```

[Senate Report 115-258]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                     Calendar No. 437
115th Congress    }                                    {       Report
                                 SENATE
 2d Session       }                                    {      115-258

======================================================================
 
         ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2019

                                _______
                                

                  May 24, 2018.--Ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

  Mr. Alexander, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted the 
                               following

                                 REPORT

                         [To accompany S. 2975]

    The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 2975) 
making appropriations for energy and water development and 
related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2019, 
and for other purposes, reports favorably thereon and 
recommends that the bill do pass.

New obligational authority

Total of bill as reported to the Senate................. $43,766,000,000
Amount of 2018 appropriations...........................  60,582,716,000
Amount of 2019 budget estimate..........................  31,610,121,000
Bill as recommended to Senate compared to--
    2018 appropriations................................. -16,816,716,000
    2019 budget estimate................................ +12,155,879,000

                                CONTENTS

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

Purpose..........................................................     4
Summary of Estimates and Recommendations.........................     4
Introduction.....................................................     4
Title I:
    Department of Defense--Civil: Department of the Army:
        Corps of Engineers--Civil:
            Investigations.......................................    11
            Construction.........................................    17
            Mississippi River and Tributaries....................    25
            Operation and Maintenance............................    27
            Regulatory Program...................................    47
            Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program......    47
            Flood Control and Coastal Emergencies................    48
            Expenses.............................................    48
            Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil 
              Works).............................................    48
        General Provisions--Corps of Engineers--Civil............    49
Title II:
    Department of the Interior:
        Central Utah Project Completion Account..................    49
        Bureau of Reclamation:
            Water and Related Resources..........................    51
            Central Valley Project Restoration Fund..............    59
            California Bay-Delta Restoration.....................    60
            Policy and Administration............................    60
        General Provisions--Department of the Interior...........    61
Title III:
    Department of Energy:
        Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy...................    65
        Cybersecurity, Energy Security, and Emergency Response...    78
        Nuclear Energy...........................................    81
        Fossil Energy Research and Development...................    84
        Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves...................    91
        Strategic Petroleum Reserve..............................    91
        Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve.......................    91
        Energy Information Administration........................    91
        Non-Defense Environmental Cleanup........................    91
        Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning 
          Fund...................................................    92
        Science..................................................    92
        Advanced Research Projects Agency--Energy................    98
        Innovative Technology Loan Guarantee Program.............    99
        Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Loan Program..    99
        Tribal Energy Loan Guarantee Program.....................   100
        Office of Indian Energy Policy and Programs..............   100
        Departmental Administration..............................   100
        Office of the Inspector General..........................   101
        Weapons Activities.......................................   102
        Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation.........................   105
        Naval Reactors...........................................   107
        Federal Salaries and Expenses............................   108
        Defense Environmental Cleanup............................   108
        Other Defense Activities.................................   111
        Power Marketing Administrations:
            Operation and Maintenance, Southwestern Power 
              Administration.....................................   112
            Construction, Rehabilitation, Operations and 
              Maintenance, Western Area Power Administration.....   113
            Falcon and Amistad Operating and Maintenance Fund....   113
        Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.....................   113
        General Provisions--Department of Energy.................   138
Title IV:
    Independent Agencies:
        Appalachian Regional Commission..........................   138
        Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board..................   139
        Delta Regional Authority.................................   139
        Denali Commission........................................   140
        Northern Border Regional Commission......................   140
        Nuclear Regulatory Commission............................   140
            Office of Inspector General..........................   141
        Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board.....................   142
    General Provisions...........................................   143
Title V: General Provisions......................................   144
Compliance With Paragraph 7, Rule XVI, of the Standing Rules of 
  the 
  Senate.........................................................   144
Compliance With Paragraph 7(c), Rule XXVI, of the Standing Rules 
  of the 
  Senate.........................................................   146
Compliance With Paragraph 12, Rule XXVI, of the Standing Rules of 
  the 
  Senate.........................................................   147
Budgetary Impact of Bill.........................................   147
Comparative Statement of Budget Authority........................   148

                                PURPOSE

    The purpose of this bill is to provide appropriations for 
fiscal year 2019, beginning October 1, 2018 and ending 
September 30, 2019, for energy and water development, and for 
other related purposes. It supplies funds for water resources 
development programs and related activities of the Corps of 
Engineers' civil works program in title I; for the Department 
of the Interior's Bureau of Reclamation and Central Utah 
Project in title II; for the Department of Energy's energy 
research and development activities, including environmental 
restoration and waste management, and atomic energy defense 
activities of the National Nuclear Security Administration in 
title III; and for independent agencies and commissions, 
including the Appalachian Regional Commission, Delta Regional 
Authority, Denali Commission, Northern Border Regional 
Commission, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in title IV.

                SUMMARY OF ESTIMATES AND RECOMMENDATIONS

    The fiscal year 2019 budget estimates for the bill total 
$31,610,121,000 in new budget (obligational) authority. The 
recommendation of the Committee totals $43,766,000,000. This is 
$12,155,879,000 above the budget estimates and $16,816,716,000 
below the enacted appropriation for the current fiscal year.
    The Committee notes the enacted appropriation for the 
current fiscal year includes $17,419,716,000 in supplemental 
appropriation for disaster relief requirements.

                         Subcommittee Hearings

    To develop this recommendation, the Committee held three 
budget hearings in April 2018 in connection with the fiscal 
year 2019 budget requests for the Corps of Engineers, Bureau of 
Reclamation, Department of Energy and National Nuclear Security 
Administration, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The 
hearings provided officials from the agencies with an 
opportunity to present the administration's most pressing 
priorities to the Committee. The Committee also invited and 
received recommendations from Senators and outside witnesses.

                              INTRODUCTION

    The Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development's 302(b) 
allocation totals $43,766,000,000 of net budget authority for 
fiscal year 2019, including adjustments, which represents an 
increase of $566,000,000 above fiscal year 2018 enacted levels. 
Within the amount recommended, $21,892,000,000 is classified as 
defense (050) spending and $21,874,000,000 is classified as 
non-defense (non-050) spending.
    The Committee's recommendation includes funding for the 
highest priority activities across the agencies funded in the 
bill. The recommendation includes funds for critical water 
infrastructure, including our Nation's inland waterways, ports, 
and harbors; agricultural water supply and drought relief in 
the West; groundbreaking scientific research and development, 
including world-class supercomputing; support for the Nation's 
nuclear weapons, non-proliferation, and nuclear Navy programs; 
and critical economic development.

                                TITLE I

                       CORPS OF ENGINEERS--CIVIL

                         DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

                       Corps of Engineers--Civil

                       OVERVIEW OF RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $6,927,000,000 for the Corps of 
Engineers [Corps], an increase of $2,142,417,000 above the 
budget request.
    The Committee's recommendation sets priorities by 
supporting our Nation's water infrastructure. Specifically, the 
Committee recommendation provides adequate appropriations to 
utilize all of the estimated fiscal year 2019 revenues for the 
fifth consecutive year, from the Inland Waterways Trust Fund 
and for the fifth consecutive year meets the target prescribed 
in the Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014 
[WRRDA], as amended, for Corps projects eligible for Harbor 
Maintenance Trust Funds.

                              INTRODUCTION

    The Corps' civil works mission is to provide quality, 
responsive engineering services to the Nation in peace and war. 
Approximately 23,000 civilians and about 290 military officers 
are responsible for executing the civil works mission. This 
bill only funds the civil works functions of the Corps.
    The Corps maintains our inland waterways, keeps our ports 
open, manages a portion of our drinking water supply, provides 
emission free electricity from dams, looks after many of our 
recreational waters, helps manage the river levels during 
flooding, provides environmental stewardship, and emergency 
response to natural disasters. The annual net economic benefit 
generated by the Corps' civil works mission is estimated to be 
$109,830,000,000, which equates to a return of about $16.60 for 
every $1 expended.
    The Corps' responsibilities include:
  --navigation systems, including 13,000 miles of deep draft 
        channels, 12,000 miles of inland waterways, 239 lock 
        chambers, and 1,067 harbors which handle over 2.3 
        billion tons of cargo annually;
  --flood risk management infrastructure, including 709 dams, 
        14,700 miles of levees, and multiple hurricane and 
        storm damage risk reduction projects along the coast;
  --municipal and industrial water supply storage at 136 
        projects spread across 25 States;
  --environmental stewardship, infrastructure, and ecosystem 
        restoration;
  --recreation for approximately 370 million recreation visits 
        per year to Corps projects;
  --regulation of waters under Federal statutes; and
  --maintaining hydropower capacity of nearly 24,000 megawatts 
        at 75 projects.

                      ONGOING CORPS REFORM EFFORTS

    The Committee commends the Corps for its several ongoing 
internal initiatives to change itself and improve how it 
delivers Civil Works water infrastructure and related programs. 
Recent efforts to streamline the processing of section 408 
actions for alterations or use of Corps Civil Works projects 
are vitally important. Important changes include maximum 
delegation of decision-making to the field, narrowed scope for 
evaluating impacts and elimination of certain procedural 
requirements. For example, the requirement for a section 408 
action for routine Operation and Maintenance was eliminated; 
the requirement for developing a 60-percent design before 
submitting an application for a 408 action has been eliminated; 
and a more limited application of navigational servitude to 408 
actions which eliminated the need for numerous permits in 
coastal areas. The Director of Civil Works has also issued 
formal direction to, among other things, operationalize risk-
informed decisionmaking to change behavior by shifting from a 
more regimented- and compliance-based paradigm to a more agile 
approach that allows for more project- and situation-specific 
adaptation based on risk after documenting any associated 
risks. The Corps is also pursuing 12 specific actions to 
improve permitting efficiencies, including aggressive 
implementation of Executive Order 13807 (One Federal Decision); 
clarification of policy to consider removal of obsolete 
structures as creditable mitigation bank actions; alignment of 
section 404 or section 10 permits with section 408 actions; and 
establishment of a Lead District approach for projects that 
cross multiple jurisdictions such as pipeline projects. The 
Committee strongly encourages the continuation of these and 
other aggressive actions to improve program and project 
delivery.

                        BUDGET STRUCTURE CHANGES

    The fiscal year 2019 budget request for the Corps proposed 
numerous structural changes, including creation of two new 
accounts--Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund and Inland Waterways 
Trust Fund--and the shifting of various studies and projects 
between accounts. The Committee rejects all such proposed 
changes and instead recommends funding for the requested 
studies and projects in the accounts in which funding has 
traditionally been provided. Unless expressly noted, the 
Committee recommends studies and projects remain at the funding 
levels included in the budget request, but in different 
accounts than in the budget request. In particular:
  --Projects requested in the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund 
        account are shown in the Construction, Mississippi 
        River and Tributaries, or Operation and Maintenance 
        accounts, as appropriate;
  --Projects requested in the Inland Waterways Trust Fund 
        account are shown in the Construction account;
  --Dredged material management plans requested in the 
        Investigations account are shown in the Operation and 
        Maintenance account;
  --Dam safety modification studies requested in the 
        Investigations account are shown in the Dam Safety and 
        Seepage/Stability Correction Program in the 
        Construction account;
  --Dam Safety and Seepage/Stability Correction Program 
        management costs requested in the Expenses account are 
        shown in the Construction account; and
  --Sand mitigation projects requested in the Harbor 
        Maintenance Trust Fund account are shown in the 
        Construction account.
    Additionally, the recommendation includes the Poplar 
Island, Maryland beneficial use of dredged material project 
within the Environmental Restoration business line as in 
previous years.
    If the Corps proposes budget structure changes in future 
fiscal years, the proposal shall be accompanied by a display of 
the funding request in the traditional budget structure.

                         DEEP DRAFT NAVIGATION

    The budget request this year fails to adequately fund our 
nation's harbors. The Committee is disappointed the fiscal year 
2019 budget request only proposes to spend $965 million for 
Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund [HMTF]-related activities, which 
is $477 million below the spending target of $1,442,000,000 
established by WRRDA, as amended. For fiscal year 2019, the 
Committee recommends an estimated $1,528,401,000 for HMTF-
related activities, which exceeds the WRRDA spending target.

                        INLAND WATERWAYS SYSTEM

    The Committee notes that the budget request only proposed 
to spend $5,250,000 of the estimated $105,000,000 deposits for 
fiscal year 2019 into the Inland Waterways Trust Fund [IWTF]. 
This would leave an estimated $99,750,000 of fiscal year 2019 
deposits unspent. By only proposing to fund one of the four 
ongoing construction projects that were funded last year, the 
budget request disregards the existing Capital Investment 
Strategy and the advice and recommendations of industry experts 
and professional engineers.
    The Committee rejects the budget request's proposal to 
reform inland waterways financing by increasing the amount paid 
by commercial navigation users of inland waterways, 
particularly when the administration fails to make full use of 
the fees already collected for this purpose.

                           ADDITIONAL FUNDING

    The Committee recommends funding above the budget request 
for Investigations, Construction, Operation and Maintenance, 
and Mississippi River and Tributaries. This funding is for 
additional work (including new starts) that either was not 
included in the budget request or was inadequately budgeted. A 
study or project may not be excluded from evaluation for 
additional funding for being inconsistent with administration 
policy.
    The administration is reminded these funds are in addition 
to its budget request, and administration budget metrics shall 
not be a reason to disqualify a study or project from being 
funded. The focus of the allocation process shall favor the 
obligation, rather than the expenditure, of funds for work in 
fiscal year 2019.
    Funding associated with each category may be allocated to 
any eligible study or project, as appropriate, within that 
category; funding associated with each subcategory may be 
allocated only to eligible studies or projects, as appropriate, 
within that subcategory.
    Work Plan.--Not later than 60 days after the date of 
enactment of this act, the Corps shall provide to the 
Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress a work 
plan consistent with the following general guidance, as well as 
the specific direction the Committee provides within each 
account: (1) a detailed description of the rating system(s) 
developed and used to evaluate studies and projects; (2) 
delineation of how these funds are to be allocated; (3) a 
summary of the work to be accomplished with each allocation, 
including phase of work and the study or project's remaining 
cost to complete (excluding Operation and Maintenance); and (4) 
a list of all studies and projects that were considered 
eligible for funding but did not receive funding, including an 
explanation of whether the study or project could have used 
funds in fiscal year 2019 and the specific reasons each study 
or project was considered as being less competitive for an 
allocation of funds.
    The work plan shall include a single group of new starts 
for Investigations and Construction. None of the funds may be 
used for any item for which the Committee has specifically 
denied funding.
    The Committee urges the Corps within its Flood and Coastal 
Storm Damage Reduction mission to strive for a balance between 
inland and coastal projects.
    New Starts.--The recommendation includes seven new study 
starts and six new construction starts to be distributed across 
the authorized mission areas of the Corps. Of the new starts in 
Investigations, two shall be for navigation studies, two shall 
be for flood and storm damage reduction studies, one shall be 
for an environmental restoration study, and two shall be for 
navigation, flood and storm damage reduction, environmental 
restoration, or multi-purpose studies. Of the new study starts 
for navigation, one shall be for a Small, Remote, or 
Subsistence Harbor. Of the new study starts for flood and storm 
damage reduction, one shall be for a multi-purpose watershed 
study to assess coastal resiliency. Of the new construction 
starts, one shall be for a navigation project, one shall be for 
a flood and storm damage reduction project, one shall be for an 
additional navigation or flood and storm damage reduction 
project, two shall be for environmental restoration projects, 
and one shall be for a navigation, flood and storm damage 
reduction, environmental restoration, or multi-purpose project.
    As all new starts are to be chosen by the Corps, all shall 
be considered of equal importance, and the expectation is that 
future budget submissions will include appropriate funding for 
all new starts selected.
    A study is not completed until preconstruction engineering 
and design [PED] is completed. No new start or new investment 
decision shall be required when moving from feasibility to PED. 
When evaluating proposals for new feasibility studies, the 
Corps is encouraged to give priority to those studies with 
executed Feasibility Cost Sharing Agreements and a sponsor with 
the ability to provide any necessary cost share for the study 
phase. The Corps is encouraged to support opportunities to 
restore critical habitat and enhance the Nation's economic 
development, job growth, and international competitiveness.
    A new construction start shall not be required for work 
undertaken to correct a design deficiency on an existing 
Federal project; it shall be considered ongoing work.

                               ASIAN CARP

    The Secretary of the Army, acting through the Chief of 
Engineers, shall make every effort to submit to Congress the 
Report of the Chief of Engineers for the Brandon Road 
feasibility study according to the original published schedule 
of February 2019. The Corps is encouraged to allocate 
sufficient funding provided in this act to ensure the Report of 
the Chief of Engineers for the Brandon Road feasibility study 
is published in this timeframe. The Corps is also directed to 
provide quarterly updates to the Committees on Appropriations 
of both Houses of Congress on the progress and status of 
efforts to prevent the further spread of Asian carp as well as 
the location and density of carp populations, including the use 
of emergency procedures.
    The Corps shall continue to collaborate with the U.S. Coast 
Guard, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the State of 
Illinois, and members of the Asian Carp Regional Coordinating 
Committee to identify and evaluate whether navigation protocols 
would be beneficial or effective in reducing the risk of 
vessels inadvertently carrying aquatic invasive species, 
including Asian carp, through the Brandon Road Lock and Dam in 
Joliet, Illinois. Any findings of such an evaluation shall be 
included in the quarterly briefings to the Committees. The 
Corps is further directed to implement navigation protocols 
shown to be effective at reducing the risk of entrainment 
without jeopardizing the safety of vessels and crews within 90 
days of enactment of this act. The Corps and other Federal and 
State agencies are conducting ongoing research on potential 
solutions.

                        UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS

    The Committee is concerned by a U.S. Immigration and 
Customs Enforcement bulletin published in 2017 that confidently 
assesses that a Chinese unmanned aerial systems (UAS) 
manufacturer was using its products to provide critical 
infrastructure data to the Chinese Government. The Corps shall 
immediately determine whether UAS that were the subject of the 
August 2017 bulletin are currently in use and report back to 
the Committee within 180 days. Due to the critical 
infrastructure funded in this bill that has an extensive 
national security component, any vulnerability to foreign 
surveillance is a serious concern to this Committee and the 
Corps shall prioritize purchases of American-made UAS in the 
future.

                             REPROGRAMMING

    The Committee is retaining the reprogramming legislation 
provided in the Energy and Water Development and Related 
Agencies Appropriations Act, 2018.

                   CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING

    The Committee did not accept or include congressionally 
directed spending, as defined in section 5(a) of rule XLIV of 
the Standing Rules of the Senate. However, the Committee has 
recommended additional programmatic funds for Investigations, 
Construction, Operations and Maintenance, and Mississippi River 
and Tributaries to address deficiencies in the budget request. 
In some cases, these additional funds have been included within 
defined categories, as in prior years, and are described in 
more detail in their respective sections below.

                         REPORTING REQUIREMENT

    The Corps shall provide a monthly report to the Committees 
on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress, which includes 
the total budget authority and unobligated balances by year for 
each program, project, or activity, including any prior year 
appropriations.
    The Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works) shall 
provide a monthly report to the Committees on Appropriations of 
both Houses of Congress, which includes the total budget 
authority and unobligated balances by year for each activity 
funded in the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army 
(Civil Works) account, including any prior year appropriations.

                             INVESTIGATIONS

Appropriations, 2018....................................    $123,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................      82,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     123,000,000

    The Committee recommends $123,000,000 for Investigations, 
an increase of $41,000,000 from the budget request. The 
Committee's recommendation allows the Corps to begin seven new 
feasibility study starts.

                              INTRODUCTION

    Funding in this account is used to develop feasibility and 
PED studies to address the Nation's water infrastructure needs, 
in support of project authorization. The Committee recognizes 
that the budget request does not provide adequate funding for 
Investigations, and specifically PED funding, to allow many of 
America's most important waterways to move efficiently from 
planning to construction. The Committee therefore recommends 
additional funding to be used to seamlessly continue 
feasibility studies into the PED study phase.

                               NEW STARTS

    The Corps is directed to designate new starts in accordance 
with the direction in the front matter under the heading 
``Additional Funding''.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The table below displays the budget request and the 
Committee's recommendation for Investigations.

                   CORPS OF ENGINEERS--INVESTIGATIONS
                        [In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Budget         Committee
              Project title                  estimate     recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 ALABAMA
 
BLACK WARRIOR AND TOMBIGBEE RIVERS, AL..             100  ..............
GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, AL..........             250  ..............
 
               CALIFORNIA
 
EAST SAN PEDRO BAY ECOSYSTEM                         298             298
 RESTORATION, CA........................
 
                ILLINOIS
 
INTERBASIN CONTROL OF GREAT LAKES-
 MISSISSIPPI RIVER......................
    AQUATIC NUISANCE SPECIES, IL, IN, OH             200             200
     & WI (BRANDON ROAD)................
 
                 INDIANA
 
MISSISSINEWA LAKE, IN...................           1,500  ..............
 
                  IOWA
 
GRAND RIVER BASIN, IA & MO..............             100             100
 
               NEW MEXICO
 
RIO GRANDE, SANDIA PUEBLO TO ISLETA                  825             825
 PUEBLO, NM.............................
 
                NEW YORK
 
BUFFALO HARBOR, NY......................             300  ..............
HUDSON RIVER HABITAT RESTORATION, NY....             355             355
 
                  OHIO
 
CLEVELAND HARBOR, OH....................             350  ..............
DELAWARE LAKE, OH.......................             750  ..............
 
                 OREGON
 
COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2024                        10,265  ..............
 IMPLEMENTATION.........................
COUGAR LAKE, OR.........................           1,500  ..............
HILLS CREEK, OR.........................           1,500  ..............
LOOKOUT POINT LAKE, OR..................           1,500  ..............
 
                  TEXAS
 
COASTAL TEXAS PROTECTION AND RESTORATION           2,675           2,675
 STUDY, TX..............................
CORPUS CHRISTI SHIP CHANNEL, TX.........             250  ..............
GIWW- BRAZOS RIVER FLOODGATES & COLORADO              50              50
 RIVER LOCK, TX.........................
GRAPEVINE LAKE, TX......................           1,500  ..............
HOUSTON SHIP CHANNEL, TX................             603             603
MATAGORDA SHIP CHANNEL, TX..............             200             200
PROCTOR LAKE, TX........................           1,500  ..............
 
                VIRGINIA
 
ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BRIDGE              1,600           1,600
 REPLACEMENT AT NORTH LANDING, VA.......
NORFOLK HARBOR, VA......................             300  ..............
                                         -------------------------------
      SUBTOTAL, ITEMS UNDER STATES......          28,471           6,906
 
             REMAINING ITEMS
 
ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR ONGOING WORK
 
    FLOOD AND STORM DAMAGE REDUCTION....  ..............           7,500
        FLOOD CONTROL...................  ..............           5,000
        SHORE PROTECTION................  ..............           2,000
    NAVIGATION..........................  ..............           9,823
        COASTAL AND DEEP-DRAFT..........  ..............           9,000
        INLAND..........................  ..............           6,000
    OTHER AUTHORIZED PROJECT PURPOSES...  ..............           5,000
        ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION OR      ..............           5,500
         COMPLIANCE.....................
COORDINATION STUDIES WITH OTHER AGENCIES  ..............  ..............
    ACCESS TO WATER DATA................             360             360
    COMMITTEE ON MARINE TRANSPORTATION                50              50
     SYSTEMS............................
 
       OTHER COORDINATION PROGRAMS
 
        COORDINATION WITH OTHER WATER                400             400
         RESOURCE AGENCIES..............
        INTERAGENCY AND INTERNATIONAL                400             400
         SUPPORT........................
        INTERAGENCY WATER RESOURCE                   100             100
         DEVELOPMENT....................
        INVENTORY OF DAMS...............             400             400
        SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS..........           1,000           1,000
        FERC LICENSING..................             100             100
    PLANNING ASSISTANCE TO STATES.......           5,000           8,000
 
   COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA
 
    AUTOMATED INFORMATION SYSTEMS                    250             250
     SUPPORT TRI-CADD...................
    COASTAL FIELD DATA COLLECTION.......           1,000           1,000
    ENVIRONMENTAL DATA STUDIES..........              80              80
    FLOOD DAMAGE DATA...................             230             230
    FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT SERVICES.....          15,000          15,000
    HYDROLOGIC STUDIES..................             500             500
    INTERNATIONAL WATER STUDIES.........             125             125
    PRECIPITATION STUDIES...............             200             200
    REMOTE SENSING/GEOGRAPHIC                         75              75
     INFORMATION SYSTEM SUPPORT.........
    SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL INFORMATION              50              50
     CENTERS............................
    STREAM GAGING.......................             550             550
    TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS..............           1,000           1,000
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT................          16,258          25,000
 
          OTHER--MISCELLANEOUS
 
    DISPOSITION OF COMPLETED PROJECTS...           1,000           1,000
    NATIONAL FLOOD RISK MANAGEMENT                 5,000           5,000
     PROGRAM............................
    NATIONAL SHORELINE MANAGEMENT STUDY.             400             400
    PLANNING SUPPORT PROGRAM............           3,500           3,500
    TRIBAL PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM..........             500           1,500
                                         -------------------------------
      SUBTOTAL, REMAINING ITEMS.........          53,528         116,093
 
        ACCOUNTING ADJUSTMENT...........               1               1
                                         -------------------------------
          GRAND TOTAL...................          82,000         123,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Biscayne Bay Coastal Wetlands Project.--The Committee 
continues to support this vital project to protect drinking 
water supplies in eastern Miami-Dade County from saltwater 
intrusion and to enhance the coastal and marine ecology of 
Biscayne Bay and the offshore coral reef system. The Committee 
notes support from Miami-Dade County and the South Florida 
Water Management District to incorporate highly treated, 
reclaimed wastewater as an additional source of freshwater to 
assist the rehydration of these coastal wetlands. The Committee 
encourages the Corps to consider the incorporation of this 
potential source of freshwater into further study, design, and 
construction of the project and to evaluate the potential to 
use additional volumes of reclaimed wastewater to restore 
freshwater artesian springs within the Bay through underground 
injection to the shallow, underlying aquifer.
    Bubbly Creek.--The Committee encourages the Corps to resume 
its study of the revitalization of the South Fork of the South 
Branch of the Chicago River (known as ``Bubbly Creek'') now 
that the Environmental Protection Agency has completed its 
evaluation of the study area and removed the site from its 
Superfund program.
    Disposition of Completed Projects.--Disposition studies not 
included in the budget request that have a non-federal interest 
who has expressed interest in assuming responsibility for a 
facility shall be considered eligible for additional funding 
provided in this account. The Committee understands the Corps 
recommended no action for the Upper Monongahela and Allegheny 
River Studies in 2017. No funds provided may be used to take 
any action on the recommendations from the Upper Monongahela 
and Allegheny River Studies.
    Mid-Chesapeake Bay Island.--The Corps has completed the 
supplemental chief's report and is awaiting approval from the 
administration before budgeting for the Mid-Chesapeake Bay 
Island Project (James and Barren Islands). The Committee 
encourages the Corps to provide funding for PED for this 
project through the annual budget process or with additional 
funds.
    Puget Sound Nearshore Study.--The Committee encourages the 
Corps to proceed with the tiered implementation strategy using 
all existing authorities as outlined in the Puget Sound 
Nearshore Ecosystem Restoration Project Feasibility Study, 
Completion Strategy Guidance dated June 2015. The Corps is 
further directed to recognize the Puget Sound Nearshore Study 
as the feasibility component for the purposes of Section 544 of 
the Water Resources Development Act of 2000. The Committee 
notes that the WIIN Act authorized construction of the Puget 
Sound Nearshore Ecosystem Restoration Project, and reminds the 
Corps that no new start, new investment decision, or new phase 
decision shall be required to move this project from 
feasibility to PED.
    Rahway River Basin (Upper Basin), New Jersey.--There has 
been an agreement to provide further analysis of the Rahway 
River Basin Flood Risk Management Feasibility Study led by the 
Corps' New England District. The Corps is encouraged to include 
funding in the fiscal year 2019 work plan to complete the 
necessary detailed analysis in conjunction with cost sharing 
agreements with the non-federal sponsor.
    Research and Development.--The Committee recommends 
additional funding for increasing collaboration research 
partnerships to advance the capability to evaluate methods for 
restoring ecosystem conservation.
    Research and Development, Additional Topic--Urban Flood 
Damage Reduction and Stream Restoration in Arid Regions.--The 
Committee recommendation includes $1,500,000 for the Corps' 
Flood & Coastal Systems research and development [R&D] program 
to continue its focus on the management of water resources 
infrastructure and projects that promote public safety, reduce 
risk, improve operational efficiencies, reduce flood damage, 
sustain the environment, and position our water resource 
infrastructure to be managed as adaptable systems due to the 
implications of hydrologic uncertainties. The R&D program shall 
also continue its focus on science and technology efforts to 
address needs for resilient water resources infrastructure, 
specifically as impacted by post-wildfire conditions including 
increased sedimentation and debris flow. The tools and 
technologies developed under this program shall also be 
applicable to other parts of the country.
    Research and Development, Additional Topic.--The Committee 
recognizes the importance of sustainable oyster reefs for 
protecting vital navigation channels and coastal 
infrastructure, supporting commercial fisheries, and 
maintaining healthy ecosystems. Recent restoration efforts have 
not achieved the intended success for U.S. oyster populations, 
and the identification of effective restoration strategies 
remains a critical gap. The Corps is encouraged to develop 
partnerships with research universities to leverage expertise 
and enhance the Engineer Research and Development Center's 
mission.
    San Francisco Waterfront Seawall.--The Committee is deeply 
concerned that the seawall protecting over three miles of San 
Francisco's waterfront and the city's financial district is in 
disrepair and at risk of failure. The Seawall provides 
essential flood protection for 24 million residents and 
visitors, $100,000,000,000 in real estate and economic 
activity, and the confluence of several rail transportation 
lines. The Committee understands the Corps first determined 
there was a Federal interest in the project in 2016 and has 
begun the Continuing Authorities Program section 103 project to 
address the highest priority areas first. Given expected sea 
level rise, increasing earthquake risk, and the unstable nature 
of the Seawall's Bay Mud infill foundation, the Committee 
strongly urges the Corps to prioritize work on this critical 
life safety project.
    Study of Water Resources Development Projects by Non-
Federal Interests.--Section 1126 of the Water Infrastructure 
Improvements for the Nation Act of 2016 [WIIN Act] allows the 
Secretary, at the request of a non-federal interest, to provide 
technical assistance relating to any aspect of a feasibility 
study if the non-federal interest contracts with the Secretary 
to pay all costs of providing such technical assistance. The 
Committee has heard concerns that the Corps is not providing 
technical assistance consistent with the spirit of this 
provision and directs the Corps to brief the Committees on 
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress on the perceived 
limitations to providing (1) review and comment of a non-
federal interest's draft work products by Corps staff at the 
District and Division levels, (2) Corps District staff 
preparation of work products and assistance to the non-federal 
interest in preparing work products, (3) assistance in 
obtaining public review and comments, and (4) consultation and 
coordination with other State and Federal agencies and affected 
Native American Tribes on environmental, permitting, and 
cultural resource compliance matters.
    Study on Performance of Innovative Materials.--Section 1173 
of the WIIN Act required the Secretary to enter into a contract 
with the Transportation Research Board of the National Academy 
of Sciences ``to develop a proposal to study the use and 
performance of innovative materials in water resources 
development projects carried out by the Corps of Engineers.'' 
The Committee encourages the Corps to prioritize commencing 
this work with the National Academy of Sciences.
    Upper Des Plaines River and Tributaries Project.--The 
Committee is aware that the project area was flooded with 
record high crests overflowing the Des Plaines River last 
summer, resulting in damage to more than 3,200 residences. The 
Committee urges the Corps to move forward with design of the 
flood damage reduction project, while the non-federal sponsor 
prepares a proposal for advance work on a number of flood 
features under Section 204 of the Water Resources Development 
Act of 1986, as amended.
    Upper Mississippi River-Illinois Waterway System.--The 
Committee is concerned that despite longstanding bipartisan 
support from Congress for the Navigation Ecosystem 
Sustainability Program [NESP], the Corps has failed to move 
forward on this project. The Committee recognizes that an 
updated economic analysis of the project is necessary to 
produce a benefit-to-cost ratio [BCR], which will inform how 
the Corps is able to move forward to construction of the 
project. The Corps is directed to determine the necessary cost 
and scope of this analysis and report to the Committees on 
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress on their findings 
within 30 days of enactment of this act. This analysis shall 
also consider the benefits of potentially re-scoping the 
project.
    Water Quality and Salinity Impacts on Oyster Reefs.--The 
Committee encourages the Corps, when conducting or reviewing 
environmental assessments or environmental impact statements 
for navigation or coastal restoration projects in areas where 
oyster reefs exist, to consider water quality and salinity 
impacts on those reefs and, when appropriate, to mitigate any 
negative impacts. The Committee also looks forward to the 
Corps' completion of the Congressionally-required assessment 
and report on the beneficial use of dredged material as 
substrate for oyster reef development.
    Willamette River.--The Committee directs the Corps to 
prioritize the restoration floodplain and aquatic habitat 
through cost-effective and tested means, such as fish-passage 
and culvert enhancement for salmon and steelhead listed under 
the Endangered Species Act.
    Additional Funding for Ongoing Work.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $41,000,000 in additional funds for 
Investigations. From these additional funds, the Corps is 
authorized to begin seven new feasibility studies. The Corps is 
directed to allocate these additional funds in accordance with 
the direction in the front matter under the heading 
``Additional Funding''. Of the additional funding provided in 
this account, not less than $16,500,000 shall be allocated to 
PED activities. Of the additional funding recommended in this 
account for Navigation and Coastal and Deep Draft Navigation, 
the Corps shall allocate not less than $2,500,000 for 
Navigation PED. Additionally, the Corps shall comply with the 
following direction in allocating funds made available for 
Investigations:
  --When evaluating ongoing studies for funding, the Corps 
        shall consider completing or accelerating ongoing 
        studies or to initiating new studies that will enhance 
        the Nation's economic development, job growth, and 
        international competitiveness; are for projects located 
        in areas that have suffered recent natural disasters; 
        are for projects the protect life and property; or are 
        for projects to address legal requirements.
  --The Corps shall consider giving priority to flood and storm 
        damage reduction studies related to preserving National 
        Historic Landmarks that are threatened by shoreline 
        erosion.
  --The Corps shall include appropriate requests for funding in 
        future budget submissions for PED and new feasibility 
        studies initiated in fiscal year 2019. The Corps shall 
        prepare the budget to reflect study completions, 
        defined as completion of PED.
  --Funding shall be available for existing studies, including 
        studies in the PED phase, and the updating of economic 
        analyses and cost estimates for studies that have 
        received appropriations. Ongoing studies that are 
        actively progressing and can utilize the funding in a 
        timely manner are eligible for these additional funds.

                              construction

Appropriations, 2018....................................  $2,085,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................     871,733,000
Committee recommendation................................   2,161,000,000

    The Committee recommends $2,161,000,000 for Construction, 
an increase of $1,289,267,000 from the budget request. The 
Committee's recommendation allows the Corps to select six new 
construction starts to begin in fiscal year 2019.

                              introduction

    Funding in this account is used for construction, major 
rehabilitation, and related activities for water resources 
development projects having navigation, flood and storm damage 
reduction, water supply, hydroelectric, environmental 
restoration, and other attendant benefits to the Nation. Funds 
to be derived from the HMTF will be applied to cover the 
Federal share of the Dredged Material Disposal Facilities 
Program.

                               new starts

    The Corps is directed to designate new starts in accordance 
with the direction in the front matter under the heading 
``Additional Funding''.

                        committee recommendation

    The table below displays the budget request and Committee's 
recommendation for Construction:

                                        CORPS OF ENGINEERS--CONSTRUCTION
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Budget estimate
                      Item                       ------------------------------------------------    Committee
                                                   Construction        HMTF            IWTF       recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   CALIFORNIA
 
AMERICAN RIVER COMMON FEATURES, NATOMAS BASIN,            42,000  ..............  ..............          42,000
 CA.............................................
HAMILTON CITY, CA...............................           6,000  ..............  ..............           6,000
ISABELLA LAKE, CA...............................         118,000  ..............  ..............         118,000
SANTA ANA RIVER MAINSTEM, CA....................          15,000  ..............  ..............          15,000
YUBA RIVER BASIN, CA............................          35,500  ..............  ..............          35,500
 
                    DELAWARE
 
DELAWARE BAY COASTLINE, ROOSEVELT INLET TO LEWIS  ..............             150  ..............             150
 BEACH, DE......................................
 
                     FLORIDA
 
HERBERT HOOVER DIKE, FL (SEEPAGE CONTROL).......          96,000  ..............  ..............          96,000
SOUTH FLORIDA ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION                       67,500  ..............  ..............          67,500
 (EVERGLADES), FL...............................
 
                     GEORGIA
 
SAVANNAH HARBOR DISPOSAL AREAS, GA & SC.........  ..............          10,500  ..............          10,500
SAVANNAH HARBOR EXPANSION, GA...................          49,000  ..............  ..............          49,000
 
                    ILLINOIS
 
OLMSTED LOCKS AND DAM, OHIO RIVER, IL & KY......          29,750  ..............           5,250          35,000
UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER RESTORATION, IL, IA, MN,          33,170  ..............  ..............          33,170
 MO & WI........................................
 
                      IOWA
 
MISSOURI RIVER FISH AND WILDLIFE RECOVERY, IA,            10,000  ..............  ..............          10,000
 KS, MO, MT, NE, ND & SD........................
 
                    KENTUCKY
 
ROUGH RIVER LAKE, KY............................          40,000  ..............  ..............          40,000
 
                    MARYLAND
 
ASSATEAGUE, MD..................................  ..............             600  ..............             600
POPLAR ISLAND, MD...............................  ..............          21,000  ..............          21,000
 
                  MASSACHUSETTS
BOSTON HARBOR, MA...............................          15,105  ..............  ..............          15,105
 
                   NEW JERSEY
 
CAPE MAY INLET TO LOWER TOWNSHIP, NJ............  ..............           7,200  ..............           7,200
RARITAN RIVER BASIN, GREEN BROOK SUB-BASIN, NJ..           5,000  ..............  ..............           5,000
 
                     OREGON
 
COLUMBIA RIVER AT THE MOUTH, OR & WA............          28,000  ..............  ..............          28,000
 
                  PENNSYLVANIA
 
EAST BRANCH CLARION RIVER LAKE, PA..............          14,000  ..............  ..............          14,000
 
                      TEXAS
 
BUFFALO BAYOU AND TRIBUTARIES, TX...............          11,908  ..............  ..............          11,908
CORPUS CHRISTI SHIP CHANNEL, TX.................          13,000  ..............  ..............          13,000
LEWISVILLE DAM, TX..............................          55,000  ..............  ..............          55,000
 
                   WASHINGTON
 
COLUMBIA RIVER FISH MITIGATION, WA, OR & ID               46,000  ..............  ..............          46,000
 (CRFM).........................................
MUD MOUNTAIN DAM, WA............................          25,000  ..............  ..............          25,000
 
                  WEST VIRGINIA
 
BLUESTONE LAKE, WV..............................           7,810  ..............  ..............           7,810
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
      SUBTOTAL, ITEMS UNDER STATES..............         762,743          39,450           5,250         807,443
 
                 REMAINING ITEMS
 
ADDITIONAL FUNDING..............................
    FLOOD AND STORM DAMAGE REDUCTION............  ..............  ..............  ..............         150,000
        FLOOD CONTROL...........................  ..............  ..............  ..............         150,000
        SHORE PROTECTION........................  ..............  ..............  ..............          50,000
    NAVIGATION..................................  ..............  ..............  ..............         500,250
    INLAND WATERWAYS TRUST FUND REVENUES........  ..............  ..............  ..............         122,750
    OTHER AUTHORIZED PROJECT PURPOSES...........  ..............  ..............  ..............          70,000
        ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION OR COMPLIANCE.  ..............  ..............  ..............          50,000
        ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE............  ..............  ..............  ..............          75,000
AQUATIC PLANT CONTROL PROGRAM...................  ..............  ..............  ..............          12,000
CONTINUING AUTHORITIES PROGRAM
    AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION (SECTION 206).           1,500  ..............  ..............          10,000
    BENEFICIAL USES OF DREDGED MATERIAL (SECTION  ..............             500  ..............           8,317
     204).......................................
    EMERGENCY STREAMBANK AND SHORELINE            ..............  ..............  ..............           8,000
     PROTECTION (SECTION 14)....................
    FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS (SECTION 205)........             500  ..............  ..............           8,000
    MITIGATION OF SHORE DAMAGES (SECTION 111)...  ..............  ..............  ..............             500
    NAVIGATION PROGRAM (SECTION 107)............  ..............  ..............  ..............           8,000
    PROJECT MODIFICATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT OF THE           1,000  ..............  ..............           8,000
     ENVIRONMENT (SECTION 1135).................
    SHORE PROTECTION (SECTION 103)..............  ..............  ..............  ..............           3,000
DAM SAFETY AND SEEPAGE/STABILITY CORRECTION               88,655  ..............  ..............         100,405
 PROGRAM........................................
EMPLOYEES' COMPENSATION.........................          17,000  ..............  ..............          17,000
INLAND WATERWAYS USERS BOARD--BOARD EXPENSE.....              60  ..............  ..............              60
INLAND WATERWAYS USERS BOARD--CORPS EXPENSE.....             275  ..............  ..............             275
RESTORATION OF ABANDONED MINES..................  ..............  ..............  ..............           2,000
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
      SUBTOTAL..................................         108,990             500  ..............       1,353,557
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL.....................................         871,733          39,950           5,250       2,161,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Aquatic Plant Control Program.--Of the funding recommended 
for the Aquatic Plant Control Program, $1,000,000 shall be for 
activities for the control of flowering rush. Of the funding 
recommended for the Aquatic Plant Control Program, $5,000,000 
shall be for nationwide research and development to address 
invasive aquatic plants; within this funding, the Corps is 
encouraged to support cost-shared aquatic plant management 
programs. Of the funding recommended for the Aquatic Plant 
Control Program, $6,000,000 shall be for watercraft inspection 
stations, as authorized by section 1039 of the WRRDA, and 
related monitoring.
    Camp Ellis Beach, Saco, Maine.--The Committee is concerned 
by the continued delay in implementing a solution at Camp Ellis 
Beach in Saco, Maine. To address continued erosion which has 
destroyed 37 homes to date, the Committee is aware that the 
Corps' initial study recommended a shore damage mitigation 
project consisting of a 750-foot-long spur jetty, and placement 
of about 360,000 cubic yards of beach fill along the beach. The 
Committee is further aware that the project's design and costs 
are under review and being updated in preparation of a new 
report to Congress detailing a path ahead on the project. 
Accordingly, the Committee directs the Secretary to 
expeditiously submit this report to the Committees on 
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress. This report shall 
include any additional legislative authorities necessary for 
the project to be approved and constructed.
    Cano Martin Pena Ecosystem Restoration Project, San Juan, 
Puerto Rico.--The Committee recognizes the importance of the 
Cano Martin Pena Ecosystem Restoration Project to residents' 
health and wellbeing, the local economy and environment, and 
the reduction of coastal flood and storm damage risk. The 
Committee encourages the Corps to include appropriate funding 
in future budget requests and to coordinate closely with non-
federal interests in Puerto Rico to minimize project planning 
and construction delays.
    Central Everglades Planning Project.--The Committee 
recognizes the importance of restoring America's Everglades, 
and urges the Corps to expedite the required validation report 
for the Central Everglades Planning Project and begin PED work 
and construction on PPA South as soon as practicable to 
complement the efforts of the South Florida Water Management 
District.
    Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal Dispersal Barrier, 
Illinois.--The issue of hydrologic separation should be fully 
studied by the Corps and vetted by the appropriate 
congressional authorizing committees and specifically enacted 
into law. No funds provided in this act may be used for 
construction of hydrologic separation measures.
    Columbia River Fish Mitigation.--The Committee understands 
the Pacific Lamprey are a culturally and ecologically important 
fish species to Pacific Northwest Tribal nations. The Corps and 
several Tribal nations have worked in partnership for years to 
develop and execute a Pacific Lamprey conservation program in 
the Columbia River basin, focused on implementing passage 
improvements. In part these activities have made it unnecessary 
for this species to be listed under the Endangered Species Act, 
however, adult returns remain low. The Committee understands 
the Corps is currently crafting a status report on these 
Pacific Lamprey improvements, and identifying possible 
activities to support Pacific Lamprey passage. The Committee 
directs the Corps to uphold the agency's Tribal treaty 
responsibilities by working with relevant Tribal nations to 
develop and implement a plan based on the status report to 
support efforts to restore the Pacific Lamprey.
    Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan [CERP]--Indian 
River Lagoon-South.--The Committee recognizes the importance of 
restoring America's Everglades, and eliminating discharges from 
Lake Okeechobee that help fuel harmful algal blooms in the St. 
Lucie River and Indian River Lagoon. The Committee urges the 
Corps to expedite preparations for design work on the C-23 and 
C-24 Reservoirs that, along with the C-44 Reservoir, will serve 
as crucial elements of the Indian River Lagoon-South CERP 
project to collect and clean discharges before they enter the 
Lagoon.
    Continuing Authorities Program.--The Committee recommends 
$53,817,000 for the Continuing Authorities Program [CAP], an 
increase of $50,817,000 from the budget request. CAP is a 
useful tool for the Corps to undertake small localized projects 
without being encumbered by the lengthy study and authorization 
phases typical of most Corps projects. Within the CAP and to 
the extent already authorized by law, the Corps is encouraged 
to consider projects that enhance coastal and ocean ecosystem 
resiliency. The management of CAP should continue consistent 
with direction provided in previous fiscal years.
    Cook County Environmental Infrastructure.--The Committee is 
aware of the high level of interest in Cook County for 
additional resources for the Section 219 Cook County 
Infrastructure Project. Given Cook County's population of 5.2 
million people, the Committee urges the Corps to support the 
project at a higher funding level to address the wide and 
expansive range of needs in this County.
    Dam Safety Assurance and Seepage/Static Instability 
Correction Program.--The Committee rejects the budget request 
proposal regarding Herbert Hoover Dike, which would make funds 
provided in this program available only if the State of Florida 
commits certain funds. Consistent with long-standing 
congressional direction, the Corps may not require funding in 
excess of legally required cost-shares for studies and projects 
as a criterion for funding decisions. The Corps shall apply dam 
safety funds to the highest priority projects.
    Howard Hanson Dam.--The Committee is aware that the 
National Marine Fisheries Service [NMFS] is preparing a 
Biological Opinion [BiOp] to determine the impact of ongoing 
operations of Howard Hanson Dam, including the Howard Hanson 
Dam--Additional Water Storage Project, on Endangered Species 
Act [ESA]-listed species and is engaging in consultations with 
the Corps. The Committee is also aware that an updated BiOp is 
anticipated in fiscal year 2018. The Committee encourages the 
Corps to continue consultations with NMFS and urges the Corps 
to work with resource co-managers to develop interim and long-
term measures to maintain fish runs past Howard Hanson Dam, 
while upholding ESA and municipal and industrial water supply 
responsibilities.
    La Grange Lock and Dam.--The Corps is directed to brief the 
Committee not later than 30 days after the enactment of this 
act on the current status of this project.
    Levee Safety Program.--The Committee noted in the report 
for the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 that it is 
concerned that the Corps has not taken steps to implement the 
levee safety initiatives required under WRRDA. The Committee 
directed the Corps, in conjunction with FEMA, to put together a 
plan of action by June 21, 2018, that includes tangible 
milestones for how the Agencies will meet the requirements 
under WRRDA section 3016. The Committee has not yet received a 
progress report and directs the Corps to provide an update 
within 30 days after enactment of this act.
    McCook and Thornton Reservoirs, Illinois.--The Committee 
encourages the Corps to use McCook Reservoir as a test pilot 
for the Non-Federal Implementation Pilot Program under WRRDA 
section 1043.
    Metro East Levees.--The Committee is disappointed by the 
lack of funding provided to the Metro East levee system. This 
levee rehabilitation project will help protect communities in 
the Metro East region from rising waters on the Mississippi 
River. The Committee urges the Corps to include funding for the 
Metro East levee system in the Corps' fiscal year 2019 work 
plan.
    Mud Mountain Dam.--The Committee commends the Corps for 
initiating construction to support the October 2014 Mud 
Mountain BiOp and mitigate the impact of the ongoing operation 
of Mud Mountain Dam on species listed under ESA by replacing 
the barrier structure and building a new fish passage facility. 
The Committee notes with interest that the Corps awarded a 
contract for the construction of the fish passage facility in 
March 2018, and reminds the Corps that complex, multi-year 
construction projects require consistent funding. Therefore, 
the Committee encourages the Corps to uphold the agency's ESA 
and Tribal treaty responsibilities by requesting sufficient 
funding in future budgets to complete construction of the fish 
passage facility by 2020 and fully implement the BiOp 
requirements.
    Napa River.--The Committee urges the Corps to expeditiously 
complete the Determination of Federal Interest in coordination 
with the local sponsor and to continue construction through 
completion of the justified and necessary elements of the 
project. The Committee also urges the Corps to prioritize 
repairs of the defective floodgates.
    Natural Infrastructure Options.--The Committee directs the 
Corps to engage with State and local government and non-profit 
organizations, where appropriate, on projects in diverse 
geographic areas to evaluate the effectiveness of a variety of 
natural infrastructure options, such as shellfish reef and 
natural vegetation, in order to promote resiliency and reduce 
damage from coastal erosion, storm surge, and flooding. Such 
features should be incorporated into approved projects where 
appropriate and effective.
    Oyster Restoration.--The Committee supports Gulf Coast 
oyster restoration efforts and the Chesapeake Bay Oyster 
Restoration Program and encourages the Corps to provide 
sufficient funding in future budget submissions or the fiscal 
year 2019 work plan.
    Prioritization of Projects in Drought-Stricken Areas.--The 
Committee urges the Corps to prioritize any authorized projects 
that would alleviate water supply issues in areas that have 
been afflicted by severe droughts in the last three fiscal 
years, to include projects focused on the treatment of brackish 
water.
    Project Modifications for Improvement of the Environment.--
Within the Section 1135 Continuing Authorities Program 
authority and to the extent already authorized by law, the 
Committee urges the Corps to give priority to projects that 
restore degraded wetland habitat and stream habitat impacted by 
construction of Corps levees with executed Feasibility Cost 
Share Agreements.
    Public-Private Partnerships.--The Committee notes that the 
Chief of Engineers continues to express strong support for 
public-private partnerships as a method to reduce the Federal 
cost of future construction projects. In 2018, Congress 
directed the Corps to issue its policy on how proposals for 
public-private partnerships will be considered by the Corps and 
how these partnerships will be incorporated into budget policy. 
The Corps is directed to prioritize completion of this policy 
to meet the September 18, 2018 deadline.
    Rehabilitation of Corps Constructed Dams.--The Committee is 
aware that implementation guidance for section 1177 of the WIIN 
Act is awaiting approval from the administration. The Corps is 
directed to submit this implementation guidance to the 
Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress as 
expeditiously as possible.
    South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Justification Sheet 
Accuracy.--The Committee, the Department of the Interior, and 
non-federal project sponsors rely on accurate and timely budget 
information for South Florida Ecosystem Restoration [SFER] 
projects from the Corps. The Committee directs the Corps to 
carefully ensure the accuracy of all budget justification 
sheets that inform SFER Integrated Financial Plan documents for 
fiscal year 2019 by September 30, 2018.
    South San Francisco Bay Shoreline.--The Committee was 
deeply disappointed by the lack of a new construction start in 
the fiscal year 2019 budget request for the first phase of the 
South San Francisco Bay Shoreline project and the lack of 
funding for a feasibility study of the next phase of the 
project. This project provides critical flood protection to 
communities, businesses, and municipal structures in Santa 
Clara County. In addition, this project will restore 
approximately 2,900 acres of former salt production ponds to 
tidal marsh habitat and improve recreational access to 
surrounding communities. The Committee strongly urges the Corps 
to prioritize progress on this project with additional funding 
allocated through the fiscal year 2019 work plan or with 
recently appropriated disaster funds.
    The Dalles Dam.--The Committee is aware that Section 204 of 
the Flood Control Act of 1950 (Public Law 81-516) authorized 
the construction of the Dalles Dam on the Columbia River. The 
original project authorization recognized that construction of 
the Dalles would result in population dislocations and that 
Indian villages would necessarily have to be relocated. The 
original authorization intended that the Corps would build a 
new Indian village in response to the dislocation of Tribes. It 
is not the Committee's intent to expand the Corps' mission. 
Rather, the Committee intends that the Corps uphold its 
responsibility to Tribes as was originally intended when 
Congress authorized the Dalles by mitigating the impacts of a 
Corps project to Tribes.
    Additional Funding for Ongoing Work.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $1,289,267,000 in additional funds for 
Construction above the budget request. The Corps shall allocate 
these additional funds in accordance with the direction in the 
front matter under the heading ``Additional Funding''. Of the 
additional funding provided for flood and storm damage 
reduction, flood control, and environmental restoration or 
compliance, the Corps shall allocate not less than $15,400,000 
for projects for hurricane and storm damage risk reduction and 
environmental restoration with both structural and 
nonstructural project elements. Of the additional funds 
recommended in this account for flood and storm damage 
reduction and flood control, the Corps shall allocate not less 
than $20,000,000 to continue construction of projects which 
principally include improvements to rainfall drainage systems 
that address flood damages. Of the additional funds recommended 
in this account for flood and storm damage reduction, 
navigation, and other authorized project purposes, the Corps 
shall allocate not less than $30,000,000 to authorized 
reimbursements for projects with executed project partnership 
agreements and that have completed construction or where non-
Federal sponsors intend to use the funds for additional water 
resource development activities. Of the additional funds 
recommended in this account, no less than $1,800,000 is to 
complete a plan for a purpose outside of the Corps' traditional 
mission.
    When allocating the additional funding provided in this 
account, the Corps is encouraged to evaluate authorized 
reimbursements in the same manner as if the projects were being 
evaluated for new or ongoing construction and shall consider 
giving priority to the following:
  --Benefits of the funded work to the national economy;
  --Extent to which the work will enhance national, regional, 
        or local economic development;
  --Number of jobs created directly by the funded activity;
  --Ability to obligate the funds allocated within the calendar 
        year, including consideration of the ability of the 
        non-Federal sponsor to provide any required cost share;
  --Ability to complete the project, separable element, or 
        project phase with the funds allocated;
  --Legal requirements, including responsibilities to Tribes;
  --For flood and storm damage reduction projects (including 
        authorized nonstructural measures and periodic beach 
        renourishments),
  --Population, economic activity, or public infrastructure at 
        risk, as appropriate, and
  --The severity of risk of flooding or the frequency with 
        which an area as experienced flooding;
  --For shore protection projects, projects in areas that have 
        suffered severe beach erosion requiring additional sand 
        placement outside of the normal beach renourishment 
        cycle or in which the normal beach renourishment cycle 
        has been delayed;
  --For navigation projects, the number of jobs or level of 
        economic activity to be supported by completion of the 
        project, separable element, or project phase;
  --For projects cost hared with the IWTF, the economic impact 
        on the local, regional, and national economy if the 
        project is not funded, as well as discrete elements of 
        work that can be completed within the funding provided 
        in this line item;
  --For other authorized project purposes and environmental 
        restoration or compliance projects, to include the 
        beneficial use of dredged material; and
  --For environmental infrastructure, projects in rural 
        communities, projects with greater economic impact, 
        projects in counties or parishes with high poverty 
        rates, projects owed past reimbursements, and projects 
        that will provide substantial benefits to water quality 
        improvement.
    The Committee recommendation includes the full use of all 
estimated fiscal year 2019 annual revenues in the IWTF as well 
as the sufficient additional IWTF prior year revenues to ensure 
ongoing new construction projects may proceed with an efficient 
funding profile. Funds recommended herein for inland waterways 
shall only be available for ongoing new construction projects, 
which have a fiscal year 2019 estimate of $246,000,000 above 
the administration's budget request. The Corps shall allocate 
all funds recommended in the IWTF Revenues line item along with 
the statutory cost share from funds provided in the Navigation 
line item prior to allocating the remainder of funds in the 
Navigation line item.

                   MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES

Appropriations, 2018....................................    $425,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................     244,735,000
Committee recommendation................................     350,000,000

    The Committee recommends $350,000,000 for Mississippi River 
and Tributaries, an increase of $105,265,000 above the budget 
request. Funds recommended in this account are for planning, 
construction, and operation and maintenance activities 
associated with water resource projects located in the lower 
Mississippi River Valley from Cape Girardeau, Missouri to the 
Gulf of Mexico.
    The table below displays the budget request and Committee's 
recommendation:

                                        MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                          Budget estimate
                              Item                               --------------------------------    Committee
                                                                       MR&T            HMTF       recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          CONSTRUCTION
 
CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO & TN................          75,847  ..............          75,847
MISSISSIPPI RIVER LEVEES, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO &TN............          32,885  ..............          32,885
ATCHAFALAYA BASIN FLOODWAY SYSTEM, LA...........................             200  ..............             200
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      SUBTOTAL, CONSTRUCTION....................................         108,932  ..............         108,932
 
                    OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
 
CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO & TN................          54,680  ..............          54,680
MISSISSIPPI RIVER LEVEES, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO &TN............           8,984  ..............           8,984
HELENA HARBOR, PHILLIPS COUNTY, AR..............................  ..............             715             715
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AR...............................             364  ..............             364
LOWER ARKANSAS RIVER, NORTH BANK, AR............................             304  ..............             304
LOWER ARKANSAS RIVER, SOUTH BANK, AR............................             187  ..............             187
ST FRANCIS BASIN, AR & MO.......................................           5,900  ..............           5,900
TENSAS BASIN, BOEUF AND TENSAS RIVERS, AR & LA..................           2,123  ..............           2,123
WHITE RIVER BACKWATER, AR.......................................           1,000  ..............           1,000
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IL...............................              38  ..............              38
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, KY...............................              95  ..............              95
ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, LA...........................................           8,865  ..............           8,865
ATCHAFALAYA BASIN FLOODWAY SYSTEM, LA...........................           1,755  ..............           1,755
BATON ROUGE HARBOR, DEVIL SWAMP, LA.............................  ..............             555             555
BAYOU COCODRIE AND TRIBUTARIES, LA..............................              48  ..............              48
BONNET CARRE, LA................................................           3,821  ..............           3,821
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, LA...............................             807  ..............             807
LOWER RED RIVER, SOUTH BANK LEVEES, LA..........................             498  ..............             498
MISSISSIPPI DELTA REGION, LA....................................             490  ..............             490
OLD RIVER, LA...................................................           9,246  ..............           9,246
TENSAS BASIN, RED RIVER BACKWATER, LA...........................           2,750  ..............           2,750
GREENVILLE HARBOR, MS...........................................  ..............             930             930
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MS...............................             135  ..............             135
VICKSBURG HARBOR, MS............................................  ..............             940             940
YAZOO BASIN, ARKABUTLA LAKE, MS.................................           5,509  ..............           5,509
YAZOO BASIN, BIG SUNFLOWER RIVER, MS............................             168  ..............             168
YAZOO BASIN, ENID LAKE, MS......................................           5,296  ..............           5,296
YAZOO BASIN, GREENWOOD, MS......................................             799  ..............             799
YAZOO BASIN, GRENADA LAKE, MS...................................           5,334  ..............           5,334
YAZOO BASIN, MAIN STEM, MS......................................           1,201  ..............           1,201
YAZOO BASIN, SARDIS LAKE, MS....................................           6,231  ..............           6,231
YAZOO BASIN, TRIBUTARIES, MS....................................             901  ..............             901
YAZOO BASIN, WILL M WHITTINGTON AUX CHAN, MS....................             357  ..............             357
YAZOO BASIN, YAZOO BACKWATER AREA, MS...........................             538  ..............             538
YAZOO BASIN, YAZOO CITY, MS.....................................             737  ..............             737
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MO...............................             208  ..............             208
WAPPAPELLO LAKE, MO.............................................           4,878  ..............           4,878
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, TN...............................              47  ..............              47
MEMPHIS HARBOR, MCKELLAR LAKE, TN...............................  ..............           2,125           2,125
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      SUBTOTAL, OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.......................         134,294           5,265         139,559
 
                         REMAINING ITEMS
 
ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR ONGOING WORK DREDGING....................  ..............  ..............           5,000
    FLOOD CONTROL...............................................  ..............  ..............          55,000
    OTHER AUTHORIZED PURPOSES...................................  ..............  ..............          40,000
COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA..............................             600  ..............             600
MAPPING.........................................................             819  ..............             819
MISSISSIPPI RIVER COMMISSION....................................              90  ..............              90
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      SUBTOTAL, REMAINING ITEMS.................................           1,509  ..............         101,509
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES..................         244,735           5,265         350,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Lower Mississippi River Main Stem.--The budget request 
proposes to consolidate several activities across multiple 
States into one line item. The Committee does not support this 
change and instead recommends continuing to fund these 
activities as separate line items.
    MAT Sinking Unit.--The MAT Sinking Unit [MSU] has been a 
key component in maintaining the Mississippi River channel for 
70 years. The Committee understands that without a timely 
replacement, the current Mississippi River channel alignment is 
at risk of migrating, threatening levees, endangering the 
public, and interrupting river commerce. Because this vital 
equipment can be utilized nationwide to protect riverbank 
erosion and sloughing, it is unclear why the Corps proposes to 
fund its replacement out of the Mississippi Rivers and 
Tributaries account rather than the Plant Replacement and 
Improvement Program [PRIP]. Therefore, the Corps shall brief 
the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress on 
why the replacement must be funded in the MR&T account instead 
of PRIP.
    Additional Funding for Ongoing Work.--When allocating the 
additional funding recommended in this account, the Corps shall 
consider giving priority to completing or accelerating ongoing 
work that will enhance the nation's economic development, job 
growth, and international competitiveness, or to studies or 
projects located in areas that have suffered recent natural 
disasters. While this funding is shown under remaining items, 
the Corps shall use these funds in investigations, 
construction, and operation and maintenance, as applicable.
    When allocating the additional funding recommended in this 
account the Corps shall allocate not less than $30,000,000 for 
additional flood control construction projects outside of the 
Lower Mississippi River Main Stem. Of the additional funds 
recommended in this account for other authorized project 
purposes, the Corps shall allocate not less than $2,000,000 for 
operation and maintenance of facilities that are educational or 
to continue land management of mitigation features. Of the 
additional funds recommended in this account, the Corps shall 
allocate not less than $5,000,000 for dredging of ports and 
harbors.

                       OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

Appropriations, 2018....................................  $3,630,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................   2,076,733,000
Committee recommendation................................   3,740,000,000

    The Committee recommends $3,740,000,000 for Operation and 
Maintenance, an increase of $1,663,267,000 above the budget 
request.

                              INTRODUCTION

    Funding in this account is used to fund operations, 
maintenance, and related activities at water resource projects 
that the Corps operates and maintains. These activities include 
dredging, repair, and operation of structures and other 
facilities, as authorized in the various river and harbor, 
flood control, and water resources development acts. Related 
activities include aquatic plant control, monitoring of 
completed projects where appropriate, removal of sunken 
vessels, and the collection of domestic waterborne commerce 
statistics.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The table below displays the budget request and Committee's 
recommendation for Operation and Maintenance.

                                  CORPS OF ENGINEERS--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                          Budget estimate
                              Item                               --------------------------------    Committee
                                                                        O&M            HMTF       recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             ALABAMA
 
ALABAMA RIVER LAKES, AL.........................................          17,121  ..............          17,121
BLACK WARRIOR AND TOMBIGBEE RIVERS, AL..........................          23,336  ..............          23,436
GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, AL..................................           7,515  ..............           7,765
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AL...............................             198  ..............             198
MOBILE HARBOR, AL...............................................  ..............          22,240          22,240
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, AL...................................  ..............             110             110
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, AL.............................              85  ..............              85
TENNESSEE--TOMBIGBEE WATERWAY WILDLIFE MITIGATION, AL & MS......           1,800  ..............           1,800
TENNESSEE--TOMBIGBEE WATERWAY, AL & MS..........................          27,996  ..............          27,996
WALTER F GEORGE LOCK AND DAM, AL & GA...........................           8,926  ..............           8,926
WATER/ENVIRONMENTAL CERTIFICATION, AL...........................  ..............              70              70
 
                             ALASKA
 
ANCHORAGE HARBOR, AK............................................  ..............           9,265           9,265
CHENA RIVER LAKES, AK...........................................           6,292  ..............           6,292
DILLINGHAM HARBOR, AK...........................................  ..............             970             970
HOMER HARBOR, AK................................................  ..............             770             770
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AK...............................             200  ..............             200
NINILCHIK HARBOR, AK............................................  ..............             600             600
NOME HARBOR, AK.................................................  ..............           2,055           2,055
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, AK...................................  ..............             750             750
 
                             ARIZONA
 
ALAMO LAKE, AZ..................................................           3,342  ..............           3,342
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AZ...............................             534  ..............             534
PAINTED ROCK DAM, AZ............................................           3,086  ..............           3,086
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, AZ.............................             107  ..............             107
WHITLOW RANCH DAM, AZ...........................................             935  ..............             935
 
                            ARKANSAS
 
BEAVER LAKE, AR.................................................           8,791  ..............           8,791
BLAKELY MT DAM, LAKE OUACHITA, AR...............................           9,131  ..............           9,131
BLUE MOUNTAIN LAKE, AR..........................................           1,870  ..............           1,870
BULL SHOALS LAKE, AR............................................           7,761  ..............           7,761
DEGRAY LAKE, AR.................................................           7,438  ..............           7,438
DEQUEEN LAKE, AR................................................           1,433  ..............           1,433
DIERKS LAKE, AR.................................................           1,506  ..............           1,506
GILLHAM LAKE, AR................................................           1,305  ..............           1,305
GREERS FERRY LAKE, AR...........................................           7,840  ..............           7,840
HELENA HARBOR, AR...............................................  ..............              15              15
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AR...............................             646  ..............             646
MCCLELLAN-KERR ARKANSAS RIVER NAVIGATION SYSTEM, AR.............          50,995  ..............          50,995
MILLWOOD LAKE, AR...............................................           4,335  ..............           4,335
NARROWS DAM, LAKE GREESON, AR...................................           5,751  ..............           5,751
NIMROD LAKE, AR.................................................           2,340  ..............           2,340
NORFORK LAKE, AR................................................           6,134  ..............           6,134
OSCEOLA HARBOR, AR..............................................  ..............              15              15
OUACHITA AND BLACK RIVERS, AR & LA..............................           7,979  ..............           7,979
WHITE RIVER, AR.................................................              25  ..............              25
YELLOW BEND PORT, AR............................................  ..............             100             100
 
                           CALIFORNIA
 
BLACK BUTTE LAKE, CA............................................           2,620  ..............           2,620
BUCHANAN DAM, HV EASTMAN LAKE, CA...............................           2,104  ..............           2,104
CHANNEL ISLANDS HARBOR, CA......................................  ..............           6,290           6,290
COYOTE VALLEY DAM, LAKE MENDOCINO, CA...........................           3,540  ..............           3,540
CRESCENT CITY HARBOR, CA........................................  ..............             200             200
DRY CREEK (WARM SPRINGS) LAKE AND CHANNEL, CA...................           7,494  ..............           7,494
FARMINGTON DAM, CA..............................................             478  ..............             478
HIDDEN DAM, HENSLEY LAKE, CA....................................           2,182  ..............           2,182
HUMBOLDT HARBOR AND BAY, CA.....................................  ..............           4,510           4,510
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, CA..............              10  ..............              10
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, CA...............................           3,450  ..............           3,450
ISABELLA LAKE, CA...............................................           1,389  ..............           1,389
LOS ANGELES COUNTY DRAINAGE AREA, CA............................          22,633  ..............          22,633
MERCED COUNTY STREAMS, CA.......................................             458  ..............             458
MOJAVE RIVER DAM, CA............................................           2,092  ..............           2,092
MORRO BAY HARBOR, CA............................................  ..............           2,400           2,400
NEW HOGAN LAKE, CA..............................................           2,878  ..............           2,878
NEW MELONES LAKE, DOWNSTREAM CHANNEL, CA........................           1,652  ..............           1,652
OAKLAND HARBOR (50 FOOT PROJECT), CA............................  ..............          19,076          19,076
OCEANSIDE HARBOR, CA............................................  ..............           2,470           2,470
PINE FLAT LAKE, CA..............................................           4,437  ..............           4,437
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, CA...................................  ..............           1,350           1,350
REDWOOD CITY HARBOR, CA.........................................  ..............           5,950           5,950
RICHMOND HARBOR, CA.............................................  ..............          10,145          10,145
SACRAMENTO RIVER (30 FOOT PROJECT), CA..........................  ..............           2,300           2,300
SACRAMENTO RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES (DEBRIS CONTROL), CA...........           1,095  ..............           1,095
SACRAMENTO RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES (DEBRIS CONTROL), CA (NAV).....  ..............             798             798
SACRAMENTO RIVER SHALLOW DRAFT CHANNEL, CA......................  ..............             210             210
SAN DIEGO HARBOR, CA............................................  ..............           4,400           4,400
SAN FRANCISCO BAY DELTA MODEL STRUCTURE, CA.....................           1,191  ..............           1,191
SAN FRANCISCO HARBOR AND BAY, CA (DRIFT REMOVAL)................  ..............           3,101           3,101
SAN FRANCISCO HARBOR, CA........................................  ..............           4,335           4,335
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER, PORT OF STOCKTON, CA.........................  ..............           5,000           5,000
SAN PABLO BAY AND MARE ISLAND STRAIT, CA........................  ..............           3,049           3,049
SANTA ANA RIVER BASIN, CA.......................................          12,537  ..............          12,537
SANTA BARBARA HARBOR, CA........................................  ..............           3,360           3,360
SANTA CRUZ HARBOR, CA...........................................  ..............              15              15
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, CA.............................           1,344  ..............           1,344
SUCCESS LAKE, CA................................................           3,543  ..............           3,543
SUISUN BAY CHANNEL, CA..........................................  ..............           3,664           3,664
TERMINUS DAM, LAKE KAWEAH, CA (DAM SAFETY)......................           2,785  ..............           2,785
VENTURA HARBOR, CA..............................................  ..............           5,370           5,370
YUBA RIVER, CA..................................................             180  ..............             180
YUBA RIVER, CA (NAV)............................................  ..............           1,435           1,435
 
                            COLORADO
 
BEAR CREEK LAKE, CO.............................................             587  ..............             587
CHATFIELD LAKE, CO..............................................           1,889  ..............           1,889
CHERRY CREEK LAKE, CO...........................................           6,479  ..............           6,479
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, CO..............              17  ..............              17
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, CO...............................             347  ..............             347
JOHN MARTIN RESERVOIR, CO.......................................           4,071  ..............           4,071
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, CO.............................             560  ..............             560
TRINIDAD LAKE, CO...............................................           1,775  ..............           1,775
 
                           CONNECTICUT
 
BLACK ROCK LAKE, CT.............................................             671  ..............             671
COLEBROOK RIVER LAKE, CT........................................           2,583  ..............           2,583
HANCOCK BROOK LAKE, CT..........................................             821  ..............             821
HOP BROOK LAKE, CT..............................................           1,285  ..............           1,285
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, CT...............................             474  ..............             474
MANSFIELD HOLLOW LAKE, CT.......................................             784  ..............             784
NORTHFIELD BROOK LAKE, CT.......................................             391  ..............             391
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, CT...................................  ..............             900             900
STAMFORD HURRICANE BARRIER, CT..................................             572  ..............             572
THOMASTON DAM, CT...............................................           1,022  ..............           1,022
WEST THOMPSON LAKE, CT..........................................             893  ..............             893
 
                            DELAWARE
 
INDIAN RIVER INLET & BAY, DE....................................  ..............               7               7
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, DE...............................              70  ..............              70
INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, DELAWARE RIVER TO CHESAPEAKE BAY, DE & MD  ..............          12,450          12,450
INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, REHOBOTH BAY DELAWARE BAY................  ..............              30              30
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, DE...................................  ..............             200             200
WILMINGTON HARBOR, DE...........................................  ..............           5,491           5,491
 
                      DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
 
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, DC...............................              80  ..............              80
POTOMAC AND ANACOSTIA RIVERS, DC (DRIFT REMOVAL)................  ..............             930             930
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, DC...................................  ..............              30              30
 
                             FLORIDA
 
CANAVERAL HARBOR, FL............................................  ..............           4,149           4,149
CENTRAL AND SOUTHERN FLORIDA, FL................................          14,429  ..............          14,429
CENTRAL AND SOUTHERN FLORIDA, FL (NAV)..........................  ..............           1,033           1,033
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, FL...............................             814  ..............             814
INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, JACKSONVILLE TO MIAMI, FL................           2,980  ..............           2,980
JACKSONVILLE HARBOR, FL.........................................  ..............           6,560           6,560
JIM WOODRUFF LOCK AND DAM, LAKE SEMINOLE, FL, AL & GA...........           7,560  ..............           7,560
MANATEE HARBOR, FL..............................................  ..............           3,845           3,845
MIAMI HARBOR, FL................................................  ..............           6,070           6,070
OKEECHOBEE WATERWAY, FL.........................................           1,229  ..............           1,229
OKEECHOBEE WATERWAY, FL (NAV)...................................  ..............           1,091           1,091
PALM BEACH HARBOR, FL...........................................  ..............           2,785           2,785
PANAMA CITY HARBOR, FL..........................................  ..............              55              55
PENSACOLA HARBOR, FL............................................  ..............           1,390           1,390
PORT EVERGLADES HARBOR, FL......................................  ..............           5,850           5,850
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, FL...................................  ..............           1,275           1,275
REMOVAL OF AQUATIC GROWTH, FL...................................  ..............           3,290           3,290
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, FL.............................             132  ..............             132
TAMPA HARBOR, FL................................................  ..............             980             980
WATER / ENVIRONMENTAL CERTIFICATION, FL.........................  ..............             180             180
 
                             GEORGIA
 
ALLATOONA LAKE, GA..............................................           9,257  ..............           9,257
APALACHICOLA, CHATTAHOOCHEE AND FLINT RIVERS, GA, AL & FL.......           1,332  ..............           1,332
ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, GA..............................           3,000  ..............           3,000
BRUNSWICK HARBOR, GA............................................  ..............           5,258           5,258
BUFORD DAM AND LAKE SIDNEY LANIER, GA...........................          11,395  ..............          11,395
CARTERS DAM AND LAKE, GA........................................           7,591  ..............           7,591
HARTWELL LAKE, GA & SC..........................................          11,119  ..............          11,119
HARTWELL LAKE, GA & SC (NAV)....................................  ..............              40              40
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, GA...............................             196  ..............             196
J STROM THURMOND LAKE, GA & SC..................................          11,069  ..............          11,069
J STROM THURMOND LAKE, GA & SC (NAV)............................  ..............              59              59
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, GA...................................  ..............             100             100
RICHARD B RUSSELL DAM AND LAKE, GA & SC.........................           9,681  ..............           9,681
SAVANNAH HARBOR, GA.............................................  ..............          34,312          34,312
SAVANNAH RIVER BELOW AUGUSTA, GA................................  ..............             201             201
WEST POINT DAM AND LAKE, GA & AL................................           7,828  ..............           7,828
 
                             HAWAII
 
BARBERS POINT HARBOR, HI........................................             295  ..............             295
HONOLULU HARBOR, HI.............................................  ..............           7,300           7,300
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, HI...............................             278  ..............             278
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, HI...................................  ..............             663             663
 
                              IDAHO
 
ALBENI FALLS DAM, ID............................................           1,182  ..............           1,182
DWORSHAK DAM AND RESERVOIR, ID..................................           4,902  ..............           4,902
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, ID...............................             377  ..............             377
LUCKY PEAK LAKE, ID.............................................          10,292  ..............          10,292
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, ID.............................             716  ..............             716
 
                            ILLINOIS
 
CALUMET HARBOR AND RIVER, IL & IN...............................  ..............           4,616           4,616
CARLYLE LAKE, IL................................................           5,719  ..............           5,719
CHICAGO HARBOR, IL..............................................  ..............           3,583           3,583
CHICAGO RIVER, IL...............................................             286  ..............             286
CHICAGO SANITARY AND SHIP CANAL DISPERSAL BARRIER, IL...........          18,920  ..............          18,920
FARM CREEK RESERVOIRS, IL.......................................             413  ..............             413
ILLINOIS WATERWAY (MVR PORTION), IL & IN........................          43,727  ..............          43,727
ILLINOIS WATERWAY (MVS PORTION), IL & IN........................           2,060  ..............           2,060
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, IL..............              50  ..............              50
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IL...............................           1,973  ..............           1,973
KASKASKIA RIVER NAVIGATION, IL..................................           2,222  ..............           2,222
LAKE MICHIGAN DIVERSION, IL.....................................  ..............             851             851
LAKE SHELBYVILLE, IL............................................           6,272  ..............           6,272
MISSISSIPPI RIVER BETWEEN MISSOURI RIVER AND MINNEAPOLIS (MVR             70,824  ..............          70,824
 PORTION), IL...................................................
MISSISSIPPI RIVER BETWEEN MISSOURI RIVER AND MINNEAPOLIS (MVS             39,140  ..............          39,140
 PORTION), IL...................................................
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, IL...................................  ..............             106             106
REND LAKE, IL...................................................           5,542  ..............           5,542
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, IL....................  ..............             680             680
WAUKEGAN HARBOR, IL.............................................  ..............           1,526           1,526
 
                             INDIANA
 
BROOKVILLE LAKE, IN.............................................           1,813  ..............           1,813
BURNS WATERWAY HARBOR, IN.......................................  ..............           4,619           4,619
CAGLES MILL LAKE, IN............................................           1,195  ..............           1,195
CECIL M HARDEN LAKE, IN.........................................           1,243  ..............           1,243
INDIANA HARBOR, IN..............................................  ..............          10,998          10,998
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IN...............................           1,051  ..............           1,051
J EDWARD ROUSH LAKE, IN.........................................           1,375  ..............           1,375
MISSISSINEWA LAKE, IN...........................................           1,274  ..............           1,274
MONROE LAKE, IN.................................................           1,374  ..............           1,374
PATOKA LAKE, IN.................................................           1,498  ..............           1,498
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, IN...................................  ..............             190             190
SALAMONIE LAKE, IN..............................................           1,313  ..............           1,313
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, IN....................  ..............              55              55
 
                              IOWA
 
CORALVILLE LAKE, IA.............................................           5,599  ..............           5,599
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, IA..............               6  ..............               6
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IA...............................           1,282  ..............           1,282
MISSOURI RIVER FISH AND WILDLIFE RECOVERY, IA, KS, MO, MT, NE,             4,829  ..............           4,829
 ND & SD........................................................
MISSOURI RIVER--SIOUX CITY TO THE MOUTH, IA, KS, MO & NE........          13,200  ..............          13,200
RATHBUN LAKE, IA................................................           2,974  ..............           2,974
RED ROCK DAM AND LAKE RED ROCK, IA..............................           5,954  ..............           5,954
SAYLORVILLE LAKE, IA............................................           7,934  ..............           7,934
 
                             KANSAS
 
CLINTON LAKE, KS................................................           2,354  ..............           2,354
COUNCIL GROVE LAKE, KS..........................................           1,378  ..............           1,378
EL DORADO LAKE, KS..............................................             738  ..............             738
ELK CITY LAKE, KS...............................................           1,031  ..............           1,031
FALL RIVER LAKE, KS.............................................           1,145  ..............           1,145
HILLSDALE LAKE, KS..............................................             967  ..............             967
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, KS..............               4  ..............               4
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, KS...............................           1,250  ..............           1,250
JOHN REDMOND DAM AND RESERVOIR, KS..............................           1,727  ..............           1,727
KANOPOLIS LAKE, KS..............................................           4,134  ..............           4,134
MARION LAKE, KS.................................................           1,833  ..............           1,833
MELVERN LAKE, KS................................................           3,146  ..............           3,146
MILFORD LAKE, KS................................................           2,153  ..............           2,153
PEARSON--SKUBITZ BIG HILL LAKE, KS..............................           1,397  ..............           1,397
PERRY LAKE, KS..................................................           2,495  ..............           2,495
POMONA LAKE, KS.................................................           2,063  ..............           2,063
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, KS.............................             472  ..............             472
TORONTO LAKE, KS................................................             733  ..............             733
TUTTLE CREEK LAKE, KS...........................................           2,399  ..............           2,399
WILSON LAKE, KS.................................................           1,844  ..............           1,844
 
                            KENTUCKY
 
BARKLEY DAM AND LAKE BARKLEY, KY & TN...........................          17,631  ..............          17,631
BARREN RIVER LAKE, KY...........................................           3,622  ..............           3,622
BIG SANDY HARBOR, KY............................................  ..............           1,960           1,960
BUCKHORN LAKE, KY...............................................           2,079  ..............           2,079
CARR CREEK LAKE, KY.............................................           1,869  ..............           1,869
CAVE RUN LAKE, KY...............................................           1,155  ..............           1,155
DEWEY LAKE, KY..................................................           3,780  ..............           3,780
ELVIS STAHR (HICKMAN) HARBOR, KY................................  ..............             915             915
FALLS OF THE OHIO NATIONAL WILDLIFE, KY & IN....................              34  ..............              34
FISHTRAP LAKE, KY...............................................           1,858  ..............           1,858
GRAYSON LAKE, KY................................................           1,211  ..............           1,211
GREEN AND BARREN RIVERS, KY.....................................           2,735  ..............           2,735
GREEN RIVER LAKE, KY............................................           4,849  ..............           4,849
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, KY...............................           1,015  ..............           1,015
KENTUCKY RIVER, KY..............................................              22  ..............              22
LAUREL RIVER LAKE, KY...........................................           2,343  ..............           2,343
MARTINS FORK LAKE, KY...........................................           1,697  ..............           1,697
MIDDLESBORO CUMBERLAND RIVER BASIN, KY..........................             266  ..............             266
NOLIN LAKE, KY..................................................           2,853  ..............           2,853
OHIO RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS, KY, IL, IN & OH......................          68,524  ..............          68,524
OHIO RIVER OPEN CHANNEL WORK, KY, IL, IN, OH, PA & WV...........           7,639  ..............           7,639
PAINTSVILLE LAKE, KY............................................           1,282  ..............           1,282
ROUGH RIVER LAKE, KY............................................           3,461  ..............           3,461
TAYLORSVILLE LAKE, KY...........................................           1,148  ..............           1,148
WOLF CREEK DAM, LAKE CUMBERLAND, KY.............................          10,313  ..............          10,313
YATESVILLE LAKE, KY.............................................           1,889  ..............           1,889
 
                            LOUISIANA
 
ATCHAFALAYA RIVER AND BAYOUS CHENE, BOEUF & BLACK, LA...........  ..............          12,675          12,675
BARATARIA BAY WATERWAY, LA......................................  ..............             100             100
BAYOU BODCAU RESERVOIR, LA......................................           1,289  ..............           1,289
BAYOU LAFOURCHE AND LAFOURCHE JUMP WATERWAY, LA.................  ..............             100             100
BAYOU PIERRE, LA................................................              33  ..............              33
BAYOU SEGNETTE WATERWAY, LA.....................................  ..............              10              10
BAYOU TECHE, LA.................................................  ..............              50              50
CADDO LAKE, LA..................................................             208  ..............             208
CALCASIEU RIVER AND PASS, LA....................................  ..............          18,639          18,639
FRESHWATER BAYOU, LA............................................  ..............             759             759
GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, LA..................................          30,185  ..............          30,185
HOUMA NAVIGATION CANAL, LA......................................  ..............             100             100
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, LA...............................           1,068  ..............           1,068
J BENNETT JOHNSTON WATERWAY, LA.................................          11,881  ..............          11,881
LAKE PROVIDENCE HARBOR, LA......................................  ..............           1,315           1,315
MERMENTAU RIVER, LA.............................................  ..............           1,540           1,540
MISSISSIPPI RIVER OUTLETS AT VENICE, LA.........................  ..............             200             200
MISSISSIPPI RIVER, BATON ROUGE TO THE GULF OF MEXICO, LA........  ..............          89,169          89,169
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, LA...................................  ..............              11              11
REMOVAL OF AQUATIC GROWTH, LA...................................  ..............             250             250
WALLACE LAKE, LA................................................             245  ..............             245
WATERWAY FROM EMPIRE TO THE GULF, LA............................  ..............              14              14
 
                              MAINE
 
DISPOSAL AREA MONITORING, ME....................................  ..............           1,050           1,050
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, ME...............................             100  ..............             100
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, ME...................................  ..............           1,000           1,000
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, ME....................  ..............              30              30
 
                            MARYLAND
 
BACK CREEK, MD..................................................  ..............              13              13
BALTIMORE HARBOR AND CHANNELS (50 FOOT), MD.....................  ..............          23,645          23,645
BALTIMORE HARBOR, MD (DRIFT REMOVAL)............................  ..............             415             415
CLAIBORNE HARBOR, MD............................................  ..............               5               5
CUMBERLAND, MD AND RIDGELEY, WV.................................             201  ..............             201
FISHING CREEK, MD...............................................  ..............              10              10
HERRING CREEK, TALL TIMBERS, MD.................................  ..............              10              10
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MD...............................             126  ..............             126
JENNINGS RANDOLPH LAKE, MD & WV.................................           6,285  ..............           6,285
KNAPPS NARROWS, MD..............................................  ..............               5               5
LOWER THOROFARE, DEAL ISLAND, MD................................  ..............               5               5
MIDDLE RIVER & DARK HEAD CREEK, MD..............................  ..............               3               3
NEAVITT HARBOR, MD..............................................  ..............               3               3
OCEAN CITY HARBOR AND INLET AND SINEPUXENT BAY, MD..............  ..............               5               5
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MD...................................  ..............             485             485
ROCK HALL HARBOR, MD............................................  ..............               5               5
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, MD.............................             173  ..............             173
WICOMICO RIVER, MD..............................................  ..............           4,000           4,000
 
                          MASSACHUSETTS
 
BARRE FALLS DAM, MA.............................................             888  ..............             888
BIRCH HILL DAM, MA..............................................             886  ..............             886
BOSTON HARBOR, MA...............................................  ..............           7,150           7,150
BUFFUMVILLE LAKE, MA............................................             731  ..............             731
CAPE COD CANAL, MA..............................................           2,535  ..............           2,535
CAPE COD CANAL, MA (NAV)........................................  ..............           5,207           5,207
CHARLES RIVER NATURAL VALLEY STORAGE AREA, MA...................             391  ..............             391
CONANT BROOK LAKE, MA...........................................             334  ..............             334
EAST BRIMFIELD LAKE, MA.........................................             684  ..............             684
HODGES VILLAGE DAM, MA..........................................             725  ..............             725
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MA...............................             348  ..............             348
KNIGHTVILLE DAM, MA.............................................           1,252  ..............           1,252
LITTLEVILLE LAKE, MA............................................             721  ..............             721
NEW BEDFORD FAIRHAVEN AND ACUSHNET HURRICANE BARRIER, MA........             505  ..............             505
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MA...................................  ..............             950             950
TULLY LAKE, MA..................................................             914  ..............             914
WEST HILL DAM, MA...............................................           1,034  ..............           1,034
WESTVILLE LAKE, MA..............................................           1,050  ..............           1,050
 
                            MICHIGAN
 
CHANNELS IN LAKE ST CLAIR, MI...................................  ..............             190             190
DETROIT RIVER, MI...............................................              72  ..............              72
DETROIT RIVER, MI (NAV).........................................  ..............           6,810           6,810
GRAND HAVEN HARBOR, MI..........................................              18  ..............              18
GRAND HAVEN HARBOR, MI (NAV)....................................  ..............           1,750           1,750
HOLLAND HARBOR, MI..............................................  ..............             600             600
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MI...............................             260  ..............             260
KEWEENAW WATERWAY, MI...........................................              27  ..............              27
LUDINGTON HARBOR, MI............................................  ..............             500             500
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MI...................................  ..............             833             833
ROGUE RIVER, MI.................................................  ..............           1,200           1,200
SAGINAW RIVER, MI...............................................  ..............           2,425           2,425
SEBEWAING RIVER, MI.............................................             531  ..............             531
ST CLAIR RIVER, MI..............................................  ..............           1,510           1,510
ST JOSEPH HARBOR, MI............................................  ..............           1,500           1,500
ST MARYS RIVER, MI..............................................           3,153  ..............           3,153
ST MARYS RIVER, MI (NAV)........................................  ..............          25,179          25,179
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, MI....................  ..............           3,138           3,138
 
                            MINNESOTA
 
BIGSTONE LAKE--WHETSTONE RIVER, MN & SD.........................             462  ..............             462
DULUTH--SUPERIOR HARBOR, MN & WI................................             750  ..............             750
DULUTH--SUPERIOR HARBOR, MN & WI (NAV)..........................  ..............           6,790           6,790
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MN...............................             240  ..............             240
LAC QUI PARLE LAKES, MINNESOTA RIVER, MN........................           1,349  ..............           1,349
MINNESOTA RIVER, MN.............................................  ..............             260             260
 
          MISSISSIPPI RIVER BETWEEN MISSOURI RIVER AND
 
    MINNEAPOLIS (MVP PORTION), MN...............................          71,737  ..............          71,737
ORWELL LAKE, MN.................................................             508  ..............             508
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MN...................................  ..............             103             103
RED LAKE RESERVOIR, MN..........................................             143  ..............             143
RESERVOIRS AT HEADWATERS OF MISSISSIPPI RIVER, MN...............           5,244  ..............           5,244
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, MN....................  ..............             246             246
 
                           MISSISSIPPI
 
BILOXI HARBOR, MS...............................................  ..............           1,748           1,748
EAST FORK, TOMBIGBEE RIVER, MS..................................             290  ..............             290
GULFPORT HARBOR, MS.............................................  ..............           3,215           3,215
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MS...............................             116  ..............             116
MOUTH OF YAZOO RIVER, MS........................................  ..............              30              30
OKATIBBEE LAKE, MS..............................................           1,740  ..............           1,740
PASCAGOULA HARBOR, MS...........................................  ..............           6,151           6,151
PEARL RIVER, MS & LA............................................              89  ..............              89
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MS...................................  ..............             131             131
ROSEDALE HARBOR, MS.............................................  ..............             935             935
WATER/ENVIRONMENTAL CERTIFICATION, MS...........................  ..............              40              40
YAZOO RIVER, MS.................................................  ..............              30              30
 
                            MISSOURI
 
CARUTHERSVILLE HARBOR, MO.......................................  ..............             615             615
CLARENCE CANNON DAM AND MARK TWAIN LAKE, MO.....................           6,955  ..............           6,955
CLEARWATER LAKE, MO.............................................           3,740  ..............           3,740
HARRY S TRUMAN DAM AND RESERVOIR, MO............................          11,638  ..............          11,638
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, MO..............               2  ..............               2
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MO...............................           1,512  ..............           1,512
LITTLE BLUE RIVER LAKES, MO.....................................           1,347  ..............           1,347
LONG BRANCH LAKE, MO............................................           3,282  ..............           3,282
MISSISSIPPI RIVER BETWEEN THE OHIO AND MISSOURI RIVERS (REG               30,821  ..............          30,821
 WORKS), MO & IL................................................
POMME DE TERRE LAKE, MO.........................................           2,767  ..............           2,767
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, MO.............................             172  ..............             172
SMITHVILLE LAKE, MO.............................................           1,606  ..............           1,606
SOUTHEAST MISSOURI PORT, MISSISSIPPI RIVER, MO..................  ..............             409             409
STOCKTON LAKE, MO...............................................           5,691  ..............           5,691
TABLE ROCK LAKE, MO & AR........................................          10,331  ..............          10,331
 
                             MONTANA
 
FT PECK DAM AND LAKE, MT........................................           5,534  ..............           5,534
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MT...............................             154  ..............             154
LIBBY DAM, MT...................................................           2,636  ..............           2,636
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, MT.............................             125  ..............             125
 
                            NEBRASKA
 
GAVINS POINT DAM, LEWIS AND CLARK LAKE, NE & SD.................          10,087  ..............          10,087
HARLAN COUNTY LAKE, NE..........................................           2,337  ..............           2,337
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, NE..............               3  ..............               3
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NE...............................             466  ..............             466
MISSOURI RIVER--KENSLERS BEND, NE TO SIOUX CITY, IA.............              46  ..............              46
PAPILLION CREEK, NE.............................................             858  ..............             858
SALT CREEKS AND TRIBUTARIES, NE.................................           3,347  ..............           3,347
 
                             NEVADA
 
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NV...............................              77  ..............              77
MARTIS CREEK LAKE, NV & CA......................................           1,278  ..............           1,278
PINE AND MATHEWS CANYONS LAKES, NV..............................             816  ..............             816
 
                          NEW HAMPSHIRE
 
BLACKWATER DAM, NH..............................................             823  ..............             823
EDWARD MACDOWELL LAKE, NH.......................................             732  ..............             732
FRANKLIN FALLS DAM, NH..........................................           1,017  ..............           1,017
HOPKINTON--EVERETT LAKES, NH....................................           1,857  ..............           1,857
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NH...............................              90  ..............              90
OTTER BROOK LAKE, NH............................................           1,395  ..............           1,395
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NH...................................  ..............             300             300
SURRY MOUNTAIN LAKE, NH.........................................             801  ..............             801
 
                           NEW JERSEY
 
BARNEGAT INLET, NJ..............................................  ..............               8               8
CHEESEQUAKE CREEK, NJ...........................................  ..............              50              50
COLD SPRING INLET, NJ...........................................  ..............               3               3
DELAWARE RIVER AT CAMDEN, NJ....................................  ..............              15              15
DELAWARE RIVER, PHILADELPHIA TO THE SEA, NJ, PA & DE............  ..............          27,785          27,785
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, NJ..............              45  ..............              45
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NJ...............................             487  ..............             487
MANASQUAN RIVER, NJ.............................................  ..............               2               2
NEW JERSEY INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, NJ............................  ..............              50              50
NEWARK BAY, HACKENSACK AND PASSAIC RIVERS, NJ...................  ..............           8,000           8,000
PASSAIC RIVER FLOOD WARNING SYSTEMS, NJ.........................             667  ..............             667
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NJ...................................  ..............           2,223           2,223
RARITAN RIVER TO ARTHUR KILL CUT-OFF, NJ........................  ..............              20              20
RARITAN RIVER, NJ...............................................  ..............              50              50
SANDY HOOK BAY AT LEONARD, NJ...................................  ..............              10              10
SHOAL HARBOR AND COMPTON CREEK, NJ..............................  ..............              10              10
SHREWSBURY RIVER, MAIN CHANNEL, NJ..............................  ..............              25              25
 
                           NEW MEXICO
 
ABIQUIU DAM, NM.................................................           3,715  ..............           3,715
COCHITI LAKE, NM................................................           3,585  ..............           3,585
CONCHAS LAKE, NM................................................           2,726  ..............           2,726
GALISTEO DAM, NM................................................             935  ..............             935
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, NM..............              27  ..............              27
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NM...............................             561  ..............             561
JEMEZ CANYON DAM, NM............................................             849  ..............             849
MIDDLE RIO GRANDE ENDANGERED SPECIES COLLABORATIVE PROGRAM, NM..           2,117  ..............           2,117
SANTA ROSA DAM AND LAKE, NM.....................................           1,385  ..............           1,385
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, NM.............................             199  ..............             199
TWO RIVERS DAM, NM..............................................           1,056  ..............           1,056
UPPER RIO GRANDE WATER OPERATIONS MODEL STUDY, NM...............             746  ..............             746
 
                            NEW YORK
 
ALMOND LAKE, NY.................................................             741  ..............             741
ARKPORT DAM, NY.................................................             330  ..............             330
BAY RIDGE AND RED HOOK CHANNELS, NY.............................  ..............              25              25
BLACK ROCK CHANNEL AND TONAWANDA HARBOR, NY.....................               5  ..............               5
BLACK ROCK CHANNEL AND TONAWANDA HARBOR, NY (NAV)...............  ..............           6,229           6,229
BRONX RIVER, NY.................................................  ..............              30              30
BROWNS CREEK, NY................................................  ..............              30              30
BUFFALO HARBOR, NY..............................................  ..............           2,754           3,055
BUTTERMILK CHANNEL, NY..........................................  ..............             400             400
EAST RIVER, NY..................................................  ..............              10              10
EAST SIDNEY LAKE, NY............................................             766  ..............             766
EASTCHESTER CREEK, NY...........................................  ..............               5               5
FIRE ISLAND INLET TO JONES INLET, NY............................  ..............              50              50
FLUSHING BAY AND CREEK, NY......................................  ..............              30              30
GLEN COVE CREEK, NY.............................................  ..............              15              15
GREAT KILLS HARBOR, NY..........................................  ..............              20              20
GREAT SOUTH BAY, NY.............................................  ..............              25              25
HUDSON RIVER CHANNEL, NY........................................  ..............             100             100
HUDSON RIVER, NY (MAINT)........................................  ..............           9,650           9,650
HUDSON RIVER, NY (O & C)........................................  ..............           2,704           2,704
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NY...............................           1,391  ..............           1,391
JONES INLET, NY.................................................  ..............              50              50
LONG ISLAND INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, NY...........................  ..............              50              50
MATTITUCK HARBOR, NY............................................  ..............              15              15
MORICHES INLET, NY..............................................  ..............              50              50
MOUNT MORRIS DAM, NY............................................           3,785  ..............           3,785
NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY CHANNELS, NY & NJ.......................  ..............           9,000           9,000
NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY HARBOR, NY & NJ.........................  ..............          16,000          16,000
NEW YORK HARBOR, NY.............................................  ..............           8,548           8,548
NEW YORK HARBOR, NY & NJ (DRIFT REMOVAL)........................  ..............          10,373          10,373
NEW YORK HARBOR, NY (PREVENTION OF OBSTRUCTIVE DEPOSITS)........  ..............           1,416           1,416
PORTCHESTER HARBOR, NY..........................................  ..............              50              50
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NY...................................  ..............           2,522           2,522
ROCHESTER HARBOR, NY............................................  ..............           1,200           1,200
SHINNECOCK INLET, NY............................................  ..............              50              50
SOUTHERN NEW YORK FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS, NY....................             854  ..............             854
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, NY....................  ..............             610             610
WESTCHESTER CREEK, NY...........................................  ..............               5               5
WHITNEY POINT LAKE, NY..........................................           1,386  ..............           1,386
 
                         NORTH CAROLINA
 
ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, NC..............................           5,590  ..............           5,590
B EVERETT JORDAN DAM AND LAKE, NC...............................           4,780  ..............           4,780
CAPE FEAR RIVER ABOVE WILMINGTON, NC............................              84  ..............              84
CAPE FEAR RIVER ABOVE WILMINGTON, NC (NAV)......................  ..............             317             317
FALLS LAKE, NC..................................................           3,275  ..............           3,275
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NC...............................             190  ..............             190
MANTEO (SHALLOWBAG) BAY, NC.....................................  ..............           1,550           1,550
MASONBORO INLET AND CONNECTING CHANNELS, NC.....................              50  ..............              50
MOREHEAD CITY HARBOR, NC........................................  ..............           5,570           5,570
NEW RIVER INLET, NC.............................................           3,555  ..............           3,555
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NC...................................  ..............             700             700
ROLLINSON CHANNEL, NC...........................................  ..............             790             790
SILVER LAKE HARBOR, NC..........................................  ..............           1,085           1,085
W KERR SCOTT DAM AND RESERVOIR, NC..............................           3,417  ..............           3,417
WILMINGTON HARBOR, NC...........................................  ..............          14,715          14,715
 
                          NORTH DAKOTA
 
BOWMAN HALEY, ND................................................             328  ..............             328
GARRISON DAM, LAKE SAKAKAWEA, ND................................          15,769  ..............          15,769
HOMME LAKE, ND..................................................             337  ..............             337
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, ND...............................             530  ..............             530
LAKE ASHTABULA AND BALDHILL DAM, ND.............................           1,999  ..............           1,999
PIPESTEM LAKE, ND...............................................             503  ..............             503
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, ND.............................             123  ..............             123
SOURIS RIVER, ND................................................           2,029  ..............           2,029
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, ND....................  ..............              85              85
 
                              OHIO
 
ALUM CREEK LAKE, OH.............................................           2,236  ..............           2,236
ASHTABULA HARBOR, OH............................................  ..............           2,359           2,359
BERLIN LAKE, OH.................................................           3,098  ..............           3,098
CAESAR CREEK LAKE, OH...........................................           2,145  ..............           2,145
CLARENCE J BROWN DAM, OH........................................           1,268  ..............           1,268
CLEVELAND HARBOR, OH............................................  ..............           6,789           7,139
CONNEAUT HARBOR, OH.............................................  ..............           1,130           1,130
DEER CREEK LAKE, OH.............................................           1,664  ..............           1,664
DELAWARE LAKE, OH...............................................           2,393  ..............           2,393
DILLON LAKE, OH.................................................           1,495  ..............           1,495
FAIRPORT HARBOR, OH.............................................  ..............           1,158           1,158
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, OH...............................             736  ..............             736
MASSILLON LOCAL PROTECTION PROJECT, OH..........................             101  ..............             101
MICHAEL J KIRWAN DAM AND RESERVOIR, OH..........................           1,466  ..............           1,466
MOSQUITO CREEK LAKE, OH.........................................           1,857  ..............           1,857
MUSKINGUM RIVER LAKES, OH.......................................          17,127  ..............          17,127
NORTH BRANCH KOKOSING RIVER LAKE, OH............................             556  ..............             556
OHIO-MISSISSIPPI FLOOD CONTROL, OH..............................           1,699  ..............           1,699
PAINT CREEK LAKE, OH............................................           1,523  ..............           1,523
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, OH...................................  ..............             306             306
ROSEVILLE LOCAL PROTECTION PROJECT, OH..........................              37  ..............              37
SANDUSKY HARBOR, OH.............................................  ..............           1,313           1,313
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, OH....................  ..............             255             255
TOLEDO HARBOR, OH...............................................  ..............           4,427           4,427
TOM JENKINS DAM, OH.............................................             825  ..............             825
WEST FORK OF MILL CREEK LAKE, OH................................           2,412  ..............           2,412
WILLIAM H HARSHA LAKE, OH.......................................           2,665  ..............           2,665
 
                            OKLAHOMA
 
ARCADIA LAKE, OK................................................             615  ..............             615
BIRCH LAKE, OK..................................................             778  ..............             778
BROKEN BOW LAKE, OK.............................................           2,074  ..............           2,074
CANTON LAKE, OK.................................................           2,119  ..............           2,119
COPAN LAKE, OK..................................................           1,171  ..............           1,171
EUFAULA LAKE, OK................................................           6,828  ..............           6,828
FORT GIBSON LAKE, OK............................................           4,998  ..............           4,998
FORT SUPPLY LAKE, OK............................................             917  ..............             917
GREAT SALT PLAINS LAKE, OK......................................             298  ..............             298
HEYBURN LAKE, OK................................................             861  ..............             861
HUGO LAKE, OK...................................................           2,524  ..............           2,524
HULAH LAKE, OK..................................................             735  ..............             735
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, OK...............................             650  ..............             650
KAW LAKE, OK....................................................           2,215  ..............           2,215
KEYSTONE LAKE, OK...............................................           4,539  ..............           4,539
MCCLELLAN-KERR ARKANSAS RIVER NAVIGATION SYSTEM, OK.............          20,810  ..............          20,810
OOLOGAH LAKE, OK................................................           2,320  ..............           2,320
OPTIMA LAKE, OK.................................................              63  ..............              63
PENSACOLA RESERVOIR, LAKE OF THE CHEROKEES, OK..................             164  ..............             164
PINE CREEK LAKE, OK.............................................           1,671  ..............           1,671
SARDIS LAKE, OK.................................................           1,285  ..............           1,285
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, OK.............................           1,360  ..............           1,360
SKIATOOK LAKE, OK...............................................           1,697  ..............           1,697
TENKILLER FERRY LAKE, OK........................................           4,318  ..............           4,318
WAURIKA LAKE, OK................................................           1,859  ..............           1,859
WISTER LAKE, OK.................................................             758  ..............             758
 
                             OREGON
 
APPLEGATE LAKE, OR..............................................           1,042  ..............           1,042
BLUE RIVER LAKE, OR.............................................           1,014  ..............           1,014
BONNEVILLE LOCK AND DAM, OR & WA................................           2,084  ..............           2,084
BONNEVILLE LOCK AND DAM, OR & WA (NAV)..........................  ..............           5,915           5,915
CHETCO RIVER, OR................................................  ..............             785             785
COLUMBIA RIVER AT THE MOUTH, OR & WA............................  ..............          23,535          23,535
COOS BAY, OR....................................................  ..............           6,958           6,958
COQUILLE RIVER, OR..............................................  ..............              26              26
COTTAGE GROVE LAKE, OR..........................................           1,261  ..............           1,261
COUGAR LAKE, OR.................................................           2,360  ..............           2,360
DEPOE BAY, OR...................................................  ..............              10              10
DETROIT LAKE, OR................................................           5,894  ..............           5,894
DORENA LAKE, OR.................................................           1,281  ..............           1,281
ELK CREEK LAKE, OR..............................................             174  ..............             174
FALL CREEK LAKE, OR.............................................           1,475  ..............           1,475
FERN RIDGE LAKE, OR.............................................           2,013  ..............           2,013
GREEN PETER--FOSTER LAKES, OR...................................           2,147  ..............           2,147
HILLS CREEK LAKE, OR............................................           1,483  ..............           1,483
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, OR..............              60  ..............              60
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, OR...............................             628  ..............             628
JOHN DAY LOCK AND DAM, OR & WA..................................           5,688  ..............           5,688
LOOKOUT POINT LAKE, OR..........................................           2,052  ..............           2,052
LOST CREEK LAKE, OR.............................................           3,621  ..............           3,621
MCNARY LOCK AND DAM, OR & WA....................................           9,623  ..............           9,623
NEHALEM BAY, OR.................................................  ..............               5               5
PORT ORFORD, OR.................................................  ..............               5               5
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, OR...................................  ..............             400             400
ROGUE RIVER AT GOLD BEACH, OR...................................  ..............               5               5
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, OR.............................              99  ..............              99
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, OR....................  ..............  ..............          10,265
SIUSLAW RIVER, OR...............................................  ..............              10              10
SKIPANON CHANNEL, OR............................................  ..............               5               5
TILLAMOOK BAY & BAR, OR.........................................  ..............               5               5
UMPQUA RIVER, OR................................................  ..............             939             939
WILLAMETTE RIVER AT WILLAMETTE FALLS, OR........................             161  ..............             161
WILLAMETTE RIVER BANK PROTECTION, OR............................             170  ..............             170
WILLOW CREEK LAKE, OR...........................................             748  ..............             748
YAQUINA BAY AND HARBOR, OR......................................  ..............           3,080           3,080
 
                          PENNSYLVANIA
 
ALLEGHENY RIVER, PA.............................................           7,863  ..............           7,863
ALVIN R BUSH DAM, PA............................................             874  ..............             874
AYLESWORTH CREEK LAKE, PA.......................................             416  ..............             416
BELTZVILLE LAKE, PA.............................................           1,640  ..............           1,640
BLUE MARSH LAKE, PA.............................................           3,682  ..............           3,682
CONEMAUGH RIVER LAKE, PA........................................           1,703  ..............           1,703
COWANESQUE LAKE, PA.............................................           2,664  ..............           2,664
CROOKED CREEK LAKE, PA..........................................           2,955  ..............           2,955
CURWENSVILLE LAKE, PA...........................................           1,060  ..............           1,060
DELAWARE RIVER, PHILADELPHIA, PA TO TRENTON, NJ.................  ..............           3,850           3,850
EAST BRANCH CLARION RIVER LAKE, PA..............................           5,891  ..............           5,891
FOSTER JOSEPH SAYERS DAM, PA....................................           2,165  ..............           2,165
FRANCIS E WALTER DAM, PA........................................           2,720  ..............           2,720
GENERAL EDGAR JADWIN DAM AND RESERVOIR, PA......................             337  ..............             337
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, PA..............              60  ..............              60
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, PA...............................           1,110  ..............           1,110
JOHNSTOWN, PA...................................................           1,581  ..............           1,581
KINZUA DAM AND ALLEGHENY RESERVOIR, PA..........................           1,550  ..............           1,550
LOYALHANNA LAKE, PA.............................................           1,529  ..............           1,529
MAHONING CREEK LAKE, PA.........................................           1,457  ..............           1,457
MONONGAHELA RIVER, PA...........................................          15,183  ..............          15,183
OHIO RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS, PA, OH & WV..........................          45,472  ..............          45,472
OHIO RIVER OPEN CHANNEL WORK, PA, OH & WV.......................           1,765  ..............           1,765
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, PA...................................  ..............             170             170
PROMPTON LAKE, PA...............................................             850  ..............             850
PUNXSUTAWNEY, PA................................................             719  ..............             719
RAYSTOWN LAKE, PA...............................................           5,281  ..............           5,281
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, PA.............................              76  ..............              76
SCHUYLKILL RIVER, PA............................................  ..............             100             100
SHENANGO RIVER LAKE, PA.........................................           3,080  ..............           3,080
STILLWATER LAKE, PA.............................................             872  ..............             872
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, PA....................  ..............             105             105
TIOGA--HAMMOND LAKES, PA........................................           3,480  ..............           3,480
TIONESTA LAKE, PA...............................................           2,699  ..............           2,699
UNION CITY LAKE, PA.............................................             611  ..............             611
WOODCOCK CREEK LAKE, PA.........................................           1,156  ..............           1,156
YORK INDIAN ROCK DAM, PA........................................           1,396  ..............           1,396
YOUGHIOGHENY RIVER LAKE, PA & MD................................           2,827  ..............           2,827
 
                           PUERTO RICO
 
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, PR...............................             134  ..............             134
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, PR...................................  ..............             100             100
SAN JUAN HARBOR, PR.............................................  ..............             630             630
 
                          RHODE ISLAND
 
BLOCK ISLAND HARBOR OF REFUGE, RI...............................  ..............           2,550           2,550
FOX POINT BARRIER, NARRANGANSETT BAY, RI........................           2,335  ..............           2,335
GREAT SALT POND, BLOCK ISLAND, RI...............................  ..............             350             350
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, RI...............................             134  ..............             134
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, RI...................................  ..............             300             300
WOONSOCKET, RI..................................................           1,424  ..............           1,424
 
                         SOUTH CAROLINA
 
ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, SC..............................           3,487  ..............           3,487
CHARLESTON HARBOR, SC...........................................  ..............          20,564          20,564
COOPER RIVER, CHARLESTON HARBOR, SC.............................  ..............           3,867           3,867
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, SC...............................              75  ..............              75
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, SC...................................  ..............             875             875
 
                          SOUTH DAKOTA
 
BIG BEND DAM, LAKE SHARPE, SD...................................           9,900  ..............           9,900
COLD BROOK LAKE, SD.............................................             345  ..............             345
COTTONWOOD SPRINGS LAKE, SD.....................................             260  ..............             260
FORT RANDALL DAM, LAKE FRANCIS CASE, SD.........................          12,178  ..............          12,178
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, SD...............................             356  ..............             356
LAKE TRAVERSE, SD & MN..........................................             827  ..............             827
OAHE DAM, LAKE OAHE, SD & ND....................................          12,865  ..............          12,865
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, SD.............................             144  ..............             144
 
                            TENNESSEE
 
CENTER HILL LAKE, TN............................................           7,719  ..............           7,719
CHEATHAM LOCK AND DAM, TN.......................................           8,384  ..............           8,384
CHICKAMAUGA LOCK, TENNESSEE RIVER, TN...........................           3,253  ..............           3,253
CORDELL HULL DAM AND RESERVOIR, TN..............................           8,571  ..............           8,571
DALE HOLLOW LAKE, TN............................................           7,828  ..............           7,828
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, TN...............................             328  ..............             328
J PERCY PRIEST DAM AND RESERVOIR, TN............................           5,623  ..............           5,623
OLD HICKORY LOCK AND DAM, TN....................................          11,491  ..............          11,491
TENNESSEE RIVER, TN.............................................          25,952  ..............          25,952
WOLF RIVER HARBOR, TN...........................................  ..............             920             920
 
                              TEXAS
 
AQUILLA LAKE, TX................................................           1,140  ..............           1,140
ARKANSAS--RED RIVER BASINS CHLORIDE CONTROL--AREA VIII, TX......           1,799  ..............           1,799
BARDWELL LAKE, TX...............................................           2,045  ..............           2,045
BELTON LAKE, TX.................................................           4,752  ..............           4,752
BENBROOK LAKE, TX...............................................           4,159  ..............           4,159
BRAZOS ISLAND HARBOR, TX........................................  ..............              85              85
BUFFALO BAYOU AND TRIBUTARIES, TX...............................           3,343  ..............           3,343
CANYON LAKE, TX.................................................           5,070  ..............           5,070
CHANNEL TO HARLINGEN, TX........................................  ..............             650             650
CHANNEL TO PORT BOLIVAR, TX.....................................  ..............             100             100
CORPUS CHRISTI SHIP CHANNEL, TX.................................  ..............           5,050           5,300
DENISON DAM, LAKE TEXOMA, TX....................................           7,980  ..............           7,980
ESTELLINE SPRINGS EXPERIMENTAL PROJECT, TX......................              39  ..............              39
FERRELLS BRIDGE DAM, LAKE O' THE PINES, TX......................           4,159  ..............           4,159
FREEPORT HARBOR, TX.............................................  ..............           4,700           4,700
GALVESTON HARBOR AND CHANNEL, TX................................  ..............           6,630           6,630
GIWW, CHANNEL TO VICTORIA, TX...................................  ..............              30              30
GIWW, CHANNEL TO CHOCOLATE BAYOU, TX............................  ..............              30              30
GRANGER DAM AND LAKE, TX........................................           6,772  ..............           6,772
GRAPEVINE LAKE, TX..............................................           5,185  ..............           5,185
GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, TX..................................          25,500  ..............          25,500
HORDS CREEK LAKE, TX............................................           1,619  ..............           1,619
HOUSTON SHIP CHANNEL, TX........................................  ..............          23,300          23,300
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, TX...............................           1,657  ..............           1,657
JIM CHAPMAN LAKE, TX............................................           1,895  ..............           1,895
JOE POOL LAKE, TX...............................................           2,645  ..............           2,645
LAKE KEMP, TX...................................................             280  ..............             280
LAVON LAKE, TX..................................................           3,932  ..............           3,932
LEWISVILLE DAM, TX..............................................           7,557  ..............           7,557
MATAGORDA SHIP CHANNEL, TX......................................  ..............           6,450           6,450
NAVARRO MILLS LAKE, TX..........................................           2,042  ..............           2,042
NORTH SAN GABRIEL DAM AND LAKE GEORGETOWN, TX...................           4,231  ..............           4,231
O C FISHER DAM AND LAKE, TX.....................................           2,851  ..............           2,851
PAT MAYSE LAKE, TX..............................................           1,397  ..............           1,397
PROCTOR LAKE, TX................................................           2,666  ..............           2,666
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, TX...................................  ..............             325             325
RAY ROBERTS LAKE, TX............................................           2,172  ..............           2,172
SABINE--NECHES WATERWAY, TX.....................................  ..............          11,250          11,250
SAM RAYBURN DAM AND RESERVOIR, TX...............................           8,963  ..............           8,963
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, TX.............................             295  ..............             295
SOMERVILLE LAKE, TX.............................................           4,904  ..............           4,904
STILLHOUSE HOLLOW DAM, TX.......................................           6,621  ..............           6,621
TEXAS CITY SHIP CHANNEL, TX.....................................  ..............              50              50
TOWN BLUFF DAM, B A STEINHAGEN LAKE, TX.........................           7,582  ..............           7,582
WACO LAKE, TX...................................................           5,669  ..............           5,669
WALLISVILLE LAKE, TX............................................           2,232  ..............           2,232
WHITNEY LAKE, TX................................................          10,253  ..............          10,253
WRIGHT PATMAN DAM AND LAKE, TX..................................           5,418  ..............           5,418
 
                              UTAH
 
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, UT...............................              24  ..............              24
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, UT.............................             477  ..............             477
 
                             VERMONT
 
BALL MOUNTAIN, VT...............................................           1,434  ..............           1,434
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, VT...............................             174  ..............             174
NORTH HARTLAND LAKE, VT.........................................           1,171  ..............           1,171
NORTH SPRINGFIELD LAKE, VT......................................             739  ..............             739
TOWNSHEND LAKE, VT..............................................           1,577  ..............           1,577
UNION VILLAGE DAM, VT...........................................             860  ..............             860
 
                         VIRGIN ISLANDS
 
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, VI...............................              49  ..............              49
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, VI...................................  ..............              50              50
 
                            VIRGINIA
 
ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY--ACC, VA.........................           2,644  ..............           2,644
ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY--DSC, VA.........................           1,438  ..............           1,438
GATHRIGHT DAM AND LAKE MOOMAW, VA...............................           2,709  ..............           2,709
HAMPTON ROADS, NORFOLK & NEWPORT NEWS HARBOR, VA (DRIFT REMOVAL)  ..............           1,500           1,500
HAMPTON ROADS, VA (PREVENTION OF OBSTRUCTIVE DEPOSITS)..........  ..............              38              38
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, VA...............................             432  ..............             432
JAMES RIVER CHANNEL, VA.........................................  ..............             350             350
JOHN H KERR LAKE, VA & NC.......................................          13,820  ..............          13,820
JOHN W FLANNAGAN DAM AND RESERVOIR, VA..........................           2,888  ..............           2,888
NORFOLK HARBOR, VA..............................................  ..............          21,625          21,925
NORTH FORK OF POUND RIVER LAKE, VA..............................             848  ..............             848
PHILPOTT LAKE, VA...............................................           5,520  ..............           5,520
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, VA...................................  ..............           1,215           1,215
 
                           WASHINGTON
 
BELLINGHAM HARBOR, WA...........................................  ..............               2               2
CHIEF JOSEPH DAM, WA............................................             600  ..............             600
COLUMBIA AND LOWER WILLAMETTE RIVERS BELOW VANCOUVER, WA &        ..............          47,220          47,220
 PORTLAND, OR...................................................
COLUMBIA RIVER AT BAKER BAY, WA & OR............................  ..............               5               5
COLUMBIA RIVER BETWEEN CHINOOK AND SAND ISLAND, WA..............  ..............               1               1
COLUMBIA RIVER BETWEEN VANCOUVER, WA AND THE DALLES, OR.........  ..............             881             881
COLUMBIA RIVER FISH MITIGATION, WA, OR & ID.....................           3,476  ..............           3,476
EVERETT HARBOR AND SNOHOMISH RIVER, WA..........................  ..............           1,980           1,980
FRIDAY HARBOR, WA...............................................  ..............               2               2
GRAYS HARBOR, WA................................................  ..............          11,237          11,237
HOWARD HANSON DAM, WA...........................................          12,680  ..............          12,680
ICE HARBOR LOCK AND DAM, WA.....................................           5,075  ..............           5,075
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, WA..............              70  ..............              70
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WA...............................             922  ..............             922
LAKE CROCKETT (KEYSTONE HARBOR), WA.............................  ..............              16              16
LAKE WASHINGTON SHIP CANAL, WA..................................           1,079  ..............           1,079
LAKE WASHINGTON SHIP CANAL, WA (NAV)............................  ..............           6,987           6,987
LITTLE GOOSE LOCK AND DAM, WA...................................           3,506  ..............           3,506
LOWER GRANITE LOCK AND DAM, WA..................................           4,347  ..............           4,347
LOWER MONUMENTAL LOCK AND DAM, WA...............................           3,430  ..............           3,430
MILL CREEK LAKE, WA.............................................           5,486  ..............           5,486
MOUNT SAINT HELENS SEDIMENT CONTROL, WA.........................             135  ..............             135
MUD MOUNTAIN DAM, WA............................................           6,174  ..............           6,174
NEAH BAY, WA....................................................  ..............              17              17
OLYMPIA HARBOR, WA..............................................  ..............               2               2
PORT TOWNSEND, WA...............................................  ..............              14              14
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, WA...................................  ..............           1,046           1,046
PUGET SOUND AND TRIBUTARY WATERS, WA............................  ..............           1,485           1,485
QUILLAYUTE RIVER, WA............................................  ..............           1,673           1,673
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, WA.............................             463  ..............             463
SEATTLE HARBOR, WA..............................................  ..............           1,816           1,816
STILLAGUAMISH RIVER, WA.........................................           2,917  ..............           2,917
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, WA....................  ..............              80              80
SWINOMISH CHANNEL, WA...........................................  ..............               2               2
TACOMA HARBOR, WA...............................................  ..............              15              15
TACOMA, PUYALLUP RIVER, WA......................................             178  ..............             178
THE DALLES LOCK AND DAM, WA & OR................................           3,274  ..............           3,274
WILLAPA RIVER AND HARBOR, WA....................................  ..............              44              44
 
                          WEST VIRGINIA
 
BEECH FORK LAKE, WV.............................................           1,842  ..............           1,842
BLUESTONE LAKE, WV..............................................           4,863  ..............           4,863
BURNSVILLE LAKE, WV.............................................           3,240  ..............           3,240
EAST LYNN LAKE, WV..............................................           2,183  ..............           2,183
ELKINS, WV......................................................             118  ..............             118
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WV...............................             474  ..............             474
KANAWHA RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS, WV................................           9,978  ..............           9,978
OHIO RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS, WV, KY & OH..........................          29,834  ..............          29,834
OHIO RIVER OPEN CHANNEL WORK, WV, KY & OH.......................           2,684  ..............           2,684
R D BAILEY LAKE, WV.............................................           1,811  ..............           1,811
STONEWALL JACKSON LAKE, WV......................................           1,504  ..............           1,504
SUMMERSVILLE LAKE, WV...........................................           2,579  ..............           2,579
SUTTON LAKE, WV.................................................           2,522  ..............           2,522
TYGART LAKE, WV.................................................           1,693  ..............           1,693
 
                            WISCONSIN
 
EAU GALLE RIVER LAKE, WI........................................             829  ..............             829
FOX RIVER, WI...................................................           4,267  ..............           4,267
GREEN BAY HARBOR, WI............................................  ..............           3,920           3,920
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WI...............................              41  ..............              41
KEWAUNEE HARBOR, WI.............................................              18  ..............              18
MILWAUKEE HARBOR, WI............................................  ..............           2,570           2,570
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, WI...................................  ..............             325             325
STURGEON BAY HARBOR AND LAKE MICHIGAN SHIP CANAL, WI............               6  ..............               6
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, WI....................  ..............             200             200
 
                             WYOMING
 
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, WY..............              15  ..............              15
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WY...............................             123  ..............             123
JACKSON HOLE LEVEES, WY.........................................             588  ..............             588
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, WY.............................             107  ..............             107
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      SUBTOTAL, PROJECTS LISTED UNDER STATES....................       1,943,355         892,425       2,847,596
 
                         REMAINING ITEMS
 
ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR ONGOING WORK NAVIGATION MAINTENANCE......  ..............  ..............          25,000
        DEEP-DRAFT HARBOR AND CHANNEL...........................  ..............  ..............         473,952
        DONOR AND ENERGY TRANSFER PORTS.........................  ..............  ..............          50,000
        INLAND WATERWAYS........................................  ..............  ..............          50,000
        SMALL, REMOTE, OR SUBSISTENCE NAVIGATION................  ..............  ..............          50,000
    OTHER AUTHORIZED PURPOSES...................................  ..............  ..............          45,000
AQUATIC NUISANCE CONTROL RESEARCH...............................             675  ..............             675
ASSET MANAGEMENT/FACILITIES AND EQUIP MAINT (FEM)...............           3,650  ..............           4,650
BUDGET/MANAGEMENT SUPPORT FOR O&M BUSINESS PROGRAMS STEWARDSHIP              900  ..............             900
 SUPPORT PROGRAM................................................
    PERFORMANCE-BASED BUDGETING SUPPORT PROGRAM.................           2,000  ..............           2,000
    RECREATION MANAGEMENT SUPPORT PROGRAM.......................           1,550  ..............           1,550
    OPTIMIZATION TOOLS FOR NAVIGATION...........................             322  ..............             322
CIVIL WORKS WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (CWWMS).....................          10,000  ..............          10,000
COASTAL INLET RESEARCH PROGRAM..................................           2,700  ..............           7,975
COASTAL OCEAN DATA SYSTEM (CODS)................................           2,500  ..............           6,500
CULTURAL RESOURCES (NAGPRA/CURATION)............................           1,000  ..............           1,000
CYBERSECURITY...................................................           4,000  ..............           4,000
DREDGE MCFARLAND READY RESERVE..................................  ..............          11,690          11,690
DREDGE WHEELER READY RESERVE....................................  ..............          15,000          15,000
DREDGING DATA AND LOCK PERFORMANCE MONITORING SYSTEM............           1,120  ..............           1,120
DREDGING OPERATIONS AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH (DOER)...........           6,450  ..............           6,450
DREDGING OPERATIONS TECHNICAL SUPPORT PROGRAM (DOTS)............           2,820  ..............           2,820
EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS REDUCTION PROGRAM............................             300  ..............             300
FACILITY PROTECTION.............................................           4,500  ..............           4,500
FISH & WILDLIFE OPERATING FISH HATCHERY REIMBURSEMENT...........           5,400  ..............           5,400
HARBOR MAINTENANCE FEE DATA COLLECTION..........................  ..............             795             795
INLAND WATERWAY NAVIGATION CHARTS...............................           4,500  ..............           4,500
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED FEDERAL FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS..........          20,000  ..............          20,000
MONITORING OF COMPLETED NAVIGATION PROJECTS.....................           3,900  ..............          10,500
NATIONAL COASTAL MAPPING PROGRAM................................           6,300  ..............          13,000
NATIONAL DAM SAFETY PROGRAM (PORTFOLIO RISK ASSESSMENT).........          10,000  ..............          15,000
NATIONAL EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS PROGRAM (NEPP)..................           5,500  ..............           5,500
NATIONAL (LEVEE) FLOOD INVENTORY................................           5,000  ..............           5,000
NATIONAL (MULTIPLE PROJECT) NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT                   3,700  ..............           5,200
 ACTIVITIES.....................................................
NATIONAL PORTFOLIO ASSESSMENT FOR REALLOCATIONS.................             500  ..............             500
REGIONAL SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM............................           3,500  ..............           3,500
RESPONSE TO CLIMATE CHANGE AT CORPS PROJECTS....................  ..............  ..............           1,500
 
        REVIEW OF NON-FEDERAL ALTERATIONS OF CIVIL WORKS
 
    PROJECTS (SECTION 408)......................................           8,500  ..............           8,500
SUSTAINABLE RIVERS PROGRAM (SRP)................................             400  ..............             400
VETERAN'S CURATION PROGRAM AND COLLECTIONS MANAGEMENT...........           6,500  ..............           6,500
WATERBORNE COMMERCE STATISTICS..................................           4,670  ..............           4,670
WATER OPERATIONS TECHNICAL SUPPORT (WOTS).......................             500  ..............           6,500
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      SUBTOTAL, REMAINING ITEMS.................................         133,357          27,485         892,369
 
ACCOUNTING ADJUSTMENT...........................................              21               8              35
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE..........................       2,076,733         919,918       3,740,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Coastal Inlet Research Program.--The Committee understands 
that communities, infrastructure, commerce, and resources that 
are tied to the coastal nearshore region are all vulnerable to 
damage from extreme coastal events and long-term coastal 
change. The Committee recommends additional funding to 
establish a multi-university-led effort to identify engineering 
frameworks to address coastal resilience needs, to develop 
adaptive pathways that lead to coastal resilience, measure the 
coastal forces that lead to infrastructure damage and erosion 
during extreme storm events, and to improve coupling of 
terrestrial and coastal models. Funding in addition to the 
budget request is also recommended for the Corps to continue 
work with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's 
National Water Center on protecting the Nation's water 
resources.
    Debris Removal.--Funding is recommended for debris removal 
activities pursuant to 33 U.S.C. 603a, as amended by the WIIN 
Act, with priority given to urban waterways.
    Donor and Energy Transfer Ports.--The additional funding 
recommended in this account for donor and energy transfer ports 
shall be allocated in accordance with 33 U.S.C. 2238c. The 
Committee notes the Corps issued implementation guidance for 
section 1110 of the WIIN Act but has not completed the 
necessary work to execute all authorized uses for this funding. 
The Committee directs the Corps to fully execute subsection (c) 
of 33 U.S.C. 2238c within 90 days of enactment of this act.
    Emerging Harbors.--The Committee understands that Hampton 
Harbor in New Hampshire qualifies as an emerging harbor. The 
Corps is directed to brief the Committees on Appropriation of 
both Houses of Congress within 30 days of enactment of this act 
on how the Corps prioritizes additional HMTF dollars for 
emerging harbors that experience unexpected levels of 
deterioration or are at severe risk of closing outside of their 
scheduled dredging cycles.
    Enhanced Options for Sand Acquisition for Beach 
Renourishment Projects.--The Committee urges the Corps to 
provide States with guidance and recommendations to implement 
cost effective measures and planning for sand management.
    Isle of Shoals North and Cape Arundel Dredged Material 
Placement Site.-- The Cape Arundel Disposal Site in the State 
of Maine selected by the Department of the Army as an 
alternative dredged material disposal site under section 103(b) 
of the Marine Protection Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, 
shall remain open until April 15, 2024, until the remaining 
disposal capacity of the site has been utilized, or until final 
designation of an Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site for 
southern Maine under section 102(c) of the Marine Protection 
Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, whichever first occurs, 
provided that the site conditions remain suitable for such 
purpose and that the site may not be used for disposal of more 
than 80,000 cubic yards from any single dredging project.
    John W. Flannagan Dam and Reservoir.--The Committee 
supports efforts to optimize regional economic benefits and 
enhanced downstream recreation opportunities along the Russell 
Fork River. The Committee understands the Corps has recently 
completed a Section 216 Initial Appraisal for the John W. 
Flannagan Dam and Reservoir and found that a feasibility-level 
study is warranted to accommodate additional whitewater 
releases. The Committee urges the Corps to implement the 
recommendations identified in the Initial Appraisal and within 
the additional funds provided in this account, prioritize an 
optimization analysis to formulate and evaluate Federal 
interest in changing project operations at the John W. 
Flannagan Dam and Reservoir as it relates to winter drawdown to 
increase regional economic benefits and extend whitewater 
recreation opportunities.
    Kennebec River Long-Term Maintenance Dredging.--In fiscal 
year 2018, Congress directed the Assistant Secretary of the 
Army (Civil Works), in consultation with the Navy, to submit a 
report to the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of 
Congress, proposing a long-term plan for regular maintenance of 
the Kennebec River. The Committee urges the Secretary to 
prioritize the completion of this report. Within 90 days 
enactment of this act, the Secretary shall brief the Committees 
on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress on the status of 
ongoing discussions with the Navy and the identification of a 
long-term plan.
    Monitoring of Completed Navigation Projects--Fisheries.--
The Committee is concerned that a reduction in or elimination 
of navigational lock operations on the Nation's inland 
waterways is having a negative impact on river ecosystems, 
particularly the ability of a number of endangered, threatened 
and game fish species to migrate through waterways, 
particularly during critical spawning periods. The Committee is 
aware of preliminary research that indicates reduced lock 
operations on certain Corps designated low-use waterways is 
directly impacting migration and that there are effective means 
to mitigate the impacts. The Committee believes maximizing the 
ability of fish to use these locks to move past the dams has 
the potential to restore natural and historic long-distance 
river migrations that may well be critical to species survival. 
In fiscal year 2018, the Committee recommended funding to 
continue preliminary research on the impact of reduced lock 
operations on riverine fish.
    The Committee understands the research underway is proving 
valuable and, within available funds for ongoing work, directs 
the Corps to continue this research at no less than the 2017 
level. The goal of the continued funding is to support the 
ongoing research and, where appropriate, expand the work to 
look at ecosystem level impacts and additional waterways, lock 
structures, lock operation methods, and fish species that will 
more fully inform the Corps' operations.
    Monitoring of Completed Navigation Projects-Non-Destructive 
Testing.--The Committee supports the Corps efforts to 
significantly improve safety, efficiency, reliability, and cost 
of maintaining critical and aging infrastructure, particularly 
post-tensioned anchorages at locks and dams along the navigable 
waterways and flood-control facilities in the United States. 
The Committee is also aware that innovative and technically 
advanced non-destructive testing [NDT] methods of inspection 
have been developed collaboratively by the Corps that will 
assist in performing this vital mission more safely and more 
accurately at significantly less cost than current methods. Of 
the funding provided in the Monitoring Completed Navigation 
Projects, $600,000 shall be used to continue the validation and 
deployment of NDT tools, modeling, and management practices for 
trunnion rods on dams of interest in navigable waterways.
    Monitoring of Completed Navigation Projects-Structural 
Health Monitoring.--Of the funding provided, $4,000,000 shall 
be to support the structural health monitoring program to 
facilitate research to maximize operations, enhance efficiency, 
and protect asset life through catastrophic failure mitigation.
    National Dam Safety Program.--In cooperation with the 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and the Bureau of 
Reclamation, the Corps is directed to conduct a comprehensive 
Independent External Peer Review [IEPR] of risk-informed dam 
safety practices in these three Federal agencies with the 
intent to inform improvements broadly in national dam safety 
practices. The Corps is directed to contract with an 
independent peer review organization in accordance with its 
current review policy and the National Academy of Science IEPR 
process. The IEPR shall also consider how dam safety practices 
are affected by human factors, as well as how risk informed 
analysis in other industries may be applicable to dam safety 
practices.
    San Rafael Channel.--The Committee is aware that the last 
full dredging of the San Rafael Channel was in 2002. This lack 
of dredging is becoming a public safety issue as the San Rafael 
Police and Fire Department, who have taken over emergency 
services and search and rescue operations, are based in the 
Channel and need access and capacity for bay patrols, rescues, 
and other public safety activity. Given public safety concerns, 
the Committee urges the Corps to prioritize dredging of the San 
Rafael Channel.
    Soil Moisture and Snowpack Monitoring Program.--Following 
the 2011 Missouri River Flood, the Government Accountability 
Office released a report concluding that increased soil 
moisture and snowpack monitoring could have mitigated the 
impact of the flood on communities along the Missouri River. 
Accordingly, WRRDA section 4003 authorized a soil moisture and 
snowpack monitoring program to be administered by the Corps in 
coordination with the National Oceanic Atmospheric 
Administration, the Natural Resources Conservation Service, the 
U.S. Geological Survey, and the Bureau of Reclamation. Section 
1179 of the WIIN Act identified the Corps as the lead agency 
for carrying out and coordinating this monitoring program. 
Activities necessary to carry out soil moisture and snowpack 
monitoring are eligible for funds provided in this account. The 
Corps is also encouraged to provide sufficient funding in 
future budget submissions for this program.
    Upper Missouri River Basin.--The Committee recognizes the 
importance of recreation on Corps-owned sites across the upper 
Missouri River Basin and encourages the Corps to prioritize 
much needed repairs and other maintenance at these sites.
    Water Operations Technical Support.--Funding in addition to 
the budget request is included for research into atmospheric 
rivers first funded in fiscal year 2015.
    WIFIA Planning and Development.--The Water Infrastructure 
Finance and Innovation Act [WIFIA] is another alternative 
financing tool that has received strong support from many 
Members of Congress. The Environmental Protection Agency's 
WIFIA program was initiated in fiscal year 2015, but to date, 
the Corps has not requested funding nor provided requested 
information on how a corresponding program for the Civil Works 
program would be implemented. Therefore, the Corps again is 
directed to provide to the Committees on Appropriations of both 
Houses of Congress a detailed plan for how WIFIA would be 
implemented, including an estimated schedule for when funding 
could be used to provide loans. The Committee recommends an 
additional $1,000,000 in this account to continue that effort.
    WRRDA Section 4001.--The Committee urges the Secretary to 
follow through on previous direction provided by Congress to 
financially support the Susquehanna, Delaware, and Potomac 
River Basin Commissions. Congress has made clear its intent and 
expects the Corps to budget accordingly. The Corps is directed 
to brief the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of 
Congress within 30 days of enactment of this act on the Federal 
role in the River Basin Commissions.
    WRRDA Section 6002.--The Committee supports the Corps' 
performing a review of its inventory, in accordance with WRRDA 
section 6002, not later than 1 year after the date of enactment 
of this act.
    Additional Funding for Ongoing Work.--The Committee cannot 
support a level of funding that does not fund operation and 
maintenance of our Nation's aging infrastructure sufficiently 
to ensure continued competitiveness in a global marketplace. 
Federal navigation channels maintained at only a fraction of 
authorized dimensions and navigation locks and hydropower 
facilities well beyond their design life result in economic 
inefficiencies and risk infrastructure failure, which can cause 
substantial economic losses. The Committee recommendation 
includes additional funds for projects and activities to 
enhance the Nation's economic growth and international 
competitiveness.
    The Committee is concerned that the Administration's 
criteria for navigation maintenance disadvantage small, remote, 
or subsistence harbors and waterways from competing for scarce 
navigation maintenance funds. Accordingly, the Committee 
directs the Corps to revise the criteria used for determining 
which navigation maintenance projects are funded to develop a 
reasonable and equitable allocation under the Operation and 
Maintenance account. The Committee supports including criteria 
to evaluate economic impact that these projects provide to 
local and regional economies.
    Any costs to cover administrative fees or any other efforts 
necessary to resolve encroachments that were the result of past 
land surveying errors made by the Corps shall be eligible for 
additional funding provided in this account.
    When allocating the additional funding recommended in this 
account, the Corps shall consider giving priority to the 
following:
  --Ability to complete ongoing work maintaining authorized 
        depths and widths of harbors and shipping channels 
        (including small, remote, or subsistence harbors), 
        including where contaminated sediments are present.
  --Ability to address critical maintenance backlog;
  --Presence of the U.S. Coast Guard;
  --Extent to which the work will enhance national, regional, 
        or local economic development;
  --Extent to which the work will promote job growth or 
        international competitiveness;
  --Number of jobs created directly by the funded activity;
  --Ability to obligate the funds allocated within the calendar 
        year;
  --Ability to complete the project, separable element, project 
        phase, or useful increment of work within the funds 
        allocated;
  --For harbor maintenance activities,
    --Total tonnage handled;
    --Total exports;
    --Total imports;
    --Dollar value of cargo handled;
    --Energy infrastructure and national security needs served;
    --Designation as strategic seaports;
    --Lack of alternative means of freight movement; and
    --Savings over alternative means of freight movement.

                           REGULATORY PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2018....................................    $200,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................     200,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     200,000,000

    The Committee recommends $200,000,000 for the Regulatory 
Program, the same as the budget request.
    Salton Sea.--The Committee is concerned with the worsening 
air quality and habitat impacts related to Salton Sea and 
encourages the Corps to prioritize permitting for the Salton 
Sea Management Plan.

            FORMERLY UTILIZED SITES REMEDIAL ACTION PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2018....................................    $139,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................     120,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     120,000,000

    The Committee recommends $120,000,000 for the Formerly 
Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program, the same as the budget 
request.

                 FLOOD CONTROL AND COASTAL EMERGENCIES

Appropriations, 2018....................................     $35,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................      27,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      35,000,000

    The Committee recommends $35,000,000 for Flood Control and 
Coastal Emergencies, an increase of $8,000,000 above the budget 
request.

                                EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2018....................................    $185,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................    $187,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     193,000,000

    The Committee recommends $193,000,000 for Expenses, an 
increase of $6,000,000 above the budget request. This 
appropriation finances the expenses for the Office of the Chief 
of Engineers, the Division Offices, and certain research and 
statistical functions of the Corps. No funding is recommended 
for creation of an Office of Congressional Affairs.
    Additional funding recommended in the Expenses account is 
for activities that were previously funded under Remaining 
Items and later migrated to the Expenses account. These 
include: up to $2,000,000 annually for the executive direction 
and management of the Dam Safety Program, which will allow for 
more appropriated Construction funds to be used on dam safety 
activities; not less than $2,000,000 annually to efficiently 
fund the Guidance Update Management Program [GUMP], providing 
vital up-to-date policy and technical guidance ensuring the 
excellence and quality of Corps Civil Works program; and not 
less than $2,000,000 annually for developing a Civil Works Data 
Modernization Program that focuses on improving and modernizing 
data management systems, data system integration methods, and 
making data publically available.
    Deauthorizations.--Within 90 days of enactment of this act, 
the Corps shall provide to the Committees on Appropriations of 
both Houses of Congress a list of all projects that have been 
deauthorized or will be deauthorized in the next two fiscal 
years as a result of section 1302 of the WIIN Act.
    Inventory of Corps Projects.--Within 120 days after 
enactment this act, the Corps shall submit to the Committee on 
Appropriations of both houses of Congress an inventory of all 
authorized Corps studies and projects in each state. For each 
study and project identified, the Corps shall include by State, 
the specific authorization, respective mission area, remaining 
Federal cost to complete, and the current status.

      OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE ARMY (CIVIL WORKS)

Appropriations, 2018....................................      $5,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................       5,000,000
Committee recommendation................................       5,000,000

    The Committee recommends $5,000,000 for the Office of the 
Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works), the same as the 
budget request.
    The Committee counts on a timely and accessible executive 
branch in the course of fulfilling its constitutional role in 
the appropriations process. The requesting and receiving of 
basic, factual information is vital to maintain a transparent 
and open governing process. The Committee recognizes that some 
discussions internal to the executive branch are pre-decisional 
in nature and, therefore, not subject to disclosure. However, 
the access to facts, figures, and statistics that inform these 
decisions are not subject to the same sensitivity and are 
critical to the appropriations process. The administration 
needs to do more to ensure timely and complete responses to 
these inquiries.

             GENERAL PROVISIONS--CORPS OF ENGINEERS--CIVIL

    Section 101. The bill includes a provision related to 
reprogramming.
    Section 102. The bill includes a provision related to 
transfers to the Fish and Wildlife Service.
    Section 103. The bill includes a provision related to open 
Lake disposal of dredged material.
    Section 104. The bill includes a provision related to the 
acquisition of buoy chain.
    Section 105. The bill includes a provision related to 
permitting for the discharge of dredged or fill material.

                                TITLE II

                       DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

                CENTRAL UTAH PROJECT COMPLETION ACCOUNT

Appropriations, 2018....................................     $10,500,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................       7,983,000
Committee recommendation................................      15,000,000

    The Committee recommends $15,000,000 for the Central Utah 
Project Completion Account, which includes $898,000 for 
transfer to the Utah Reclamation Mitigation and Conservation 
Account for use by the Utah Reclamation Mitigation and 
Conservation Commission, $1,398,675 for necessary expenses of 
the Secretary of the Interior, and up to $1,500,000 for the 
Commission's administrative expenses. This allows the 
Department of the Interior to develop water supply facilities 
that will continue to sustain economic growth and an enhanced 
quality of life in the western States, the fastest growing 
region in the United States. The Committee remains committed to 
complete the Central Utah Project, which would enable the 
project to initiate repayment to the Federal Government.

                         Bureau of Reclamation

                       OVERVIEW OF RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $1,478,000,000 for the Bureau of 
Reclamation [Reclamation], an increase of $490,983,000 above 
the budget request. The Committee recommendation sets 
priorities by supporting our Nation's water infrastructure.

                              INTRODUCTION

    In addition to the traditional missions of bringing water 
and power to the West, Reclamation continues to develop 
programs, initiatives, and activities that will help meet new 
water needs and balance the multitude of competing uses of 
water in the West. Reclamation is the largest wholesaler of 
water in the country, operating 338 reservoirs with a total 
storage capacity of 140 million acre-feet. Reclamation projects 
deliver 10 trillion gallons of water to more than 31 million 
people each year, and provide 1 out of 5 western farmers with 
irrigation water for 10 million acres of farmland that produce 
60 percent of the Nation's vegetables and 25 percent of its 
fruits and nuts. Reclamation manages, with partners, 289 
recreation sites that have 90 million visits annually.

                       FISCAL YEAR 2019 WORK PLAN

    The Committee recommends funding above the budget request 
for Water and Related Resources. Reclamation is directed to 
submit a work plan, not later than 60 days after the date of 
enactment of this act, to the Committees on Appropriations of 
both Houses of Congress proposing its allocation of these 
additional funds. The work plan shall be consistent with the 
following general guidance.
  --None of the funds may be used for any item for which the 
        Committee has specifically denied funding.
  --The additional funds are provided for ongoing studies or 
        projects that were either not included in the budget 
        request or for which the budget request was inadequate.
  --Funding associated with a category may be allocated to 
        eligible studies or projects within that category.
  --Reclamation may not withhold funding from a study or 
        project because it is inconsistent with administration 
        policy. The Committee notes that these funds are in 
        excess of the administration's budget request, and that 
        administration budget metrics should not disqualify a 
        study or project from being funded.

                             REPROGRAMMING

    The Committee is retaining the reprogramming legislation 
provided in the Energy and Water Development and Related 
Agencies Appropriations Act, 2018.

                           DROUGHT RESILIENCY

    Congress has invested approximately $500 million over the 
past 4 years in drought and water supply-related activities. 
The Committee remains intently focused on the need for 
substantially increased investment in improving drought 
resiliency as well as in finding opportunities for agencies to 
combine water supply benefits with other mission priorities. In 
Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies 
Appropriations Act, 2017, the Committee began the transition 
from mitigating an ongoing drought in the West to preparing for 
the next one. The Committee continues that approach in this 
year's bill by recommending another $196 million for the 
drought resiliency programs authorized in the WIIN Act.
    The Committee directs Reclamation to continue working with 
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Marine 
Fisheries Service, and relevant State agencies to undertake 
comprehensive, around the clock, real-time monitoring of water 
supply conditions and their impact on endangered species during 
critical periods in the winter and spring.
    The Committee believes that the only answer to these 
chronic droughts is a combination of additional storage, 
substantial investments in desalination and recycling, improved 
conveyance, and increased efficiencies in the uses of water 
both for agriculture and potable purposes. As the West has 
consistently been the fastest growing part of the country, it 
is incumbent on Reclamation to lead the way in increasing the 
water that is available from year to year and to incentivize 
more efficient use of the water that is available.

                        UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS

    The Committee is concerned by a U.S. Immigration and 
Customs Enforcement bulletin published in 2017 that confidently 
assesses that a Chinese unmanned aerial systems [UAS] 
manufacturer was using its products to provide critical 
infrastructure data to the Chinese government. Reclamation 
shall immediately determine whether UAS that were the subject 
of the August 2017 bulletin are currently in use and report 
back to the Committee within 180 days. Due to the critical 
infrastructure funded in this bill that has an extensive 
national security component, any vulnerability to foreign 
surveillance is a serious concern to this Committee and 
Reclamation shall prioritize purchases of American-made UAS in 
the future.

                   CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING

    The Committee did not accept or include congressionally 
directed spending, as defined in section 5(a) of rule XLIV of 
the Standing Rules of the Senate. However, the Committee has 
recommended additional programmatic funds above the budget 
request for the Water and Related Resources account. In some 
cases, these additional funds have been included within defined 
categories, as in prior years, and are described in more detail 
in their respective sections below.

                      WATER AND RELATED RESOURCES

Appropriations, 2018....................................  $1,332,124,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................     891,017,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,382,000,000

    The Committee recommends $1,382,000,000 for Water and 
Related Resources, an increase of $490,983,000 above the budget 
request.

                              INTRODUCTION

    The Water and Related Resources account supports the 
development, management, and restoration of water and related 
natural resources in the 17 western States. The account 
includes funds for operating and maintaining existing 
facilities to obtain the greatest overall level of benefits, to 
protect public safety, and to conduct studies on ways to 
improve the use of water and related natural resources. Work 
will be done in partnership and cooperation with non-federal 
entities and other Federal agencies.
    The Committee recommends increased funding in the Water and 
Related Resources account on a number of line items to better 
allow Reclamation to address the immediate impacts of the 
drought.

                               BUREAU OF RECLAMATION--WATER AND RELATED RESOURCES
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Budget estimate            Committee recommendation
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
                  Project title                      Resources      Facilities       Resources      Facilities
                                                    management         OM&R         management         OM&R
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     ARIZONA
 
AK CHIN INDIAN WATER RIGHTS SETTLEMENT ACT        ..............          16,200  ..............          16,200
 PROJECT........................................
COLORADO RIVER BASIN--CENTRAL ARIZONA PROJECT...           6,272             648           6,272             648
COLORADO RIVER FRONT WORK AND LEVEE SYSTEM......           2,303  ..............           2,303  ..............
SALT RIVER PROJECT..............................             649             250             649             250
SAN CARLOS APACHE TRIBE WATER SETTLEMENT ACT               1,550  ..............           1,550  ..............
 PROJECT........................................
YUMA AREA PROJECTS..............................           1,183          22,626           1,183          22,626
 
                   CALIFORNIA
 
CACHUMA PROJECT.................................             778             790             778             790
CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECTS:........................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
    AMERICAN RIVER DIVISION, FOLSOM DAM UNIT/              1,377           8,838           1,377           8,838
     MORMON ISLAND..............................
    AUBURN-FOLSOM SOUTH UNIT....................              35           2,184              35           2,184
    DELTA DIVISION..............................           4,812           6,772           4,812           6,772
    EAST SIDE DIVISION..........................           1,290           2,772           1,290           2,772
    FRIANT DIVISION.............................           1,393           3,324           1,393           3,324
    SAN JOAQUIN RIVER RESTORATION SETTLEMENT....          35,000  ..............          35,000  ..............
    MISCELLANEOUS PROJECT PROGRAMS..............           8,771             400           8,771             400
    REPLACEMENTS, ADDITIONS, AND EXTRAORDINARY    ..............          17,444  ..............          17,444
     MAINT. PROGRAM.............................
    SACRAMENTO RIVER DIVISION...................           1,675             495           1,675             495
    SAN FELIPE DIVISION.........................             185              98             185              98
    SAN JOAQUIN DIVISION........................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
    SHASTA DIVISION.............................             474           9,460             474           9,460
    TRINITY RIVER DIVISION......................          12,291           4,777          12,291           4,777
    WATER AND POWER OPERATIONS..................           3,989          10,793           3,989          10,793
    WEST SAN JOAQUIN DIVISION, SAN LUIS UNIT....           3,219           5,681           3,219           5,681
ORLAND PROJECT..................................  ..............             873  ..............             873
SALTON SEA RESEARCH PROJECT.....................             300  ..............             300  ..............
SOLANO PROJECT..................................           1,162           2,534           1,162           2,534
VENTURA RIVER PROJECT...........................             400              36             400              36
 
                    COLORADO
 
ANIMAS-LA PLATA PROJECT.........................             612           2,185             612           2,185
ARMEL UNIT, P-SMBP..............................              10             393              10             393
COLLBRAN PROJECT................................             185           2,416             185           2,416
COLORADO-BIG THOMPSON PROJECT...................             198          13,727             198          13,727
FRUITGROWERS DAM PROJECT........................              50             139              50             139
FRYINGPAN-ARKANSAS PROJECT......................             152          12,424             152          12,424
FRYINGPAN-ARKANSAS PROJECT--ARKANSAS VALLEY       ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
 CONDUIT........................................
GRAND VALLEY UNIT, CRBSCP, TITLE II.............             506           2,326             506           2,326
LEADVILLE/ARKANSAS RIVER RECOVERY PROJECT.......  ..............           2,586  ..............           2,586
MANCOS PROJECT..................................              78             420              78             420
NARROWS UNIT, P-SMBP............................  ..............              38  ..............              38
PARADOX VALLEY UNIT, CRBSCP, TITLE II...........           1,502           2,811           1,502           2,811
PINE RIVER PROJECT..............................              79             388              79             388
SAN LUIS VALLEY PROJECT, CLOSED BASIN...........             118           2,832             118           2,832
SAN LUIS VALLEY PROJECT, CONEJOS DIVISION.......              16              34              16              34
UNCOMPAHGRE PROJECT.............................             767             174             767             174
UPPER COLORADO RIVER OPERATIONS PROGRAM.........             870  ..............             870  ..............
 
                      IDAHO
 
BOISE AREA PROJECTS.............................           3,014           2,571           3,014           2,571
COLUMBIA AND SNAKE RIVER SALMON RECOVERY PROJECT          19,000  ..............          19,000  ..............
LEWISTON ORCHARDS PROJECTS......................           1,383              27           1,383              27
MINIDOKA AREA PROJECTS..........................           2,188           3,475           2,188           3,475
PRESTON BENCH PROJECT...........................              14              33              14              33
 
                     KANSAS
 
ALMENA UNIT, P-SMBP.............................              44             481              44             481
BOSTWICK UNIT, P-SMBP...........................             331             935             331             935
CEDAR BLUFF UNIT, P-SMBP........................              39             535              39             535
GLEN ELDER UNIT, P-SMBP.........................              71           3,402              71           3,402
KANSAS RIVER UNIT, P-SMBP.......................  ..............             102  ..............             102
KIRWIN UNIT, P-SMBP.............................              17             446              17             446
WEBSTER UNIT, P-SMBP............................              16             481              16             481
WICHITA PROJECT--CHENEY DIVISION................              88             403              88             403
 
                     MONTANA
 
CANYON FERRY UNIT, P-SMBP.......................             238           5,009             238           5,009
EAST BENCH UNIT, P-SMBP.........................              59             666              59             666
FORT PECK RESERVATION / DRY PRAIRIE RURAL WATER            4,731  ..............           4,731  ..............
 SYSTEM.........................................
HELENA VALLEY UNIT, P-SMBP......................               5             166               5             166
HUNGRY HORSE PROJECT............................  ..............             434  ..............             434
HUNTLEY PROJECT.................................               7              46               7              46
LOWER MARIAS UNIT, P-SMBP.......................              91           1,508              91           1,508
LOWER YELLOWSTONE PROJECT.......................             716              30             716              30
MILK RIVER PROJECT..............................             447           1,467             447           1,467
MISSOURI BASIN O&M, P-SMBP......................           1,047             117           1,047             117
ROCKY BOYS/NORTH CENTRAL MT RURAL WATER SYSTEM..           3,984  ..............           3,984  ..............
SUN RIVER PROJECT...............................              52             268              52             268
YELLOWTAIL UNIT, P-SMBP.........................              22           8,939              22           8,939
 
                    NEBRASKA
 
AINSWORTH UNIT, P-SMBP..........................              69             131              69             131
FRENCHMAN-CAMBRIDGE UNIT, P-SMBP................             372           1,964             372           1,964
MIRAGE FLATS PROJECT............................              13              98              13              98
NORTH LOUP UNIT, P-SMBP.........................              93             140              93             140
 
                     NEVADA
 
LAHONTAN BASIN PROJECT..........................           4,992           4,859           4,992           4,859
LAKE TAHOE REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.........             115  ..............             115  ..............
LAKE MEAD /LAS VEGAS WASH PROGRAM...............             700  ..............             700  ..............
 
                   NEW MEXICO
 
CARLSBAD PROJECT................................           2,551           1,300           2,551           1,300
EASTERN NEW MEXICO RURAL WATER SUPPLY...........  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
MIDDLE RIO GRANDE PROJECT.......................          12,634          10,885          12,634          10,885
RIO GRANDE PROJECT..............................           1,860           5,074           1,860           5,074
RIO GRANDE PEUBLOS PROJECT......................           1,000  ..............           1,000  ..............
TUCUMCARI PROJECT...............................              15              16              15              16
 
                  NORTH DAKOTA
 
DICKINSON UNIT, P-SMBP..........................  ..............             449  ..............             449
GARRISON DIVERSION UNIT, P-SMBP.................           9,221          12,284           9,221          12,284
HEART BUTTE UNIT, P-SMBP........................              82           1,326              82           1,326
 
                    OKLAHOMA
 
ARBUCKLE PROJECT................................              66             183              66             183
MCGEE CREEK PROJECT.............................             124             835             124             835
MOUNTAIN PARK PROJECT...........................              34             673              34             673
NORMAN PROJECT..................................              72             310              72             310
WASHITA BASIN PROJECT...........................             240           1,093             240           1,093
W.C. AUSTIN PROJECT.............................              57             555              57             555
 
                     OREGON
 
CROOKED RIVER PROJECT...........................             268             457             268             457
DESCHUTES PROJECT...............................             386             189             386             189
EASTERN OREGON PROJECTS.........................             471             216             471             216
KLAMATH PROJECT.................................          13,755           3,745          13,755           3,745
ROGUE RIVER BASIN PROJECT, TALENT DIVISION......           1,774             615           1,774             615
TUALATIN PROJECT................................             177             216             177             216
UMATILLA PROJECT................................             572           2,549             572           2,549
 
                  SOUTH DAKOTA
 
ANGOSTURA UNIT, P-SMBP..........................             130             688             130             688
BELLE FOURCHE UNIT, P-SMBP......................             385             836             385             836
KEYHOLE UNIT, P-SMBP............................             198             720             198             720
LEWIS AND CLARK RURAL WATER SYSTEM..............             100  ..............             100  ..............
MID-DAKOTA RURAL WATER PROJECT..................  ..............              15  ..............              15
MNI WICONI PROJECT..............................  ..............          13,475  ..............          13,475
OAHE UNIT, P-SMBP...............................              37              73              37              73
RAPID VALLEY PROJECT............................  ..............              79  ..............              79
RAPID VALLEY UNIT, P-SMBP.......................  ..............             208  ..............             208
SHADEHILL UNIT, P-SMBP..........................             153             466             153             466
 
                      TEXAS
 
BALMORHEA PROJECT...............................              37              13              37              13
CANADIAN RIVER PROJECT..........................              57              88              57              88
LOWER RIO GRANDE WATER RESOURCES CONSERVATION                 50  ..............              50  ..............
 PROGRAM........................................
NUECES RIVER PROJECT............................             107             869             107             869
SAN ANGELO PROJECT..............................              37             594              37             594
 
                      UTAH
 
HYRUM PROJECT...................................              90             197              90             197
MOON LAKE PROJECT...............................              19             105              19             105
NEWTON PROJECT..................................              50             104              50             104
OGDEN RIVER PROJECT.............................             286             224             286             224
PROVO RIVER PROJECT.............................           1,191             512           1,191             512
SANPETE PROJECT.................................              59              13              59              13
SCOFIELD PROJECT................................             253              99             253              99
STRAWBERRY VALLEY PROJECT.......................             751              46             751              46
WEBER BASIN PROJECT.............................           1,082             959           1,082             959
WEBER RIVER PROJECT.............................             100             198             100             198
 
                   WASHINGTON
 
COLUMBIA BASIN PROJECT..........................           4,436           8,473           4,436           8,473
WASHINGTON AREA PROJECTS........................             329             138             329             138
YAKIMA PROJECT..................................             744           6,083             744           6,083
YAKIMA RIVER BASIN WATER ENHANCEMENT PROJECT....          13,200  ..............          13,200  ..............
 
                     WYOMING
 
BOYSEN UNIT, P-SMBP.............................             191           1,893             191           1,893
BUFFALO BILL DAM, DAM MODIFICATION, P-SMBP......              33           2,764              33           2,764
KENDRICK PROJECT................................              68           4,047              68           4,047
NORTH PLATTE PROJECT............................              78           1,209              78           1,209
NORTH PLATTE AREA, P-SMBP.......................              72           5,437              72           5,437
OWL CREEK UNIT, P-SMBP..........................               6              99               6              99
RIVERTON UNIT, P-SMBP...........................               8             580               8             580
SHOSHONE PROJECT................................              34             761              34             761
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
      SUBTOTAL, ITEMS UNDER STATES..............         207,939         293,656         207,939         293,656
 
                 REMAINING ITEMS
 
ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR ONGOING WORK RURAL WATER.  ..............  ..............          86,500  ..............
    FISH PASSAGE AND FISH SCREENS...............  ..............  ..............          10,000  ..............
    WATER CONSERVATION AND DELIVERY.............  ..............  ..............         241,844  ..............
    ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION AND COMPLIANCE....  ..............  ..............          40,000  ..............
    FACILITIES OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, AND        ..............  ..............  ..............           4,000
     REHABILITATION.............................
COLORADO RIVER BASIN SALINITY CONTROL PROJECT,             1,934          13,519           1,934          13,519
 TITLE I........................................
COLORADO RIVER BASIN SALINITY CONTROL PROJECT,             6,000  ..............           6,000  ..............
 TITLE II.......................................
COLORADO RIVER STORAGE PROJECT (CRSP), SECTION 5           3,513           6,397           3,513           6,397
COLORADO RIVER STORAGE PROJECT (CRSP), SECTION 8           3,347  ..............           3,347  ..............
COLORADO RIVER WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT             940  ..............             940  ..............
DAM SAFETY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR     ..............           1,300  ..............           1,300
 DAM SAFETY PROGRAM.............................
    INITIATE SAFETY OF DAMS CORRECTIVE ACTION...  ..............          66,500  ..............          66,500
    SAFETY EVALUATION OF EXISTING DAMS..........  ..............          20,284  ..............          20,284
EMERGENCY PLANNING & DISASTER RESPONSE PROGRAM..  ..............           1,300  ..............           1,300
ENDANGERED SPECIES RECOVERY IMPLEMENTATION                19,152  ..............          19,152  ..............
 PROGRAM........................................
ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION............           1,844  ..............           1,844  ..............
EXAMINATION OF EXISTING STRUCTURES..............  ..............           9,123  ..............           9,123
GENERAL PLANNING ACTIVITIES.....................           2,000  ..............           2,000  ..............
INDIAN WATER RIGHTS SETTLEMENTS AAMODT                     8,301  ..............           8,301  ..............
 LITIGATION SETTLEMENT..........................
    BLACKFEET IWRS..............................          10,000  ..............          10,000  ..............
    CROW TRIBE RIGHTS...........................          12,772  ..............          12,772  ..............
    NAVAJO-GALLUP...............................          68,932             671          68,932             671
LAND RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PROGRAM...............          10,684  ..............          10,684  ..............
LOWER COLORADO RIVER OPERATIONS PROGRAM.........          31,176  ..............          31,176  ..............
MISCELLANEOUS FLOOD CONTROL OPERATIONS..........  ..............             980  ..............             980
NATIVE AMERICAN AFFAIRS PROGRAM.................          10,571  ..............          12,425  ..............
NEGOTIATION & ADMINISTRATION OF WATER MARKETING.           2,462  ..............           2,462  ..............
OPERATION & PROGRAM MANAGEMENT..................           1,204           2,437           1,204           2,437
POWER PROGRAM SERVICES..........................           2,193             307           2,193             307
PUBLIC ACCESS AND SAFETY PROGRAM................             600             206             600             206
RECLAMATION LAW ADMINISTRATION..................           2,148  ..............           2,148  ..............
RECREATION & FISH & WILDLIFE PROGRAM                       6,497  ..............           6,497  ..............
 ADMINISTRATION.................................
 
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT:
    DESALINATION AND WATER PURIFICATION PROGRAM.           1,753           1,150          18,653           1,150
    SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM..............          11,014  ..............          16,765  ..............
SITE SECURITY ACTIVITIES........................  ..............          26,220  ..............          26,220
UNITED STATES/MEXICO BORDER ISSUES--TECHNICAL                 90  ..............              90  ..............
 SUPPORT........................................
WATERSMART PROGRAM WATERSMART GRANTS............          10,000  ..............          34,000  ..............
    WATER CONSERVATION FIELD SERVICES PROGRAM...           1,750  ..............           4,179  ..............
    COOPERATIVE WATERSHED MANAGEMENT............             250  ..............           2,250  ..............
    BASIN STUDIES...............................           2,000  ..............           5,200  ..............
    DROUGHT RESPONSE & COMPREHENSIVE DROUGHT               2,901  ..............           4,000  ..............
     PLANS......................................
    TITLE XVI WATER RECLAMATION & REUSE PROGRAM.           3,000  ..............          54,406  ..............
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
      SUBTOTAL, REMAINING ITEMS.................         239,028         150,394         726,011         154,394
 
UNDERFINANCING..................................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL.....................................         446,967         444,050         933,950         448,050
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Anadromous Fish Screen Program.--The Committee is concerned 
that insufficient resources are being devoted to completing 
work on the last two remaining priority unscreened diversions 
on the Sacramento River, both of which have been specifically 
identified as priorities in the California Natural Resources 
Agency Sacramento Valley Salmon Resiliency Strategy. The 
Committee strongly urges Reclamation to allocate sufficient 
resources from within available funds to complete the screening 
of these high priority diversions.
    Arkansas Valley Conduit.--The Committee understands 
Reclamation has proactively worked over the past year to 
identify cost savings by using existing locally owned 
facilities. Despite receiving appropriations since 2009 and the 
project being in its final phase, the fiscal year 2019 budget 
request includes no funding for this Conduit, jeopardizing the 
clean drinking water supply to rural Southeastern Colorado. The 
Committee further understands that the project could incur a 
delay cost of 3 percent, costing taxpayers more than $1,000,000 
to achieve the same results. The Committee urges Reclamation to 
prioritize additional funding to build and maintain critical 
infrastructure in rural communities across the Nation.
    Aquifer Recharge.--The Committee is aware that many States 
have implemented new methods of recharging aquifers for 
increased water storage and drought mitigation. The Committee 
directs Reclamation to work closely with project beneficiaries 
to identify and resolve any barriers to aquifer recharge 
projects when appropriate, while utilizing full authority to 
prioritize funds for ongoing projects through completion.
    CALFED Water Storage Feasibility Studies.--In testimony 
before the Subcommittee, the Commissioner of Reclamation 
asserted that the agency would complete feasibility studies for 
the Sites and Temperance Flat reservoirs by the end of August 
2018 and would complete the feasibility study for the Los 
Vaqueros reservoir by November 2018. The Committee notes that 
these studies have taken more than 15 years and expects 
Reclamation to take such steps as are necessary to ensure that 
each of these studies is completed as soon as possible.
    Columbia Basin Project.--The Committee understands the 
Odessa Subarea of the Columbia Basin Project is facing 
significant challenges as groundwater from the aquifer has been 
declining. This rapid decline has put agriculture production 
and commercial, municipal, and industrial water uses at risk. 
The Committee commends Reclamation's work with the State of 
Washington and impacted irrigation districts to prevent further 
depletion of the aquifer and deliver surface water to 
agricultural lands within the Columbia Basin Project through a 
pressurized delivery system. In May 2018, Reclamation issued a 
Supplemental Information Report for the Odessa Groundwater 
Replacement Program that allows Reclamation to request funding 
to support the project, which to date has been supported 
through State, local, and private investments. The Committee 
encourages Reclamation to request funding in future budgets to 
support projects associated with the Odessa Groundwater 
Replacement Program.
    Groundwater Recharge.--Using the funds recommended under 
the heading ``Water Conservation and Delivery'', Reclamation 
shall make funding available for water conservation programs, 
conjunctive use projects, and other projects to maximize 
groundwater storage and beneficial use.
    Projects Serving Military Installations.--The Committee is 
concerned that Reclamation's criteria for allocating funding 
have not adequately accounted for projects that would directly 
benefit military base operations and national security 
facilities. The Committee directs Reclamation to brief the 
Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress within 
30 days of delivering the report to Congress, which was 
required in the fiscal year 2018 appropriations bill, on the 
recommendations contained within that report.
    Rural Water Projects.--Voluntary funding in excess of 
legally required cost shares for rural water projects is 
acceptable but shall not be used by Reclamation as a criterion 
for allocating additional funding recommended by the Committee 
or for budgeting in future years.
    Salton Sea.--The Committee encourages Reclamation to 
establish an interagency Salton Sea working group to coordinate 
Corps permitting, Environmental Protection Agency financing 
opportunities, and Department of Agriculture restoration work 
as well as expedite implementation of objectives set forth in 
the August 2016 Memorandum of Understanding.
    Scoggins Dam, Tualatin Project, Oregon.--The Committee 
supports the budget request for preconstruction activities at 
Scoggins Dam under the Safety of Dams program. Consistent with 
the Tualatin Project Water Supply Feasibility Study authorized 
in Public Law 108-137 and statutory authority granted by Public 
Law 114-113 allowing for additional benefits to be conducted 
concurrently with dam safety improvements, the Committee 
directs Reclamation to evaluate alternatives, including new or 
supplementary works, provided that safety remains the paramount 
consideration, to address dam safety modifications and 
increased storage capacity. Considering the high risk 
associated with Scoggins Dam, the Committee urges Reclamation 
to work with local stakeholders and repayment contractors to 
prioritize this joint project including feasibility and 
environmental review of the preferred alternative in fiscal 
year 2019. The Committee understands that a replacement 
structure downstream could significantly reduce project costs 
for both the Federal Government and local stakeholders. 
Reclamation may accept contributed funds from non-federal 
contractors to expedite completion of any level of review.
    Research and Development: Desalination and Water 
Purification Program.--Of the funding recommended for this 
program, $12,000,000 shall be for desalination projects as 
authorized in section 4009(a) of the WIIN Act.
    Research and Development, Science and Technology Program.--
The Committee is aware that the Reclamation Science and 
Technology Office has been investing in efforts under the Open 
Water Data Initiative to integrate currently fragmented water 
supply data from several Federal agencies into a connected, 
national water data framework. Furthermore, the Committee 
understands that the Science and Technology Office has a future 
goal to develop web-based decision support tools. The Committee 
urges Reclamation to expedite the development and testing of a 
web-based Water Supply Decision Support System that will help 
Federal, State, municipal, Tribal, and private water managers 
and users make better water-use decisions to support water 
conservation and drought resilience in the western States. Such 
a system will allow a diverse group of water managers and users 
to better leverage the Federal Government's investment in 
producing water supply data on river levels, snow pack, 
weather, and climate.
    St. Mary's Diversion Dam and Conveyance Works.--The 
Committee encourages Reclamation to use additional funding for 
the Milk River Project to move forward with its design work for 
the St. Mary Canal Diversion Dam, including completion of 
designs, specifications, and cost estimates. The committee also 
encourages Reclamation to consider the replacement of the St. 
Mary Canal Diversion Dam as an extraordinary maintenance 
measure, and allow local stakeholders additional flexibility in 
paying for a dam replacement, instead of one lump sum payment.
    WaterSMART Program.--The Committee encourages Reclamation 
to prioritize eligible Water Conservation projects that will 
provide water supplies to meet the needs of threatened and 
endangered species.
    WaterSMART Program: Title XVI Water Reclamation & Reuse 
Program.--Of the funding recommended for this program, 
$20,000,000 shall be for water recycling and reuse projects as 
authorized in section 4009(c) of the WIIN Act.
    Yakima River Basin Integrated Water Resource Management 
Plan.--The Committee supports the Yakima River Basin Integrated 
Water Resource Management Plan [Plan]. This innovative water 
management plan represents years of collaboration in the Yakima 
River Basin among stakeholders including Reclamation, the State 
of Washington, the Yakama Nation, irrigators and farmers, 
conservation organizations, recreationists, and local 
governments to address water supply needs for agriculture, fish 
and wildlife, and municipal use. The Committee encourages 
Reclamation to request funding in future budgets to implement 
additional authorized elements of the Plan.
    Additional Funding for Water and Related Resources Work.--
The Committee recommendation includes an additional 
$490,983,000 above the budget request for Water and Related 
Resources studies, projects, and activities. Priority in 
allocating these funds shall be given to advance and complete 
ongoing work; including preconstruction activities and where 
environmental compliance has been completed; improve water 
supply reliability; improve water deliveries; enhance national, 
regional, or local economic development; promote job growth; 
advance Tribal and nontribal water settlement studies and 
activities; or address critical backlog maintenance and 
rehabilitation activities. Reclamation is encouraged to 
allocate additional funding for aquifer recharging efforts to 
address the ongoing backlog of related projects. Of the funds 
recommended under the heading ``Water Conservation and 
Delivery'', $30,000,000 is allocated to fund Colorado River 
water conservation, including the Lower Colorado River 
Operations Program and the Upper Colorado River Operations 
Program. Of the additional funding recommended under the 
heading ``Water Conservation and Delivery'', $134,000,000 shall 
be for water storage projects as authorized in section 4007 of 
Public Law 114-322. Of the additional funding recommended under 
the heading ``Environmental Restoration or Compliance'', not 
less than $30,000,000 shall be for activities authorized under 
sections 4001 and 4010 of Public Law 114-322 or as set forth in 
Federal-State plans for restoring threatened and endangered 
fish species affected by the operation of Reclamation's water 
projects. Reclamation is reminded that activities authorized 
under Indian Water Rights Settlements are eligible to compete 
for the additional funding under ``Water Conservation and 
Delivery''.
    Buried Metallic Water Pipe.--Reclamation shall continue 
following its temporary design guidance.

                CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT RESTORATION FUND

                          GROSS APPROPRIATION

Appropriations, 2018....................................     $41,376,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................      62,008,000
Committee recommendation................................      62,008,000

                         OFFSETTING COLLECTIONS

Appropriations, 2018....................................     $41,376,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................      62,008,000
Committee recommendation................................      62,008,000

                           NET APPROPRIATION

Appropriations, 2018....................................................
Budget estimate, 2019...................................................
Committee recommendation................................................

    The Committee recommends $62,008,000 for the Central Valley 
Project Restoration Fund, the same as the budget request. This 
appropriation is fully offset by collections, resulting in a 
net appropriation of $0.
    The Central Valley Project Restoration Fund was authorized 
in the Central Valley Project Improvement Act, title 34 of 
Public Law 102-575. This fund uses revenues from payments by 
project beneficiaries and donations for habitat restoration, 
improvement and acquisition, and other fish and wildlife 
restoration activities in the Central Valley project area of 
California. Payments from project beneficiaries include several 
required by the act (Friant Division surcharges, higher charges 
on water transferred to non-Central Valley Project users, and 
tiered water prices) and, to the extent required in 
appropriations acts, additional annual mitigation and 
restoration payments.

                    CALIFORNIA BAY-DELTA RESTORATION

Appropriations, 2018....................................     $37,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................      35,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      35,000,000

    The Committee recommends $35,000,000 for California Bay-
Delta Restoration, the same as the budget request.
    This account funds activities that are consistent with the 
CALFED Bay-Delta Program, a collaborative effort involving 18 
State and Federal agencies and representatives of California's 
urban, agricultural, and environmental communities. The goals 
of the program are to improve fish and wildlife habitat, water 
supply reliability, and water quality in the San Francisco Bay-
San Joaquin River Delta, the principle hub of California's 
water distribution system.

                       POLICY AND ADMINISTRATION

Appropriations, 2018....................................     $59,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................      61,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      61,000,000

    The Committee recommends $61,000,000 for Policy and 
Administration, the same as the budget request.
    This account funds the executive direction and management 
of all Reclamation activities, as performed by the 
Commissioner's offices in Washington, DC; Denver, Colorado; and 
five regional offices. The Denver office and regional offices 
charge individual projects or activities for direct beneficial 
services and related administrative and technical costs. These 
charges are covered under other appropriations.
    Reclamation Project Reimbursability Decisions.-- In 
September 2017, the Department of the Interior's Office of 
Inspector General released a report calling into question 
Reclamation's method of financial participation in the State of 
California's Bay-Delta Conservation Plan. The Committee is 
concerned that Reclamation was not satisfactorily transparent 
in its use of funds for activities that were not included in 
the budget request. Reclamation is directed to submit an annual 
report 60 days after the end of each fiscal year detailing the 
use of financial assistance agreements to redirect appropriated 
funds from their intended purpose outlined in the previous 
year's budget request. Reclamation is directed to review and 
report to the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of 
Congress within 90 days after enactment of this act, on the 
advisability of developing additional financial controls and 
requiring more extensive written justifications for 
determinations of what costs are reimbursable for complex 
projects involving major Federal expenditures and multiple 
funding sources.

             GENERAL PROVISIONS--DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

    Section 201. The bill includes a provision regarding 
reprogramming.
    Section 202. The bill includes a provision regarding the 
San Luis Unit and Kesterson Reservoir.

                               TITLE III

                          DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

                       Overview of Recommendation

    The Committee recommends $34,990,015,000 for the Department 
of Energy, an increase of $9,512,377,000 above the budget 
request.
    The Committee recommendation sets priorities by supporting 
the Office of Science and ARPA-E, leading the world in 
scientific computing, addressing the Federal Government's 
responsibility for environmental cleanup and disposal of used 
nuclear fuel, keeping large construction projects on time and 
on budget, effectively maintaining our nuclear weapons 
stockpile, and supporting our nuclear Navy.

                              Introduction

    The mission of the Department of Energy [Department] is to 
ensure America's security and prosperity by addressing its 
energy, environmental, and nuclear challenges through 
transformative science and technology solutions. To accomplish 
this mission, the Secretary of Energy [Secretary] relies on a 
world-class network of national laboratories, private industry, 
universities, States, and Federal agencies, which allows our 
brightest minds to solve our Nation's most important 
challenges.
    The Committee's recommendation for the Department includes 
funding in both defense and non-defense budget categories. 
Defense funding is recommended for atomic energy defense 
activities, including the National Nuclear Security 
Administration, which manages our Nation's stockpile of nuclear 
weapons, prevents proliferation of dangerous nuclear materials, 
and supports the Navy's nuclear fleet; defense environmental 
cleanup to remediate the former nuclear weapons complex; and 
safeguards and security for Idaho National Laboratory. Non-
defense funding is recommended for the Department's energy 
research and development programs (including nuclear, fossil, 
and renewable energy, energy efficiency, grid modernization and 
resiliency, and the Office of Science), power marketing 
administrations, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and 
administrative expenses.

                        Reprogramming Guidelines

    The Committee's recommendation includes control points to 
ensure the Secretary spends taxpayer funds in accordance with 
congressional direction. The Committee's recommendation also 
includes reprogramming guidelines to allow the Secretary to 
request permission from the Committee for certain expenditures, 
as defined below, which would not otherwise be permissible. The 
Secretary's execution of appropriated funds shall be fully 
consistent with the direction provided under this heading and 
in section 301 of the bill, unless the Committee includes 
separate guidelines for specific actions in the bill or report.
    Prior to obligating any funds for an action defined below 
as a reprogramming, the Secretary shall notify and obtain 
approval of the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of 
Congress. The Secretary shall submit a detailed reprogramming 
request in accordance with section 301 of the bill, which 
shall, at a minimum, justify the deviation from prior 
congressional direction and describe the proposed funding 
adjustments with specificity. The Secretary shall not, pending 
approval from the Committee, obligate any funds for the action 
described in the reprogramming proposal.
    The Secretary is also directed to inform the Committees on 
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress promptly and fully 
when a change in program execution and funding is required 
during the fiscal year.
    Definition.--A reprogramming includes:
  --the reallocation of funds from one activity to another 
        within an appropriation;
  --any significant departure from a program, project, 
        activity, or organization described in the agency's 
        budget justification as presented to and approved by 
        Congress;
  --for construction projects, the reallocation of funds from 
        one construction project identified in the agency's 
        budget justification to another project or a 
        significant change in the scope of an approved project;
  --adoption of any reorganization proposal which includes 
        moving prior appropriations between appropriations 
        accounts; and
  --any reallocation of new or prior year budget authority, or 
        prior year deobligations.

            Direction on Research and Development Activities

    The budget request proposes a shift away from later-stage 
research and development activities to refocus the Department 
on an early-stage research and development mission. The 
Committee believes that such an approach will not successfully 
integrate the results of early-stage research and development 
into the U.S. energy system and thus will not adequately 
deliver innovative energy technologies, practices, and 
information to American consumers and companies. The Committee 
directs the Department to implement mid- and late-stage 
research and development activities as directed in this report 
in a timely manner.

                        Crosscutting Initiatives

    The recommendation supports several crosscutting 
initiatives funded in prior years that reach outside of 
individual program offices to draw on the diverse disciplines 
within the agency as a whole. These initiatives, which address 
the Energy-Water Nexus; grid modernization; subsurface science, 
technology and engineering research, development, and 
deployment; cybersecurity; advanced materials, and the Beyond 
Batteries Initiative have allowed for a more comprehensive 
review of complex issues.
    Grid Modernization.--The Department is directed to continue 
the ongoing work between the national laboratories, industry, 
and universities to improve grid reliability and resiliency 
through the strategic goals of the Grid Modernization 
Initiative and encourages the Department to include all applied 
energy programs to ensure broad energy system resilience and 
modernization. Further, the Committee supports the Grid 
Modernization Laboratory Consortium and supports continued 
implementation of the Grid Multi-Year Program Plan. The 
Committee directs the Department to emphasize national grid 
resilience modeling and improved grid cyber resilience to 
address emerging national resilience challenges of the grid and 
related energy systems, planned investments in energy storage 
to improve grid flexibility and resilience, and advanced 
sensors and control paradigms that promise to improve energy 
system resilience of the future smart grid. The Committee 
recognizes that the inaugural projects funded for a 3-year 
duration will be concluding in fiscal year 2019 and therefore 
the Department is directed to continue support for the Grid 
Modernization Initiative and the Grid Modernization Laboratory 
Consortium and provide a plan to Congress to extend the multi-
year program plan to include priorities for field validation of 
the most successful research outcomes with industry and State 
stakeholders to accelerate adoption of the key Department 
results.
    Beyond Batteries Initiative.--The Committee is supportive 
of the Department's approach to consider energy storage 
holistically, and focus on advances in controllable loads, 
hybrid systems, and new approaches to energy storage. The 
Committee agrees that advances in this wide range of energy 
storage technologies will allow for loads to be combined with 
generation from all sources to optimize use of existing assets 
to provide grid services, and increase grid reliability. The 
Department shall continue to use all of its capabilities to 
accelerate the development of storage technologies, including 
the basic research capabilities of the Office of Science, the 
technology expertise of the Office of Energy Efficiency and 
Renewable Energy, the grid-level knowledge of the Office of 
Cybersecurity, Energy Security and Emergency Response, and the 
rapid technology development capabilities of ARPA-E. The 
Committee directs the Department to coordinate efforts among 
various existing Department programs to maximize efficiency of 
funds and expand vital research.
    The Department is encouraged to prioritize achieving a 
long-term goal of deploying technologies at $100/kWh or less 
cost installed while being able to cycle twice per day, 
discharging for at least 4 hours, with a lifetime of roughly 20 
years or at least 8,000 cycles.
    Subsurface Crosscut.--The Committee supports the ongoing 
Subsurface Technology and Engineering Research [SubTER] 
Initiative, focused on revolutionizing sustainable subsurface 
energy production and storage through transformational 
improvements in the ability to access, characterize, predict, 
and adaptively manipulate subsurface fracture and flow 
processes. SubTER aims to double reservoir recovery, decrease 
the environmental footprint, and enhance energy security and 
public safety. The Committee supports the SubTER program's 
approach to increasing domestic supply of oil, gas, and 
geothermal energy resources by manipulating the permeability of 
subsurface rock formations to injection fluids. To validate 
methods which enhance oil and gas recovery from fracking wells, 
the Committee encourages the Department to conduct pilot field 
tests of promising technologies with university and industry 
partners to reduce permeability and control the flow of fluids 
in the subsurface with targets of blocking highly permeable 
pathways that reduce sweep efficiency in porous rock and 
plugging fractures in shales.
    Energy-Water Nexus.--The Committee recognizes water and 
energy are critical resources that are reciprocally linked. The 
Energy-Water Nexus crosscut consists of a collaboration of 
agencies, national laboratories, State and local governments, 
utilities, industry, and the science community working 
collectively to address energy and water resource challenges, 
specifically as they relate to energy security and energy 
sector water needs.
    Advanced Materials.--The Committee supports the 
Department's attention to advanced materials research and 
development, focusing on lightweight materials and composites, 
and corrosion and materials under extremes. The Committee 
understands in previous years, other program offices 
independently had standalone existing materials programs, and 
continues to support formal coordination across offices through 
the Materials Working Group. Continued coordination supports 
the Department's ability to impact the materials development 
cycle from scientific discovery to technological innovation and 
deployment.
    Cybersecurity Crosscut.--Cybersecurity activities within 
the Department cover a broad scope ranging from the protection 
of Department assets against cybersecurity threats to improving 
cybersecurity in the electric power and oil and natural gas 
sectors to other areas in the national security portfolio. As 
cybersecurity threats become more complex, and the Department 
increases its focus on cybersecurity research and development, 
it is vital that there be clear crosscutting objectives and 
coordination across the Department. The Committee directs the 
Department to develop a plan that integrates all of the 
Department's cybersecurity research, development, and 
deployment investments, and brief the Committees on 
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress within 90 days after 
enactment of this act.
    Arctic Energy Office.--The Committee supports the promotion 
of research, development, and deployment of electric power 
technology that is cost-effective and well-suited to meet the 
needs of rural and remote regions of the United States, 
especially where permafrost is present or located nearby. In 
addition, the Committee further supports research, development 
and deployment in such regions of enhanced oil recovery 
technology, including heavy oil recovery, reinjection of 
carbon, and extended reach drilling technologies; gas-to-
liquids technology and liquefied natural gas, including 
associated transportation systems; small hydroelectric 
facilities, river turbines, and tidal power; natural gas 
hydrates, coal bed methane, and shallow bed natural gas; and 
alternative energy, including wind, geothermal, and fuel cells. 
The Department is encouraged to support a renewed focus on the 
Arctic region, and as a cross-cutting activity, use the Arctic 
Energy Office as a centralized area to support the use of 
energy resources, but also innovative activities, including 
microgrids and integrated energy systems.
    Regional Initiatives.--The Committee continues to urge the 
Department to utilize investments through existing regional 
capabilities that include industry, universities, and State and 
regional economic development assets. The Committee further 
encourages the national laboratories to expand their geographic 
outreach through people and access to specialized equipment and 
user facilities in order to contribute to the success of these 
regional initiatives.

                        Commonly Recycled Paper

    The Secretary shall not expend funds for projects that 
knowingly use as a feedstock commonly recycled paper that is 
segregated from municipal solid waste or collected as part of a 
collection system that commingles commonly recycled paper with 
other solid waste at any point from the time of collection 
through materials recovery.

                            ENERGY PROGRAMS

                 Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

Appropriations, 2018....................................  $2,321,778,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................     695,610,000
Committee recommendation................................   2,322,000,000

    The Committee recommends $2,322,000,000 for Energy 
Efficiency and Renewable Energy [EERE], an increase of 
$1,626,390,000 above the budget request. Within available 
funds, the Committee recommends $162,500,000 for program 
direction.
    Congressional Direction.--The Committee directs the 
Department to maintain a diverse portfolio of early-, mid-, and 
late-stage research, development, and market transformation 
activities. Regular consultation with industry is encouraged to 
avoid duplication of private-sector efforts. The Committee 
further directs the Department to fully execute the funds 
appropriated in this act, as directed in this report, in a 
timely manner and to keep Congress apprised of progress in 
implementing funded programs, projects, and activities. 
Further, the Committee directs the Department to give priority 
to stewarding the assets and optimizing the operations of EERE-
designated user facilities across the Department of Energy 
complex. In future budget requests, the Committee directs EERE 
to demonstrate a commitment to operations and maintenance of 
facilities that support the Department's critical missions.
    Workforce Development.--The development of a skilled 
workforce is critical to the successful deployment and long-
term sustainability of energy efficient and renewable energy 
technologies. The Committee encourages funding within EERE 
programs to be allocated to training and workforce development 
programs that assist and support workers in trades and 
activities required for the continued growth of the U.S. energy 
efficiency and clean energy sectors. Furthermore, the Committee 
encourages the Department to work with 2-year, public 
community, and technical colleges for job training programs 
that lead to an industry-recognized credential in the energy 
workforce.
    Electrification Futures Study.--The Committee encourages 
continued coordination between the EERE and the Office of 
Cybersecurity, Energy Security, and Emergency Response to 
evaluate the impacts of mass electrification on the utility 
business model and the electricity distribution system of the 
U.S. through the Electrification Futures Study.
    Cybersecurity.--The Committee believes cybersecurity 
vulnerabilities must be addressed as renewable energy 
technologies enter into the marketplace. The Committee also 
believes there is a gap with respect to distributed generators 
and behind-the-substation generators, storage, smart buildings 
technologies and electric vehicles where the potential for 
cyberattacks will continue to grow and threaten the modern 
grid. Within funds recommended for EERE, not less than 
$20,000,000 is recommended to establish a program that will 
bring cybersecurity into early-stage technology R&D so that it 
is built into new technology for this effort. Within 180 days 
after enactment of this act, the Department shall submit to the 
Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress a 
multi-year program plan for this effort to encompass all EERE 
programs.
    Energy Star.--The Department is encouraged to support the 
Environmental Protection Agency's efforts to reexamine Energy 
Star guidelines and standard operating procedures to ensure 
transparency, predictability, and consistency for all 
stakeholders.

                          VEHICLE TECHNOLOGIES

    The Committee recommends $337,500,000 for Vehicle 
Technologies, including $7,000,000 for operations and 
maintenance of the National Transportation Research Center.
    Within this amount, the Committee recommends not less than 
$163,200,000 for Battery and Electrification Technologies to 
lower the cost of batteries across light-, medium- and heavy-
duty vehicles through battery processing science, advanced 
battery chemistries, materials research, and modeling and 
simulation of battery performance. The Committee recommends not 
less than $38,100,000 for electric drive research and 
development including high power density electric drive 
systems, wireless charging and power electronic for extreme 
fast charging. The Committee also supports research and 
development to lower the cost of batteries for electric 
vehicles through cobalt-free materials and roll-to-roll 
manufacturing. Funding in this area shall also support research 
and development to improve electric motor technology through 
advanced material processing and the use of high-performance 
computing for multi-physics discovery to understand these new 
processes.
    The Committee further recommends $25,000,000 for Energy 
Efficient Mobility Systems, including the Systems and Modeling 
for Accelerated Research in Transportation [SMART] Mobility, 
Big Data Solutions for Mobility [Big Data], and Advanced 
Computing for Energy [ACE] initiatives, including HPC4Mobility 
and HPC-enabled analytics. These investments are critical to 
expanding U.S. energy security, economic vitality, and quality 
of life. Therefore, the Committee supports continued funding 
for research that allows the U.S. to continue its leadership in 
advancing state-of-the-art transportation infrastructure.
    The Committee recommends $43,000,000 for Advanced Engine 
and Fuel Technologies for research focused on advanced fuel 
formulations that optimize engine performance. Within this 
amount, $24,500,000 is recommended for the Co-Optimization of 
Engine and Fuels Multi-Laboratory Consortium.
    The Committee recommends $60,000,000 for Materials 
Technology. Within this amount, $25,000,000 is recommended for 
early-stage research on multi-material joining and propulsion 
materials at the national laboratories, and carbon fiber-
reinforced composites at the Carbon Fiber Technology Facility.
    Within available funds, the Committee recommends 
$10,000,000 for continued funding of section 131 of the 2007 
Energy Independence and Security Act for transportation 
electrification.
    The Committee recommends $25,000,000 to continue the five 
awards under the SuperTruck II program and encourages the 
Department to provide additional early-stage research funding 
for heavy-duty vehicle technologies as part of the program.
    Within available funds, the Committee recommends 
$46,300,000 for Outreach, Deployment, and Analysis. Within this 
amount, $37,800,000 is recommended for deployment through the 
Clean Cities Program. The Department is encouraged to ensure 
balance in the award of funds to achieve varied aims in 
fostering broader adoption of clean vehicles and installation 
of supporting infrastructure. The Committee further encourages 
the Department to prioritize projects in States where the 
transportation sector is responsible for a higher percentage of 
the State's total energy consumption and is the largest source 
of greenhouse gases.
    The Committee supports Advanced Vehicle Competitions, a 
collegiate engineering competition that provides hands-on, 
real-world experience to demonstrate a variety of advanced 
technologies and designs, and supports development of a 
workforce trained in advanced vehicles. The Committee 
recommends $2,500,000 following the successful EcoCAR 3 
competition to support a new 4-year collegiate engineering 
competition, EcoCAR 4.
    The Committee recommends $10,000,000 to continue improving 
the energy efficiency of commercial off-road vehicles, 
including up to $5,000,000 for fluid power systems.
    The Committee is concerned with the Department's lack of 
requested funding for natural gas vehicle research and 
development. With an abundant source of low-cost domestic 
natural gas, this resource as a transportation fuel is becoming 
the alternative fuel of choice for high fuel use fleets and 
off-road vehicles. Further research is needed on natural gas 
storage, natural gas engines, and fueling infrastructure 
optimization. Within available funding, the Committee 
recommends $15,000,000 to address technical barriers to the 
increased use of natural gas vehicles, including the 
development of novel compression and liquefaction technologies, 
advanced materials, and improvements in processes for 
conditioning, storing and dispensing natural gas. The Committee 
directs the Department to undertake a comprehensive study, with 
stakeholder input, on natural gas vehicle deployment in on- and 
off-road transportation, identifying barriers to increased 
deployment of natural gas vehicles.

                         BIOENERGY TECHNOLOGIES

    The Committee recommends $215,000,000 for Bioenergy 
Technologies.
    Within available funds, the Committee recommends not less 
than $30,000,000 for Advanced Algal Systems to sustain the 
investment in development of algal biofuels.
    The Committee further recommends $30,000,000 for Feedstock 
Supply and Logistics, $50,000,000 for Demonstration and Market 
Transformation, and $10,000,000 for Analysis and 
Sustainability.
    The Committee further recommends $95,000,000 for Conversion 
Technologies. Within this amount, $20,000,000 is recommended to 
continue activities of the Agile Biology Foundry intended to 
achieve substantial improvements in conversion efficiencies and 
the scale-up of biological processes with lower development 
costs and lead times.
    Within available funds, the Committee recommends $5,000,000 
within Conversion Technologies to continue the research 
biopower program, which makes full and innovative use of 
biomass, municipally-derived biosolids, municipal solid waste, 
and livestock waste.
    Within available funds the Committee recommends $5,000,000 
to support the development and testing of new domestic 
manufactured low-emission, high-efficiency, residential wood 
heaters that supply easily accessed and affordable renewable 
energy and have the potential to reduce the national costs 
associated with thermal energy.
    The Committee recognizes that biomethane or anaerobic 
digesters can provide important solutions to meet renewable 
energy goals, as well as address environmental and economic 
challenges and divert organic waste from landfills. The 
Committee encourages the Department to fund research, 
development, and demonstration activities to help lower upfront 
development costs and promote smaller-scale, community 
digesters. Within available funds for Conversion Technologies, 
the Committee recommends $5,000,000 to improve the efficiency 
of community and smaller digesters that accept both farm and 
food wastes.
    Within available funding, the Committee recommends not less 
than $10,000,000 to establish a multi-university partnership to 
conduct research and enhance educational programs that improve 
alternative energy production derived from urban and suburban 
wastes. The Committee further directs the Department to 
collaborate with institutions in Canada and Mexico to leverage 
capacity and capitalize on North American resources.
    Within available funds, the Committee supports research to 
develop the foundation for scalable technologies to use carbon 
dioxide produced in biorefineries to produce higher value 
fuels, chemicals or materials.

                  HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL TECHNOLOGIES

    The Committee recommends $115,000,000 for Hydrogen and Fuel 
Cell Technologies.
    Within the amounts recommended, the Committee recommends 
$39,000,000 for Hydrogen Fuel Research and Development for 
efforts to reduce the cost and improve the performance of 
hydrogen generation and storage systems, hydrogen measurement 
devices for fueling stations, hydrogen compressor components, 
and hydrogen station dispensing components. The Department 
shall continue to research novel onboard hydrogen tank systems, 
as well as trailer delivery systems to reduce cost of delivered 
hydrogen. Further, the Department is directed to support 
research and development activities that reduce the use of 
platinum group metals, provide improvements in electrodes and 
membranes and balance-of-plant components and systems. The 
Committee recommends $1,000,000 for Systems Analysis, including 
research on in-situ metrology for process control systems for 
manufacturing of key hydrogen system components.
    Within the amounts recommended, $19,000,000 is recommended 
for Hydrogen Infrastructure Research and Development. Further, 
the Department is directed to continue the H2@Scale Initiative, 
which couples current research efforts within the program with 
new opportunities for using hydrogen to provide grid resiliency 
and advance a wide range of industrial processes for the 
production of fuels, chemicals, and materials.
    The Committee recommends $19,000,000 for Technology 
Acceleration activities, including $3,000,000 for manufacturing 
research and development, and $7,000,000 for industry-led 
efforts to demonstrate a hydrogen-focused integrated renewable 
energy production, storage, and transportation fuel 
distribution/retailing system. Regular consultation with 
industry is encouraged to avoid duplication of private-sector 
activities.
    The Committee further recommends $7,000,000 for Safety, 
Codes, and Standards to maintain a robust program and engage 
regulatory and code officials to support their technical needs 
relative to infrastructure and vehicle safety.
    The Committee encourages the Secretary to work with the 
Secretary of Transportation and industry on coordinating 
efforts to deploy hydrogen fueling infrastructure.

                              SOLAR ENERGY

    The Committee recommends $239,500,000 for Solar Energy.
    Within available funds, the Committee recommends 
$55,000,000 for Concentrating Solar Power research, 
development, and demonstration to reduce overall system costs, 
better integrate subsystem components, develop higher-
temperature receivers, and improve the design of solar 
collection and thermal energy storage. Within this amount, 
$5,000,000 is recommended for competitively selected projects 
focused on advanced thermal desalination technologies.
    The Committee recommends $70,000,000 for Photovoltaic 
Research and Development to develop new or improved high-
performance cell materials and architectures and achieve 
greater than 40-percent cell efficiencies. The Department is 
encouraged to cooperate with industry and academia in its 
research and development efforts.
    The Committee recommends $35,000,000 for Balance of System 
Soft Cost Reduction to reduce non-hardware costs through new 
techno-economic tools and methodologies for distributed energy 
resources; an assessment of the potential for block-chain 
technologies to improve management of distributed solar; and 
standardization of planning, permitting, and installation tools 
and methodologies. Within this amount, the Committee recommends 
not less than $1,000,000 for the joint Solar Ready Vets program 
within the Department of Defense as a way to train America's 
veterans to fill the growing need for solar industry workers.
    Within the amounts recommended for Balance of System Soft 
Cost Reduction, $5,000,000 is recommended to re-invigorate the 
National Community Solar Partnership program to provide 
technical assistance to low- and moderate-income individuals, 
businesses, non-profit organizations, and State, local, and 
tribal governments to increase use of community solar 
installations.
    Further, the Committee recommends $49,500,000 for Systems 
Integration to address the technical barriers to increased 
solar penetration on the grid, including grid reliability, 
dispatchability, power electronics, and communications. The 
Committee encourages research and development efforts to target 
grid storage improvements, demand-response and load-shaping 
technologies, and modeling and planning tools for distributed 
energy resources.
    The Committee recommends $30,000,000 for Manufacturing 
Competitiveness to develop advanced low-cost manufacturing 
process technologies, including thickness reduction and faster 
processing with fewer steps. Within this area, the Committee 
also supports early-stage research on photovoltaics based on 
earth abundant materials focusing on scalable production 
methods, material stability, and ultrahigh efficiency tandem 
photovoltaic cell manufacturing approaches. To directly address 
fundamental barriers that could limit new technology's 
adoption, the Committee believes the fastest approach for rapid 
commercialization of new photovoltaic technologies would be to 
bring national laboratory capabilities and academia, in 
partnership with early-stage companies to develop a new 
photovoltaic U.S. manufacturing base. The Department is 
directed to create a 5-year domestic manufacturing capability 
consortium focused on inherently scalable production methods 
such as solution processing, roll-to-roll manufacturing, the 
science of inherent material stability, and ultrahigh 
efficiency through tandem manufacturing. Within available 
funds, the Committee recommends not less than $10,000,000 for 
the first year of the consortium.

                              WIND ENERGY

    The Committee recommends $80,000,000 for Wind Energy.
    The Committee supports research using high-performance 
computing, modeling and simulation, including the Atmosphere to 
Electrons initiative, and reliability and grid integration 
efforts. Further, the Department is directed to give priority 
to stewarding the assets and optimizing the operations of the 
Department-owned wind research and development facilities. 
Within available funds, the Committee recommends not less than 
$30,000,000 for the National Wind Technology Center, which 
shall include the development of a large-scale research 
platform to support next-generation wind energy science and 
manufacturing and systems integration of multiple energy 
generation, consumption, and storage technologies with the 
grid.
    The Committee encourages the Department to prioritize 
distributed wind technologies that reduce costs and improve 
performance, and to collaborate with industry to invest in the 
development and demonstration of technologies and practices 
that advance distributed wind. Within available funds, the 
Committee recommends $10,000,000 for distributed wind.
    The Committee directs the Department to support the 
advancement of innovative technologies for offshore wind 
development, including freshwater, deepwater, shallow water, 
and transitional depth installations. In addition, the 
Department is directed to support the innovative offshore wind 
demonstration projects for which funding has been allocated in 
previous fiscal years, and further supports efforts to optimize 
their development, design, construction methods, testing plans, 
and economic value proposition. The Committee recommends not 
less than $6,000,000 in new project development for the 
offshore wind demonstration projects to be allocated equitably 
between the approved projects, and to provide not less than 18 
months of additional development to ensure success. The 
Committee further directs the Department to support the 
deployment and testing of scale floating wind turbines designed 
to reduce energy costs. Within available funds, the Committee 
recommends not less than $30,000,000 for the Department to 
prioritize early-stage research on materials and manufacturing 
methods and advanced components that will enable accessing 
high-quality wind resources, on development that will enable 
these technologies to compete in the marketplace without the 
need for subsidies, and on activities that will accelerate 
fundamental offshore-specific research and development such as 
those that target technology and deployment challenges unique 
to U.S. waters. Further, the Committee recommends not less than 
$10,000,000 for existing national-level offshore wind test 
facilities.
    The Committee supports the Department's research on the 
effects of offshore wind, especially the impact of marine sound 
and other stressors on marine mammals, and encourages the 
Department to work with nonprofit research institutions, like 
aquariums, to continue this work.

                              WATER POWER

    The Committee recommends $105,000,000 for Water Power.
    Hydropower Technologies.--Within available funds, the 
Committee recommends $35,000,000 for conventional hydropower 
and pumped storage activities, including up to $6,600,000 for 
the purposes of section 242 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005. 
Within available funds, the Department is directed to continue 
research, development, and deployment efforts on pumped 
hydropower storage technologies and use cases.
    Marine and Hydrokinetic Technology Research, Development, 
and Deployment.--The Committee recommends $70,000,000 for 
marine and hydrokinetic technology research, development, and 
deployment activities, including research into mitigation of 
marine ecosystem impacts of these technologies.
    Within the funding available for marine and hydrokinetic 
technology, $30,000,000 is recommended for a balanced portfolio 
of competitive solicitations to support industry-led and 
university research, development, and deployment of marine and 
hydrokinetic technologies; and support wave, ocean current, 
tidal and in-river energy conversion components and systems 
across the high- and low-technology readiness spectrum to 
increase energy capture, reliability, survivability, and 
integration into local or regional grids for lower costs and to 
assess and monitor environmental effects. Within this amount, 
not less than $8,000,000 is recommended to support 
collaborations between universities, Marine Renewable Energy 
Centers, and national laboratories. Further, not less than 
$5,000,000 is recommended to prioritize infrastructure needs at 
marine and hydrokinetic technology testing sites operated by 
Marine Renewable Energy Centers. The Department is directed to 
support ongoing design of the previously awarded open-water 
wave energy test facility within available funds. The 
Department is also directed to continue its coordination with 
the U.S. Navy on marine energy technology demonstration.
    The Committee encourages close coordination between the 
Department and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the 
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, the National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration, other relevant agencies and 
industry to reduce the amount of time to permit marine energy 
test and validation projects.

                        GEOTHERMAL TECHNOLOGIES

    The Committee recommends $85,000,000 for Geothermal 
Technologies.
    Within available funds, $53,000,000 is recommended for 
Enhanced Geothermal Systems. To facilitate necessary technology 
development and expand understanding of subsurface dynamics, 
the Committee recommends $30,000,000 for the continuation of 
activities of the Frontier Observatory for Research in 
Geothermal Energy [FORGE], with activities to include ongoing 
novel subsurface characterization, full-scale well drilling, 
and technology research and development to accelerate the 
commercial pathway to large-scale enhanced geothermal systems 
power generation.
    Further, the Committee recommends $15,000,000 for 
Hydrothermal, $10,000,000 for Low-Temperature and Co-produced 
Resources, and $7,000,000 for Systems Analysis.
    The Committee recognizes that enhanced geothermal systems 
are versatile, inherently modular, and scalable from 
residential utilization to district heating opportunities and 
large power parks that can provide baseload capacity. The 
Committee encourages the Department to support enhanced 
geothermal system applications for industrial and residential 
uses.
    The Committee directs the Department to continue its 
efforts to identify prospective geothermal resources in areas 
with no obvious surface expressions.

                         ADVANCED MANUFACTURING

    The Committee recommends $311,000,000 for Advanced 
Manufacturing.
    The Committee recommends $80,000,000 for Advanced 
Manufacturing Research and Development Projects.
    The Committee recommends $171,000,000 for Advanced 
Manufacturing Research and Development Facilities. The 
Committee recommends $25,000,000 for the Manufacturing 
Demonstration Facility and the Carbon Fiber Technology Facility 
for early-stage research in additive manufacturing, carbon 
fiber and composites development, and manufacturing of multi-
material systems to reduce the energy intensity and life-cycle 
energy consumption of domestic manufactured products, thereby 
increasing the competitiveness of U.S. manufacturing 
industries. Within funding for the Manufacturing Demonstration 
Facility, $5,000,000 is recommended for the development of 
additive systems and automation technologies that have the 
potential to deposit multiple materials allowing for hybrid 
material solutions that enhance performance in extreme 
environments and enable precise property profiles.
    The Committee recognizes the important role large-area 
additive manufacturing can play in helping to advance the 
deployment of building, transportation, and clean energy 
technologies. The Committee directs the Department to further 
foster the partnership between the National Laboratories, 
universities, and industry to use bio-based thermoplastics 
composites, such as micro- and nano-cellulosic materials, and 
large-area 3-D printing to overcome challenges to the cost and 
deployment of building, transportation, and energy 
technologies.
    In addition, the Committee recommends $20,000,000 to 
support the development of additive manufacturing involving 
nanocellulosic feedstock materials made from forest products to 
overcome challenges to the cost and deployment of building, 
transportation, and energy technologies, and encourages the 
Department to leverage expertise and capabilities for large-
scale additive manufacturing through partnerships between 
universities and the Manufacturing Demonstration Facility.
    To ensure grid reliability and resiliency, energy storage 
at scale must be achieved. Validation of materials for 
production of energy storage is both slow and expensive, 
currently taking an average of 18 years from concept to 
commercialization. For technologies such as batteries, 
materials innovation is traditionally separate from scale-up 
and device integration, and this disconnect slows progress. 
Therefore, within the amounts recommended, the Committee 
recommends $20,000,000 for a manufacturing demonstration 
facility specifically focused on accelerating the processes 
needed for clean energy materials to go from discovery to 
scale-up, which will drive manufacturing innovation, lower the 
cost of battery energy storage, and spur job creation by 
bringing down the timeline for validation from an average of 18 
years to an average of 5 years.
    The Committee recommends $25,000,000 for the third year of 
research and development efforts to lower the cost and energy 
intensity of technologies to provide clean, safe water through 
the Energy-Water Desalination Hub. The Committee is concerned 
that after 2 years of funding for this hub in fiscal years 2017 
and 2018, the Department still has not completed the 
cooperative agreement solicitation and award process to begin 
work in this important research area. Therefore, upon enactment 
of this act, the Committee directs the Department to brief the 
Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress on 
schedule and milestones for soliciting and evaluating proposals 
from qualified consortia and awarding a 5-year cooperative 
agreement.
    The Committee recommends $56,000,000 to support four Clean 
Energy Manufacturing Institutes [CEMIs], including $14,000,000 
each for the Smart Manufacturing Innovation Institute, the 
Reducing Embodied-energy and Decreasing Emissions [REMADE] 
Institute, and the Rapid Advancement in Process Intensification 
Deployment [RAPID] Institute, and a CEMI selection to be 
announced. The Committee notes the PowerAmerica Next Generation 
Power Electronics Manufacturing Innovation Institute and the 
Advanced Composites Manufacturing Innovation Institute have 
both received $70,000,000 over the past 5 years to stand up a 
sustainable effort, and encourages the Department to work with 
one or more national laboratories and universities to build a 
sustainable plan for these institutes. The Committee is pleased 
with the ongoing work of the innovative advanced manufacturing 
opportunities through the CEMIs, and directs the Department to 
issue a solicitation and make an award for the sixth CEMI not 
later than October 1, 2018.
    The Committee recommends $25,000,000 to continue Critical 
Materials Hub. The Committee notes many municipal recycling 
facilities where collected recyclables are separated, now use 
technologies which are aging and inefficient. The Committee 
directs the Department to conduct a study to determine if the 
eddy current technology, which is now in use by most 
facilities, might be upgraded to increase the supply of 
recycled aluminum and to make recommendations as to how this 
might be accomplished and report to the Committees on 
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress within 180 days after 
enactment of this act.
    The Committee recommends $40,000,000 for the Industrial 
Technical Assistance program. Within this amount, the Committee 
recommends $12,000,000 to provide ongoing support for the 
Combined Heat and Power [CHP] Technical Assistance Partnerships 
[TAPs] and related CHP Technical Partnership activities at the 
Department, including $5,000,000 for the TAPs and $7,000,000 
for related CHP activities. The Committee also encourages the 
Department to prioritize research, development, and 
demonstration of district energy systems, and work to 
accelerate greater deployment of district energy systems in 
communities, campuses, industries, and cities nationwide by 
supporting adaptive regional and local technology, and market 
opportunities.
    The Committee encourages the Department to continue its 
efforts of extending the Industrial Assessment Centers to 
underserved areas and furthering the geographic reach of the 
program to regions that are less likely to be adequately 
serviced because of their distance from the current Centers. 
Therefore, the Committee recommends $10,000,000 to expand the 
technical assistance provided by the Industrial Assessment 
Centers and fund no fewer than two but no more than four 
additional centers. The Committee recognizes the great 
potential for energy savings in municipal, industrial, and 
agricultural wastewater treatment systems and encourages the 
Department to expand on the technical assistance provided by 
the Industrial Assessment Centers to address these needs. 
Within the funds recommended for the Industrial Assessment 
Centers, the Committee recommends $3,000,000 for wastewater 
treatment technical assistance.
    Within available funds, the Committee recommends 
$10,000,000 for district heating. The Committee further directs 
the Department to collaborate with industry on the potential 
energy efficiency and energy security gains to be realized with 
district energy systems.
    The Committee supports research and development on 
improving foundational materials and processes applicable to 
aluminum and other primary metal industries.
    The Committee supports the issuance of a competitive 
solicitation for university/industry-led teams to improve the 
efficiency of drying processes, which consume approximately 10 
percent of the energy used in the manufacturing sector.
    The Committee directs the Department to develop a national 
smart manufacturing plan that will identify areas where the 
Department can facilitate more rapid development, deployment 
and adoption of smart manufacturing technologies. The 
Department shall submit a plan to the Committees on 
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress not later than 180 
days after the enactment of this act.

                         BUILDING TECHNOLOGIES

    The Committee recommends $225,000,000 for Building 
Technologies.
    Within available funds, the Committee recommends 
$39,000,000 for the Commercial Building Integration program for 
a program of core research and development of more cost-
effective integration techniques and technologies that could 
help the transition toward deep retrofits. In addition, the 
Committee encourages the Department to increase engagement with 
private sector stakeholders to develop market-transforming 
policies and investments in commercial building retrofits.
    Within available funds, the Committee recommends 
$28,000,000 for the Residential Building Integration program. 
The Committee encourages funding to be concentrated on industry 
teams to facilitate research, demonstrate and test new systems, 
and facilitate widespread deployment through direct engagement 
with builders, the construction trades, equipment 
manufacturers, smart grid technology and systems suppliers, 
integrators, and State and local governments.
    The Committee recommends $108,000,000 for the Emerging 
Technologies subprogram. Within available funds, the Committee 
recommends not less than $30,000,000 for building-grid 
integration research and development consistent with a 
transactive energy system, including development of advanced 
transactive control methodologies, field validation and testing 
in existing buildings, continuation of the Building-to-Grid 
Integration Demonstration, and coordination with the Office of 
Cybersecurity, Energy Security, and Emergency Response 
transactive energy systems activities. Within this amount, 
$5,000,000 is recommended to continue promoting regional 
demonstrations of new, utility-led, residential Connected 
Communities advancing smart grid systems. Further, within 
available funds for Emerging Technologies, the Committee 
recommends not less than $18,000,000 for HVAC & Refrigeration 
R&D, $14,000,000 for Building Envelope and $5,300,000 for 
Building Energy Modeling.
    Within available funds for Emerging Technologies, the 
Committee recommends $25,000,000 for research, development, 
demonstration, and commercial application activities related to 
advanced solid-state lighting technology development. If the 
Secretary finds solid-state lighting technology eligible for 
the Twenty-First Century Lamp prize, specified under section 
655 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, 
$5,000,000 shall be made available to fund the prize or 
additional projects for solid-state lighting research and 
development.
    Within available funds, the Committee recommends 
$10,000,000 for research and development for energy efficiency 
efforts related to the direct use of natural gas in residential 
applications, including gas heat pump heating and water 
heating, onsite combined heat and power, natural gas appliance 
venting, green pilots, and micro-meters.
    Within available funds, the Committee recommends $5,000,000 
for novel earlier stage research, development, and 
demonstration of technologies to advance energy efficient, 
high-rise Cross-Laminated Timber [CLT] building systems. The 
Committee directs the Department to support university 
research, in partnership with national labs, for developing, 
building, and evaluating CLT wall systems for embodied energy 
content, operating energy efficiency, wall moisture profiles, 
structural connector durability, and health monitoring sensors.
    The Committee recommends $50,000,000 for Equipment and 
Buildings Standards. The Department has missed two deadlines 
for reports to Congress mandated by section 305 of the Energy 
Independence and Security Act [EISA] of 2007. These reports are 
invaluable sources of information for the Committee and other 
stakeholders about the status of energy conservation standards 
and the Department's plans to comply with its statutory 
obligations. The Department shall submit to the Committees on 
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress a status report 
within 30 days after enactment of this act. The Committee 
recommends $7,000,000 for the Building Energy Codes Program to 
provide assistance to States and to organizations that develop 
model codes and standards to improve building resilience as 
well as efficiency.
    Energy efficiency is a critical component of infrastructure 
development strategies. The Committee recognizes the importance 
of the Transformation in Cities initiative for local government 
planning and directs the Department to continue to support the 
goals of the initiative.
    The Committee is concerned with the Department's recently 
announced plans to cancel the 2019 Solar Decathlon, pending a 
reevaluation of the program. The Committee recommends not less 
than $5,000,000 for the Solar Decathlon. The annual competition 
has engaged thousands of university students to apply energy 
research and development to the practical concerns of housing 
by balancing design excellence and smart energy production and 
innovation, energy efficiency, and market potential. While the 
Committee understands that commercialization of technology is 
important, this should not become the sole or even the primary 
focus of the competition. Therefore, not later than 30 days 
after the enactment of this act, the Department shall brief the 
Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress on its 
plans for preserving the Solar Decathlon in its current form, 
any adjustments to the competition, and plans by the Department 
to accelerate adoption of suitable energy and water efficient 
technologies in the marketplace.

                   FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

    The Committee recommends $31,000,000 for the Federal Energy 
Management Program.
    The Committee encourages the continued use of the Assisting 
Federal Facilities with Energy Conservation Technologies grant 
program to leverage more private sector investment in aging 
Federal facilities and infrastructure.

              WEATHERIZATION AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL PROGRAM

    The Committee recommends $306,000,000 for the 
Weatherization and Intergovernmental Program.
    Within this amount, $251,000,000 is recommended for the 
Weatherization Assistance Program [WAP], including $248,000,000 
for Weatherization Assistance Grants and $3,000,000 for 
Training and Technical Assistance; and $55,000,000 is 
recommended for State Energy Program grants.
    The Committee recognizes the importance of providing 
Federal funds under the Weatherization and Intergovernmental 
Program to States and tribes in a timely manner to avoid any 
undue delay of services to eligible low-income households, and 
to encourage local high-impact energy efficiency and renewable 
energy initiatives and energy emergency preparedness. 
Therefore, the full amount of the funds recommended for WAP and 
the State Energy Program shall be obligated to States, tribes, 
and other direct grantees not later than 60 days after 
enactment of this act.
    Within available funds, $500,000 is recommended for current 
WAP grant recipients via the Weatherization Innovation Pilot 
Program to develop and implement strategies to treat harmful 
substances, including vermiculite.
    The Committee supports WAP's continued participation in the 
interagency working group on Healthy Homes and Energy with the 
Department of Housing and Urban Development. The Department is 
encouraged to further coordinate with the Office of Lead Hazard 
Control and Healthy Homes on energy-related housing projects. 
The Committee directs the Department to begin tracking the 
occurrence of window replacements, which supports the reduction 
of lead-based paint hazards in homes.

                           STRATEGIC PROGRAMS

    The Committee recommends $12,500,000 for Strategic 
Programs.
    Within available funds, $2,500,000 is recommended for the 
Energy Transition Initiative [ETI] to support ongoing 
initiatives to address high energy costs, reliability, and 
inadequate infrastructure challenges faced by island and remote 
communities. The Committee supports ETI's efforts to develop a 
cross-sector initiative of organizations pursuing energy 
transition efforts that will address energy challenges, build 
capacity, accelerate the sharing of best practices and 
innovations between similarly-situated regions, and leverage 
specialized expertise into commercial opportunity. The 
Committee further directs the Department to support initiatives 
for building of cost-effective, resilient energy infrastructure 
on island and remote communities, including in Alaska, the 
Caribbean, Hawaii, New England, and elsewhere.

         Cybersecurity, Energy Security, and Emergency Response

Appropriations, 2018....................................................
Budget estimate, 2019...................................     $95,800,000
Committee recommendation................................     260,000,000

    The Committee recommends $260,000,000 for Cybersecurity, 
Energy Security, and Emergency Response, an increase of 
$164,200,000 above the budget request. Within available funds, 
the Committee recommends $28,500,000 for program direction.
    Early-Stage Research, Electricity Sector.--The Committee 
rejects the budget's sole focus on early-stage research. Most 
utilities have limited research and development budgets, 
primarily due to regulatory constraints designed to keep 
electricity costs low for consumers. Additionally, utilities 
are unlikely to implement new concepts because most utilities 
would need to use their own systems for testing and evaluation, 
which could impact consumers. State public utility commissions 
also have limited budgets that do not support research and 
development. The States rely heavily on the Department's 
technical assistance on assessments of data and tools to help 
them evaluate grid modernization alternatives. The Department 
plays a vital role, not only in early-stage research, but also 
in deployment, field testing, and evaluation.

               CYBERSECURITY FOR ENERGY DELIVERY SYSTEMS

    The Committee recommends $80,829,000 for Cybersecurity for 
Energy Delivery Systems.
    The Committee recommends $10,000,000 for the DarkNet 
project to explore opportunities for getting the Nation's 
critical infrastructure off the Internet and shielding the 
Nation's electricity infrastructure from disruptive cyber 
penetration.
    The Committee supports extension of cyber risk information 
sharing tools to close remaining vulnerabilities in the 
distribution and transmission system. The Committee encourages 
the Department to continue existing work within ongoing 
programs and to invest in research addressing power system 
vulnerabilities in supply chain and life cycle management for 
critical power system components and advanced adaptive 
defensive methods for grid control systems.

                        TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY

    The Committee recommends $39,000,000 for Transmission 
Reliability.
    The Committee supports continued investment in advanced 
grid modeling algorithms and tool development to ensure 
resilient grid controls and protection systems that meet the 
challenges of the emerging smart grid.

                     RESILIENT DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS

    The Committee recommends $38,671,000 for Resilient 
Distribution Systems.
    Within available funding, $5,000,000 is recommended to 
develop high fidelity sensors and use data analytics to improve 
operations in steady-state and under extreme conditions, and to 
continue early-stage research to develop low-cost, printable 
sensors that can predict the health of critical equipment in 
the electric delivery system.
    The Committee supports the promotion of regional 
demonstrations of new, utility-led, residential Connected 
Communities advancing smart grid systems. The Department shall 
focus on identifying and addressing technical and regulatory 
barriers impeding grid integration of distributed energy 
systems to reduce energy costs and improve the resiliency and 
reliability of the electric grid. The Committee supports 
advanced control concepts and open test beds for new 
distribution control tools for enhanced distribution system 
resilience.

                             ENERGY STORAGE

    The Committee recommends $41,000,000 for Energy Storage.
    Within available funds, the Committee continues to support 
development of an operational energy storage test facility 
capable of performance-driven data in a utility environment.
    The Committee supports the Beyond Batteries initiative and 
cost-shared demonstrations of energy storage technologies with 
the private sector needed to achieve the Department's 
technology goal. Low-cost, grid-scale energy storage is crucial 
to a 21st century electricity grid, and the Department's 
storage research, development and deployment efforts shall 
support nationwide efforts to improve grid resiliency, 
reliability, and security, empower consumers, and increase 
integration of a broad range of generation sources.
    The Committee encourages the Department to further the 
development and demonstration of non-battery advanced storage 
components, including compressed air energy storage development 
and demonstration to enable efficiency improvements for 
utility-scale, bulk energy storage solutions.
    The Committee notes that innovation and advancement in 
distributed energy resources is helping the Nation's power grid 
to better address reliability, resiliency, safety, and 
accessibility. This enhances our Nation's energy security and 
global leadership. The Committee encourages the Department to 
further advance the development and demonstration of innovative 
battery and non-battery energy storage components. Energy 
storage is needed to better enable distributed energy 
resources; integrate intermittent uses such as water heaters, 
electric vehicle chargers, battery storage systems, and pumps; 
help balance supply and demand in the power grid to aid 
consumers to better manage their energy costs; protect 
residential and commercial customers and public services from 
power interruptions; and improve grid security and reliability.
    The Committee supports grid-scale field demonstrations of 
energy storage projects, either as single facilities or as 
aggregations of units, with a focus on new use cases rather 
than new battery chemistry. The Committee encourages the 
Department to support State energy offices and universities 
with energy storage planning and deployment, and to participate 
in industry-led safety codes and standards development. The 
Committee also supports funding for development of analytical 
methods for including energy storage in electric system 
planning, as well as for development of software tools to 
better value energy storage technologies. The Committee 
encourages the Department to remain committed to research and 
development partnerships related to the development and 
deployment of energy storage, with stakeholders in diverse 
geographic regions with unique market dynamics and policy 
challenges that can help to inform nationwide efforts to 
improve grid resiliency, reliability, and security, empower 
consumers, and increase integration of a broad range of 
generation sources. The Committee encourages the Department to 
make additional investments in cutting-edge storage 
technologies and relevant software, including conventional and 
advanced batteries. The Committee further encourages the 
Department to prioritize pilot scale initiatives with relevant 
utilities and State energy organizations that have the 
potential to advance real-time deployment and testing of these 
technologies.
    The Committee is supportive of research for novel materials 
and system components to resolve key cost and performance 
challenges for electrochemical energy storage systems based on 
earth abundant advanced chemistries. In addition, the Committee 
supports continued materials research that will improve the 
understanding and predictability of energy storage systems and 
components, as well as enable safer and more reliable materials 
and systems to be developed.

             TRANSFORMER RESILIENCE AND ADVANCED COMPONENTS

    The Committee recommends $7,000,000 for Transformer 
Resilience and Advanced Components.
    Within available funds, the Committee directs the 
Department to continue to support research and development for 
advanced components and grid materials for low-cost, power flow 
control devices, including both solid state and hybrid concepts 
that use power electronics to control electromagnetic devices 
and enable improved controllability, flexibility, and 
resiliency.

             INFRASTRUCTURE SECURITY AND ENERGY RESTORATION

    The Committee recommends $18,000,000 for Infrastructure 
Security and Energy Restoration.
    The Committee supports further development of energy sector 
situational awareness capabilities through Eagle-I, the Federal 
Government's situational awareness tool for national power 
outages. The Committee encourages the Department to further 
illustrate how to benefit from increased access to more varied 
sources of data.
    The Committee previously directed the Department to submit 
a report identifying strategic laboratory, university, and 
industry partnerships that would enhance national security and 
assist industry in addressing critical threats, including 
electromagnetic pulses [EMP], geomagnetic disturbances [GMD], 
cyber-attacks, and supply chain disruptions. The Committee 
looks forward to receiving this report expeditiously. The 
Committee supports the establishment of an EMP/GMD testing 
facility that can, without posing risk to the existing grid, 
replicate EMP/GMD events and cyber-attacks on a real world 
configuration of critical grid components and systems. Such a 
facility is necessary to expose entire substations, including 
devices such as Extra High Voltage Transformers and subsystem 
components, to the combined effects of the complete composite 
EMP Waveform for early stage research and development, as well 
as testing and validation purposes at both the transmission and 
distribution levels. The Committee encourages the Department to 
ensure such a facility to be a collaborative public-private 
effort between national laboratories, utilities, and research 
universities.

                             Nuclear Energy

Appropriations, 2018....................................  $1,205,056,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................     757,090,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,206,000,000

    The Committee recommends $1,206,000,000 for Nuclear Energy, 
an increase of $448,910,000 above the budget request. The 
Committee's recommendation prioritizes funding for programs, 
projects and activities that will ensure a strong future for 
nuclear power in the United States.
    Nuclear power provides more than 20 percent of our Nation's 
electricity and nearly 60 percent of our emissions-free 
electricity. Electricity generation from our Nation's operating 
nuclear power plants is critical to our national security, 
economy, and way of life. Nuclear power is a reliable, 
resilient source of power, and the Department is encouraged to 
seek opportunities to take advantage of that fact to meet its 
long-term needs.

                        RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

                     INTEGRATED UNIVERSITY PROGRAM

    The Committee recommends $5,000,000 for the Integrated 
University Program.
    The Committee notes the administration repeatedly attempts 
to defund this program, despite continued success in developing 
highly qualified nuclear specialists to meet national needs.

                   NUCLEAR ENERGY ENABLING TECHNOLOGY

    The Committee recommends $149,200,000 for Nuclear Energy 
Enabling Technology.
    Within this amount, the Committee recommends $50,000,000 
for Crosscutting Technology Development, $28,200,000 for 
Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling and Simulation, $41,000,000 
for National Scientific User Facilities, and $30,000,000 for 
the Energy Innovation Hub for Modeling and Simulation. The 
Committee notes that the budget request made the short-sighted 
recommendation to cancel the Energy Innovation Hub for Modeling 
and Simulation for the second year in a row, despite the 
important contributions it continues to make to improving 
operations and safety of operating nuclear reactors, and its 
likely application in licensing accident tolerant fuels and 
other advanced technologies.

       REACTOR CONCEPTS RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, AND DEMONSTRATION

    The Committee recommends $302,000,000 for Reactor Concepts 
Research, Development, and Demonstration.
    Advanced nuclear technologies hold great promise for 
reliable, safe, emission-free energy and should be a priority 
for the Department. The Department was previously directed to 
provide a report that sets aggressive, but achievable goals to 
demonstrate a variety of private-sector advanced reactor 
designs and fuel types by the late 2020s. The Department is 
directed to expedite that report and provide it to the 
Committee as soon as possible.
    Advanced Reactor Technology.--Within available funds, the 
Committee recommends $150,000,000, for Advanced Reactor 
Technology, including $22,000,000 for the fourth year of the 
advanced reactor concepts program.
    The Committee supports the Department's goal to accelerate 
reactor manufacturing, development, and deployment of advanced 
reactors. The Department is encouraged to leverage its 
technological capabilities in materials research and 
development, advanced manufacturing, high-fidelity modeling and 
simulation, sensors and control systems to transform the 
methods of reactor design, manufacturing, licensing and 
operation. The Committee recommends $30,000,000 above the 
budget request for the demonstration of a Transformational 
Challenge Reactor concept.
    Versatile Fast Reactor.--The Committee supports the budget 
request and recommends $15,000,000 for the Versatile Fast 
Reactor. The Department was previously directed to provide a 
report that details all current programs and projects within 
the Office of Nuclear Energy, whether the Department plans to 
continue to support each program or project, and the expected 
out-year funding through completion of the program or project. 
The Department is directed to expedite that report and provide 
it to the Committee as soon as possible.
    Light Water Reactor Sustainability.--Within available 
funds, the Committee recommends $47,000,000. The most cost-
effective way for the United States to maintain low-cost, 
carbon-free electricity is to safely extend the lives of our 
Nation's existing nuclear reactors from 60 to 80 years. 
Therefore, the Committee recommends additional funding above 
the budget request for this activity as a priority. The 
Committee directs the Secretary to use funding in this activity 
to continue research and development work on the technical 
basis for subsequent license renewal. The Secretary shall focus 
funding in this program on materials aging and degradation, 
advanced instrumentation and control technologies, and 
component aging modeling and simulation. The Secretary shall 
also coordinate with industry to determine other areas of high-
priority research and development in this area.

                  FUEL CYCLE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

    The Committee recommends $267,300,000 for Fuel Cycle 
Research and Development.
    Within available funds, $30,000,000 is recommended for 
Material Recovery and Waste Form Development, $6,000,000 is 
recommended for Materials Protection, Accountancy, and Controls 
for Transmutation, and $8,500,000 is recommended for Systems 
Analysis and Integration.
    The Committee continues to strongly support the 
recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's 
Nuclear Future and believes that near-term action is needed to 
address the accumulating inventory of spent nuclear fuel. The 
Committee recommends $35,300,000 for Integrated Waste 
Management System activities. Funding is recommended to 
implement plans to consolidate spent nuclear fuel from around 
the United States to one or more private or government interim 
central storage facilities. Priority shall be given to 
accepting spent nuclear fuel from shutdown reactors, and to 
accelerating the development of a transportation capability to 
move spent fuel from its current storage locations. Within 
funds recommended, the Committee recommends up to $10,000,000 
for the Secretary, within existing authorities, to contract for 
the management of spent nuclear fuel to which the Secretary 
holds the title or has a contract to accept title, which 
includes contracting with a private company for consolidated 
interim storage of spent nuclear fuel.
    The Committee directs the Secretary to work across the 
administration and to report to the Committees on 
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress, not later than 180 
days after the date of enactment of this act, with information 
regarding existing resources and funding opportunities for 
which communities hosting decommissioned/decommissioning 
reactors may be eligible. The report shall also include what 
opportunities exist for these affected communities to consider 
alternative uses for these sites upon completion of the 
decommissioning process.
    The Committee does not adopt the budget proposal to 
eliminate research and development activities previously funded 
in this account. The Committee recommends $62,500,000 to 
continue research and development activities on behavior of 
spent fuel in long-term storage, under transportation 
conditions, and in various geologic media, which will continue 
to be important to developing a solution to the waste problem. 
Priority shall be placed on the ongoing study of the 
performance of high-burnup fuel in dry storage and on the 
potential for direct disposal of existing spent fuel dry 
storage canister technologies.
    The Committee continues to place a high priority on the 
development of nuclear fuels with enhanced accident-tolerant 
characteristics to significantly mitigate the potential 
consequences of a nuclear accident. The Committee urges the 
Secretary to maintain focus and priority on achieving results 
in these efforts. The Committee recommends $125,000,000 for the 
Advanced Fuels program. The Department is directed to continue 
implementation of the accident tolerant fuels development 
program, the goal of which remains development of accident 
tolerant nuclear fuels leading to commercial reactor fuel 
assembly testing by 2022. Within this amount not less than 
$55,600,000 is recommended to continue the participation of 
three industry-led teams in Phase 2 of the cost-shared research 
and development program. Further, the Committee recommends not 
less than $20,000,000 to support accident tolerant fuels 
development at the national laboratories and other facilities, 
including at the Advanced Test Reactor, the Transient Reactor 
Test Facility, and the Halden reactor. In addition to amounts 
awarded through the Small Business Innovation Research and 
Small Business Technology Transfer programs, $3,000,000 is to 
continue the previously awarded small business projects to 
develop ceramic cladding for accident tolerant fuels.
    Finally, the United States currently lacks either a supply 
of high assay low enriched uranium [HALEU], or a process to 
make HALEU, for advanced reactor designs that would require 
enrichment up to 20 percent, below levels considered usable for 
nuclear weapons. The Committee recommends $10,000,000 for the 
Department to begin work to design and build a demonstration 
facility to produce HALEU from naval spent nuclear fuel or 
other available HEU within the Department's inventory. The 
Committee notes that using naval spent fuel for this purpose 
has the added benefit of potentially reducing the volume of 
waste that would eventually require disposal in a permanent 
repository.

                             INFRASTRUCTURE

                   RADIOLOGICAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT

    The Committee recommends $29,000,000 for Radiological 
Facilities Management, including $20,000,000 for continued safe 
operations and maintenance of Oak Ridge National Laboratory hot 
cells.

                      IDAHO FACILITIES MANAGEMENT

    The Committee recommends $238,000,000 for Idaho Facilities 
Management. The Advanced Test Reactor [ATR] is a vital asset 
that provides research capability across the Department. The 
Department was previously directed to provide a report that 
lists all current and planned users for the ATR for the next 3 
years, the operating cost attributed to each user, and the 
source of funds that will be applied to cover the costs for 
each user. The Department is directed to expedite that report 
and provide it to the Committee as soon as possible.

                 Fossil Energy Research and Development

Appropriations, 2018....................................    $726,817,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................     502,070,000
Committee recommendation................................     727,000,000

    The Committee recommends $727,000,000 for Fossil Energy 
Research and Development, an increase of $224,930,000 above the 
budget request. Within available funds, the Committee 
recommends $61,070,000 for program direction.
    Early-Stage Research and Development.--The Fossil Energy 
Research and Development program advances transformative 
scientific research, development, and deployment of 
technologies that enable the reliable, efficient, affordable, 
and environmentally sound use of fossil fuels. Fossil energy is 
an essential part of the United States' energy future, and the 
National Energy Technology Laboratory [NETL] supports the 
Office of Fossil Energy in this critical national priority. The 
Committee rejects the approach to only provide funds for early-
stage research. Such restrictions would cripple innovation and 
development, and would reduce the number of energy technologies 
adopted in the marketplace.
    Fossil Energy Roadmap.--The Committee previously directed 
the Department to develop a cohesive policy and technology 
strategy and supporting roadmap or long term plan for its 
Fossil Energy Research and Development portfolio and supporting 
infrastructure. This roadmap will guide the discovery or 
advancement of technological solutions and incorporate lessons 
learned for the future of research, development, and 
demonstration efforts on advanced carbon capture and storage 
[CCS] technologies, advanced fossil energy systems, and 
crosscutting fossil energy research, as well as guide the 
discovery or advancement of technological solutions for the 
prudent and sustainable development of unconventional oil and 
gas. The Committee looks forward to receiving the roadmap 
expeditiously.
    NETL.--No funds shall be used for the closure of NETL 
sites. The Committee supports NETL's mission to discover, 
develop, and deploy new technologies to support a strong 
domestic fossil energy path. The Committee previously directed 
the Department to conduct a comprehensive assessment of Fossil 
Energy writ large to include the Fossil Energy Headquarters 
programs, NETL, and relevant competencies of other national 
laboratories which support the mission of the Office of Fossil 
Energy. The Committee looks forward to receiving the assessment 
expeditiously.
    National Carbon Capture Center.--The Committee recommends 
funding for the National Carbon Capture Center consistent with 
the cooperative agreement and fiscal year 2018. The Committee 
continues to encourage the Department to establish university 
partnerships to support ongoing fossil energy programs, to 
promote broader research into CCS technologies, and to expand 
its technology transfer efforts. The Department has previously 
funded several university-based CCS projects and is encouraged 
to build on an established research base to support ongoing 
research and to address the wider implementation of CCS 
technologies.
    The Committee reiterates the importance of adequate Federal 
support to promote design-related work and testing for a 
commercial-scale, post-combustion carbon dioxide capture 
project on an existing coal-fueled generating unit as well as 
fossil energy research, development, and deployment of 
breakthrough technologies.

                       COAL CCS AND POWER SYSTEMS

    The Committee recommends $463,030,000 for Coal CCS and 
Power Systems.
    The Committee does not support the Department's proposal to 
reorganize or consolidate the Carbon Capture, Carbon Storage, 
Advanced Energy Systems, crosscutting research and development 
programs, and the Supercritical CO2 Technology 
Program [STEP].
    The Committee supports the Department's Cooperative 
Agreements to develop cost sharing partnerships to conduct 
basic, fundamental, and applied research that assist industry 
in developing, deploying, and commercializing efficient, low-
carbon, nonpolluting energy technologies that could compete 
effectively in meeting requirements for clean fuels, chemical 
feedstocks, electricity, and water resources. The Committee 
encourages the Department to fund activities that promote the 
reuse of captured carbon dioxide from coal, natural gas, 
industrial facilities, and other sources for the production of 
fuels and other valuable products. Within the ongoing CCS 
Program, the Department is encouraged to pursue an aggressive 
timeline to develop advanced carbon storage and utilization 
technologies and enhanced oil recovery that will improve the 
economics associated with domestic energy production. The 
Committee supports small-scale and modular coal-fired 
technologies with reduced carbon outputs or carbon capture that 
can support incremental power generation capacity additions 
that will enable a step-change in performance, efficiency, or 
cost of electricity as compared to the technology in existence 
on the date of enactment.
    The Committee supports small-scale and modular coal-fired 
technologies with reduced carbon outputs or carbon capture that 
can support incremental power generation capacity additions 
that will enable a step-change in performance, efficiency, or 
cost of electricity as compared to the technology in existence 
on the date of enactment.
    The Committee recommends research and development as well 
as pilot-scale activities that will improve the performance, 
reliability and efficiency of both new- and existing-fossil 
fuel fired power plants, including solvent-based, heat-
integrated carbon capture and storage research and testing at 
pilot-scale facilities installed at a commercial power plant 
with focus on solvent physical property impact on column 
performance, transformative approaches to mitigate emissions, 
and solvent quality maintenance to ultimately reduce capital 
and operating costs; development and testing of materials for 
highly efficient energy platforms; advancement of gasification 
systems; development of carbon products from coal; development 
of transformational energy conversion systems including 
pressurized oxycombustion, supercritical CO2 cycles, 
and chemical looping technologies; advancement of turbine 
technologies for higher efficiency and pressure cycles; 
development of fuel cells; coal and methane to liquid fuels; 
development and testing of advanced water management 
technologies; and continued investigation of rare earths 
recovery from coal and coal refuse.
    Within funds available for CCS and Power Systems, the 
Committee recommends not less than $30,000,000 to support a new 
solicitation for Front-End Engineering and Design [FEED] 
studies of two commercial-scale carbon capture power projects 
for retrofit at an existing coal plant and for a coal or 
natural gas plant that generates carbon dioxide suitable for 
utilization or storage. A FEED study shall incorporate work 
from feasibility studies and testing to provide specific 
project definition, detailed design, scopes of work, material 
purchasing and construction schedules, cost for project 
execution, and subsurface, structural, and environmental 
permitting requirements.
    Carbon Capture.--Achieving low-cost carbon capture 
technology is important to facilitating economic environmental 
mitigation solutions for the power and industrial sectors while 
opening up a broader carbon utilization economy. The Committee 
encourages the Department to focus its Carbon Capture research, 
development and deployment efforts on improving the efficiency 
and decreasing the costs of carbon capture technologies, 
demonstrating carbon capture technologies for private sector-
driven adoption at fossil energy power systems and industrial 
sources, and to identify how these technologies can be 
integrated within business models and operations. This includes 
small- and large-scale pilot testing of technologies moving 
through the program pipeline on both coal and natural gas 
applications, as well as on industrial sources.
    Carbon Storage.--Within available funds for Carbon Storage, 
the Committee recommends $12,000,000 for Carbon Use and Reuse 
to continue research and development activities to support 
valuable and innovative uses for carbon. The Committee believes 
the potential for carbon dioxide utilization technologies to 
become economically viable has improved in recent years, and 
these technologies should continue to receive attention from 
the Office of Fossil Energy. The Committee urges the Office of 
Fossil Energy to prioritize research on carbon dioxide 
utilization technologies, direct air capture technologies, and 
industrial source capture. The Committee also encourages the 
Office of Fossil Energy to collaborate with the Bioenergy 
Technologies program within the EERE, the private sector, and 
academia to support projects that utilize carbon dioxide in the 
production of algae and other potentially marketable products. 
The Committee supports early-stage research and development in 
conversion of coal pitch/coal to carbon fiber and in other 
value-added products for alternative uses of coal. Within 
Carbon Storage, the Committee recommends $55,000,000 for 
Storage Infrastructure. The Committee recognizes the successful 
work of the Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnerships and the 
important role they play in supporting the research and 
development of carbon utilization and storage. The Committee 
supports the focus on infrastructure development strategies 
through continued efforts to expand regional geological 
characterization to reduce uncertainties, collect and analyze 
data, facilitate and inform regional permitting and policy 
challenges. The Department is directed to fulfill prior 
commitments to the Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnerships. 
Further, the Committee recommends funding beyond the current 
phase, through a multiyear continuation of competitively 
selected partnerships to expand the work of the existing 
partnerships. The Committee recommends not less than 
$20,000,000 for a competitive continuation of the Regional 
Carbon Sequestration Partnership Program and not less than 
$30,000,000 to continue the four-phase CarbonSAFE initiative. 
The Committee directs the Department to work collaboratively 
with the Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnerships to develop 
a Storage Infrastructure roadmap through 2025 to identify the 
knowledge gaps and technology and policy developments that are 
needed to close those gaps.
    Advanced Energy Systems.--The Committee recommends up to 
$30,000,000 for solid oxide fuel cell systems, which supports 
research and development to enable efficient, cost-effective 
electricity generation with minimal use of water. The Committee 
encourages the Department to promote and assist in the research 
and development of new higher efficiency gas turbines used in 
power generation systems to allow the United States to upgrade 
and increase the reliability and resiliency of the Nation's 
electrical grid system, to better compete against the threat of 
foreign competitors who are being subsidized by their 
governments, while reducing the cost of electricity and 
significantly lowering emissions. This includes awarding grants 
and funding contract proposals from industry, small businesses, 
universities and other appropriate parties.
    The Committee supports coal and coal biomass to liquids 
activities and encourages the Department to focus on research 
and development to improve cost and efficiency of coal-to-fuels 
technology implementation and polygeneration. The Committee 
recognizes the importance of emerging technologies such as, 
coal-to-liquids [CTL] fuel conversion. Within available funds, 
the Committee supports research and development that will 
ensure CTL technologies have an opportunity to grow. The 
Committee supports the activities proposed in Power Generation 
Efficiency which would focus on improving the reliability and 
efficiency of existing plants through early stage research and 
development.
    Crosscutting Research.--The Committee supports Advanced 
Ultrasupercritical Materials research and development to 
identify, test, qualify, and develop a domestic supply chain 
capable of producing components from high temperature steam 
materials.
    STEP.--The Committee rejects the proposed changes in the 
request to the STEP Program, and recommends $25,000,000 to 
complete the necessary design and construction of the 10MW 
pilot facility, and conduct the necessary testing, including 
long-duration testing for the facility.
    NETL Coal Research and Development.--Within available funds 
for NETL Coal Research and Development, the Committee 
recommends $18,000,000 for the Department to continue its 
external agency activities to develop and test advanced 
separation technologies and accelerate the advancement of 
commercially viable technologies for the recovery of rare earth 
elements and minerals from U.S. coal and coal byproduct 
sources. The Committee expects research to support pilot-scale 
and experimental activities for near-term applications.

                        NATURAL GAS TECHNOLOGIES

    The Committee recommends $53,200,000 for Natural Gas 
Technologies.
    Risk-Based Data Management System.--Within available funds, 
the Committee recommends $5,200,000 to continue the Risk Based 
Data Management System [RBDMS] to support a cloud-based 
application and necessary cybersecurity initiatives. In 
addition, funding shall support the continued integration of 
FracFocus and RBDMS for improved public access to State-oil and 
gas-related data, as well as for State regulatory agencies to 
support electronic permitting for operators, eForms for 
improved processing time for new permits, operator training 
from the improved FracFocus 3.2 after enhancements are 
implemented, and miscellaneous reports, such as Produced Water 
Report: Current and Future Beneficial Uses Report. The 
Committee supports the continued efforts to provide public 
transparency, while protecting proprietary information.
    Methane Hydrate Activities.--The Committee recommends 
$20,000,000 for methane hydrates. The Committee notes that the 
budget request includes no money for actual research into the 
methods for producing methane hydrates. The Committee 
encourages the Department to perform a long-term methane 
hydrate production test in the Arctic, as proposed in the 
Methane Hydrate Advisory Committee's earlier recommendations 
(May 21, 2014) to the Department.
    Environmentally Prudent Development.--The Committee 
recommends $10,000,000 for the Environmentally Prudent 
Development subprogram.
    Emissions Mitigation from Midstream Infrastructure.--The 
Committee recommends $12,000,000 for the Emissions Mitigation 
from Midstream Infrastructure subprogram. The Committee 
recommends funds for natural gas infrastructure research, 
including advanced materials and novel sensor technologies. The 
Department is directed to incorporate this research into its 
ongoing work in this field, so that it shall complement the 
Emissions Mitigation from Midstream Infrastructure subprogram.
    Emissions Quantification from Natural Gas Infrastructure.--
The Committee recommends $6,000,000 for the Emissions 
Quantification from Natural Gas Infrastructure research 
subprogram.

               UNCONVENTIONAL FOSSIL ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES

    The Committee recommends $54,000,000 for Unconventional 
Fossil Energy Technologies. The Committee notes the importance 
of providing research support that will assure sustainable, 
reliable, affordable, and environmentally sound supplies of 
domestic unconventional fossil energy resources.
    The Committee understands the Department is continuing to 
conduct a study on the feasibility of establishing an ethane 
storage and distribution hub in central Appalachia. The 
Department is directed to identify the Federal agencies with 
jurisdictional oversight of such a project and to coordinate 
with the liaisons of those agencies to streamline the 
permitting application and approval process for a central 
Appalachian ethane storage and distribution hub. Further, the 
Department is directed to brief the Committees on 
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress on their findings and 
recommendations once complete.
    The Department is encouraged to explore research and 
development for safe drilling and completion technologies that 
use no fresh water and can be deployed in horizontal wells.
    Within available funds, $15,500,000 is recommended for 
research to better understand reservoirs and to improve low 
recovery factors from unconventional natural gas and oil wells 
and $15,500,000 is recommended to continue research toward 
enhanced recovery technologies in shale oil, low permeability 
reservoirs, residual oil zone reservoirs, fractured reservoirs, 
and conventional oil reservoirs. The Department shall solicit, 
award and manage these research projects on a nationwide basis 
directly with researchers from universities and not-for-profit 
research organizations. The projects may include research 
projects to improve environmental mitigation, water quality and 
treatment, infrastructure technology as well as the societal 
impacts of unconventional shale plays. These awards shall 
identify ways to improve existing technologies, encourage 
prudent development, provide cost-effective solutions, and 
develop a better understanding of these reservoirs' resource 
potential.
    The Committee recommends $17,500,000 for the Unconventional 
Field Test Sites.
    The Committee recognizes the Department's ongoing efforts 
to support research into the exploration for and development of 
emerging unconventional oil and/or gas reservoirs, and directs 
the Department to direct future allocations to projects in 
locations geologically representative of the unconventional 
reservoir of interest. The Committee encourages continued 
efforts to characterize emerging unconventional reservoirs but 
with emphasis on geographic areas where geological conditions 
are optimal for the generation and accumulation of economically 
significant amounts of oil or gas in the geological 
formation(s) being studied, as indicated by published reports 
and existing early-stage commercial activity. The Committee 
further encourages a focus of available resources on potential 
unconventional reservoirs for which there is limited data 
rather than well-known existing reservoirs. University-led 
research is preferred to ensure a broad range of expertise is 
utilized to address the entire range of environmental, socio-
economic, geological, and technical challenges associated with 
unconventional oil and gas development. The Committee also 
recognizes that private industry participation in very early 
development phase research projects, although desirable, is 
often difficult to achieve due to the highly proprietary nature 
of early-stage exploration data.
    The Committee recommends $4,000,000 for further research on 
multipronged approaches for characterizing the constituents of 
and managing the cleaning of water produced during the 
extraction of oil and natural gas, of which $2,000,000 is 
recommended to partner with research universities engaged in 
the study of characterizing, cleaning, treating, and managing 
produced water and who are willing to engage though public 
private partnerships with the energy industry to develop and 
assess commercially viable technology to achieve the same. The 
Committee encourages the Department to work with the energy 
producing industry to identify and develop--to a commercial 
scale--technologies that can characterize, clean and 
effectively treat produced water to have beneficial reuse.
    The Committee directs the Department to continue its 
research partnership with the Department of Transportation on 
the crude oil characterization study to improve the safety of 
crude oil transported by rail. The Committee recommends up to 
$1,500,000 for completion of the study.
    The Committee recognizes that the United States possesses 
vast domestic coal reserves that cannot be mined economically 
at current prices. Although some natural gas is absorbed by 
coal and can be economically recovered through methane 
extraction, more efficient recovery mechanisms are feasible. To 
validate methods for recovering a greater fraction of energy 
contained in deep coal deposits, the Committee encourages the 
Department to conduct pilot field tests of technologies for in-
situ biological conversion of coal to natural gas with 
university participants, and evaluate the feasibility of 
converting coal deposits in both the Western and Eastern United 
States into natural gas.

                 NATIONAL ENERGY TECHNOLOGY LABORATORY

    The Committee recommends $50,000,000 for NETL Research and 
Operations and $45,000,000 for NETL Infrastructure.
    NETL Infrastructure.--The Committee directs the Department 
to prioritize funds to provide site-wide upgrades for safety, 
avoid an increase in deferred maintenance, and provide for the 
continued update and refresh of Joule through the final year of 
a 3-year lease.

                 Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves

Appropriations, 2018....................................      $4,900,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................      10,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      10,000,000

    The Committee recommends $10,000,000 for Naval Petroleum 
and Oil Shale Reserves, the same as the budget request.

                      Strategic Petroleum Reserve

Appropriations, 2018....................................    $252,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................     175,105,000
Committee recommendation................................     175,105,000

    The Committee recommends $175,105,000 for the Strategic 
Petroleum Reserve, the same as the budget request.

                   Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve

Appropriations, 2018....................................      $6,500,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................      10,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      10,000,000

    The Committee recommends $10,000,000 for the Northeast Home 
Heating Oil Reserve, the same as the budget request.

                   Energy Information Administration

Appropriations, 2018....................................    $125,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................     115,035,000
Committee recommendation................................     125,000,000

    The Committee recommends $125,000,000 for the Energy 
Information Administration, an increase of $9,965,000 above the 
budget request.
    The Committee recognizes the importance of building energy 
information and the opportunity for better data collection 
presented by new technologies. The Department is encouraged to 
upgrade the Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Surveys to 
a real-time data collection system with rapid reporting of 
results, without compromising statistical validity or data 
security.

                   Non-Defense Environmental Cleanup

Appropriations, 2018....................................    $298,400,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................     218,400,000
Committee recommendation................................     353,240,000

    The Committee recommends $353,240,000 for Non-Defense 
Environmental Cleanup, an increase of $134,840,000 above the 
budget request.
    Small Sites.--The Committee recommends $174,000,000 for 
Small Sites. Within the available funds, the Committee 
recommends $10,000,000 for work required pursuant to the 
agreement reached in 2012 between the Department, the Advisory 
Council on Historic Preservation, and State and local 
governments to complete the demolition of K-25 in exchange for 
preserving the historic contributions made by the K-25 site to 
the Manhattan Project. The Committee also recommends 
$20,000,000 for operations, maintenance, and cleanup activities 
to support the Manhattan Project National Historical Park sites 
in Hanford, Washington, and Los Alamos, New Mexico. The Park 
tells an important story in our Nation's history: the 
development and production of the technology and materials 
necessary to create the world's first atomic bomb.
    Within available funds, the Committee recommends 
$55,000,000 to continue work at Lawrence Berkeley National 
Laboratory, $45,000,000 for Moab, and $25,000,000 to continue 
the removal of the High Flux Beam Reactor stack at Brookhaven.

      Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning Fund

Appropriations, 2018....................................    $840,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................     752,749,000
Committee recommendation................................     840,818,000

    The Committee recommends $840,818,000 for Uranium 
Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning [UED&D] 
activities, an increase of $88,069,000 above the budget 
request.
    The Committee recommendation includes $195,000,000 for East 
Tennessee Technology Park to continue cleanup and demolition of 
all remaining facilities including the K-1200 complex and the 
K-1600 complex, and to conduct remedial actions, and site 
closure activities. The Committee also recommends $206,000,000 
for Paducah, and $408,099,000 for Portsmouth. Additional 
funding of $60,000,000 above the budget request is recommended 
for the Portsmouth Site, and the Department shall not barter, 
transfer, or sell uranium during fiscal year 2019 to generate 
additional funding for Portsmouth cleanup that is in excess of 
the amount of funding recommended.

                                Science

Appropriations, 2018....................................  $6,259,903,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................   5,390,972,000
Committee recommendation................................   6,650,000,000

    The Committee recommends $6,650,000,000 for Science, an 
increase of $1,259,028,000 above the budget request.
    Distinguished Scientist Program.--The Committee recommends 
$4,000,000 to support the Department's Distinguished Scientist 
Program, as authorized in section 5011 of Public Law 110-69 to 
promote scientific and academic excellence through 
collaborations between institutions of higher education and 
national laboratories to be funded from across all Office of 
Science programs.
    Quantum Information Science.--The Committee supports the 
Office of Science's coordinated and focused research program in 
quantum information science to support the Department's 
science, energy, and national security missions. This emerging 
field of science promises to yield revolutionary new approaches 
to computing, sensing, communication, and metrology, as well as 
our understanding of the universe, and accordingly the 
Committee recommends $105,000,000 as requested across the 
Office of Science programs to advance early stage fundamental 
research in this field of science.
    Small Business Innovation Research.--The Committee 
recognizes the importance of small businesses in meeting the 
research and development mission of the Department and is 
concerned that the Department's previous delays in issuing 
Small Business Innovation Research [SBIR] and Small Business 
Technology Transfer [STTR] awards had a negative impact on 
small businesses. The Committee directs the Department to meet 
its congressionally mandated deadlines of reviewing small 
businesses' applications for SBIR/STTR awards as required by 
P.L. 112-81.

                 ADVANCED SCIENTIFIC COMPUTING RESEARCH

    The Committee recommends $980,000,000 for Advanced 
Scientific Computing Research.
    The Committee recommends $232,706,000 for the Exascale 
Computing Project. In addition, the Committee recommends 
$205,000,000 for the Oak Ridge Leadership Computing Facility, 
$145,000,000 for the Argonne Leadership Computing Facility, 
$110,000,000 for the National Energy Research Scientific 
Computing Center, and $85,000,000 for ESnet. The Committee 
supports the Department's efforts to fully fund an upgrade to 
ESnet and urges the Department to submit budget requests that 
provide ESnet the ability to procure the technology and 
operational resources needed for mission success. Further, the 
Committee recommends $10,000,000 for the Computational Sciences 
Graduate Program. The Committee recommends not less than 
$24,000,000 for Research and Evaluation Prototypes.
    The Committee recommends not less than $159,000,000 for 
Mathematical, Computational, and Computer Sciences Research to 
support the development of critical tools for advanced 
computing. The Committee is supportive of recent research 
thrusts to develop scientific machine learning tools to enhance 
scientific discovery from user facility data and fundamental 
research in quantum information science that will lay the 
groundwork for deployable quantum computing systems.
    The Committee recommends $75,667,000 for Computational 
Partnerships [SciDAC]. Within available funding for SciDAC, the 
Committee recommends up to $13,000,000 to support work on 
artificial intelligence and big data focused on the development 
of algorithms and methods to identify new ways of extracting 
information from data generated at the Office of Science's 
large user facilities or validating use of machine learning in 
the Office of Science's program's scientific simulations. This 
is the only funding recommended within the Office of Science 
that shall be available for this work. Further, none of the 
funding in the Office of Science is available for clinical 
trials or therapeutics.

                         BASIC ENERGY SCIENCES

    The Committee recommends $2,193,400,000 for Basic Energy 
Sciences [BES].
    The Committee recommends not less than $110,000,000 for the 
Energy Frontier Research Centers to continue multi-
disciplinary, fundamental research needed to address scientific 
grand challenges. The Committee continues to support the EPSCoR 
program and its goals of broadening participation in 
sustainable and competitive basic energy research in eligible 
jurisdictions. The Committee recommends $20,000,000 for EPSCoR 
and directs the Department to resume annual or at minimum, 
biennial, Implementation Grant solicitations. The Committee 
further directs the Department to submit a report to the 
Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress not 
later than 90 days after enactment of this act that provides a 
plan for future solicitations.
    The Committee recommends not less than $519,009,000 to 
fully fund optimal operations at the five BES light sources and 
to adequately invest in the recapitalization of key instruments 
and infrastructure, and in staff and other resources necessary 
to deliver critical scientific capabilities to users. Within 
the available funds, the Committee recommends $118,200,000 for 
the operation of NSLS-II. Recognizing that the Department has 
constructed only half of the 60 beamlines that the NSLS-II can 
accommodate, and has not yet requested funding for the 
construction of additional beamlines in fiscal year 2019, the 
Committee directs the Department to submit as part of its 
fiscal year 2020 budget request a plan for the buildout of 
additional beamlines to fully leverage the capabilities of the 
NSLS-II.
    The Committee recommends $285,000,000 for high-flux neutron 
source operations which will allow for both Spallation Neutron 
Source [SNS] and High Flux Isotope Reactor [HFIR] to proceed 
with the most critical deferred repairs, replace outdated 
instruments, and make essential machine improvements. The 
Committee does not recommend funding for the Lujan Neutron 
Scattering Center.
    The Committee recommends not less than $140,000,000 to 
fully fund optimal operations at the five BES Nanoscale Science 
Research Centers and to adequately invest in the 
recapitalization of key instruments and infrastructure, and in 
staff and other resources necessary to deliver critical 
scientific capabilities to users.
    The Committee recommends $24,088,000 for the Batteries and 
Energy Storage Hub, the Joint Center for Energy Storage 
Research [JCESR]. The Committee is highly supportive of the 
work of JCESR to develop energy storage research prototypes for 
transportation and grid applications beyond lithium-ion 
technologies. These prototypes will demonstrate the potential 
to scale up manufacturing prototype batteries to decrease costs 
and increase energy density of novel energy storage concepts. 
The Committee supports the continued research and development 
for JCESR, to ensure the outcome of basic research leads to 
practical solutions that are competitive in the marketplace.
    The Committee recommends not less than $15,000,000 for the 
Fuels from Sunlight Hub. The Committee directs the Department 
of Energy to submit a solar fuels research initiative strategic 
plan within 120 days after enactment of this act. The 10-year 
plan shall include research challenges and opportunities, 
program goals and milestones to overcome scientific and 
technological impediments, a description of coordination 
between the Office of Science, EERE, and ARPA-E to leverage 
basic research and early-stage translational research in solar 
fuels to accelerate the pace of innovation, an assessment of 
U.S. leadership in solar fuels research relative to 
international competition and the extent to which the 
Department's investments are sufficient to maintain U.S. 
leadership.
    The Committee supports funding for energy research 
activities related to enhanced efficiency in energy conversion 
and utilization, including emergent polymer optoelectronic 
technologies, to ensure continued competitiveness in a global 
marketplace. The Department is directed to continue its 
partnership with qualified institutions of higher education in 
this effort. The Committee encourages the Department to 
continue funding to support research and development needs of 
graduate and post-graduate science programs at Historically 
Black Colleges and Universities.
    The Committee recommends $26,000,000 for exascale systems.
    Within the amounts recommended for Construction, the 
Committee recommends $70,000,000 for the Proton Power Upgrade 
project at the Spallation Neutron Source, $15,000,000 for the 
Second Target Station preliminary engineering design and to 
continue work towards a project baseline, $50,000,000 for the 
Advanced Light Source Upgrade, $140,000,000 for the Advanced 
Photon Source Upgrade, $28,000,000 for LCLS-II HE, and 
$139,300,000 for LCLS-II.
    Not less than $14,100,000 is available for Other Project 
Costs, of which $6,000,000 is for the High Energy Upgrade at 
LCLS-II; $6,100,000 is for LCLS-II; and $2,000,000 is for the 
Advanced Light Source Upgrade.

                 BIOLOGICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH

    The Committee recommends $715,000,000 for Biological and 
Environmental Research. The Committee recognizes the unique and 
beneficial role that the Department plays for the Nation in the 
advancement of biosciences to address core departmental 
missions in energy and the environment. The Department is 
directed to give priority to optimizing the operation of 
Biological and Environmental Research User Facilities.
    The Committee recommends $371,000,000 for Biological 
Systems Science, including not less than $100,000,000 for the 
four recently selected Bioenergy Research Centers. The 
Committee directs the Department to maintain Genomic Science as 
a top priority and recommends $90,000,000 for Foundational 
Genomics Research and $34,908,000 for Biomolecular 
Characterization and Imaging Science. The Committee recommends 
$70,000,000 for the Joint Genome Institute, an essential 
component for genomic research. The Committee recognizes the 
importance of the emerging field of microbiome research to the 
mission objectives of the Office of Science and more broadly 
within the Department, especially in relation to energy 
security and environmental sustainability. To address 
programmatic opportunities in microbiome research and 
development and to maintain U.S. leadership in the field, the 
Committee recommends an additional $10,000,000 to begin the 
establishment of a national microbiome database. The Department 
should lead this effort in collaboration with other Federal 
agencies.
    The Committee recommends $344,000,000 for Earth and 
Environmental Systems Sciences. Within available funding for 
Earth and Environmental Systems Sciences, the Committee 
recommends not less than $40,000,000 for Terrestrial Ecosystem 
Science, of which not less than $10,000,000 is for NGEE-Arctic, 
$8,300,000 is for the SPRUCE field site, $5,800,000 is for Next 
Generation Ecosystem Experiments Tropics, $6,800,000 is for 
Watershed Function SFA, and $5,700,000 is for AmeriFLUX Long-
Term Earth System Observations. Within available funding for 
Earth and Environmental Systems Sciences, the Committee 
recommends not less than $22,143,000 for Subsurface 
Biogeochemical Research, including not less than $3,000,000 to 
support on-going research and discovery related to mercury 
biogeochemical transformations in the environment.
    The Committee recommends $97,000,000 for Earth and 
Environmental Systems Modeling and directs the Department to 
expend appropriated funds for earth system modeling, and 
regional and global model analysis. The Committee further 
directs the Department to make land-energy interactions, land 
biogeochemistry, uncertainty quantification, and model 
evaluation (e.g., ILAMB) a priority within the regional and 
global modeling activities, and continue to support performance 
optimization of coupled systems for execution on high 
performance and exascale systems. The Committee recommends 
$15,000,000 to support the exascale computing initiative.
    Within available funds, not less than $133,500,000 is 
recommended for Facilities and Infrastructure in the Earth and 
Environmental Systems Sciences program, including $45,000,000 
for the Environmental Molecular Sciences Laboratory, and 
$68,000,000 for the Atmospheric Radiation Measurement [ARM] 
User Facility. The Committee also recommends an additional 
$17,500,000 to replace the ARM mobile unit. The Committee 
supports the Department's proposal to initiate a terrestrial-
aquatic interfaces pilot project and encourages the Department 
to explore as part of this pilot the resilience of ecosystems 
in coastal regions in response to changing environments and 
extreme weather events.
    The Committee encourages the Department to increase its 
funding for academia to perform independent evaluations of 
climate models using existing data sets and peer-reviewed 
publications of climate-scale processes to determine various 
models' ability to reproduce the actual climate.

                         FUSION ENERGY SCIENCES

    The Committee recommends $425,000,000 for Fusion Energy 
Sciences.
    U.S. Contribution to ITER.--The Committee recommends 
$122,000,000 for the in-kind contributions and related support 
activities of the International Thermonuclear Experimental 
Reactor [ITER] project. The Committee does not recommended 
funding for the cash contribution.
    The Committee recommends not less than $7,000,000 for the 
Material Plasma Exposure eXperiment and not less than 
$92,500,000 for DIII-D.
    The Committee directs the Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory 
Committee to review establishing a reactor concepts research, 
development, and deployment activity. Within 180 days after 
enactment of this act, the Department is directed to brief the 
Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress on a 
recommendation, which if supported, will include a technical 
plan, program and eligibility requirements, and funding profile 
for future fiscal years.

                          HIGH ENERGY PHYSICS

    The Committee recommends $1,010,000,000 for High Energy 
Physics. The Committee strongly supports the Department's 
efforts to advance the recommendations of the Particle Physics 
Project Prioritization Panel Report [P5], which established 
clear priorities for the domestic particle physics program.
    The Committee recommends $7,500,000 for the Dark Energy 
Spectroscopic Instrument; $14,450,000 for the G2 Dark Matter 
Experiment LUX-ZEPLIN; and $10,000,000 for the Facility for 
Advanced Accelerator Experimental Tests II. The Committee notes 
that fabrication of the Large Synoptic Survey Telescope Camera 
will be complete with fiscal year 2018 funding and recommends 
$6,250,000 for ongoing efforts for commissioning and initial 
operation of the camera.
    In accordance with the P5, the Committee strongly urges the 
Department to maintain a balanced portfolio of small-, medium- 
and large-scale experiments, and to ensure adequate funding for 
the basic research program at universities and the national 
laboratories. In particular, in addition to the support for the 
Long Baseline Neutrino Facility to study neutrino physics, the 
Committee urges the Department to support the P5 recommendation 
for a next-generation Stage 4 Cosmic Microwave Background 
experiment for precision studies of the early universe.
    Four years into executing the P5, the Committee commends 
the Office of Science and the high energy physics community for 
achieving significant accomplishments and meeting the 
milestones and goals set forth in the strategic plan, including 
advancing the high-luminosity accelerator and detector upgrades 
for the Large Hadron Collider, construction of the Long 
Baseline Neutrino Facility/Deep Underground Neutrino 
Experiment, completing the construction of second generation 
dark matter and dark energy experiments, operating the world's 
highest power beams for neutrino physics, building a successful 
prototype of the strongest accelerator magnet ever built, and 
discovering new configurations of matter. The Committee 
encourages the Department and the high energy physics community 
to continue to provide progress reports on meeting P5 goals. 
The Committee recommends $145,000,000 to continue construction 
of the Long Baseline Neutrino Facility/Deep Underground 
Neutrino Experiment, consistent with the Department's project 
cost profile, and $35,000,000 for the PIP-II accelerator 
upgrade.
    A recent National Academies study, Opportunities in Intense 
Ultrafast Lasers, Towards the Brightest Light, highlighted the 
importance of investing in high-intensity laser technology to 
maintain U.S. leadership and open up new frontiers of science. 
To help advance this important area of research, the Committee 
directs the Department to provide a plan within 90 days after 
enactment of this act that responds to the recommendations of 
this study concerning this important national capability.

                            NUCLEAR PHYSICS

    The Committee recommends $710,000,000 for Nuclear Physics, 
and strongly supports the Long Range Plan for Nuclear Science 
released in October 2015 to address important scientific 
questions with modest or constrained growth in the nuclear 
science budgets, while still maintaining a strong, vital and 
world-leading program.
    Within available funds, the Committee recommends 
$75,000,000 for the Facility for Rare Isotope Beams [FRIB], and 
encourages the Department to work with Michigan State 
University to commence early operations at FRIB. The Committee 
also recommends $11,500,000 for the Stable Isotope Production 
Facility to provide increased domestic capacity for production 
of critically needed enriched stable isotopes for research, 
defense, and industry, and reduce the Nation's dependence on 
foreign supplies. The Committee also recommends $6,600,000 for 
the Gamma-Ray Energy Tracking Array, which will enable 
advanced, high resolution gamma ray detection capabilities for 
FRIB.
    The Committee further recommends optimal operations at the 
Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider, Continuous Electron Beam 
Accelerator Facility, the Argonne Tandem Linac Accelerator 
System, and the Brookhaven Linac Isotope Producer Facility.

           WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT FOR TEACHERS AND SCIENTISTS

    The Committee recommends $24,500,000 for Workforce 
Development for Teachers and Scientists. Within available 
funds, the Committee recommends $11,300,000 for the Science 
Undergraduate Laboratory Internship; $1,000,000 for the 
Community College Institute of Science and Technology; 
$4,500,000 for the Graduate Student Research Program; 
$1,200,000 for the Albert Einstein Distinguished Educator 
Fellowship; $2,900,000 for the National Science Bowl; $750,000 
for Technology Development and Online Application; $600,000 for 
Evaluation Studies; $500,000 for Outreach; and $50,000 for 
Laboratory Equipment Donation Program.

                  SCIENCE LABORATORIES INFRASTRUCTURE

    The Committee recommends $302,100,000 for Science 
Laboratories Infrastructure.
    Within these funds, the Committee recommends $26,000,000 
for nuclear operations at Oak Ridge National Laboratory. In 
future budget requests, the Committee directs the Office of 
Science to work with the Office of Nuclear Energy to 
demonstrate a commitment to operations and maintenance of 
nuclear facilities at Oak Ridge National Laboratory that 
support multiple critical missions.

               Advanced Research Projects Agency--Energy

Appropriations, 2018....................................    $353,314,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................................
Committee recommendation................................     375,000,000

    The Committee recommends $375,000,000 for the Advanced 
Research Projects Agency--Energy [ARPA-E], an increase of 
$375,000,000 above the budget request. Within available funds, 
the Committee recommends $33,250,000 for program direction.
    ARPA-E was established by the America COMPETES Act of 2007 
following a recommendation by the National Academies of 
Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in the Rising Above the 
Gathering Storm report. Since receiving its first funding in 
fiscal year 2009, ARPA-E continues to catalyze and support the 
development of transformational, high-impact energy 
technologies to ensure the Nation's economic and energy 
security and technological leadership. Project sponsors 
continue to form strategic partnerships and new companies, as 
well as secure private sector funding to help move ARPA-E 
technologies closer to the market.
    The Committee definitively rejects the short-sighted 
proposal to terminate ARPA-E, and instead increases investment 
in this transformational program and directs the Department to 
continue to spend funds provided on research and development 
and program direction. The Department shall not use any 
appropriated funds to plan or execute the termination of ARPA-
E.

              Innovative Technology Loan Guarantee Program

                        ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

                          GROSS APPROPRIATION

Appropriations, 2018....................................     $33,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................      10,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      33,000,000

                         OFFSETTING COLLECTIONS

Appropriations, 2018....................................    -$10,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................     -15,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     -15,000,000

                           NET APPROPRIATION

Appropriations, 2018....................................     $23,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................      -5,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      18,000,000

    The Committee recommends $33,000,000 in funding for the 
Loan Guarantee Program, an increase of $23,000,000 above the 
budget request. This funding is offset by $15,000,000 in 
collections from loan guarantee applicants, for a net 
appropriation of $18,000,000. An additional $44,000,000 is 
credited to the bill as an adjustment from negative subsidies 
associated with this program. No funds recommended under this 
heading may be used to plan, develop, implement or pursue the 
elimination of the Title XVII Innovative Technologies Loan 
Program.

        Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Loan Program

Appropriations, 2018....................................      $5,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................       1,000,000
Committee recommendation................................       5,000,000

    The Committee recommends $5,000,000 for the Advanced 
Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Loan Program, an increase of 
$4,000,000 above the budget request.

                  Tribal Energy Loan Guarantee Program

Appropriations, 2018....................................      $1,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................      -8,500,000
Committee recommendation................................       1,000,000

    The Committee recommends $1,000,000 for the Tribal Energy 
Loan Guarantee Program, an increase of $9,500,000 above the 
budget request.

              Office of Indian Energy Policy and Programs

Appropriations, 2018....................................................
Budget estimate, 2019...................................................
Committee recommendation................................     $18,000,000

    The Committee recommends $18,000,000 for the Office of 
Indian Energy Policy and Programs. The activities of this 
office have previously been funded in the Departmental 
Administration account.

                      Departmental Administration

                                (GROSS)

Appropriations, 2018....................................    $285,652,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................     235,534,000
Committee recommendation................................     266,000,000

                        (MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES)

Appropriations, 2018....................................    -$96,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................     -96,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     -96,000,000

                           NET APPROPRIATION

Appropriations, 2018....................................    $189,652,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................     139,534,000
Committee recommendation................................     170,000,000

    The Committee recommends $266,000,000 in funding for 
Departmental Administration. This funding is offset by 
$96,000,000 in revenue for a net appropriation of $170,000,000.
    The Committee has reduced the number of control points in 
this account to provide flexibility to the Department in its 
management and funding of its support functions. The Department 
is directed to continue to submit its budget request for this 
account in its current structure. The Other Departmental 
Administration activity includes Technology Transition 
Management, Chief Human Capital Officer, Chief Information 
Officer, Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business 
Utilization, General Counsel, Energy Policy and Systems 
Analysis, Technology Transitions, International Affairs, Public 
Affairs, Economic Impact and Diversity, and Office of Energy 
Jobs Development. The Office of Indian Energy Policy and 
Programs is funded in a separate account.
    Within International Affairs, the Committee recommends 
$2,000,000 for the Israel Binational Industrial Research and 
Development [BIRD] Foundation and $4,000,000 to continue the 
U.S.-Israel Center of Excellence in Energy Engineering and 
Water Technology as authorized by the United States-Israel 
Strategic Partnership Act. This joint research and development 
center between the U.S. and Israel shall focus on collaborative 
research initiatives among universities, research institutions, 
and industry partners that could include hydrocarbon extraction 
and processing, energy infrastructure and policies, process 
water treatment, alternative energy sources, and impacts on 
coastal communities. Funding provided shall be matched with 
Israeli government and industry funding. The Department is 
directed to expeditiously obligate funding provided in fiscal 
year 2018 and provide to the Committees on Appropriations of 
both Houses of Congress a briefing on implementation and 
management. The Committee directs the Department to ensure the 
center is cost-shared with Israel and non-federal partners.
    Technology Transfer.--Within the amount recommended for 
Other Departmental Administration, the Committee recommends 
$8,505,000 for the Office of Technology Transition. In awarding 
funding from the Technology Commercialization Fund, the 
Department shall assure cost match with private partners is in 
accordance with cost sharing in section 988 of the Energy 
Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 16352).
    Small Refinery Exemption.--The Department is directed to 
continue to follow the direction included in the Energy and 
Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 
2018, under this heading.

                    Office of the Inspector General

Appropriations, 2018....................................     $49,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................      51,330,000
Committee recommendation................................      51,330,000

    The Committee recommends $51,330,000 for the Office of the 
Inspector General, the same as the request.

                    ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES

                NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

    The Committee recommendation for the National Nuclear 
Security Administration [NNSA] continues funding for 
recapitalization of our nuclear weapons infrastructure, while 
modernizing and maintaining a safe, secure, and credible 
nuclear deterrent without the need for underground testing. 
This is among our most important national security priorities.
    At the same time, the Committee supports continuing 
important efforts to secure and permanently eliminate remaining 
stockpiles of nuclear and radiological materials overseas and 
in the United States that could be used for nuclear or 
radiological weapons. In addition, the Committee supports Naval 
Reactors and the important role they play in enabling the 
Navy's nuclear fleet.
    The NNSA is a semi-autonomous agency within the Department. 
The NNSA Act clearly lays out the functions of the NNSA, and 
gives the Administrator authority over, and responsibility for, 
those functions. No funds shall be used to reorganize, 
reclassify, or study combining any of those functions with the 
Department. Funds may be used to evaluate any other function 
not specifically listed as an NNSA function in the NNSA Act, 
such as a chief scientist or office of policy.

                     INTEGRATED UNIVERSITY PROGRAM

    The Committee directs the Secretary to carry out the 
requirements of 42 U.S.C. 16274a in support of university 
research and development in areas relevant to the NNSA's 
mission. Within available funds, the Committee recommends not 
less than $5,000,000 for the Integrated University Program to 
cultivate the next generation of leaders in nonproliferation, 
nuclear security, and international security. Together with 
funds from the Office of Nuclear Energy and the Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission, this program ensures highly qualified 
nuclear specialists will be available to meet national needs. 
The Committee directs the Department to request funding for 
this program in future budget years. Funding for this program 
shall not come from prior year funds.
    In addition to the Integrated University Program within 
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation, the NNSA manages several 
university-related programs, ranging from fellowships and 
scholarships to university research. The NNSA has not been able 
to provide a clear accounting of these various programs, and is 
directed to provide a report annually with the budget request 
that lists all of the university programs requested, the 
recommended funding level, and the value that program provides 
the NNSA.

                           PROJECT MANAGEMENT

    The Committee is concerned about the NNSA's ability to 
properly estimate costs and timelines for large projects. The 
NNSA is encouraged to assess current performance on projects 
costing more than $750,000,000, and make appropriate project 
management changes. The Committee encourages the NNSA to 
identify problems in cost and schedule estimates early, and 
provide updated information to the Committees on Appropriations 
of both Houses of Congress in a timely manner.

                           Weapons Activities

Appropriations, 2018.................................... $10,642,138,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................  11,017,078,000
Committee recommendation................................  10,850,000,000

    The Committee recommends $10,850,000,000 for Weapons 
Activities, a decrease of $167,078,000 below the budget 
request, to ensure the safety, security, reliability, and 
effectiveness of the Nation's nuclear weapons stockpile without 
the need for nuclear testing.

                        DIRECTED STOCKPILE WORK

    The Committee recommends $4,700,501,000 for Directed 
Stockpile Work.
    Life Extension Programs.--The Committee recommends 
$1,919,988,000 for Life Extension Programs [LEPs] and Major 
Alterations, which fully funds all LEPs and major alterations 
in the budget request, consistent with the plan of record 
approved by the Nuclear Weapons Council. The NNSA needs to 
ensure that LEPs are completed on time and on budget to prevent 
impact on other high priorities, such as modernizing aging 
infrastructure, critical nonproliferation activities to combat 
nuclear terrorism, and naval nuclear propulsion.
    Weapons Dismantlement and Disposition.--The Committee 
recommends $56,000,000 for the dismantlement of retired nuclear 
weapons removed from the stockpile.
    Strategic Materials.--The Committee supports the budget 
request for strategic materials, including management of 
existing material stockpiles and methods to replenish the 
supply needed for our national security programs. As the 
Department progresses through the ongoing warhead life 
extension programs, it will require the necessary strategic 
materials to meet the stockpile demands. The NNSA is encouraged 
to explore all options, including leveraging qualified 
industrial partners, to ensure it can maintain a consistent 
supply of purified uranium metal and other strategic materials.
    The Committee continues to support the Nuclear Weapons 
Council's program of record for plutonium pit production to 
meet the Fiscal Year 2015 National Defense Authorization Act 
requirement of 30 pits per year at Los Alamos National 
Laboratory by 2026.
    Within available funds, NNSA is directed to contract with a 
third-party federally-Funded Research and Development 
Corporation to conduct an independent assessment of the NNSA's 
decision to conduct pit production operations at two sites. 
NNSA shall identify and execute a contract with an independent 
FFRDC, not directly involved in plutonium pit production, not 
later than 60 days after enactment of this a act. NNSA shall 
not proceed with conceptual design activities for the recently 
announced preferred alternative until an FFRDC is under 
contract. The assessment shall include an analysis of the four 
options evaluated in the recent Plutonium Pit Production 
Engineering Assessment, all identified risks, engineering 
requirements, workforce development requirements, and other 
factors considered. The FFRDC shall submit its report to the 
Committees on Appropriations of both the Houses of Congress not 
later than 210 days after enactment of this act.
    Domestic Uranium Enrichment.--The Department's approved 
Mission Need Statement [MNS] for Domestic Uranium Enrichment 
states that in 2014-2015, the American Centrifuge Plant had 
successfully completed its mission of providing reliability and 
operational data. The Department's research and development on 
small centrifuges has not yet reached that level of maturity. 
The MNS also stated that the cost range to enrich uranium using 
AC-100 would cost approximately twice as much as using small 
centrifuges. The Committee is concerned that the Department 
lacks a credible plan to obtain adequate data on small 
centrifuge operations to complete the Analysis of Alternatives 
for uranium enrichment as scheduled. The Committee recommends 
$50,000,000 for Domestic Uranium Enrichment, including not more 
than $5,000,000 for research, development, and demonstration of 
AC-100 and not less than $45,000,000 for research, development 
and demonstration of small centrifuges. No funds are 
recommended for uranium downblending within this account.
    Tritium Sustainment.--The Committee recommends $290,275,000 
for tritium sustainment, including $85,000,000 to downblend 
uranium for tritium production.

           RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TECHNOLOGY, AND ENGINEERING

    The Committee recommends $2,042,289,000 for Research, 
Development, Technology, and Engineering.
    Science.--The Committee directs the Administrator to enter 
into a contract with the group known as JASON for a study to 
assess the efforts of the NNSA to understand plutonium aging 
and the lifetime of plutonium pits in nuclear weapons. The 
Administrator shall make available all information that is 
necessary to successfully complete a meaningful study on a 
timely basis. Not later than 18 months after the date of 
enactment of this act, the Administrator shall submit to 
Congress a report on the findings of the study. The report 
shall include recommendations of the study for improving the 
knowledge, understanding, and application of the fundamental 
and applied sciences related to the study of plutonium aging 
and pit lifetimes, an estimate of minimum and likely lifetimes 
for pits in current warheads, and the feasibility of reusing 
pits in modified nuclear weapons. The report shall be submitted 
in unclassified form but may include a classified annex.
    Academic Alliances and Partnerships.--The Committee 
recognizes the importance of the Academic Alliances and 
Partnerships program in supporting fundamental science and 
technology research at universities that support stockpile 
stewardship, the development of the next generation of highly-
trained workforce, and the maintenance of a strong network of 
independent technical peers. The Committee is also aware of the 
expertise provided to the NNSA by academic alliances and the 
centers of excellence program. The Committee encourages the 
NNSA to fund new centers of excellence, especially in the field 
of materials under extreme conditions research. The Committee 
recommends $53,364,000. Within this amount, not less than 
$20,000,000 is recommended for the Minority Serving Institution 
Partnership Program, within which not less than $2,000,000 is 
recommended for Tribal Colleges and Universities.
    Engineering.--The Committee recommends $22,500,000 to 
complete the recapitalization of the Microsystems and 
Engineering Sciences Applications silicon fabrication facility, 
consistent with the budget request. The Committee also supports 
increased investment in Enhanced Surety in recognition of new 
threats and the challenges maintaining readiness on aging 
systems. Within the available funding, $5,000,000 is 
recommended for next-generation technology development for 
warhead system certification and the protection against theft/
loss and terrorism incident.
    Inertial Confinement Fusion Ignition and High-Yield.--The 
Committee finds that the Inertial Confinement Fusion and High 
Yield [ICF] program continues to be a critical and essential 
component of nuclear stockpile certification without 
underground nuclear weapons testing, maintaining U.S. 
leadership in high energy density physics and laser 
technologies, and developing the next-generation workforce. 
Therefore, the Committee recommends $544,934,000 for the ICF 
program. Within available funds, the Committee recommends 
$344,000,000 for inertial confinement fusion activities at the 
National Ignition Facility, $63,100,000 is recommended for 
Sandia National Laboratory's Z facility, and $80,000,000 is 
recommended for the University of Rochester's Omega facility. 
Within available funds for facility operations and other 
amounts, the Committee recommends not less than $30,000,000 for 
target research, development, and production. To ensure a 
robust, diverse, and competitive vendor base for targets, the 
Committee directs the NNSA to compete as much scope as 
practicable and limit sole-source contracts to $15,000,000 or 
less. The Committee further encourages continued research by 
the NNSA in High Energy Density Plasmas and recognizes the 
partnerships between the laboratories and research universities 
to address the critical need for skilled graduates to replace 
an aging workforce at our NNSA laboratories.
    Advanced Simulation and Computing.--The Committee 
recommends $703,404,000 for advanced simulation and computing. 
Within available funds, the Committee recommends not less than 
$163,000,000 for activities associated with the exascale 
initiative, such as advanced system architecture design 
contracts with vendors and advanced weapons code development to 
effectively use new high performance computing platforms. 
Within funds provided, the Committee recommends up to 
$13,000,000 for work on integration of artificial intelligence 
approaches into mechanistic modeling and prediction.
    Advanced Manufacturing Development.--The Committee 
recommends $96,838,000 for Advanced Manufacturing Development. 
Within available funds, $35,914,000 is recommended for Process 
Technology Development, including $5,000,000 to modernize and 
upgrade legacy applications at weapons production facilities to 
improve manufacturing and safety.

                     INFRASTRUCTURE AND OPERATIONS

    The Committee recommends $2,749,048,000 for Infrastructure 
and Operations.
    Project 06-D-141, Uranium Processing Facility, Y-12, Oak 
Ridge, Tennessee.--The Committee recommends $703,000,000 to 
continue construction activities of the five remaining 
subprojects of the Uranium Processing Facility, including the 
Main Process Building and the Salvage and Accountability 
Building. The Committee notes that the designs for these 
nuclear facilities have reached the 90 percent completion 
milestone and the NNSA Administrator has approved the cost and 
schedule baselines for both buildings.
    The Committee supports the ongoing effort to replace 
existing enriched uranium capabilities currently residing in 
Building 9212 by 2025 for not more than $6,500,000,000 and the 
strategy of breaking the project into more manageable 
subprojects. This practice is specifically permitted by DOE 
Order 413.3B, and is a practical approach for any project of 
this magnitude.

                    Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation

Appropriations, 2018....................................  $1,999,219,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................   1,862,825,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,902,000,000

    The Committee recommends $1,902,000,000 for Defense Nuclear 
Nonproliferation, an increase of $39,175,000 above the budget 
request.
    Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation provides a vitally 
important component of our national security--preventing 
nuclear materials and weapons from falling into the wrong 
hands, including non-weapons nations, terrorist organizations, 
and other non-state entities. This mission is challenged by an 
increasingly dangerous world with emerging and evolving 
threats, in addition to the proliferation of technologies that 
simplify production, manufacturing, and design of nuclear 
materials and weapons. The Committee recognizes the importance 
of bilateral and multilateral agreements and organizations in 
detecting, intercepting, and deterring nuclear and radiological 
threats. The Committee urges the full use of these partnerships 
to further strengthen U.S. and global security. Within 
available funds, the Committee recommends up to $18,000,000 to 
partner with interested State or local governments to improve 
capabilities to train first-responders, and other experts in 
nuclear operations, safeguards, cyber, and emergency 
operations.
    To preserve and advance uranium and engineering expertise 
for purposes of national security and nonproliferation, the 
Committee encourages the ongoing collaboration between the 
Department's Office of Intelligence and the Defense Nuclear 
Nonproliferation program. Further, as the pathways to 
proliferation increase, it is vital to maintain the skilled 
workforce and unique infrastructure to detect nuclear 
proliferation and support policymakers in the future. The 
Department is directed to provide a report to the Committees on 
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress within 90 days after 
enactment of this act that provides a plan to maintain the 
necessary technical competencies and infrastructure. The 
Department is directed to coordinate with other government 
agencies and non-government entities to ensure it addresses the 
broad spectrum of nonproliferation needs.
    Domestic Radiological Security.--The Committee recommends 
$115,433,000 for Domestic Radiological Security, including not 
less than $25,000,000 for the Cesium Irradiator Replacement 
Program.
    Nonproliferation and Arms Control.--The Committee 
recommends $129,703,000 for Nonproliferation and Arms Control 
activities. Within available funds, the Committee recommends 
not less than $3,000,000 for international cooperation between 
governmental and non-governmental organizations at the national 
and sub-national levels to implement robust export control 
protocols.
    Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Research and 
Development.--The Committee recommends $487,270,000 for Defense 
Nuclear Nonproliferation Research and Development. The 
Committee supports a robust research and development capability 
to support nonproliferation initiatives. Proliferation of 
illicit nuclear materials and weapons continues to be a high-
consequence threat, and our ability to detect the production 
and movement of these materials is vitally important. Research 
and development in this area is especially important. The 
Committee recommendation supports continued research and 
development of novel enrichment technologies to support 
nonproliferation goals, and recommends $7,500,000 for this 
purpose. The Committee also supports exploration and 
development of material disposal technologies, and recommends 
up to $10,000,000 for this purpose.
    Low Enriched Uranium for Naval Applications.--Within 
available funds for Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Research 
and Development, the Committee recommends $10,000,000 for 
Advanced Low Enriched Uranium Fuel Research and Development for 
the national laboratories to develop low-enriched fuels that 
could replace highly enriched uranium for naval applications. 
Consistent with section 7319 of title 10, United States Code, 
this funding is recommended within the Defense Nuclear 
Nonproliferation account. This work shall be managed within 
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation.
    Seismic Research Instruments.--Several U.S. Government 
agencies reduce the costs of seismic research by utilizing 
shared-use instruments instead of owning, operating, and 
maintaining their own equipment. The Committee directs that 
within 180 days after enactment of this act, the NNSA shall 
submit a report to Committees on Appropriations of both Houses 
of Congress on the cost-effectiveness of establishing an 
agreement between the Department and one or more instrument 
centers to maintain and provide shared use of any instruments 
the Department acquires, rather than the Department doing so 
internally.
    MOX Construction.--The Committee recommends $220,000,000 
for closeout costs associated with the termination of MOX Fuel 
Fabrication Facility construction, consistent with the budget 
request and the Secretary's waiver to terminate the project.
    Use of Prior Year Funds.--The Committee recommendation 
assumes the use of $19,000,000 in prior year funds as 
recommended in the budget request, and the use of $55,000,000 
in prior year funds from Nonproliferation Construction.

                             Naval Reactors

Appropriations, 2018....................................  $1,620,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................   1,788,618,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,620,000,000

    The Committee recommends $1,620,000,000 for Naval Reactors, 
a decrease of $168,618,000 below the budget request. The 
Committee's recommendation fully funds important national 
priorities, including the Columbia-class replacement submarine 
design and the prototype refueling. Naval Reactors currently 
relies on high-enriched uranium from weapons that have been 
removed from the stockpile to fuel the Navy's aircraft carriers 
and submarines. The Committee encourages Naval Reactors to work 
with the NNSA to ensure there is a long-term plan that meets 
the Navy's needs for high-enriched uranium.

               COLUMBIA-CLASS REACTOR SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT

    The Committee recommends $138,000,000 for Columbia-Class 
Reactor Systems Development. Columbia-class submarines must be 
delivered on time to maintain our survivable deterrent. The 
Committee directs Naval Reactors to provide the report in the 
Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies 
Appropriations Act, 2018, on technical risks to delivering the 
lead submarine on time, and mitigation strategies for those 
risks.

                       NAVAL REACTORS DEVELOPMENT

    The Committee recommends $475,000,000 for Naval Reactors 
Development. Within the available funds, the Committee 
recommends $83,000,000 for the Advanced Test Reactor and 
$2,000,000 for planning, preparation, and shipments of 
unirradiated or irradiated material to support a pilot project 
on ZIRCEX.

                              CONSTRUCTION

    The Committee recommends $233,194,000 for Construction. 
Within available funds, the Committee recommends $209,000,000 
for the Spent Fuel Handling Facility in Idaho, $13,200,000 for 
the Fire System Upgrade at Bettis, and $10,994,000 to replace 
an overhead piping utility distribution system at the KS site.

                     Federal Salaries And Expenses

Appropriations, 2018....................................    $407,595,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................     422,529,000
Committee recommendation................................     408,000,000

    The Committee recommends $408,000,000 for Federal Salaries 
and Expenses, a decrease of $14,529,000 below the budget 
request.

                     Defense Environmental Cleanup

Appropriations, 2018....................................  $5,988,048,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................   5,630,217,000
Committee recommendation................................   5,988,000,000

    The Committee recommendation for Defense Environmental 
Cleanup is $5,988,000,000, an increase of $357,783,000 above 
the budget request. Within available funds, the Department is 
directed to fund the hazardous waste worker training program at 
$10,000,000.
    Future Budget Requests.--The Committee directs the 
Department to include out-year funding projections in the 
annual budget request for Environmental Management, and an 
estimate of the total cost and time to complete each site.
    Richland.--As a signatory to the Tri-Party Agreement, the 
Department is required to meet specific compliance milestones 
toward the cleanup of the Hanford site. Among other things, the 
Department committed to provide the funding necessary to enable 
full compliance with its cleanup milestones. Unfortunately, if 
the Department's fiscal year 2019 budget request were enacted 
without change, future fiscal year Tri-Party Agreement 
milestones could be at risk, threatening high-risk cleanup 
projects near the City of Richland, Washington and the 
economically and environmentally important Columbia River. The 
Committee recognizes that significant progress has been made at 
the Hanford Site. However, because the Department's budget 
request could slow or halt critical cleanup work and threaten 
the Department's compliance with its legal obligations under 
the Tri-Party Agreement, the Committee recommends $838,171,000 
for Richland Operations. Additional funding is recommended for 
cleanup of the 300-296 waste site under the 324 Building, 
interim stabilization of PUREX Tunnel #2, risk reduction 
activities associated with legacy waste sites, K-West facility 
cleanup and deactivation, site-wide infrastructure, and 
community and regulatory support. The Committee recommends no 
funding for the Department to carry out activities relating to 
single-shell tank stabilization nor activities in the Office of 
River Protection's tank farms within this control point.
    Within available funds, the Department recommends 
$8,5000,000 for the Hazardous Materials Management and 
Emergency Response facilities. Further, within available funds, 
the Department is directed to support the recently established 
Hanford Workforce Engagement Center to provide education and 
advocacy to current and former Hanford employees on all 
available Federal and State compensation programs, and to 
identify if a capability to resolve disputes and concerns can 
be integrated into the Hanford Workforce Engagement Center. 
Funding for maintenance and public safety efforts at B Reactor 
in the Manhattan Project National Historical Park is 
recommended within the Non-Defense Environmental Cleanup 
account.
    Oak Ridge Reservation.--The Committee recommends 
$410,000,000 for the Oak Ridge Reservation, including 
$10,000,000 to continue preliminary design of a new landfill. 
The existing on-site waste disposal facility is expected to 
reach capacity before all cleanup activities are completed. The 
new landfill needs to be completed to ensure that there is no 
interruption of cleanup activities. Additional funds above the 
budget request are recommended to address the growing backlog 
of deferred maintenance associated with excess contaminated 
facilities, several of which are on the Department's list of 
high-risk facilities, and to focus efforts at reducing threats 
to worker safety and health. Efforts should also be focused on 
cleanup of facilities needed for other purposes, such as hot 
cells, reactors, and other excess facilities located in the 
central campus at Oak Ridge National Laboratory.
    U-233 Disposition Program.--The Committee recommends 
$52,300,000 for the disposition of material in Building 3019. 
Removal of legacy material from this building, an aging 
facility in the heart of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory 
central campus, must remain a high priority for the Department. 
Removal of the Uranium 233 will enable the overall security 
posture at the laboratory to be relaxed, which will reduce 
costs and eliminate nuclear safety issues, and make the campus 
more conducive to collaborative science. The Committee 
encourages the Department to seek opportunities to expedite the 
disposition of material in Building 3019, including public-
private partnerships that may reduce the overall cost of 
cleanup. At the same time, the Department shall consider direct 
disposal of remaining material that may not be suitable to 
processing.
    Mercury Treatment Facility.--The Committee recommends 
$76,000,000 for construction of the Outfall 200 Mercury 
Treatment Facility. Remediation of mercury contamination at the 
Oak Ridge Reservation is an important precursor to full site 
remediation. Reducing the mercury being released into the East 
Fork of Poplar Creek continues to be among the highest 
priorities for the Environmental Management program.
    Office of River Protection.--The Committee recommends 
$1,573,000,000 for the Office of River Protection. Funds above 
the budget request are recommended to resume engineering, 
procurement, and design work on the High-Level Waste Treatment 
Facility, to ensure compliance with the 2016 Consent Decree and 
Tri-Party Agreement milestones, and to continue tank waste 
retrievals. Funds that support the Waste Treatment Plant 
project are recommended separately for: (1) Low-Activity Waste 
Treatment Facility, Analytical Laboratory, and Balance of 
Facilities; (2) High-Level Waste Treatment Facility; (3) Pre-
Treatment Facility; and (4) Low Activity Waste Pretreatment 
System. The Committee recommends no funding for the Department 
to carry out activities relating to the test bed initiative for 
low activity waste disposition. The Committee is aware of 
efforts to remove high-curie constituents from high-level waste 
tanks to facilitate low-activity waste vitrification through 
the Direct Feed Low Activity Waste concept and meet consent 
decree requirements. Funding is provided to install and test 
one tank-side treatment device. The Department shall not 
proceed with expansion of this approach until it reports to the 
Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress on how 
this approach will be integrated with existing and planned 
capital facilities, how lifecycle cost compare to other 
approaches, strategy for obtaining State permits, and plans for 
ancilliary waste streams. The Department shall report to the 
Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress before 
moving ahead with any plans to place the High Level Waste 
Treatment Facility or the Pretreatment Facility into 
preservation mode for an extended period of time.
    The Committee recognizes the Department's efforts to 
improve working conditions in the tank farms and to address 
chemical vapor exposures by implementing recommendations from 
the 2014 Hanford Tank Vapor Assessment Report. The Committee is 
aware of three subsequent reviews conducted by the Department's 
Office of the Inspector General and Office of Enterprise 
Assessments, and the National Institute for Occupational Safety 
and Health. Within available funds in the Tank Farms Activities 
control point, the Department is directed to continue ongoing 
work to address chemical vapor exposures, implement 
recommendations from all reviews, and maintain a safe work 
environment for Hanford employees.
    Savannah River Site.--The Committee recommends 
$1,400,000,000 for the Savannah River site. Within available 
funds, $3,000,000 is for disposition of spent fuel from the 
High Flux Isotope Reactor. The Committee remains concerned 
about the coordination among the Office of Environmental 
Management, the NNSA, and the Office of Management and Budget 
when planning for retiree pension payments at the Savannah 
River Site. The Department is directed to provide the report 
required in the Energy and Water Development and Related 
Agencies Appropriations Act, 2018 on retiree pension payments 
as soon as possible.
    Waste Isolation Pilot Plant.--The Department proposes to 
dispose of 34 metric tons of surplus plutonium at the Waste 
Isolation Pilot Plant [WIPP] in New Mexico. The Department is 
directed to work cooperatively with the State of New Mexico, 
recognizing the limits in the Land Withdrawal Act and New 
Mexico's status as an independent regulator of the WIPP 
facility. Further, no later than February 1, 2019, the 
Department shall submit to the Committees on Appropriations of 
both Houses of Congress, a plan for obtaining all necessary 
final state and Federal permits; acquiring independent 
scientific and technical review of dilute and dispose processes 
and waste forms to ensure compliance with waste acceptance 
criteria; defining any legislative changes necessary to 
accommodate this material and the existing WIPP waste 
inventory; and outlining any necessary design and construction 
modifications to the current facility, including cost and 
schedule impacts of any modifications needed to WIPP facilities 
or for developing additional repositories.
    Technology Development and Demonstration.--The Committee 
recommends $28,954,000 for Technology Development and 
Demonstration. The Committee supports the Department's efforts 
to expand technology development and demonstration to address 
its long-term and technically complex cleanup challenges. 
Within the amount recommended, not less than $5,000,000 is 
recommended for work on qualification, testing and research to 
advance the state-of-the-art on containment ventilation 
systems. Further, the Department is directed to take the 
necessary steps to implement and competitively award a 
cooperative university affiliated research center for that 
purpose.
    Within available funds provided, not less than $5,000,000 
is recommended to fund the existing cooperative agreement with 
the Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder 
Participation [CRESP] and up to $5,000,000 is recommended for 
research and development of robotics to enhance worker safety.

                        Other Defense Activities

Appropriations, 2018....................................    $840,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................     853,300,000
Committee recommendation................................     840,000,000

    The Committee recommends $840,000,000 for Other Defense 
Activities, a decrease of $13,300,000 from the budget request. 
Within available funds, the Committee recommends $254,378,000 
for Specialized Security Activities. Within the available funds 
for Environment, Health and Safety, the Committee recommends 
not less than $1,000,000 for the Epidemiologic Study of One 
Million U.S. Radiation Workers and Veterans, which was 
originally approved by the Office of Science in 2012.

                    POWER MARKETING ADMINISTRATIONS

    No funds are recommended to divest transmission assets of 
the Power Marketing Administrations [PMA]. The Committee 
reminds the Department of the prohibition on studying transfer 
of PMA assets in Public Law 99-349.
    The Committee understands the Department has used existing 
authorities to reorganize the reporting structure for the Power 
Marketing Administrations [PMAs), shifting responsibilities 
from the Deputy Secretary of Energy to the Assistant Secretary 
of the Office of Electricity. While the Committee understands 
the expertise of the Office of Electricity and recognizes the 
already existing relationship between PMAs and the Office of 
Electricity, the Committee remains concerned with this 
unnecessary change and urges the Department to continue the 
long-standing practice of the PMA's organizational reporting to 
the Deputy Secretary of Energy.
    The bill includes reductions of $16,000,000 and $44,000,000 
to the annual expense requests for Southwestern Power 
Administration and Western Area Power Administration, 
respectively, to account for the Congressional Budget Office's 
[CBO] initial estimate of collections assumed in the budget 
request. CBO inadvertently misreported its estimate of annual 
expense collections associated with the level of funding for 
administrative expenses proposed in the fiscal year 2019 
President's request by approximately $60,000,000 (in the 
aggregate), but the oversight was not discovered until after 
the House Committee on Appropriations had reported its version 
of the fiscal year 2019 Energy and Water Development 
appropriations bill and, therefore, could not be corrected 
prior to the Senate Committee on Appropriations taking action 
on this bill. CBO has indicated that it will adjust its 
estimate of the annual expense collection estimate prior to the 
conference between the House and Senate. Assuming that the 
Committee provides the requested level for annual expenses in 
the conference, the updated collection estimates will be at or 
around the levels in the budget request. The Committee has 
included additional lines in the detail table accompanying 
Title III of this report to show these adjustments.
    Additionally, CBO has continued to raise questions about 
the current receipt authority provided in this and prior year 
appropriations acts to create carryover of unobligated balances 
for purchase power and wheeling expenditures [PPW]. Since the 
scoring for PPW receipts has historically equaled expenses as a 
result of a 2001 scoring agreement, the Committee continues to 
be unable to recommend the full budget request for PPW expenses 
for the Southeastern Power Administration, Southwestern Power 
Administration, or Western Area Power Administration due to CBO 
scoring. The Committee recommends the full amount for PPW 
expenses that CBO has estimated will be spent for those 
purposes in fiscal year 2019, which is approximately 
$200,000,000 lower (in the aggregate) than the budget request. 
The Committee will continue to work to resolve the differences 
in the CBO and administration estimates for PPW expenses.

     Operations and Maintenance, Southwestern Power Administration

Appropriations, 2018....................................     $11,400,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................      26,400,000
Committee recommendation................................      10,400,000

    The Committee recommends a net appropriation of $10,400,000 
for the Southwestern Power Administration.

Construction, Rehabilitation, Operations and Maintenance, Western Area 
                          Power Administration

Appropriations, 2018....................................     $93,372,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................     132,372,000
Committee recommendation................................      89,372,000

    The Committee recommends a net appropriation of $89,372,000 
for the Western Area Power Administration.

           Falcon and Amistad Operating and Maintenance Fund

Appropriations, 2018....................................        $228,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................         228,000
Committee recommendation................................         228,000

    The Committee recommends a net appropriation of $228,000 
for the Falcon and Amistad Operating and Maintenance Fund.

                  Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2018....................................    $367,600,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................     369,900,000
Committee recommendation................................     369,900,000

                            REVENUES APPLIED

Appropriations, 2018....................................   -$367,600,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................    -369,900,000
Committee recommendation................................    -369,900,000

    The Committee recommends a net appropriation of $0 for the 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [FERC]. California 
recently experienced one of its worst fire seasons in modern 
history, resulting in severe challenges to the well-being of 
utilities and the electric system in that State. The Committee 
is concerned that the safe, reliable, and affordable delivery 
of electricity to consumers could be compromised by the 
increasing frequency and severity of natural disasters due to 
climate change--including hurricanes, floods, and wildfires. As 
FERC reviews way to improve the resilience of the electric 
transmission system, the Committee directs FERC to include the 
evaluation of just and reasonable cost-recovery mechanisms for 
the development of resilient infrastructure and system repair 
and restoration, as well as practices to better prepare the 
Nation's bulk power system for natural disasters. FERC shall 
study the impacts and effects of strict liability doctrines on 
utilities' ability to invest in the reliability and resilience 
of transmission systems. FERC is directed to report its 
findings and recommendations to the Committees on 
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress, not later than 90 
days after the enactment of this act.
    The Committee encourages FERC to prioritize meaningful 
opportunities for public engagement and coordination with State 
and local governments in the Federal permitting and review 
processes of energy infrastructure proposals. Specifically, 
review processes should remain transparent and consistent, and 
ensure the health, safety, and security of the environment and 
each affected community.
    Oroville Dam.--FERC is directed to brief the Committees on 
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress on its response to 
the recommendations of the external independent panel reviewing 
FERC's dam safety practices in light of the 2017 incident at 
Oroville Dam in California within 60 days of receiving the 
external independent panel's report.
    FERC shall require the licensee of Oroville Dam to request 
the United States Society on Dams to nominate independent 
consultants to prepare a level 2 risk analysis, consistent with 
the Commission's guidelines, for use in conducting the next 
Part 12 safety review of Oroville Dam, currently scheduled for 
2019. FERC shall ensure the independence of the nominated 
consultants from the licensee.
    The Committee encourages FERC to prioritize meaningful 
opportunities for public engagement and coordination with State 
and local governments in the Federal permitting and review 
processes of energy infrastructure proposals. Specifically, 
review processes should remain transparent and consistent, and 
ensure the health, safety, and security of the environment and 
each affected community.

                                                                  DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
                                                                [In thousands of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                            Committee recommendation
                                                                                                                                  compared to--
                                                                           2018       Budget estimate     Committee    ---------------------------------
                                                                      Appropriations                    recommendation        2018
                                                                                                                         Appropriations  Budget estimate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          ENERGY PROGRAMS
 
               ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE ENERGY
 
Sustainable Transportation:
    Vehicle technologies...........................................         337,500           68,500          337,500   ...............        +269,000
    Bioenergy technologies.........................................         221,545           37,000          215,000           -6,545         +178,000
    Hydrogen and fuel cell technologies............................         115,000           58,000          115,000   ...............         +57,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Sustainable Transportation.........................         674,045          163,500          667,500           -6,545         +504,000
 
Renewable Energy:
    Solar energy...................................................         241,600           67,000          239,500           -2,100         +172,500
    Wind energy....................................................          92,000           33,000           80,000          -12,000          +47,000
    Water power....................................................         105,000           45,000          105,000   ...............         +60,000
    Geothermal technologies........................................          80,906           30,000           85,000           +4,094          +55,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Renewable Energy...................................         519,506          175,000          509,500          -10,006         +334,500
 
Energy Efficiency:
    Advanced manufacturing.........................................         305,000           75,000          311,000           +6,000         +236,000
    Building technologies..........................................         220,727           57,000          225,000           +4,273         +168,000
    Federal energy management program..............................          27,000           10,000           31,000           +4,000          +21,000
 
    Weatherization and Intergovernmental Programs:
        Weatherization:
            Weatherization assistance program......................         248,000   ...............         248,000   ...............        +248,000
            Training and technical assistance......................           3,000   ...............           3,000   ...............          +3,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal, Weatherization.............................         251,000   ...............         251,000   ...............        +251,000
 
    State Energy Program Grants....................................          55,000   ...............          55,000   ...............         +55,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Weatherization and Intergovernmental Program.......         306,000   ...............         306,000   ...............        +306,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Energy Efficiency..................................         858,727          142,000          873,000          +14,273         +731,000
 
Corporate Support:
    Facilities and infrastructure:
        National Renewable Energy Laboratory [NREL]................          92,000           90,000           97,000           +5,000           +7,000
    Program direction..............................................         162,500          125,110          162,500   ...............         +37,390
    Strategic programs.............................................          15,000   ...............          12,500           -2,500          +12,500
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Corporate Support..................................         269,500          215,110          272,000           +2,500          +56,890
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Energy efficiency and renewable energy.............       2,321,778          695,610        2,322,000             +222       +1,626,390
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE ENERGY................       2,321,778          695,610        2,322,000             +222       +1,626,390
                                                                    ====================================================================================
            ELECTRICITY DELIVERY AND ENERGY RELIABILITY
 
Research and development:
    Transmission Reliability.......................................          39,000   ...............  ...............         -39,000   ...............
    Resilient Distribution Systems.................................          38,000   ...............  ...............         -38,000   ...............
    Cyber security for energy delivery systems.....................          75,829   ...............  ...............         -75,829   ...............
    Energy storage.................................................          41,000   ...............  ...............         -41,000   ...............
    Transformer resilience and advanced components.................           7,000   ...............  ...............          -7,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Research and development...........................         200,829   ...............  ...............        -200,829   ...............
 
Transmission Permitting and Technical Assistance...................           7,000   ...............  ...............          -7,000   ...............
Infrastructure security and energy restoration.....................          12,000   ...............  ...............         -12,000   ...............
Program direction..................................................          28,500   ...............  ...............         -28,500   ...............
    Reliability....................................................         248,329   ...............  ...............        -248,329   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, ELECTRICITY DELIVERY AND ENERGY RELIABILITY...........         248,329   ...............  ...............        -248,329   ...............
                                                                    ====================================================================================
       CYBERSECURITY, ENERGY SECURITY, AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
 
Research and development:
    Cybersecurity for energy delivery systems......................  ...............          70,000           80,829          +80,829          +10,829
    Transmission reliability.......................................  ...............  ...............          39,000          +39,000          +39,000
    Resilient distribution systems.................................  ...............  ...............          38,671          +38,671          +38,671
    Energy storage.................................................  ...............  ...............          41,000          +41,000          +41,000
    Transformer resilience and advanced components.................  ...............  ...............           7,000           +7,000           +7,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Research and development...........................  ...............          70,000          206,500         +206,500         +136,500
 
Transmission permitting and technical assistance...................  ...............  ...............           7,000           +7,000           +7,000
Infrastructure security and energy restoration.....................  ...............          18,000           18,000          +18,000   ...............
Program direction..................................................  ...............           7,800           28,500          +28,500          +20,700
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, CYBERSECURITY, ENERGY SECURITY, AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE  ...............          95,800          260,000         +260,000         +164,200
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                        ELECTRICITY DELIVERY
 
Transmission reliability...........................................  ...............          13,000   ...............  ...............         -13,000
Resilient distribution systems.....................................  ...............          10,000   ...............  ...............         -10,000
Energy storage.....................................................  ...............           8,000   ...............  ...............          -8,000
Transformer resilience and advanced components.....................  ...............           5,000   ...............  ...............          -5,000
Transmission permitting and technical assistance...................  ...............           6,000   ...............  ...............          -6,000
Program direction..................................................  ...............          19,309   ...............  ...............         -19,309
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, ELECTRICITY DELIVERY..................................  ...............          61,309   ...............  ...............         -61,309
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                           NUCLEAR ENERGY
 
Research and development:
    Integrated university program..................................           5,000   ...............           5,000   ...............          +5,000
    STEP R&D.......................................................           5,000   ...............  ...............          -5,000   ...............
    Nuclear energy enabling technologies...........................         159,000          116,000          149,200           -9,800          +33,200
    Reactor concepts RD&D..........................................         237,000          163,000          302,000          +65,000         +139,000
    Fuel cycle research and development............................         260,056           60,000          267,300           +7,244         +207,300
    International nuclear energy cooperation.......................           3,000            2,500            2,500             -500   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Research and development...........................         669,056          341,500          726,000          +56,944         +384,500
 
Infrastructure:
    Radiological facilities management:
        Space and defense infrastructure...........................          20,000   ...............          20,000   ...............         +20,000
        Research reactor infrastructure............................           9,000            9,000            9,000   ...............  ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Radiological facilities management.............          29,000            9,000           29,000   ...............         +20,000
 
    INL facilities management:
        INL operations and infrastructure..........................         288,000          204,000          238,000          -50,000          +34,000
        Construction:
            16-E-200 Sample preparation laboratory.................           6,000   ...............  ...............          -6,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal, INL facilities management..................         294,000          204,000          238,000          -56,000          +34,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal, Infrastructure.............................         323,000          213,000          267,000          -56,000          +54,000
 
Idaho sitewide safeguards and security.............................         133,000          136,090          133,000   ...............          -3,090
Program direction..................................................          80,000           66,500           80,000   ...............         +13,500
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, NUCLEAR ENERGY........................................       1,205,056          757,090        1,206,000             +944         +448,910
                                                                    ====================================================================================
               FOSSIL ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
 
Coal CCS and Power Systems:
    Carbon Capture.................................................         100,671           20,000          104,015           +3,344          +84,015
    Carbon Storage.................................................          98,096           20,000          103,015           +4,919          +83,015
    Advanced Energy Systems........................................         112,000          135,000          116,000           +4,000          -19,000
    Cross Cutting Research.........................................          58,350           78,300           61,000           +2,650          -17,300
    NETL Coal Research and Development.............................          53,000           65,000           54,000           +1,000          -11,000
    STEP (Supercritical CO2).......................................          24,000           25,000           25,000           +1,000   ...............
    Transformational Coal Pilots...................................          35,000   ...............  ...............         -35,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Coal CCS and Power Systems.........................         481,117          343,300          463,030          -18,087         +119,730
 
Natural Gas Technologies:
    Research.......................................................          50,000            5,500           53,200           +3,200          +47,700
Unconventional fossil energy technologies from petroleum--oil                40,000           14,000           54,000          +14,000          +40,000
 technologies......................................................
Program direction..................................................          60,000           61,070           61,070           +1,070   ...............
Special recruitment programs.......................................             700              200              700   ...............            +500
NETL Research and Operations.......................................          50,000           40,000           50,000   ...............         +10,000
NETL Infrastructure................................................          45,000           38,000           45,000   ...............          +7,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, FOSSIL ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT................         726,817          502,070          727,000             +183         +224,930
                                                                    ====================================================================================
Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves.............................          20,200           20,550           20,550             +350   ...............
Use of prior year balances.........................................         -15,300          -10,550          -10,550           +4,750   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, NAVAL PETROLEUM AND OIL SHALE RESERVES................           4,900           10,000           10,000           +5,100   ...............
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                    STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE
 
Strategic Petroleum Reserve........................................         252,000          175,105          175,105          -76,895   ...............
Sale of crude oil..................................................        -350,000         -300,000         -350,000   ...............         -50,000
Use of sale proceeds...............................................         350,000   ...............         350,000   ...............        +350,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE...........................         252,000         -124,895          175,105          -76,895         +300,000
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                       SPR PETROLEUM ACCOUNT
 
SPR Petroleum Account..............................................           8,400   ...............           8,400   ...............          +8,400
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, SPR PETROLEUM ACCOUNT.................................           8,400   ...............           8,400   ...............          +8,400
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                 NORTHEAST HOME HEATING OIL RESERVE
 
Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve.................................          10,000           10,000           10,000   ...............  ...............
Use of prior year balances.........................................          -3,500   ...............  ...............          +3,500   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, NORTHEAST HOME HEATING OIL RESERVE....................           6,500           10,000           10,000           +3,500   ...............
                                                                    ====================================================================================
ENERGY INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION..................................         125,000          115,035          125,000   ...............          +9,965
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                 NON-DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP
 
Fast Flux Test Reactor Facility (WA)...............................           2,240            2,240            2,240   ...............  ...............
Gaseous Diffusion Plants...........................................         101,304          100,575          102,000             +696           +1,425
Small sites........................................................         119,856           55,031          174,000          +54,144         +118,969
West Valley Demonstration Project..................................          75,000           60,554           75,000   ...............         +14,446
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, NON-DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP.....................         298,400          218,400          353,240          +54,840         +134,840
                                                                    ====================================================================================
    URANIUM ENRICHMENT DECONTAMINATION AND DECOMMISSIONING FUND
 
Oak Ridge..........................................................         194,673          151,039          195,000             +327          +43,961
Nuclear facility D&D, Paducah......................................         205,530          202,581          206,000             +470           +3,419
 
Portsmouth:
    Nuclear facility D&D, Portsmouth...............................         342,389          306,931          366,931          +24,542          +60,000
    Construction:
        15-U-408 On-site waste disposal facility, Portsmouth.......          38,882           41,168           41,168           +2,286   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Portsmouth.........................................         381,271          348,099          408,099          +26,828          +60,000
 
Pension and community and regulatory support.......................          22,794           21,030           21,030           -1,764   ...............
Title X uranium/thorium reimbursement program......................          35,732           30,000           10,689          -25,043          -19,311
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, URANIUM ENRICHMENT DECONTAMINATION AND DECOMMISSIONING         840,000          752,749          840,818             +818          +88,069
       FUND........................................................
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                              SCIENCE
 
Advanced scientific computing research.............................         605,000          666,304          747,294         +142,294          +80,990
    Construction:
    17-SC-20 SC Exascale Computing Project.........................         205,000          232,706          232,706          +27,706   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Advanced scientific computing research.............         810,000          899,010          980,000         +170,000          +80,990
 
Basic energy sciences:
    Research.......................................................       1,744,900        1,635,700        1,751,100           +6,200         +115,400
    Construction:
        13-SC-10 LINAC coherent light source II, SLAC..............         192,100          139,300          139,300          -52,800   ...............
        18-SC-10 APS Upgrade, ANL..................................          93,000           60,000          140,000          +47,000          +80,000
        18-SC-11 Spallation Neutron Source Proton Power Upgrade              36,000   ...............          70,000          +34,000          +70,000
         (PPU), ORNL...............................................
        18-SC-12 Advanced Light Source Upgrade (ALS-U), LBNL.......          16,000           10,000           50,000          +34,000          +40,000
        18-SC-13 LINAC coherent light source II HE, SLAC...........           8,000            5,000           28,000          +20,000          +23,000
        19-SC-14 Second Target Station, ORNL.......................  ...............  ...............          15,000          +15,000          +15,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Construction...................................         345,100          214,300          442,300          +97,200         +228,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Basic energy sciences..........................       2,090,000        1,850,000        2,193,400         +103,400         +343,400
 
Biological and environmental research..............................         673,000          500,000          715,000          +42,000         +215,000
 
Fusion energy sciences:
    Research.......................................................         410,111          265,000          303,000         -107,111          +38,000
 
    Construction:
        14-SC-60 ITER..............................................         122,000           75,000          122,000   ...............         +47,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Fusion energy sciences.............................         532,111          340,000          425,000         -107,111          +85,000
 
High energy physics:
    Research.......................................................         767,600          627,000          800,000          +32,400         +173,000
    Construction:
        11-SC-40 Long baseline neutrino facility / deep underground          95,000          113,000          145,000          +50,000          +32,000
         neutrino experiment, FNAL.................................
        11-SC-41 Muon to electron conversion experiment, FNAL......          44,400           30,000           30,000          -14,400   ...............
        18-SC-42 PIP-II, FNAL......................................           1,000   ...............          35,000          +34,000          +35,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Construction...................................         140,400          143,000          210,000          +69,600          +67,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, High energy physics............................         908,000          770,000        1,010,000         +102,000         +240,000
 
Nuclear physics:
    Operations and maintenance.....................................         586,800          525,000          635,000          +48,200         +110,000
    Construction:
        14-SC-50 Facility for rare isotope beams, Michigan State             97,200           75,000           75,000          -22,200   ...............
         University................................................
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Nuclear physics................................         684,000          600,000          710,000          +26,000         +110,000
 
Workforce development for teachers and scientists..................          19,500           19,000           24,500           +5,000           +5,500
 
Science laboratories infrastructure:
    Infrastructure support:
        Payment in lieu of taxes...................................           1,713            1,513            1,713   ...............            +200
        Oak Ridge landlord.........................................           6,382            6,434            6,434              +52   ...............
        Facilities and infrastructure..............................          70,347           30,724           48,253          -22,094          +17,529
        Oak Ridge nuclear operations...............................          26,000           10,000           26,000   ...............         +16,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Infrastructure support.........................         104,442           48,671           82,400          -22,042          +33,729
 
    Construction:
        19-SC-71 Science User Support Center, BNL..................  ...............           2,000           10,000          +10,000           +8,000
        19-SC-72 Electrical Capacity and Distribution Capability,    ...............          20,000           60,000          +60,000          +40,000
         ANL.......................................................
        18-SC-71 Energy Sciences Capability, PNNL..................          20,000            4,000           35,000          +15,000          +31,000
        17-SC-71 Integrated Engineering Research Center, FNAL......          20,000            5,000           32,500          +12,500          +27,500
        17-SC-73 Core Facility Revitalization, BNL.................          30,000           13,632           42,200          +12,200          +28,568
        15-SC-78 Integrative genomics building, LBNL...............          38,350           13,549   ...............         -38,350          -13,549
        15-SC-76 Materials design laboratory, ANL..................          44,500           20,000   ...............         -44,500          -20,000
        19-SC-73 Translational Research Capability, ORNL...........  ...............  ...............          35,000          +35,000          +35,000
        19-SC-74 BioEPIC Building, LBNL............................  ...............  ...............           2,000           +2,000           +2,000
        19-SC-75 CEBAF Renovation and Expansion, TJNAF.............  ...............  ...............           1,000           +1,000           +1,000
        19-SC-76 Craft Resources Support Facility, ORNL............  ...............  ...............           1,000           +1,000           +1,000
        19-SC-77 Large Scale Collaboration Center, SLAC............  ...............  ...............           1,000           +1,000           +1,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Construction:......................................         152,850           78,181          219,700          +66,850         +141,519
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Science laboratories infrastructure................         257,292          126,852          302,100          +44,808         +175,248
 
Safeguards and security............................................         103,000          106,110          106,000           +3,000             -110
Science program direction..........................................         183,000          180,000          184,000           +1,000           +4,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, SCIENCE...............................................       6,259,903        5,390,972        6,650,000         +390,097       +1,259,028
                                                                    ====================================================================================
NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL.............................................  ...............          90,000   ...............  ...............         -90,000
 
              ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY-ENERGY
 
ARPA-E projects....................................................         324,064   ...............         341,750          +17,686         +341,750
Program direction..................................................          29,250   ...............          33,250           +4,000          +33,250
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY-ENERGY..............         353,314   ...............         375,000          +21,686         +375,000
                                                                    ====================================================================================
       TITLE 17--INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY LOAN GUARANTEE PROGRAM
 
Administrative expenses............................................          33,000           10,000           33,000   ...............         +23,000
Offsetting collection..............................................         -10,000          -15,000          -15,000           -5,000   ...............
Rescission.........................................................  ...............        -240,000   ...............  ...............        +240,000
Title 17 negative subsidy..........................................          15,000          -44,000          -44,000          -59,000   ...............
Rescission of emergency funding....................................  ...............        -383,433   ...............  ...............        +383,433
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, TITLE 17--INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY LOAN GUARANTEE PROGRAM          38,000         -672,433          -26,000          -64,000         +646,433
                                                                    ====================================================================================
      ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY VEHICLES MANUFACTURING LOAN PROGRAM
 
Administrative expenses............................................           5,000            1,000            5,000   ...............          +4,000
Rescission of emergency funding....................................  ...............      -4,300,000   ...............  ...............      +4,300,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY VEHICLES MANUFACTURING LOAN                  5,000       -4,299,000            5,000   ...............      +4,304,000
       PROGRAM.....................................................
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                TRIBAL ENERGY LOAN GUARANTEE PROGRAM
 
Administrative expenses............................................           1,000   ...............           1,000   ...............          +1,000
Rescission.........................................................  ...............          -8,500   ...............  ...............          +8,500
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, TRIBAL ENERGY LOAN GUARANTEE PROGRAM..................           1,000           -8,500            1,000   ...............          +9,500
                                                                    ====================================================================================
            OFFICE OF INDIAN ENERGY POLICY AND PROGRAMS
 
Administrative Expenses............................................  ...............  ...............          13,200          +13,200          +13,200
Program Direction..................................................  ...............  ...............           4,800           +4,800           +4,800
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, OFFICE OF INDIAN ENERGY POLICY AND PROGRAMS...........  ...............  ...............          18,000          +18,000          +18,000
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                    DEPARTMENTAL ADMINISTRATION
 
Administrative operations:
    Salaries and expenses:
        Office of the Secretary:
        Program direction..........................................           5,300            5,395            5,395              +95   ...............
        Chief Financial Officer....................................          48,484           48,912           48,912             +428   ...............
        Chief Information Officer..................................         126,274           96,793          131,593           +5,319          +34,800
        Office of Indian energy policy and programs................          18,000           10,005   ...............         -18,000          -10,005
        Congressional and intergovernmental affairs................           6,200            6,212            4,212           -1,988           -2,000
        Economic impact and diversity..............................          10,169           10,005           10,005             -164   ...............
        Other Departmental Administration..........................         174,225          173,901          168,883           -5,342           -5,018
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Salaries and expenses..........................         388,652          351,223          369,000          -19,652          +17,777
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Administrative operations......................         388,652          351,223          369,000          -19,652          +17,777
 
    Strategic partnership projects.................................          40,000           40,000           40,000   ...............  ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Departmental administration........................         428,652          391,223          409,000          -19,652          +17,777
 
Use of prior-year balances.........................................  ...............          -2,000   ...............  ...............          +2,000
Funding from other defense activities..............................        -143,000         -153,689         -143,000   ...............         +10,689
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Departmental administration (gross)...................         285,652          235,534          266,000          -19,652          +30,466
 
Miscellaneous revenues.............................................         -96,000          -96,000          -96,000   ...............  ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, DEPARTMENTAL ADMINISTRATION (net).....................         189,652          139,534          170,000          -19,652          +30,466
                                                                    ====================================================================================
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL....................................          49,000           51,330           51,330           +2,330   ...............
                                                                    ====================================================================================
      TOTAL, ENERGY PROGRAMS.......................................      12,933,049        3,785,071       13,281,893         +348,844       +9,496,822
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                  ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES
 
              NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
 
                         WEAPONS ACTIVITIES
 
Directed stockpile work:
    Life Extension Programs and Major Alterations:
        B61 Life extension program.................................         788,572          794,049          794,049           +5,477   ...............
        W76-1 Life extension program...............................         224,134           48,888           48,888         -175,246   ...............
        W88 Alteration program.....................................         332,292          304,285          304,285          -28,007   ...............
        W80-4 Life extension program...............................         399,090          654,766          654,766         +255,676   ...............
        IW-1.......................................................  ...............          53,000           53,000          +53,000   ...............
        W76-2 Modification program.................................  ...............          65,000           65,000          +65,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Life Extension Programs and Major Alterations..       1,744,088        1,919,988        1,919,988         +175,900   ...............
 
    Stockpile systems:
        B61 Stockpile systems......................................          59,729           64,547           64,547           +4,818   ...............
        W76 Stockpile systems......................................          51,400           94,300           94,300          +42,900   ...............
        W78 Stockpile systems......................................          60,100           81,329           81,329          +21,229   ...............
        W80 Stockpile systems......................................          80,087           80,204           80,204             +117   ...............
        B83 Stockpile systems......................................          35,762           35,082           35,082             -680   ...............
        W87 Stockpile systems......................................          83,200           83,107           83,107              -93   ...............
        W88 Stockpile systems......................................         131,576          180,913          180,913          +49,337   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Stockpile systems..............................         501,854          619,482          619,482         +117,628   ...............
 
    Weapons dismantlement and disposition..........................          56,000           56,000           56,000   ...............  ...............
 
    Stockpile services:
        Production support.........................................         485,400          512,916          512,916          +27,516   ...............
        Research and Development support...........................          31,150           38,129           38,129           +6,979   ...............
        R and D certification and safety...........................         196,840          216,582          216,582          +19,742   ...............
        Management, technology, and production.....................         285,400          300,736          300,736          +15,336   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Stockpile systems..............................         998,790        1,068,363        1,068,363          +69,573   ...............
 
    Strategic materials:
        Domestic uranium enrichment................................          60,000          100,704           50,000          -10,000          -50,704
        Uranium sustainment........................................          24,000           87,182           87,182          +63,182   ...............
        Plutonium sustainment......................................         210,367          361,282          361,282         +150,915   ...............
        Tritium sustainment........................................         198,152          205,275          290,275          +92,123          +85,000
        Lithium sustainment........................................  ...............          29,135           29,135          +29,135   ...............
        Strategic materials sustainment............................         216,196          218,794          218,794           +2,598   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Strategic materials:...........................         708,715        1,002,372        1,036,668         +327,953          +34,296
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Directed stockpile work............................       4,009,447        4,666,205        4,700,501         +691,054          +34,296
 
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E):
    Science:
        Advanced certification.....................................          57,710           57,710           57,710   ...............  ...............
        Primary assessment technologies............................          89,313           95,057           89,313   ...............          -5,744
        Dynamic materials properties...............................         120,000          131,000          120,000   ...............         -11,000
        Advanced radiography.......................................          37,600           32,544           32,544           -5,056   ...............
        Secondary assessment technologies..........................          76,833           77,553           77,553             +720   ...............
        Academic alliances and partnerships........................          52,963           53,364           53,364             +401   ...............
        Enhanced capabilities for subcritical experiments..........          40,105          117,632           80,000          +39,895          -37,632
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Science........................................         474,524          564,860          510,484          +35,960          -54,376
 
    Engineering:
        Enhanced surety............................................          39,717           43,226           43,226           +3,509   ...............
        Weapons system engineering assessment technology...........          23,029           27,536           23,029   ...............          -4,507
        Nuclear survivability......................................          45,230           48,230           45,230   ...............          -3,000
        Enhanced surveillance......................................          45,147           58,375           45,147   ...............         -13,228
        Stockpile responsiveness...................................          30,000           34,000           30,000   ...............          -4,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Engineering....................................         183,123          211,367          186,632           +3,509          -24,735
 
    Inertial confinement fusion ignition and high yield:
        Ignition...................................................          79,575           22,434           79,575   ...............         +57,141
        Support of other stockpile programs........................          23,565           17,397           23,565   ...............          +6,168
        Diagnostics, cryogenics and experimental support...........          77,915           51,453           77,915   ...............         +26,462
        Pulsed power inertial confinement fusion...................           7,596            8,310            7,596   ...............            -714
        Joint program in high energy density laboratory plasmas....           9,492   ...............           9,492   ...............          +9,492
        Facility operations and target production..................         346,791          319,333          346,791   ...............         +27,458
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Inertial confinement fusion ignition and high           544,934          418,927          544,934   ...............        +126,007
           yield...................................................
 
    Advanced simulation and computing:
        Advanced simulation and computing..........................         721,244          656,401          656,401          -64,843   ...............
        Construction:
            18-D-670 Exascale class computer cooling equipment,              22,000           24,000           24,000           +2,000   ...............
             LANL..................................................
            18-D-620 Exascale computing facility modernization                3,000           23,000           23,000          +20,000   ...............
             project, LLNL.........................................
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Subtotal, Construction.............................          25,000           47,000           47,000          +22,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Subtotal, Advanced simulation, Computing and                746,244          703,401          703,401          -42,843   ...............
                 Construction......................................
 
Advanced manufacturing development:
    Additive manfacturing..........................................          12,000           17,447           17,447           +5,447   ...............
    Component manufacturing development............................          38,644           48,477           43,477           +4,833           -5,000
    Process technology development.................................          34,896           30,914           35,914           +1,018           +5,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Advanced manufacturing development.................          85,540           96,838           96,838          +11,298   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Research, Development, Test and Evaluation            2,034,365        1,995,393        2,042,289           +7,924          +46,896
           (RDT&E).................................................
 
Infrastructure and Operations:
    Operations of facilities.......................................         848,470          891,000          874,000          +25,530          -17,000
    Safety and environmental operations............................         110,000          115,000          110,000   ...............          -5,000
    Maintenance and repair of facilities...........................         515,138          365,000          250,000         -265,138         -115,000
    Recapitalization:
        Infrastructure and safety..................................         482,661          431,631          320,000         -162,661         -111,631
        Capability based investments...............................         130,000          109,057          105,000          -25,000           -4,057
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Recapitalization...............................         612,661          540,688          425,000         -187,661         -115,688
 
    Construction:
        19-D-125 Plutonium infrastructure recapitalization, LANL...  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............
        19-D-670 138kV Power Transmission System Replacement, NNSS.  ...............           6,000   ...............  ...............          -6,000
        18-D-680 Material staging facility, PX.....................           5,200   ...............          10,418           +5,218          +10,418
        18-D-660 Fire station, Y-12................................          28,000   ...............  ...............         -28,000   ...............
        18-D-650 Tritium production capability, SRS................  ...............          27,000           27,000          +27,000   ...............
        18-D-690 Lithium production capability, Y-12...............           5,000           19,000           19,000          +14,000   ...............
        17-D-640 U1a complex enhancements project, NNSA............          22,100           53,000           53,000          +30,900   ...............
        17-D-630 Electrical distribution system, LLNL..............           6,000   ...............  ...............          -6,000   ...............
        16-D-515 Albuquerque Complex project.......................          98,000           47,953           47,953          -50,047   ...............
        15-D-613 Emergency Operations Center, Y-12.................           7,000   ...............  ...............          -7,000   ...............
        07-D-220 Radioactive liquid waste treatment facility, LANL.           2,100   ...............  ...............          -2,100   ...............
        07-D-220-04 TRU liquid waste facility, LANL................          17,895   ...............  ...............         -17,895   ...............
        06-D-141 Uranium Processing Facility, Y-12.................         663,000          703,000          703,000          +40,000   ...............
    Chemistry and metallurgy replacement:
        04-D-125 Chemistry and metallurgy replacement project, LANL  ...............         235,095          235,095         +235,095   ...............
        04-D-125-04 RLUOB equipment installation, phase 2..........         127,025   ...............  ...............        -127,025   ...............
        04-D-125-05 PF-4 equipment installation....................          50,214   ...............  ...............         -50,214   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Chemistry and metallurgy replacement...........         177,239          235,095          235,095          +57,856   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Construction...................................       1,031,534        1,091,048        1,095,466          +63,932           +4,418
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Infrastructure and Operations......................       3,117,803        3,002,736        2,754,466         -363,337         -248,270
 
Secure transportation asset:
    Operations and equipment.......................................         185,568          176,617          176,617           -8,951   ...............
    Program direction..............................................         105,600          102,022          102,022           -3,578   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Secure transportation asset........................         291,168          278,639          278,639          -12,529   ...............
 
Defense nuclear security:
    Defense nuclear security.......................................         686,977          690,638          690,638           +3,661   ...............
    Security improvements program..................................          30,000   ...............  ...............         -30,000   ...............
 
    Construction:
        17-D-710 West end protected area reduction project, Y-12...          53,600   ...............  ...............         -53,600   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Defense nuclear security.......................         770,577          690,638          690,638          -79,939   ...............
 
Information technology and cyber security..........................         186,728          221,175          221,175          +34,447   ...............
Legacy contractor pensions.........................................         232,050          162,292          162,292          -69,758   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, WEAPONS ACTIVITIES....................................      10,642,138       11,017,078       10,850,000         +207,862         -167,078
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                  DEFENSE NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION
 
Global material security:
    International nuclear security.................................          46,339           46,339           46,339   ...............  ...............
    Domestic radiologic security...................................         110,433           90,764          115,433           +5,000          +24,669
    International radiologic security..............................          78,907           59,576           78,907   ...............         +19,331
    Nuclear smuggling detection....................................         154,429          140,429          154,429   ...............         +14,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Global material security...........................         390,108          337,108          395,108           +5,000          +58,000
 
Material management and minimization:
    Conversion.....................................................  ...............          98,300           88,300          +88,300          -10,000
    Nuclear material removal.......................................          32,925           32,925           32,925   ...............  ...............
    Material disposition...........................................         183,669          200,869          200,869          +17,200   ...............
    Laboratory and partnership support.............................          92,000   ...............          15,000          -77,000          +15,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Material management and minimization...............         308,594          332,094          337,094          +28,500           +5,000
 
Nonproliferation and arms control..................................         134,703          129,703          129,703           -5,000   ...............
 
Defense nuclear nonproliferation R&D:
    Proliferation detection........................................         278,255          273,200          281,521           +3,266           +8,321
    Nuclear detonation detection...................................         195,749          182,895          195,749   ...............         +12,854
    Nonproliferation fuels development.............................          82,500   ...............          10,000          -72,500          +10,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Defense nuclear nonproliferation R&D...............         556,504          456,095          487,270          -69,234          +31,175
 
Nonproliferation construction:
    99-D-143 Mixed Oxide (MOX) Fuel Fabrication Facility, SRS......         335,000          220,000          220,000         -115,000   ...............
    18-D-150 Surplus plutonium disposition project, SRS............  ...............          59,000           59,000          +59,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Nonproliferation construction......................         335,000          279,000          279,000          -56,000   ...............
 
Legacy contractor pensions.........................................          40,950           28,640           28,640          -12,310   ...............
Nuclear counterterrorism and incident response.....................         282,360          319,185          319,185          +36,825   ...............
Use of prior-year balances.........................................  ...............         -19,000          -74,000          -74,000          -55,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation...................       2,048,219        1,862,825        1,902,000         -146,219          +39,175
 
Rescission.........................................................         -49,000   ...............  ...............         +49,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, DEFENSE NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION......................       1,999,219        1,862,825        1,902,000          -97,219          +39,175
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                           NAVAL REACTORS
 
Columbia-class reactor systems development.........................         156,700          138,000          138,000          -18,700   ...............
Naval reactors development.........................................         473,065          514,951          475,000           +1,935          -39,951
S8G Prototype refueling............................................         250,000          250,000          200,000          -50,000          -50,000
Naval reactors operations and infrastructure.......................         466,884          525,764          525,764          +58,880   ...............
 
Construction:
    19-D-930 KS Overhead Piping....................................  ...............          10,994           10,994          +10,994   ...............
    17-D-911 BL Fire System Upgrade................................  ...............          13,200           13,200          +13,200   ...............
    15-D-904 NRF Overpack Storage Expansion 3......................          13,700   ...............  ...............         -13,700   ...............
    15-D-903 KL Fire System Upgrade................................          15,000   ...............  ...............         -15,000   ...............
    14-D-901 Spent fuel handling recapitalization project, NRF.....         197,000          287,000          209,000          +12,000          -78,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Construction.......................................         225,700          311,194          233,194           +7,494          -78,000
 
Program direction..................................................          47,651           48,709           48,042             +391             -667
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, NAVAL REACTORS........................................       1,620,000        1,788,618        1,620,000   ...............        -168,618
                                                                    ====================================================================================
FEDERAL SALARIES AND EXPENSES......................................         407,595          422,529          408,000             +405          -14,529
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION..............      14,668,952       15,091,050       14,780,000         +111,048         -311,050
                                                                    ====================================================================================
 
                   DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP
 
Closure sites administration.......................................           4,889            4,889            4,889   ...............  ...............
 
Richland:
    River corridor and other cleanup operations....................         183,692           89,577          209,577          +25,885         +120,000
    Central plateau remediation....................................         662,879          562,473          618,473          -44,406          +56,000
    RL Community and regulatory support............................          10,121            5,121           10,121   ...............          +5,000
    RL Excess facilities D&D.......................................  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............
    Construction:
        18-D-404 WESF Modifications and capsule storage............           6,500            1,000   ...............          -6,500           -1,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Richland.......................................         863,192          658,171          838,171          -25,021         +180,000
 
Idaho National Laboratory:
    Idaho cleanup and waste disposition............................         420,000          346,026          346,026          -73,974   ...............
    Idaho community and regulatory support.........................           4,071            3,200            3,200             -871   ...............
    ID Excess facilities D&D.......................................          10,000   ...............  ...............         -10,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Idaho National Laboratory..........................         434,071          349,226          349,226          -84,845   ...............
 
NNSA sites and Nevada offsites:
    Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.........................           1,175            1,704            1,704             +529   ...............
    Separations Process Research Unit..............................           4,800           15,000           15,000          +10,200   ...............
    Nevada.........................................................          60,136           60,136           60,136   ...............  ...............
    Sandia National Laboratory.....................................           2,600            2,600            2,600   ...............  ...............
    Los Alamos National Laboratory.................................         220,000          191,629          220,000   ...............         +28,371
    LLNL Excess facilities D&D.....................................         100,000   ...............          50,000          -50,000          +50,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, NNSA sites and Nevada offsites.....................         388,711          271,069          349,440          -39,271          +78,371
 
Oak Ridge Reservation:
    OR Nuclear facility D&D........................................         118,203           90,221          189,000          +70,797          +98,779
    U233 disposition program.......................................          50,311           45,000           52,300           +1,989           +7,300
    OR Cleanup and disposition.....................................          71,000           67,000           74,000           +3,000           +7,000
    Construction:
        17-D-401 On-site waste disposal facility...................          10,000            5,000           10,000   ...............          +5,000
        14-D-403 Outfall 200 mercury treatment facility............          17,100           11,274           76,000          +58,900          +64,726
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Construction...................................          27,100           16,274           86,000          +58,900          +69,726
 
    OR Community & regulatory support..............................           5,605            4,711            5,700              +95             +989
    OR Technology development and deployment.......................           3,000            3,000            3,000   ...............  ...............
    OR Excess facilities D&D.......................................         125,000   ...............  ...............        -125,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Oak Ridge Reservation..............................         400,219          226,206          410,000           +9,781         +183,794
 
Office of River Protection:
    Waste treatment and immobilization plant commissioning.........           8,000           15,000           15,000           +7,000   ...............
    Rad liquid tank waste stabilization and disposition............         719,000          677,460          771,947          +52,947          +94,487
    Construction:
        15-D-409 Low activity waste pretreatment system............          93,000           56,053           56,053          -36,947   ...............
        01-D-16 A-D Waste treatment and immobilization plant.......  ...............         675,000          655,000         +655,000          -20,000
        18-D-16 Waste treatment and immobilization plant--LBL/              630,000   ...............  ...............        -630,000   ...............
         Direct feed LAW...........................................
        01-D-16 D High-level waste facility........................          75,000   ...............          60,000          -15,000          +60,000
        01-D-16 E Pretreatment facility............................          35,000           15,000           15,000          -20,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Construction.......................................         833,000          746,053          786,053          -46,947          +40,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Office of River Protection.........................       1,560,000        1,438,513        1,573,000          +13,000         +134,487
 
Savannah River Site:
    SR Site risk management operations.............................         482,960          517,436          517,436          +34,476   ...............
    SR Community and regulatory support............................          11,249            4,749            4,749           -6,500   ...............
    SR Radioactive liquid tank waste stabilization and disposition.         637,105          805,686          732,863          +95,758          -72,823
    Construction:
        19-D-701 SR Security system replacement....................  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............
        18-D-402 Saltstone disposal unit #8/9......................             500           37,450           37,450          +36,950   ...............
        18-D-402 Emergency Operations Center Replacement, SR.......             500            1,259            1,259             +759   ...............
        17-D-402 Saltstone disposal Unit #7, SRS...................          30,000           41,243           41,243          +11,243   ...............
        05-D-405 Salt waste processing facility, SRS...............         150,000           65,000           65,000          -85,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Construction...................................         181,000          144,952          144,952          -36,048   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Savannah River Site............................       1,312,314        1,472,823        1,400,000          +87,686          -72,823
 
Waste Isolation Pilot Plant:
    Waste Isolation Pilot Plant....................................         270,971          311,695          311,695          +40,724   ...............
    Construction:
        15-D-411 Safety significant confinement ventilation system,          86,000           84,212           84,212           -1,788   ...............
         WIPP......................................................
        15-D-412 Exhaust shaft, WIPP...............................          19,600            1,000            1,000          -18,600   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant....................         376,571          396,907          396,907          +20,336   ...............
 
Program direction..................................................         300,000          300,000          300,000   ...............  ...............
Program support....................................................          14,979           12,979           12,979           -2,000   ...............
Safeguards and Security............................................         298,102          324,434          324,434          +26,332   ...............
Technology development.............................................          35,000           25,000           28,954           -6,046           +3,954
Excess facilities..................................................  ...............         150,000   ...............  ...............        -150,000
Use of prior year balances.........................................  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP.........................       5,988,048        5,630,217        5,988,000              -48         +357,783
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                      OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES
 
Environment, health, safety and security:
    Environment, health, safety and security.......................         130,693          135,194          132,583           +1,890           -2,611
    Program direction..............................................          68,253           70,653           70,653           +2,400   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Environment, Health, safety and security...........         198,946          205,847          203,236           +4,290           -2,611
 
Independent enterprise assessments:
    Independent enterprise assessments.............................          24,068           24,068           24,068   ...............  ...............
    Program direction..............................................          50,863           52,702           52,702           +1,839   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Independent enterprise assessments.................          74,931           76,770           76,770           +1,839   ...............
 
Specialized security activities....................................         262,912          254,378          254,378           -8,534   ...............
 
Office of Legacy Management:
    Legacy management..............................................         137,674          140,575          140,575           +2,901   ...............
    Program direction..............................................          16,932           18,302           18,302           +1,370   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Office of Legacy Management........................         154,606          158,877          158,877           +4,271   ...............
 
Defense related administrative support.............................         143,000          153,689          143,000   ...............         -10,689
Office of hearings and appeals.....................................           5,605            5,739            5,739             +134   ...............
Use of prior year balances.........................................  ...............          -2,000           -2,000           -2,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES..............................         840,000          853,300          840,000   ...............         -13,300
                                                                    ====================================================================================
DEFENSE NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL.....................................  ...............          30,000   ...............  ...............         -30,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES......................      21,497,000       21,604,567       21,608,000         +111,000           +3,433
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                 POWER MARKETING ADMINISTRATIONS\1\
 
                 SOUTHEASTERN POWER ADMINISTRATION
 
Operation and maintenance:
    Purchase power and wheeling....................................          66,070           73,184           73,184           +7,114   ...............
    Program direction..............................................           6,379            6,500            6,500             +121   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Operation and maintenance..........................          72,449           79,684           79,684           +7,235   ...............
 
    Less alternative financing [PPW]...............................         -15,070          -13,824          -13,824           +1,246   ...............
    Offsetting collections (for PPW)...............................         -51,000          -59,360          -59,360           -8,360   ...............
    Offsetting collections (PD)....................................          -6,379           -6,500           -6,500             -121   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, SOUTHEASTERN POWER ADMINISTRATION.....................  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                 SOUTHWESTERN POWER ADMINISTRATION
 
Operation and maintenance:
    Operating expenses.............................................          16,680           17,006           17,006             +326   ...............
    Purchase power and wheeling....................................          50,000           93,000           93,000          +43,000   ...............
    Program direction..............................................          31,335           32,995           32,995           +1,660   ...............
    Construction...................................................          14,932           16,875           16,875           +1,943   ...............
    Reduction due to CBO initial estimates of collections..........  ...............  ...............         -16,000          -16,000          -16,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Operation and maintenance..........................         112,947          159,876          143,876          +30,929          -16,000
 
    Less alternative financing (for O&M)...........................          -9,042           -8,894           -8,894             +148   ...............
    Less alternative financing (for PPW)...........................         -10,000          -10,000          -10,000   ...............  ...............
    Less alternative financing (Const).............................          -9,417          -12,180          -12,180           -2,763   ...............
    Offsetting collections (PD)....................................         -16,035          -29,695          -29,695          -13,660   ...............
    Offsetting collections (for O&M)...............................          -2,853           -5,707           -5,707           -2,854   ...............
    Offsetting collections (for PPW)...............................         -40,000          -83,000          -83,000          -43,000   ...............
    Use of prior year balances.....................................         -14,200   ...............  ...............         +14,200   ...............
    Southwestern Power Administration CBO initial estimates of       ...............          16,000           16,000          +16,000   ...............
     collections...................................................
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, SOUTHWESTERN POWER ADMINISTRATION.....................          11,400           26,400           10,400           -1,000          -16,000
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                 WESTERN AREA POWER ADMINISTRATION
 
Operation and maintenance:
    Construction and rehabilitation................................          52,272           32,632           32,632          -19,640   ...............
    Operation and maintenance......................................          72,407           77,056           77,056           +4,649   ...............
    Purchase power and wheeling....................................         498,072          567,362          567,362          +69,290   ...............
    Program direction..............................................         235,722          238,483          238,483           +2,761   ...............
    Reduction due to CBO initial estimates of collections..........  ...............  ...............         -43,000          -43,000          -43,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Operation and maintenance..........................         858,473          915,533          872,533          +14,060          -43,000
 
Less alternative financing (for O&M)...............................          -5,068           -7,758           -7,758           -2,690   ...............
Less alternative financing (for Construction)......................         -40,500          -27,077          -27,077          +13,423   ...............
Less alternative financing (for Program Dir.)......................         -38,398          -39,136          -39,136             -738   ...............
Less alternative financing (for PPW)...............................        -289,072         -260,954         -260,954          +28,118   ...............
Offsetting collections (for program direction).....................        -116,050         -150,761         -150,761          -34,711   ...............
Offsetting collections (for O&M)...................................         -13,854          -25,009          -25,009          -11,155   ...............
Offsetting collections (Public Law 108-477, Public Law 109-103)....        -209,000         -306,408         -306,408          -97,408   ...............
Offsetting collections (Public Law 98-381).........................          -9,306           -9,058           -9,058             +248   ...............
Use of prior-year balances.........................................         -43,853   ...............  ...............         +43,853   ...............
Western Area Power Administration CBO initial estimates of           ...............          43,000           43,000          +43,000   ...............
 collections.......................................................
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, WESTERN AREA POWER ADMINISTRATION.....................          93,372          132,372           89,372           -4,000          -43,000
                                                                    ====================================================================================
         FALCON AND AMISTAD OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE FUND
 
Operation and maintenance..........................................           5,048            5,329            5,329             +281   ...............
Offsetting collections.............................................          -3,948           -4,979           -4,979           -1,031   ...............
Less alternative financing.........................................            -872             -122             -122             +750   ...............
CBO estimate for third party financing.............................             872              122              122             -750   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, FALCON AND AMISTAD OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE FUND.....           1,100              350              350             -750   ...............
                                                                    ====================================================================================
      TOTAL, POWER MARKETING ADMINISTRATIONS.......................         105,872          159,122          100,122           -5,750          -59,000
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission...............................         367,600          369,900          369,900           +2,300   ...............
FERC revenues......................................................        -367,600         -369,900         -369,900           -2,300   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION..................  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                         General Provisions
 
Title III Rescissions:
    Northeast gasoline supply reserve sale.........................  ...............         -71,000   ...............  ...............         +71,000
    Strategic Petroleum Reserve crude oil sale.....................  ...............         -15,000   ...............  ...............         +15,000
    Strategic Petroleum Reserve use of sale proceeds...............  ...............          15,000   ...............  ...............         -15,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, General Provisions....................................  ...............         -71,000   ...............  ...............         +71,000
                                                                    ====================================================================================
      GRAND TOTAL, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY............................      34,535,921       25,477,760       34,990,015         +454,094       +9,512,255
              (Appropriations).....................................     (34,584,921)     (30,409,693)     (34,990,015)       (+405,094)     (+4,580,322)
              (Rescissions)........................................        (-49,000)       (-248,500)  ...............        (+49,000)       (+248,500)
              (Rescissions of emergency funding)...................  ...............     (-4,683,433)  ...............  ...............     (+4,683,433)
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                        SUMMARY OF ACCOUNTS
 
Energy efficiency and renewable energy.............................       2,321,778          695,610        2,322,000             +222       +1,626,390
Electricity delivery and energy reliability........................         248,329   ...............  ...............        -248,329   ...............
Cybersecurity, Energy Security, and Emergency Response.............  ...............          95,800          260,000         +260,000         +164,200
Electricity delivery...............................................  ...............          61,309   ...............  ...............         -61,309
Nuclear energy.....................................................       1,205,056          757,090        1,206,000             +944         +448,910
Fossil Energy Research and Development.............................         726,817          502,070          727,000             +183         +224,930
Naval Petroleum & Oil Shale Reserves...............................           4,900           10,000           10,000           +5,100   ...............
Strategic petroleum reserve........................................         252,000         -124,895          175,105          -76,895         +300,000
SPR Petroleum Account..............................................           8,400   ...............           8,400   ...............          +8,400
Northeast home heating oil reserve.................................           6,500           10,000           10,000           +3,500   ...............
Energy Information Administration..................................         125,000          115,035          125,000   ...............          +9,965
Non-Defense Environmental Cleanup..................................         298,400          218,400          353,240          +54,840         +134,840
Uranium enrichment D&D fund........................................         840,000          752,749          840,818             +818          +88,069
Science............................................................       6,259,903        5,390,972        6,650,000         +390,097       +1,259,028
Nuclear Waste Disposal.............................................  ...............          90,000   ...............  ...............         -90,000
Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy...........................         353,314   ...............         375,000          +21,686         +375,000
Title 17 Innovative technology loan guarantee program..............          38,000         -672,433          -26,000          -64,000         +646,433
Advanced technology vehicles manufacturing loan pgm................           5,000       -4,299,000            5,000   ...............      +4,304,000
Tribal Energy Loan Guarantee program...............................           1,000           -8,500            1,000   ...............          +9,500
Office of Indian Energy Policy and Programs........................  ...............  ...............          18,000          +18,000          +18,000
Departmental administration........................................         189,652          139,534          170,000          -19,652          +30,466
Office of the Inspector General....................................          49,000           51,330           51,330           +2,330   ...............
 
Atomic energy defense activities:
    National Nuclear Security Administration:
        Weapons activities.........................................      10,642,138       11,017,078       10,850,000         +207,862         -167,078
        Defense nuclear nonproliferation...........................       1,999,219        1,862,825        1,902,000          -97,219          +39,175
        Naval reactors.............................................       1,620,000        1,788,618        1,620,000   ...............        -168,618
        Federal Salaries and Expenses..............................         407,595          422,529          408,000             +405          -14,529
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, National Nuclear Security Admin................      14,668,952       15,091,050       14,780,000         +111,048         -311,050
 
    Defense environmental cleanup..................................       5,988,048        5,630,217        5,988,000              -48         +357,783
    Other defense activities.......................................         840,000          853,300          840,000   ...............         -13,300
    Defense nuclear waste disposal.................................  ...............          30,000   ...............  ...............         -30,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Atomic Energy Defense Activities......................      21,497,000       21,604,567       21,608,000         +111,000           +3,433
 
Power marketing administrations\1\:
    Southeastern Power Administration..............................  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............
    Southwestern Power Administration..............................          11,400           26,400           10,400           -1,000          -16,000
    Western Area Power Administration..............................          93,372          132,372           89,372           -4,000          -43,000
    Falcon and Amistad operating and maintenance fund..............           1,100              350              350             -750   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Power Marketing Administrations.......................         105,872          159,122          100,122           -5,750          -59,000
 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission:
    Salaries and expenses..........................................         367,600          369,900          369,900           +2,300   ...............
    Revenues.......................................................        -367,600         -369,900         -369,900           -2,300   ...............
General Provisions.................................................  ...............         -71,000   ...............  ...............         +71,000
Strategic Petroleum Reserve crude oil sale.........................  ...............         -15,000   ...............  ...............         +15,000
Strategic Petroleum Reserve use of sale proceeds...................  ...............          15,000   ...............  ...............         -15,000
                                                                    ====================================================================================
      Total Summary of Accounts, Department of Energy..............      34,535,921       25,477,760       34,990,015         +454,094       +9,512,255
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Totals include alternative financing costs, reimbursable agreement funding, and power purchase and wheeling expenditures. Offsetting collection
  totals reflect funds collected for annual expenses, including power purchase and wheeling.

                GENERAL PROVISIONS--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

    Section 301. The bill includes a provision related to 
reprogramming.
    Section 302. The bill includes a provision to authorize 
intelligence activities pending enactment of the fiscal year 
2019 Intelligence Authorization Act.
    Section 303. The bill includes a provision related to 
independent cost estimates.
    Section 304. The bill includes a provision concerning a 
pilot program for consolidated storage of spent nuclear fuel.

                                TITLE IV

                          INDEPENDENT AGENCIES

    The budget request proposes to eliminate the Delta Regional 
Authority, Denali Commission, and Northern Border Regional 
Commission. The budget requests funding to conduct closeout of 
the agencies in fiscal year 2019. The Committee strongly 
opposes the termination of these agencies, and recommends 
funding to continue their activities. The Administration shall 
continue all activities funded by this act, as well as follow 
directive language included in this report. No funds shall be 
used for the planning of or implementation of termination of 
these agencies.

                    Appalachian Regional Commission

Appropriations, 2018....................................    $155,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................     152,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     155,000,000

    The Committee recommends $155,000,000 for the Appalachian 
Regional Commission [ARC], an increase of $3,000,000 above the 
budget request. Established in 1965, the Appalachian Regional 
Commission is an economic development agency composed of 13 
Appalachian States and a Federal co-chair appointed by the 
President. Within available funding, $73,000,000 is recommended 
for base funds.
    Further, not less than $16,000,000 shall be for a program 
of industrial site and workforce development in Southern and 
South Central Appalachia, focused primarily on the automotive 
supplier sector and the aviation sector. Up to $13,500,000 of 
that amount is recommended for activities in Southern 
Appalachia. The funds shall be distributed to States that have 
distressed counties in Southern and South Central Appalachia 
using the ARC Area Development Formula.
    Within available funding, the Committee recommends 
$16,000,000 for a program of basic infrastructure improvements 
in distressed counties in Central Appalachia. Funds shall be 
distributed according to ARC's distressed counties formula and 
shall be in addition to the regular allocation to distressed 
counties.
    Within available funds, the Committee recommends 
$50,000,000 for the POWER Initiative to support communities, 
primarily in Appalachia, that have been adversely impacted by 
the closure of coal-powered generating plants and a declining 
coal industry by providing resources for economic 
diversification, job creation, job training, and other 
employment services.
    The Committee recognizes that the headquarters of the Delta 
Regional Authority, the Denali Commission, and the Northern 
Border Regional Commission are each headquartered in their 
respective regions. However, the Appalachian Regional 
Commission is headquartered in Washington, D.C. Headquartering 
regional commissions within the region affected is a sensible 
approach to ensure that the commissions are housed in more 
affordable locations than the District of Columbia, thereby 
reducing administrative overhead and making the commissions 
closer and more accountable to the people the commissions were 
designed to serve. Accordingly, the Committee directs the 
Appalachian Regional Commission, not later than 180 days after 
the enactment of this act, to provide the Committees on 
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress with a report that 
examines the feasibility of relocating the Appalachian Regional 
Commission to within the Appalachian region, including any 
potential long-term cost savings that could be accomplished.
    The Committee believes that if the Appalachian Regional 
Commission is going to move, it should move to the State of 
West Virginia.

                Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2018....................................     $31,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................      31,243,000
Committee recommendation................................      31,000,000

    The Committee recommends $31,000,000 for the Defense 
Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, a decrease of $243,000 below 
the budget request. Congress permanently authorized the 
Inspector General for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to 
serve as the Inspector General for the Defense Nuclear 
Facilities Safety Board. The Committee recommendation includes 
$1,103,000 within the Office of Inspector General of the 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission to perform these services.

                        Delta Regional Authority

Appropriations, 2018....................................     $25,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................       2,500,000
Committee recommendation................................      25,000,000

    The Committee recommends $25,000,000 for the Delta Regional 
Authority [DRA], an increase of $22,500,000 above the budget 
request. DRA is a Federal-State partnership that is designed to 
assist the eight-State Mississippi Delta Region in developing 
basic infrastructure, transportation, skill training, and 
opportunities for economic development for distressed counties 
and parishes. Within available funds, not less than $10,000,000 
is recommended for flood control, basic public infrastructure 
development and transportation improvements, which shall be 
allocated separate from the State formula funding method. The 
Committee does not include a statutory waiver with regard to 
DRA's priority of funding, and directs DRA to focus on 
activities relating to basic public infrastructure and 
transportation infrastructure before allocating funding toward 
other priority areas.

                           Denali Commission

Appropriations, 2018....................................     $30,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................       7,300,000
Committee recommendation................................      15,000,000

    The Committee recommends $15,000,000 for the Denali 
Commission, an increase of $7,700,000 above the budget request. 
The Denali Commission is a Federal-State partnership 
responsible for promoting infrastructure development, job 
training, and other economic support services in rural areas 
throughout Alaska.

                  Northern Border Regional Commission

Appropriations, 2018....................................     $15,000,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................         850,000
Committee recommendation................................      20,000,000

    The Committee recommends $20,000,000 for the Northern 
Border Regional Commission, an increase of $19,150,000 above 
the budget request. Within available funds, no less than 
$4,000,000 is recommended for initiatives that seek to address 
the decline in forest-based economies throughout the region.

                     Nuclear Regulatory Commission

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2018....................................    $909,137,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................     958,050,000
Committee recommendation................................     898,350,000

                                REVENUES

Appropriations, 2018....................................   -$779,768,032
Budget estimate, 2019...................................    -805,018,500
Committee recommendation................................    -794,218,500

                           NET APPROPRIATION

Appropriations, 2018....................................    $129,300,892
Budget estimate, 2019...................................     153,031,500
Committee recommendation................................     104,131,500

    The Committee recommends $898,350,000 for the Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission [Commission], a decrease of $59,700,000 
below the budget request. The Committee's recommendation 
requires the use of $20,000,000 of unobligated balances from 
prior year appropriations. This amount is offset by estimated 
revenues of $794,218,500, resulting in a net appropriation of 
$104,131,500. In developing this recommendation, the Committee 
has consulted with the Commission to ensure it maintains its 
gold-standard health and safety mission while reducing low-
priority work.
    Budget Execution Plan.--The Commission is directed to 
provide the Committee with a specific budget execution plan not 
later than 30 days after the enactment of this act. This plan 
shall provide details at the product line level within each of 
the control points, as applicable, included in the table after 
the Office of Inspector General heading below.
    Budget Control Points.--The recommendation includes budget 
control points for fiscal year 2019 to ensure the Commission's 
budget execution follows congressional intent. These budget 
control points are included in the table following the heading 
of Office of Inspector General. As it did for fiscal year 2018, 
the Committee includes statutory language incorporating the 
control points by reference into law, and notes that any 
breaches are subject to the reporting requirements and remedies 
of the Antideficiency Act contained in title 31 of the United 
States Code.
    Reprogramming Authority.--Section 402 continues 
reprogramming authority included in the Energy and Water 
Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2018, for 
the Commission between the budget control points, subject to 
prior congressional approval, with a provision made for 
emergency circumstances. This reprogramming authority 
supersedes the Commission's existing guidance on internal 
reprogrammings.
    Unobligated Balances from Prior Appropriations.--The 
Committee notes that the Commission carries unobligated 
balances from appropriations received prior to fiscal year 
2019. The Committee's recommendation requires the use of 
$20,000,000 of these balances, derived from fee-based 
activities. Because the Commission has already collected fees 
corresponding to these activities in prior years, the Committee 
does not include these funds within the fee base calculation 
for determining authorized revenues, and does not provide 
authority to collect additional offsetting receipts for their 
use. The Committee notes that any remaining unobligated 
balances carried forward from prior years are subject to the 
reprogramming guidelines in section 402, and shall only be used 
to supplement appropriations consistent with those guidelines.
    Integrated University Program.--The Committee recommends 
$15,000,000 for the Integrated University Program, of which not 
less than $5,000,000 is for grants to support research projects 
that do not align with programmatic missions but are critical 
to maintaining the discipline of nuclear science.
    Reporting Requirement.--The Committee directs the 
Commission to continue the reporting required in the 
explanatory statement for the Energy and Water Development and 
Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2018, relating to progress 
against the Commission's licensing goals and right-sizing 
commitments.
    Rulemaking.--The Committee directs the Commission to 
provide in its annual budget request and the semi-annual report 
to Congress on licensing and regulatory activities a list of 
all rulemaking activities planned, to include their priority 
and schedule.

                      OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

                          GROSS APPROPRIATION

Appropriations, 2018....................................     $12,859,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................      12,609,000
Committee recommendation................................      12,609,000

                                REVENUES

Appropriations, 2018....................................    -$10,555,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................     -10,355,400
Committee recommendation................................     -10,355,400

                           NET APPROPRIATION

Appropriations, 2018....................................      $2,304,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................       2,253,600
Committee recommendation................................       2,253,600

    The Committee recommends $12,609,000 for the Office of 
Inspector General, the same as the budget request, which is 
offset by revenues estimated at $10,355,400, for a net 
appropriation of $2,253,600. The Office of Inspector General 
serves both the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Defense 
Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, and the recommendation 
includes $1,103,000 for that purpose, which is not available 
from fee revenues.

                                          NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                    Committee
                                                                                  Committee      recommendation
                           Item                              Budget estimate   recommendation      compared to
                                                                                                 budget estimate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SALARIES AND EXPENSES.....................................           958,050  ................          -958,050
    NUCLEAR REACTOR SAFETY................................  ................           469,767          +469,767
    NUCLEAR MATERIALS AND WASTE SAFETY....................  ................           108,609          +108,609
    DECOMMISSIONING AND LOW-LEVEL WASTE...................  ................            25,393           +25,393
    CORPORATE SUPPORT.....................................  ................           299,581          +299,581
    INTEGRATED UNIVERSITY PROGRAM.........................  ................            15,000           +15,000
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal............................................           958,050           918,350           -39,700
 
          USE OF PRIOR YEAR BALANCES......................  ................           -20,000           -20,000
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
            TOTAL, SALARIES AND EXPENSES..................           958,050           898,350           -59,700
                                                           =====================================================
REVENUES..................................................          -805,019          -794,219           -10,800
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal............................................           153,032           104,132           -48,900
 
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL:
    OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL...........................            12,609            12,609  ................
    REVENUES..............................................           -10,355           -10,355  ................
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal............................................             2,254             2,254  ................
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION................           155,285           106,385           -48,900
          APPROPRIATIONS..................................         (155,285)         (106,385)         (-48,900)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                  Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board

Appropriations, 2018....................................      $3,600,000
Budget estimate, 2019...................................       3,600,000
Committee recommendation................................       3,600,000

    The Committee recommends $3,600,000 for the Nuclear Waste 
Technical Review Board to be derived from the Nuclear Waste 
Fund, the same as the budget request.

                           GENERAL PROVISIONS

    Section 401. The bill includes a provision regarding 
Congressional requests for information.
    Section 402. The bill includes a provision regarding 
reprogramming.

                                TITLE V

                           GENERAL PROVISIONS

    The following list of general provisions is recommended by 
the Committee:
    Section 501. The bill includes a provision regarding 
influencing congressional action.
    Section 502. The bill includes a provision regarding 
transfer authority.
    Section 503. The bill includes a provision regarding 
requirements for computer networks.

                     Program, Project, and Activity

    In fiscal year 2019, for purposes of the Balanced Budget 
and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Public Law 99-177), 
as amended, the following information provides the definition 
of the term ``program, project or activity'' for departments 
and agencies under the jurisdiction of the Energy and Water 
Development and Related Agencies Appropriation Act. The term 
``program, project or activity'' shall include the most 
specific level of budget items identified in the Energy and 
Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill, 
2019 and the report accompanying the bill.
    If a sequestration order is necessary, in implementing the 
Presidential order, departments and agencies shall apply any 
percentage reduction required for fiscal year 2019 pursuant to 
the provisions of Public Law 99-177 to all items specified in 
the report accompanying the bill by the Senate Committee on 
Appropriations in support of the fiscal year 2019 budget 
estimates as modified by congressional action.

  COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7, RULE XVI, OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

    Paragraph 7 of rule XVI requires Committee reports on 
general appropriations bills to identify each Committee 
amendment to the House bill ``which proposes an item of 
appropriation which is not made to carry out the provisions of 
an existing law, a treaty stipulation, or an act or resolution 
previously passed by the Senate during that session.''
    The Committee is filing an original bill, which is not 
covered under this rule, but reports this information in the 
spirit of full disclosure.
    The Committee recommends funding for the following programs 
or activities which currently lack authorization for fiscal 
year 2019:

                             APPROPRIATIONS NOT AUTHORIZED BY LAW--FISCAL YEAR 2019
                                             [Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Appropriation
                                                      Last Year of  Authorization   in Last Year        Net
                   Agency/Program                    Authorization      Level            of        Appropriation
                                                                                   Authorization   in this Bill
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Corps FUSRAP.......................................            \1\  .............  .............         120,000
EERE Program Direction.............................           2006        110,500        164,198         162,500
EERE Weatherization Activities.....................           2012      1,400,000         68,000         251,000
EERE State Energy Programs.........................           2012        125,000         50,000          55,000
EERE Marine and Hydrokinetic R&D...................           2012         50,000         34,000          70,000
Nuclear Energy.....................................           2009        495,000        792,000       1,206,000
Nuclear Energy Infrastructure and Facilities.......           2009        145,000        245,000         267,000
Fossil Energy......................................           2009        641,000        727,320         727,000
Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves.............           2014         20,000         20,000          10,000
Strategic Petroleum Reserve........................           2003  not specified        172,856         175,105
Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve.................           2003  not specified          6,000          10,000
Energy Information Administration..................           1984  not specified         55,870         125,000
Office of Science..................................           2013      6,007,000      4,876,000       6,650,000
Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing Program..           2012  not specified          6,000           5,000
Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy...........           2013        312,000        265,000         375,000
 
Non-Defense Environmental Cleanup:
    West Valley Demonstration......................           1981          5,000          5,000          75,000
Departmental Administration........................           1984        246,963        185,682         170,000
 
Atomic Energy Defense Activities:
    National Nuclear Security Administration:
        Weapons Activities.........................           2018     10,377,475     10,642,138      10,850,000
        Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation...........           2018      1,883,310      1,999,219       1,902,000
        Naval Reactors.............................           2018      1,431,551      1,620,000       1,620,000
        Federal Salaries and Expenses..............           2018        407,551        407,595         408,000
Defense Environmental Cleanup......................           2018      5,440,106      5,988,048       5,988,000
Other Defense Activities...........................           2018        816,000        840,000         840,000
 
Power Marketing Administrations:
    Southwestern...................................           1984         40,254         36,229          10,400
    Western Area...................................           1984        259,700        194,630          89,372
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission...............           1984  not specified         29,582  ..............
Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board............           2018         30,600         31,000          31,000
Nuclear Regulatory Commission......................           1985        460,000        448,200         104,132
Delta Regional Authority...........................           2018         30,000         25,000          25,000
Northern Border Regional Commission................           2018         30,000         15,000          20,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Program was initiated in 1972 and has never received a separate authorization.

COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7(c), RULE XXVI, OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

    Pursuant to paragraph 7(c) of rule XXVI, on May 24, 2018, 
the Committee ordered favorably reported a bill (S. 2975) 
making appropriations for energy and water development and 
related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2019, 
and for other purposes, provided, that the bill be subject to 
amendment and that the bill be consistent with its budget 
allocation, and provided that the Chairman of the Committee or 
his designee be authorized to offer the substance of the 
original bill as a Committee amendment in the nature of a 
substitute to the House companion measure, by a recorded vote 
of 30-1, a quorum being present. The vote was as follows:
        Yeas                          Nays
Chairman Shelby                     Mr. Graham
Mr. McConnell
Mr. Alexander
Ms. Collins
Ms. Murkowski
Mr. Blunt
Mr. Moran
Mr. Hoeven
Mr. Boozman
Mrs. Capito
Mr. Lankford
Mr. Daines
Mr. Kennedy
Mr. Rubio
Mrs. Hyde-Smith
Mr. Leahy
Mrs. Murray
Mrs. Feinstein
Mr. Durbin
Mr. Reed
Mr. Tester
Mr. Udall
Mrs. Shaheen
Mr. Merkley
Mr. Coons
Mr. Schatz
Ms. Baldwin
Mr. Murphy
Mr. Manchin
Mr. Van Hollen

 COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 12, RULE XXVI, OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

    Paragraph 12 of rule XXVI requires that Committee reports 
on a bill or joint resolution repealing or amending any statute 
or part of any statute include ``(a) the text of the statute or 
part thereof which is proposed to be repealed; and (b) a 
comparative print of that part of the bill or joint resolution 
making the amendment and of the statute or part thereof 
proposed to be amended, showing by stricken-through type and 
italics, parallel columns, or other appropriate typographical 
devices the omissions and insertions which would be made by the 
bill or joint resolution if enacted in the form recommended by 
the Committee.''
    In compliance with this rule, no changes to existing law 
are displayed because this bill proposes no changes.
                                ------                                

                        BUDGETARY IMPACT OF BILL

  PREPARED IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE PURSUANT TO SEC. 308(A), PUBLIC LAW 93-344, AS
                                                     AMENDED
                                            [In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Budget authority               Outlays
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
                                                               Committee    Amount  in   Committee    Amount  in
                                                               allocation      bill      allocation      bill
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comparison of amounts in the bill with the subcommittee
 allocation for 2019: Subcommittee on Energy and Water
 Development:
    Mandatory...............................................  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........
    Discretionary...........................................       43,766       43,766       43,842    \1\43,842
        Security............................................       21,892       21,892           NA           NA
        Nonsecurity.........................................       21,874       21,874           NA           NA
Projection of outlays associated with the recommendation:
    2019....................................................  ...........  ...........  ...........    \2\25,518
    2020....................................................  ...........  ...........  ...........       12,393
    2021....................................................  ...........  ...........  ...........        4,189
    2022....................................................  ...........  ...........  ...........          969
    2023 and future years...................................  ...........  ...........  ...........          596
Financial assistance to State and local governments for 2019           NA          180           NA  ...........
                                                                                                      .......\2\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority.
\2\Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority.
 
NA: Not applicable.

  COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2018 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL
                                                                        YEAR 2019
                                                                [In thousands of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                         Senate Committee recommendation
                                                                                                                             compared with (+ or -)
                                Item                                       2018       Budget estimate     Committee    ---------------------------------
                                                                      appropriation                     recommendation        2018
                                                                                                                         appropriation   Budget estimate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE--CIVIL
 
                       DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
 
                     Corps of Engineers--Civil
 
Investigations.....................................................         123,000           82,000          123,000   ...............         +41,000
Construction.......................................................       2,085,000          871,733        2,161,000          +76,000       +1,289,267
Mississippi River and Tributaries..................................         425,000          244,735          350,000          -75,000         +105,265
Operation and Maintenance..........................................       3,630,000        2,076,733        3,740,000         +110,000       +1,663,267
Regulatory Program.................................................         200,000          200,000          200,000   ...............  ...............
Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP)...........         139,000          120,000          120,000          -19,000   ...............
Flood Control and Coastal Emergencies..............................          35,000           27,000           35,000   ...............          +8,000
Expenses...........................................................         185,000          187,000          193,000           +8,000           +6,000
Office of Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works)............           5,000            5,000            5,000   ...............  ...............
Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund......................................  ...............         965,132   ...............  ...............        -965,132
Inland Waterways Trust Fund........................................  ...............           5,250   ...............  ...............          -5,250
                                                                    ====================================================================================
      Total, title I, Department of Defense--Civil.................       6,827,000        4,784,583        6,927,000         +100,000       +2,142,417
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                TITLE II--DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
 
                        Central Utah Project
 
Central Utah Project Completion Account............................          10,500            7,983           15,000           +4,500           +7,017
 
                       Bureau of Reclamation
 
Water and Related Resources........................................       1,332,124          891,017        1,382,000          +49,876         +490,983
Central Valley Project Restoration Fund............................          41,376           62,008           62,008          +20,632   ...............
    Central Valley Project collections.............................         -41,376          -62,008          -62,008          -20,632   ...............
      Subtotal.....................................................  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............
 
California Bay-Delta Restoration...................................          37,000           35,000           35,000           -2,000   ...............
Policy and Administration..........................................          59,000           61,000           61,000           +2,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Bureau of Reclamation.................................       1,428,124          987,017        1,478,000          +49,876         +490,983
                                                                    ====================================================================================
      Total, title II, Department of the Interior..................       1,438,624          995,000        1,493,000          +54,376         +498,000
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                  TITLE III--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
 
                          Energy Programs
 
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.............................       2,321,778          695,610        2,322,000             +222       +1,626,390
Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability........................         248,329   ...............  ...............        -248,329   ...............
Cybersecurity, Energy Security, and Emergency Response.............  ...............          95,800          260,000         +260,000         +164,200
Electricity Delivery...............................................  ...............          61,309   ...............  ...............         -61,309
Nuclear Energy.....................................................       1,072,056          621,000        1,073,000             +944         +452,000
    Defense function...............................................         133,000          136,090          133,000   ...............          -3,090
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal.....................................................       1,205,056          757,090        1,206,000             +944         +448,910
 
Fossil Energy Research and Development.............................         726,817          502,070          727,000             +183         +224,930
Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves.............................           4,900           10,000           10,000           +5,100   ...............
Strategic Petroleum Reserve........................................         252,000          175,105          175,105          -76,895   ...............
    Sale of crude oil..............................................        -350,000         -300,000         -350,000   ...............         -50,000
    Use of sale proceeds...........................................         350,000   ...............         350,000   ...............        +350,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal.....................................................         252,000         -124,895          175,105          -76,895         +300,000
 
SPR petroleum account..............................................           8,400   ...............           8,400   ...............          +8,400
Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve.................................           6,500           10,000           10,000           +3,500   ...............
Energy Information Administration..................................         125,000          115,035          125,000   ...............          +9,965
Non-defense Environmental Cleanup..................................         298,400          218,400          353,240          +54,840         +134,840
Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning Fund........         840,000          752,749          840,818             +818          +88,069
Science............................................................       6,259,903        5,390,972        6,650,000         +390,097       +1,259,028
Nuclear Waste Disposal.............................................  ...............          90,000   ...............  ...............         -90,000
Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy...........................         353,314   ...............         375,000          +21,686         +375,000
Title 17 Innovative Technology Loan Guarantee Program..............          33,000           10,000           33,000   ...............         +23,000
    Offsetting collection..........................................         -10,000          -15,000          -15,000           -5,000   ...............
    Rescission.....................................................  ...............        -240,000   ...............  ...............        +240,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal.....................................................          23,000         -245,000           18,000           -5,000         +263,000
 
    Title 17 negative subsidy......................................         -15,000          -44,000          -44,000          -29,000   ...............
    Rescission of emergency funding................................  ...............        -383,433   ...............  ...............        +383,433
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal.....................................................           8,000         -672,433          -26,000          -34,000         +646,433
 
Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Loans program...........           5,000            1,000            5,000   ...............          +4,000
    Rescission of emergency funding................................  ...............      -4,300,000   ...............  ...............      +4,300,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal.....................................................           5,000       -4,299,000            5,000   ...............      +4,304,000
 
Tribal Energy Loan Guarantee Program...............................           1,000   ...............           1,000   ...............          +1,000
    Rescission.....................................................  ...............          -8,500   ...............  ...............          +8,500
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal.....................................................           1,000           -8,500            1,000   ...............          +9,500
 
Office of Indian Energy Policy and Programs........................  ...............  ...............          18,000          +18,000          +18,000
Departmental Administration........................................         285,652          235,534          266,000          -19,652          +30,466
    Miscellaneous revenues.........................................         -96,000          -96,000          -96,000   ...............  ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Net appropriation..........................................         189,652          139,534          170,000          -19,652          +30,466
Office of the Inspector General....................................          49,000           51,330           51,330           +2,330   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Energy programs.......................................      12,903,049        3,785,071       13,281,893         +378,844       +9,496,822
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                  Atomic Energy Defense Activities
 
              National Nuclear Security Administration
 
Weapons Activities.................................................      10,642,138       11,017,078       10,850,000         +207,862         -167,078
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation...................................       2,048,219        1,862,825        1,902,000         -146,219          +39,175
    Rescission.....................................................         -49,000   ...............  ...............         +49,000   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal.....................................................       1,999,219        1,862,825        1,902,000          -97,219          +39,175
 
Naval Reactors.....................................................       1,620,000        1,788,618        1,620,000   ...............        -168,618
Federal Salaries and Expenses......................................         407,595          422,529          408,000             +405          -14,529
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, National Nuclear Security Administration..............      14,668,952       15,091,050       14,780,000         +111,048         -311,050
                                                                    ====================================================================================
             Environmental and Other Defense Activities
 
Defense Environmental Cleanup......................................       5,988,048        5,630,217        5,988,000              -48         +357,783
Other Defense Activities...........................................         840,000          853,300          840,000   ...............         -13,300
Defense nuclear waste disposal.....................................  ...............          30,000   ...............  ...............         -30,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Environmental and Other Defense Activities............       6,828,048        6,513,517        6,828,000              -48         +314,483
                                                                    ====================================================================================
      Total, Atomic Energy Defense Activities......................      21,497,000       21,604,567       21,608,000         +111,000           +3,433
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                 Power Marketing Administrations\1\
 
Operation and maintenance, Southeastern Power Administration.......           6,379            6,500            6,500             +121   ...............
    Offsetting collections.........................................          -6,379           -6,500           -6,500             -121   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal.....................................................  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............
 
Operation and maintenance, Southwestern Power Administration.......          30,288           45,802           45,802          +15,514   ...............
    Reduction due to CBO initial estimates of collections for        ...............  ...............         -16,000          -16,000          -16,000
     annual expenses...............................................
    Offsetting collections.........................................         -18,888          -35,402          -35,402          -16,514   ...............
    Southwestern Power Administration CBO initial estimates of       ...............          16,000           16,000          +16,000   ...............
     collections for annual expenses...............................
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal.....................................................          11,400           26,400           10,400           -1,000          -16,000
 
Construction, Rehabilitation, Operation and Maintenance, Western            223,276          265,142          265,142          +41,866   ...............
 Area Power Administration.........................................
    Reduction due to CBO initial estimates of collections for        ...............  ...............         -43,000          -43,000          -43,000
     annual expenses...............................................
    Offsetting collections.........................................        -129,904         -175,770         -175,770          -45,866   ...............
    Western Area Power Administration CBO initial estimates of       ...............          43,000           43,000          +43,000   ...............
     collections for annual expenses...............................
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal.....................................................          93,372          132,372           89,372           -4,000          -43,000
 
Falcon and Amistad Operating and Maintenance Fund..................           4,176            5,207            5,207           +1,031   ...............
    Offsetting collections.........................................          -3,948           -4,979           -4,979           -1,031   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal.....................................................             228              228              228   ...............  ...............
 
    CBO estimate for 3rd party financing...........................             872              122              122             -750   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal.....................................................           1,100              350              350             -750   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Power Marketing Administrations.......................         105,872          159,122          100,122           -5,750          -59,000
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
 
Salaries and expenses..............................................         367,600          369,900          369,900           +2,300   ...............
Revenues applied...................................................        -367,600         -369,900         -369,900           -2,300   ...............
 
                         General Provisions
 
Title III Rescissions:
    Northeast gasoline supply reserve sale.........................  ...............         -71,000   ...............  ...............         +71,000
    Strategic Petroleum Reserve crude oil sale.....................  ...............         -15,000   ...............  ...............         +15,000
    Strategic Petroleum Reserve use of sale proceeds...............  ...............          15,000   ...............  ...............         -15,000
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, General Provisions....................................  ...............         -71,000   ...............  ...............         +71,000
                                                                    ====================================================================================
      Total, title III, Department of Energy.......................      34,505,921       25,477,760       34,990,015         +484,094       +9,512,255
          Appropriations...........................................     (34,554,921)     (30,409,693)     (34,990,015)       (+435,094)     (+4,580,322)
          Rescissions..............................................        (-49,000)       (-248,500)  ...............        (+49,000)       (+248,500)
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                   TITLE IV--INDEPENDENT AGENCIES
 
Appalachian Regional Commission....................................         155,000          152,000          155,000   ...............          +3,000
Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board............................          31,000           31,243           31,000   ...............            -243
Delta Regional Authority...........................................          25,000            2,500           25,000   ...............         +22,500
Denali Commission..................................................          30,000            7,300           15,000          -15,000           +7,700
Northern Border Regional Commission................................          15,000              850           20,000           +5,000          +19,150
Southeast Crescent Regional Commission.............................             250   ...............  ...............            -250   ...............
 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission:
    Salaries and expenses..........................................         909,137          958,050          898,350          -10,787          -59,700
    Revenues.......................................................        -779,768         -805,019         -794,219          -14,451          +10,800
    Rescission.....................................................             -68   ...............  ...............             +68   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal.....................................................         129,301          153,031          104,131          -25,170          -48,900
 
    Office of Inspector General....................................          12,859           12,609           12,609             -250   ...............
    Revenues.......................................................         -10,555          -10,355          -10,355             +200   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal.....................................................           2,304            2,254            2,254              -50   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Nuclear Regulatory Commission.........................         131,605          155,285          106,385          -25,220          -48,900
          Appropriations...........................................        (131,673)        (155,285)        (106,385)        (-25,288)        (-48,900)
          Rescissions..............................................            (-68)  ...............  ...............            (+68)  ...............
                                                                    ====================================================================================
Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board...............................           3,600            3,600            3,600   ...............  ...............
                                                                    ====================================================================================
      Total, title IV, Independent agencies........................         391,455          352,778          355,985          -35,470           +3,207
 
                                                                    ====================================================================================
                        OTHER APPROPRIATIONS
 
    SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR DISASTER RELIEF REQUIREMENTS
 
                    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE--CIVIL
 
                       DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
 
                     Corps of Engineers--Civil
 
Investigations (Public Law 115-123) (emergency)....................         135,000   ...............  ...............        -135,000   ...............
Construction (Public Law 115-123) (emergency)......................      15,055,000   ...............  ...............     -15,055,000   ...............
Mississippi River and Tributaries (Public Law 115-123) (emergency).         770,000   ...............  ...............        -770,000   ...............
Operations and Maintenance (Public Law 115-123) (emergency)........         608,000   ...............  ...............        -608,000   ...............
Flood Control and Coastal Emergencies (Public Law 115-123)                  810,000   ...............  ...............        -810,000   ...............
 (emergency).......................................................
Expenses (Public Law 115-123) (emergency)..........................          20,000   ...............  ...............         -20,000   ...............
Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability (Public Law 115-123)             13,000   ...............  ...............         -13,000   ...............
 (emergency).......................................................
Strategic Petroleum Reserve (Public Law 115-123) (emergency).......           8,716   ...............  ...............          -8,716   ...............
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Other Appropriations..................................      17,419,716   ...............  ...............     -17,419,716   ...............
                                                                    ====================================================================================
      Grand total..................................................      60,582,716       31,610,121       43,766,000      -16,816,716      +12,155,879
          Appropriations...........................................     (43,212,068)     (36,542,054)     (43,766,000)       (+553,932)     (+7,223,946)
          Emergency appropriations.................................     (17,419,716)  ...............  ...............    (-17,419,716)  ...............
          Rescissions..............................................        (-49,068)       (-248,500)  ...............        (+49,068)       (+248,500)
          Rescissions of emergency appropriations..................  ...............     (-4,683,433)  ...............  ...............     (+4,683,433)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Totals adjusted to net out alternative financing costs, reimbursable agreement funding, and power purchase and wheeling expenditures. Offsetting
  collection totals only reflect funds collected for annual expenses, excluding power purchase wheeling.

                                              [all]
```