99–010 

Calendar No. 146 

112TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 1st Session 112–66 

NUCLEAR ENERGY RESEARCH INITIATIVE 

IMPROVEMENT ACT 

AUGUST 30 (legislative day, AUGUST 2), 2011.—Ordered to be printed 

Filed under authority of the order of the Senate of August 2, 2011 

Mr. BINGAMAN, from the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 1067] 

The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was 

referred the bill (S. 1067) to amend the Energy Policy Act of 2005 

to require the Secretary of Energy to carry out a research and development and demonstration program to reduce manufacturing 

and construction costs relating to nuclear reactors, and for other 

purposes, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon 

with an amendment and recommends that the bill, as amended, do 

pass. 

The amendment is as follows: 

Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert in lieu thereof 

the following: 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Nuclear Energy Research Initiative Improvement 

Act of 2011’’. 

SEC. 2. NUCLEAR ENERGY RESEARCH INITIATIVE. 

Section 952 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 16272) is amended by 

striking subsection (a) and inserting the following: 

‘‘(a) NUCLEAR ENERGY RESEARCH INITIATIVE.— 

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct research to lower the cost of 

nuclear reactor systems while increasing the levels of safety and security of the 

systems, including research regarding— 

‘‘(A) modular and small-scale reactors; 

‘‘(B) balance-of-plant issues; 

‘‘(C) cost-efficient manufacturing and construction; 

‘‘(D) licensing issues; and 

‘‘(E) enhanced proliferation controls. 


wreier-aviles on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with REPORTS
2 

‘‘(2) CONSULTATION REQUIREMENT.—In carrying out initiatives under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall consult with— 

‘‘(A) the Secretary of Commerce; 

‘‘(B) the Secretary of the Treasury; 

‘‘(C) the Nuclear Regulatory Commission; and 

‘‘(D) any other individual who the Secretary determines to be necessary. 

‘‘(3) SCHEDULE.— 

‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment 

of this paragraph, the Secretary shall develop and publish on the website 

of the Department of Energy a schedule that contains an outline of a 5-year 

strategy to lower effectively the costs of nuclear reactors. 

‘‘(B) PUBLIC WORKSHOPS.—In developing the schedule under subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall conduct public workshops to provide an opportunity for public comment. 

‘‘(C) REVIEW.—Before the date on which the Secretary publishes the 

schedule under subparagraph (A), the Nuclear Energy Advisory Committee 

shall conduct a review of the schedule. 

‘‘(D) ANNUAL UPDATES.— 

‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the date on which 

the Secretary publishes the schedule under subparagraph (A) and annually thereafter, the Secretary shall update the schedule. 

‘‘(ii) PUBLIC WORKSHOPS.—In updating the schedule under clause (i), 

the Secretary shall conduct public workshops in accordance with subparagraph (B). 

‘‘(4) COST SHARING.—Section 988 shall apply to initiatives carried out under 

this section.’’. 

PURPOSE

The purpose of S. 1067 is to require the Secretary of Energy to 

carry out a research and development and demonstration program 

to reduce manufacturing and construction costs relating to nuclear 

reactors while increasing their levels of safety and security. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED

The 104 nuclear power plants currently operating in the United 

States generate roughly 20 percent of the nation’s electricity, and 

roughly 70 percent of the nation’s carbon-free electricity. New nuclear power plants will need to be built in the years ahead to replace existing plants as they age and are retired, to meet increased 

energy demand, and to help reduce carbon dioxide emissions. 

The greatest challenge to the deployment of new nuclear power 

plants is their large capital cost. A new nuclear power plant is estimated to cost between $6 billion and $8 billion. Congress has previously sought to address this problem through loan guarantees in 

title XVII of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, insurance against regulatory delays in section 638 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, production tax credits in section 1306 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, 

and improvements in the licensing process in title XXVIII of the 

Energy Policy Act of 1992. In addition, section 952 of the Energy 

Policy Act of 2005 established a Nuclear Energy Research Initiative 

within the Department of Energy for research and development on 

nuclear energy systems. 

Additional legislation is needed to make lowering the cost of nuclear reactor systems a primary objective of the Department of Energy’s Nuclear Energy Research Initiative. 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

S. 1067 was introduced by Senator Mark Udall on May 25, 2011. 

Senators Bingaman, Murkowski and Klobuchar are cosponsors. The 


wreier-aviles on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with REPORTS
3 

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources held a legislative 

hearing on S. 1067 on June 7, 2011. 

Similar legislation was introduced by Senator Mark Udall in the 

111th Congress as S. 2052 on October 29, 2009. Senators Bingaman, Murkowski, Crapo, Landrieu, Risch, and Klobuchar were cosponsors. A companion bill, H.R. 5163, was introduced in the House 

of Representatives on April 28, 2010. 

The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources held a legislative hearing on S. 2052 on December 15, 2009. S. Hrg. 111–375. In 

addition, the Committee held an oversight hearing on nuclear energy development on March 18, 2009. S. Hrg. 111–21. The Committee ordered S. 2052 favorably reported at its business meeting 

on September 27, 2010. 

The Committee ordered S. 1067 favorably reported, with an 

amendment in the nature of a substitute, at its business meeting 

on July 14, 2011. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, in 

open business session on July 14, 2011, by voice vote of a quorum 

present recommends that the Senate pass S. 1067. 

Senator Sanders asked to be recorded as voting no. 

COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS

During its consideration of S. 1067, the Committee adopted an 

amendment in the nature of a substitute, which makes a number 

of changes to the bill as introduced. The substitute amendment replaces the existing general authority for nuclear energy research 

and development under the heading ‘‘Nuclear Energy Research Initiative’’ in section 952(a) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, and replaces it with the more specific authority of S. 1067. The substitute 

also adds new language to section 952(a)(1) that directs the Secretary shall conduct research that increases the levels of safety and 

security, as well as lowers the cost, of nuclear reactor systems, and 

strikes the authorization of appropriations. 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1 provides a short title. 

Section 2 amends section 952(a) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 

(42 U.S.C. 16272(a)), ‘‘Nuclear Energy Research Initiative,’’ by 

striking that section and replacing it with the text of S. 1067, as 

amended. 

Paragraph (1) of section 952(a), as amended, requires the Secretary of Energy to conduct research to lower the cost of nuclear 

reactor systems as part of the Nuclear Energy Research Initiative 

while increasing levels of safety and security, and identifies research on modular and small-scale reactors, balance-of-plant 

issues, cost-efficient manufacturing and construction, licensing 

issues, and enhanced proliferation controls as types of research included within the initiative. 

Paragraph (2) directs the Secretary of Energy, in carrying out research under paragraph (1), to consult with the Secretary of Commerce, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Nuclear Regulatory ComVerDate Mar 15 2010 11:00 Sep 01, 2011 Jkt 099010 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR066.XXX SR066

wreier-aviles on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with REPORTS
4 

mission, and any other individual who the Secretary determines to 

be necessary. 

Paragraph (3) directs the Secretary of Energy to develop and post 

on the Department of Energy’s website a schedule outlining a fiveyear strategy to lower effectively the costs of nuclear reactors. Subparagraphs require the Nuclear Energy Advisory Committee to review the schedule, and the Secretary to update it annually. The 

Secretary is also required to solicit public comment through public 

workshops when developing and updating the schedule. 

Paragraph (4) applies the cost-sharing requirements of section 

988 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to the Nuclear Energy Research Initiative. 

COST AND BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS

The following estimate of costs of this measure has been provided 

by the Congressional Budget Office. 

S. 1067—Nuclear Energy Research Initiative Improvement Act of 

2011 

Summary: S. 1067 would authorize the Department of Energy 

(DOE) to conduct research related to nuclear reactor systems. Assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts, CB0 estimates 

that implementing S. 1067 would cost $231 million over the 2012– 

2016 period. Enacting S. 1067 would not affect direct spending or 

revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply. 

S. 1067 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) 

and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments. 

Estimated cost to the federal government: The estimated budgetary impact of S. 1067 is shown in the following table. The costs 

of this legislation fall within budget function 270 (energy). 

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars 

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2012– 

2016 

CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION 

Estimated Authorization Level .......................................... 50 51 52 52 53 258 

Estimated Outlays ............................................................ 30 45 51 52 53 231 

Basis of estimate: S. 1067 would authorize DOE to conduct research aimed at reducing the costs of deploying new commercial 

nuclear reactors and increasing levels of safety and security of such 

systems. Under the bill, those efforts would be aimed particularly 

at developing modular and small-scale nuclear reactors and technologies to enhance the sustainability, cost-effectiveness, and security of nuclear reactors. 

Based on information from DOE about the level of effort required 

to make appreciable progress toward those objectives, CB0 estimates that fully funding S. 1057 would require appropriations totalling $50 million in 2012 and $258 million over the 2012–2016 

period. Assuming appropriation of those amounts, CB0 estimates 

that resulting spending would total $231 million over the 2012– 

2016 period, with additional spending occurring in later years. 

Those estimated outlays are based on historical spending patterns 

for DOE’s nuclear programs. 


wreier-aviles on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with REPORTS
5 

Pay-as-you-go considerations: None. 

Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: S. 1067 contains no 

intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in UMRA 

and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments. 

Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Megan Carroll; Impact on 

State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Ryan Miller; Impact on the 

Private Sector: Amy Petz. 

Estimate approved by: Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant Director 

for Budget Analysis. 

REGULATORY IMPACT EVALUATION

In compliance with paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, the Committee makes the following evaluation 

of the regulatory impact which would be incurred in carrying out 

S. 1067. 

The bill is not a regulatory measure in the sense of imposing 

Government established standards or significant economic responsibilities on private individuals and businesses. 

No personal information would be collected in administering the 

program. Therefore, there would be no impact on personal privacy. 

Little, if any, additional paperwork would result from the enactment of S. 1067. 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING

S. 1067, as ordered reported, does not contain any congressionally directed spending items, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff 

benefits as defined in rule XLIV of the Standing Rules of the Senate. 

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS

The testimony on S. 1067 given by the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Reactor Technologies, Office of Nuclear Energy, The U.S. 

Department of Energy at the Committee’s June 7, 2011 hearing as 

follows: 

STATEMENT OF JOHN E. KELLY, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SEC- RETARY FOR REACTOR TECHNOLOGIES, OFFICE OF NU- CLEAR ENERGY, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

INTRODUCTION

Thank you, Chairman Bingaman, Ranking Member 

Murkowski, and Members of the Committee. This is my 

first testimony before Congress and it is a particular pleasure to be discussing small modular reactors (SMRs) with 

you, as they have been an area of great interest to me for 

some time. 

Before joining the Department of Energy, I co-chaired an 

American Nuclear Society special committee that was developing solutions to generic licensing issues for small 

modular reactors. Over the course of the last 18 months, 

this special committee, together with the Nuclear Energy 

Institute, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the nuclear industry, has made great progress in forging the 

blueprint for the regulatory framework for small modular 


wreier-aviles on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with REPORTS
6 

reactors. This progress demonstrates an increased interest 

in the licensing and commercialization of SMRs. 

The Administration continues to view nuclear power as 

an important clean energy option. Small modular reactors, 

specifically reactors that have an electrical output of less 

than 300 megawatts, are a promising and innovative technology. We see these smaller reactors as giving our utilities additional clean energy options and allowing nuclear 

power to penetrate the energy market more broadly. Secretary Chu has written that, ‘‘if we can develop this technology in the U.S. and build these reactors with American 

workers, we will have a key competitive edge’’. SMRs are 

already inspiring American innovation and have the potential to significantly enhance U.S. competiveness. 

Since former Assistant Secretary Dr. Pete Miller testified to this Committee in 2009 on the two bills we are discussing today, several developments have taken place. A 

little over a year ago, we released our fiscal year 2011 

budget request, which proposed a small modular reactor 

program with $40 million of funding. The proposal was to 

spend half of that funding on R&D efforts and half to initiate a competitive selection process to establish public-private partnerships to cost-share design certification and licensing efforts with the selected winners. 

Earlier this year, the Department released its fiscal year 

2012 budget request, which included an expanded version 

of the small modular reactor program. The request for FY 

2012 is $29 million for R&D and $67 million for design 

certification and licensing activities. The DOE request outlines a multi-year, $452 million program that would use 

cost-shared arrangements with industry partners to complete design certification activities for up to two light 

water small modular reactor designs. There are several potential SMR vendors pursuing both LWR designs and more 

advanced concepts. Many utilities are interested in this 

technology to replace aging fossil plants. 

The events at the Fukushima nuclear power plants have 

led the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to launch a 90-day 

review to see what lessons can be learned from the Japanese experience and applied to U.S. nuclear plants. I want 

to note that designers of light water SMRs have already 

placed major emphasis on the inherent safety of these reactors. Because of their lower power level, SMRs have a 

much lower level of decay heat and therefore may require 

less cooling after reactor shutdown. Several designs incorporate passive safety features that utilize gravity-driven 

systems rather than engineered, pump-driven systems to 

supply backup cooling in unusual circumstances. Some 

concepts use natural circulation for normal operations, requiring no primary system pumps and providing an even 

more robust safety case. In addition, many SMR designs 

utilize integral designs for which all major primary components are located in a single pressure vessel. That feature 

results in a much lower susceptibility to certain potential 

events, such as a loss of coolant accident, because there is 


wreier-aviles on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with REPORTS
7 

no large external primary piping. Lastly, most SMRs can 

be sited underground, which should improve their security 

profile and may enhance seismic safety. 

COMMENTS ON S. 512 AND S. 1067

Turning to the two bills under consideration by the Committee, the Department has a few comments. 

S. 1067 gives broad authority to conduct research into 

small modular reactors, as well as other connected issues. 

S. 512, the Nuclear Power 2021 Act, would require the 

Department of Energy to carry out a program to develop 

and demonstrate two small modular reactor designs. If 

passed, several factors would be important to consider: 

• The requirement that at least one of the designs be 

less than 50 MW is too restrictive; simply having an upper 

bound of approximately 300 MWe would be more appropriate. Cost-shared design development and licensing 

should be based on competitive procurements and the market place should establish the appropriate design parameters. 

• The licensing effort should include two different designs. 

• The program should initially be focused on light water 

reactor technology based on the large amount of experience—both design and licensing—with such reactors. 

CONCLUSION

That concludes my formal remarks. Thank you for the 

opportunity to testify and I look forward to answering your 

questions and working with the Committee to achieve the 

administration’s goals of energy security and reducing the 

nation’s carbon emissions. 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by the bill S. 

1067, as ordered reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is 

printed in italic, existing law in which no change is proposed is 

shown in roman): 

ENERGY POLICY ACT OF 2005 

Public Law 109–58 

AN ACT To ensure jobs for our future with secure, affordable, and reliable energy. 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE IX—RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT 

* * * * * * * 


wreier-aviles on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with REPORTS
8 

Subtitle E—Nuclear Energy 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 952. NUCLEAR ENERGY RESEARCH PROGRAMS. 

ø(a) NUCLEAR ENERGY RESEARCH INITIATIVE.—The Secretary 

shall carry out a Nuclear Energy Research Initiative for research 

and development related to nuclear energy.¿ 

(a) NUCLEAR ENERGY RESEARCH INITIATIVE.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct research to 

lower the cost of nuclear reactor systems while increasing the 

levels of safety and security of the systems, including research 

regarding— 

(A) modular and small-scale reactors; 

(B) balance-of-plant issues; 

(C) cost-efficient manufacturing and construction; 

(D) licensing issues; and 

(E) enhanced proliferation controls. 

(2) CONSULTATION REQUIREMENT.—In carrying out initiatives 

under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall consult with— 

(A) the Secretary of Commerce; 

(B) the Secretary of the Treasury; 

(C) the Nuclear Regulatory Commission; and 

(D) any other individual who the Secretary determines to 

be necessary. 

(3) SCHEDULE.— 

(A) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the date 

of enactment of this paragraph, the Secretary shall develop 

and publish on the website of the Department of Energy a 

schedule that contains an outline of a 5-year strategy to 

lower effectively the costs of nuclear reactors. 

(B) PUBLIC WORKSHOPS.—In developing the schedule 

under subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall conduct public 

workshops to provide an opportunity for public comment. 

(C) REVIEW.—Before the date on which the Secretary publishes the schedule under subparagraph (A), the Nuclear 

Energy Advisory Committee shall conduct a review of the 

schedule. 

(D) ANNUAL UPDATES.— 

(i) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the 

date on which the Secretary publishes the schedule 

under subparagraph (A) and annually thereafter, the 

Secretary shall update the schedule. 

(ii) PUBLIC WORKSHOPS.—In updating the schedule 

under clause (i), the Secretary shall conduct public 

workshops in accordance with subparagraph (B). 

(4) COST SHARING.—Section 988 shall apply to initiatives carried out under this section. 

* * * * * * * 

Æ 


wreier-aviles on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with REPORTS