

15,000 

116.000 

Bi 11 

9,000 

349,000 

40,950 

277,360 

1,825, 461 

-49,000 

1 '776' 461 

473,267 

156,700 

190,000 

449,682 

13,700 

15,000 

141,000 

Bill vs. 

Enacted 

+9,000 

+14,000 

-42,258 

+5,479 

+38,000 

-76,539 

-29,872 

-106,411 

+32,929 

-57,000 

+66,000 

-1 '400 

+13,000 

+15,000 

-33,300 

+41,000 

B

+

-

-

-

+

Insert graphic folio 140 here HR230.023

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

(Amounts in thousands) 

10-D-903 Security upgrades, KAPL ................... . 

Subtotal, Construction ....................... . 

Program direction ..... . 

Subtotal, Naval Reactors ..................... . 

Rescission ........................................... . 

TOTAL, NAVAL REACTORS ............................ . 

FEDERAL SALARIES AND EXPENSES ........................ . 

TOTAL, FEDERAL SALARIES AND EXPENSES ............. . 

TOTAL, NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION. 

DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP 

Closure sites administration .......................... 

Closure and other sites administration ................ 

Richland: 

River corridor and other cleanup operations ......... 

Central plateau remediation ......................... 

RL Community and regulatory support ................. 

RL Safeguards and security .......................... 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

12,900 

148,300 

44' 100 

1,420,120 

-307 

1,419,813 

FY 2018 

Request 

144,700 

48,200 

1,479,751 

1,479,751 

Bill 

169' 700 

46,651 

1,486,000 

1,486,000 

Bill vs. B

Enacted 

-12,900 

+21 ,400 +

+2,551 

+65,880 

+307 

+66' 187 

============= ============= ============== ============== =======

390,000 418,595 412,595 +22,595 

390,000 418,595 412,595 +22,595 

============= ============= ============== ============== =======

12,938,252 13,931,000 13,914,400 +976,148 -

============= ============= ============== ============== =======

9,389 4,889 --- -9,389 

-.- --- 37,919 +37,919 +

143,755 58,692 93,692 -50,063 +

659,818 637,879 642,250 -17,568 

24 '701 5' 121 5' 121 -19,580 

--- --- 81,990 +81 ,990 +

Insert graphic folio 141 here HR230.024

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Construction: 

18-D-404 WESF Modifications and capsule storage .. . 

15-D-401 Containerized sludge removal annex, RL .. . 

Subtotal, Richland ......................... . 

Office of River Protection: 

Waste treatment and immobilization plant 

commissioning .................................... . 

Rad liquid tank waste stabilization and disposition. 

Construction: 

15-D-409 Low activity waste pretreatment system ... 

01-D-16 A-D, Waste treatment and immobilization 

plant .............................. · · · · · · · · · · · · · 

18-D-16 Waste treatment and immobilization plant -

LBL!Di rect feed LAW ............................ . 

01-D-16 D High-level waste facility .............. . 

01-D-16 E, Pretreatment facility ................. . 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

11,486 

839 '760 

3,000 

733,965 

73,000 

593,000 

97,000 

FY 2018 

Request 

6,500 

8,000 

716,192 

8,000 

713,311 

93,000 

655,000 

35,000 

Bill 

6,500 

8.000 

837,553 

8,000 

713,311 

93,000 

---

643,000 

26,000 

35,000 

Bill vs. 

Enacted 

+6,500 

-3,486 

-2,207 

+5,000 

-20,654 

+20,000 

-593,000 

+643,000 

+26,000 

-62,000 

------------- ------------- -------------- --------------

Total, Construction ............................ . 763,000 783,000 797,000 +34,000 

Subtotal, Office of river protection ........... . 1,499,965 1 '504 '311 1,518,311 +18,346 

Idaho National Laboratory: 

Idaho cleanup and waste disposition ................ . 379,088 346' 155 378,000 -1 '088 

Idaho community and regulatory support ............. . 3,000 4,071 4,071 +1 '071 

------------- ------------- -------------- --------------

Total, Idaho National Laboratory ................. . 382,088 350,226 382,071 -17 

B

+1

-6

+6

+

+

+

+

+

Insert graphic folio 142 here HR230.025

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

(Amounts in thousands) 

NNSA sites and Nevada offsites: 

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory ........... . 

Separations Process Research Unit ................ . 

Nevada ........................................... . 

Sandia National Laboratory ....................... . 

Los Alamos National Laboratory ................... . 

Total, NNSA sites and Nevada off-sites ......... . 

Oak Ridge Reservation: 

OR Nuclear faci 1 i ty D&D ............................ . 

U233 disposition program ........................... . 

OR Cleanup and waste disposition ................... . 

Construction: 

17-D-401 On-site waste disposal facility ....... . 

14-D-403 Outfall 200 mercury treatment facility. 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

1,396 

3,685 

62,176 

4' 130 

194,000 

265,387 

131 ,851 

43,311 

68,457 

6,000 

5 '100 

FY 2018 

Request 

1 '175 

1 '800 

60' 136 

2,600 

191,629 

257,340 

77' 479 

33,784 

66,632 

5,000 

17' 100 

Bill 

31,175 

1 '800 

60' 136 

2,600 

194,000 

289,711 

112,479 

52,300 

66,632 

10,000 

17 '1 00 

Bill vs. 

Enacted 

+29,779 

-1 '885 

-2,040 

-1 '530 

+24,324 

-19,372 

+8,989 

-1,825 

+4,000 

+12,000 

------------- ------------- -------------- --------------

Subtotal, Construction ....................... . 

OR Community & regulatory support .................. . 

OR Technology development and deployment ........... . 

OR Safeguards and security ......................... . 

Total, Oak Ridge Reservation ................. . 

Savannah River Site: 

SR Site risk management operations ................. . 

Nuclear Material Management ........................ . 

11 '100 

5,500 

3,000 

263,219 

448,980 

22' 100 

4,605 

3,000 

207,600 

323,482 

27' 100 

4,605 

3,000 

17,605 

283,721 

462,954 

+16,000 

-895 

+17,605 

+20,502 

+13,974 

B

+

+

+

+

+

+

+4

-3

Insert graphic folio 143 here HR230.026

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Environmental Cleanup .............................. . 

SR Community and regulatory support ................ . 

SR Radioactive liquid tank waste stabilization and 

disposition ...................................... . 

SR Safeguards and security ................... , ..... . 

Construction: 

18-D-402 Saltstone disposal unit #8/9 .......... . 

17-D-402 Saltstone disposal Unit #7, SRS ....... . 

15-D-402 Salt stone disposal Unit #6, SRS ....... . 

05-D-405 Salt waste processing facility, SRS ... . 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

11.249 

600,123 

5,500 

7 '577 

160 '000 

FY 2018 

Request 

159,978 

11,249 

597,258 

500 

40,000 

---

150,000 

Bill vs. B

Bill Enacted 

--- --- -1

4,749 -6,500 

597,258 -2,865 

142,233 +142,233 +1

500 +500 

40,000 +34,500 

- - -7,577 

150,000 -10' 000 ~~~W~MWW MWW. ~------W- --- -W--~-- - --- ~--- ...................... ---~- .

Total, Savannah River Site ................... . 1 ,233,429 1,282,467 1,397,694 +164,265 +1

Waste Isolation Pilot Plant: 

Waste Isolation Pilot Plant ....................... .. 260' 188 250,971 250,971 -9,217 

CB Safeguards and security ......................... . 6,470 +6,470 

Construction: 

15-D-411 Safety significant confinement 

ventilation system, WIPP ....................... . 2,532 46,000 46,000 +43,468 

15-D-412 Exhaust shaft, WIPP ..................... . 30,000 19,600 19,600 -10,400 

--·---·------

____________ .. 

-------------- --·----------- -------

Total, Waste isolation pilot plant ............. . 292,720 316,571 323,041 +30,321 

Program direction ............... ,., .. ,, ............. ,. 290,050 300,000 300,000 +9,950 

Program support ............ , . , , ... , .................. . 14,979 35,088 14,979 --- -

Safeguards and Security .............................. . 262,189 269' 160 --- -262,189 -2

Technology development ........................ . 25,025 25,000 20,000 -5,025 

Insert graphic folio 144 here HR230.027

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

(Amounts in thousands) 

CB-0101 Economic assistance to the state of NM ....... . 

Cyber security ....................................... . 

Excess facilities .................................... . 

Subtotal, Defense Environmental Cleanup ........ . 

TOTAL, DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEAN UP ............ . 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

26,800 

5,405,000 

5,405,000 

FY 2018 

Request 

43,342 

225,000 

5,537,186 

5' 537' 186 

Bill vs. B

Bi 11 Enacted 

-26,800 

-

-2

5,405,000 -1

5,405,000 -1

============= ============= ============== ============== =======

DEFENSE URANIUM ENRICHMENT DECONTAMINATION AND 

DECOMMISSIONING ................................... . 563,000 -563,000 

OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES 

Environment, health, safety and security: 

Environment, health, safety and security ........... . 126,972 130,693 128,946 +1,974 

Program direction .................................. . 64,000 68,765 68,000 +4,000 

-------~----- ---- .. ~------ ------~---- .... - ------- .......... _______

Subtotal, Environment, Health, safety and security 190,972 199,458 196 '946 +5,974 

Independent enterprise assessments: 

Independent enterprise assessments. 24,580 24,068 24,068 -512 

Program direction ................. . 51,000 50,863 50,863 -137 ---------- ---~----- --- ______ ........... -- ________ ., ____________

Subtotal, Independent enterprise assessments .... 75,580 74,931 74,931 -649 

Specialized security activities ...................... . 237,912 237,912 249,912 +12,000 +

Insert graphic folio 145 here HR230.028

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Office of Legacy Management: 

Legacy management .................................. . 

Program direction ....... , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... . 

Subtotal, Office of Legacy Management ............ . 

Defense related administrative support ............ , .. . 

Office of hearings and appeals ................. . 

TOTAL, OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES .................. . 

DEFENSE NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL ....................... . 

TOTAL, ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES ......... 

POWER MARKETING ADMINISTRATIONS (1) 

SOUTHEASTERN POWER ADMINISTRATION 

Operation and maintenance: 

Purchase power and wheeling ....................... 

Program direction .......................... , ...... 

Subtotal, Operation and maintenance ............. 

Less alternative financing (PPW) .................... 

Offsetting collections (for PPW) .................... 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

140,306 

14,014 

FY 2018 

Request 

137,674 

16,932 

Bill 

137,674 

16,932 

Bill vs. B

Enacted 

-2,632 

+2,918 

~~·~~--·-~--~ 

~~~~--~------

-----------~--

-------~------

----·~-

154 '320 

119,716 

5.500 

784,000 

154,606 

143' 000 

5' 605 

815,512 

154,606 

143,000 

5,605 

825,000 

+286 

+23,284 

+105 

+41 ,000 

============= ============= ============== ============== =======

30,000 30,000 +30,000 

19,690,252 20,313,698 20,174,400 +484' 148 -1

============= ============= ============== ============== =======

78,929 75,055 66,070 -12,859 

6,000 6,379 6,379 +379 

------------- ------------- -------------- -------------- -------

84,929 81,434 72,449 -12,480 

-18,169 -15,070 -15,070 +3,099 

-60 '760 -59,985 -51,000 +9,760 

Insert graphic folio 146 here HR230.029

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Offsetting collections (PO) ................. , ...... . 

Use of prior-year balances ......................... . 

TOTAL, SOUTHEASTERN POWER ADMINISTRATION .... , ..... 

SOUTHWESTERN POWER ADMINISTRATION 

Operation and maintenance: 

Operating expenses ............................... . 

Purchase power and wheeling ...................... . 

Program direction ................................ . 

Construction ..................................... . 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

-1 '000 

-5,000 

13,896 

83.000 

31,516 

12,486 

FY 2018 

Request 

-6,379 

16,680 

93,000 

31,335 

14,932 

Bill 

-6,379 

16,680 

20,000 

31,335 

14,932 

Bill vs. 

Enacted 

-5,379 

+5,000 

+2,784 

-63,000 

-181 

+2,446 

B

-

---~~M~M-~-·-

----

... ---~-~ .... -~---------- ... ~--- _____ ........ 

-------

Subtotal, Operation and maintenance ............ . 140,898 155,947 82,947 -57,951 -

Less alternative financing (for O&M) ............... . -6,269 -9,042 -9,042 -2.773 

Less alternative financing (for PPW) ............... . -10,000 -10,000 -10,000 . --

Less alternative financing (Canst) ................. . -5,986 -9,417 -9,417 -3,431 

Offsetting collections (PO) ........................ . -29,271 -16,035 -16,035 +13,236 

Offsetting collections (for O&M) ................... . -5,315 -2,853 -2,853 +2,462 

Offsetting collections (for PPW) ................... . ·73,000 -83,000 -10,000 +63,000 +

Use of prior year balances ......................... . -14,200 -14,200 -14,200 

__ 

.. __________ ............................... 

-------------- -------

TOTAL. SOUTHWESTERN POWER ADMINISTRATION ......... . 11 • 057 11,400 11,400 +343 

WESTERN AREA POWER ADMINISTRATION 

Operation and maintenance: 

Construction and rehabilitation .............. . 62,442 52,272 52,272 -10. 170 

Insert graphic folio 147 here HR230.030

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Operation and maintenance ........................ . 

Purchase power and wheeling ...................... . 

Program direction ................................ . 

Subtotal, Operation and maintenance ............ . 

Less alternative financing (for O&M) ............... . 

Less alternative financing (for Construction) ...... . 

Less alternative financing (for Program Dir. ) ...... . 

Less alternative financing (for PPW) ............... . 

Offsetting collections (for program direction). 

Offsetting collections (for O&M) ................... . 

Offsetting collections (P.L. 108-477, P.L. 109-103). 

Offsetting collections (P.L. 98-381) ............... . 

Use of prior-year balances ......................... . 

TOTAL, WESTERN AREA POWER ADMINISTRATION ......... . 

FALCON AND AMISTAD OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE FUND 

Operation and maintenance .......................... . 

Offsetting collections ............................. . 

Less alternative financing ......................... . 

TOTAL, FALCON AND AMISTAD O&M FUND ............... . 

TOTAL, POWER MARKETING ADMINISTRATIONS ......... . 

FY 2017 Enacted 

76,697 

581,634 

226,497 

FY 2018 

Request 

72,407 

597,997 

235,722 

Bill vs. 

Bill Enacted 

72,407 -4,290 

468,072 -113,562 

235,722 +9,225 

------------- ------------- ------------·- --------------

947,270 958,398 828,473 -118,797 

-5,068 -5,068 

-43,884 -40,500 -40,500 +3,384 

-6 '343 -8,056 -38,398 -32,055 

-214,625 -289,072 -289,072 -74,447 

-150' 441 -150,392 -120,050 +30' 391 

-27,122 -23,922 -18,854 +8,268 

-367,009 -308,925 -179,000 +188,009 

-8,265 -9,306 -9,306 -1 '041 

. 34 '000 ·34,853 -34,853 -853 

_______ .,. _____ 

------------- -------------- -··-----------

95,581 93,372 93,372 -2,209 

============= ============= ============== ============== 

4,393 

-3,838 

-323 

232 

5,048 

-3,948 

-872 

228 

5,048 

-3,948 

-872 

228 

+655 

-110 

-549 

-4 

B

-1

-1

-

+

+1

============= ============= ============== ============== =======

106,870 105,000 105,000 -1,870 

============= ============= ============== ============== =======

Insert graphic folio 148 here HR230.031

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

(Amounts in thousands) 

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ............. . 

FERC revenues ................................... . 

General Provisions 

Title III Rescissions: 

Department of Energy: 

Fossil Energy Research and Development ........... . 

Energy Programs and PMAs ......................... . 

Atomic Energy Defense Activities ................. . 

Uranium lease and take-back revolving fund ........... . 

Uranium lease and take-back revolving fund initial 

capitalization ..................................... . 

Northeast gasoline supply reserve sale ............... . 

Total. General Provisions .................... . 

GRAND TOTAL, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ................ . 

(Total amount appropriated) .................. . 

(Rescissions) ................................ . 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

346,800 

-346,800 

-240,000 

-81,063 

-13,740 

-334,803 

30,746,009 

( 31 '181 '773) 

(-435,764) 

FY 2018 

Request 

367,600 

-367,600 

10,000 

1 ,000 

-70,000 

-59,000 

27,870,597 

(28,215,964) 

(-345,367) 

Bill 

367,600 

-367,600 

29,888,401 

(30,348,401) 

(-460,000) 

Bill vs. 

Enacted 

+20,800 

-20.800 

+240,000 

+81,063 

+13,740 

+334,803 

-857,608 

(-833,372) 

(-24,236) 

B

-

+

+

+2,0

(+2,1

(-1

============= ============= ============== ============== =======

Insert graphic folio 149 here HR230.032

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

(Amounts in thousands) 

SUMMARY OF ACCOUNTS 

Energy efficiency and renewable energy ............... . 

Electricity delivery and energy reliability ......... .. 

Nuclear energy ....................................... . 

Fossil Energy Research and Development ............... . 

Naval Petroleum & Oil Shale Reserves ................. . 

Strategic petroleum reserve .......................... . 

SPR Petroleum Account ................................ . 

Northeast home heating oil reserve ................... . 

Energy Information Administration .................... . 

Non-Defense Environmental Cleanup .................... . 

Uranium enrichment D&O fund .......................... . 

Nuclear Waste Disposal ............................... . 

Science .............................................. . 

Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy ............. . 

Departmental administration .......................... . 

Office of the Inspector General ...................... . 

Title 17 Innovative technology loan guarantee program. 

Advanced technology vehicles manufacturing loan pgm .. . 

Tribal Energy Loan Guarantee program ................. . 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

2,090,200 

230,000 

1,016,616 

668,000 

14,950 

223,000 

6,500 

122,000 

247,000 

768,000 

5,392,000 

306,000 

143,000 

44,424 

7,000 

5,000 

FY 2018 

Request 

636,149 

120,000 

703,000 

280,000 

4,900 

180,000 

8,400 

6,500 

118,000 

218,400 

752,749 

90,000 

4,472,516 

-26,367 

145,652 

49,000 

-250,000 

2,000 

Bi 11 

1 '103 '908 

218,500 

969,000 

634,600 

4,900 

252,000 

6,500 

118,000 

222,400 

768,000 

90,000 

5,392,000 

185,693 

49,000 

-411,000 

5,000 

500 

Bill vs. 

Enacted 

-986,292 

-11,500 

-47,616 

-33,400 

-10,050 

+29,000 

-4,000 

-24,600 

+90,000 

-306,000 

+42,693 

+4,576 

-418,000 

+500 

B

+4

+

+2

+3

+

+

+9

+

+

-1

Insert graphic folio 150 here HR230.033

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Atomic energy defense activities: 

National Nuclear Security Administration: 

Weapons activities ............................... . 

Defense nuclear nonproliferation ................. . 

Naval reactors ................................... . 

Federal Salaries and Expenses .................... . 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

9,245,567 

1,882,872 

1,419,813 

390,000 

FY 2018 

Request 

10,239,344 

1,793,310 

1,479,751 

418,595 

Bill vs. B

Bill Enacted 

10,239,344 +993,777 

1,776,461 -106,411 -

1,486,000 +66' 187 

412,595 +22,595 

-------------

------------~ 

-------------- -------------- -------

Subtotal, National Nuclear Security Admin ...... . 12,938,252 13,931,000 13,914,400 +976,148 -

Defense environmental cleanup ...................... . 5,405,000 5,537,186 5,405,000 -.. -1

Other defense activities ................. . 784,000 815,512 825,000 +41,000 

Defense nuclear waste disposal ..................... . 30,000 30,000 +30,000 

........ 

--- --- -"' .. -- ---- --

-

...... 

---

...... 

-

.. 

-- - -

.. 

"'--- 

Total, Atomic Energy Defense Activities .......... . 19,690,252 20,313,698 20,174,400 +484, 148 -1

Power marketing administrations {1): 

Southeastern Power Administration ........ . --- --- ·--

Southwestern Power Administration .................. . 11,057 11,400 11,400 +343 

Western Area Power Administration .................. . 95' 581 93,372 93,372 -2,209 

Falcon and Amistad operating and maintenance fund .. . 232 228 228 -4 

------------- --·----------

., __________ ., __ 

-------------- -------

Total, Power Marketing Administrations ........... . 106,870 105,000 105,000 -1,870 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission: 

Salaries and expenses ...................... . 346,800 367,600 367,600 +20,800 

Revenues ........................................... . -346,800 -367,600 -367,600 -20,800 

Insert graphic folio 151 here HR230.034

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

(Amounts in thousands) 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

FY 2018 

Request 

General Provisions ................................... . -334,803 -59,000 

Bill vs. B

Bill Enacted 

+334,803 +

============= ============= ============== ============== =======

Total Summary of Accounts, Department of Energy ... 

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 

30,746,009 27,870,597 29,888,401 -857,608 +2,0

============= ============= ============== ============== =======
150 

GENERAL PROVISIONS—DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

The bill includes a provision that prohibits the use of funds provided in this title to initiate requests for proposals, other solicitations or arrangements for new programs or activities that have not 

yet been approved and funded by the Congress; requires notification or a report for certain funding actions; prohibits funds to be 

used for certain multi-year ‘‘Energy Programs’’ activities without 

notification; prohibits the obligation or expenditure of funds provided in this title through a reprogramming of funds except in certain circumstances; and permits the transfer and merger of unexpended balances of prior appropriations with appropriation accounts established in this bill. 

The bill continues a provision that authorizes intelligence activities of the Department of Energy for purposes of section 504 of the 

National Security Act of 1947. 

The bill continues a provision that prohibits the use of funds in 

this title for capital construction of high hazard nuclear facilities, 

unless certain independent oversight is conducted. 

The bill continues a provision that prohibits the use of funds provided in this title to approve critical decision-2 or critical decision3 for certain construction projects, unless a separate independent 

cost estimate has been developed for that critical decision. 

The bill continues a provision restricting certain activities in the 

Russian Federation. 

The bill includes a provision regarding authority to release refined petroleum product from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve 

(SPR). Instead of engaging the Congress on developing appropriate 

legislation for a regional refined petroleum product reserve, the 

previous Administration chose to establish the Northeast Gasoline 

Supply Reserve (NGSR) under the existing authorities of the SPR. 

As such, the NGSR is subject to national impact thresholds for releases, making it operationally ineffective as a regional product reserve. The Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of 

Representatives is evaluating the proper configuration of the SPR 

in light of current circumstances. This evaluation will be informed, 

in part, by an assessment of the SPR being undertaken by the Government Accountability Office. While this work is ongoing, this bill 

includes temporary authority to ensure the operational effectiveness of the NGSR. 

The bill includes a provision regarding a drawdown and sale of 

crude oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. 

The bill continues a provision regarding management of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. 

The bill includes a provision limiting the amount of funds to be 

used for the working capital fund. 

151 

TITLE IV—INDEPENDENT AGENCIES 

APPALACHIAN REGIONAL COMMISSION

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $152,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 26,660,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 130,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... ¥22,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ +103,340,000 

The Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) is a regional economic development agency established in 1965 by the Appalachian 

Regional Development Act (P.L. 89–4). It is composed of the governors of the 13 Appalachian States and a federal co-chair appointed by the President. Each year, the ARC provides funding for 

several hundred projects in the Appalachian Region in areas such 

as business development, education and job training, telecommunications, infrastructure, community development, housing, and 

transportation. 

To diversify and enhance regional business development, 

$10,000,000 is provided to continue the program of high-speed 

broadband deployment in distressed counties within the Central 

Appalachian region that have been most negatively impacted by 

the downturn in the coal industry. This funding shall be in addition to the 30 percent directed to distressed counties. 

Within available funds, the Committee directs $50,000,000 for 

activities in support of the POWER+ Plan. 

The ARC targets 50 percent of its funds to distressed counties or 

distressed areas in the Appalachian region. The Committee continues to believe this should be the primary focus of the ARC. The 

recommendation does not include funds to shut down the ARC. 

DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $30,872,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 30,600,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 30,600,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... ¥272,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ – – – 

The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) was created by the fiscal year 1989 National Defense Authorization Act. 

The Board, composed of five members appointed by the President, 

provides advice and recommendations to the Secretary of Energy 

regarding public health and safety issues at the Department’s defense nuclear facilities. The DNFSB is responsible for reviewing 

and evaluating the content and implementation of the standards 

relating to the design, construction, operation, and decommissioning of the Department of Energy’s defense nuclear facilities. 

152 

DELTA REGIONAL AUTHORITY

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $25,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 2,500,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 15,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... ¥10,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ +12,500,000 

The Delta Regional Authority (DRA) is a federal-state partnership established by the Delta Regional Authority Act of 2000 (P.L. 

106–554) that serves a 252-county/parish area in an eight-state region near the mouth of the Mississippi River. Led by a federal cochair and the governors of each participating state, the DRA is designed to remedy severe and chronic economic distress by stimulating economic development and fostering partnerships that will 

have a positive impact on the region’s economy. The DRA seeks to 

help local communities leverage other federal and state programs 

that are focused on basic infrastructure development, transportation improvements, business development, and job training services. Under federal law, at least 75 percent of appropriated funds 

must be invested in distressed counties and parishes, with 50 percent of the funds for transportation and basic infrastructure improvements. 

The recommendation does not include funds to shut down the 

DRA. 

DENALI COMMISSION

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $15,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 7,300,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 11,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... ¥4,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ +3,700,000 

The Denali Commission is a regional development agency established by the Denali Commission Act of 1998 (P.L. 105–277) to provide critical utilities, infrastructure, health services, and economic 

support throughout Alaska. To ensure that local communities have 

a stake in Commission-funded projects, local cost share requirements for construction and equipment have been established for 

both distressed and non-distressed communities. 

The recommendation does not include funds to shut down the 

Denali Commission. 

NORTHERN BORDER REGIONAL COMMISSION

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $10,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 850,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 5,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... ¥5,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ +4,150,000 

The Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (P.L.110–234) 

authorized the establishment of the Northern Border Regional 

Commission as a federal-state partnership intended to address the 

economic development needs of distressed portions of the four-state 

region of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, and New York. 

153 

The recommendation does not include funds to shut down the 

Northern Border Regional Commission. 

SOUTHEAST CRESCENT REGIONAL COMMISSION

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $250,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... – – – 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 250,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... – – – 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ +250,000 

The Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (P.L. 110–234) 

authorized the establishment of the Southeast Crescent Regional 

Commission as a federal-state partnership intended to address the 

economic development needs of distressed portions of the sevenstate region in the southeastern United States not already served 

by a regional development agency. 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $905,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 939,137,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 939,137,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... +34,137,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ – – – 

REVENUES

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $¥794,580,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... ¥803,409,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... ¥779,829,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... +14,751,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ +23,580,000 

NET APPROPRIATION

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $110,420,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 135,728,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 159,308,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... +48,888,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ +23,580,000 

The Committee recommendation for the Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) provides the following amounts: 

(Dollars in thousands) 

Account FY 2017 enacted FY 2018 request Cmte. rec. 

Nuclear Reactor Safety ............................................................................... $462,300 $466,655 $466,655

Nuclear Materials and Waste Safety .......................................................... 113,700 113,145 113,145 

Decommissioning and Low-Level Waste ..................................................... 27,200 27,980 27,980 

Integrated University Program .................................................................... 15,000 – – – 15,000 

Yucca licensing ........................................................................................... – – – 30,000 30,000 

Corporate Support ....................................................................................... 309,800 301,357 301,357

TOTAL, Program Level ........................................................................ 928,000 939,137 954,137 

Savings and Carryover ................................................................................ ¥23,000 – – – ¥15,000 

TOTAL ................................................................................................. 905,000 939,137 939,137 

154 

The recommendation includes $15,000,000 in savings for fiscal 

year 2018 that was not included in the budget request. The Committee directs the Commission to apply these savings in a manner 

that continues to ensure the protection of public health and safety 

and maintains the effectiveness of the current inspection program. Within available funds, not more than $9,500,000 is included for 

salaries, travel, and other support costs for the Office of the Commission. These salaries and expenses shall include only salaries 

and benefit and travel costs, and not general and administrative 

and infrastructure costs. The Committee directs that these funds 

are to be jointly managed by the Commissioners, and the bill requires that the use and expenditure of these salaries and expenses 

shall only be by a majority vote of the Commission. The NRC shall 

continue to include a breakout and explanation of the Commission 

salaries and expenses in its annual budget requests. If the Commission wishes to change the composition of the funds requested 

for its salaries and expenses in future years, it must do so in an 

annual budget request or through a reprogramming. The recommendation directs $30,000,000 to continue adjudication 

of the Yucca Mountain license application. 

Integrated University Program.—The Committee recommendation includes $15,000,000 to provide financial support for the university education programs, as the Commission continues to be reliant on a pipeline of highly trained nuclear engineers and scientists and benefits substantially from this university program. 

Not less than $5,000,000 of this amount is to be used for grants 

to support research projects that do not align with programmatic 

missions, but are critical to maintaining the discipline of nuclear 

science and engineering. 

Project Aim.—The Committee commends the NRC for the 

progress made to date on the Project Aim initiative. The NRC’s 

twin workforce goals under this initiative—of correctly sizing the 

agency staff while also increasing workforce agility—will enhance 

the NRC’s ability to address emergent safety issues in a timely 

way. However, the dynamic environment of the nuclear industry 

will continue to challenge the NRC’s ability to forecast needed competencies and staffing levels. To address this, the NRC has undertaken the Enhanced Strategic Workforce Planning initiative. While 

this effort is meritorious, the NRC acknowledges that this initiative 

will not incorporate the efficiency gains of process improvements 

already implemented under Project Aim and consequently could result in overestimates of needed FTEs. The NRC must continue to 

review the organizational structure of the agency to ensure that 

staff and resources are aligned to support estimated workload requirements and that the estimates themselves reflect recent efficiency gains. The NRC is directed to provide to the Committees on 

Appropriations of both Houses of Congress by February 5, 2018, a 

report on the actions taken to improve the fidelity of agency estimates of necessary FTE levels and to optimize the structure of the 

agency over the next five years, including a review of the size, function, and number of program offices and regional offices. 

Risk-Informed Activities.—The Committee notes that the Commission’s existing policy statement on the use of probabilistic risk 

assessment (PRA) finds that the many potential applications of this 

risk tool, if implemented broadly in nuclear regulatory activities, 

155 

‘‘would promote regulatory stability and efficiency’’ and concludes 

that the use of probabilistic insights ‘‘should be increased to the extent supported by the state-of-the-art.’’ The Committee agrees with 

this policy and supports sustained progress by the NRC in continuing to apply risk analysis tools to identify areas where its regulations may be insufficiently protective and where they may be 

needlessly restrictive. Given the Commission’s recent direction to 

agency staff reaffirming the Commission’s interest in sustained 

progress in the implementation of this policy and directing a suite 

of follow-on actions, the Commission is directed to submit to the 

Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress not later 

than 120 days after enactment of this Act a report that provides 

its plan for broadening the application of risk assessment tools 

across the agency’s activities; for improving the realism of PRA information used in regulatory decision-making; for establishing a 

more risk-informed licensing, inspection, and oversight process; and 

for training its technical staff more thoroughly in the use of these 

approaches. 

Rulemaking.—The Commission needs to continue to aggressively 

monitor the rulemaking process and also ensure that the Committee receives accurate reports on rulemaking activities. The Commission shall list all rulemaking activities planned, to include their 

priority, schedule, and actions taken to adhere to the backfit rule, 

in the annual budget request and the semi-annual report to Congress on licensing and regulatory activities. 

Digital Instrumentation and Control.—The future of commercial 

nuclear power depends, in part, on the NRC’s ability to keep pace 

with innovation and technological developments. The NRC has 

demonstrated its capacity to adapt to new technology and innovation in its decision to issue a construction license for a first-of-akind medical isotope production facility. In a similar vein, the NRC 

should endeavor to ensure that it establishes an efficient, reliable, 

and predictable licensing process for power reactors to transition 

from analog to digital instrumentation and control systems for safety-related applications. 

Subsequent License Renewal.—The Commission is directed to include in the fiscal year 2019 budget request the actions taken to 

be prepared to effectively and efficiently review any subsequent license renewal applications. 

Reporting Requirements.—The Committee directs the Commission to continue to provide quarterly reports on licensing goals and 

right-sizing commitments, as described in the explanatory statement for P.L. 114–113. 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

GROSS APPROPRIATION

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $12,129,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 12,859,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 12,859,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... +730 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ – – – 

156 

REVENUES

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $¥10,044,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... ¥10,555,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... ¥10,555,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... ¥511 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ – – – 

NET APPROPRIATION

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $2,085,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 2,304,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 2,304,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... +219 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ – – – 

The Committee has included $1,131,000 within this appropriation for the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board for Inspector 

General services from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Inspector General. 

NUCLEAR WASTE TECHNICAL REVIEW BOARD

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, 2017 ............................................................................ $3,600,000 

Budget estimate, 2018 ....................................................................... 3,600,000 

Recommended, 2018 ........................................................................... 3,600,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2017 .................................................................... – – – 

Budget estimate, 2018 ................................................................ – – – 

The Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board (NWTRB) was established by the 1987 amendments to the Nuclear Waste Policy Act 

of 1982 to provide independent technical oversight of the Department of Energy’s nuclear waste disposal program. The Committee 

expects the NWTRB to continue its active engagement with the Department and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission on issues involving nuclear waste disposal. 

GENERAL PROVISIONS—INDEPENDENT AGENCIES 

The bill continues a provision requiring the Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission to fully comply with Congressional requests for information. 

The bill continues a provision regarding the circumstances in 

which the Nuclear Regulatory Commission may reprogram funds. 

TITLE V—GENERAL PROVISIONS 

The bill continues a provision that prohibits the use of funds provided in this Act to, in any way, directly or indirectly influence congressional action on any legislation or appropriation matters pending before the Congress, other than to communicate to Members of 

Congress as described in section 1913 of title 18, United States 

Code. 

The bill continues a provision consolidating the transfer authorities into and out of accounts funded by this Act. No additional 

transfer authority is implied or conveyed by this provision. For the 

purposes of this provision, the term ‘‘transfer’’ shall mean the shifting of all or part of the budget authority in one account to another. 

157 

The bill continues a provision prohibiting funds in contravention 

of E.O. 12898 of February 11, 1994, regarding environmental justice. 

The bill includes a provision prohibiting funds in this Act from 

being used to maintain or establish computer networks unless such 

networks block the viewing, downloading, or exchange of pornography. 

The bill includes a provision prohibiting the use of funds to further implementation of components of the National Ocean Policy 

developed under E.O. 13547. 

The bill includes a provision prohibiting the use of funds for the 

removal of any federally owned or operated dam unless the removal was previously authorized by Congress. 

The bill continues a provision prohibiting funds in this Act from 

being used to close the Yucca Mountain license application process 

or for actions that would remove the possibility that Yucca Mountain might be an option in the future. 

The bill includes a provision regarding the spending reduction 

account. 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORT REQUIREMENTS 

The following items are included in accordance with various requirements of the Rules of the House of Representatives. 

STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

Pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following is a statement of general performance goals and objectives for which this measure authorizes funding: 

The Committee on Appropriations considers program performance, including a program’s success in developing and attaining 

outcome-related goals and objectives, in developing funding recommendations. 

TRANSFER OF FUNDS

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following is submitted describing the transfer of funds provided in the accompanying bill. 

TITLE I—CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CIVIL

Under section 103, ‘‘General Provisions, Corps of Engineers— 

Civil’’, $5,400,000 under the heading ‘‘Operation and Maintenance’’ 

may be transferred to the Fish and Wildlife Service to mitigate for 

fisheries lost due to Corps projects. 

TITLE II—BUREAU OF RECLAMATION

Under ‘‘Water and Related Resources’’, $67,693,000 is available 

for transfer to the Upper Colorado River Basin Fund and 

$5,551,000 is available for transfer to the Lower Colorado River 

Basin Development Fund. Such funds as may be necessary may be 

advanced to the Colorado River Dam Fund. The amounts of transfers may be increased or decreased within the overall appropriation 

under the heading. 

158 

Under ‘‘California Bay Delta Restoration’’, such sums as may be 

necessary to carry out authorized purposes may be transferred to 

appropriate accounts of other participating federal agencies. 

TITLE III—DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Under ‘‘Atomic Energy Defense Activities—National Nuclear Se- curity Administration—Naval Reactors’’, $82,500,000 shall be 

transferred to ‘‘Department of Energy—Energy Programs—Nuclear 

Energy’’ for the Advanced Test Reactor. 

Under section 301, ‘‘General Provisions—Department of Energy’’, 

unexpended balances of prior appropriations provided for activities 

in this Act may be transferred to appropriation accounts for such 

activities established pursuant to this title. Balances so transferred 

may be merged with funds in the applicable established accounts 

and thereafter may be accounted for as one fund for the same time 

period as originally enacted. 

DISCLOSURE OF EARMARKS AND CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED

SPENDING ITEMS

Neither the bill nor the report contains any congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in 

clause 9 of rule XXI. 

CHANGES IN THE APPLICATION OF EXISTING LAW

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1)(A) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, the following statements are submitted 

describing the effect of provisions in the accompanying bill which 

directly or indirectly change the application of existing law. 

TITLE I—CORPS OF ENGINEERS 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, Investigations, providing for detailed studies and plans and specifications of projects prior to construction. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, Investigations, providing for a limited number of new starts. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, Construction, stating that funds can be used for the construction of river 

and harbor, flood and storm damage reduction, shore protection, 

aquatic ecosystem restoration, and related projects authorized by 

law, and for detailed studies and plans and specifications of such 

projects. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, Construction, permitting the use of funds from the Inland Waterways Trust 

Fund and the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, Construction, providing for a limited number of new starts. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, Mississippi River and Tributaries, permitting the use of funds from the 

Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund. 

Language has been included under the Corps of Engineers, Operation and Maintenance, stating that funds can be used for: the operation, maintenance, and care of existing river and harbor, flood 

and storm damage reduction, aquatic ecosystem restoration, and 

related projects authorized by law; providing security for infraVerDate Sep 11 2014 11:46 Jul 18, 2017 Jkt 026261 PO 00000 Frm 00158 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR230.XXX HR230
159 

structure owned or operated by the Corps, including administrative 

buildings and laboratories; maintaining authorized harbor channels 

provided by a State, municipality, or other public agency that serve 

essential navigation needs of general commerce; surveying and 

charting northern and northwestern lakes and connecting waters; 

clearing and straightening channels; and removing obstructions to 

navigation. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, Operation and Maintenance, permitting the use of funds from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund; providing for the use of funds from 

a special account for resource protection, research, interpretation, 

and maintenance activities at outdoor recreation areas; and allowing use of funds to cover the cost of operation and maintenance of 

dredged material disposal facilities for which fees have been collected. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, Operation and Maintenance, providing that one percent of the total 

amount of funds provided for each of the programs, projects, or activities funded under the Operation and Maintenance heading shall 

not be allocated to a field operating activity until the fourth quarter of the fiscal year and permitting the use of these funds for 

emergency activities as determined by the Chief of Engineers to be 

necessary and appropriate. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, Expenses, regarding support of the Humphreys Engineer Support 

Center Activity, the Institute for Water Resources, the United 

States Army Engineer Research and Development Center, and the 

United States Army Corps of Engineers Finance Center. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, Expenses, providing that funds are available for official reception and 

representation expenses. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, Expenses, prohibiting the use of other funds in Title I of this Act for 

the activities funded in Expenses. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, Expenses, permitting any Flood Control and Coastal Emergency appropriation to be used to fund the supervision and general administration of emergency operations, repairs, and other activities in response to any flood, hurricane or other natural disaster. 

Language has been included to provide for funding for the Office 

of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, General 

Provisions, section 101, providing that none of the funds may be 

available for obligation or expenditure through a reprogramming of 

funds except in certain circumstances. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, General 

Provisions, section 102, prohibiting the execution of any contract 

for a program, project or activity which commits funds in excess of 

the amount appropriated (to include funds reprogrammed under 

section 101) that remain unobligated. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, General 

Provisions, section 103, providing for transfer authority to the Fish 

and Wildlife Service for mitigation for lost fisheries. 

160 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, General 

Provisions, section 104, prohibiting certain dredged material disposal activities. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, General 

Provisions, section 105, prohibiting any acquisition that is not consistent with a certain federal regulation. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, General 

Provisions, section 106, prohibiting certain activities at a Corps of 

Engineers project. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, General 

Provisions, section 107, prohibiting requirement of a permit for the 

discharge of dredged or fill material under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act for certain activities. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, General 

Provisions, section 108, authorizing withdrawal of a rule related to 

the definition of waters under the jurisdiction of the Federal Water 

Pollution Control Act. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, General 

Provisions, section 109 allowing the possession of firearms at water 

resources development projects under certain circumstances. 

TITLE II—DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Language has been included under Bureau of Reclamation, 

Water and Related Resources, providing that funds are available 

for fulfilling federal responsibilities to Native Americans and for 

grants to and cooperative agreements with State and local governments and Indian tribes. 

Language has been included under Bureau of Reclamation, 

Water and Related Resources, allowing fund transfers within the 

overall appropriation to the Upper Colorado River Basin Fund and 

the Lower Colorado River Basin Development Fund; providing that 

such sums as necessary may be advanced to the Colorado River 

Dam Fund; and, transfers may be increased or decreased within 

the overall appropriation. 

Language has been included under Bureau of Reclamation, 

Water and Related Resources, providing for funds to be derived 

from the Reclamation Fund or the special fee account established 

by 16 U.S.C. 6806; that funds contributed under 43 U.S.C. 395 by 

non-federal entities shall be available for expenditure; and that 

funds advanced under 43 U.S.C. 397a are to be credited to the 

Water and Related Resources account and available for expenditure. 

Language has been included under Bureau of Reclamation, 

Water and Related Resources, providing that funds may be used for 

high priority projects carried out by the Youth Conservation Corps, 

as authorized by 16 U.S.C. 1706. 

Language has been included under Bureau of Reclamation, Central Valley Project Restoration Fund, directing the Bureau of Reclamation to assess and collect the full amount of additional mitigation and restoration payments authorized by section 3407(d) of 

Public Law 102–575. 

Language has been included under Bureau of Reclamation, Central Valley Project Restoration Fund, providing that none of the 

funds under the heading may be used for the acquisition or lease 

of water for in-stream purposes if the water is already committed 

161 

to in-stream purposes by a court order adopted by consent or decree. 

Language has been included under Bureau of Reclamation, California Bay-Delta Restoration, permitting the transfer of funds to 

appropriate accounts of other participating federal agencies to 

carry out authorized programs; allowing funds made available 

under this heading to be used for the federal share of the costs of 

the CALFED Program management; and requiring that CALFED 

implementation be carried out with clear performance measures 

demonstrating concurrent progress in achieving the goals and objectives of the program. 

Language has been included under Bureau of Reclamation, Policy and Administration, providing that funds are to be derived from 

the Reclamation Fund and prohibiting the use of any other appropriation in the Act for activities budgeted as policy and administration expenses. 

Language has been included under Bureau of Reclamation, Administrative Provision, providing for the purchase of motor vehicles 

for replacement. 

Language has been included under General Provisions, Department of the Interior, section 201, providing that none of the funds 

may be available for obligation or expenditure through a reprogramming of funds except in certain circumstances. 

Language has been included under General Provisions, Department of the Interior, section 202, regarding the San Luis Unit and 

the Kesterson Reservoir in California. 

Language has been included under General Provisions, Department of the Interior, section 203, prohibiting funds to implement 

the San Joaquin River Restoration program. 

TITLE III—DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Language has been included under Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy for the purchase, construction, and acquisition of plant 

and capital equipment. 

Language has been included under Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability for the purchase, construction, and acquisition of 

plant and capital equipment. 

Language has been included under Nuclear Energy for the purchase, construction, and acquisition of plant and capital equipment. 

Language has been included under Fossil Energy Research and 

Development for the acquisition of interest, including defeasible 

and equitable interest in any real property or any facility or for 

plant or facility acquisition or expansion, and for conducting inquires, technological investigations, and research concerning the 

extraction, processing, use and disposal of mineral substances without objectionable social and environmental costs under 30 U.S.C. 3, 

1602 and 1603. 

Language has been included under the Naval Petroleum and Oil 

Shale Reserves, permitting the use of unobligated balances. 

Language has been included under the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, directing the Secretary of Energy to draw down and sell 

crude oil from the Strategic Petroleum and providing that the proceeds be deposited in the Energy Security and Infrastructure Modernization Fund for use in carrying out the Life Extension II 

project. 

162 

Language has been included under Science providing for the purchase, construction, and acquisition of plant and capital equipment; 

and for the purchase of motor vehicles. 

Language has been included under Nuclear Waste Disposal for 

the acquisition of real property or facility construction or expansion. 

Language has been included under Innovative Technology Loan 

Guarantee Program crediting fees collected pursuant to section 

1702(h) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 as offsetting collections to 

this account and making fees collected under section 1702(h) in excess of the appropriated amount unavailable for expenditure until 

appropriated. 

Language has been included under Innovative Technology Loan 

Guarantee Program prohibiting the subordination of certain interests. 

Language has been included under Innovative Technology Loan 

Guarantee Program rescinding subsidy amountsfor the cost of loan 

guarantees. 

Language has been included under Innovative Technology Loan 

Guarantee Program cancelling authority for commitments to guarantee loans, excluding commitments made by October 1, 2017. 

Language has been included under Departmental Administration 

providing for the hire of passenger vehicles and for official reception and representation expenses. 

Language has been included under Departmental Administration 

providing, notwithstanding the provisions of the Anti-Deficiency 

Act, such additional amounts as necessary to cover increases in the 

estimated amount of cost of work for others, as long as such increases are offset by revenue increases of the same or greater 

amounts. 

Language has been included under Departmental Administration, notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 3302, and consistent with the authorization in Public Law 95–238, to permit the Department of Energy to use revenues to offset appropriations. The appropriations 

language for this account reflects the total estimated program 

funding to be reduced as revenues are received. Language has been 

included under Weapons Activities for the purchase, construction, 

and acquisition of plant and capital equipment; and for the purchase of motor vehicles. 

Language has been included under Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation for the purchase, construction, and acquisition of plant 

and capital equipment and other incidental expenses. 

Language has been included under Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation restricting the use of funds provided for a specific 

project. 

Language has been included under Naval Reactors for the purchase, construction, and acquisition of plant and capital equipment, 

facilities, and facility expansion. 

Language has been included under Naval Reactors transferring 

certain funds to Nuclear Energy. 

Language has been included under Federal Salaries and Expenses providing funding for official reception and representation 

expenses. 

163 

Language has been included under Defense Environmental 

Cleanup for the purchase, construction, and acquisition of plant 

and capital equipment; and for the purchase of motor vehicles. 

Language has been included under Other Defense Activities for 

the purchase, construction, and acquisition of plant and capital 

equipment. 

Language has been included under Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal for the acquisition of real property or facility construction or 

expansion. 

Language has been included under Bonneville Power Administration Fund providing funding for official reception and representation expenses and precluding any new direct loan obligations. 

Language has been included under Southeastern Power Administration providing funds for official reception and representation expenses. 

Language has been included under Southeastern Power Administration providing that, notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 3302 and 16 

U.S.C. 825s, amounts collected from the sale of power and related 

services shall be credited to the account as discretionary offsetting 

collections and remain available until expended for the sole purpose of funding the annual expenses of the Southeastern Power Administration; amounts collected to recover purchase power and 

wheeling expenses shall be credited to the account as offsetting collections and remain available until expended for the sole purpose 

of making purchase power and wheeling expenditures. 

Language has been included under Southwestern Power Administration providing funds for official reception and representation 

expenses. 

Language has been included under Southwestern Power Administration providing that, notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 3302 and 16 

U.S.C. 825s, amounts collected from the sale of power and related 

services shall be credited to the account as discretionary offsetting 

collections and remain available until expended for the sole purpose of funding the annual expenses of the Southwestern Power 

Administration; amounts collected to recover purchase power and 

wheeling expenses shall be credited to the account as offsetting collections and remain available until expended for the sole purpose 

of making purchase power and wheeling expenditures. 

Language has been included under Construction, Rehabilitation, 

Operation and Maintenance, Western Area Power Administration, 

providing funds for official reception and representation expenses. 

Language has been included under Construction, Rehabilitation, 

Operation and Maintenance, Western Area Power Administration 

providing that, notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 3302,16 U.S.C. 825s, and 

43 U.S.C. 392a, amounts collected from the sale of power and related services shall be credited to the account as discretionary offsetting collections and remain available until expended for the sole 

purpose of funding the annual expenses of the Western Area Power 

Administration; amounts collected to recover purchase power and 

wheeling expenses shall be credited to the account as offsetting collections and remain available until expended for the sole purpose 

of making purchase power and wheeling expenditures. 

Language has been included under Falcon and Amistad Operating and Maintenance Fund providing that, notwithstanding 68 

Stat. 255 and 31 U.S.C. 3302, amounts collected from the sale of 

164 

power and related services shall be credited to the account as discretionary offsetting collections and remain available until expended for the sole purpose of funding the annual expenses of the 

hydroelectric facilities of those dams and associated Western Area 

Power Administration activities. 

Language has been included under Falcon and Amistad Operating and Maintenance Fund providing that the Western Area 

Power Administration may accept a limited amount of contributions from the United States power customers of the Falcon and 

Amistad Dams for use by the Commissioner of the United States 

Section of the International Boundary and Water Commission for 

operating and maintenance of hydroelectric facilities. 

Language has been included under Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission to permit the hire of passenger motor vehicles, to provide official reception and representation expenses, and to permit 

the use of revenues collected to reduce the appropriation as revenues are received. 

Language has been included under Department of Energy, General Provisions, section 301, prohibiting the use of funds to prepare 

or initiate requests for proposals or other solicitations or arrangements for programs that have not yet been fully funded by the 

Congress; requiring notification and reporting requirements for certain funding awards; limiting the use of multi-year funding mechanisms; providing that none of the funds may be available for obligation or expenditure through a reprogramming of funds except in 

certain circumstances; and providing that unexpended balances of 

prior appropriations may be transferred and merged with new appropriation accounts established in this Act. 

Language has been included under Department of Energy, General Provisions, section 302, providing that funds for intelligence 

activities are deemed to be specifically authorized for purposes of 

section 504 of the National Security Act of 1947 during fiscal year 

2018 until enactment of the Intelligence Authorization Act for fiscal 

year 2018. 

Language has been included under Department of Energy, General Provisions, section 303, prohibiting the use of funds for capital 

construction of high hazard nuclear facilities unless certain independent oversight is conducted. 

Language has been included under Department of Energy, General Provisions, section 304, prohibiting the use of funds to approve 

critical decision-2 or critical decision-3 for certain construction 

projects, unless a separate independent cost estimate has been developed for that critical decision. 

Language has been included under Department of Energy, General Provisions, section 305, prohibiting nonproliferation activities 

in the Russian Federation until certain reporting requirements are 

met. 

Language has been included under Department of Energy, General Provisions, section 306, authorizing the Secretary of Energy to 

draw down and sell refined petroleum product from the Strategic 

Petroleum Reserve under certain circumstances. 

Language has been included under Department of Energy, General Provisions, section 307, directing the Secretary of Energy to 

draw down and sell additional crude oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and providing that the proceeds of a sale be deposVerDate Sep 11 2014 11:46 Jul 18, 2017 Jkt 026261 PO 00000 Frm 00164 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR230.XXX HR230
165 

ited in the SPR Petroleum Account for use for the costs of previously authorized sales of crude oil. 

Language has been included under Department of Energy, General Provisions, section 308, limiting the authority of the Secretary 

of Energy to establish regional petroleum product reserves. 

Language has been included under Department of Energy, General Provisions, section 309, limiting the amount of funds that may 

be transferred to the working capital fund. 

TITLE IV—INDEPENDENT AGENCIES 

Language has been included under Appalachian Regional Commission providing for the hire of passenger vehicles and services 

authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109. 

Language has been included under Delta Regional Authority allowing the expenditure of funds as authorized by the Delta Regional Authority Act without regard to section 382C(b)(2), 382F(d), 

382M and 382N of said Act. 

Language has been included under Denali Commission allowing 

the expenditure of funds notwithstanding section 306(g) of the 

Denali Commission Act of 1998, and providing for cost share requirements for Commission-funded construction projects in distressed and non-distressed communities, as defined by section 307 

of the Denali Commission Act of 1998 (Division C, Title III, Public 

Law 105–277), and an amount not to exceed 50 percent for non-distressed communities. 

Language has been included under Denali Commission allowing 

funding to be available for payment of a non-federal share for certain programs. 

Language has been included under Northern Border Regional 

Commission for expenditure as authorized by subtitle V of title 40, 

United States Code, without regard to section 15751(b). 

Language has been included under Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Salaries and Expenses that provides for salaries and other 

support costs for the Office of the Commission, to be controlled by 

majority vote of the Commission. 

Language has been included under Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Salaries and Expenses that provides for official representation 

expenses and permits the use of revenues from licensing fees, inspections services, and other services for salaries and expenses to 

reduce the appropriation as revenues are received. Funding is provided to support university research and development, and for a 

Nuclear Science and Engineering Grant Program. 

Language has been included under the Nuclear Regulatory Commission providing funds that are not derived from fee revenues. 

Language has been included under Office of Inspector General 

that provides for the use of revenues from licensing fees, inspections services, and other services for salaries and expenses, notwithstanding section 3302 of title 31, United States Code, to reduce 

the appropriation as revenues are received. 

Language has been included under Independent Agencies, General Provisions, section 401, requiring the NRC to comply with certain procedures when responding to Congressional requests for information. 

Language has been included under Independent Agencies, General Provision, section 402, providing that none of the funds may 

166 

be available for obligation or expenditure through a reprogramming 

of funds except in certain circumstances. 

TITLE V—GENERAL PROVISIONS 

Language has been included under General Provisions, section 

501, prohibiting the use of funds in this Act to influence congressional action on any legislation or appropriation matters pending 

before the Congress. 

Language has been included under General Provisions, section 

502, prohibiting the transfer of funds except pursuant to a transfer 

made by, or transfer authority provided in this or any other appropriations Act, or certain other authorities, and requiring a report. 

Language has been included under General Provisions, section 

503, prohibiting funds in contravention of Executive Order No. 

12898 of February 11, 1994, regarding environmental justice. 

Language has been included under General Provisions, section 

504, prohibiting funds from being used to maintain or establish 

computer networks unless such networks block the viewing, 

downloading, or exchange of pornography. 

Language has been included under General Provisions, section 

505, prohibiting the use of funds to further implementation of components of the National Ocean Policy developed under Executive 

Order 13547. 

Language has been included under General Provisions, section 

506, prohibiting the use of funds for the removal of any federallyowned or operated dam unless the removal has been previously authorized by Congress. 

Language has been included under General Provisions, section 

507, prohibiting funds in this Act from being used to close the 

Yucca Mountain license application process, or for actions that 

would remove the possibility that Yucca Mountain might be an option in the future. 

Language has been included under General Provisions, section 

508, setting at $0 the amount that the proposed new budget authority exceeds the allocation made by the Committee on Appropriations under section 302(b) of the Congressional Budget Act of 

1974. 

PROGRAM DUPLICATION

No provision of this bill establishes or reauthorizes a program of 

the Federal Government known to be duplicative of another Federal program, a program that was included in any report from the 

Government Accountability Office to Congress pursuant to section 

21 of Public Law 111–139, or a program related to a program identified in the most recent Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance. 

DIRECTED RULE MAKING

The bill does not direct any rule making. 

COMPLIANCE WITH RULE XIII, CL. 3(e) (RAMSEYER RULE) 

In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, the Committee notes that the accomVerDate Sep 11 2014 11:46 Jul 18, 2017 Jkt 026261 PO 00000 Frm 00166 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR230.XXX HR230
167 

panying bill does not propose to repeal or amend a statute or part 

thereof. 

APPROPRIATIONS NOT AUTHORIZED BY LAW

Pursuant to clause 3(f) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 

Representatives, the following table lists the appropriations in the 

accompanying bill which are not authorized: 

168 


Insert offset folio 033 here 23912A.083

(thousand dollars) 

Appropnatoon 1n Net 

Last Year of Authorization LastYearof Appropriation 

Asency/Program Authorization Level Authorization in this Bill 

CorpsFUSRAP 118,000 

EERE Program Direction 2006 110,500 164,198 125,849 

EERE Weatherization Activities 2012 1,400,000 68,000 228,000 

EERE State Energy Programs 2012 125,000 50,000 50,000 

EERE Marine and Hydrokinetic R&D 2012 50,000 34,000 29,000 

Nuclear Energy 2009 495,000 792,000 969,000 

Nuclear Energy Infrastructure and Facilities 2009 145,000 245,000 253,000 

Fossil Energy 2009 841,000 727,320 634,600 

Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves 2014 20,000 20,000 4,900 

Strategic Petroleum Reserve 2003 not specified 172,856 252,000 

Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve 2003 not specified 6,000 6,500 

Energy Information Administration 1984 not specified 55,870 118,000 

Office of Science 2013 6,007,000 4,876,000 5,392,000 

Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing Program 2012 not specified 6,000 5,000 

Non-Defense Environmental Cleanup: 

West Valley Demonstration 1981 5,000 5,000 84,585 

Departmental Administration 1984 246,963 185,682 185,693 

Atomic Energy Defense Activities: 

National Nuclear Security Administration: 

Weapons Activnies 2017 9,429,029 9,245,567 10,239,344 

Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation 2017 1,886,916 1,882,872 1,776,461 

Naval Reactors 2017 1,417,620 1,419,813 1,486,000 

Federal Salaries and Expenses 2017 395,517 390,000 412,595 

Defense Environmental Cleanup 2017 5,273,558 5,405,000 5,405,000 

Other Defense Activities 2017 789,552 784,000 825,000 

Power Marketing Administrations: 

Southwestern 1984 40,254 36,229 11,400 

WestemArea 1984 259,700 194,630 93,372 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 1984 not specified 29,582 0 Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board 2017 31,000 30,872 30,600 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1985 460,000 448,200 161,612 

1 Program was initiated in 1972 and has never received a separate authorization 
169 

RESCISSIONS

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following table is submitted describing the 

rescissions recommended in the accompanying bill: 

Amount 

Department or Activity 

Department of Energy: Title 17 Innovative Technology Loan Guarantee Program .................................................................................... 411,000,000 

Department of Energy: Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation ................ 49,000,000 

COMPARISON WITH THE BUDGET RESOLUTION

Pursuant to clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives and section 308(a)(1)(A) of the Congressional 

Budget Act of 1974, the following table compares the levels of new 

budget authority provided in the bill with the appropriate allocation under section 302(b) of the Budget Act. 

[In millions of dollars] 

302(b) Allocation This Bill 

Budget 

Authority Outlays Budget Authority Outlays 

Mandatory ....................................................................... ........................ ........................ 0 1 0 

Discretionary ................................................................... 37,562 38,934 37,562 38,931 

1 Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority. 

FIVE-YEAR OUTLAY PROJECTIONS

Pursuant to section 308(a)(1)(B) of the Congressional Budget Act 

of 1974, the following table contains five-year projections prepared 

by the Congressional Budget Office of outlays associated with the 

budget authority provided in the accompanying bill: 

[In millions of dollars] 

Projection of outlays associated with the recommendation: 

2018 .............................................................................................. 2 22,847 

2019 .............................................................................................. 10,856 

2020 .............................................................................................. 3,413 

2021 .............................................................................................. 518 

2022 and future years ................................................................. 230 

2 Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority. 

ASSISTANCE TO STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

Pursuant to section 308(a)(1)(C) of the Congressional Budget Act 

of 1974, the amount of financial assistance to State and local governments is as follows: 

[In millions of dollars] 

Budget 

Authority Outlays 

Financial assistance to State and local governments for 2018 ............................................ 143 2 0 

2 Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority. 

170 


Insert graphic folio 178 here HR230.035

FULL COMMITTEE VOTES 

Pursuant to the provisions of clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the House of Representatives, the 

results of each roll call vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with the names of 

those voting for and those voting against, are printed below: 

ROLL CALL NO. 1 

Date: July 12,2017 

Measure: Energy and Water Appropriations Bill, FY 2018 

Motion by: Ms. Kaptur 

Description of Motion: To strike provisions prohibiting funding to require permits for certain 

agricultural activities, to implement the San Joaquin River Settlement Agreement, and to implement 

the National Ocean Policy; a provision related to the Waters of the United States rule; and a provision 

related to firearms on Army Corps of Engineers land. 

Results: Defeated 20 yeas to 32 nays. 

Members Voting Yea 

Mr. Aguilar 

Mr. Cartwright 

Ms. Clark 

Ms. DeLauro 

Ms. Kaptur 

Mr. Kilmer 

Ms. Lee 

Mrs. Lowey 

Ms. McCollum 

Ms. Meng 

Ms. Pingree 

Mr. Pocan 

Mr. Price 

Mr. Quigley 

Ms. Roybal-Allard 

Mr. Ruppersberger 

Mr. Ryan 

Mr. Serrano 

Mr. Visclosky 

Ms. Wasserman Schultz 

Members Voting Nay 

Mr. Aderholt 

Mr.Amodei 

Mr. Bishop 

Mr. Calvert 

Mr. Carter 

Mr. Cole 

Mr. Cuellar 

Mr. Culberson 

Mr. Dent 

Mr. Diaz-Balart 

Mr. Fleischmann 

Mr. Fortenberry 

Mr. Frelinghuysen 

Ms. Granger 

Mr. Graves 

Dr. Harris 

Ms. Herrera Beutler 

Mr. Jenkins 

Mr. Joyce 

Mr. Moolenaar 

Mr. Newhouse 

Mr. Palazzo 

Mrs. Roby 

Mr. Rogers 

Mr. Rooney 

Mr. Simpson 

Mr. Stewart 

Mr. Taylor 

Mr. Valadao 

Mr. Womack 

Mr. Yoder 

Mr. Young 
171 


Insert graphic folio 179 here HR230.036

FULL COMMITTEE VOTES 

Pursuant to the provisions of clause 3(b) of rule Xlll of the House of Representatives, the 

results of each roll call vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with the names of 

those voting for and those voting against, are printed below: 

ROLL CALL NO. 2 

Date: July 12,2017 

Measure: Energy and Water Appropriations Bill, FY 2018 

Motion by: Mr. Cartwright 

Description of Motion: To increase funds for energy efficiency and renewable energy. 

Results: Defeated 22 yeas to 30 nays. 

Members Voting Yea 

Mr. Aguilar 

Mr. Bishop 

Mr. Cartwright 

Ms. Clark 

Mr. Cuellar 

Ms. DeLauro 

Ms. Kaptur 

Mr. Kilmer 

Ms. Lee 

Mrs. Lowey 

Ms. McCollum 

Ms. Meng 

Ms. Pingree 

Mr. Pocan 

Mr. Price 

Mr. Quigley 

Ms. Roybal-Allard 

Mr. Ruppersberger 

Mr. Ryan 

Mr. Serrano 

Mr. Visclosky 

Ms. Wasserman Schultz 

Members Voting Nay 

Mr. Aderholt 

Mr.Amodei 

Mr. Calvert 

Mr. Carter 

Mr. Cole 

Mr. Culberson 

Mr. Dent 

Mr. Diaz-Balart 

Mr. Fleischmann 

Mr. Fortenberry 

Mr. Frelinghuysen 

Ms. Granger 

Mr. Graves 

Dr. Harris 

Ms. Herrera Beutler 

Mr. Jenkins 

Mr. Joyce 

Mr. Moolenaar 

Mr. Newhouse 

Mr. Palazzo 

Mrs. Roby 

Mr. Rogers 

Mr. Rooney 

Mr. Simpson 

Mr. Stewart 

Mr. Taylor 

Mr. Valadao 

Mr. Womack 

Mr. Yoder 

Mr. Young 

Insert offset folio 035 here 23912A.042

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR 2017 

ANO BUDGET REQUESTS AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR 2018 

(Amounts in thousands) 

TITLE I - DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE - CIVIL 

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY 

Corps of Engineers - Civil 

Investigations ....................................... . 

Construction ......................................... . 

Mississippi River and Tributaries .................... . 

Operation and Maintenance ............................ . 

Regula tory Program ................................... . 

Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program 

(FUSRAP) ........................................... . 

Flood Control and Coastal Emergencies ................ . 

Expenses ............................................. . 

Office of Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil 

Works) ....................................... ······· 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

121,000 

1,876,000 

362,000 

3' 149' 000 

200,000 

112' 000 

32,000 

181,000 

4,764 

FY 2018 

Request 

86,000 

1,020,000 

253,000 

3' 100' 000 

200,000 

118,000 

35,000 

185,000 

5,000 

Bill 

105,000 

1,697,000 

301,000 

3,519,000 

200,000 

118,000 

32,000 

181,000 

4,764 

Bill vs. B

Enacted 

-16,000 +

-179,000 +6

-61,000 +

+370,000 +4

+6,000 

--- 

--- 

--- 

============== ============== ============== ============== =======

Total, title I, Department of Defense- Civil .. . 6,037,764 5,002,000 6,157,764 +120,000 +1 '1

Appropriations ............................. . (6,037,764) (5,002,000) (6,157,764) (+120,000) ( +1 ' 1

TITLE II - DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Central Utah Project 

Central Utah Project Completion Account .. 10,500 8,983 8,983 -1,517 

Insert offset folio 036 here 23912A.043

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR 2017 

AND BUDGET REQUESTS AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR 2018 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Bureau of Reclamation 

Water and Related Resources ......................... . 

Central Valley Project Restoration Fund .............. . California Say-Delta Restoration ..................... . 

Policy and Admi ni strati on ............................ . 

Total, Bureau of Reclamation ..................... . 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

1 '155' 894 

55,606 

36,000 

59,000 

1,306,500 

FY 2018 

Request 

960,017 

41,376 

37,000 

59,000 

1,097,393 

Sill 

1,091,790 

41,376 

37,000 

59,000 

1,229,166 

Bill vs. B

Enacted 

-64,104 +1-14,230 

+1 ,000 

-77,334 +1

============== ============== ============== ============== =======

Total, title II, Department of the Interior .... . 

Appropriations ............................. . 

TITLE III - DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Energy Programs 

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy ............... . 

Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability .......... . 

Nuclear Energy ....................................... . 

Defense function ................................ . 

Subtotal ..................................... . 

Fossil Energy Research and Development ............... . 

Foss i 1 proviso ................................... . 

Subtotal ....................................... . 

1 '317. 000 

(1,317,000) 

2,090,200 

230,000 

880,000 

136,616 

1,106,376 

(1,106,376) 

636,149 

120,000 

570,000 

133,000 

1,238,149 

(1,238,149) 

1,103,908 

218,500 

836,000 

133,000 

-78,851 

(-78,851) 

-986,292 

-11 ,500 

-44,000 

-3,616 

--------·----- --------------

--------------

1,016,616 

618,000 

50,000 

668.000 

703,000 

280,000 280,000 

969,000 

634,600 634,600 

-47,616 

+16,600 

-50.000 -33,400 

+1

(+1

+4

+

+2+2+3

+3

Insert offset folio 037 here 23912A.044

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR 2017 

AND BUDGET REQUESTS AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR 2018 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves ............... . 

Strategic Petroleum Reserve .......................... . 

Sale of crude oil ................................ . 

Use of sale proceeds ............................. . 

FY 2017 

Enacted 14,950 

223,000 

-340,000 

340,000 

FY 2018 

Request 

4,900 

180,000 

-350,000 

350,000 

Bi 11 

4,900 

252,000 

-350,000 

350,000 

Bill vs. 

Enacted 

-10,050 

+29,000 

-10,000 

+10,000 

-------------- -------------- --------------

--------------

252,000 +29,000 

SPR petroleum account. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . --- 8, 400 

Sale of crude oil (Sec. 307) .............. . -8,400 -8,400 

Use of sale proceeds (Sec. 307) .................. . 8,400 +8,400 

B

+

-------------- --------------

-------

Subtotal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . --- 8, 400 

Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve ................... . 

Energy Information Administration .................... . 

Non-defense Environmental Cleanup .................... . 

Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning 

Fund ............................................... . 

Science .............................................. . 

Nuclear Waste Disposal ............................... . 

Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy ............. . 

Rescission ....................................... . 

Subtotal ..................................... . 

Title 17 Innovative Technology Loan Guarantee Program. 

Offsetting call action .......................... . 

6,500 

122,000 

247,000 

768,000 

5,392,000 

306,000 

306,000 

37,000 

-30,000 

6,500 

118,000 

218,400 

752,749 

4,472,516 

90,000 

20,000 

-46,367 -26,367 

2,000 

-2,000 

6,500 --" 

118,000 -4,000 

222,400 -24,600 

768,000 . -- +

5,392,000 ""- +9

90,000 +90,000 

-306,000 -

+

--------------

.................................................

-306,000 +

2,000 ·35,000 

-2,000 +28,000 

Insert offset folio 038 here 23912A.045

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR 2017 

AND BUDGET REQUESTS AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR 2016 

(Amounts in thousands) 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

FY 2018 

Request Bi 11 

Bill vs. B

Enacted 

Rescission........................................ --- -250,000 -411,000 -411,000 -1

Subtotal ..................................... . 

Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Loans 

program ............................................ . 

Tribal Energy Loan Guarantee Program ................. . 

Rescission ......................................... . 

Subtotal ......................................... . 

Departmental Administration .......................... . 

Mi see 11 aneous revenues ........................... . 

Net appropriation ............................ . 

Office of the Inspector General ...................... . 

Total, Energy programs ......................... . 

Atomic Energy Defense Activities 

National Nuclear Security Administration 

Weapons Activities ................................... . 

Rescission ....................................... . 

7,000 

5,000 

9,000 

·9,000 

246,000 

-103,000 

143,000 

44,424 

11,283,690 

9,316,093 

-64,126 

-250,000 

2,000 

241,652 

-96,000 

145,652 

49,000 

7,510,699 

10,239,344 

-411,000 

5,000 

500 500 

281,693 

-96,000 

165,693 

49,000 

9,609,001 

10,239,344 

-418,000 

-6,500 

+9,000 

+500 

+35,693 

+7,000 

+42,693 

+4,576 

-1,674,669 

+921 '251 

+64' 126 

-1

+

+

+2' 0

Insert offset folio 039 here 23912A.046

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR 2017 

AND BUDGET REQUESTS AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR 2018 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Budget amendment rescission ...................... . 

Subtotal ....................................... . 

Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation ..................... . 

Rescission ....................................... . 

Subtotal ....................................... . 

Nava 1 Reactors ....................................... . 

Rescission ....................................... . 

Subtotal ....................................... . 

Federal Salaries and Expenses ........................ . 

Total, National Nuclear Security Administration. 

Environmental and Other Defense Activities 

Defense Environmental Cleanup ........................ . Defense Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and 

Decommissioning .................................... . 

Other Defense Activities ............................. . 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

-8,400 

9,245,567 

1,902,000 

-19,128 

1,882,872 1,420,120 

-307 

1,419,813 

390,000 

12,938,252 

5,405,000 

563,000 

784,000 

FY 2018 

Request 

10,239,344 

1,842,310 

-49,000 

1,793,310 

1,479,751 1 ,479, 751 

418,595 

13,931,000 

5 '537' 186 

815,512 

Bill 

10,239,344 

1,825,461 

-49,000 

1 ,776' 461 

1,486,000 1,486,000 

412,595 

13,914,400 

5,405,000 

825,000 

Bill vs. 

Enacted +8,400 

+993,777 

-76,539 

-29,872 

-106,411 

+65,880 

+307 

+66,187 

+22,595 

+976,148 

-563,000 

+41 ,000 

B

--

-

-1

Insert offset folio 040 here 23912A.047

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR 2017 

AND BUDGET REQUESTS AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR 2018 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Defense nuclear waste disposal ....................... . 

Total, Environmental and Other Defense Activities. 

Total, Atomic Energy Defense Activities ........ . 

Power Marketing Administrations /1 

Operation and maintenance, Southeastern Power 

Administration ..................................... . 

Offsetting collections ......................... . 

Subtotal ................................... . 

Operation and maintenance, Southwestern Power 

Administration ..................................... . 

Offsetting collections ......................... . 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

6,752,000 

19,690,252 

1 ,000 

-1 ,000 

45,643 

-34,586 

FY 2018 

Request 

30,000 

6,382,698 

20,313,698 

6,379 

-6,379 

30,286 

-18,888 

Bill 

30,000 

6,260,000 

20,174,400 

6,379 

-6,379 

30,268 

-18,888 

Bill vs. 

Enacted 

+30,000 

-492,000 

+484' 148 

+5,379 

-5,379 

-15,355 

+15,698 

-------------- -------------- -------------- --------------

Subtota 1 ................................... . 11,057 11,400 11,400 +343 

Construction, Rehabilitation, Operation and 

Maintenance, Western Area Power Administration ..... . 273,144 267,686 232,276 -40,868 

Offsetting collections ......................... . -177,563 -174,314 -138,904 +38,659 

B

-1

-1

-

+

-------------- -------------- -------------- -------------- -------

Subtota 1 ................................... . 95,581 93,372 93,372 -2,209 

Falcon and Amistad Operating and Maintenance Fund ..... 4,070 4,176 4,176 +106 

Insert offset folio 041 here 23912A.048

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR 2017 

AND BUDGET REQUESTS AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR 2018 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Offsetting collections ........................... . 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

-3,B38 

FY 2018 

Request 

-3,948 

Bill 

-3,948 

Bill vs. B

Enacted 

-110 

-------------• 

Subtotal ..................................... . 

Total, Power Marketing Administrations ..... . 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

Salaries and expenses ................................ . 

Revenues applied ..................................... . 

General Provisions 

Title III Rescissions: 

Department of Energy: 

Energy Programs and PMAs ......................... . 

Atomic Energy Defense Activities (050) ........... . 

Fossil Energy Research and Development ........... . 

Subtotal ..................................... . 

Uranium lease and take-back revolving fund ........... . Uranium lease and take-back revolving fund initial 

capitalization ..................................... . 

232 228 228 -4 

-------------- -------------- -------------- -------------- -------

106,870 105,000 

346,800 367,600 

-346,800 -367,600 

-81.063 -13' 740 

-240,000 -334,803 

10,000 

1,000 

105,000 

367,600 

-367,600 

·1 ,870 

+20,800 

-20,800 

+81,063 +13,740 

+240,000 +334,803 

-

Insert offset folio 042 here 23912A.049

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR 2017 

AND BUDGET REQUESTS AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR 2018 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Northeast gasoline supply reserve sale ............... . 

Total, title III. Department of Energy ......... . 

Appropriations ............................. . 

Rescissions ................................ . 

TITLE IV - INDEPENDENT AGENCIES 

Appalachian Regional Commission ...................... . 

Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board ........... ,,,. 

Delta Regional Authority ............................. . 

Denali Commission ............ , ....................... . 

Northern Border Regional Commission ... , .............. . 

Southeast Crescent Regional Commission ....... . 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission: 

Salaries and expenses ............................ . 

Revenues ......................................... . 

Subtotal ..................................... . 

Office of Inspector General ...................... . 

Revenues ......................................... . 

Subtotal .......................... , .......... . 

Total, Nuclear Regulatory Commission ....... . 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

FY 2018 

Request 

-70,000 

Bi 11 

Bill vs. B

Enacted 

+

============== ============== ============== ============== =======

30,746,009 

(31 ,181. 773) 

(-435,764) 

27,870,597 

(28,215,964) 

( -345. 367) 

============== ============== 

152,000 26,660 

30,872 30,600 

25,000 2,500 

15,000 7,300 10,000 850 

250 ---

905,000 939,137 

-794,580 -803,409 

29,888,401 

(30,348,401) 

(-460,000) 

130,000 

30,600 

15,000 11.000 

5,000 

250 

939,137 

-779,829 

-857,608 

(-833,372) 

(-24,236) 

============== 

-22,000 

-272 

-10,000 

-4,000 -5,000 

---

+34 ,137 

+14,751 

+2,0

(+2,1

(-1

+1

+

+

-------------- -------------- -------

110,420 135,728 159,308 +48,888 +

12,129 12,859 12,859 +730 

-10,044 -10,555 -10,555 -511 

-------------- -------------- -------------- -·-·---------- -------

2,085 2,304 2,304 +219 

-------------- -------------- -------------- -------------- -------

112,505 138,032 161.612 +49 ,107 +

Insert offset folio 043 here 23912A.050

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR 2017 

AND BUDGET REQUESTS AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR 2018 

(Amounts in thousands) 

Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board ................. . 

Total, title IV, Independent agencies ............ . 

Appropriations ........ , ...................... . 

Grand total ................ , ................... . 

Appropriations ............................. . 

Rescissions ............. , .................. . 

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 

FY 2017 

Enacted 

3,600 

349,227 

(349' 227) 

38,450,000 

(38,885,764) 

(-435,764) 

FY 2018 

Request 

3,600 

209,542 

(209,542) 

34,188,515 

(34,533,882) 

( -345' 367) 

Bi 11 

3,600 

357,062 

(357,062) 

37,641,376 

(38' 101 '376) 

(-460,000) 

Bill vs. 

Enacted 

+7,835 

(+7,835) 

·808,624 

(-784,388) 

(-24,236) 

B

+1

(+1

+3,4

(+3,5

(·1
(181) 

ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF NITA LOWEY AND MARCY KAPTUR 

The Energy and Water Development bill funds critical energy 

and water resource projects, supports science activities necessary 

for American competitiveness and contributes to our national defense through vital weapons, naval reactor research, and nonproliferation funding. All of which are priorities that should unite 

rather than divide us. While Chairman Simpson has worked to incorporate the interests of Members from both parties where possible, much of the funding in this bill is a reflection of priorities 

from the Majority’s side of the aisle. 

Beyond the funding decisions, the Majority fortifies the partisan 

cast of the bill by including ideological riders on the Clean Water 

Act, guns on Corps lands and National Ocean Policy. We should 

not have to remind our Majority colleagues that similar provisions 

have imperiled enactment of this bill in the past. 

The Republican Majorities in the House and Senate have proven 

they cannot govern responsibly. With full control of the Executive 

and Legislative branches, nearly three months beyond the April 15 

deadline, Congress has not even adopted a budget. It is a willfully 

blind and irresponsible approach to funding the government. 

The Committee began our work with a piecemeal approach to the 

302(b) allocations that failed to provide the American people with 

a full budget blueprint for federal spending in fiscal year 2018. 

Now we know why. The Majority is choosing to consider bills that 

will breach the defense spending cap included in the Budget Control Act by $72,476,000,000 and further cut nondefense spending by 

nearly five billion dollars. Democrats and Republicans in Congress 

must work together to raise the budget caps in the Budget Control 

Act, as we have done every year under sequestration. Our commitment to men and women in uniform, senior citizens, and working 

men and women, and mothers and fathers raising the next generation cannot be met under the current budget caps. The subcommittee’s allocation is $37,568,000,000. This allocation 

is $3,246,861,000 above the Administration’s budget request and 

$209,000,000 below the 2017 level. After adjusting for 

scorekeeping, the defense allocation is $1,086,000,000 above 2017, 

while the non-defense allocation is $1,295,000,000 below 2017. 

Funding for the Corps of Engineers is a bright spot within the bill, $1,155,764,000 above the President’s inadequate request, ensuring that some ongoing projects will continue. The bill provides 

$6,157,764,000 for the Army Corps of Engineers and 

$1,340,000,000 for projects funded from the Harbor Maintenance 

Trust Fund, $40,000,000 above 2017. This funding will allow preventive and proactive investments necessary for the economy and 

the safety of American citizens. The funding above the request will 

also allow investments in the nation’s ports and waterways, which 

are critical to ensuring that American-made goods can move to 

182 

market, both domestically and abroad. We firmly believe that our 

underinvestment in infrastructure continues to hamper economic 

gains and prolongs the underemployment plaguing our middle 

class. 

While this bill ensures increased investment beyond that included in the budget request, we should be doing even more to 

build infrastructure and create jobs. Federal support of water resource projects creates construction jobs and indirect economic benefits that encourage local businesses and individuals to embrace 

risk and make critical investments in their communities. The inclusion of six new study starts and two new construction projects will 

allow incremental progress in addressing the $75 billion in projects 

awaiting funding. 

We appreciate the Chairman’s support provided for Science in 

the bill. This account is critical to the competitiveness of our nation. With a return on investment of 20 to 67 percent, publicly 

funded research grows our economy and helps the United States 

maintain its position as the global leader in innovation. If the U.S. 

is to truly achieve energy independence and tackle the challenges 

posed by climate change, the federal government must continue to 

prioritize investments in cutting-edge research at our national laboratories and universities along with supporting advancements in 

high-potential, high-impact energy technologies that are too early 

for private-sector investment. 

On the other hand, the bill’s support for the Science account is 

offset by the early termination of ARPA-E, beyond even that of the 

Administration’s request. ARPA-E has used approximately 

$1,500,000,000 to fund more than 580 projects through 36 focused 

programs and three open funding solicitations. Since 2015, 74 of 

these projects have attracted more than $1,800,000,000 in private 

sector follow-on funding. APRA-E projects have generated 218 patents, and 56 companies have been formed as a result of this funding. This highly innovative and effective program enjoys bipartisan 

support both on and off Capitol Hill, including from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the heads of Southern Company, PG&E, and 

DuPont, among others. The early termination of this program does 

a tremendous disservice to U.S. leadership in energy technologies 

necessary for our economic and energy security. 

With regard to the applied energy programs at the Department 

of Energy, investments in energy technology programs are once 

again skewed heavily toward nuclear and fossil fuels. We must provide for critical research and development for the nuclear and fossil 

energy sectors to increase efficiency and reduce emissions of those 

sources that currently provide the bulk of our electricity generation. However, continued and sustained research and development 

programs in renewable energy cannot be the price of this support. 

The advances in renewable energy are not the drumbeats of some 

distant clean energy future. That future is now, and the rest of the 

world is ready to lay siege to our technologies if we do not continue 

to innovate. An investment in clean energy is an investment in 

American jobs: 288,000 people work in the auto industry supply 

chain making parts that make vehicles cleaner and more fuel efficient; 360,000 people work in the solar industry; and, the single 

fastest growing job in America is Wind Turbine Technician. 

183 

While our President is choosing to ignore the realities of human 

activity on the climate, the rest of the world has roundly rebuked 

him. Just last week, the other 19 leaders in the G–20 confirmed 

their intention to push towards a cleaner energy future. Meanwhile, Volvo announced that after 2019, it will design no new models of conventional internal combustion powered vehicles, and 

France announced that it would ban the sale of diesel and gas vehicles by 2040—joining India who promised to make the switch by 

2030. 

The fact that countries as populous as India and as developed as 

France can make such pledges is a tribute to the innovations that 

have been driven by the Department of Energy. The Department 

has spearheaded the research to make all-electric cars a reality, 

from the materials science to manufacture lightweight vehicles, to 

the chemical engineering necessary for improved batteries, to the 

electrochemical science which is allowing charging to happen faster 

and cheaper. Finally, it was a loan from DOE which helped Tesla 

jump from a small company into the second most highly valued car 

company that will soon bring all-electric vehicles to the mainstream. 

In an era when Wall Street chases quarterly profits and ever-improving earnings reports, we owe it to our constituents to play the 

long game—making investments that may take decades to pay off. 

More than any other, the energy sector needs government support 

right up until it becomes commercially viable. For decades, American presidents have made statements targeting energy independence, but this year, that target is finally in sight. The Energy Information Administration’s recent report expects the U.S. to be a net 

energy exporter by 2026. The Department of Energy deserves great 

credit for bringing us to this point. The next revolution will be the 

clean energy revolution, but if we do not provide continued and 

consistent support to these nascent technologies, we will be left behind. 

The bill provides $10,239,344,000, a massive 11 percent increase 

over the FY 2017 appropriation, for the National Nuclear Security 

Administration (NNSA), even though NNSA continues to be 

plagued by staggering cost overruns and schedule delays. While we 

understand the need to modernize a complex built substantially in 

the 1950s, we continue to question whether the organization has 

the necessary tools and processes to continue to manage large increases in these activities year after year. The agency projects more 

than $300,000,000,000 in spending on nuclear weapons programs 

over the next 25 years. Notably, NNSA says it may need 

$2,900,000,000,000 more in funding between 2022 and 2026 to implement its weapons activities than the agency is projecting to request. During this period, the NNSA is planning to be in the midst 

of simultaneously executing four to five major warhead life extension programs and several major construction projects. While the 

Chairman continues strong oversight of the NNSA, it is long past 

time to examine the assumptions underlying the modernization 

program to determine if it is well justified, affordable and the absolute minimum necessary to meet the country’s military requirements. 

184 

Nonproliferation programs are our first line of defense and the 

most cost-effective way to achieve the urgent goal of securing and 

reducing the amount of vulnerable bomb-grade material. The bill 

includes $1,776,461,000 for these critical programs, $106,411,000 

below 2017. Increasing worldwide terror threats are proof that we 

should be increasing our expenditures on proliferation risks. In 

March 2015, the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board recommended 

that the Department expand its nonproliferation efforts and augment existing funding, and expressed concern about the recent 

trend of falling budgets for the core non-proliferation efforts. This 

bill continues the downward spiral of funding to secure material 

that could be used against a civilian population while providing a 

massive increase to the weapons account. 

The inclusion of controversial riders is an unnecessary diversion 

from our primary responsibility—ensuring that taxpayer funds are 

invested wisely in Federal programs that will contribute to the economic vitality of our nation. 

Three of the water riders taken together risk protection of the 

world’s most precious resource: fresh water. The first Clean Water 

Act provision authorizes the Corps of Engineers and the Environmental Protection Agency to withdraw the Waters of the United 

States rule without regard to any provision of statute or regulation 

that establishes a requirement for such withdrawal. This provision 

would ensure key process steps required by the Administrative Procedures Act and the Clean Water Act would be bypassed. The bill 

also includes provisions regarding agricultural exemptions to the 

Clean Water Act and a prohibition of activities related to the National Ocean Policy. 

The inclusion of the rider allowing guns to be carried on all 

Corps of Engineers lands injects into the bill an unnecessarily partisan topic that is unwarranted. We disagree with the notion that 

reasonable limits on where guns can be carried are an infringement upon the Second Amendment. We see no need to contribute 

to an environment where guns are commonplace in recreational 

areas where families are trying to escape the pressures of everyday 

life. 

The cuts proposed in this bill cede the future to our competitors 

who are coopting the energy technologies that the American people 

paid us to protect. While we should be looking to build on our significant progress towards energy independence under the previous 

Administration, the cuts to clean energy programs represent a serious blow to advancing the nation’s position globally. 

185 

Ultimately, we appreciate the hard work of Chairman Simpson. 

The allocation provided to Energy and Water required significant 

cuts, and, while we would have made very different decisions, we 

recognize the challenge. While the Chairman largely limited the 

damage, the damage was principally to Democratic priorities. We 

look forward to the day when allocations across all Subcommittees 

are returned to acceptable levels and to working with the Chairman and the members of this Committee to advance the process. 

However, we cannot support this bill given the funding decisions 

and ideological riders currently included in the Committee product. 

NITA LOWEY. 

MARCY KAPTUR. 

Æ