105TH CONGRESS REPT. 105–67 " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session Part 1

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY CIVILIAN RESEARCH AND

DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1997

APRIL 22, 1997.—Ordered to be printed

Mr. SENSENBRENNER, from the Committee on Science,

submitted the following

R E P O R T

together with

ADDITIONAL AND SUPPLEMENTAL VIEWS

[To accompany H.R. 1277]

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

The Committee on Science, to whom was referred the bill (H.R.

1277) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 1998 and fiscal

year 1999 for the civilian research, development, demonstration,

and commercial application activities of the Department of Energy,

and for other purposes, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon with an amendment and recommends that the bill as

amended do pass.
2

C O N T E N T S

Page

I. Amendment ................................................................................................. 2

II. Purpose of the Bill ...................................................................................... 9

III. Background and Need for Legislation ....................................................... 10

IV. Summary of Hearings ................................................................................. 11

V. Committee Actions ...................................................................................... 12

VI. Summary of Major Provisions of the Bill .................................................. 13

VII. Section-By-Section Analysis and Committee Views ................................. 16

VIII. Committee Cost Estimate ........................................................................... 54

IX. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate ............................................. 54

X. Compliance with Public Law 104-4 ........................................................... 59

XI. Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations ........................... 59

XII. Oversight Findings and Recommendations by the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight .............................................................. 59

XIII. Constitutional Authority Statement .......................................................... 59

XIV. Federal Advisory Committee Statement ................................................... 59

XV. Congressional Accountability Act .............................................................. 59

XVI. Committee Recommendations .................................................................... 59

XVII. Additional and Supplemental Views ......................................................... 59

I. AMENDMENT

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 ‘‘Department of Energy Civilian Research and Development Act of 1997’’.

SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

For purposes of this Act—

(1) the term ‘‘CERN’’ means the European Organization for Nuclear Research;

(2) the term ‘‘Department’’ means the Department of Energy;

(3) the term ‘‘Large Hadron Collider project’’ means the Large Hadron

Collider project at CERN; and

(4) the term ‘‘Secretary’’ means the Secretary of Energy.

SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

(a) ENERGY SUPPLY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES.—There are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary for Energy Supply Research and Development operating expenses and capital equipment $2,838,719,000 for fiscal year

1998 and $2,847,812,000 for fiscal year 1999, of which—

(1) $272,820,000 for fiscal year 1998 (reduced by $15,000,000 to reflect the

use of prior year balances) and $270,342,000 for fiscal year 1999 shall be for

Solar and Renewable Resources Technologies, including—

(A) $2,150,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $2,150,000 for fiscal year 1999

for Solar Building Technology Research;

(B) $63,900,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $64,900,000 for fiscal year

1999 for Photovoltaic Energy Systems;

(C) $18,170,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $13,620,000 for fiscal year

1999 for Solar Thermal Energy Systems;

(D) $28,835,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $28,190,000 for fiscal year

1999 for Biopower/Biofuels Energy Systems;

(E) $29,500,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $18,140,000 for fiscal year

1999 for Wind Energy Systems;

(F) $2,800,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $500,000 for fiscal year 1999 for

the National Renewable Energy Laboratory;

(G) $19,518,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $19,518,000 for fiscal year

1999 for Geothermal Electric Research and Development and Deployment;

(H) $1,000,000 for fiscal year 1998 for Hydropower;

(I) $44,500,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $36,500,000 for fiscal year 1999

for Electric Energy Systems and Storage, of which—

(i) $8,000,000 for fiscal year 1998 shall be for Electric and Magnetic Fields Research and Development;
3

(ii) $32,500,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $32,500,000 for fiscal year

1999 shall be for High-Temperature Superconductivity Research and

Development; and (iii) $4,000,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $4,000,000 for fiscal year

1999 shall be for Energy Storage Systems;

(J) $50,000,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $75,000,000 for fiscal year 1999

shall be for a Solar and Renewable Energy Science Initiative, to be managed by the Director of the Office of Energy Research, in consultation with

the Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy on the

goals and priorities of the initiative, for grants to be competitively awarded

and subject to peer review for research related to solar and renewable energy; and (K) $12,447,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $11,824,000 for fiscal year

1999 for Program Direction;

(2) $173,166,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $146,540,000 for fiscal year 1999

shall be for Nuclear Energy, including— (A) $47,000,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $43,350,000 for fiscal year

1999 for Advanced Radioisotope Power Systems; (B) $9,500,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $8,809,000 for fiscal year 1999

for Oak Ridge Landlord; (C) $3,217,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $3,217,000 for fiscal year 1999

for Test Reactor Area Landlord; (D) $2,000,000 for fiscal year 1998 for Advanced Test Reactor Fusion

Irradiations; (E) $6,000,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $6,000,000 for fiscal year 1999

for University Nuclear Science and Reactor Support; (F) $70,535,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $60,000,000 for fiscal year 1999

for Termination Costs; (G) $20,854,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $11,807,000 for fiscal year

1999 for Isotope Support; and (H) $14,060,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $13,357,000 for fiscal year

1999 for Program Direction;

(3) $77,160,000 for fiscal year 1998 (reduced by $3,535,000 reflecting the use of prior year balances) and $76,828,000 for fiscal year 1999 shall be for Uranium Programs; (4) $107,870,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $100,237,000 for fiscal year 1999

shall be for Environment, Safety, and Health; (5) $367,538,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $378,564,000 for fiscal year 1999

shall be for Biological and Environmental Research, including— (A) $157,037,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $161,748,000 for fiscal year

1999 for Life Sciences;

(B) $100,954,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $103,983,000 for fiscal year

1999 for Environmental Processes;

(C) $66,435,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $68,428,000 for fiscal year

1999 for Environmental Remediation;

(D) $43,112,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $44,405,000 for fiscal year

1999 for Medical Applications and Measurement Sciences; and

(E) $1,000,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $1,000,000 for fiscal year 1999

for the United States-Mexico Foundation for Science for research on biosciences and the environment,

except that, notwithstanding subparagraphs (A) through (E), the total amount

which may be appropriated under this paragraph shall not exceed the overall

sums stated at the beginning of this paragraph;

(6) $240,000,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $240,000,000 for fiscal year 1999

shall be for Fusion Energy Sciences, of which $5,000,000 for fiscal year 1998

and $5,000,000 for fiscal year 1999 shall be for General Plasma Science;

(7) $659,812,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $678,888,000 for fiscal year 1999

shall be for Basic Energy Sciences, including—

(A) $391,047,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $402,060,000 for fiscal year

1999 for Materials Sciences, of which not to exceed $5,000,000 for each such

fiscal year may be used for the High Flux Beam Reactor at Brookhaven National Laboratory;

(B) $199,933,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $205,931,000 for fiscal year

1999 for Chemical Sciences;

(C) $41,371,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $42,612,000 for fiscal year

1999 for Engineering and Geosciences; and

(D) $27,461,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $28,285,000 for fiscal year

1999 for Energy Biosciences;
4

(8) $140,907,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $145,134,000 for fiscal year 1999

shall be for Computational and Technology Research, including—

(A) $117,490,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $121,014,000 for fiscal year

1999 for Mathematical, Information, and Computational Sciences;

(B) $15,829,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $16,304,000 for fiscal year

1999 for Laboratory Technology Research; and

(C) $7,588,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $7,816,000 for fiscal year 1999

for Advanced Energy Projects;

(9) $1,500,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $1,500,000 for fiscal year 1999 shall

be for Energy Research Analysis;

(10) $29,070,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $27,434,000 for fiscal year 1999

shall be for Energy Research-Energy Supply Program Direction;

(11) $682,387,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $682,387,000 for fiscal year 1999

shall be for Environmental Restoration and Waste Management (Non-Defense),

including—

(A) $457,625,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $457,625,000 for fiscal year

1999 for Environmental Restoration;

(B) $153,004,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $153,004,000 for fiscal year

1999 for Waste Management; and

(C) $71,758,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $71,758,000 for fiscal year

1999 for Nuclear Material and Facility Stabilization;

(12) $11,554,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $11,152,000 for fiscal year 1999

shall be for Technical Information Management; and

(13) $93,480,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $88,806,000 for fiscal year 1999

shall be for Field Operations.

(b) ENERGY ASSETS ACQUISITION.—There are authorized to be appropriated to

the Secretary for the purchase, construction, expansion, and acquisition of real

plant, property, and other physical assets for energy supply research and development activities, $43,582,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $45,332,000 for fiscal year

1999, of which—

(1) for Solar and Renewable Resources Technology, $2,200,000 for fiscal

year 1998 shall be for completion of Project 96–E–100, Field Test Laboratory

Building Renovation and Expansion, National Renewable Energy Laboratory;

(2) for Nuclear Energy, $4,425,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $6,425,000 for

fiscal year 1999 shall be for completion of Project 95–E–201, Test Reactor Area

Fire and Life Safety Improvements, Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory;

(3) for Uranium Programs—

(A) $400,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $5,200,000 for fiscal 1999 for completion of Project 98–U–200, DUF6 Cylinder Storage Yards, K–25 Plant,

Oak Ridge, Tennessee; and

(B) $6,000,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $10,700,000 for fiscal year 1999

for completion of Project 96–U–201, DUF6 Cylinder Storage Yards, Paducah, Kentucky, Gaseous Diffusion Plant;

(4) for Basic Energy Sciences, $7,000,000 for fiscal year 1998 and

$4,000,000 for fiscal year 1999 for completion of Project 96–E–300, Combustion

Research Facility, Phase II, Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore, California;

(5) for Multiprogram Energy Laboratories-Facilities Support, $21,260,000

for fiscal year 1998 and $19,007,000 for fiscal year 1999 for—

(A) Project MEL–001, Multiprogram Energy Laboratories Infrastructure Project, Various Locations, $7,259,000 for fiscal year 1998 and

$12,161,000 for fiscal year 1999;

(B) Project 96–E–333, Multiprogram Energy Laboratories Upgrades,

Various Locations, $5,273,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $268,000 for fiscal

year 1999;

(C) Project 95–E–308, Sanitary System Modifications, Phase II,

Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, New York, $568,000 for fiscal year

1998;

(D) Project 95–E–307, Fire Safety Improvements-Phase III, Argonne

National Laboratory, Argonne, Illinois, $718,000 for fiscal year 1998;

(E) Project 95–E–301, Central Heating Plant Rehabilitation-Phase I,

Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Illinois, $3,442,000 for fiscal year

1998; and

(F) Project 94–E–363, Roofing Improvements, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, $4,000,000 for fiscal year 1998 and

$6,578,000 for fiscal year 1999; and
5

(6) for Environmental Restoration and Waste Management (Non-Defense),

$2,297,000 for fiscal year 1998, of which—

(A) $1,900,000 shall be for completion of Project 94–E–602, Bethel Federal Facility Agreement Upgrade, Oak Ridge National Laboratory; and

(B) $397,000 shall be for completion of Project 93–E–900, Long-Term

Storage of TMI–2 Fuel; Idaho National Energy and Environmental Laboratory, Idaho.

(c) GENERAL SCIENCE AND RESEARCH ACTIVITIES.—There are authorized to be

appropriated to the Secretary for General Science and Research Activities operating

expenses and capital equipment—

(1) $865,210,000 for fiscal year 1998 (reduced by $15,000,000 to reflect the

use of prior year balances), including—

(A) $599,185,000 for High Energy Physics;

(B) $256,525,000 for Nuclear Physics; and

(C) $9,500,000 for Program Direction; and

(2) $941,000,000 for fiscal year 1999, including—

(A) $607,645,000 for High Energy Physics;

(B) $324,330,000 for Nuclear Physics; and

(C) $9,025,000 for Program Direction.

None of the funds authorized for High Energy Physics by this subsection or subsection (d) may be used for the Large Hadron Collider project, unless the Secretary,

in consultation with the Director of the National Science Foundation, has transmitted to the Committee on Science of the House of Representatives and the Committee

on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate a report on the impacts of such

funding on the operations and viability of United States high energy and nuclear

physics facilities.

(d) SCIENCE ASSETS ACQUISITION.—There are authorized to be appropriated to

the Secretary for the purchase, construction, expansion, and acquisition of real

plant, property, and other physical assets for general science and research activities,

$126,870,000 for fiscal year 1998, of which—

(1) $50,850,000 shall be for High Energy Physics, including—

(A) $30,950,000 for completion of Project 92–G–302, Fermilab Main Injector, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Illinois;

(B) $9,400,000 for completion of Project 97–G–303, Stanford Linear Accelerator Center Master Station Upgrade, California;

(C) $5,500,000 for architectural engineering and technical design work

for Project 98–G–304, Neutrinos at the Main Injector, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Illinois; and

(D) $5,000,000 for completion of Project 98–G–305, Fermilab C-Zero

Area Experimental Hall, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Illinois;

and

(2) $76,020,000 shall be for Nuclear Physics, for completion of Project 91–

G–300, Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider, Brookhaven National Laboratory,

Upton, New York.

(e) FOSSIL ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT.—There are authorized to be

appropriated to the Secretary for Fossil Energy Research and Development operating expenses, capital equipment, and construction, $348,854,000 for fiscal year 1998

and $348,185,000 for fiscal year 1999, of which—

(1) $105,831,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $104,206,000 for fiscal year 1999

shall be for Coal operating expenses, including—

(A) $5,064,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $5,064,000 for fiscal year 1999

for Coal Preparation;

(B) $5,816,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $5,816,000 for fiscal year 1999

for Direct Liquefaction;

(C) $4,223,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $4,223,000 for fiscal year 1999

for Indirect Liquefaction;

(D) $741,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $741,000 for fiscal year 1999 for

Advanced Clean Fuels Research Advanced Research and Environmental

Technology;

(E) $5,462,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $5,462,000 for fiscal year 1999

for Advanced Pulverized Coal-Fired Powerplant;

(F) $10,927,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $10,927,000 for fiscal year 1999

for Indirect Fired Cycle;

(G) $22,342,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $20,717,000 for fiscal year

1999 for High-Efficiency-Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle;

(H) $17,875,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $17,875,000 for fiscal year

1999 for High-Efficiency Pressurized Fluidized Bed;
6

(I) $9,734,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $9,734,000 for fiscal year 1999

for Advanced Clean/Efficient Power Systems Advanced Research and Environmental Technology; and (J) $23,647,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $23,647,000 for fiscal year 1999

for Advanced Research and Technology Development;

(2) $47,419,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $46,464,000 for fiscal year 1999

shall be for Oil Technology operating expenses, including— (A) $31,157,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $31,157,000 for fiscal year

1999 for Exploration and Production Supporting Research; (B) $3,931,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $3,931,000 for fiscal year 1999

for Recovery Field Demonstrations; (C) $6,411,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $5,456,000 for fiscal year 1999

for Exploration and Production Environmental Research; and (D) $5,920,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $5,920,000 for fiscal year 1999

for Processing Research and Downstream Operations;

(3) $85,877,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $85,877,000 for fiscal year 1999

shall be for Gas operating expenses, including— (A) $14,123,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $14,123,000 for fiscal year

1999 for Natural Gas Research Exploration and Production; (B) $993,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $993,000 for fiscal year 1999 for

Natural Gas Research Delivery and Storage; (C) $31,379,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $31,379,000 for fiscal year

1999 for Natural Gas Research Advanced Turbine Systems; (D) $4,808,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $4,808,000 for fiscal year 1999

for Natural Gas Research Utilization; (E) $4,617,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $4,617,000 for fiscal year 1999

for Natural Gas Research Environmental Research/Regulatory Analysis; (F) $1,210,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $1,210,000 for fiscal year 1999

for Fuel Cells Advanced Research; (G) $16,335,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $16,335,000 for fiscal year

1999 for Fuel Cells Molten Carbonate Systems to continue cost-shared cost

reduction and performance improvement of one system; and (H) $12,412,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $12,412,000 for fiscal year

1999 for Fuel Cells Advanced Concepts;

(4) $61,783,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $62,494,000 for fiscal year 1999

shall be for Program Direction and Management Support operating expenses,

including—(A) $13,676,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $12,992,000 for fiscal year

1999 for Headquarters Program Direction; and (B) $48,107,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $49,502,000 for fiscal year

1999 for Energy Technology Center Program Direction;

(5) $2,000,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $2,000,000 for fiscal year 1999 shall

be for Plant and Capital Equipment, for construction of General Plant Projects;

(6) $12,935,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $12,935,000 for fiscal year 1999

shall be for Fossil Energy Environmental Restoration operating expenses;

(7) $5,836,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $5,836,000 for fiscal year 1999 shall

be for Cooperative Research and Development operating expenses;

(8) $2,173,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $2,173,000 for fiscal year 1999 shall

be for Fuels Conversion, Natural Gas, and Electricity operating expenses; and

(9) $25,000,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $30,000,000 for fiscal year 1999

shall be for a Fossil Energy Science Initiative to be managed by the Director

of the Office of Energy Research, in consultation with the Assistant Secretary

for Fossil Energy on the goals and priorities of the initiative, for grants to be

competitively awarded and subject to peer review for research relating to fossil

energy.

Notwithstanding paragraphs (1) through (9), the total amount which may be appropriated under this subsection shall not exceed the overall sums stated at the beginning of this subsection.

(f) ENERGY CONSERVATION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT.—There are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary for Energy Conservation Research and Development operating expenses and capital equipment, $416,908,000 for fiscal year

1998 (reduced by $20,000,000 to reflect the use of prior year balances) and

$439,403,000 for fiscal year 1999, of which—

(1) $41,004,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $40,230,000 for fiscal year 1999

shall be for the Building Technology, State and Community Sector (NonGrants), including—

(A) $8,762,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $8,762,000 for fiscal year 1999

for Building Systems Design for Building America Program;
7

(B) $20,550,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $20,250,000 for fiscal year

1999 for Building Equipment and Materials; and (C) $11,692,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $11,218,000 for fiscal year

1999 for Management and Planning;

(2) $125,380,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $125,048,000 for fiscal year 1999

shall be for the Industry Sector, including— (A) $55,660,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $55,660,000 for fiscal year

1999 for Industries of the Future (Specific); (B) $39,120,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $39,120,000 for fiscal year

1999 for Industries of the Future (Crosscutting); (C) $23,950,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $23,950,000 for fiscal year

1999 for Technology Access; and (D) $6,650,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $6,318,000 for fiscal year 1999

for Management and Planning;

(3) $179,576,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $179,225,000 for fiscal year 1999

shall be for the Transportation Sector, including— (A) $2,700,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $2,700,000 for fiscal year 1999

for Clean Cities; (B) $124,046,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $124,046,000 for fiscal year

1999 for Advanced Automotive Technologies; (C) $18,000,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $18,000,000 for fiscal year

1999 for Advanced Heavy Vehicle Technologies; (D) $30,500,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $30,500,000 for fiscal year

1999 for Transportation Materials Technologies; and (E) $7,030,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $6,679,000 for fiscal year 1999

for Implementation and Program Management,

except that, notwithstanding subparagraphs (A) through (E), the total amount

which may be appropriated under this paragraph shall not exceed the overall

sums stated at the beginning of this paragraph; (4) $20,948,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $19,900,000 for fiscal year 1999

shall be for Policy and Management; and (5) $50,000,000 for fiscal year 1998 and $75,000,000 for fiscal year 1999

shall be for an Energy Efficiency Science Initiative to be managed by the Director of the Office of Energy Research, in consultation with the Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy on the goals and priorities

of the initiative, for grants to be competitively awarded and subject to peer review for research relating to energy efficiency.

SEC. 4. FUNDING LIMITATIONS.

None of the funds authorized by this Act for fiscal year 1998 or fiscal year 1999

may be used for the following programs, projects, and activities, except to fulfill contractual obligations:

(1) Nuclear Energy Advanced Light Water Reactor.

(2) Nuclear Energy Commercial Reactor.

(3) Nuclear Energy Security.

(4) Nuclear Energy Termination Costs Gas Turbine-Modular Helium Reactor.

(5) Nuclear Energy Termination Costs Advanced Light Water Reactor.

(6) Fossil Energy Research and Development Advanced Research and Technology Development Coal Technology Export.

(7) Clean Coal Technology Program.

SEC. 5. NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES REPORTS.

(a) HIGH ENERGY AND NUCLEAR PHYSICS.—The Secretary shall enter into appropriate arrangements with National Academy of Sciences for the Academy to prepare

a report on the high energy and nuclear physics activities of the Department, assuming a combined budget of $977,080,000 for all activities authorized under section

3 (c) and (d) for fiscal year 1998, and $941,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 1999,

2000, 2001, and 2002. The report shall include—

(1) a priority list of research opportunities, including both ongoing and proposed activities;

(2) an analysis of the relevance of each research facility to the research opportunities listed under paragraph (1);

(3) recommendations for the optimal balance among facility operations, construction, and research support and the optimal balance between university and

laboratory research programs; and

(4) recommended schedules for the continuation, consolidation, or termination of each research program, and continuation, upgrade, transfer, or closure

of each research facility.
8

Not later than December 31, 1997, the Secretary shall transmit to the Committee

on Science of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate the report prepared under this subsection.

(b) BASIC ENERGY SCIENCES.—(1) The Secretary shall enter into appropriate arrangements with the National Academy of Sciences for the Academy to prepare a

report on the basic energy sciences activities of the Department, based on the following three budget options for the entire Basic Energy Sciences account and all related research and energy asset activities: (A) Provision of $683,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 1999 through 2002.

(B) Provision of $683,000,000 for fiscal year 1999, and an amount reflecting

a three percent reduction in each year thereafter through fiscal year 2002. (C) Provision of $683,000,000 for fiscal year 1999, and an amount reflecting

a three percent increase in each year thereafter through fiscal year 2002.

(2) None of the figures described in paragraph (1)(A) through (C) shall be altered to reflect inflationary allowances. The report shall include—

(A) a priority list of research opportunities, including both ongoing and proposed activities;

(B) an analysis of the relevance of each research facility to the research opportunities listed under subparagraph (A);

(C) recommendations for the optimal balance among facility operations, construction, and research support and the optimal balance between university and

laboratory research programs; and

(D) recommended schedules for the continuation, consolidation, or termination of each research program, and continuation, upgrade, transfer, or closure

of each research facility.

Not later than December 31, 1997, the Secretary shall transmit to the Committee

on Science of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate the report prepared under this paragraph.

(c) NATIONAL SPALLATION NEUTRON SOURCE.—The Secretary shall enter into

appropriate arrangements with National Academy of Sciences for the Academy to

prepare a report containing a detailed evaluation of the costs of construction and

operation of the National Spallation Neutron Source at alternative appropriate sites,

including at least the Argonne National Laboratory, the Brookhaven National Laboratory, the Los Alamos National Laboratory, and the Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Such report shall also include an identification of other advantages and disadvantages of each site evaluated. Not later than December 31, 1997, the Secretary

shall transmit to the Committee on Science of the House of Representatives and the

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate the report prepared

under this subsection. Along with such report, the Secretary shall include a recommendation from the Department for the preferred site that will meet its program

criteria, taking into consideration the effect of delay on neutron science work, existing expertise in the field of neutron science, affiliations with institutions of higher

education in neutron science, and State allocations or commitments to facilities.

SEC. 6. PROHIBITION ON USE OF CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY RESERVE FUNDS.

No funds in the Clean Coal Technology Reserve may be used to initiate or carry

out a clean coal technology program based outside the United States.

SEC. 7. NEXT GENERATION INTERNET.

None of the funds authorized by this Act, or any other Act enacted before the

date of the enactment of this Act, may be used for the Next Generation Internet.

Notwithstanding the previous sentence, funds may be used for the continuation of

programs and activities that were funded and carried out during fiscal year 1997.

SEC. 8. LIMITATIONS.

(a) PROHIBITION OF LOBBYING ACTIVITIES.—None of the funds authorized by this

Act shall be available for any activity whose purpose is to influence legislation pending before the Congress, except that this subsection shall not prevent officers or employees of the United States or of its departments or agencies from communicating

to Members of Congress on the request of any Member or to Congress, through the

proper channels, requests for legislation or appropriations which they deem necessary for the efficient conduct of the public business.

(b) LIMITATION ON APPROPRIATIONS.—No sums are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary for fiscal years 1998 and 1999 for the activities for which

sums are authorized by this Act, unless such sums are specifically authorized to be

appropriated by this Act.

(c) ELIGIBILITY FOR AWARDS.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall exclude from consideration for grant

agreements made by the Department after fiscal year 1997 any person who re-
9

ceived funds, other than those described in paragraph (2), appropriated for a fiscal year after fiscal year 1997, under a grant agreement from any Federal funding source for a project that was not subjected to a competitive, merit-based

award process. Any exclusion from consideration pursuant to this subsection

shall be effective for a period of 5 years after the person receives such Federal

funds.

(2) EXCEPTION.—Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the receipt of Federal

funds by a person due to the membership of that person in a class specified by

law for which assistance is awarded to members of the class according to a formula provided by law.

(3) DEFINITION.—For purposes of this subsection, the term ‘‘grant agreement’’ means a legal instrument whose principal purpose is to transfer a thing

of value to the recipient to carry out a public purpose of support or stimulation

authorized by a law of the United States, and does not include the acquisition

(by purchase, lease, or barter) of property or services for the direct benefit or

use of the United States Government. Such term does not include a cooperative

agreement (as such term is used in section 6305 of title 31, United States Code)

or a cooperative research and development agreement (as such term is defined

in section 12(d)(1) of the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980

(15 U.S.C. 3710a(d)(1))).

SEC. 9. NOTICE.

(a) NOTICE OF REPROGRAMMING.—If any funds authorized by this Act are subject to a reprogramming action that requires notice to be provided to the Appropriations Committees of the House of Representatives and the Senate, notice of such action shall concurrently be provided to the Committees on Science and Commerce of

the House of Representatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

of the Senate.

(b) NOTICE OF REORGANIZATION.—The Secretary shall provide notice to the

Committees on Science, Commerce, and Appropriations of the House of Representatives, and the Committees on Energy and Natural Resources and Appropriations of

the Senate, not later than 15 days before any major reorganization of any program,

project, or activity of the Department.

SEC. 10. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON THE YEAR 2000 PROBLEM.

With the year 2000 fast approaching, it is the sense of Congress that the Department should—

(1) give high priority to correcting all 2-digit date-related problems in its

computer systems to ensure that those systems continue to operate effectively

in the year 2000 and beyond;

(2) assess immediately the extent of the risk to the operations of the Department posed by the problems referred to in paragraph (1), and plan and

budget for achieving Year 2000 compliance for all of its mission-critical systems;

and

(3) develop contingency plans for those systems that the Department is unable to correct in time.

SEC. 11. BUY AMERICAN.

(a) COMPLIANCE WITH BUY AMERICAN ACT.—No funds appropriated pursuant to

this Act may be expended by an entity unless the entity agrees that in expending

the assistance the entity will comply with sections 2 through 4 of the Act of March

3, 1933 (41 U.S.C. 10a–10c, popularly known as the ‘‘Buy American Act’’).

(b) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—In the case of any equipment or products that may

be authorized to be purchased with financial assistance provided under this Act, it

is the sense of Congress that entities receiving such assistance should, in expending

the assistance, purchase only American-made equipment and products.

(c) NOTICE TO RECIPIENTS OF ASSISTANCE.—In providing financial assistance

under this Act, the Secretary of Energy shall provide to each recipient of the assistance a notice describing the statement made in subsection (a) by the Congress.

II. PURPOSE OF THE BILL

The purpose of the bill is to authorize appropriations for Fiscal

Year 1998 and Fiscal Year 1999 for the civilian research, development, demonstration, and commercial application activities of the

Department of Energy under the jurisdiction of the Committee on

Science.
10

III. BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

Three circumstances dictate the need for this legislation: (1) the

importance of preserving and strengthening the Nation’s scientific

leadership; (2) the lack of specific authorizations for the bulk of the

Department of Energy’s civilian research, development, demonstration and commercial application activities under the Committee on

Science’s jurisdiction; and (3) the necessity to balance the budget.

The Committee on Science believes the Nation’s future is tied to

science, and that the Federal Government should play an important role in the promotion and support of our scientific endeavors.

As we enter the next millennium, our nation faces many challenges

that can be met by enhancing the country’s scientific and technical

base. Whether finding a cure for a deadly disease, developing technologies which minimize waste and pollution, or discovering clean

and safe energy sources to sustain us well into the future, a

healthy scientific research and development base is required.

The Department of Energy is a major funding source for science.

The Department of Energy’s Office of Energy Research supports

the Federal Government’s third largest basic research program,

and is exceeded in size only by the National Institutes of Health

and the National Science Foundation. In addition, the Department

supports major energy research and development efforts, including

solar and renewable energy, energy efficiency, fossil energy, and

nuclear and fusion energy. However, with the exception of Hydrogen Research which is authorized through 2001 by the Hydrogen

Future Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-271), very few of the Department’s programs have specific authorizations—nearly all such authorizations contained in the Energy Policy of Act of 1992 either

have or will soon expire. This circumstance, in and of itself, dictates a compelling need for a comprehensive authorization bill to

provide guidance and direction to the Department that preserves

and strengthens the Nation’s science base and our energy future.

The Committee also enthusiastically supports the efforts to balance the budget. For if Congress and the Administration fail to

achieve this goal, future funding for all discretionary programs, including science and technology programs, will be jeopardized.

Twenty years ago, non-defense discretionary spending accounted

for almost 22.3 percent of the budget while interest on the national

debt was a mere 7 percent. Today, the Federal Government spends

16.1 percent of the federal budget on non-defense discretionary programs and 15 percent on servicing the national debt. As interest

on the public debt and the entitlement program spending continues

to grow, less and less funding will be available for non-defense discretionary spending programs such as energy and scientific research. To prepare America for an increasingly technologically-advanced competitive world and to prepare our next generation of scientists and engineers, we need to first assure our Federal financial

house is in order.

Given the circumstance of a stringent budget environment and

the desire to enhance our science base, the Committee has examined closely each of the programs, projects and activities proposed

by the Department of Energy in its Fiscal Year 1998 budget re-
11

quest and has used the following five criteria in prioritizing its

funding recommendations:

1. Federal Research and Development should focus on essential

programs that are long-term, high-risk, non-commercial, cutting

edge, well-managed, and have great potential for scientific discovery; funding for programs that do not meet this standard should be

eliminated or decreased to reduce budget demands and to enable

new initiatives.

2. Federal R&D should be highly relevant to and tightly focused on agency missions, with accountability and procedures for

evaluating quality and results.

3. Beyond the demonstration of technical feasibility, activities

associated with evolutionary advances or incremental improvements to a product or process, or the marketing or commercialization of a product or process should be left to the private sector.

4. Where possible, international, industry and state science

partnerships should be nurtured as a way to leverage U.S. taxpayer R&D investment.

5. Infrastructure necessary for carrying out essential federal

R&D programs needs to be prioritized consistent with program requirements.

The Committee believes that this authorization bill, the Department of Energy Civilian Research and Development Authorization

of 1997, meets the Committee’s responsibilities to set priorities for

good fundamental science and a balanced energy research portfolio

that is vital to the Nation’s future and a balanced budget.

IV. SUMMARY OF HEARINGS

The Subcommittee on Energy and Environment held hearings

dedicated to the Fiscal Year 1998 Department of Energy budget authorization request on March 6, 19 and 20, 1997, and heard testimony from Department of Energy officials and from the General

Accounting Office on the Department’s management of its major

system acquisitions. In addition, a number of non-governmental

witnesses addressed the Department’s Fiscal Year 1998 budget request and broader Departmental issues at a hearing on April 9,

1997.

Department of Energy officials who testified included: (1) Dr.

Martha A. Krebs, Director, Office of Energy Research; (2) the Honorable Patricia Fry Godley, Assistant Secretary for Fossil Energy;

(3) the Honorable Christine A. Ervin, Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy; (4) Dr. Terry R. Lash, Director, Office of Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology; (5) Mr.

Peter N. Brush, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety and Health; and (6) Mr. James M. Owendoff, Acting

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management.

The following also provided testimony concerning the Department of Energy: (1) Mr. Victor S. Rezendes, Director, Resources,

Community, and Economic Development Division, U.S. General Accounting Office; (2) Mr. Fred L. Smith, President, Competitive Enterprise Institute; (3) Ms. Anna Aurilio, Staff Scientist, U.S. Public

Interest Research Group; (4) Dr. David Baldwin, Senior Vice Presi-
12

dent, General Atomics; (5) Mr. Ralph DeGennaro, Executive Director, Taxpayers for Common $ense; (6) Mr. Scott Sklar, Executive

Director, Solar Unity Network; (7) Mr. Aris Melissaratos, Vice

President, Science, Technology, and Quality Division, Westinghouse

Electric Corporation; and (8) Mr. Jerry Taylor, Director, Natural

Resources Studies Division, CATO Institute.

V. COMMITTEE ACTIONS

As summarized in the previous section, the Subcommittee on Energy and Environment heard testimony relevant to DOE’s Fiscal

Year 1998 budget request at hearings held on March 6, 19, 20, and

April 9, 1997.

On April 10, 1997, Mr. Calvert, Chairman of the Subcommittee

on Energy and Environment, introduced H.R.1277, the Department

of Energy Civilian Research and Development Authorization Act of

1997, to authorize appropriations for DOE research, development,

demonstration and commercial application activities for Fiscal

Years 1998 and 1999.

The Full Committee met to consider H.R. 1277 on Wednesday,

April 16, 1997.

Amendment 1.—Mr. Calvert, Chairman of the Science Committee’s Subcommittee on Energy and Environment, offered a manager’s amendment that corrected technical errors and made a number of changes to address bipartisan Member interests. These include the following: (1) provision of $2.0 million over two years

with available funds for the United States-Mexico Foundation for

Science for research on bioscience and the environment, and $5.4

million over two years for the Clean Cities Initiative; (2) removal

of the prohibitions for authorization of appropriations of certain Department of Energy programs, with the exception of those that

refer to Nuclear Energy; Coal Technology Export and Clean Coal

Technology; (3) initiation of a National Academy of Sciences report

on the Department’s Basic Energy Sciences program; and (4) assurance that in managing the new Energy Science Initiatives that the

Director of Energy Research will consult with the Assistant Secretaries of the programs involved. The amendment was adopted by

a voice vote.

Amendment 2.—Mr. Doyle offered an amendment to restore funding for Nuclear Energy Security and the Advance Light Water Reactor program. The amendment was withdrawn pending further

hearings by the Committee.

Amendment 3.—Mr. Boehlert offered an amendment to restore

funding for the Large Hadron Collider project. The amendment was

withdrawn pending further review of the program by the Committee.

Amendment 4.—Mr. Ehlers offered an amendment to eliminate

the line item for the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, which was

adopted by a division vote of 18 yeas to 8 noes.

Amendment 5.—Mr. Barton offered an amendment to prohibit

funding for the Large Hadron Collider project, which was defeated

by a division vote of 12 yeas to 20 noes.

Amendment 6.—Mr. Davis offered an en bloc amendment to: (1)

increase funding for the Energy Conservation Research and Development Building Technologies program by $35,896,000 in Fiscal
13

Year 1998, and by $36,570,000 in Fiscal Year 1999, with offsetting

funds to be derived from the Energy Efficiency Science Initiative;

and (2) to delete corresponding funding limitations. Following debate, in which Mr. Davis noted that the manager’s amendment deleted practically all of the funding limitations in Section 4, the

amendment was withdrawn.

Amendment 7.—Ms. Lofgren offered an amendment to restore

funding of $9,172,000 in each of Fiscal Years 1998 and 1999 for the

Biological and Environmental Research Human Interactions program. The amendment was withdrawn.

Amendment 8.—Mr. Roemer offered an amendment to eliminate

self-regulation at Department of Energy laboratories, other than

defense laboratories. Following debate, the amendment was withdrawn.

Amendment 9.—Mr. Brown, on behalf of Mr. Traficant, offered an

amendment to add a new Section 10 to the bill that requires any

entity that is appropriated funds pursuant to this act or amendments thereto, to comply with sections 2-4 of the Act of March 3,

1933 (41 U.S.C. 10a-10c, popularly known as the ‘‘Buy American

Act’’), and that recipients of funds pursuant to this act shall be notified of subsection (a)’s requirement of compliance with the Buy

American Act. The amendment was adopted by voice vote.

With a quorum present, Mr. Roemer, Ranking Democratic Member of the Subcommittee on Energy and Environment moved that

the Committee report the bill, H.R. 1277, as amended, to the House

and that the staff prepare the legislative report and make technical

and conforming changes, and that the Chairman take all necessary

steps to bring the bill before the House for consideration. The motion was approved by voice vote.

Mr. Sensenbrenner, Chairman of the Committee on Science,

asked and received unanimous consent that Committee Members

have 2 subsequent calendar days in which to submit supplemental,

minority or additional views on the measure, and that, pursuant to

Clause 1 of Rule XX of the Rules of the House of Representatives,

the Committee authorize the Chairman to offer such motions as

may be necessary in the House to go to conference with the Senate

on H.R. 1277 or a similar Senate bill.

VI. SUMMARY OF MAJOR PROVISIONS OF THE BILL

H.R. 1277 authorizes appropriations for the civilian research, development, demonstration and commercial application activities of

the Department of Energy under the jurisdiction of the Committee

on Science.

• Authorizes $4,605,143,000 for the Department of Energy DOE Civilian Research and Development (R&D) for fiscal year 1998,

up $117,866,000—or 2.6%—over the FY 1997 comparable appropriated level of $4,487,277,000:

—Energy Supply Research and Development Activities—

$2,838,719,000.

—Energy Assets Acquisition—$43,582,000.

—General Science and Research Activities—$850,210,000.

—Science Assets Acquisition—$126,870,000.

—Fossil Energy Research and Development—$348,854,000.
14

—Energy Conservation Research and Development—$396,908,000.

• Authorizes $4,621,732,000 for Fiscal Year 1999, up $134,455,000—or 3.0%—over FY 1997.

—Energy Supply Research and Development Activities— $2,847,812,000. —Energy Assets Acquisition—$45,332,000.

—General Science and Research Activities—$941,000,000.

—Fossil Energy Research and Development—$348,185,000.

—Energy Conservation Research and Development— $439,403,000.

• Major Increases and Initiatives over 2 Years

—Increases Solar and Renewable Energy $86.7 million (including

the already authorized Hydrogen Research Program) over 1997

($282.8 million in FY 1998, an increase of $34.6—or 13.9%—

over FY 1997; and $300.3 million in FY 1999—an increase of

$52.1 million—or 21.0%—over FY 1997).

—Increases Energy Conservation R&D $100.5 million over FY 1997 ($396.9 million in FY 1998, an increase of $30.5 million—

or 8.3%—over FY 1997; and $439.4 million in FY 1999, an increase of $73.0 million—or 19.9%—over FY 1997).

—Increases Environmental Cleanup $222.8 million over FY 1997 ($682.4 million in each of FY 1998 and FY 1999, an annual increase of $111.4 million—or 19.5%—over FY 1997).

—Maintains Fossil Energy R&D ($348.9 million in FY 1998 and $348.2 million in FY 1999).

—Establishes a $305.0 million Clean Energy Science Initiative

over FY 1998 and FY 1999 for competitive, peer-reviewed research in the fields of solar and renewable energy, fossil energy

and energy efficiency. —Increases Fusion Energy Sciences $30.0 million over the Presi- dent’s request ($240.0 million in FY 1998 and FY 1999) for initiating and strengthening alternate fusion confinement concepts; increasing utilization of the remaining two major experiments (Doublet DIII-D at General Atomics and Alcator C-MOD

at MIT); strengthening and maintaining diversity in the theory

and computational programs; and strengthening universitybased basic fusion sciences and technology. —Increases Biological and Environmental Research $53.6 million over 1997 ($367.5 million in FY 1998, an increase of $21.3 million—or 6.1%—over FY 1997; and $378.6 million in FY 1999—

an increase of $32.3 million—or 9.3%—over FY 1997) for research on the long-term health and environmental consequences of energy production, development, and use, including the Human Genome Project. —Increases Basic Energy Sciences $76.1 million over 1997 ($659.8 million in FY 1998, an increase of $28.5 million—or

4.5%—over FY 1997; and $678.9 million in FY 1999—an increase of $47.6 million—or 7.5%—over FY 1997) to support

world-class, peer-reviewed fundamental energy-related research and to operate major scientific user facilities.

—Increases High Energy and Nuclear Physics $119.3 million

over 1997 ($850.2 million in FY 1998, an increase of $14.3 million—or 1.7%—over FY 1997; and $941.0 million in FY 1999—

an increase of $105.0 million—or 12.6%—over FY 1997) for re-
15

search on the nature of matter and energy at its most fundamental level.

• Taxpayer Savings: $180 million over 2 Years

—Cuts DOE R&D bureaucratic overhead by 10.2% over 2 years,

saving $70.8 million.

—Eliminates funding authorizations for 2 lower-priority Fossil

Energy programs, saving $31.5 million.

—Reduces funding for Nuclear Energy $77.6 million below FY

1997 ($173.2 million in FY 1998, a decrease of $25.5 million—

or 12.8%—below FY 1997; and $146.5 million in FY 1999, a decrease of $52.1 million—or 26.2%—below FY 1997), and eliminates funding authorizations for 5 lower-priority Nuclear Energy programs.

• Other Provisions

—Directs the Secretary of Energy to enter into appropriate arrangements with the National Academy of Sciences for reports

studying and evaluating the Department’s High Energy and

Nuclear Physics and Basic Energy Sciences programs, and an

evaluation of the cost to construct and operate the National

Spallation Neutron Source at alternative appropriate sites.

—Prohibits the use of funds in the Clean Coal Technology Reserve Fund to initiate or carry out a clean coal technology program based outside the United States.

—Prohibits the use of funds authorized by this Act, or any other

Act enacted before the date of the enactment of this Act, for

the Next Generation Internet, except for continuation of programs and acivities that were funded and carried out during

Fiscal Year 1997.

—Prohibits lobbying activities, limits appropriations for Fiscal

Years 1998 and 1999, and excludes from consideration for

grant agreements, for a period of five years, any person who

received funding for a project not subject to a competitive,

merit-based award process.

—Provides that if any funds authorized by this Act are subject

to a reprogramming action that requires notice to be provided

to the Appropriations Committees of the House and Senate,

then notice of such action shall concurrently be provided to the

House Committees on Science and Commerce, and to the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Also requires the Secretary of Energy to provide notice to the aforementioned House and Senate Committees, as well as the Appropriations Committees of each body, not later than fifteen

days before any major reorganization of any program, project,

or activity of the Department.

—Expresses the sense of Congress that the Department of Energy should (1) give high priority to correcting all 2-digit daterelated (‘‘Year 2000’’) problems in its computer systems to ensure that those systems continue to operate effectively in the

year 2000 and beyond; (2) assess immediately the extent of the

risk to its operations by the Year 2000 problem, and plan and

budget for achieving Year 2000 compliance for all of its mission-critical systems; and (3) develop contingency plans for

those systems that cannot be corrected.
16

—Requires any entity that is appropriated funds pursuant to this

act or amendments thereto, to comply with sections 2-4 of the

Act of March 3, 1933 (41 U.S.C. 10a-10c, popularly known as

the ‘‘Buy American Act’’); and that recipients of funds pursuant

to this act shall be notified of subsection (a)’s requirement of

compliance with the Buy American Act.

VII. SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS AND COMMITTEE VIEWS

Section 1. Short Title.

Section 1 cites the Act as the ‘‘Department of Energy Civilian Research and Development Authorization Act of 1997.’’

Section 2. Definitions.

Section 2 defines (1) ‘‘CERN’’ to mean the European Organization

for Nuclear Research; (2) ‘‘Department’’ to mean the Department of

Energy; (3) ‘‘Large Hadron Collider project’’ to mean the Large

Hadron Collider project at CERN; and (4) ‘‘Secretary’’ to mean the

Secretary of Energy.

Section 3. Authorization of Appropriations.

As shown in Table 1, H.R. 1277 authorizes $4,605,143,000 for

Fiscal Year 1998 and $4,621,732,000 for Fiscal Year 1999 for the

Department of Energy’s civilian research, development, demonstration, and commercial application activities under the jurisdiction of

the Committee on Science. In addition to these sums, $25,000,000

for Fiscal Year 1998 and $30,000,000 for Fiscal Year 1999 are authorized for Hydrogen Research by Public Law 104-261, the Hydrogen Futures Act of 1996. Including the already authorized funding

for Hydrogen Research, the Department’s civilian research, development, demonstration, and commercial application activities are

authorized a total of $4,630,143,000 for Fiscal Year 1998—an increase of $126,276,000, or 2.8 percent above the Fiscal Year 1997

comparable appropriation of $4,503,867,000—and a total of

$4,651,732,000 for Fiscal Year 1999—an increase of $148,865,000,

or 3.3 percent above Fiscal Year 1997.

Also shown in Table 1 is the difference between the Committee’s

recommended authorization for Fiscal Year 1998 and the Fiscal

Year 1997 comparable appropriation, and the difference between

the Committee’s recommended authorization for Fiscal Year 1999

and the Fiscal Year 1998 recommendation.

[Table 1 follows:]
17
18

Section 3(a)—Energy Supply Research and Development Activities.

The Energy Supply Research and Development Activities appropriation account funds 13 line items: (1) Solar and Renewable Resources Technologies; (2) Nuclear Energy; (3) Uranium Programs;

(4) Environment, Safety and Health; (5) Biological and Environmental Research; (6) Fusion Energy Sciences; (7) Basic Energy

Sciences; (8) Computational and Technology Research; (9) Energy

Research Analysis; (10) Energy Research-Energy Supply Program

Direction; (11) Environmental and Waste Management (Non-Defense); (12) Technical Information Management; and (13) Field Operations.

As shown in Table 2, which summarizes the Committee’s authorization recommendations for Fiscal Years 1998 and 1999, H.R.

1277 authorizes $2,838,719,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and

$2,847,812,000 for Fiscal Year 1999 for Energy Supply Research

and Development Activities. In addition to these sums, $25,000,000

for Fiscal Year 1998 and $30,000,000 for Fiscal Year 1999 are authorized for Hydrogen Research by Public Law 104-261, the Hydrogen Futures Act of 1996. Including the already authorized funding

for Hydrogen Research, Energy Supply Research and Development

Activities are authorized a total of $2,863,718,000 for Fiscal Year

1998—an increase of $194,898,000, or 7.3 percent above the Fiscal

Year 1997 comparable appropriation of $2,668,821,000—and a total

of $2,877,812,000 for Fiscal Year 1999—an increase of

$208,991,000, or 7.8 percent above the Fiscal Year 1997 comparable appropriation.

[Table 2 follows:]
19
20

Subsection 3(a)(1)—Solar and Renewable Resources Technologies.

The Committee’s authorization recommendations for Solar and

Renewable Energy Technologies for Fiscal Years 1998 and 1999 are

shown in Table 3. H.R. 1277 authorizes $272,820,000 (reduced by

$15,000,000 to reflect the use of prior year balances) for Fiscal Year

1998 and $270,342,000 for Fiscal Year 1999 for Solar and Renewable Energy Technologies. In addition to these sums, $25,000,000

for Fiscal Year 1998 and $30,000,000 for Fiscal Year 1999 are authorized for Hydrogen Research by Public Law 104-261, the Hydrogen Futures Act of 1996. Including the already authorized funding

for Hydrogen Research, Solar and Renewable Energy Technologies

are authorized a total of $297,820,000 (reduced by $15,000,000 to

reflect the use of prior year balances) for Fiscal Year 1998—an increase of $34,600,000, or 13.9 percent above the Fiscal Year 1997

comparable appropriation of $248,220,000—and a total of

$300,342,000 for Fiscal Year 1999—an increase of $52,122,000, or

21.0 percent above the Fiscal Year 1997 comparable appropriation.

[Table 3 follows:]
21
22

As shown in Table 3 and included in bill language are the following amounts:

(A) $2,150,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $2,150,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Solar Building Technology Research;

(B) $63,900,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $64,900,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Photovoltaic Energy Systems;

(C) $18,170,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $13,620,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Solar Thermal Energy Systems;

(D) $28,835,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $28,190,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Biopower/Biofuels Energy Systems;

(E) $29,500,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $18,140,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Wind Energy Systems;

(F) $2,800,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $500,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for the National Renewable Energy Laboratory;

(G) $19,518,000 for each of Fiscal Years 1998 and 1999 for

Geothermal Electric Research and Development and Deployment;

(H) $1,000,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 for Hydropower;

(I) $44,500,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $36,500,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Electric Energy Systems and Storage, of which—

(i) $8,000,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 for Electric and Magnetic

Fields Research and Development;

(ii) $32,500,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $32,500,000 for Fiscal Year 1999 for High-Temperature Superconductivity Research

and Development; and

(iii) $4,000,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $4,000,000 for Fiscal Year 1999 for Energy Storage Systems;

(J) $50,000,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $75,000,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for a Solar and Renewable Energy Science Initiative, to

be managed by the Director of the Office of Energy Research, in

consultation with the Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and

Renewable Energy on the goals and priorities of the Initiative, for

grants to be competitively awarded and subject to peer review for

research related to solar and renewable energy; and

(K) $12,447,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $11,824,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Program Direction.

The Committee authorization recommendations for Solar and Renewable Resources Technologies contained in bill language for Fiscal Years 1998 and 1999 do not provide authorization of appropriations for the Renewable Energy Production Incentive Program, the

International Solar Energy Program, Solar Technology Transfer,

Geothermal Heat Pump Deployment, Renewable Indian Energy Resources, and Electric Energy Systems and Storage Climate Challenge. In addition, the Committee authorization recommendations

contained in bill language for Fiscal Year 1999 do not provide authorization of appropriations for Hydropower or for Electric and

Magnetic Fields Research and Development.

Committee Views—Solar and Renewable Energy Science Initiative.

The Committee strongly supports research on alternative energy

sources—and particularly research on solar and renewable energy—and believes much more emphasis needs to be placed on

basic and applied research in these areas. For example, in testi-
23

mony before the Subcommittee on Energy and Environment on

March 19, 1997, the Department’s Assistant Secretary for Energy

Efficiency and Renewable Energy estimated that the Department’s

funding for basic research in energy efficiency and solar and renewable energy programs accounts for only five percent of the overall

funding for these programs. In order to restore a more appropriate

balance between research and development activities in these programs, the Committee recommendation establishes a Solar and Renewable Energy Science Initiative to be funded at $50,000,000 in

Fiscal Year 1998 and at $75,000,000 in Fiscal Year 1999 for grants

to be competitively awarded and subject to peer review for research

related to solar and renewable energy—including research related

to photovoltaics, solar thermal, biopower/biofuels, wind, geothermal, hydrogen, and electric energy systems and storage. The

Initiative funds are to be managed by the Department’s Director of

the Office of Energy Research, in consultation with the Assistant

Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy on the goals

and priorities of the Initiative. The Committee expects that the majority of the Initiative’s grants will be for university-based and private-sector laboratory research and emphasizes that the Initiative’s

funds are to be available only for competitively-awarded and peerreviewed grants, and are not be used to fund either National Laboratory or in-house research unless such funds have been competitively-awarded and peer-reviewed in competitions that solicit applications from all types of research performers.

Subsection 3(a)(2)—Nuclear Energy.

The Committee’s authorization recommendations for Nuclear Energy for Fiscal Years 1998 and 1999 are shown in Table 4. H.R.

1277 authorizes $173,166,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and

$146,540,000 for Fiscal Year 1999 for Nuclear Energy.

[Table 4 follows:]
24
25

As shown in Table 4 and included in bill language are the following amounts:

(A) $47,000,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $43,350,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Advanced Radioisotope Power Systems; (B) $9,500,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $8,809,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Oak Ridge Landlord; (C) $3,217,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $3,217,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Test Reactor Area Landlord; (D) $2,000,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 for Advanced Test Reactor

Fusion Irradiations; (E) $6,000,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $6,000,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for University Nuclear Science and Reactor Support; (F) $70,535,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $60,000,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Termination Costs; (G) $20,854,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $11,807,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Isotope Support; and (H) $14,060,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $13,357,000 for Fiscal Year 1999 for Program Direction.

The Committee authorization recommendations for Nuclear Energy contained in bill language for Fiscal Years 1998 and 1999 do

not provide authorization of appropriations for the Light Water Reactor (consistent with the Department’s Fiscal Year 1998 budget

request) or the Nuclear Energy Security Programs. Also, the Committee authorization recommendations contained in bill language

for Fiscal Year 1999 do not provide authorization of appropriations

for Advanced Test Reactor Fusion Irradiations (consistent with the

Department’s Fiscal Year 1998 budget request justification materials). In addition, Section 4 provides that no funds authorized by

this Act for Fiscal Years 1998 and 1999 may be use for the following 5 Nuclear Energy programs, except to fulfill contractual obligations: (1) Nuclear Energy Advanced Light Water Reactor; (2) Nuclear Energy Commercial Reactor; (3) Nuclear Energy Security; (4)

Nuclear Energy Termination Costs Gas Turbine-Modular Helium

Reactor; and (5) Nuclear Energy Termination Costs Advanced

Light Water Reactor.

Committee Views—Advanced Light Water Reactor.

The Advanced Light Water Reactor Program received no further

authorization in the bill. The Committee believes that the Department has most likely received sufficient appropriations in prior

years to meet all of its obligations in this Program.

Committee Views—Nuclear Energy Security Program.

The Nuclear Energy Security (NES) Program is not authorized in

the bill. Although some aspects of this program appear to be an appropriate and desirable avenue for federal R&D, the Department of

Energy has not provided the needed information to adequately review the scope and substance of this proposed program. Furthermore, the Committee is concerned about possible overlap with activities under the purview of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

The Committee remains committed to efforts to increase reactor

safety and minimize the production of spent nuclear fuel. Thus, the

Department is encouraged to present a more detailed, and perhaps

revised, outline of the size, scope, and goals of the NES program.
26

Committee Views—University Nuclear Science and Reactor

Support Program.

The Committee’s authorization recommendations include

$6,000,000 in each of Fiscal Years 1998 and 1999 for the University Nuclear Science and Reactor Support Program. These amounts

are consistent with the Department’s Fiscal Year 1998 budget request and represents a 50 percent increase above the Fiscal Year

1997 appropriation of $4,000,000. The Committee recognizes that

in order to maintain the capability in the U.S. to conduct research,

address pressing environmental challenges, and preserve the nuclear energy option, the ability to adequately educate and train personnel in nuclear sciences and technology is vital. The Committee

also recognizes that our universities and university research reactors play a major role in providing this education and training.

Subsection 3(a)(3)—Uranium Programs.

The Committee’s authorization recommendations for Uranium

Programs are $73,625,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $76,828,000 for

Fiscal Year 1999 as shown in Table 2. These recommendations assume a 5 percent reduction in Program Direction in Fiscal Year

1998 relative to the Fiscal Year 1997 level, and an additional 5 percent reduction in Program Direction in Fiscal Year 1999 relative to

Fiscal Year 1998.

Subsection 3(a)(4)—Environment, Safety and Health.

The Committee’s authorization recommendations for Environment, Safety and Health are $107,870,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and

$100,237,000 for Fiscal Year 1999 as shown in Table 2. These recommendations assume a 5 percent reduction in Program Direction

in Fiscal Year 1998 relative to the Fiscal Year 1997 level, and an

additional 5 percent reduction in Program Direction in Fiscal Year

1999 relative to Fiscal Year 1998. In addition, the Fiscal Year 1999

recommendation assumes, consistent with the Department’s Fiscal

Year budget request justification materials, no funding for State

Health Agreements.

Subsection 3(a)(5)—Biological and Environmental Research.

The Committee’s authorization recommendations for Biological

and Environmental Research are $367,538,000 for Fiscal Year 1998

and $378,546,000 for Fiscal Year 1999 as shown in Table 2. These

amounts include $1,000,000 in each of Fiscal Year 1998 and 1999

for the U.S.-Mexico Foundation for Science for research on biosciences and the environment.

As shown in Table 2 and included in bill language are the following amounts:

(A) $157,037,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $161,748,000 for

Fiscal Year 1999 for Life Sciences;

(B) $100,954,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $103,983,000 for

Fiscal Year 1999 for Environmental Processes;

(C) $66,435,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $68,428,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Environmental Remediation;
27

(D) $43,112,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $44,405,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Medical Applications and Measurement Sciences;

and

(E) $1,000,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $1,000,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for the United States-Mexico Foundation for Science for

research on biosciences and the environment.

Committee View—United States-Mexico Foundation for

Science.

The non-governmental United States-Mexico Foundation for

Science was established in 1992 by the Governments of Mexico and

the United States with the strong support of the research and business communities of both countries. Each country provided equal financial support to the Foundation (a total of $4 million).

The Foundation’s mission is to contribute to the technological

and scientific strength of the two countries through fostering relevant research, training and human resource development, and

promoting collaborative and comprehensive solutions of common

problems.

The Foundation is uniquely structured to accomplish this mission. The Foundation’s Board of Governors consists of high level

and influential members from the Mexican Academy of Scientific

Investigation, the National Academy of Medicine, and the Academy

of Engineering; and the U.S. National Academies of Science and of

Engineering, and the Institute of Medicines. In addition, there are

representatives of both Mexican and American businesses who are

members of the Board.

The Foundation is binational in structure and has the ability to

be flexible in selection of priority areas which are defined as being

of mutual interest and potential benefit to both countries. The

Foundation has a proven track record of supporting high-quality research projects selected with a peer-review system. The Foundation

also currently supports a visiting scientist program, a Hewlett

Foundation training program in science and technology policy and

graduate and summer scholarship programs.

Subsection 3(a)(6)—Fusion Energy Sciences.

The Committee’s authorization recommendations for Fusion Energy Sciences are $240,000,000 for each of Fiscal Years 1998 and

1999, of which $5,000,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $5,000,000 for

Fiscal Year 1999 is for General Plasma Science. These recommendations are increases of $15,000,000 for each Fiscal Year

over the Department’s Fiscal Year 1998 request of $225,000,000.

Committee Views—Fusion Energy Sciences.

The Committee’s recommendation provides an additional

$15,000,000 million above the Department’s Fiscal Year 1998 request in each of Fiscal Years 1998 and 1999 for the Fusion Energy

Sciences program with the intent that these dollars be used for: (1)

initiating and strengthening work in alternate confinement concepts; (2) increasing utilization of the remaining two major experiments; (3) strengthening and maintaining diversity in the theory

and computational programs; and (4) strengthening basic fusion

science and technology in the university.
28

Committee Views—International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER).

The Committee remains strongly supportive of U.S. participation

in international scientific endeavors. In this context, the Committee supports U.S. participation through the completion of the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) Engineering

and Design Activities (EDA) in July, 1998. However, the Committee notes that to date, there is no official indication from the ITER

project group itself or the participating parties what the end of

EDA might bring in terms of an agreement to go forward to construction. At the same time, there are indications there may be

some interim period of as much as 2 to 3 years before a final design

and construction agreement is at hand. While the Committee applauds the Department’s call for study of the ITER project by the

National Academy of Sciences, it remains concerned that there is

seemingly no plan to address this interim period.

Therefore, the Committee asks that by February, 1998, the Department of Energy submit a plan to Congress that assumes level

funding for the program and which addresses the following issues:

(1) What, if anything, is the appropriate role, if any, of the U.S. fusion community in the ITER project after completion of the EDA

and prior to a construction agreement?; (2) Given the importance

of participation in the international fusion program to the U.S. fusion program, in what other international activities should the U.S.

seek to participate during this interim period?; and (3) What elements of the U.S. domestic fusion program should be strengthened

and/or maintained in order to ensure that the U.S. has maximum

impact on and leverage with the international fusion program in

future years?

Subsection 3(a)(7)—Basic Energy Sciences.

The Committee’s authorization recommendations for Basic Energy Sciences are $659,182,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and

$678,888,000 for Fiscal Year 1999 as shown in Table 2.

As shown in Table 2 and included in bill language are the following amounts:

(A) $391,047,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $402,060,000 for

Fiscal Year 1999 for Materials Sciences, of which not to exceed

$5,000,000 for each such Fiscal Year may be used for the High

Flux Beam Reactor at Brookhaven National Laboratory;

(B) $199,933,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $205,931,000 for

Fiscal Year 1999 for Chemical Sciences;

(C) $41,371,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $42,612,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Engineering and Geosciences; and

(D) $27,461,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $28,285,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Energy Biosciences.

Committee Views—High Flux Beam Reactor and Groundwater Contamination at Brookhaven National Laboratory.

The High Flux Beam Reactor (HFBR) at the Department’s

Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL)—a world-class research reactor that provides beams of neutrons for scientists from around
29

the world in disciplines ranging from biology and chemistry to

physics and materials science—is currently funded at nearly

$24,000,000 in Fiscal Year 1997 and the Department’s Fiscal Year

1998 budget request includes $25,383,000 for the facility.

The HFBR was shut down in December, 1996, for routine maintenance. Subsequently, in a memo issued to employees on January

17, 1997, BNL notified its staff that routine monitoring by the Laboratory had recently found tritium in the groundwater at a concentration level of about two-and-a-half times the New York State

Drinking Water Standard. BNL also announced that the HFBR

would remain shut down until the situation was satisfactorily understood by both the Department and the Laboratory.

In spite of a continuing series of press releases issued by BNL,

the Department, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA) and assurances by the BNL, the Department, EPA, and the

Suffolk County Department of Health Services that the tritium

contamination poses no health threat, the Department announced

on February 24, 1997, that it would connect 500 more homes near

BNL to public water at a cost of $6,200,000 by providing a grant

to the Suffolk County Water Authority. These hook-ups are in addition to those already offered to some 800 homeowners. The Department has yet to identify the source of funds to be used to pay for

the hook-ups.

The Committee recommendation for Materials Sciences includes

bill language limiting the amount authorized to be appropriated for

the HFBR to no more than $5,000,000 in each of Fiscal Years 1998

and 1999. This action was taken to express the Committee’s frustration with the Department’s handling of the situation at BNL

and the Department’s reluctance to be forthcoming about the cost

of the cleanup, the amount of research funds it intends to reprogram to pay for the cleanup, and the rationale for spending

$6,200,000 of taxpayers’ funds for water hook-ups to public water

when the Laboratory, the Department, the EPA, and the Suffolk

County Department of Health Services are all on record that the

tritium contamination poses no health threat. The Committee expects the Department to fully explain its actions before further

funding will be provided beyond the $5,000,000 contained in bill

language.

Subsection 3(a)(8)—Computational and Technology Research.

The Committee’s authorization recommendations for Computational and Technology Research are $140,907,000 for Fiscal Year

1998 and $145,134,000 for Fiscal Year 1999 as shown in Table 2.

As shown in Table 2 and included in bill language are the following amounts:

(A) $117,490,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $121,014,000 for

Fiscal Year 1999 for Mathematical, Information, and Computational Sciences;

(B) $15,829,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $16,304,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Laboratory Technology Research; and

(C) $7,588,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $7,816,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Advanced Energy Projects.
30

Committee Views—Next Generation Internet.

Section 7 prohibits the use of funds authorized by this Act, or

any other Act enacted before the date of the enactment of this Act,

for the Next Generation Internet (NGI), except for continuation of

programs and acivities that were funded and carried out during

Fiscal Year 1997. Consequently, the recommended authorizations

for Mathematical, Information, and Computational Sciences for

each of Fiscal Years 1998 and 1999 have been reduced by

$35,000,000. This provision ensures that the Committee will have

the opportunity to review and authorize NGI, while at the same

time allowing for minimal on-going research in that program. The

progression of our country’s computer networking technology plays

a vital role in our nation’s continued leadership in scientific research. The Committee, however, feels it necessary to develop more

of a record before addressing funding for NGI, and is working with

the Administration to develop a plan concerning NGI. The Committee expects to hold hearings on NGI in the future to better understand how it will further the goals of advancing network technologies.

Subsection 3(a)(9)—Energy Research Analysis.

The Committee’s authorization recommendations for Energy Research Analysis are $1,500,000 for each of Fiscal Years 1998 and

1999, consistent with the Department’s Fiscal Year 1998 budget request.

Subsection 3(a)(10)—Energy Research-Energy Supply Program Direction.

The Committee’s authorization recommendations for Energy Research-Energy Supply Program Direction are $29,070,000 for Fiscal

Year 1998 and $27,434,000 for Fiscal Year 1999. These recommendations assume a 5 percent reduction in Program Direction

in Fiscal Year 1998 relative to the Fiscal Year 1997 level, and an

additional 5 percent reduction in Program Direction in Fiscal Year

1999 relative to Fiscal Year 1998.

Subsection 3(a)(11)—Environmental Restoration and Waste Management (Non-Defense).

The Committee’s authorization recommendations for Environmental Restoration and Waste Management (Non-Defense) are

$682,387,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $682,387,000 for Fiscal Year

1999 as shown in Table 2.

As shown in Table 2 and included in bill language are the following amounts:

(A) $457,625,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $457,625,000 for

Fiscal Year 1999 for Environmental Restoration;

(B) $153,004,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $153,004,000 for

Fiscal Year 1999 for Waste Management; and

(C) $71,758,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $71,758,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Nuclear Material and Facility Stabilization.
31

Committee Views—Environmental Restoration and Waste

Management (Non-Defense).

The Committee’s authorization recommendations of $682,387,000

for each of Fiscal Years 1998 and FY 1999 represent an increase

of $111,436,000, or 19.5 percent, over the Fiscal Year 1997 comparable appropriation of $570,951,000. The majority of this increase is for accelerated cleanup activities at 46 Formerly Utilized

Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP) sites in 14 States with

a goal of completing cleanup by 2002. These are sites that are Department-owned or Department-leased, or are at privately-owned

sites where radioactive contamination remains from the early years

of the Nation’s Atomic Energy program, or from commercial operations that Congress authorized the Department to remedy. The

Committee endorses the accelerated cleanup of FUSRAP sites and

provided the requested funding level. However, the Committee is

also aware that the Department will need to work with affected

communities and regulators to meet the accelerated cleanup goal

and to implement cleanup strategies. Consequently, the Committee

intends to closely monitor these cleanup activities and those activities’ resource requirements.

Subsection 3(a)(12)—Technical Information Management.

The Committee’s authorization recommendations for Technical

Information Management are $11,554,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and

$11,152,000 for Fiscal Year 1999. These recommendations assume

a 5 percent reduction in Program Direction in Fiscal Year 1998 relative to the Fiscal Year 1997 level, and an additional 5 percent reduction in Program Direction in Fiscal Year 1999 relative to Fiscal

Year 1998.

Subsection 3(a)(13)—Field Operations.

The Committee’s authorization recommendations for Field Oper- ations are $93,480,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $87,434,000 for

Fiscal Year 1999. These recommendations assume a 5 percent reduction in Fiscal Year 1998 relative to the Fiscal Year 1997 level,

and an additional 5 percent reduction in Fiscal Year 1999 relative

to Fiscal Year 1998.

Section 3(b)—Energy Assets Acquisition.

The Energy Assets Acquisition appropriation account is a new account created for construction projects previously funded within the

Energy Supply Research and Development appropriation. The Department’s Fiscal Year budget request includes full up-front funding of $88,914,000 for 2 new and 11 ongoing projects.

As shown in Table 5, which summarizes the Committee’s authorization recommendations for Fiscal Years 1998 and 1999, H.R.

1277 authorizes $43,582,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $45,332,000

for Fiscal Year 1999 for Energy Assets Acquisition. The total provided for the two Fiscal Years is equivalent to the $88,914,000 requested for Fiscal Year 1998, but has been spread out over two

years in a manner consistent with each project’s obligation requirements.

In addition to meeting budget constraints, the Committee did not

provide the full up-front funding as requested for Energy Assets
32

1Department of Energy: Opportunity to Improve Management of Major System Acquisitions

(GAO/RCED-97-17, Nov. 26, 1996).

Acquisition because of the Department’s poor track record of successfully completing construction projects within originally projected schedules and costs. This record was documented by the

General Accounting Office in a November, 1996, report1 on the Department’s management of its major system acquisitions. The GAO

found that from 1980 through 1996, DOE conducted 80 projects

that it designated as major system acquisitions. Thirty-one of the

projects were terminated prior to completion, after expenditures of

over $10 billion. Only 15 of the projects were completed, and most

of them were finished behind schedule and with cost overruns. Further, 3 of the 15 projects have not yet been used for their intended

purpose. The remaining 34 projects are ongoing, many with substantial cost increases and ‘‘schedule slippages.’’

The GAO believes there are four key factors underlying the cost

overruns, schedule slippage, and terminations of the Department’s

most critical projects. These are unclear or changing missions; the

incremental funding of projects; a flawed system of incentives both

for Department’s employees and contractors; and a lack of sufficient Department’s personnel with the appropriate skills to effectively oversee contractors’ operations. On the positive side, according to GAO, the Department is implementing several initiatives

that could help improve its overall management as well as the

management of individual major system acquisitions, and GAO believes that their implementation offers the Department an excellent opportunity to address the key factors. The Committee will

closely monitor the Department’s implementation of these initiatives.

[Table 5 follows:]
33
34

As shown in Table 5 and included in bill language are the following amounts:

(1) for Solar and Renewable Resources Technology, $2,200,000 for

Fiscal Year 1998 for completion of Project 96-E-100, Field Test

Laboratory Building Renovation and Expansion, National Renewable Energy Laboratory;

(2) for Nuclear Energy, $4,425,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and

$6,425,000 for Fiscal Year 1999 for completion of Project 95-E-201,

Test Reactor Area Fire and Life Safety Improvements, Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory;

(3) for Uranium Programs—

(A) $400,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $5,200,000 for fiscal

1999 for completion of Project 98-U-200, DUF6 Cylinder Storage

Yards, K-25 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee; and

(B) $6,000,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $10,700,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for completion of Project 96-U-201, DUF6 Cylinder Storage Yards, Paducah, Kentucky, Gaseous Diffusion Plant;

(4) for Basic Energy Sciences, $7,000,000 for Fiscal Year 1998

and $4,000,000 for Fiscal Year 1999 for completion of Project 96-

E-300, Combustion Research Facility, Phase II, Sandia National

Laboratories, Livermore, California;

(5) for Multiprogram Energy Laboratories-Facilities Support,

$21,260,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $19,007,000 for Fiscal Year

1999 for—

(A) Project MEL-001, Multiprogram Energy Laboratories Infrastructure Project, Various Locations, $7,259,000 for Fiscal Year

1998 and $12,161,000 for Fiscal Year 1999;

(B) Project 96-E-333, Multiprogram Energy Laboratories Upgrades, Various Locations, $5,273,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and

$268,000 for Fiscal Year 1999;

(C) Project 95-E-308, Sanitary System Modifications, Phase II,

Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, New York, $568,000 for

Fiscal Year 1998;

(D) Project 95-E-307, Fire Safety Improvements-Phase III, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Illinois, $718,000 for Fiscal

Year 1998;

(E) Project 95-E-301, Central Heating Plant RehabilitationPhase I, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Illinois,

$3,442,000 for Fiscal Year 1998; and

(F) Project 94-E-363, Roofing Improvements, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, $4,000,000 for Fiscal

Year 1998 and $6,578,000 for Fiscal Year 1999; and

(6) for Environmental Restoration and Waste Management (NonDefense), $2,297,000 for Fiscal Year 1998, of which—

(A) $1,900,000 for completion of Project 94-E-602, Bethel Federal Facility Agreement Upgrade, Oak Ridge National Laboratory;

and

(B) $397,000 for completion of Project 93-E-900, Long-Term

Storage of TMI-2 Fuel; Idaho National Energy and Environmental

Laboratory, Idaho.
35

Section 3(c)—General Science and Research Activities.

The General Science and Research Activities appropriation account funds the High Energy and Nuclear Physics programs, which

provide insight into the nature of matter and energy, and support

large, world-class scientific particle accelerators and detectors for

physics research. The Department funds approximately 90 percent

of all Federal research in High Energy and Nuclear Physics, which

is conducted by more than 3,000 researchers and over 1,000 graduate students from more than 100 universities and the National

Laboratories.

The major High Energy Physics facilities are the Alternating

Gradient Synchrotron at BNL, the Tevatron at the Fermi National

Accelerator (Fermilab)—with both fixed and colliding beam facilities—and the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center (SLAC). Two

large construction projects are nearing completion, the B-Factory at

SLAC and the Fermilab Main Injector, and the program is negotiating with CERN about U.S. contributions to the Large Hadron

Collider (LHC) accelerator and detectors. The program also supports the technology base required to develop the advanced concepts and technologies for new high energy physics facilities.

The Nuclear Physics program conducts research activities to understand the structure of atomic nuclei and the fundamental forces

required to hold nuclei together. The experimental research program supports particle accelerators and several other research facilities located at National Laboratories and universities. A Nuclear

Theory program complements experimental activities. The program

supports the operation and maintenance of facilities and the construction of new facilities. Currently under construction is the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) at BNL, a colliding beam accelerator that will study nuclear matter as it undergoes a phase transition to a plasma of gluons and quarks.

Table 6 summarizes the Committee’s authorization recommendations for General Science and Research Activities for Fiscal Years

1998 and 1999. For Fiscal Year 1998, H.R. 1277 authorizes

$865,210,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 (reduced by $15,000,000 to reflect the use of prior year balances), for General Science and Research Activities including $599,185,000 for High Energy Physics,

$256,525,000 for Nuclear Physics, and $9,500,000 for Program Direction. And for Fiscal Year 1999, H.R. 1277 authorizes

$941,000,000 including $607,645,000 for High Energy Physics,

$324,330,000 for Nuclear Physics, and $9,025,000 for Program Direction.

[Table 6 follows:]
36
37

Finally, Subsection 3(c) provides that none of the funds authorized for High Energy Physics by this subsection or Subsection 3(d)

may be used for the LHC project, unless the Secretary, in consultation with the Director of the National Science Foundation (NSF),

has transmitted to the Committee on Science of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

of the Senate a report on the impacts of such funding on the operations and viability of United States high energy and nuclear physics facilities.

As a result of the restrictive language with regard to the LHC

project, the Committee recommendation for High Energy Physics

for Fiscal Year 1998 includes a reduction of $35,000,000 from the

amounts requested by the Department for the LHC, and for Fiscal

Year 1999 includes a reduction of $65,000,000 from the amounts

requested by the Department for the LHC. The Committee recommendations for each of Fiscal Years 1998 and 1999 also provide

an additional $10,000,000 to meet critical program needs.

Committee Views—High Energy Physics Funding.

Passage of the amendment offered by Representative Ehlers during the Full Science Committee markup of H.R. 1277 deleted the

provision in the bill, as introduced, that specified that the Stanford

Linear Accelerator Center (SLAC) receive a total budget of

$141,594,000 in each of Fiscal Years 1998 and 1999. In so doing,

the Committee determined that no High Energy Physics center or

laboratory would be authorized at a specific level of funding in H.R.

1277. For purposes of clarification, however, it may be important

to stress that H.R. 1277, as reported, does not in any way terminate the funding for SLAC or prejudice the annual funding process

for the High Energy Physics program in regard to any particular

center or laboratory.

In this regard, the Committee is nevertheless concerned that,

after a large expenditure of funds to build and maintain SLAC and

other High Energy Physics user facilities, the Department has not

committed sufficient funds for their adequate operation and utilization. The Committee urges the Department to support the domestic

High Energy Physics facilities so that taxpayers can receive an appropriate return on their investment.

Committee Views—Large Hadron Collider Project.

CERN, located in Geneva, Switzerland, has initiated the LHC,

which is estimated to cost about $6.0 billion (using U.S. costing

methods). LHC will consist of a 7 trillion electron volt (TeV) on 7

TeV proton-proton colliding beams facility—7 times the energy of

the Tevatron at Fermilab—to be constructed in the existing Large

Electron-Positron (LEP) machine tunnel (LEP will be removed).

On February 3, 1997, representatives of the Department of Energy, NSF and CERN initialed a preliminary agreement for U.S.

participation in the LHC. The Department plans to contribute

$450.0 million to the LHC accelerator and detectors over the period

FY 1996 through FY 2004, with an additional amount of approximately $80 million being planned by the NSF for the LHC detectors. The Department’s LHC contribution is tentatively broken

down as follows: $250.0 million for detectors and $200.0 million for
38

the accelerator (including $90 million in direct purchases by CERN

from U.S. vendors and $110 million for fabrication of components

by U.S. laboratories). Under the agreement, the DOE accelerator

effort will focus on the design of the interaction regions and their

integration into the LHC accelerator.

The Department provided LHC funding in FY 1996 ($6.0 million)

and in Fiscal Year 1997 ($15.0 million) for preliminary research

and development, design and engineering work on the subsystems

and components being proposed for inclusion in the agreement with

CERN. The Fiscal Year 1998 request is $35.0 million to support

continuation of these research and development and design efforts,

and to initiate fabrication of subsystems and components. The Department is also requesting the remaining $394.0 million as an advance appropriation, with $65.0 million available in Fiscal Year

1999; $70.0 million available in Fiscal Year 2000; $70.0 million

available in Fiscal Year 2001; $70.0 million available in Fiscal Year

2002; $65.0 million available in Fiscal Year 2003; and $54.0 million

available in Fiscal Year 2004.

While supportive of U.S. participation in principle, the Committee nevertheless has four major concerns that the proposed agreement initialed by CERN, NSF and the Department may not be in

the Nation’s best interest.

First, under the proposed agreement, the U.S. is contributing directly to the construction of the LHC accelerator, which is contrary

to the tradition that the project host assume the full accelerator

construction cost and that direct project contributions be limited to

detectors. While the Committee has no objection to changing tradition per se, it believes that the Department should extract a like

commitment from the CERN Member States that a similar procedure will be used when the next High Energy Physics facility is

constructed anywhere in the world and that these Member States

would make a similar contribution to that facility.

Second, under the proposed agreement the U.S. has no formal

management role in the project even with a significant commitment of resources that exceeds that of a number of CERN Member

States.

Third, there is concern that several CERN Member States are reducing their contributions to CERN at a time when the U.S. is

being asked to contribute a significant level of resources.

And fourth, there is concern that the level of resources that the

Department proposes committing to the LHC may negatively impact the utilization of the Nation’s current portfolio of High Energy

and Nuclear Physics facilities.

While H.R. 1277 does not prevent the Department from committing resources to the LHC, it does require the Secretary, in consultation with the Director of NSF, to provide to the Committee on

Science of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate a report on the impacts

of such funding on the operations and viability of United States

High Energy and Nuclear Physics facilities. The Committee intends

to support this restriction until the Department adequately addresses the aforementioned concerns.
39

Section 3(d)—Science Assets Acquisition.

The Science Assets Acquisition appropriation account is a new

account created for construction projects previously funded within

the General Science and Research Activities appropriation. The Department’s Fiscal Year budget request includes full up-front funding of $126,870,000 for 2 new and 3 ongoing projects.

As shown in Table 7, which summarizes the Committee’s authorization recommendations for Fiscal Years 1998 and 1999, H.R.

1277 authorizes $126,870,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 for Science Assets Acquisition. Although the Committee has concerns about providing full up-front funding for construction projects given the Department’s spotty track record on managing its construction

projects, the Committee is more confident that the proposed

projects—which date back as far as 1991—can be completed as proposed with the projected budgets and schedules.

[Table 7 follows:]
40
41

As shown in Table 7 and included in bill language are the following amounts:

(1) $50,850,000 for High Energy Physics, including—

(A) $30,950,000 for completion of Project 92-G-302, Fermilab

Main Injector, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Illinois;

(B) $9,400,000 for completion of Project 97-G-303, Stanford

Linear Accelerator Center Master Station Upgrade, California;

(C) $5,500,000 for architectural engineering and technical design work for Project 98-G-304, Neutrinos at the Main Injector,

Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Illinois; and

(D) $5,000,000 for completion of Project 98-G-305, Fermilab CZero Area Experimental Hall, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Illinois; and

(2) $76,020,000 for Nuclear Physics, for completion of Project 91-

G-300, Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, New York.

Section 3(e)—Fossil Energy Research and Development.

The Committee’s authorization recommendations for Fossil Energy Research and Development are shown in Table 8, which summarizes the Committee’s authorization recommendations for Fiscal

Years 1998 and 1999. H.R. 1277 authorizes $348,854,000 for Fiscal

Year 1998 and $348,185,000 for Fiscal Year 1999 for Fossil Energy

Research and Development.

[Table 8 follows:]
42
43

As shown in Table 8 and included in bill language are the following amounts:

(1) $105,831,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $104,206,000 for Fiscal Year 1999 for Coal operating expenses, including—

(A) $5,064,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $5,064,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Coal Preparation; (B) $5,816,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $5,816,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Direct Liquefaction; (C) $4,223,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $4,223,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Indirect Liquefaction; (D) $741,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $741,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Advanced Clean Fuels Research Advanced Research

and Environmental Technology; (E) $5,462,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $5,462,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Advanced Pulverized Coal-Fired Powerplant; (F) $10,927,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $10,927,000 for Fiscal Year 1999 for Indirect Fired Cycle; (G) $22,342,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $20,717,000 for Fiscal Year 1999 for High-Efficiency-Integrated Gasification Combined

Cycle; (H) $17,875,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $17,875,000 for

Fiscal Year 1999 for High-Efficiency Pressurized Fluidized Bed;

(I) $9,734,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $9,734,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Advanced Clean/Efficient Power Systems Advanced

Research and Environmental Technology; and (J) $23,647,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $23,647,000 for Fiscal Year 1999 for Advanced Research and Technology Development.

(2) $47,419,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $46,464,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 Oil Technology operating expenses, including—

(A) $31,157,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $31,157,000 for Fiscal Year 1999 for Exploration and Production Supporting Research;

(B) $3,931,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $3,931,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Recovery Field Demonstrations;

(C) $6,411,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $5,456,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Exploration and Production Experimental Research;

and

(D) $5,920,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $5,920,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Processing Research and Downstream Operations.

(3) $85,877,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $85,877,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Gas operating expenses, including—

(A) $14,123,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $14,123,000 for Fiscal Year 1999 for Natural Gas Research Exploration and Production;

(B) $993,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $993,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Natural Gas Research Delivery and Storage;

(C) $31,379,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $31,379,000 for Fiscal Year 1999 for Natural Gas Research Advanced Turbine Systems;

(D)$4,808,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $4,808,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Natural Gas Utilization;

(E) $4,617,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $4,617,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Natural Gas Research Environmental Research/Regulatory Analysis;
44

(F) $1,210,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $1,210,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Fuel Cells Advanced Research;

(G) $16,335,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $16,335,000 for Fiscal Year 1999 for Fuel Cells Molten Carbonate Systems to continue

cost-shared cost reduction and performance improvement of one

system; and

(H) $12,412,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $12,412,000 for

Fiscal Year 1999 for Fuel Cells Advanced Concepts.

(4) $61,783,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $62,494,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Program Direction and Management Support operating expenses, including—

(A) $13,676,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $12,992,000 for Fiscal Year 1999 for Headquarters Program Direction; and

(B) $48,107,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and, within available

Fossil Energy Research and Development funds, $49,502,000 for

Fiscal Year 1999 for Energy Technology Center Program Direction.

(5) $2,000,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $2,000,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Plant and Capital Equipment, for construction of

General Plant Projects at the Federal Energy Technology Center

sites and at the Bartlesville Project Office.

(6) $12,935,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $12,935,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Fossil Energy Environmental Restoration operating

expenses.

(7) $5,836,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $5,836,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Cooperative Research and Development operating expenses.

(8) $2,173,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $2,173,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Fuels Conversion, Natural Gas, and Electricity operating expenses; and

(9) $25,000,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $30,000,000 for Fiscal Year 1999 for a Fossil Energy Science Initiative to be managed

by the Director of the Office of Energy Research, in consultation

with the Assistant Secretary for Fossil Energy on the goals and priorities of the Initiative, for grants to be competitively awarded and

subject to peer review for research relating to fossil energy.

The Committee authorization recommendations for Fossil Energy

Research and Development contained in bill language for Fiscal

Years 1998 and 1999 do not provide authorization of appropriations

for the Coal Technology Export Program or for Mining. However,

the Committee recommendations for Fiscal Years 1998 and 1999

for the Coal Advanced Research and Technology Development Program assume $4,965,000 in funding each year for research conducted at the Albany (Oregon) Research Center.

Committee Views—Fossil Energy Science Initiative.

The Committee strongly supports research on fossil energy

sources. Fossil fuels provide some 85 percent of the Nation’s energy

consumption and the Nation is expected to remain dependent on

fossil fuels for the next 20 years. However, the Committee also believes much more emphasis needs to be placed on basic and applied

research in these areas. In order to restore a more appropriate balance between research and development activities in these programs, the Committee recommendation establishes a Fossil Energy
45

Science Initiative to be funded at $25,000,000 in Fiscal Year 1998

and at $30,000,000 in Fiscal Year 1999 for grants to be competitively awarded and subject to peer review for research related to

fossil—including research related to coal, oil, and natural gas. The

Initiative funds are to be managed by the Department’s Director of

the Office of Energy Research, in consultation with the Assistant

Secretary for Fossil Energy on the goals and priorities of the Initiative. The Committee expects that the majority of the Initiative’s

grants will be for university-based and private-sector laboratory research and emphasizes that the Initiative’s funds are to be available only for competitively-awarded and peer-reviewed grants, and

are not be used to fund either National Laboratory or in-house research unless such funds have been competitively-awarded and

peer-reviewed in competitions that solicit applications from all

types of research performers.

Section 3(f)—Energy Conservation Research and Development.

The Committee’s authorization recommendations for Energy Conservation Research and Development are shown in Table 9, which

summarizes the Committee’s authorization recommendations for

Fiscal Years 1998 and 1999. H.R. 1277 authorizes $416,908,000 (reduced by $20,000,000 to reflect the use of prior year balances) for

Fiscal Year 1998 and $439,403,000 for Fiscal Year 1999 for Energy

Conservation Research and Development.

[Table 9 follows:]
46
47

As shown in Table 9 and included in bill language are the following amounts:

(1) $41,004,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $40,230,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for the Building Technology, State and Community Sector (Non-Grants), including—

(A) $8,762,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $8,762,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Building Systems Design for Building America Program;

(B) $20,550,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $20,250,000 for Fiscal Year 1999 for Building Equipment and Materials; and

(C) $11,692,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $11,218,000 for Fiscal Year 1999 for Management and Planning.

(2) $125,380,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $125,048,000 for Fiscal Year 1999 for the Industry Sector, including—

(A) $55,660,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $55,660,000 for Fiscal Year 1999 for Industries of the Future (Specific);

(B) $39,120,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $39,120,000 for Fiscal Year 1999 for Industries of the Future (Crosscutting);

(C) $23,950,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $23,950,000 for Fiscal Year 1999 for Technology Access; and

(D) $6,650,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $6,318,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Management and Planning.

(3) $179,576,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $179,225,000 for Fiscal Year 1999 for the Transportation Sector, including—

(A) Within available Transportation Sector funds, $2,700,000

for Fiscal Year 1998 and $$2,700,000 for Fiscal Year 1999 for

Clean Cities;

(B) $124,046,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $124,046,000 for

Fiscal Year 1999 for Advanced Automotive Technologies;

(C) $18,000,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $18,000,000 for Fiscal Year 1999 for Advanced Heavy Vehicle Technologies;

(D) $30,500,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $30,500,000 for Fiscal Year 1999 for Transportation Materials Technologies; and

(E) $7,030,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $6,679,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Implementation and Program.

(4) $20,948,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $19,900,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for Policy and Management;.

(5) $50,000,000 for Fiscal Year 1998 and $75,000,000 for Fiscal

Year 1999 for an Energy Efficiency Science Initiative to be managed by the Director of the Office of Energy Research, in consultation with the Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy on the goals and priorities of the Initiative, for grants

to be competitively awarded and subject to peer review for research

relating to energy efficiency.

The Committee authorization recommendations for Energy Conservation Research and Development contained in bill language for

Fiscal Years 1998 and 1999 does not provide authorization of appropriations for the Transportation Sector Technology Deployment

Program.
48

Committee Views—Energy Efficiency Science Initiative.

The Committee strongly supports energy efficiency research and

believes much more emphasis needs to be placed on basic and applied research in these areas. For example, in testimony before the

Subcommittee on Energy and Environment on March 19, 1997, the

Department’s Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy estimated that the Department’s funding for basic research on energy efficiency and solar and renewable energy programs accounts for only five percent of the overall funding for these

programs. In order to restore a more appropriate balance between

research and development activities in these programs, the Committee recommendation establishes an Energy Efficiency Science

Initiative to be funded at $50,000,000 in Fiscal Year 1998 and at

$75,000,000 in Fiscal Year 1999 for grants to be competitively

awarded and subject to peer review for research related to energy

efficiency—including research related to the building, industry, and

transportation sectors. The Initiative funds are to be managed by

the Department’s Director of the Office of Energy Research in consultation with the Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and

Renewable Energy on the goals and priorities of the Initiative. The

Committee expects that the majority of the Initiative’s grants will

be for university-based and private-sector laboratory research and

emphasizes that the Initiative’s funds are to be available only for

competitively-awarded and peer-reviewed grants, and are not be

used to fund either National Laboratory or in-house research unless such funds have been competitively-awarded and peer-reviewed in competitions that solicit applications from all types of research performers.

Committee Views—Clean Cities.

The Committee strongly supports the Clean Cities Initiative, a

locally-based public-private partnership that seeks to expand the

use of clean fuels. Coordinated by the Department of Energy, the

Clean Cities program combines local decision-making and volunteer

efforts to carry out plans at the local level to create alternative

fuels markets. The Committee has authorized $2,700,090 in each

of Fiscal Years 1998 and 1999 to continue this initiative.

Section 4. Funding Limitations.

Section 4 provides that no funds authorized by this Act for Fiscal

Years 1998 and 1999 may be used for the following seven programs, except to fulfill contractual obligations: (1) Nuclear Energy

Advanced Light Water Reactor; (2) Nuclear Energy Commercial Reactor; (3) Nuclear Energy Security; (4) Nuclear Energy Termination

Costs Gas Turbine-Modular Helium Reactor; (5) Nuclear Energy

Termination Costs Advanced Light Water Reactor; (6) Fossil Energy Research and Development Advanced Research and Technology Development Coal Technology Export; and (7) Clean Coal

Technology Program.

Committee View—Finding Limitations.

The Committee does support authorization of appropriations for

the programs delineated in this section.
49

Section 5. National Academy of Sciences Reports.

(a) High Energy and Nuclear Physics—Subsection 5(a) requires

the Secretary to enter into appropriate arrangements with the National Academy of Sciences for the Academy to prepare a report on

the high energy and nuclear physics activities of the Department,

assuming a combined budget of $977,080,000 for all General

Science and Research activities authorized under Subsection 3(c)

and all Science Assets Acquisition activities authorized under Subsection 3(d) for Fiscal Year 1998, and $941,000,000 for each of the

Fiscal Years 1999, 2000, 2001, and 2002. The Secretary is to transmit to the Committee on Science of the House of Representatives

and the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate

the report prepared under this subsection not later than December

31, 1997, which shall include: (1) a priority list of research opportunities, including both ongoing and proposed activities; (2) an analysis of the relevance of each research facility to the research opportunities listed under clause (1); (3) recommendations for the optimal balance among facility operations, construction, and research

support and the optimal balance between university and laboratory

research programs; and (4) recommended schedules for the continuation, consolidation, or termination of each research program, and

continuation, upgrade, transfer, or closure of each research facility.

(b) Basic Energy Sciences—Subsection 5(a) requires the Secretary

to enter into appropriate arrangements with National Academy of

Sciences for the Academy to prepare a report on the basic energy

sciences activities of the Department, based on the following three

options for the entire Basic Energy Sciences account and all related

research and energy asset activities: (A) provision of $683,000,000

for each of Fiscal Years 1999 through 2002; (B) provision of

$683,000,000 for Fiscal Year 1999, and an amount reflecting a

three-percent reduction in each year thereafter through Fiscal Year

2002; and (C) provision of $683,000,000 for Fiscal Year 1999, and

an amount reflecting a three-percent increase in each year thereafter through Fiscal Year 2002. The Secretary is to transmit to the

Committee on Science of the House of Representatives and the

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate the report prepared under this subsection not later than December 31,

1997, which shall include: (1) a priority list of research opportunities, including both ongoing and proposed activities; (2) an analysis

of the relevance of each research facility to the research opportunities listed under clause (1); (3) recommendations for the optimal

balance among facility operations, construction, and research support and the optimal balance between university and laboratory research programs; and (4) recommended schedules for the continuation, consolidation, or termination of each research program, and

continuation, upgrade, transfer, or closure of each research facility.

(c) National Spallation Neutron Source—Subsection 5(c) requires

the Secretary to enter into appropriate arrangements with National Academy of Sciences for the Academy to prepare a report

containing a detailed evaluation of the costs of construction and operation of the National Spallation Neutron Source at alternative

appropriate sites, including at least the Argonne National Laboratory, the Brookhaven National Laboratory, the Los Alamos National Laboratory, and the Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Such
50

report shall also include an identification of other advantages and

disadvantages of each site evaluated. Not later than December 31,

1997, the Secretary shall transmit to the Committee on Science of

the House of Representatives and the Committee on Energy and

Natural Resources of the Senate the report along with a recommendation from the Department for the preferred site that will

meet its program criteria, taking into consideration the effect of

delay on neutron science work, existing expertise in the field of

neutron science, affiliations with institutions of higher education in

neutron science, and State allocations or commitments to facilities.

Committee Views—National Academy of Sciences Reports on

High Energy and Nuclear Physics and Basic Energy

Sciences.

The Department’s High Energy and Nuclear Physics and Basic

Energy Sciences programs maintain large inventories of facilities,

requiring a continual balance of research, operations, and facility

construction needs. And the Department is well aware that, with

large sums devoted to ‘‘keeping the lights on’’ at these facilities, research and operations funding can be more easily squeezed during

periods of tight budgets. In fact, the Department has acknowledged

through its Scientific Facility Initiative that the operating time at

its various facilities is at a minimal level and research programs

may be suffering to maintain the facility base.

For several years, the Committee has requested that the Department initiate a process with outside experts to review the Department’s long-term plans to meet these programs’ competing needs of

research, operations, and construction. However, such reviews have

not been forthcoming. The Committee does note that the Department has requested a review of the High Energy Physics program

by the High Energy Physics Advisory Panel, but the Committee

still believes that a review by outside experts is appropriate in high

energy physics. The reviews of the High Energy and Nuclear Physics and Basic Energy Sciences programs required by H.R. 1277 are

expected to be wide-ranging and to address tough issues such as

facility-closure, where appropriate. And the Committee remains

committed to working with the Department and the National Academy of Sciences to ensure that the reports are useful and timely.

Committee View—National Spallation Neutron Source.

The DOE has been funding work on a one-megawatt spallation

neutron source (about six times that of the highest currently available worldwide), called the National Spallation Neutron Source

(NSNS) and has declared that if the project is to proceed to construction it will be sited at Oak Ridge National Laboratory. The

NSNS, which will likely cost over $1 billion, is an interlaboratory

effort involving Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory,

Brookhaven National Laboratory, Los Alamos National Laboratory,

and Argonne National Laboratory, with Oak Ridge responsible for

project management and coordination of the technical design.

There will be the potential for at least three target areas and for

30 to 40 instruments, and it is expected that the NSNS will serve

over 1,000 users per year.
51

House Report 104-149, accompanying the 1996 Energy and

Water Development Appropriations Bill (H.R. 1905), concurred

with the Department that the NSNS’s preferred alternative site

was at Oak Ridge National Laboratory. However, the accompanying Senate Report 104-120 rejected the House’s endorsement of

Oak Ridge as the preferred site and directed the Department to establish and pursue a competitive site selection process for this proposed facility. The conferees, in House Report 104-293, did not take

a position on siting the facility.

The Committee takes note of a Department of Energy’s Inspector

General (IG) April 1995 document entitled Report on Audit of the

Department of Energy’s Environmental Molecular Sciences Laboratory. That report criticized the Department for not exploring all

practical alternatives as required by Department Order 4700.1 before deciding to proceed with the construction of a new research

laboratory in Richland, Washington. The Committee concurs wih

the thrust of IG’s report. Namely, that with the current concern

about budget constraints, it is imperative that the Department

fully evaluate all available options before proceeding with a billiondollar construction project. Since the Department refuses to take on

this task, the Committee directs the Secretary of Energy to engage

the National Academy of Sciences to provide such an evaluation.

The Academy should recommend whether existing assets, other Department facilities, and national laboratories, could fulfill the mission of the proposed NSNS. Such an evaluation would be consistent

with a commitment to deficit reduction and prudent spending, and

would maximize utilization of available resources.

Section 6. Prohibition on Use of Clean Coal Technology Reserve

Funds.

Section 6 prohibits the use of funds in the Clean Coal Technology

Reserve to initiate or carry out a clean coal technology program

based outside the United States.

Committee View—Clean Coal Technology Reserve Funds.

The Committee opposes the use of Clean Coal Technology Reserve funds to initiate or carry out a Clean Coal Technology program based outside the United States, and that any funds in excess

of program needs should be returned to the Treasury.

Section 7. Next Generation Internet.

Section 7 prohibits the use of funds authorized by this Act, or

any other Act enacted before the date of the enactment of this Act,

for the Next Generation Internet, except for continuation of programs and acivities that were funded and carried out during Fiscal

Year 1997.

Committee View—Next Generation Internet.

This provision ensures that the Committee will have the opportunity to review and authorize the Next Generation Internet (NGI),

while at the same time allowing for minimal on-going research in

that program. The progression of our country’s computer

networking technology plays a vital role in our nation’s continued

leadership in scientific research. The Committee, however, feels it
52

necessary to develop more of a record before addressing funding for

NGI, and is working with the Administration to develop a plan concerning NGI. The Committee expects to hold hearings on NGI in

the future to better understand how it will further the goals of advancing network technologies.

Section 8. Limitations.

Subsection 8(a)—Prohibition of Lobbying Activities.

Subsection 8(a) forbids the use of funds authorized by this Act

for any activity whose purpose is to influence legislation pending

before Congress. However, this subsection does not prevent employees of the departments or agencies from communicating with Members of Congress to conduct public business.

Committee View—Prohibition of Lobbying Activities.

The Committee is committed to ensuring that awards for research are used solely for that purpose. Funds should not be used

for any purpose, other than that specified in the award. The Committee, however, does not exclude appropriate communications between the executive branch and the Congress.

Subsection 8(b)—Limitation on Appropriations.

Subsection 8(b) provides that no sums are authorized to be appropriated that are not specifically authorized to be appropriated

by this Act for Fiscal Years 1998 and 1999, or by an Act of Congress in succeeding Fiscal Years.

Committee View—Limitation on Appropriations.

The Committee emphasizes that the only funds authorized to be

appropriated for DOE’s research, development, demonstration and

commercial applications activities are made available under this

Act. It is the Committee’s position that annual authorizations designating specific sums are required for appropriations of such sums

to be authorized. Organic act authority permits agency missions

and programmatic activity, but is not sufficient to authorize actual

funding.

Subsection 8(c)—Eligibility for Awards.

Subsection 8(c) requires the head of each federal agency for

which funds are authorized under this Act to exclude from consideration for grant agreements, for a period of 5 years, any person

who received funds for a project not subject to competitive, meritbased review process after Fiscal Year 1997. The subsection is not

applicable to awards to long-standing Cooperative Research and

Development Agreement program nor awards to persons who are

members of a class specified by law for which assistance is awarded according to formula provided by law.

Committee View—Eligibility for Awards.

The Committee has a long-standing position that awards should

be made on a competitive, merit-based process that ensures that

taxpayers’ dollars are spent in the most cost-effective and productive manner.
53

Section 9. Notice.

Section 9(a) requires that if any funds of this Act, or amendments made by this Act, are subject to reprogramming which requires notice to be given to the Appropriations Committees of the

House of Representatives and the Senate, notice of such action

shall be concurrently provided to the Committees on Science and

Commerce of the House of Representatives and the Committee on

Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate.

Section 9(b) requires the Secretary to notify the Committees on

Science, Commerce, and Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Committees on Energy and Natural Resources and

Appropriations of the Senate if any program, project, or activity of

the Department of Energy is preparing to undergo any major reorganization no later than 15 days prior to such reorganization.

Committee View—Notice.

The Committee believes that such notice must be given if it is

to carry out its oversight responsibilities under the Rules of the

House.

Section 10. Sense of Congress on the Year 2000 Problem.

It is the sense of Congress that the Department of Energy should

give high priority to correcting the year 2000 problem in all of its

computer systems to ensure effective operation in the year 2000

and beyond. The Department of Energy needs to assess immediately the risk of the problem upon their systems and develop a

plan and a budget to correct the problem for its mission-critical

programs. The Department of Energy also needs to begin consideration of contingency plans, in the event that certain systems are

unable to be corrected in time.

Committee Views—Year 2000 Problem.

Despite knowing of the problem for years, the Federal Government has yet to adequately create strategies to address the year

2000 problem. The Committee believes Congress should continue to

take a leadership role in raising awareness about the issue with

both government and the private sector.

The potential impact on federal programs if the year 2000 problem is not corrected in an effective and timely manner is substantial and potentially serious. If federal computers are not prepared

to handle the change of date on January 1, 2000, there is a risk

to all government systems and the programs they support. It is imperative that such corrective action be taken to avert disruption to

critical Federal Government programs.

Section 11. Buy American.

Section 11 requires any entity that is appropriated funds pursuant to this act or amendments thereto, to comply with sections 2-

4 of the Act of March 3, 1933 (41 U.S.C. 10a-10c, popularly known

as the ‘‘Buy American Act’’); and that recipients of funds pursuant

to this act shall be notified of subsection (a)’s requirement of compliance with the Buy American Act.
54

Committee View—Buy American.

It is the Committee’s position that the Federal Government buy

goods manufactured in the United States when feasible, and where

cost-effective and practicable.

VIII. COMMITTEE COST ESTIMATE

Clause 7(a) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives requires each committee report accompanying each bill or

joint resolution of a public character to contain: (1) an estimate,

made by such committee, of the costs which would be incurred in

carrying out such bill or joint resolution in the Fiscal Year in which

it is reported, and in each of the five Fiscal Years following such

Fiscal Year (or for the authorized duration of any program authorized by such bill or joint resolution, if less than five years); (2) a

comparison of the estimate of costs described in subparagraph (1)

of this paragraph made by such committee with an estimate of

such costs made by any Government agency and submitted to such

committee; and (3) when practicable, a comparison of the total estimated funding level for the relevant program (or programs) with

the appropriate levels under current law. However, clause 7(d) of

that rule provides that this requirement does not apply when a cost

estimate and comparison prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office under section 403 of the Congressional Budget

Act of 1974 has been timely submitted prior to the filing of the report and included in the report pursuant to clause 2(l)(3)(C) of rule

XI. A cost estimate and comparison prepared by the Director of the

Congressional Budget Office under section 403 of the Congressional

Budget Act of 1974 has been timely submitted prior to the filing

of this report and included in Section IX of this report pursuant to

clause 2(l)(3)(C) of rule XI.

Clause 2(l)(3)(B) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives requires each committee report that accompanies a

measure providing new budget authority (other than continuing appropriations), new spending authority, or new credit authority, or

changes in revenues or tax expenditures to contain a cost estimate,

as required by section 308(a)(1) of the Congressional Budget Act of

1974 and, when practicable with respect to estimates of new budget

authority, a comparison of the total estimated funding level for the

relevant program (or programs) to the appropriate levels under current law. H.R. 1277 does not contain any new budget authority,

credit authority, or changes in revenues or tax expenditures. Assuming that the sums authorized under the bill are appropriated,

H.R. 1277 does authorize additional discretionary spending, as described in the Congressional Budget Office report on the bill, which

is contained in Section IX of this report.

IX. CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE

[Text of the CBO estimate follows:]
55
56
57
58
59

X. COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 104-4

H.R. 1277 contains no unfunded mandates.

XI. COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Clause 2(l)(3)(A) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives requires each committee report to include oversight

findings and recommendations required pursuant to clause 2(b)(1)

of rule X. The Committee has no oversight findings.

XII. OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS BY THE

COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM AND OVERSIGHT

Clause 2(l)(3)(D) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives requires each committee report to contain a summary

of the oversight findings and recommendations made by the House

Government Reform and Oversight Committee pursuant to clause

4(c)(2) of rule X, whenever such findings and recommendations

have been submitted to the Committee in a timely fashion. The

Committee on Science has received no such findings or recommendations from the Committee on Government Reform and

Oversight.

XIII. CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

Clause 2(l)(4) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives requires each report of a committee on a bill or joint resolution of a public character to include a statement citing the specific

powers granted to the Congress in the Constitution to enact the

law proposed by the bill or joint resolution. Article I, section 8 of

the Constitution of the United States grants Congress the authority to enact H.R. 1277.

XIV. FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT

This legislation does not establish or authorize the establishment

of any new federal advisory committee.

XV. CONGRESSIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY ACT

The Committee finds that H.R. 1277 does not relate to the terms

and conditions of employment or access to public services or accommodations within the meaning of section 102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act (Public Law 104-1).

XVI. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

On April 16, 1997, a quorum being present, the Committee favorably reported the Department of Energy Civilian Research and Development Act of 1997, by a voice vote, and recommends its enactment.

XVIII. ADDITIONAL AND SUPPLEMENTAL VIEWS
60
61
62
63
64
65