1 

ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT 

APPROPRIATIONS FOR 2011 

HEARINGS 

BEFORE A 

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE 

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT 

PETER J. VISCLOSKY, Indiana, Chairman 

CHET EDWARDS, Texas 

ED PASTOR, Arizona 

MARION BERRY, Arkansas 

CHAKA FATTAH, Pennsylvania 

STEVE ISRAEL, New York 

JOHN W. OLVER, Massachusetts 

LINCOLN DAVIS, Tennessee 

JOHN T. SALAZAR, Colorado 

PATRICK J. MURPHY, Pennsylvania 

RODNEY P. FRELINGHUYSEN, New 

Jersey 

ZACH WAMP, Tennessee 

MICHAEL K. SIMPSON, Idaho 

DENNIS R. REHBERG, Montana 

KEN CALVERT, California 

RODNEY ALEXANDER, Louisiana 

NOTE: Under Committee Rules, Mr. Obey, as Chairman of the Full Committee, and Mr. Lewis, as Ranking 

Minority Member of the Full Committee, are authorized to sit as Members of all Subcommittees. 

TAUNJA BERQUAM, JOSEPH LEVIN, JAMES WINDLE, 

TYLER KRUZICH, and CASEY PEARCE, Staff Assistants 

PART 7 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Page 

Nuclear Energy ........................................................................ 1 

Secretary of Energy ................................................................ 81 

( 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
PART 7—ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS FOR 2011 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
1 

ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT 

APPROPRIATIONS FOR 2011 

HEARINGS 

BEFORE A 

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE 

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT 

PETER J. VISCLOSKY, Indiana, Chairman 

CHET EDWARDS, Texas 

ED PASTOR, Arizona 

MARION BERRY, Arkansas 

CHAKA FATTAH, Pennsylvania 

STEVE ISRAEL, New York 

JOHN W. OLVER, Massachusetts 

LINCOLN DAVIS, Tennessee 

JOHN T. SALAZAR, Colorado 

PATRICK J. MURPHY, Pennsylvania 

RODNEY P. FRELINGHUYSEN, New 

Jersey 

ZACH WAMP, Tennessee 

MICHAEL K. SIMPSON, Idaho 

DENNIS R. REHBERG, Montana 

KEN CALVERT, California 

RODNEY ALEXANDER, Louisiana 

NOTE: Under Committee Rules, Mr. Obey, as Chairman of the Full Committee, and Mr. Lewis, as Ranking 

Minority Member of the Full Committee, are authorized to sit as Members of all Subcommittees. 

TAUNJA BERQUAM, JOSEPH LEVIN, JAMES WINDLE, 

TYLER KRUZICH, and CASEY PEARCE, Staff Assistants 

PART 7 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Page 

Nuclear Energy ........................................................................ 1 

Secretary of Energy ................................................................ 81 

( 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations 

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

61–780 WASHINGTON : 2010 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
2 

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS 

DAVID R. OBEY, Wisconsin, Chairman 

NORMAN D. DICKS, Washington 

ALAN B. MOLLOHAN, West Virginia 

MARCY KAPTUR, Ohio 

PETER J. VISCLOSKY, Indiana 

NITA M. LOWEY, New York 

JOSE ́ E. SERRANO, New York 

ROSA L. DELAURO, Connecticut 

JAMES P. MORAN, Virginia 

JOHN W. OLVER, Massachusetts 

ED PASTOR, Arizona 

DAVID E. PRICE, North Carolina 

CHET EDWARDS, Texas 

PATRICK J. KENNEDY, Rhode Island 

MAURICE D. HINCHEY, New York 

LUCILLE ROYBAL-ALLARD, California 

SAM FARR, California 

JESSE L. JACKSON, JR., Illinois 

CAROLYN C. KILPATRICK, Michigan 

ALLEN BOYD, Florida 

CHAKA FATTAH, Pennsylvania 

STEVEN R. ROTHMAN, New Jersey 

SANFORD D. BISHOP, JR., Georgia 

MARION BERRY, Arkansas 

BARBARA LEE, California 

ADAM SCHIFF, California 

MICHAEL HONDA, California 

BETTY MCCOLLUM, Minnesota 

STEVE ISRAEL, New York 

TIM RYAN, Ohio 

C.A. ‘‘DUTCH’’ RUPPERSBERGER, Maryland 

BEN CHANDLER, Kentucky 

DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, Florida 

CIRO RODRIGUEZ, Texas 

LINCOLN DAVIS, Tennessee 

JOHN T. SALAZAR, Colorado 

PATRICK J. MURPHY, Pennsylvania 

JERRY LEWIS, California 

C. W. BILL YOUNG, Florida 

HAROLD ROGERS, Kentucky 

FRANK R. WOLF, Virginia 

JACK KINGSTON, Georgia 

RODNEY P. FRELINGHUYSEN, New 

Jersey 

TODD TIAHRT, Kansas 

ZACH WAMP, Tennessee 

TOM LATHAM, Iowa 

ROBERT B. ADERHOLT, Alabama 

JO ANN EMERSON, Missouri 

KAY GRANGER, Texas 

MICHAEL K. SIMPSON, Idaho 

JOHN ABNEY CULBERSON, Texas 

MARK STEVEN KIRK, Illinois 

ANDER CRENSHAW, Florida 

DENNIS R. REHBERG, Montana 

JOHN R. CARTER, Texas 

RODNEY ALEXANDER, Louisiana 

KEN CALVERT, California 

JO BONNER, Alabama 

STEVEN C. LATOURETTE, Ohio 

TOM COLE, Oklahoma 

BEVERLY PHETO, Clerk and Staff Director 

(II)


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
(1) 

ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT, AND 

RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR 

2011 

TUESDAY, MARCH 23, 2010. 

NUCLEAR ENERGY FY2011 BUDGET 

WITNESSES 

WARREN F. MILLER, JR., ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR NUCLEAR ENERGY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Mr. PASTOR [presiding]. The hearing will come to order. 

Good afternoon. We have before us today Dr. Warren ‘‘Pete’’ Miller, Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy. This is his first time 

before this subcommittee. He brings impressive experience to this 

job, and we look forward to working with him. He will be presenting the President’s fiscal year 2011 budget request for the Office of Nuclear Energy. 

The Office of Nuclear Energy comes to us today proposing a revised portfolio for fiscal year 2011. The President’s request includes 

$824 million for nuclear energy, $37 million above fiscal year 2010. 

However, these figures are misleading without considering that all 

activities related to Yucca Mountain are included in the Office of 

Nuclear Energy, albeit at a drastically reduced level, and the Nuclear Power 2010 program has been completed. The proposal includes research into nuclear reactor enabling technologies, small 

modular reactors, and advanced reactor concepts. 

While we have yet to see the Nuclear Energy Strategic Plan 

promised to us—how long has the promise been? Since our bill last 

year, I guess, the promise was made—we hope to see it soon. 

This budget proposal raises questions regarding the administration’s approach to nuclear energy. On its face it appears that the 

administration is spreading its investment into a growing number 

of activities at the possible expense of making substantial progress 

on anything. I look forward to your defense of the choices made. 

The most significant revision proposed for the Office of Nuclear 

Energy is its leading role in nuclear waste disposal. The administration’s termination of Yucca has created a great deal of uncertainty when it comes to how the Nation will dispose of its nuclear 

waste. To say the least, the administration could have communicated this major policy decision in a more forthright manner. 

Your organization, Dr. Miller, will be responsible for executing 

the Department’s responsibility under the Nuclear Waste Policy 

Act and forming the Blue Ribbon Commission that will be looking 

at alternatives for the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle. We have 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
2 

questions regarding how your organization will support the termination process and the path forward. 

Your full written testimony is entered into the record. After the 

hearing we may have some questions for you to answer for the 

record. Assistant Secretary Miller, I ask that you ensure your responses and any supporting information requested by the subcommittee are delivered in final form no later than 4 weeks from 

today. If Members have additional questions that they would like 

to submit for the record, please provide them to the subcommittee 

by 5 p.m. tomorrow. 

Mr. PASTOR. With these opening comments, I would like to yield 

to the Ranking Member. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Dr. Miller, good afternoon, and congratulations on your appointment. To say the least, it is pretty interesting 

times for all things nuclear, so we are very pleased to have you 

with us this afternoon. 

Your experience in the military—and I note you are a West Point 

graduate, Vietnam service—academia, and during your long career 

at Los Alamos obviously give us some full testimony that you have 

come to the job well prepared, and we recognize that. It is great 

to have somebody with your background at the helm. 

I said to Secretary Johnson last week that as our Nation drives 

towards the development of clean energy solutions, it must be an 

all-inclusive approach.That simply must include the responsible expansion of nuclear power. 

Unlike last year’s request, which left this committee having to 

carry the water for many nuclear programs, this budget appears to 

reflect a results-oriented approach. It appears that the programmatic maker of the Office of Nuclear Energy supports that notion as well. Take the Next Generation Nuclear Plant as one example. Last year no funding was requested for the program despite 

the potential to move forward towards new nuclear technologies. 

This year the program is back in the request at $105 million. 

Programs like the Next Generation Nuclear Plant, though recently concluded the Nuclear Power 2010 program, and now the 

newly proposed Small Modular Reactor Program, can move us more 

quickly forward towards increasing our nuclear power share of electricity production beyond its current 20 percent. 

During these tough times it should not be the government’s role 

to create jobs, but rather to provide the opportunity. I think many 

have been confused on this point. I believe that nuclear power offers one such opportunity. With estimates that each new power 

plant will generate as many as 2,400 construction jobs, nearly $40 

million in labor income, and over $100 million in local, State and 

Federal tax revenue, this must be one of the solutions. 

Dr. Miller, while I am encouraged by what I have seen so far of 

your request, I feel I must also call your attention to the picture 

on the far wall on my left. I think you may be familiar with it. 

That is not the face of the Moon, it is an aerial shot of where Yucca 

Mountain is. That photo hangs in this hearing room as a rather 

frank reminder of where this committee stands on Yucca Mountain. 

Last week Mr. Pastor and I made our opinion of the administration’s position on Yucca Mountain quite evident. We will have time 

with Secretary Chu tomorrow to get at this issue, but this request 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
3 

proposes to eliminate the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management and move its remaining functions under your office. I understand that all of the employees have received notice of expected 

separation. The Deputy Secretary of Energy has identified these 

employees, over 180 of them, as surplus. I find that—and I think 

we probably find that—pretty troubling. I intend to discuss this in 

greater detail with Secretary Chu when he appears before us tomorrow. I also hope that we can have at least some level of candid 

discussion on this important policy decision as we discuss the details of your budget request. 

Thank you for your appearance. 

And, Mr. Chairman, thank you for the time. 

Mr. PASTOR. Assistant Secretary Miller. 

Mr. MILLER. Thank you. Vice Chairman Pastor, Ranking Member 

Frelinghuysen, members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss President Obama’s fiscal year 2011 budget request for the Office of Nuclear Energy. 

The administration is committed to restarting our domestic nuclear industry. President Obama recently announced conditional 

commitments for more than $8 billion in loan guarantees to build 

two new nuclear reactors, potentially the first new reactors ordered 

and constructed in the United States in more than 30 years. As the 

President has said, to meet our growing energy needs and prevent 

the worst consequences of climate change, we need to increase our 

supply of nuclear power. 

The President’s fiscal year 2011 budget request further supports nuclear power by requesting an additional $36 billion in loan guarantee authority. This would bring the total to $54 billion. In addition, the President’s budget request totals $912 million for the Office of Nuclear Energy, including $495 million to support a robust 

research and development program. This $495 million will provide 

a firm, broad foundation for the future of nuclear power by engaging the country’s intellectual capacity both to overcome the challenges in front of us and to train the workforce of tomorrow. 

Mr. Chairman, my written testimony covers our budget request 

in detail, so with my remaining time I will focus on a few important themes. 

Our proposed cross-cutting research activity, called Nuclear Energy Enabling Technologies, is intended to galvanize the applied research communities at universities, national laboratories, and the 

private sector to tackle those issues that, if resolved, could be game 

changers for future deployment of nuclear energy. These range 

from novel nuclear fuels to radiation-resistant structures, to advanced computational modeling to create virtual simulations of existing and future reactors. It is critical that we establish a strong 

research effort to regain U.S. nuclear energy leadership through increased engagement of our science and engineering communities. 

In February, the Department of Energy established a Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future to conduct a comprehensive review of the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle. The 

Commission will produce a final report within 2 years that will provide recommendations for developing a safe, long-term solution to 

managing the Nation’s used nuclear fuel and nuclear waste, and 

my office will provide support as requested. While the Commission 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
4 

is working, we will continue our strong research program on fuel 

cycle technologies. 

I would like to call to your attention our new Modified Open 

Cycle program. Over the past several years, our country has been 

engaged in a debate over whether to continue with our oncethrough strategy or move to full recycling of our used nuclear fuel. 

Each of these options has advantages, but also significant drawbacks. It is important to understand that there is a wide range of 

promising technical options in between these two possibilities that 

should be explored and considered. 

Modified open cycle research will encourage creative approaches 

to managing our used fuel in ways that extend our fuel resources 

while reducing our radioactive waste burden, thus providing future 

policymakers with a wider array of options from which to choose. 

Finally, our budget request would support new reactor designs, 

including the Next-Generation Nuclear Power Plant for industrial 

process heat, and long-range R&D on small module reactors. The 

SMR program would also support near-term deployment activities 

up to and including design certification cost sharing. 

Smaller reactors offer potential advantages in the way they are 

sited, licensed, financed, manufactured and built. If successfully deployed, they offer the United States a tremendous opportunity to 

position itself as a world leader in nuclear energy, bolster our manufacturing sector, create thousands of good-paying jobs, and to 

build a new generation of reactors that are made in the USA. 

President Obama has said, ‘‘The nation that leads the world in 

creating new sources of clean energy will be the nation that leads 

the 21st century global economy.’’ I believe that our nuclear energy 

R&D budget will help ensure that nuclear energy is part of that 

clean energy mix. 

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to appear before 

the committee, and I am pleased to take any questions now. 

[The information follows:] 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
5 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 12 61780A.001
6 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 13 61780A.002
7 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 14 61780A.003
8 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 15 61780A.004
9 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 16 61780A.005
10 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 17 61780A.006
11 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 18 61780A.007
12 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 19 61780A.008
13 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 20 61780A.009
14 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 21 61780A.010
15 

Mr. PASTOR. As you have heard, we have a vote. We are going 

to go ahead and probably ask a few questions and then come back 

and do the remainder. 

The question I have to start with will be the last bill you received monies for the hub, the nuclear hub. We are now almost 6 

months since the bill was passed and became law. What is the status of the hub to this point? 

Mr. MILLER. Starting in the fall, as soon as we received appropriations, we began first with workshops with the community that 

would compete for this hub. Then we issued a funding opportunity 

announcement. We have gotten responses, and we are in the midst 

right now of peer review of the response of the proposals that we 

have received. We hope to make a decision on the recipient of that 

process by the end of May and start working. 

Mr. PASTOR. How many people turned in a proposal? 

Mr. MILLER. So, unfortunately, the procurement process doesn’t 

allow me to answer that question publicly. 

Mr. PASTOR. Not even the number? 

Mr. MILLER. I actually asked that question before coming, and I 

was told I wasn’t supposed to answer that question. I am sorry, 

Congressman. 

Mr. PASTOR. Maybe it is a sole-source bid, I don’t know. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. No, it is not a sole-source bid. 

Mr. PASTOR. We know it is more than one then. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. It is not a sole source. 

Mr. PASTOR. Wow, that is interesting. Well, for this year you requested, I think, what, 24–? 

Mr. MILLER. Yes. 

Mr. PASTOR. And last year you received 22–. 

Mr. MILLER. Yes. 

Mr. PASTOR. We are almost 6 months into the year. Now, obvi- ously you haven’t spent $11 million. 

Mr. MILLER. No, we have not. 

Mr. PASTOR. And by the time you get started, we are into May, 

so that is even further into the year. And startup costs are not 

going to take—so what are you going to do? Would it be practical 

for me to say you have $22 million, and just because of following 

the rules, you are now into June before you even start actual work 

on implementing the hub, so you still have over two-thirds of the 

budget still available to you that you might be able to use this year 

and carry over to the following year. 

Mr. MILLER. Yes. The scope of the hub that was planned was a 

5-year program at approximately $25 million a year. 

Mr. PASTOR. Right. 

Mr. MILLER. And the expectation was that we wouldn’t get started for 6 months. So the expectation was to carry over some of that 

support or money into the next fiscal year. After that, if it looks 

like the program isn’t going to spend that kind of money, we would 

make adjustments in 2012 or beyond, depending upon the scope of 

the actual work being done by the hub. So that is what the plan 

is. 

Mr. PASTOR. What if the plan was, since you are going to carry 

over almost two-thirds of the money, why don’t we see how much 

you can spend this year and next year and try to have a better estiVerDate Mar 15 2010 07:51 Dec 03, 2010 Jkt 061780 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A780P2.XXX A780P2

wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
16 

mate so that we can see where we can fund other priorities that 

this administration has? That is another way of looking at it. 

Mr. MILLER. Yes. Well, we did think of that, Congressman. And 

the President’s plan is the plan that I just laid out of carrying over, 

and then going into the next year, and then making adjustments 

in following years. It is even possible in following years the Administration will request more than $25 million. 

Mr. PASTOR. Because I would say the other way of looking at it 

is they have two-thirds of the budget left over from this year, so 

why don’t we see what is realistic in 2010 and then move it over 

to 2011, because there are other priorities that this President has 

asked for in DOE that we will also try to fund, especially under his 

other dictate of fiscal responsibility. 

Mr. MILLER. I understand. 

Mr. PASTOR. And so we have two competing responsibilities that 

the President has laid on us. So that is a possibility that I just 

bring out, so—Ranking Member. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I suspect a lot of people haven’t voted 

though; is that right? If it is all right with you, Mr. Chairman, I 

will just proceed. 

Dr. Miller, there are competing views on the role of the Federal 

Government in advancing nuclear power. Obviously some people 

would like us to do nothing, but we don’t believe in that on this 

committee, nor does the President. There is an argument that government should incur the early risk and make up sizeable upfront 

investments in reactor research and development, design and demonstration. Then there is the counterargument. The counterargument is that industry needs to have skin in the game early in the 

project since industry will be the eventual beneficiary of taxpayer 

investments. 

Currently, as all of us are aware, many projects are cost shared 

with industry, as required by law. How would you explain, what is 

your take on the proper role of the Department in terms of supporting research, development, design, licensing, demonstrations 

and the deployment of nuclear reactors? I know that is somewhat 

of a softball, but I think it goes to the core of what we are talking 

about here. What is your take on what we should be doing? 

Mr. MILLER. I think I understand the question, Congressman. 

Well, first let us talk about the Generation III reactors, the ones 

that we are hoping to begin deploying in the not-too-distant future. 

There it is clear that the government role is loan guarantees. There 

needs to be some help with the early movers, the earlier plants, in 

order to help with the capital costs associated with earlier plants. 

Then, on the other hand, when we get to the small modular reactors, we hope there to help with design certification of those reactors, and as yet it is not clear whether the Federal role needs to 

be any more than cost sharing up to design certification. 

So I think it is going to depend on the reactor type. It is going 

to depend on the capital cost. It is going to depend on the market 

at the time. But there is clearly a limit to where the Federal Government ought to go. But when there is something to be gained for 

the American taxpayer, like deployment of the next-generation reactors, I think it is up to us to make sure that we provide the appropriate simulation to make sure it happens. 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
17 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. So the administration is, for many people, 

taking some bold action. 

Mr. PASTOR. I would think so, sir. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. That is a stake in the ground. How we are 

going to pay for it all, I don’t know. But obviously, from our standpoint, I think we have to make sure that we support the President. 

We need to make sure we have the ability to pay for those loan 

guarantees. 

Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will get some other questions 

later. 

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Simpson. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Following up on what Ranking Member Frelinghuysen was talking about, you and I talked the other day about the 

role of industry in all of this. And my concern, as I expressed to 

you, is that industry isn’t involved. Eventually we are doing this 

research and development of reactor types to actually deploy them. 

We don’t want to do it if industry doesn’t want it. It is not going 

to make much sense. 

So what role do we have with industry up front so that we know 

that what we are doing—as an example, what are the two designs 

that are going to be designed, one by Westinghouse, one by General 

Atomics? Are those two different designs? What is the role of industry, the end users, in these concepts and so forth? 

And do we have any formalized, or should we have some formalized type of process by which the DOE and those that are going to 

be using whatever we develop can coordinate their activities and 

can talk about what is expected of industry to put up? Because for 

years, for the 8 years I have sat on this committee, every year we 

have talked about what industry thinks the government ought to 

do, what government thinks industry ought to do. It is the chicken 

and egg; nobody wants to jump off the cliff. And somehow we have 

got to have some type of way of sitting down and saying, listen, 

this is what we are doing, this is what we want to do, and this is 

going to be our commitment on the part of the government, and 

this is going to be our commitment on the part of industry. And 

I am not sure if there is any formalized sort of thing to do that. 

Is that something we should be doing? 

Mr. MILLER. Thank you for that question. And it is an interesting discussion that we had. 

So let me just speak about the general topic. First, you asked 

about the two designs. There are two different designs, Westinghouse and GA, for the NGNP. And so in that particular case, what 

happens is industry is not shy about coming to visit us. And so in 

that case, many times we have been visited by those who are interested, and they talk to us all the time about their concerns, their 

interests. And then there tends to be a period in which we can’t 

talk to them, like we are in a period right now of negotiating the 

terms of these particular agreements. So then we have to pause 

and can’t talk to them, and then we can start talking to them 

again. So one method that we do this is just they come in and talk 

to us, our door is open. So I have spoken to a wide group of industrial people interested in NGNP. 

So then on the small module reactor, for example, we are going 

to do workshops where we are going to bring industry people in to 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
18 

talk about what is the best way that the government—and most 

appropriate way—that the government can speed up the commercialization of these small module reactors? So that is another approach. 

The other approach is for the Light Water Reactor Sustainability 

program. There we are working on trying to do, again, what is appropriate for the government to extend the life of the existing 

plants. There we have an advisory committee that actually has 

EPRI, which is an industry organization that is part of the advisory committee. 

And so we have been using a wide range of approaches of involving industrial concerns in what we are doing, because, as you point 

out, Congressman, there is no sense for us working on a reactor 

that no one is going to commercialize. So I think it is very important that we consider all possibilities as far as different approaches 

to involving industry, and we are surely open to that. 

Mr. SIMPSON. I was kind of surprised that we are now working 

on what the cost-sharing relationship is going to be with General 

Atomics and with Westinghouse on these proposed projects. I would 

have thought that—and this is, I guess, part of the planning I am 

talking about—that beforehand that determination would have 

been made. And as an appropriator, I am sitting here thinking, 

what is going to be expected of me if we decide to move forward 

with NGNP? And we have put a lot of money into it so far, but as 

we move down the road 2, 4, 10 years, what is going to be expected 

of this committee in terms of appropriating money? And what can 

I expect industry to put on the table? 

We need some determinations beforehand rather than letting out 

the plans and then saying, let’s negotiate on what the price is. And 

that is, I guess, where I am coming from is that somehow we need 

to develop some type of working group with industry so that we are 

working as a team, both the government and industry, with the different industries, both the end users and those that are going to 

be building the reactors and so forth. And how is this all going to 

work? 

And I will talk a little bit more when we get back about the 

budget. One of the things that is frustrating, I think, to all of us 

on the committee, not this administration, but the fact that every 

time we have a new Secretary, we redesign the entire budget. And 

so I would like to understand where the old budget is in this budget, things like what happened to Gen 4, and where is that money 

now? And what are we calling it, New Reactor Concepts? Have we 

just changed the name? We need some follow-through so that we 

have some longevity in terms of what we are appropriating money 

for. 

But I will tell you, before we go over to answer the vote on this, 

I do compliment the administration. This is the first administration 

that has actually said that they supported and wanted to promote 

nuclear power, that has actually put a budget behind it that looks 

like they are serious about it. So I do compliment the administration for that. 

Mr. PASTOR. We will recess to vote. [Recess.] 

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Rehberg, you want to throw a couple of questions? 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
19 

Mr. REHBERG. Is it my turn? 

Mr. PASTOR. Sure. 

Mr. REHBERG. I had a fellow from DOE a couple of years ago 

that came up with a suggestion. As we look at coal sequestration, 

there may be an opportunity for a cogeneration facility to do something with the CO2. Sequestration, of course, is a problem in the 

creation of any kind of electricity from coal. Is there anything going 

on in your neck of the woods, in your arena, that you are aware 

of at DOE having to do with a cogeneration opportunity with coal? 

Mr. MILLER. I am sorry, Congressman, you mean nuclear with 

coal? 

Mr. REHBERG. Yes, nuclear with coal. 

Mr. MILLER. No, not that I know of. I don’t know of anything like 

that. I will tell you where we cross with EM and with FE and NE 

is discussions of migration of materials underground; how do you 

retain materials that would seep, and how do you model that? That 

is where I connect a lot with Mr. Markowsky at FE, but I don’t 

know of any activities we have about cogeneration, meaning at the 

same site having a coal plant and a nuclear plant. 

Mr. REHBERG. It was just an idea they threw out, and they said 

because of the burning, it might have an opportunity to burn the 

CO2, which seemed plausible, but it is way out there. I was hoping 

that maybe that idea had filtered through. It did not. Okay. 

Mr. MILLER. No, but we will get back to you for the record, and 

I will check into it. 

Mr. REHBERG. See if there are any studies that have been done 

or any opportunity along that line. 

[The information follows:] 

Mr REHBERG. See if there are any studies that have been done or any opportunity 

along the lines of nuclear cogeneration with coal and the opportunity of nuclear 

burning CO2 emissions. 

Dr. MILLER. The Office of Nuclear Energy has not studied nuclear co-generation 

with coal or the potential use of nuclear power to ‘‘burn’’ CO2 emissions from coal 

power plants. There are other applications in which nuclear energy and coal can be 

used together, e.g., the use of nuclear heat to liquefy coal for transportation uses. 

Mr. REHBERG. That is all, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. 

Mr. PASTOR. When we did this bill, it was enacted in Title III, 

there is a paragraph that says, within 60 days of enactment—a report included in the House report detailing an implementation and 

progress measurement plan for each funded Energy Innovation 

Hub. 

Sixty days would probably bring us, what, until about January? 

And I asked during the vote if we had received a report, and as 

of yet we have not received it for your hub. 

Mr. MILLER. I am sorry, Congressman, I don’t know about the report you are referring to, so I will have to get back to you. Several 

reports have been requested that relate to NE, but I don’t know of 

one on the hubs. 

Mr. PASTOR. Well, I will hand this to you. 

And there was another plan I think you had to submit to the 

committee. And as I prepared for it yesterday, I said, where is it 

so I can be ready to chat about this plan? And they said, we 

haven’t received it yet. I think that was, what, how many days 

after—end of January I think it was due. 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
20 

Mr. MILLER. The nuclear R&D plan of which you are referring 

to, that one was due at the end of January. It is embarrassing that 

you don’t have that plan yet, and all I can tell you—— 

Mr. PASTOR. Well, it is hard to do a budget when you don’t have 

these—— 

Mr. MILLER. All I can tell you is various offices in the administration are working feverishly on that plan, trying to get convergence on that plan. I had hoped to hand it to you today, but I do 

not have it in my possession to hand to you today. But I hope you 

get it really soon. 

Mr. PASTOR. Soon. Couple of months? Days? Weeks? 

Mr. MILLER. No, sir. Soon, I hope, is days to weeks, not months. 

Mr. PASTOR. Days to weeks, okay. All right. 

Well, it is easier to work on a request on a budget when you 

know what the plans are, what you anticipate doing. And when we 

are just waiting for the plan and waiting for reports, it is very difficult to make decisions that will take us into the next fiscal year. 

So I just would encourage you as quickly as you can to bring it forward, because we are going to conclude the hearings probably the 

week after we return from the Easter break, and we will start looking at various requests from the Department of Energy. And so the 

later we wait, the more difficulty we are going to have in giving 

you a bill—— 

Mr. MILLER. Understood. 

Mr. PASTOR [continuing]. That is fair to you. Rodney. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. The scientific integrity of the review of nuclear waste alternatives is important to the committee, obviously. 

Last year Congress included statutory text that the Blue Ribbon 

Commission should, and I quote, ‘‘consider all alternatives to nuclear waste disposal,’’ end of quotation marks. The charter of the 

Commission seems to include all alternatives. Currently that is our 

understanding. 

The fiscal year 2011 budget request includes $45 million, $36 

million above fiscal year 2010, for the Used Nuclear Fuel Disposition program. This program lists a broad set of activities in its proposals, including, and I quote, ‘‘rapid response or increase from the 

proposed Blue Ribbon Commission,’’ end of quotes, and, and I 

quote, ‘‘a comprehensive understanding of the current technical 

basis for geological disposal of nuclear spent fuel and high-level 

waste,’’ all within quotation marks. 

Is it fair to say that this program will be investing in research 

to understand all alternatives to nuclear waste disposal? 

Mr. MILLER. Thank you for that question. 

The R&D program that we have in place, are planning—assuming whatever Congress decides—in NE will include a broad range 

of potential disposal pathways. And so starting in 2011, we are 

looking at lots of different geologic media in which high-level waste 

might be stored. Now, having said that, of course, we are also going 

to receive recommendations from the Blue Ribbon Commission, and 

that clearly will inform the future of the direction which we go, but 

in the meantime, we are looking at a broad range of media. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Yucca Mountain, to the committee’s understanding, should be on that list. Is that your understanding? 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
21 

Mr. MILLER. When we discuss this issue, we are talking about 

salt, we are talking about basalt; we are not talking about sites. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I understand there are a lot of different 

sites, but is it your understanding that Yucca is still on the radar 

screen as a potential disposal site? 

Mr. MILLER. No, it is not on the radar screen. The President and 

the Secretary have decided that that is not a path forward for final 

disposal of waste. So, no, that particular site is not. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. The Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste 

Management of which I spoke in my opening remarks is moving its 

functions to your office. Can you tell us a little bit about what is 

happening there? The people that have been working in this program, I am sure we could come up with a better term than ‘‘surplus.’’ I mean, just looking at what has been done, obviously you 

have people with a vast amount of experience. And I assume that 

institutional memory is something which we want to retain. What 

are your plans? 

Mr. MILLER. Sir, when we are looking at the 2011 budget request—and, of course, it still all depends on what is appropriated— 

our plan is to look at the skill mix that had been funded by the 

RW program, for example, geochemists, geologists, people who do 

computational modeling of flow-through media, to look at that mix 

and to try to move appropriate personnel into NE in order to fulfill 

its requirements under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act. 

So we are going to have several jobs. One is to do R&D, which 

is what we are talking about now, in NE. We are proposing to be 

responsible for the so-called ‘‘standard contracts’’ and administering those, and then the Nuclear Waste Fund. All three of those 

previous activities that had been managed at RW, the proposal is 

to move all of those to NE, so it includes that R&D that you are 

talking about. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. So there is a separation afoot. So are you 

going to take a look at that to see whether some of these people 

can be retained? 

Mr. MILLER. Yes. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. So that is what you are telling us, that 

these people are going to be involved in some way, perhaps. 

Mr. MILLER. I can’t candidly tell you all of the people who had 

been involved will be included, no. I can’t say everyone, but I can 

say we certainly are going to look at the appropriations, what the 

Congress has approved, and that which we are able to support 

within the budget, we certainly are going to look at that. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. If there is a geological solution here, I 

would hope we do our level best to make sure that people with substantial knowledge—getting way beyond the billions of dollars that 

have been invested, certainly we would want to retain those individuals, not cast them into the wind somewhere. 

Mr. MILLER. I share that sentiment. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I am glad to hear you say that. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Secretary, I just want to make a point here that 

as we were the writing the bill and had the bill go forward with 

the process in the House and the negotiations with the Senate, and 

finally the conference and signed by the President, all alternatives 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
22 

for nuclear waste disposal, at least the intent of the House and the 

Senate as they provided the money for the Blue Ribbon Commission, was that all alternatives meant consideration of Yucca Mountain. So I just highlight it to you so that you can reference that the 

congressional intent for the Blue Ribbon Commission was that all 

alternatives meant that Yucca Mountain would be also included in 

all the considerations of the Blue Ribbon Commission. 

Mr. MILLER. I understand. 

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Ryan. 

Mr. RYAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Welcome. Thank you for what you are doing. I appreciate what 

the administration is doing with regards to nuclear energy. 

I see you are from Chicago. I am not too far away in northeast 

Ohio, Youngstown area, Akron. 

One of the issues, as I am just reading through and thinking 

about how important nuclear energy is and how much of the supply 

chain over the years we have lost to other countries, I only have 

one question at this point, and that is, I just want to ask, what do 

we need to do from the legislative side to help regrow our supply 

chain and the manufacturing component of the spin-off, the ripple 

effect that nuclear energy will provide? I think even if we do ramp 

up rather quickly, a lot of the components are going to be exported 

to other countries in the short term. But how do we ramp up, how 

can you help us ramp up, and what can this committee do to help 

our country ramp up so that the Chicagos and Youngstowns and 

Akrons of the world can benefit from this, even if they don’t have 

a facility in their community? 

Mr. MILLER. Thank you. 

So first with the reactors for which we are requesting authority 

for loan guarantees as well as the loan guarantees that we have 

just announced, those vendors that are providing those reactors 

have discussed with us about where are they going to get the components that they are using and the workforce that they are using 

in building the plants, and they expect the majority of them to be 

from here, from the United States. Some of those companies—for 

example, AREVA is actually building facilities within the United 

States. So we expect those new plants to have a significant number 

of U.S. components in them. 

And then the second one is the small module reactors, which I 

am excited about as a possibility for getting the United States back 

into the game of actually being vendors for power reactors. And 

there, as I said in my opening comments, we hope to have reactors 

that are built in the U.S. with American vendors again. 

Now, there are American vendors as partners in these larger 

companies that are building the Gen III+ reactors, but these will 

be a new start for the United States in the nuclear business. 

If it proves to be something that industry wants to deploy, you 

know, we can’t overpromise anything, but there is enough hope 

there that we ought to do what we can to make sure we see for 

sure whether we can make these things go. 

Mr. RYAN. I know it wouldn’t be necessarily through the Department of Energy, but are there tax incentives that we can help on 

the private sector side to help let them know that it is okay to start 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
23 

making some of these investments? Because a lot of these foreign 

countries do provide a level of subsidy for that kind of thing. 

Mr. MILLER. It is out of my depth. I don’t know much about tax 

incentives. 

Mr. RYAN. You have a powerful voice in Washington. Loan it to 

the cause. 

Mr. MILLER. We certainly can think about it and get back to you, 

but I am not prepared right now to talk about it. 

Mr. RYAN. Just if you can express the need for those kinds of 

things. Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

As far as Yucca goes—I don’t even want to talk about Yucca, it 

is what it is—but you are going to send up a letter or have sent 

up a letter requesting reprogramming money; is that right? I understand it goes into NE? 

Mr. MILLER. No. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Where does it go? 

Mr. MILLER. You are talking about for 2010 now? 

Mr. SIMPSON. Yes. 

Mr. MILLER. In 2010, my understanding is a letter was sent to 

Congress informing Congress of what is planned for the 2010 activity that had been allocated or appropriated for Yucca Mountain. It 

is our understanding that the senior leadership of DOE is working 

with the RW leadership and the general counsel and CFO on this 

whole issue of how to close out, if you will, the Yucca Mountain activity, but the 2010 activity is not an NE part. We start in 2011 

is when the responsibility shifts to us. 

Mr. SIMPSON. EM takes over Yucca Mountain at that time, right? 

Mr. MILLER. The plan is that EM would have the physical facility 

at Yucca Mountain, and NE would have responsibility for the Nuclear Waste Policy Act and implementing that act. 

Mr. SIMPSON. You are not aware of what the reprogramming request is to use those funds that were originally going to be used 

for the licensing process? They are going to have to reprogram 

those if they want to use them for something else. 

Mr. MILLER. Correct. 

Mr. SIMPSON. But you are not sure what the proposal is for that. 

Mr. MILLER. Well, there is a letter that was sent that there was 

intent to reprogram, and there was intent to close out the program, 

to work with employees, to work with the site records—for example, retention of all the records. So that has been sent, that is my 

understanding. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Okay. One other thing. This committee has been 

very supportive of—and one of the things I don’t think we have 

spent enough money on in years gone by is infrastructure. If we 

are going to retain and bring the best research scientists to work 

at our national labs, we have to have the scientific facilities for 

them to work in. And as you know, out in Idaho, some places were 

in old grocery stores and garage doors and everything else. But the 

committee has been very supportive of increasing that budget for 

infrastructure improvements. 

It looks like in your NE research and development budget, it is 

kind of a makeover of the old budget with some new programs, new 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
24 

initiatives, such as the Small Module Reactor program. These new 

initiatives may add to the overall research and development effort 

and an increase in demands on the infrastructure. 

Last year the committee put in $173 million last year into the 

NE budget, the infrastructure budget, in Idaho, which, as you 

know, they have done some great work out there in building labs 

and equipment and so forth. This year’s request is $10 million less. 

Does this request fully support the upgrades to the scientific and 

testing capabilities at the INL that may be needed to implement 

the expansion of the new NE programs? 

Mr. MILLER. Thank you, Congressman. This is, again, an extremely interesting question. 

I had an opportunity to be in Paris for the conference that President Sarkozy had on civil nuclear energy, to talk to my Japanese, 

Russian and French colleagues about investment in nuclear energy 

R&D, and there is no question that ours isn’t up to what some 

other countries invest in nuclear energy R&D. But having said 

that, only about 10 years ago we were at zero, and we have come 

up to now a request of $500 million. I think that is pretty darn impressive with what we have done. 

So as we look at this balance of $500 million, and we struggle 

with the balance between infrastructure, intellectual capability, 

and people who are doing research and theory and computation 

and experiment, the experimental facilities, they have what they 

need, it is not easy to make that balance. We have done the best 

we can. We think in the future the balance is likely to move toward 

investment more in infrastructure. 

Of course, it would be nice if we had a much greater budget, but 

we are here to defend the President’s budget. We think it is a solid 

budget. And we have spent considerable time trying to think 

through this thing of infrastructure and people and students in the 

next generation, so it is the balance we came up with. I think it 

is a strong budget, and I am supporting it. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Couple of quick questions. On the Advanced Test 

Reactor, it is 40 years old. Last year we fenced off $12 million for 

the ATR Life Extension. How much is being requested in the fiscal 

year 2011 for the Life Extension project at the ATR? 

Mr. MILLER. Well, the ATR is a component, as you point out, of 

the facilities infrastructure budget, Idaho National Laboratory. I 

don’t have the exact number with me for what fraction of that is 

for ATR. We can get that number for you. 

[The information follows:] 

Dr. MILLER. The Fiscal Year 2011 budget request includes approximately $12.3 

million to continue ATR LEP activities. ATR LEP projects will continue to focus on 

reconstitution of the safety basis and replacing aging components to improve operational reliability and support the growing demand for this world-clss irradiation research and test reactor. This investment will help extend the life of this national 

asset in its support of national security, energy, and material research missions, and 

prepare for the Core Internal Changeout scheduled in the 2014–2015 timeframe. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Okay. In Oak Ridge, Congress provided $10 million 

for the Radiochemical Engineering Development Center at the Oak 

Ridge National Laboratory. Did this investment complete the maintenance for that facility? Because none has been requested this 

year, I understand. 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
25 

Mr. MILLER. Yes. Thank you for that question also, Congressman 

Simpson. 

So in the best of all worlds, we would also be investing in facilities at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, and we would be investing 

in facilities at other national laboratories. I think that the overall 

facilities is appropriate for the size of the program of $500 million. 

But of course, yes, it would be nice if we could also invest in those. 

But we think we have done the right balance for the size of the 

budget. 

Mr. SIMPSON. But as far as the Radiochemical Engineering Development Center, it doesn’t need any additional money for its 

maintenance, or is it just that there was not any to request this 

year? 

Mr. MILLER. They could use money, it just didn’t make it in the 

cut of our requests. 

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Fattah. 

Mr. FATTAH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

General, how are you? 

Mr. MILLER. Fine, sir. How are you? 

Mr. FATTAH. I am doing well. 

Senator Webb and Senator Alexander have a proposal before the 

Senate, I have offered it as a companion bill in the House, that 

would essentially launch a nonincremental approach to trying to 

jump-start or restart our pursuit of nuclear energy focused around 

small module reactors—there are some other features to the bill, 

obviously, and investments in solar and some other renewables, but 

really the main focus is on nuclear. You have been doing some 

work. The 2005 act obviously allowed for investments in some nextgeneration plants, and I note that a Pennsylvania company—I represent Pennsylvania—Westinghouse has been one of the competitively awarded grants under that. Today, Bill Gates has announced 

a major partnership with Toshiba to move forward on some small 

nuclear reactors. So I know that we are all headed in the right direction, the compass is correct, I mean, the country is moving. 

Gallup yesterday released a poll that shows 62 percent of Americans believe that nuclear has to be a central part of the energy mix 

going forward. Unfortunately, over the last 30 years we have had 

a dearth of energy, if you will, around nuclear, but things seem to 

be starting to be aligned in the right direction. 

So your proposals, in terms of this year’s budget, if the committee was looking for where there are additional needs relative to 

where we would like to get to—and in keeping with your responsibilities to OMB and all of that—are there areas that you would 

think that additional investments could be aptly utilized? The administration should be congratulated on getting the first loan guarantee deals out, and I have been a major proponent of the loan 

guarantee program, but I would be interested in any answer that 

could be forthcoming about what is left to be done that is not yet 

represented in the request. 

Mr. MILLER. Thank you very much, Congressman, for that question. I believe the President’s budget supports the priorities of the 

Office of Nuclear Energy. 

Mr. FATTAH. I support the President’s budget, and otherwise. I 

just wanted to get your expertise since there seems to be a growing 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
26 

consensus both among the public and among policymakers—and 

obviously Secretary Chu testified before this committee last year 

and said absolutely nuclear is going to be a significant part of what 

we are doing. And we have been outpaced by countries like France 

and others who have moved quickly. So let me thank you for your 

response. 

Mr. MILLER. Thank you very much, sir. 

Mr. REHBERG. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Normally we, as elected officials, like to see programs end because they never really do, but in the case of Yucca Mountain— 

again, I don’t want to beat a dead horse, but we have spent 25 

years on it and $10 billion, so we ought not just flippantly ignore 

the closure or the discounting it as a solution. 

Is anything being done that cannot be undone by the next administration, Republican or Democrat, that might have a different philosophy? Because I haven’t heard any objective reason as to why 

it is unacceptable; most of it has been subjective. And I respect the 

right of the President and/or the Secretary to make that determination, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that we have to agree. We 

might want to undo it in the future. 

My question is, are you doing anything at the site that is going 

to preclude a different philosophy in a different administration? 

Mr. MILLER. Thank you very much. 

Let me first again say that the President and Secretary have 

stated that Yucca Mountain is not going to be pursued as the repository. And let me also repeat that I said that we are doing everything to retain all of the records. We are required by law to retain written as well as physical records. 

And then let me also say that now that we are moving in a different direction, Yucca Mountain was selected, down selected, during a period of time in which the country had basically decided that 

we weren’t going to pursue nuclear energy, we weren’t going to 

build any more plants, we were going to allow those plants that 

exist to live out their life, we were going to take the used fuel, we 

were going to put it away, we were going to close it up, and that 

was the end. Well, this is a new world now, and it is a new opportunity for us. 

Mr. REHBERG. I think that explains, though, why there was a 

limitation on the amount that was going to be able to be restored. 

And if I remember correctly, the concept was that there should be 

a place in the West and a place in the East. 

There will always be a necessity to do something with waste, and 

it just seems like we have wasted a lot of years to change directions. And so, trust me, you don’t have to repeat the company line, 

I got it, you said it three times already, I understand that, but my 

question is is anything being done at the site—it would be like taking a tank and filling it with cement—are you doing something at 

the site that cannot be undone? 

Mr. MILLER. Not that I know of. 

Mr. REHBERG. Thank you. 

Mr. PASTOR. I believe I heard this, and you can correct me if I 

am wrong, that in the reprogramming request, the letter that is 

here that you think—it is your opinion that some of that money 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
27 

may be used for the archiving of the documentation as a result of 

Yucca Mountain? 

Mr. MILLER. That is my understanding. 

Mr. PASTOR. And in 2011, then, you will have that responsibility. 

Mr. MILLER. That is right. 

Mr. PASTOR. So in your budget for 2011, are there monies that 

you have in the budget that—— 

Mr. MILLER. Yes, I understand. The answer is that there are no 

dollars actually specified in the budget for that purpose, but it is 

our intent to fulfill that responsibility in 2011. It will be part of our 

responsibility. I don’t think we have actually written it down in so 

many words, so if it requires us to come back and discuss it with 

the committee, we will. But that responsibility just has to be carried out by law. 

Mr. PASTOR. That is what I am getting to. In your budget, to see 

a line item that says to continue the archiving, and it was difficult 

to find. We know that that is something that needs to be done, and 

it is already going to start, hopefully, in the next couple of months. 

I don’t know how much money from the reprogramming is going to 

go to that effort. And we agree with you that the archiving is very 

important, but we are trying to determine how you are going to accomplish that in 2011. And I guess that is where I want to get to. 

Mr. MILLER. Mr. Chairman, I am happy to get back to you in detail as to how much we believe that will cost. And we have every 

intention of doing it in 2011. 

[The information follows:] 

Dr. MILLER. The Department is committed to preserving the relevant scientific 

knowledge gained from the Yucca Mountain Project. Records generated by the 

OCRWM in the course of activities at Yucca Mountain are managed and archived 

in accordance with the requirements of the Federal Records Act and related regulations. 

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Chairman, can I just say something, one thing 

on Yucca? 

Mr. PASTOR. Sure. 

Mr. FATTAH. I understand the concerns of my colleagues, and I 

share many of them. I do want to say that we have arrived at a 

point in our country where there is cynicism and there are a lot 

of concerns. Politicians run for office, they make commitments. The 

President made a commitment not to proceed with Yucca Mountain. And so we, I think, understand and should understand that 

the administration is following through on a commitment that was 

made to the American people about what the policy would be. So 

even though there should be appropriate archival, we should also 

understand that this policy was ratified in an election that took 

place in 2008 vis-a-vis what we would do relative to Yucca Mountain. 

Mr. PASTOR. What activities will you have with the Blue Ribbon 

Commission? 

Mr. MILLER. My assigned role in the charter is to respond to any 

requests or any assistance that they ask of us. So we are just responding to any information they ask of us. 

Mr. PASTOR. And do you have a line item that allows you to do 

that, or will you take from this program or that program? How do 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
28 

you anticipate—I don’t know what the cost is going to be, so I ask 

that question. 

Mr. MILLER. In fiscal year 2010, there was $5 million requested 

in the RW budget request, and so there isn’t any in our request for 

2011. The hope is that the 2010 will be enough, the $5 million will 

be enough. If not, we will have to work with everyone to try to 

make sure they are supported, and that people understand what 

we are doing to support them, and from what budget we are supporting them. But we have to continue to respond to their requests. 

Mr. PASTOR. And you are right, you are correct, the $5 million 

was aired, and so was the language, ‘‘All alternatives will be looked 

at.’’ 

What was the anticipation of the administration in terms of how 

long this Blue Ribbon Commission was going to exist and be funded by the $5 million? 

Mr. MILLER. Well, I think the $5 million request came considerably before the charter was established for the Blue Ribbon Commission, but the charter says 18 months, an initial report; 24 

months, the final report. That is what is in the charter. 

Mr. PASTOR. And where are they at in terms of organizing and 

beginning deliberation? 

Mr. MILLER. So the Commission has been announced, the members have been announced. The first meeting is this week, the 25th 

and 26th, I believe. So they are off and running. 

Mr. PASTOR. I was going to ask you if your opinion was that they 

would do the work for 18 months, but I know you have to stay with 

the charter language, so I won’t ask you the questions. 

Mr. MILLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. PASTOR. What activities involving the Nuclear Waste Policy 

Act will your organization support in fiscal year 2011? 

Mr. MILLER. Three items I would mention. One is our responsibility for what is called the standard contracts, which basically 

means United States Government takes responsibility for used fuel 

and understands it takes responsibility for used fuel. The second 

is the Nuclear Waste Fund. And the third is the broad R&D responsibility for looking at a disposal site, an ultimate disposal site, 

for used fuel. 

Mr. PASTOR. Rodney. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I talked a little bit earlier about the broad 

list of activities that relate to the Used Nuclear Fuel Disposition 

Program, and I went over some of them. One of the new activities 

is to inform policy decisionmaking regarding the management of 

nuclear spent fuel and waste. What mechanism can you tell us, formal or informal, will be used to inform the Commission? 

Mr. MILLER. Again, we believe our responsibility is to respond to 

requests from the Commission, not proactively inform them. So we 

will respond to requests that the Blue Ribbon Commission comes 

to us with. We will coordinate the requests with, for example, EM, 

which certainly has—— 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. You have a lot of information at your command, a lot of institutional memory here. You are going to let them 

go and sort of reinvent the wheel here? There is quite a lot of information that has been gathered that would be, I think, extremely 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
29 

beneficial to their deliberations, determinations, and perhaps their 

eventual recommendations. 

Mr. MILLER. Well, we believe we will have the resources to respond to the requests we will get from the Blue Ribbon Commission from the point of view of tapping the scientific community as 

well as the Federal workforce. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Let me tackle, and let me do it respectfully 

of Mr. Fattah, for whom I have worked, this whole notion that this 

decision to close Yucca Mountain has somehow been ratified by a 

Presidential election. I mean, before we get too excited about the 

building of new nuclear reactors and, should we say, smaller 

versions, somebody needs to be focusing on what is going to happen 

to what is produced here. Either it is going to have to be reused, 

or it is going to have to be restored, or we are going to have to 

maintain it at a variety of different sites. 

You are familiar with all the things. You spent many years at 

Los Alamos. I mean, there is a lot going on out there. So I sort of 

worry here that we are—the whole issue of cradle to grave, we talk 

about the cradle because that is somewhat politically attractive, 

but we don’t talk about the grave. So I am not sure I need a reaction from you, but I feel very strongly about this, and I don’t view 

it in a partisan way. Huge amount of investment here, ratepayers, 

all sorts of things that people are counting on for some sort of a 

solution. 

I want to get your comments on—I assume you joined Deputy 

Secretary Poneman in Paris. I looked at his statement. Obviously 

we are all concerned about nuclear proliferation. What did you take 

away from that conference that related to the whole issue of financing? I have already commended the President for what he is doing. 

And President Sarkozy is looking for some sort of resources from 

the International Monetary Fund, but what did you come away 

with, the sort of bigger picture of financing? 

You look at some of our European allies, they are way ahead of 

the curve. And let me say parenthetically, you talk about vendors, 

we have sort of a Buy America policy around here, but my constituents often tell me at town meetings, we don’t make a lot around 

here. I know there is a notion that we have some great companies 

that are involved, as Congressman Simpson has mentioned, but a 

lot of the stuff that we are looking for, the components, actually we 

don’t make anymore. We have a workforce that is aging. I guess 

part of that conference focused on how we have a trained workforce 

for the future for whatever we build. 

What were some of your takeaways from Paris besides the securing of nuclear materials and smuggling and things which would obviously have catastrophic consequences? But did you come away 

with anything on the financing picture, what they are doing that 

perhaps we could emulate, or are they struggling the same way we 

are in terms of balancing risk of the companies, or even others that 

you mentioned? 

Mr. MILLER. The conference that you are referring to was an 

international conference; it didn’t focus at all on the French or the 

French experience. There were 65 countries represented from all 

over the world. It was actually more focused on aspiring nuclear 

countries than it was on countries such as France or Japan. There 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
30 

were several roundtables that discussed various aspects of nuclear 

energy. The financing part focused much more on how countries 

that are emerging that desire nuclear energy, how would they go 

about financing their first purchases of nuclear energy. So the financing focused on the World Bank, and it focused on those kinds 

of instruments that such countries would use. It didn’t focus so 

much on loan guarantees or the kind of thing that we are looking 

at here in our country. 

Another takeaway had to do with infrastructure. It is critically 

important that these countries understand that buying a reactor 

means also buying into the equivalent of a Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission, buying into all of the infrastructure associated with 

education of a workforce. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. And disposal. 

Mr. MILLER. And disposal. And disposal. 

So I think a takeaway for me, I think, is many countries were 

enthusiastic, some countries were quite enthusiastic, but other 

countries I thought left with a little realism about what they would 

be buying into if they were to become part of the nuclear energy 

world. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I am excited about the potential of what we 

could do in this country. I think we all are. I mean, that is nonpartisan, bipartisan, and I commend the administration. It just 

takes so long to get anything done around here. I mean, it is not 

just you, there is everything. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 

you have got all sorts of standards that have to be met, obviously. 

Those are important. But we are raising an expectation here, and 

I worry about our ability to deliver when we see what is happening 

in China with their progress—of course, they can do just about 

anything they want because they seem to accelerate, but in reality 

they will face disposal issues as well. They may be able to moderate the populace in terms of their apprehensions because of the 

nature of their government. But I appreciate your reaction to my 

question. Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. PASTOR. I am just going to announce that probably at 3:45, 

4 o’clock, we have three votes. So what I would like to do is not 

keep you any longer for this series of votes, so we will try to get 

as many questions and comments. 

Mr. FATTAH. This is my last question or comment for the day. 

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Fattah. 

Mr. FATTAH. I think the Ranking Member should understand 

that I actually support, I think almost in total, his view about 

Yucca Mountain, that there was a major investment, we had 

agreed that is where the depository would be. I supported that in 

every way. That needed to be demonstrated over my years here. 

I am just saying that it is not a surprise that we are here at this 

moment. There was an election contest in which this was a subject 

matter, and which the winning candidate said that the country was 

going to go into a different direction. So inasmuch as we are concerned about policy, we are also concerned about the American 

public not being cynical about the political process and how we go 

about moving things forward. 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
31 

So even though I don’t agree that we should move away from 

Yucca Mountain or that it would not have been the appropriate 

place, I just wanted to put on the record that it is not by happenstance that we have arrived at this moment, that there is a process 

that we all could see that led us to where we are right now. Thank 

you. 

Mr. PASTOR. Thank you. 

In some of the comments and some of the questions from the 

Members here, you probably got the sense there is some frustration 

in terms of over the years we have been here, you have seen administrations come, or you see Secretaries come in the same administration, and priorities change, and sometimes very quickly. 

And I will give you an example, the hydrogen fuel cell. A couple 

years ago the hydrogen fuel cell was the mantra. And then we have 

now a new administration, a new Secretary who said, well, I don’t 

think we ought to go there, but yet we invested money, and people 

invested time. 

I ask that question because here we have seen changes come, 

and sometimes very quickly, after we have spent a lot of money in 

doing the research. As I looked at your budget, you have a broad 

research agenda. When I looked at it, I said, wow, this is an aggressive agenda. But then I began to wonder, are we investing a 

lot into many things, and whether, knowing how things change, 

that maybe this Secretary ought to concentrate on a few things so 

that we can fund them for a period of time to make sure that the 

money is used more effectively. And so I would ask you to talk 

about your budget agenda in the context of my comments. 

Mr. MILLER. Yes. Thank you. 

So as I mentioned before, we went, in our country, from zero 

funding in nuclear energy R&D where now we have a nice healthy 

program of research. And my observation is the real competitive 

advantage we have is our intellectual capability. The national laboratories, the universities, small companies, we have some great 

capability here in our country, and we need to galvanize that in nuclear energy. 

So what we did in this budget is, first, there is one big component that talks about reactor designs, and it is both near term, all 

the way from loan guarantees through looking at reactor types that 

aren’t that different, significantly different, but like the one that 

was mentioned before that Mr. Gates is investing in, the Traveling 

Wave Reactor. We have ideas at the laboratories that are somewhat like the idea he has. It is really important, I think, that that 

portfolio of reactor designs include both near-term activities and 

long-term activities where we engage this intellectual capability 

that we have in this great country of ours. 

And then on the other side we are talking about fuel cycle. We 

are looking at opportunities to look at how can we use this used 

fuel and get more uranium utilization out of this used fuel? What 

are the ways in which we might be able to do that? And we have 

some time owing to the safety of dry cask storage—we have some 

time to look at that. And we are engaging some really smart people 

to start thinking again about that. 

And then in the middle, there are just so many things that cross. 

Structural materials. The material problems we are having in some 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
32 

of our reactors owing to embrittlement is because we haven’t 

stopped to basically understand the materials issues associated 

with some of these reactors. 

So we think we have thought this through very carefully of reactor designs, fuel cycles, and cross-cutting technologies like structures, like fuels, that go across these so that we can position the 

United States so that we won’t be here again looking back and saying, well, the whole world is ahead of us. We should leapfrog this 

world, And we have the capability of doing it. That is what our investment is intended to do. 

Mr. PASTOR. Thank you. 

Mike. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, just a couple of things. The Blue 

Ribbon Commission meets Thursday and Friday? 

Mr. MILLER. Yes, sir. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Is that open to the public; i.e., could I go? 

Mr. MILLER. Let’s see, if I remember correctly, for the agenda, a 

portion of the meeting is open to the public. But the agenda is on 

the Federal Register, so it says which ones are public and what 

part is public and what part is not. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Okay. Thank you. 

Has or will the administration submit legislation for amending 

the Energy Policy Act of 2005? And will that include waste confidence? 

Mr. MILLER. Okay. When you first asked the question, I thought 

you were referring to the part that dealt with NGNP. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Well, that and the waste confidence issue. 

Mr. MILLER. Okay. So on the legislation, as you know, Congressman, it deals with NGNP, has some verbiage in it that has kind 

of been overtaken by events. We need to get together soon in the 

administration to propose legislation that would correct some of 

those issues. 

I don’t know of any discussion about waste confidence and legislation related to waste confidence. So that question kind of takes 

me by surprise, and I would have to think about that. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Well, take the message back that we need to legislate waste confidence. If we don’t, we are going to bring the nuclear 

industry to a standstill, because if we don’t have a permanent geological repository, you can’t really say you have waste confidence. 

And the NRC is going to say—I am afraid anyway. 

Mr. MILLER. I understand. 

Mr. SIMPSON. One other thing. The defense authorization bill reduced the GPP, the general plant project, limit from $10 million to 

$5 million for NNSA labs in 2011. We supported a $10 million limit 

in this committee because it actually gives more flexibility to the 

labs to do some of the projects, and I have seen the results of it 

out in Idaho with some of the things that they have done. 

Do you support keeping the GPP limit at $10 million for the nonNNSA labs? 

Mr. MILLER. I do support that. And I believe Under Secretary 

Koonin said a similar thing for the Office of Science lab. 

Mr. SIMPSON. One last question. One of the very important programs that you are working on is the Light Water Reactor Sustainability program. Talk about the importance of that, the importance 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
33 

to our energy future, and what we hope to gain of that. And what 

are our 2011 goals for this program? 

Mr. MILLER. First, if the existing fleet of 104 reactors, if the vast 

majority of them, let’s say 100, have license extension for 60 

years—which seems like it is going to happen, half of them already 

have been approved by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission—then 

in the year 2029, the first of those will go off line, their 60-year 

life will be over, and the last one in 2050. So that is 20 percent 

of our electricity that will go off line—— 

Mr. SIMPSON. Of our green electricity. 

Mr. MILLER [continuing]. And 70 percent of our green electricity 

will go off line. Most proposals or most predictions of Gen III reactor deployment and even small module reactor deployment, it will 

be very difficult to make up that complete loss of the existing fleet. 

And so we think it is in the country’s interest to participate with 

industry on dealing with issues that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission will ask—if they were to ask for a further extension, a further license extension, up to, let’s say, 80 years. 

And so there are aging issues, materials issues, issues related to 

nondestructive evaluation. How would you, for example, use instruments to go in a reactor, portions of a reactor, internals, to try to 

assess in real time what is the behavior, how is it aging? 

We think it is extremely important that the Federal Government 

participate in this when it is sure that it is the more long-term 

issues and the issues that go across reactor types, so that it is not 

getting into private things or proprietary things, that kind of thing, 

with industry. So we think the program is extremely important. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Thank you. And thanks for the job you are doing. 

I look forward to working with you on these important projects for 

Idaho and for the country. 

Mr. PASTOR. Rodney. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. In terms of our R&D, how would you characterize our position in terms of research on advanced nuclear concepts? We talked in a previous hearing about some of the things 

that are happening abroad and appear to be accelerating abroad. 

Where are we? And how do we strengthen our position vis-a-vis 

what others may be doing? 

Mr. MILLER. We have some great ideas out there. I will just 

throw one out at you. A former colleague of mine—I used to be on 

the faculty at UC Berkeley—has an idea of using molten salt—that 

is not a brand new idea, but his approach is using molten salt with 

fuel elements that look like the fuel in NGNP. And it is a new concept of a reactor that really has a tremendous amount of potential. 

First, it could potentially use thorium as the fuel as opposed to 

uranium, which would greatly extend our supplies of nuclear fuel. 

Because it uses these tricell elements, it is probably going to get 

very high burn-up, very high uranium utilization out of it, and you 

can do it at higher temperatures, higher efficiency. 

See, it is one of these ideas where it is a game changer, it is not 

just an incremental change. And under advanced concepts, that is 

the kind of thing we want to do is to look at real game changers, 

bright new ideas. 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
34 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Are other countries looking at game changers as well? What do we know about other countries, what they are 

doing? We give credit to our scientists, but—— 

Mr. MILLER. I think, Congressman, we have been dealt a darn 

good hand, and the reason is we just have some really creative people, and we have the advantage or disadvantage, whichever way 

you want to say, of those other countries being kind of locked into 

decisions they have made. They have made long-term—— 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. We have made a few decisions we are 

locked into as well. 

Mr. MILLER. That is true, but we do have some flexibility of some 

new ideas in which we could deploy something new without necessarily being constrained by having decided, for example, we are 

going to deploy a large liquid metal reactor by year 20-whatever. 

This flexibility we need to take advantage of, and advanced concepts is going to help us do that. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. It may not be fair to say this, but we focused a little bit last week on the migration of some of our best 

minds abroad, I mean, literally establishing factories and technological centers, which I assume would be a critical mass for some 

pretty smart people; in other words, people we might have actually 

trained. 

Mr. MILLER. In nuclear we are going to turn that around. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. We are. You are giving us that vote of confidence? 

Mr. MILLER. Yes, sir. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Well, on that note, thank you very much, 

Mr. Chairman. And that is for the record, too. Thank you. 

Mr. PASTOR. What is interesting is that a couple of years ago we 

went to China, and we went to one of their—I guess equivalent to 

the lab in Beijing, and they were showing us the pebblebed reactor. 

And all the young scientists—when I first went in, I said, we are 

going to have a problem in the translation. That was my thought 

in terms of—— 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Everybody speaks English. 

Mr. PASTOR. Well, they spoke excellent English, and they are all 

trained and graduated from universities here in the United 

States—MIT, Stanford, Berkeley. It was very interesting to see 

how before they may have stayed here, and you would have found 

them working in industry here or labs here or universities here, 

but the migration now is that as we have trained them and educated them here, they have decided to go back to their home and 

now are doing well in terms of—in this case in China. So it was 

very interesting. 

Mr. Secretary, thank you very much. I look forward to seeing you 

again with the plan in hand. 

Mr. MILLER. Yes, sir. 

Mr. PASTOR. And don’t forget to tell the Blue Ribbon Commission 

that all alternatives include Yucca. 

Thank you very much for being here. 

This hearing is adjourned. 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
35 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 74 here 61780A.011
36 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 75 here 61780A.012
37 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 76 here 61780A.013
38 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 77 here 61780A.014
39 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 78 here 61780A.015
40 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 79 here 61780A.016
41 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 80 here 61780A.017
42 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 81 here 61780A.018
43 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 82 here 61780A.019
44 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 83 here 61780A.020
45 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 84 here 61780A.021
46 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 85 here 61780A.022
47 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 86 here 61780A.023
48 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 87 here 61780A.024
49 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 88 here 61780A.025
50 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 89 here 61780A.026
51 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 90 here 61780A.027
52 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 91 here 61780A.028
53 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 92 here 61780A.029
54 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 93 here 61780A.030
55 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 94 here 61780A.031
56 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 95 here 61780A.032
57 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 96 here 61780A.033
58 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 97 here 61780A.034
59 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 98 here 61780A.035
60 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 99 here 61780A.036
61 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 100 here 61780A.037
62 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 101 here 61780A.038
63 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 102 here 61780A.039
64 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 103 here 61780A.040
65 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 104 here 61780A.041
66 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 105 here 61780A.042
67 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 106 here 61780A.043
68 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 107 here 61780A.044
69 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 108 here 61780A.045
70 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 109 here 61780A.046
71 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 110 here 61780A.047
72 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 111 here 61780A.048
73 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 112 here 61780A.049
74 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 113 here 61780A.050
75 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 114 here 61780A.051
76 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 115 here 61780A.052
77 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 116 here 61780A.053
78 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 117 here 61780A.054
79 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 118 here 61780A.055

wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
(81) 

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 24, 2010. 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY FISCAL YEAR 2011 BUDGET 

WITNESS 

HON. STEVEN CHU, SECRETARY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Mr. PASTOR [presiding]. The committee will come to order. Good 

afternoon, Dr. Chu. Good afternoon, everyone. We have before us 

today Secretary of Energy, Dr. Steven Chu. He is here to present 

the administration’s fiscal year 2011 budget request for the Department of Energy. Mr. Secretary, congratulations on your first year 

and we look forward to your insights into this budget request. 

As the Nation continues to discuss the merits and structure of 

a comprehensive energy policy for the 21st century, the Department of Energy must take a leadership role in the transformation 

of our energy sector. I firmly believe and support the principle that 

innovation, technology, and research and development should be at 

the very core of our national effort to this end. I do believe that 

we can invent and invest our way out of our energy problems and 

that government should help lead the way. This is not to say that 

government is the answer. This is to say that government’s role 

must be structured to complement the role of the private sector. 

As the debate over the policies and initiatives for smarter energy 

consumption and a more robust energy mix continues, the ultimate 

outcome of that discussion will be irrelevant if strong leadership 

and fundamental management reforms are not forthcoming at the 

Department of Energy. This committee has been front and center 

in pushing the Department toward more robust management of its 

portfolio, including project management and cost estimating. 

Mr. Secretary, we hope you will take a strong leadership role in 

transforming these practices at the Department to ensure that the 

taxpayer gets the most of their hard-earned money. I would note 

that over 60 percent of the Department’s funding is associated with 

maintaining and securing the nuclear stockpile, and cleanup associated with the legacy of radioactive waste. 

While I understand that the Nuclear Posture Review is further 

delayed, this committee continues to insist on a comprehensive and 

enduring policy foundation for our nuclear arsenal. 

I am hopeful that this administration will answer the questions 

posed by the subcommittee in 2007, placing the requirements of its 

weapons complex in the context of our future military requirements. 

This subcommittee continues to have concern about the President’s decision regarding Yucca Mountain. Given the absence of a 

repository will affect not only our energy portfolio for the future, 

but also the cleanup of radioactive waste at DOE sites and disposal 

of spent fuel from military operations. Several of these sites are 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
82 

represented by members on this subcommittee. So please rest assured that we intend to be involved in any decisions affecting the 

disposal of spent nuclear fuel and defense waste. 

Mr. Secretary, I look forward to hearing from you today about 

the fiscal year 2011 budget request, how you will address the energy and national security challenges we face, and how your management plans will ensure efficient planning and execution. I expect we will be working together to address the challenges ahead, 

but I also again remind you that cooperation and respect is a twoway street. We will continue to have the dialogue. There will be 

differences and there will be concurrences. So we look forward to 

working with you in a cooperative effort to ensure the best budget 

result. 

Mr. Secretary, I would ask that you ensure that the hearing 

record responses to the questions for the record and any supporting 

information requested by the subcommittee are delivered in final 

form to the subcommittee no later than 4 weeks from the time you 

receive them. 

I also ask that if members have additional questions, they will 

submit for the record, and that they please do so to the subcommittee by 5:00 p.m. this afternoon. And with these opening 

comments, I would like to yield to our Ranking Member. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Dr. Chu, welcome back to the committee. I have served on this 

committee for most of my time in Congress. And I don’t think I 

have ever had less contact with an Energy Secretary or with your 

Department. Even correspondence I have sent you on Yucca Mountain and on your proposed reprogramming of funds goes unanswered until the day before you are scheduled to appear before us. 

While the timing may be coincidental, it sets a tone that you only 

need to respond to the committee to forestall criticism. In the future, I hope we can build a more constructive, positive relationship. 

I know you are busy, but that lack of contact makes me wonder if 

you understand our role as appropriators. 

As an example, I note your op-ed penned in yesterday’s Wall 

Street Journal where you wrote, and I quote: And with the new authority granted by the President’s 2011 budget request, the Department of Energy will be able to support between 6 and 9 new reactors, end of quotation marks. 

Mr. Secretary, let me be perfectly clear. There will be no authority granted unless Congress grants it. The dollars we appropriate 

are not yours, nor the President’s, but belong to the people we represent. This committee by law will determine how they are spent. 

Moving on to the matter before us, I am generally pleased by the 

priorities in your 2011 request, especially the Defense portion, ‘‘Renewables and the Nuclear Energy Portfolio,’’ which signals support 

for near-term expansion of this critical clean power source. 

Mr. Secretary, I am also gratified to see the request for $36 billion in additional loan guarantee authority for nuclear power 

plants. But I ask why the administration has failed to include the 

$360 million that the committee must set aside to cover this new 

authority. 

That omission, plus an ill-considered repetition of a proposal 

which was rejected by Congress last year to reopen contributions 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
83 

to the Uranium Enrichment Decommissioning and Decontamination Fund leaves this subcommittee with a $560 million hole. By 

any gauge, that is a challenge that will be difficult to address. 

While I am generally supportive of your priorities, I regret that 

the request is nearly 7 percent more than last year. Mr. Secretary, 

more than 92 percent of the Stimulus Act funding you were given 

last year has yet to be spent. I know there is a difference between 

spending and obligating. Those are borrowed dollars that have 

raised our Federal debt to unprecedented levels. Frankly, my constituents want to see some restraint in the size of government, not 

continued growth. They want private sector jobs, not public sector 

ones. 

Mr. Chairman, this may be the only time we have you before us. 

I must request your indulgence to ask once again about Yucca 

Mountain. Mr. Secretary, this subcommittee and the public are 

owed answers on recent developments surrounding that license application. Last year’s House-Senate conference provided clear, unambiguous language to the Department to continue the license application through this fiscal year. And last year, the full House 

voted overwhelmingly not to eliminate funding for it; yet the Department has filed to withdraw the license application ‘‘with prejudice’’ in quotation marks. 

If this is approved, no future administration will be able to refile 

the license application, even if it is found by the Blue Ribbon Commission or others, that the Yucca Mountain repository is truly the 

best option for long-term waste storage. This decision could quite 

possibly expose U.S. taxpayers to billions of dollars in liabilities. 

And it cedes our international leadership role in the scientific and 

technical development of a deep geological waste repository to 

countries like Sweden and Switzerland that are actively working 

for it on a specific site. This administration has unilaterally halted 

the program, I believe; established unsound science, and has done 

so with absolutely zero consultation with Congress. 

And I continue to be disturbed by the Department’s, quote ‘‘game 

plan,’’ as you articulated in a recent conversation with the Wall 

Street Journal’s managing editor, Robert Thompson. Permit me to 

read one of your quotations. And I quote, ‘‘While it is fair to say 

that the whole history of Yucca Mountain was more political than 

scientific, but also very truthfully I can say that given what we 

know today, the repository looks less and less good. So now we are 

in a situation where it can’t move forward. When Yucca Mountain 

was being established in the early 1980s, the idea was that the nuclear industry was going to tail off. Now because of climate change, 

we do want to restart the nuclear industry. Because of that, the 

statutory limit of Yucca Mountain would have been used up in the 

next couple of decades. So we need to take a fresh look at everything.’’ 

Perhaps I come from the old school in which $9 billion is actually 

a lot of money. But I understand your rationale. We have known 

for years that a second repository was going to be needed, but that 

shouldn’t make us throw away billions of taxpayer and ratepayer 

dollars dedicated to building the first one. And we have known for 

years that other geological formations might be even better for a 

repository. But the consensus scientific opinion was that Yucca 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
84 

Mountain was a good choice. From where I am sitting, the scientific consensus hasn’t changed one bit, nor has the expressed will 

of Congress or this subcommittee. It is politics that has changed 

and that is leading the administration to throw away the work of 

decades, adding to the cynicism that comes when politics trumps 

sound science. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Secretary. 

Secretary CHU. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member 

Frelinghuysen. Let me go through my prepared remarks as quickly 

as I can and get to the question-and-answer period. So I want to 

discuss the budget request from the Department of Energy. 

President Obama stated that the Nation that leads the world in 

creating new energy and clean sources will be the Nation that 

leads in the 21st economy. And this is primarily what this budget 

is about. I couldn’t agree more with that. It is going to create new, 

clean energy jobs, expand the frontiers of science, reduce nuclear 

dangers, and help curb the carbon pollution that threatens our 

planet. The budget request includes an investment of $2.4 billion in energy efficiency and renewable energy. And through this budget, we 

are going to increase research, demonstration, deployment of wind, 

solar, geothermal energies, make buildings and homes more efficient, develop energy-efficient vehicles, and pursue carbon capture 

and sequestration. 

Our budget request also includes an additional 36 billion in loan 

guarantee authority in the nuclear power sector, as well as 495 

million for nuclear energy research and development. 

The Department of Energy is also focused on the safety and security of our people. The Department is requesting a significant increase, more than 550 million, in new funding for the NNSA Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation program to help meet the President’s goals of securing all vulnerable nuclear materials around the 

world in 4 years. 

We also ensure the safety, security and effectiveness of our nuclear stockpile. With the $7 billion in funds we have requested, we 

can upgrade our infrastructure that has been allowed to decay in 

the past decade, support the work of our national labs, and recruit 

the skilled workforce we will need. 

The budget also protects public health and safety by supporting 

commitments to clean up the environmental legacy of the Nation’s 

nuclear weapons program. I have included a detailed description of 

these and other key programs in my prepared statement for the 

record. 

But during this time today, I want to focus on one of my key priorities in the Department, the integrated set of research and development initiatives that are critical to accelerating clean energy 

breakthroughs, the Energy Innovation Hubs, Advanced Research 

Projects Agency-Energy, and the Energy Frontier Research Centers. I believe it will take all three of these efforts to discover and 

commercialize energy breakthroughs we all need. 

So let me describe each of them briefly. 

The Energy Frontier Research Centers constitute small groups of 

researchers focused on breakthroughs in science. They are mostly 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
85 

university-led teams working to solve specific scientific problems 

that are blocking clean energy development. For example, one 

EFRC is working to improve our scientific understanding of the 

chemical reactions in battery electrodes. When you think of the 

EFRCs, think about a collaborative team of scientists such as Watson and Crick who gave us the structure of DNA and the protein 

crystallographers in that same research unit that founded molecular biology. As one of my colleagues have said, the partnership of 

Watson and Crick, represented marvelous resonance between two 

minds in a state where 1 plus 1 didn’t equal 2, it equaled more like 

10. So the Department proposes expanding the Energy Frontier Research Centers to capture emerging opportunities and new materials in basic research for energy needs. 

ARPA-E, the Advanced Research Project Agency-Energy, funds 

small groups focused on breakthroughs in technology. This is primarily in the private sector. These are using highly entrepreneurial 

funding models to support specific technologies where short-term 

R&D efforts could lead to game-changing results. 

For example, the ARPA-E project is developing a technology to 

capture emissions from power plants that were inspired by the way 

the human body captures and disposes of carbon dioxide. When you 

think of ARPA-E, you think of the visionary risk-takers launching 

new technologies, startup companies out of their garages, of Bill 

Hewlett and David Packard pioneering a new audio oscillator that 

ended up jump-starting an entire new industry in what is now 

called Silicon Valley. The fiscal year 2011 budget request includes 

300 million for ARPA-E. 

The Energy Innovation Hubs are different than these other two. 

They are large, multidisciplinary, highly collaborative teams of scientists and engineers working over a longer period of time to 

achieve specific high-priority goals. For example, one of the hubs 

is focused on cost-effective ways to create transportation fuels directly from sunlight. They are led by top researchers with the 

knowledge, resources, and authority to nimbly guide the efforts, 

seizing new opportunities or closing off unproductive lines of research. When you think of the hubs, think of large mission-oriented 

research efforts such as the Manhattan Project at Los Alamos or 

the type of projects that AT&T Bell Laboratories, which discovered 

the transistor. 

The Department will continue funding three innovation hubs introduced in fiscal year 2010. But in addition, we are proposing a 

new hub to dramatically improve batteries and energy storage. We 

don’t know where the big energy breakthroughs are going to come 

from, but we do know what has worked before. To reach our energy 

goals, we must take a portfolio approach in R&D, pursuing several 

research strategies that have proven to be successful in the past. 

But I want to be clear: This is not a kitchen-sink approach. This 

is coordinated, prioritized, with a full view of where we are going 

to have to put these pieces together. Discovering new energy solutions will take smart collaborators pushing the frontiers of science. 

It will take risk-takers working out of their garages. It will take 

robust research teams on a mission. And it will take a Department 

of Energy that brings together the different parts of this research 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
86 

strategy to accelerate the innovation process. That is my unwavering commitment to you. 

I am looking forward to working with you as we pursue new solutions to the energy problem and create a generation of clean energy jobs. I will be happy to take questions at this time. 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
87 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 134 here 61780A.056
88 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 135 here 61780A.057
89 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 136 here 61780A.058
90 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 137 here 61780A.059
91 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 138 here 61780A.060
92 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 139 here 61780A.061
93 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 140 here 61780A.062
94 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 141 here 61780A.063
95 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 142 here 61780A.064
96 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 143 here 61780A.065
97 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 144 here 61780A.066
98 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 145 here 61780A.067
99 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 146 here 61780A.068
100 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 147 here 61780A.069
101 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 148 here 61780A.070
102 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 149 here 61780A.071
103 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 150 here 61780A.072
104 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 151 here 61780A.073
105 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 152 here 61780A.074
106 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 153 here 61780A.075
107 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 154 here 61780A.076
108 

Mr. PASTOR. I have been told that there is a possibility that in 

the very near future, within 5 to 15 minutes, there may be a call 

to vote. So we will start with some questions and then we will 

leave to go vote and come back to continue. 

I have a request and, if there is objection obviously I won’t. But 

Congressman Wamp is the Ranking Member on a MILCON that is 

going to start a hearing. He would like to ask one question before 

he leaves. Mr. Wamp. 

Mr. WAMP. Thank you for your courtesy. And it is timely because 

Secretary Chu just spent almost 2 full days in Oak Ridge and saw 

several aspects of what is done there. And I am grateful for your 

time and enjoyed being there with you. So did our Governor and 

Congressman Lincoln Davis, and he can follow up on this when I 

go to the other hearing. 

But I wanted to ask you a couple of questions. I know the public 

knew of most of what you did there. But some of what you did 

there, the public doesn’t know and shouldn’t know. But is there 

anything that you saw or learned in Oak Ridge that in any way 

opened your incredibly educated eyes to anything? Was there anything that you were struck by after seeing the really excellent multipurpose site? The national security missions are certainly grateful 

for the budget request on nonproliferation activities to meet this 

administration’s priorities. Yet, clearly, what is done there will assist in a major way the world being a safer place. After we provided 

the build-up for a long period of time, we are certainly involved in 

meeting whatever the NPR recommends and we are grateful for 

that. 

Clearly in the science arena, you all have made a big commitment just in the last 15 months in certain areas, that the Oak 

Ridge National Laboratory is working on. I know you gave a long 

talk on climate change. While I don’t agree with a lot of the objective, it was certainly a talk that the scientists at the Oak Ridge 

National Laboratory really keyed into and agree with, obviously, a 

lot of what you said. 

I was also fascinated at dinner the other night when we talked 

about the research programs at ARPA-E and your priorities there. 

And I want you to go into that today so that the subcommittee and 

the professional staff can fully understand what your priorities are 

and why you need what you need from the subcommittee. 

Secretary CHU. Thank you, Congressman. Very quickly. I visited 

two facilities, Y–12, which is part of the NNSA laboratory complex. 

And I visited Oak Ridge National Laboratory. And I was struck by 

the fact that in both sites there were an amazing number of Americans working there, a very dedicated workforce on two different aspects. In Y–12, I saw a new place that was being used to consolidate the nuclear materials in a much safer way, so that you can 

reduce the footprint at Oak Ridge, you can actually reduce the expenditures, because just the guarding this material was becoming 

exorbitantly expensive. 

It is a place where we also do a lot of the refurbishment and dismantlement of our nuclear weapons. This is a very important part 

of our continuing national security. And, again, amazing workforce. 

And Oak Ridge National Laboratory is one of the leading national laboratories in the Office of Science. As you know, we exVerDate Mar 15 2010 07:51 Dec 03, 2010 Jkt 061780 PO 00000 Frm 00108 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A780P2.XXX A780P2

wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
109 

tended that for another 5 years because of its outstanding management and operation. It is a center for a wide range of activities. It 

is the leader in the world in advanced computing and the use of 

advanced computing to do all sorts of things that will play an integral role in the economic prosperity of the United States. 

I did give a long talk. I perhaps spent a fifth of my time on climate change, only to say that contrary to some people’s beliefs, the 

evidence of human-caused climate change is mounting, not decreasing. I hope I spent most of my time talking about the economic opportunities the United States has in becoming a leader in this evolution towards sustainable energy. We have a chance and, again, 

it is because of the great innovation machine in the research universities, in the national laboratory, in the private sector especially. When guided very gently, that great innovation machine can 

develop leading technologies that can be used at home, but, equally 

important, that can be exported around the world. 

So in my talk there, I was focusing on having the United States 

seize those opportunities for prosperity tomorrow and the years 

and decades ahead. 

Mr. WAMP. ARPA-E? 

Secretary CHU. ARPA-E, is a new way of funding in the very 

short term, 2 years, 3 years maximum. It is a push where the program directors in ARPA-E are being proactive, just like in DARPA, 

and they are saying what areas in the technology sector are ripe 

for a little push to really break open development. We are funding 

initiatives that we believe can be home runs. So we are not going 

for signals. If you swing for home runs, you will strike out. But if 

you hit a home run and a grand slam, then it really gives us a very 

different result. It creates new industries. 

So a lot of the activities we are funding at ARPA are of that ilk. 

It is very short term, specific. It is sort of prefunding that we hope 

in 2 or 3 years the private sector will pick up. 

Mr. WAMP. Is the stimulus money for ARPA-E actually spent, obligated under Mr. Frelinghuysen’s question? Why don’t you tell us 

that? 

Secretary CHU. Yes. So in terms of the stimulus money for 

ARPA-E, the first round of proposals have gone out. The second 

round, in terms of all of the stimulus money and appropriations, 

in answer to that question, we were given 36.7 billion. Right now 

we have obligated 26 billion. We will go to 30 billion by June. By 

the end of fiscal year 2010 we will have obligated all of it. A large 

fraction of the selection has already been done. Under contract, 

about 12 billion. The costing is slower in part because of the costing of any of these areas; in particular some of the weatherization 

grants, the State energy programs, the ECBG. And some of these 

programs, you give them to States and we try to help the States 

set up—and many of these things, they too had to go out for proposals. 

And so what we are doing is we are helping the States. There 

are some excellent States who are costing these at a very good clip. 

Ohio is a shining example of one such State. And there are other 

States that are less experienced in this, but we are trying to help 

them. 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
110 

I think we are partnering with the States. We are trying to get 

that money out. But in general, I think we are on our schedule to 

cost the money as rapidly as we can. We actually had an obligation 

schedule and a costing schedule with some of the programs. The 

ramp-up is now going very quickly. It is being well used, and it will 

be out there and costed in short time. 

Mr. PASTOR. Thank you, Mr. Wamp. 

Mr. Secretary, as I understand, things have changed again. Now, 

the vote will probably be at 2:30. We have changed again. The 

issue is that sometime this afternoon, the supplemental is going to 

be on the floor, and once that is on the floor, we will have to adjourn. 

Secretary CHU. I understand. 

Mr. PASTOR. So what I am going to try to do is give the members 

at least 5 minutes to ask a question. So we are going to try to accommodate as many members as we can, not knowing what time 

the supplemental comes on and when we have to adjourn. The reason I am going to ask these questions is that I am kind of learning 

on the job. But I have seen where assistant secretaries and other 

people from the Department have come forth. Usually we lead off 

when you had a requirement—I will give you an example from yesterday. 

We had Assistant Secretary Miller here. In the legislation that 

was passed last year, it said that a report on the hubs will be delivered no later than 60 days after enactment. And so I mentioned to 

the Assistant Secretary, that sometime in January that was due. 

And based on his expression, he was a little bit surprised to know 

that that was something that was required. 

But he also had another commitment to the committee, the strategic report that was due also around January, and he apologized 

profusely. He was hoping to have it here, but no plan in hand. 

In 2007, I remember on the subcommittee we asked NNSA for 

the Nuclear Strategy for the 21st Century, and they said it was 

coming. And then they said, ‘‘Well, now, we may have the Nuclear 

Posture Review that was promised last November,’’ that that is 

coming. And so it is these series of ‘‘it is coming, have faith.’’ 

Well, as I told you at the very beginning, my intent and I think 

a lot of the members of the subcommittee share this, was to look 

at these reports and see what the future was, where we were going, 

so that we can make decisions as we planned the 2011 budget. And 

so it is for us to be able to get the backup, the information, so we 

can make decisions that are rational. And now I think we have a 

bigger mandate since our administration has told us to be fiscally 

responsible, to make sure that the moneys are invested in the right 

way. 

So I would ask you and recommend highly to you that you may 

want to talk to some of your Assistant Secretaries, Under Secretaries and the various personnel that you have. It is very important that they fulfill their obligation and bring in these reports to 

us, and the quicker the better. So that we can go on with our work, 

looking at your 2011 budget, and making decisions that are based 

on data that they have provided to us. 

Secretary CHU. Well, I don’t know if it is any small comfort, I 

will add my apologies. I knew about that obligation and we slipped. 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
111 

And I will go back and make sure we redouble our efforts and get 

that back to you. We have slipped on that. There has been a lot 

of effort. These hubs are new. It is getting a very clear idea that 

it is very important to start these in the right way. So I’ve put a 

lot of direct, personal effort because it is something I take very seriously. So in the startups of the hubs, it wasn’t clear, just as it 

probably was not clear for a little while. I hope to clarify that as 

best as possible to you and the other members of the committee 

and the staff of this committee. It was also not clear in the Department of Energy for a little while and we had to go round and round 

and round. And I had to essentially develop with my team exactly 

what we mean. 

But we will take our responsibilities and our duties to you and 

this committee very seriously. And also, just along the apology 

part, certainly I misspoke in the Wall Street Journal article 

about—— 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. We do read. They are usually pretty accurate. 

Secretary CHU. In the Wall Street Journal article about our 

budget request, it is a request. But I think the Ranking Member 

will hopefully support me on that request. But it is a request and 

we—even I know that. So that I apologize that that slipped. I 

didn’t catch it. 

Mr. PASTOR. With a misrepresentation, I guess, on the reporter. 

Secretary CHU. No, no. Whatever I wrote. 

Mr. PASTOR. I am trying to get you a way out of this one. Rodney, as I understand now, the supplemental will be brought up 

after this series of votes. So we are going to clarify it, so as we 

leave we will know where we are at. Rodney. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I don’t need to 

reiterate my unhappiness. I am just wondering, I have a few questions and you may want to bring a few reenforcements up to join 

you. I would like to clear up some matters relative to the legal authority for some of your actions relative to Yucca. 

Mr. Secretary, Section 304 of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act establishes the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management which 

will be headed by a director. Your budget request materials very 

clearly state that you are terminating the office. Are you requesting 

an amendment to the Nuclear Waste Policy Act? 

Secretary CHU. No. I felt that this was something I discussed 

with general counsel in my office as to how to interpret that. And 

we respectfully believe that it is an authority in the Department 

of Energy that we can reallocate—— 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. The office, as you are aware, was established by statute. I don’t think you can do it unilaterally. 

Secretary CHU. Well, all I can say is I am not a legal expert in 

this matter. But I did talk with our general counsel on it at some 

length. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I raise the issue. This is why some basic 

communication would help, despite the political dynamic and the 

determination that the White House is ironclad. You do have to 

have some statutory authority to do it. 

On March 10th, the Department sent a Notice of Expected Separation to more than 150 DOE employees who may lose their jobs 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
112 

as a result of the administration’s Yucca Mountain policy. This 

puts them on notice that workforce restructuring opportunities may 

be available to them. It is a kind way to put it, including jobs in 

another part of the DOE. You are aware of this notice? 

Secretary CHU. Yes. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Yes, of course. And are you aware of section 

302 of our fiscal year 2010 act? Or maybe somebody behind you is. 

Secretary CHU. Yes. Yes. We are seeking to reprogram the funds 

so that given the present administration’s intent to close down 

Yucca Mountain, that given the expense of it, we thought it would 

be prudent to begin and to reprogram those funds. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Let me just read from that section. And I 

quote, ‘‘None of the funds appropriated by this act may be used to 

develop or implement a workforce restructuring plan that covers 

employees of the Department of Energy.’’ All within quotation 

marks. 

Now, I have asked the lawyers at the GAO to give me their preliminary opinion on this provision. But I am sort of looking for 

yours. And you are using fiscal year 2010 funds to restructure the 

Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. And what is 

your authority for doing it? 

Secretary CHU. Again, this is—— 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I don’t want to get into moral authority. I 

am wondering what your legal authority is. 

Secretary CHU. Absolutely. So on matters of legal authority, 

again, I look to the general counsel on this. And so we would be 

happy to discuss it, but again this is something where I was under 

the impression and advised that we, of course, needed to inform 

this committee and Congress of our intent to do this. But, I was 

told it was within our capability. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Some think that this provision only applies 

to the Defense nuclear facilities because of its original links to section 3161 of the fiscal year 1993 Defense authorization bill. 

But a defense nuclear facility is defined in the act and I quote, 

‘‘includes,’’ in quotation mark, ‘‘a nuclear waste storage or disposal 

facility that is under the control or jurisdiction of the Secretary,’’ 

end of quotation. That sounds pretty much like Yucca Mountain. I 

assume you would agree. 

I think we need some clarity here. I know that determination has 

been made but quite honestly, I don’t think you have the statutory 

authority to do it. 

Secretary CHU. Well, I think this would require a longer discussion, you and I and our staffs on that. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. We will have that. I welcome that. 

Secretary CHU. Okay. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. And I think, quite honestly, public opinion 

is behind having it, certainly in relation to the Blue Ribbon Commission that the Chairman and I have talked about. That always 

ought to be on the table. I know the word is out it has been eliminated. But in reality that is not our read there, nor is it in the statute which I cited there. 

Secretary CHU. Okay. I am misunderstanding what you were 

saying because I was on an earlier comment. If the discussion is 

what the Blue Ribbon Commission—— 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
113 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. That is one discussion. But I think to some 

extent if you move unilaterally, you are actually violating section 

3161 of that 1993 Defense Authorization Act. Obviously we are 

going to see what we can do to get a little more clarity. And I welcome the discussion with you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. ISRAEL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Secretary, I want to 

thank you for the work you are doing. Your Department has had 

a legacy of several decades I believe of unfilled potential, and I believe you are changing that. You are changing it in your management style, you are changing it your expertise, and you are changing it with new investments. So thank you for that. 

I know we are going to go to votes fairly soon, so I will ask a 

very quick question. I am going to dispense with the wind-up and 

get right to the pitch. You and I have had conversations in the past 

about PACE bonds, Property Assessed Clean Energy bonds. You 

recognize that energy efficiency is low-hanging fruit to displace oil 

almost immediately. You also recognize that the best way of achieving that energy efficiency is to allow people to get a faster return 

on investment. And one good way of doing that is to incentivize 

local governments to help people finance those energy-efficiency 

retrofits in deployment of renewable energy, whether it is an individual homeowner or a major commercial property developer. 

My question is—I have asked this to Secretary Johnson and Secretary Souza as well. I am going to pose it to you and then ask if 

you and I could follow up. I believe that the big game-changer in 

this would simply be for the Department of Energy to apply its existing loan guarantee authorities to guarantee local financing, to 

guarantee that when a municipality goes into the bond market to 

finance those retrofits, that the full faith and credit of the United 

States Government is behind those financings. 

We passed that language in the climate change bill in the House. 

I am not sure you need an act of Congress to do that. You have 

the authority to simply say that some of your loan guarantee authority will apply to PACE bonds and other local financing. 

So I am asking you today to give that deeper consideration. I 

know that there are some theories in the Department, but when 

can we have a conversation so that we can get to a decision by you 

on applying some of that loan guarantee authority to PACE bonds 

and other local financing mechanisms? 

Secretary CHU. Congressman, first, yes, I am a big fan of the 

PACE mechanism of funding, upfront cash so homeowners and 

even businesses can do retrofits that will prevent out-of-pocket expenses and actually save them money on a month-to-month basis. 

We are looking at this—I am being assaulted now with a lot of 

legal questions. 

In some sense I should have my younger brother, the lawyer, 

here. In any case, I have asked whether we, within our authority, 

can do this or not. But I do agree that it is something that we are 

very enthusiastic about and we would invite you over to the Department of Energy, so we can talk about that. 

Mr. ISRAEL. I would like to have that conversation and also some 

certainty as to when the lawyers are going to give you an answer. 

I know it has been churning, but if we can do a little less churning 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
114 

and a little more producing it would be good. If you can prioritize 

that, I would appreciate it and look forward to following up with 

you personally. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Simpson. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for being 

here, Secretary. I appreciate it very much. 

Let me say first of all, I appreciate the administration’s response 

to the nuclear energy budget in this budget that you proposed. I 

see many administrations come through that say they support nuclear energy. Then when the budget comes in, it doesn’t seem to 

do that. This is the first one that I have seen that actually looks 

like they are serious about nuclear energy. So I thank you for that. 

It is very important. 

I told you I wasn’t going to ask you anything about Yucca Mountain, and I am not; but I will make a statement and you can respond if you want to. You don’t have to. The white elephant sitting 

in the room back there is—we all know why it is closing. Nobody 

wants to say it, but we all know why it is closing. It has nothing 

to do with science or anything else. It is just the reality. And I get 

it. It is going to close. But I do have one complaint. You are seeking 

to withdraw the license application. I understand why you are 

doing that. What I don’t understand is why you are seeking to 

withdraw it with prejudice. Which means that some future administration, some future Congress, when we are all gone, can’t decide 

those guys back in 2000 knew what they were doing and this 

maybe is a good place to put it. 

Now, the Blue Ribbon Commission is not a siting commission. It 

is a process commission to look at how we are going to deal with 

this stuff. But we all agree that at some point in time we are going 

to need a geological repository. You said that last year. At some 

point in time, we are going to have to have some siting commission, 

some future administration, some future Congress, whoever, is 

going to have to have a siting commission. 

Why not leave everything on the table instead of trying to tie the 

hands—and, in fact, this doesn’t really tie the hands. What it does 

is just make it more expensive, because it just means you cannot 

reapply for the same license application. They could say we are 

going to expand Yucca Mountain. It is a different license application, and we can apply for it. All that withdrawing with prejudice 

says is you are going to have to go through some additional steps, 

maybe reducing the size of it, maybe expanding the size of it, 

change it somehow so it is a different license. That just means it 

adds cost to it. So I just don’t understand why you would withdraw 

it with prejudice. 

Having said that, I think what Ranking Member Frelinghuysen 

was saying was the ability of the Department of Energy to discontinue the OCRWM division, a division that was created by Congress, by statute, is questionable. And so we probably need some 

legal clarification or at least some discussions with you on that. 

Having said all that, will you guarantee me that it is the intent 

of the Department of Energy to meet the milestones in the Governor’s agreement to the State of Idaho, and does that include having all the SNF removed from the State of Idaho by the year 2035? 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
115 

Secretary CHU. So in answer to your last question, the answer 

is a very simple ‘‘yes.’’ We intend to fulfill our obligation. The reason we are withdrawing with prejudice is so that we give a very 

clear signal this administration does not intend to proceed, so we 

move on with it. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Are you going to blow it up? It is a big hole in the 

ground. We have abandoned mines that we try to take care of. Are 

they going to put cement over it? 

Secretary CHU. None of the above. 

Mr. SIMPSON. I think it is a pretty clear indication that you have 

made. I don’t think you have to withdraw with prejudice. I mean, 

you said we ain’t going to pursue it. 

Anyway, one other question. Loan guarantees. I appreciate the fact that you put out the $8 billion in the conditional loan guarantees for the new reactors. It is a huge step forward. As you know, 

for front-end enrichment facilities, there are proposed loan guarantees that are currently before the Department of Energy. I talked 

with the Under Secretary of the loan guarantee program, the director of the loan guarantee program. There have been applications 

that have been going on for about 18 months. His goal is to try to 

reduce that to 4 to 6 months. 

Any idea when we are going to see any type of results from the 

loan guarantee on the front-end enrichment? And I also applauded 

your decision yesterday with the 45 million that you have committed to USEC, at Oak Ridge and so on. I think that is the right 

step. I don’t think these companies have to be in competition with 

one another. The fact is we need all technologies. 

Secretary CHU. Yes, I agree with that. And what we are doing 

is we are proceeding on the two front-end loan guarantee applications. They are on different timetables. One is not holding up the 

other. We are trying to work and finalize arrangements so that we 

can finance both of them. I think that is proceeding forward. So, 

in fact, if what we hope is to restart the nuclear industry, we will 

need both. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Could you tell me how the credit subsidies are determined in the loan guarantee program? 

Secretary CHU. Very, very complicated issue. It depends on the 

financial stability of the assets of the company; in case of default, 

what the Federal Government could put liens on. These are complex determinations on the bond rating, if you will, that accompany 

many other things, the assets. And then we determine a range. 

And then through discussions with OMB, a credit subsidy is finally 

determined. 

Mr. PASTOR. Thank you. Mr. Davis. 

Mr. DAVIS. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. And, Mr. Secretary, thank you for being here today. My father always told me 

if you want to hear a sermon, be sure you have a preacher that is 

preaching it. And if you want someone to operate your farm, be 

sure you get a farmer. Now, I use those two analogies for a reason. 

If you want someone to be the head of the Agency for Energy Research and Development, get a scientist and someone who has been 

there and done that and knows what they are doing. 

I am pleased for one of the few very first times, we have a Noble 

Laureate and someone who gets it. Someone who is willing to quesVerDate Mar 15 2010 07:51 Dec 03, 2010 Jkt 061780 PO 00000 Frm 00115 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A780P2.XXX A780P2

wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
116 

tion even what may be going on in the laboratories, if necessary, 

and to be sure that those individuals we have tasked with certain 

responsibilities are fulfilling those responsibilities. 

I have been impressed with your leadership of this Department 

and I am sure that in the future we will even be more impressed 

as you continue to work to be sure that America’s energy needs and 

our national security needs will be met. 

I hear a lot about climate change being discussed. In my district, 

it is a very rural district, and there will be folks who challenge me 

on all cases, generally: Climate change is not occurring; there are 

just changes in certain cycles. And I say, ‘‘So you believe that it is 

a cyclical process?’’ ‘‘Yep.’’ ‘‘So you think we go through cycles on 

the Earth and therefore the temperatures change.’’ They say, 

‘‘yeah.’’ And I say, ‘‘So you believe in climate change.’’ ‘‘Oh, yeah, 

but I don’t believe man has anything to do with it.’’ And then you 

say, ‘‘Well, if we are talking about an energy policy, climate 

change, you are pretty happy that we are talking about removing 

the hold from our throat that foreign countries have on us that are 

supplying us with energy.’’ 

So, should we call this an energy policy? Should we shift the title 

of what we are doing? Because everyone wants cheaper energy. 

My wife and I built a house many years ago when we put a splitunit electric system in it. The air handler was in the basement and 

the outside condenser was outside. And then natural gas came, and 

we put a natural gas system in. And then that ran out because 

they were using the wells in the area—I am getting to energy efficiency. And then when the natural gas ran out, we put in another 

propane. And eventually, about 2 years ago, we put in a high-efficiency electric unit that has saved us 65 percent or better of the 

energy we consumed the last 30 years in that house, on an average 

annual basis, if you look at the kilowatts that we use per month 

by using the highly efficient unit. 

So for me, I think there are many, many parts of the puzzle 

when we talk about becoming closer to energy independent, and becoming more and more economically secure, and having more national security as we look in the energy policy that brings us there. 

So from where I am sitting, I am looking at someone like you 

that has the experience, has the knowledge. Where do you see our 

country being a decade from today as it relates to all of the proposals we are seeing in the area of energy? And what do you expect 

our labs to be able to do to make us more energy independent and 

less dependent on nations who may not be our friend? 

Secretary CHU. Well, I agree with you. I think the lowest-hanging fruit is to promote energy efficiencies. Show homeowners, show 

individuals, show companies, how to decrease their energy usage so 

they save money and create incentives and really show this can be 

done. 

I do this personally in every home I’ve lived in. Well, there is one 

that was built very recently that I didn’t have to do much. In every 

other home that was older I personally, with my own hands, 

weatherized these homes, putting insulation in, and I got huge energy savings immediately—and a more comfortable home. 

And so I think that is one of the things. In 10 years’ time we 

hope we will have then piloted successfully and deployed at scale 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
117 

energy-efficiency programs that homeowners can immediately start 

saving money using finance mechanisms so there is no out-of-pocket cost, but on a monthly basis they are saving money. I think we 

want to do the same in industries, factories, and commercial buildings. 

So these are some of the things that we want to push as hard 

as possible. We also want to develop and push the continuation of 

cleaner forms of energy, to develop cleaner ways of using fossil fuel 

as we develop renewable energy. 

So I see within 10 years a growth of wind, I see solar 

photovoltaics dropping at least by a factor of 2, hopefully a factor 

of 3 in price. Factor 4, magic will occur. But then, without subsidy, 

everyone will put it on their roof. I see batteries that will have 

twice the energy density of today’s batteries, so we can have plugin hybrids at a massive scale. In 10 years, we begin to massively 

deploy—it is simply, again, saving more money because you can 

plug your car in, and if we have batteries that are compact and 

could last 15 years, that were at the target price we want, you are 

driving your car in the first 40–50 miles with maybe three times 

less cost and decreasing our oil dependency. In 10 years’ time, what 

I see in the battery technology, I think this will happen. 

Mr. DAVIS. I think also, as I see the increasing of potential loan 

guarantees for those reactors in nuclear energy, is that also an 

area where you see expansion? 

Secretary CHU. Yes, very much so. I think it is the intent of the 

administration to—and this is why we are requesting 36 billion in 

additional loan guarantee authority. So that we can show that the 

new generation 3-plus reactors can be built on time, on budget, 

that it makes good economic sense. And then the private sector, the 

financial companies will say, this makes good economic sense, it is 

a good way to baseload clean energy, and they will take over. That 

is the strategy. 

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Rehberg. Calvert. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you, Mr. 

Secretary. It is always great to see a fellow Californian out here 

today. 

As you know, not all solutions for energy are high-tech. Some solutions are relatively low-tech, and one of those was a number of 

companies that are coming out with new roofing granules, so-called 

cool roofs. You talked about them. President Obama has talked 

about them. And as a matter of fact, 3M Corporation that make 

these roofing granules just happens to be in my congressional district. It’s a low-tech solution that works, brings down your energy 

costs substantially. 

And since you both have talked about it, you continue to be a 

strong proponent of those technologies, could you encourage homeowners to install cool roofs when possible? 

Secretary CHU. Yes. The answer is yes. 

Mr. CALVERT. Okay. Then you know in this Home Star legislation that is now being considered here in Congress, the so-called 

Silver Star rebate to consumers who make energy-efficient upgrades such as insulation and other things that you have talked 

about. Which I think is great. But I think other products also need 

to be considered. I know you cannot have an open-ended process on 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
118 

this, but certainly these ideas that have substantial energy savings 

I think you should look at. Would you agree that it makes sense 

to add cool roofing to the list of products eligible for Silver Star rebates? 

Secretary CHU. Yes. 

Mr. CALVERT. Well, good. That is good to have that on the record. 

That was easy. 

I understand that you sent notification on February 17th that the Department intends to reprogram $115 million of the remaining fiscal year 2010 funds to close Yucca Mountain, which was not 

at all what those funds, as you know, were intended for. And I 

should note at this point the committee has not approved or denied 

that reprogramming. So I would expect that no action has yet been 

taken; is that correct? 

Secretary CHU. That is correct. We are waiting on the ruling 

from the NRC. 

Mr. CALVERT. Well, do you intend to reprogram those funds without congressional approval? 

Secretary CHU. Well, that again goes back to this legal question 

that we need to—— 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. We would like the answer ‘‘no.’’ 

Secretary CHU. We will work on clarifying the legal question. 

Mr. CALVERT. You do not know. You may? 

Secretary CHU. I hear a difference of opinion between Ranking 

Member Frelinghuysen and our lawyers. So we need to work that 

out. 

Mr. CALVERT. So the answer is you may make a determination 

to reprogram those funds without congressional approval? 

Secretary CHU. Let’s say before we do anything, we are going to 

have a discussion with this committee. 

Mr. CALVERT. Okay, that is fair enough. I will just leave it at 

that. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Berry. 

Mr. BERRY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Secretary, for being here. 

My question relates to Yucca Mountain also. It is my understanding that you intend to continue to collect the nuclear waste 

fees, but there is no Yucca Mountain anymore and we do not know 

what we are going to do. And we still have to spend the money to 

take care of this stuff while it is on site. 

What are we going to do? Why are we even collecting those fees? 

Why don’t we think about returning them, if we do not know what 

we are going to do with them? 

Secretary CHU. Well, this is one of the charges of the Blue Ribbon Commission, to first determine the appropriate fee collection as 

they make recommendations to me, the President, and Congress on 

how to move forward with better solutions. So one of the charges 

of that committee is to look at the fees. 

But I would have to say that we need that money for the the 

long-term disposal of the permanent waste. We will need that 

money for the current storage. But the rate, the fee, all those 

things, that is part of the charge of the Blue Ribbon Commission. 

Mr. BERRY. I guess my first reaction to that was that if we collected fees or taxes for everybody that needs it, there would not be 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
119 

anything left. It would take all the resources of the entire world. 

I do not consider that to be an acceptable situation. 

How long is it going to take this Blue Ribbon Commission to do 

their work? Are we going to be bound by that, or are we still going 

to have to pass legislation? Or is the Department of Energy going 

to be able to decide after they receive that information from the 

commission? 

Secretary CHU. Well, the Blue Ribbon Commission is actually beginning to meet tonight and tomorrow on this. The chairs, General 

Scowcroft and Congressman Hamilton, are very eager to get on 

with this and to deliver a report before the announced deadline. 

They want to do this as soon as possible. So we do not want to 

delay. 

But again, we also want it to be a thoughtful process, where this 

very distinguished committee and any subcommittees they choose 

to form can really look at this and give us advice. And what we 

know today is really different than where we were in 1982 and the 

mid-1980s. 

The quote in the Wall Street Journal interview is correct. We are 

in a different place. We know more. I think we would like the Blue 

Ribbon Commission to take that new knowledge—and, quite frankly, we do want to restart the nuclear industry in the United States. 

That is part and parcel of a lot of things. 

Let me also say with regard to everybody’s favorite topic, Yucca 

Mountain, that things evolved from the first time a decision was 

made. The Supreme Court ruling changed things. As we went more 

into it, things changed. Over a period of years, the determination 

was made that in order to make this repository work and the requirements that were not anticipated at the beginning of this, a titanium shield had to be constructed which was not budgeted, 

which, you know, rough estimate, this is an additional $5-plus billion. 

And so as things progressed along it looked like, you know, what 

was happening? Now we want to take stock and get this very distinguished committee to say, give us advice, nonpartisan advice. 

Mr. BERRY. The people that made the original decision, were 

they not distinguished? Or very distinguished? 

Secretary CHU. Everybody was very distinguished. No, seriously, 

what has happened is that the requirements changed. There were 

a few things. The most notable requirement was 10,000 years to a 

million years, a very different requirement. And so there were all 

sorts of things that were changing from the mid-1980s to today. 

Mr. BERRY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. 

Mr. PASTOR. Quick question. You know the language for the 

charter. And as written it says, we think including a deep geologic 

disposal—that Yucca Mountain should be considered. 

And the charter also says that—it references that the Secretary—such other matters the Secretary deems appropriate. 

And I guess the question is, as directly as I can put it: Have you 

told the Blue Ribbon Commission that Yucca Mountain is not an 

alternative to be considered? 

Secretary CHU. Yes. 

Mr. PASTOR. So therefore it is not. 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
120 

Secretary CHU. Correct. 

Mr. PASTOR. Well, I have to tell you that it was our intent—and 

the legislative history was that Yucca Mountain, should also be 

considered. But that is, a political battle we will have to fight 

somewhere else. So thank you. 

Mr. Frelinghuysen. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Just following up on Congressman Calvert’s 

question on the notification to the committee on the intent to reprogram. If you have not made a decision—that means you are responsible for executing the plan as Congress directed. 

Secretary CHU. No. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Tell me why that is wrong. 

Secretary CHU. Let me clarify. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. We understand that if you do not do anything, that you ought to proceed with continuing on the license application. 

Secretary CHU. Let me try and state it a little clearer. A decision 

was made in the administration to discontinue advancing Yucca 

Mountain. But I thought the question was: Are we going forward 

with this? We cannot go forward with it until the NRC rules on it. 

Okay. So given that, we are waiting for an NRC ruling, so we have 

applied to the NRC to say we want to discontinue. They make a 

ruling. So we would like to discontinue it, but you have to go 

through these procedures. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. So until we go through those procedures—— 

Secretary CHU. Right. Until the NRC says we accept your application to withdraw, we cannot do that. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. In the time remaining, can you put a little 

meat on the bones relative to what you have done to create jobs 

under the stimulus bill? I know you have talked about numbers. 

We see from time to time, and I will not pull them out of a hat 

here, we do some good things—invest in smart grids—and then 

some suggest we lose 36,000 meter reader jobs. 

I wonder, can you paint a picture for us of the money that has 

been spent—so we understand the difference. You say you have obligated $26 billion? Tie some job numbers to that. And if you can, 

distinguish between private sector jobs and adding on people to 

State payrolls and stuff like that. 

Secretary CHU. Sure. We believe that most of the Recovery Act 

money is stimulating private sector jobs. Our experience is, once we 

obligate money, that all of a sudden starts a stream of activity. 

People go out and hire. The so-called costs that are spent is a bill. 

After you have done the work, then you apply for the bill. So that 

is followed by a month, maybe later. 

So once you have said, okay, we have selected an organization, 

a company, whatever, and then you finally obligate the money, 

they go out and they start hiring. So we have many, many examples of that—— 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I do not mean to be crass, but I did visit 

your Web site. And I assumed, under your tutelage, that Web site 

would be of the highest quality. I saw nothing on the DOE’s Web 

site where we have these types of figures. And I cannot see anyVerDate Mar 15 2010 07:51 Dec 03, 2010 Jkt 061780 PO 00000 Frm 00120 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A780P2.XXX A780P2

wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
121 

thing on there as to how jobs are being created by program. Have 

you taken a look at your Web site? 

Secretary CHU. Yes, I have. But let me just—— 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. You are telling me it is all there? 

Secretary CHU. Did you look at the DOE Web site or recovery.gov 

Web site? 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I assume you have command over the DOE 

Web site. You have got more money, obviously, close to $40 billion, 

that you might as well take some credit for creating jobs on your 

own Web site. So you are telling me that the Recovery Act has its 

own Web site? 

Secretary CHU. That is correct. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. And has sucked away—has the totals, but 

you do not have them on your Web site? 

Secretary CHU. Well, we have the totals. And so what you are 

asking—I do not know. I have to ask my people, whether when you 

click on the DOE Web site, whether there are links that guide people. But there was, a very good reason for trying to consolidate all 

the Recovery Act money on a single Web site so you can click 

around, independent of the Agency. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Yeah, but nobody proportionately got, quite 

honestly, as much money as you did. And I am sure you are putting it to good use. If we need any more clarity, we will look at the 

other Web site. 

Secretary CHU. And I will make sure that on the home page of 

the DOE Web site, there is an easy click to the recovery Web site 

if you want to do that, if it is not there already. But I will certainly 

do that. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. Mr. Chairman, 

thank you. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Secretary, as I understand it, the NRC can let 

you withdraw it with prejudice, they could let you withdraw it 

without prejudice, or they could deny you from withdrawing the license application. In any case, if they let you withdraw it, waste 

confidence is an issue as we move forward. 

Are you going to propose legislation to effectively legislate waste 

confidence? 

Secretary CHU. Well, again, we are going to take it one step at 

a time. The Blue Ribbon Commission is there to look at what we 

know now; also they will anticipate things being developed for the 

coming decades. The NRC believes that the current dry-cask storage of waste, does not impose an immediate environmental threat. 

We can do this. Also we can store it safely, securely for many decades. And so we have time to develop a strategy. 

So the Blue Ribbon Commission is being asked to make recommendations, including legislative recommendations that would 

then go to Congress. Rather than jumping at this, given that the 

NRC has said that it could be a half-century or century before it 

becomes an environmental challenge—— 

Mr. SIMPSON. Let me just make one other comment that you can 

comment on. One of the things that has concerned me is we talked 

a lot about the science and technology, all important work. But at 

some point in time, this stuff has got to get out in the real world. 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
122 

I think ARPA-E is a great start for particularly small new technologies. Those things that might not be able to compete in the real 

world until they have a chance at this kind of thing. What about NGNP? You know, I understand you awarded $40 

million for the design work to two companies for two different designs on, what, the Prismatic reactor and the Pebble bed reactor? 

You are now negotiating final cost-share. 

When are we going to start working with industry so that I, as 

an appropriator, and we, as an Appropriations Committee, know 

what is going to be expected of us? What is going to be the government’s responsibility and share? And when does industry step in 

and when are they going to take over? 

We need some, formal type organization, that works this out 

ahead of time. I am surprised that after awarding these two things 

that we are now discussing with them cost-share. You would think 

that would almost have been a done deal before the bids were 

awarded. 

I am just saying, are we doing it right? Do we need a better organizational structure to work with industry? Because ultimately we 

can do all the science in the world; if industry doesn’t want it, it 

doesn’t mean anything. It has got to be deployable. 

Secretary CHU. I agree. But you know, I think the Department 

of Energy has been a good partner with industry and with Congress. Legislation had a program to help companies go through the 

licensing, for example, for the new AP–1000 nuclear reactor that is 

still in this process. But that program after 2010 is ending, and it 

is well on its way. 

So in these issues, any new design reactor, if industry is not 

going to pick it up, we don’t really want to see it. These are big, 

expensive things. 

And so we will continue doing this in the small modular reactors. 

There has been a lot of new industry interest in this. So we are 

facilitating that; facilitating the licensing, so we can actually help 

initiate getting it going. But eventually you want to step back and 

say, look, is this going to stand on its own? 

For example, this generation of nuclear reactors like the AP– 

1000. You know, after you have built a couple of them, two or 

three. That should be enough proof that you can build these things 

on time, on budget. Then let industry decide. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Okay. Let me ask just one follow-up, and then I 

can be done, Mr. Chairman, and I don’t have to come back. 

Mr. PASTOR. We are not coming back. 

Mr. SIMPSON. So I will be done. If the NRC denied your withdrawal of the application, what would that do to your fiscal year 

2011 budget? 

Secretary CHU. Good question. I think we are going to have to 

regroup there, wouldn’t we? 

Mr. PASTOR. Be another reprogramming. 

Secretary CHU. I don’t know. We will see. 

Mr. SIMPSON. So there is no ancillary plan? 

Secretary CHU. I think if they deny our request, then we will 

have to—— 

Mr. SIMPSON. Reassess. 

Secretary CHU. We will have to reassess where we are. 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
123 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Let me just push for better communications 

between all of us. So if there are some issues you are moving on, 

I think it is important to let the committee leadership, the committee members, know. 

Secretary CHU. Okay. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. If you can give us that assurance. 

Secretary CHU. Yes, I will. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. We are educable. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Some of us. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Some of us more educable than Mr. Simpson. But he is very knowledgeable, as you know, certainly when it 

comes to Idaho and nuclear issues. But I am headed out to Berkeley and to Livermore to see what is going on out there. 

We would like better communication, generally speaking, between you and our membership. 

Secretary CHU. You have my pledge. With regard to, for example, 

that letter. I have been frustrated with the time delay of some of 

the letters, not only from Congress but in general. And as I sign 

some of these things, I am actually looking back at the tortuous 

route and why did it take 4 months. So we have a new person in 

the Department, executive secretary, that will hopefully accelerate 

this. There is no reason in the world it should be taking 4 months 

to answer letters. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Secretary, thank you very much for being with 

us. 

This will conclude the hearing, because after this series of votes 

we will get on with the supplemental on the floor. And the committee rule is that if there is appropriations business on the floor 

that the subcommittee cannot have hearings. 

So we thank you for being here with us this afternoon. You have 

heard some of the comments from some of the members and some 

of their concerns. Just to remind you from the beginning of my 

statement, there will be questions for the record. 

Secretary CHU. Right. 

Mr. PASTOR. And if you could answer them within the time period requested, we would greatly appreciate it. And as Assistant 

Secretary Miller said yesterday, next time we see each other the 

plan will be in hand. So I hope that all the other plans that are 

due through the hubs and the other ones, we will have soon. 

So I need to look at some of these plans to dictate what happens 

in the future. So I would appreciate it very much. And I wish you 

a great day, and congratulations on your tenure at the Department 

of Energy. 

Secretary CHU. All right. Thank you. 

Mr. PASTOR. That concludes the hearing. 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING
124 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 196 here 61780A.077
125 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 197 here 61780A.078
126 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 198 here 61780A.079
127 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 199 here 61780A.080
128 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 200 here 61780A.081
129 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 201 here 61780A.082
130 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 202 here 61780A.083
131 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 203 here 61780A.084
132 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 204 here 61780A.085
133 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 205 here 61780A.086
134 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 206 here 61780A.087
135 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 207 here 61780A.088
136 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 208 here 61780A.089
137 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 209 here 61780A.090
138 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 210 here 61780A.091
139 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 211 here 61780A.092
140 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 212 here 61780A.093
141 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 213 here 61780A.094
142 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 214 here 61780A.095
143 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 215 here 61780A.096
144 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 216 here 61780A.097
145 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 217 here 61780A.098
146 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 218 here 61780A.099
147 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 219 here 61780A.100
148 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 220 here 61780A.101
149 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 221 here 61780A.102
150 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 222 here 61780A.103
151 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 223 here 61780A.104
152 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 224 here 61780A.105
153 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 225 here 61780A.106
154 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 226 here 61780A.107
155 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 227 here 61780A.108
156 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 228 here 61780A.109
157 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 229 here 61780A.110
158 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 230 here 61780A.111
159 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 231 here 61780A.112
160 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 232 here 61780A.113
161 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 233 here 61780A.114
162 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 234 here 61780A.115
163 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 235 here 61780A.116
164 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 236 here 61780A.117
165 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 237 here 61780A.118
166 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 238 here 61780A.119
167 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 239 here 61780A.120
168 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 240 here 61780A.121
169 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 241 here 61780A.122
170 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 242 here 61780A.123
171 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 243 here 61780A.124
172 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 244 here 61780A.125
173 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 245 here 61780A.126
174 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 246 here 61780A.127
175 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 247 here 61780A.128
176 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 248 here 61780A.129
177 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 249 here 61780A.130
178 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 250 here 61780A.131
179 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 251 here 61780A.132
180 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 252 here 61780A.133
181 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 253 here 61780A.134
182 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 254 here 61780A.135
183 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 255 here 61780A.136
184 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 256 here 61780A.137
185 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 257 here 61780A.138
186 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 258 here 61780A.139
187 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 259 here 61780A.140
188 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 260 here 61780A.141
189 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 261 here 61780A.142
190 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 262 here 61780A.143
191 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 263 here 61780A.144
192 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 264 here 61780A.145
193 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 265 here 61780A.146
194 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 266 here 61780A.147
195 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 267 here 61780A.148
196 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 268 here 61780A.149
197 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 269 here 61780A.150
198 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 270 here 61780A.151
199 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 271 here 61780A.152
200 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 272 here 61780A.153
201 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 273 here 61780A.154
202 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 274 here 61780A.155
203 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 275 here 61780A.156
204 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 276 here 61780A.157
205 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 277 here 61780A.158
206 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 278 here 61780A.159
207 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 279 here 61780A.160
208 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 280 here 61780A.161
209 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 281 here 61780A.162
210 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 282 here 61780A.163
211 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 283 here 61780A.164
212 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 284 here 61780A.165
213 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 285 here 61780A.166
214 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 286 here 61780A.167
215 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 287 here 61780A.168
216 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 288 here 61780A.169
217 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 289 here 61780A.170
218 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 290 here 61780A.171
219 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 291 here 61780A.172
220 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 292 here 61780A.173
221 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 293 here 61780A.174
222 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 294 here 61780A.175
223 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 295 here 61780A.176
224 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 296 here 61780A.177
225 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 297 here 61780A.178
226 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 298 here 61780A.179
227 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 299 here 61780A.180
228 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 300 here 61780A.181
229 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 301 here 61780A.182
230 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 302 here 61780A.183
231 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 303 here 61780A.184
232 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 304 here 61780A.185
233 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 305 here 61780A.186
234 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 306 here 61780A.187
235 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 307 here 61780A.188
236 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 308 here 61780A.189
237 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 309 here 61780A.190
238 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 310 here 61780A.191
239 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 311 here 61780A.192
240 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 312 here 61780A.193
241 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 313 here 61780A.194
242 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 314 here 61780A.195
243 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 315 here 61780A.196
244 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 316 here 61780A.197
245 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 317 here 61780A.198
246 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 318 here 61780A.199
247 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 319 here 61780A.200
248 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 320 here 61780A.201
249 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 321 here 61780A.202
250 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 322 here 61780A.203
251 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 323 here 61780A.204
252 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 324 here 61780A.205
253 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 325 here 61780A.206
254 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 326 here 61780A.207
255 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 327 here 61780A.208
256 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 328 here 61780A.209
257 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 329 here 61780A.210
258 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 330 here 61780A.211
259 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 331 here 61780A.212
260 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 332 here 61780A.213
261 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 333 here 61780A.214
262 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 334 here 61780A.215
263 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 335 here 61780A.216
264 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 336 here 61780A.217
265 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 337 here 61780A.218
266 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 338 here 61780A.219
267 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 339 here 61780A.220
268 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 340 here 61780A.221
269 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 341 here 61780A.222
270 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 342 here 61780A.223
271 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 343 here 61780A.224
272 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 344 here 61780A.225
273 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 345 here 61780A.226
274 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 346 here 61780A.227
275 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 347 here 61780A.228
276 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 348 here 61780A.229
277 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 349 here 61780A.230
278 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 350 here 61780A.231
279 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 351 here 61780A.232
280 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 352 here 61780A.233
281 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 353 here 61780A.234
282 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 354 here 61780A.235
283 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 355 here 61780A.236
284 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 356 here 61780A.237
285 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 357 here 61780A.238
286 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 358 here 61780A.239
287 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 359 here 61780A.240
288 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 360 here 61780A.241
289 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 361 here 61780A.242
290 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 362 here 61780A.243
291 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 363 here 61780A.244
292 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 364 here 61780A.245
293 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 365 here 61780A.246
294 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 366 here 61780A.247
295 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 367 here 61780A.248
296 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 368 here 61780A.249
297 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 369 here 61780A.250
298 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 370 here 61780A.251
299 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 371 here 61780A.252
300 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 372 here 61780A.253
301 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 373 here 61780A.254
302 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 374 here 61780A.255
303 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 375 here 61780A.256
304 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 376 here 61780A.257
305 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 377 here 61780A.258
306 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 378 here 61780A.259
307 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 379 here 61780A.260
308 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 380 here 61780A.261
309 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 381 here 61780A.262
310 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 382 here 61780A.263
311 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 383 here 61780A.264
312 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 384 here 61780A.265
313 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 385 here 61780A.266
314 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 386 here 61780A.267
315 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 387 here 61780A.268
316 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 388 here 61780A.269
317 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 389 here 61780A.270
318 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 390 here 61780A.271
319 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 391 here 61780A.272
320 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 392 here 61780A.273
321 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 393 here 61780A.274
322 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 394 here 61780A.275
323 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 395 here 61780A.276
324 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 396 here 61780A.277
325 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 397 here 61780A.278
326 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 398 here 61780A.279
327 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 399 here 61780A.280
328 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 400 here 61780A.281
329 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 401 here 61780A.282
330 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 402 here 61780A.283
331 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 403 here 61780A.284
332 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 404 here 61780A.285
333 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 405 here 61780A.286
334 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 406 here 61780A.287
335 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 407 here 61780A.288
336 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 408 here 61780A.289
337 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 409 here 61780A.290
338 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 410 here 61780A.291
339 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 411 here 61780A.292
340 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 412 here 61780A.293
341 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 413 here 61780A.294
342 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 414 here 61780A.295
343 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 415 here 61780A.296
344 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 416 here 61780A.297
345 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 417 here 61780A.298
346 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 418 here 61780A.299
347 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 419 here 61780A.300
348 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 420 here 61780A.301
349 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 421 here 61780A.302
350 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 422 here 61780A.303
351 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 423 here 61780A.304
352 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 424 here 61780A.305
353 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 425 here 61780A.306
354 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 426 here 61780A.307
355 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 427 here 61780A.308
356 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 428 here 61780A.309
357 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 429 here 61780A.310
358 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 430 here 61780A.311
359 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 431 here 61780A.312
360 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 432 here 61780A.313
361 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 433 here 61780A.314
362 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 434 here 61780A.315
363 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 435 here 61780A.316
364 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 436 here 61780A.317
365 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 437 here 61780A.318
366 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 438 here 61780A.319
367 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 439 here 61780A.320
368 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 440 here 61780A.321
369 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 441 here 61780A.322
370 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 442 here 61780A.323
371 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 443 here 61780A.324
372 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 444 here 61780A.325
373 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 445 here 61780A.326
374 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 446 here 61780A.327
375 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 447 here 61780A.328
376 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 448 here 61780A.329
377 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 449 here 61780A.330
378 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 450 here 61780A.331
379 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 451 here 61780A.332
380 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 452 here 61780A.333
381 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 453 here 61780A.334
382 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 454 here 61780A.335
383 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 455 here 61780A.336
384 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 456 here 61780A.337
385 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 457 here 61780A.338
386 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 458 here 61780A.339
387 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 459 here 61780A.340
388 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 460 here 61780A.341
389 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 461 here 61780A.342
390 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 462 here 61780A.343
391 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 463 here 61780A.344
392 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 464 here 61780A.345
393 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 465 here 61780A.346
394 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 466 here 61780A.347
395 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 467 here 61780A.348
396 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 468 here 61780A.349
397 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 469 here 61780A.350
398 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 470 here 61780A.351
399 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 471 here 61780A.352
400 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 472 here 61780A.353
401 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 473 here 61780A.354
402 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 474 here 61780A.355
403 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 475 here 61780A.356
404 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 476 here 61780A.357
405 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 477 here 61780A.358
406 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 478 here 61780A.359
407 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 479 here 61780A.360
408 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 480 here 61780A.361
409 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 481 here 61780A.362
410 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 482 here 61780A.363
411 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 483 here 61780A.364
412 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 484 here 61780A.365
413 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 485 here 61780A.366
414 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 486 here 61780A.367
415 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 487 here 61780A.368
416 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 488 here 61780A.369
417 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 489 here 61780A.370
418 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 490 here 61780A.371
419 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 491 here 61780A.372
420 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 492 here 61780A.373
421 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 493 here 61780A.374
422 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 494 here 61780A.375
423 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 495 here 61780A.376
424 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 496 here 61780A.377
425 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 497 here 61780A.378
426 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 498 here 61780A.379
427 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 499 here 61780A.380
428 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 500 here 61780A.381
429 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 501 here 61780A.382
430 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 502 here 61780A.383
431 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 503 here 61780A.384
432 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 504 here 61780A.385
433 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 505 here 61780A.386
434 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 506 here 61780A.387
435 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 507 here 61780A.388
436 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 508 here 61780A.389
437 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 509 here 61780A.390
438 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 510 here 61780A.391
439 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 511 here 61780A.392
440 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 512 here 61780A.393
441 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 513 here 61780A.394
442 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 514 here 61780A.395
443 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 515 here 61780A.396
444 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 516 here 61780A.397
445 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 517 here 61780A.398
446 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 518 here 61780A.399
447 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 519 here 61780A.400
448 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 520 here 61780A.401
449 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 521 here 61780A.402
450 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 522 here 61780A.403
451 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 523 here 61780A.404
452 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 524 here 61780A.405
453 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 525 here 61780A.406
454 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 526 here 61780A.407
455 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 527 here 61780A.408
456 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 528 here 61780A.409
457 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 529 here 61780A.410
458 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 530 here 61780A.411
459 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 531 here 61780A.412
460 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 532 here 61780A.413
461 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 533 here 61780A.414
462 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 534 here 61780A.415
463 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 535 here 61780A.416
464 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 536 here 61780A.417
465 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 537 here 61780A.418
466 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 538 here 61780A.419
467 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 539 here 61780A.420
468 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 540 here 61780A.421
469 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 541 here 61780A.422
470 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 542 here 61780A.423
471 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 543 here 61780A.424
472 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 544 here 61780A.425
473 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 545 here 61780A.426
474 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 546 here 61780A.427
475 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 547 here 61780A.428
476 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 548 here 61780A.429
477 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 549 here 61780A.430
478 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 550 here 61780A.431
479 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 551 here 61780A.432
480 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 552 here 61780A.433
481 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 553 here 61780A.434
482 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 554 here 61780A.435
483 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 555 here 61780A.436
484 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 556 here 61780A.437
485 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 557 here 61780A.438
486 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 558 here 61780A.439
487 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 559 here 61780A.440
488 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 560 here 61780A.441
489 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 561 here 61780A.442
490 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 562 here 61780A.443
491 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 563 here 61780A.444
492 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 564 here 61780A.445
493 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 565 here 61780A.446
494 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 566 here 61780A.447
495 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 567 here 61780A.448
496 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 568 here 61780A.449
497 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 569 here 61780A.450
498 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 570 here 61780A.451
499 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 571 here 61780A.452
500 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 572 here 61780A.453
501 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 573 here 61780A.454
502 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 574 here 61780A.455
503 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 575 here 61780A.456
504 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 576 here 61780A.457
505 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 577 here 61780A.458
506 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 578 here 61780A.459
507 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 579 here 61780A.460
508 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 580 here 61780A.461
509 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 581 here 61780A.462
510 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 582 here 61780A.463
511 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 583 here 61780A.464
512 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 584 here 61780A.465
513 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 585 here 61780A.466
514 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 586 here 61780A.467
515 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 587 here 61780A.468
516 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 588 here 61780A.469
517 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 589 here 61780A.470
518 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 590 here 61780A.471
519 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 591 here 61780A.472
520 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 592 here 61780A.473
521 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 593 here 61780A.474
522 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 594 here 61780A.475
523 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 595 here 61780A.476
524 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 596 here 61780A.477
525 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 597 here 61780A.478
526 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 598 here 61780A.479
527 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 599 here 61780A.480
528 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 600 here 61780A.481
529 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 601 here 61780A.482
530 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 602 here 61780A.483
531 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 603 here 61780A.484
532 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 604 here 61780A.485
533 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 605 here 61780A.486
534 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 606 here 61780A.487
535 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 607 here 61780A.488
536 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 608 here 61780A.489
537 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 609 here 61780A.490
538 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 610 here 61780A.491
539 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 611 here 61780A.492
540 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 612 here 61780A.493
541 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 613 here 61780A.494
542 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 614 here 61780A.495
543 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 615 here 61780A.496
544 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 616 here 61780A.497
545 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 617 here 61780A.498
546 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 618 here 61780A.499
547 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 619 here 61780A.500
548 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 620 here 61780A.501
549 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 621 here 61780A.502
550 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 622 here 61780A.503
551 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 623 here 61780A.504
552 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 624 here 61780A.505
553 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 625 here 61780A.506
554 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 626 here 61780A.507
555 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 627 here 61780A.508
556 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 628 here 61780A.509
557 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 629 here 61780A.510
558 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 630 here 61780A.511
559 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 631 here 61780A.512
560 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 632 here 61780A.513
561 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 633 here 61780A.514
562 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 634 here 61780A.515
563 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 635 here 61780A.516
564 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 636 here 61780A.517
565 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 637 here 61780A.518
566 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 638 here 61780A.519
567 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 639 here 61780A.520
568 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 640 here 61780A.521
569 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 641 here 61780A.522
570 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 642 here 61780A.523
571 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 643 here 61780A.524
572 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 644 here 61780A.525
573 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 645 here 61780A.526
574 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 646 here 61780A.527
575 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 647 here 61780A.528
576 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 648 here 61780A.529
577 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 649 here 61780A.530
578 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 650 here 61780A.531
579 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 651 here 61780A.532
580 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 652 here 61780A.533
581 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 653 here 61780A.534
582 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 654 here 61780A.535
583 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 655 here 61780A.536
584 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 656 here 61780A.537
585 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 657 here 61780A.538
586 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 658 here 61780A.539
587 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 659 here 61780A.540
588 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 660 here 61780A.541
589 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 661 here 61780A.542
590 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 662 here 61780A.543
591 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 663 here 61780A.544
592 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 664 here 61780A.545
593 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 665 here 61780A.546
594 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 666 here 61780A.547
595 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 667 here 61780A.548
596 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 668 here 61780A.549
597 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 669 here 61780A.550
598 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 670 here 61780A.551
599 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 671 here 61780A.552
600 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 672 here 61780A.553
601 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 673 here 61780A.554
602 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 674 here 61780A.555
603 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 675 here 61780A.556
604 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 676 here 61780A.557
605 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 677 here 61780A.558
606 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 678 here 61780A.559
607 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 679 here 61780A.560
608 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 680 here 61780A.561
609 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 681 here 61780A.562
610 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 682 here 61780A.563
611 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 683 here 61780A.564
612 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 684 here 61780A.565
613 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 685 here 61780A.566
614 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 686 here 61780A.567
615 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 687 here 61780A.568
616 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 688 here 61780A.569
617 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 689 here 61780A.570
618 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 690 here 61780A.571
619 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 691 here 61780A.572
620 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 692 here 61780A.573
621 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 693 here 61780A.574
622 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 694 here 61780A.575
623 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 695 here 61780A.576
624 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 696 here 61780A.577
625 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 697 here 61780A.578
626 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 698 here 61780A.579
627 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 699 here 61780A.580
628 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 700 here 61780A.581
629 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 701 here 61780A.582
630 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 702 here 61780A.583
631 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 703 here 61780A.584
632 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 704 here 61780A.585
633 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 705 here 61780A.586
634 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 706 here 61780A.587
635 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 707 here 61780A.588
636 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 708 here 61780A.589
637 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 709 here 61780A.590
638 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 710 here 61780A.591
639 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 711 here 61780A.592
640 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 712 here 61780A.593
641 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 713 here 61780A.594
642 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 714 here 61780A.595
643 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 715 here 61780A.596
644 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 716 here 61780A.597
645 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 717 here 61780A.598
646 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 718 here 61780A.599
647 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 719 here 61780A.600
648 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 720 here 61780A.601
649 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 721 here 61780A.602
650 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 722 here 61780A.603
651 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 723 here 61780A.604
652 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 724 here 61780A.605
653 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 725 here 61780A.606
654 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 726 here 61780A.607
655 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 727 here 61780A.608
656 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 728 here 61780A.609
657 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 729 here 61780A.610
658 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 730 here 61780A.611
659 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 731 here 61780A.612
660 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 732 here 61780A.613
661 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 733 here 61780A.614
662 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 734 here 61780A.615
663 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 735 here 61780A.616
664 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 736 here 61780A.617
665 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 737 here 61780A.618
666 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 738 here 61780A.619
667 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 739 here 61780A.620
668 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 740 here 61780A.621
669 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 741 here 61780A.622
670 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 742 here 61780A.623
671 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 743 here 61780A.624
672 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 744 here 61780A.625
673 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 745 here 61780A.626
674 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 746 here 61780A.627
675 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 747 here 61780A.628
676 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 748 here 61780A.629
677 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 749 here 61780A.630
678 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 750 here 61780A.631
679 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 751 here 61780A.632
680 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 752 here 61780A.633
681 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 753 here 61780A.634
682 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 754 here 61780A.635
683 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 755 here 61780A.636
684 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 756 here 61780A.637
685 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 757 here 61780A.638
686 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 758 here 61780A.639
687 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 759 here 61780A.640
688 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 760 here 61780A.641
689 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 761 here 61780A.642
690 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 762 here 61780A.643
691 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 763 here 61780A.644
692 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 764 here 61780A.645
693 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 765 here 61780A.646
694 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 766 here 61780A.647
695 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 767 here 61780A.648
696 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 768 here 61780A.649
697 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 769 here 61780A.650
698 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 770 here 61780A.651
699 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 771 here 61780A.652
700 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 772 here 61780A.653
701 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 773 here 61780A.654
702 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 774/1100 here 61780A.655
(i) 

W I T N E S S E S 

Page 

Chu, Hon. Steven ..................................................................................................... 81 

Miller, W. F., Jr ....................................................................................................... 1 

Æ 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with HEARING