24–421 

109TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 109–275 

MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2006, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES 

NOVEMBER 7, 2005.—Ordered to be printed 

Mr. HOBSON, from the committee of conference, 

submitted the following 

CONFERENCE REPORT 

[To accompany H.R. 2419] 

The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the 

two Houses on the amendment of the Senate to the bill (H.R. 2419) 

‘‘making appropriations for energy and water development for the 

fiscal year ending September 30, 2006, and for other purposes’’, 

having met, after full and free conference, have agreed to recommend and do recommend to their respective Houses as follows: 

That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the Senate, and agree to the same with an amendment, as 

follows: 

In lieu of the matter stricken and inserted by said amendment, 

insert: 

That the following sums are appropriated, out of any money in the 

Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2006, for energy and water development and for other 

purposes, namely: 

TITLE I 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CIVIL 

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CIVIL

The following appropriations shall be expended under the direction of the Secretary of the Army and the supervision of the Chief 

of Engineers for authorized civil functions of the Department of the 

Army pertaining to rivers and harbors, flood control, shore protecVerDate Aug 31 2005 21:24 Nov 08, 2005 Jkt 024421 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6603 E:\HR\OC\HR275.XXX HR275
2 

tion and storm damage reduction, aquatic ecosystem restoration, 

and related purposes. 

INVESTIGATIONS

For expenses necessary for the collection and study of basic information pertaining to river and harbor, flood control, shore protection and storm damage reduction, aquatic ecosystem restoration, 

and related projects, restudy of authorized projects, miscellaneous 

investigations, and, when authorized by law, surveys and detailed 

studies and plans and specifications of projects prior to construction, $164,000,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, 

That, notwithstanding any other provision of law, within the funds 

provided under this heading, $1,000,000 shall be available for planning assistance to the state of Ohio for Stark County watershed 

basin study: Provided further, That using $8,000,000 of the funds 

provided herein, the Secretary of the Army, acting through the Chief 

of Engineers, is directed to conduct a comprehensive hurricane protection analysis and design at full federal expense to develop and 

present a full range of flood control, coastal restoration, and hurricane protection measures exclusive of normal policy considerations 

for South Louisiana and the Secretary shall submit a preliminary 

technical report for comprehensive Category 5 protection within 6 

months of enactment of this Act and a final technical report for Category 5 protection within 24 months of enactment of this Act: Provided further, That the Secretary shall consider providing protection 

for a storm surge equivalent to a Category 5 hurricane within the 

project area and may submit reports on component areas of the 

larger protection program for authorization as soon as practicable: 

Provided further, That the analysis shall be conducted in close coordination with the State of Louisiana and its appropriate agencies. 

CONSTRUCTION

For expenses necessary for the construction of river and harbor, 

flood control, shore protection and storm damage reduction, aquatic 

ecosystem restoration, and related projects authorized by law; for 

conducting detailed studies, and plans and specifications, of such 

projects (including those involving participation by States, local governments, or private groups) authorized or made eligible for selection by law (but such detailed studies, and plans and specifications, 

shall not constitute a commitment of the Government to construction); $2,372,000,000, to remain available until expended; of which 

such sums as are necessary to cover the Federal share of construction costs for facilities under the Dredged Material Disposal Facilities program shall be derived from the Harbor Maintenance Trust 

Fund as authorized by Public Law 104–303; and of which such 

sums as are necessary pursuant to Public Law 99–662 shall be derived from the Inland Waterways Trust Fund, to cover one-half of 

the costs of construction and rehabilitation of inland waterways 

projects, (including the rehabilitation costs for Lock and Dam 11, 

Mississippi River, Iowa; Lock and Dam 19, Mississippi River, Iowa; 

Lock and Dam 24, Mississippi River, Illinois and Missouri; Lock 

27, Mississippi River, Illinois; and Lock and Dam 3, Mississippi 

River, Minnesota) shall be derived from the Inland Waterways 

Trust Fund; and of which $12,000,000 shall be exclusively for 

projects and activities authorized under section 107 of the River and 

3 

Harbor Act of 1960; and of which $500,000 shall be exclusively for 

projects and activities authorized under section 111 of the River and 

Harbor Act of 1968; and of which $7,000,000 shall be exclusively for 

projects and activities authorized under section 103 of the River and 

Harbor Act of 1962; and of which $40,000,000 shall be exclusively 

available for projects and activities authorized under section 205 of 

the Flood Control Act of 1948; and of which $15,000,000 shall be 

exclusively for projects and activities authorized under section 14 of 

the Flood Control Act of 1946; and of which $300,000 shall be exclusively for projects and activities authorized under section 208 of 

the Flood Control Act of 1954; and of which $30,000,000 shall be 

exclusively for projects and activities authorized under section 1135 

of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986; and of which 

$30,000,000 shall be exclusively for projects and activities authorized under section 206 of the Water Resources Development Act of 

1996; and of which $5,000,000 shall be exclusively for projects and 

activities authorized under sections 204 and 207 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 and section 933 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986: Provided, That the Chief of Engineers is directed to use $11,250,000 of the funds appropriated herein 

for the Dallas Floodway Extension, Texas, project, including the 

Cadillac Heights feature, generally in accordance with the Chief of 

Engineers report dated December 7, 1999: Provided further, That 

the Chief of Engineers is directed to use $1,500,000 of the funds provided herein for the Hawaii Water Management Project: Provided 

further, That the Chief of Engineers is directed to use $13,000,000 

of the funds appropriated herein for the navigation project at 

Kaumalapau Harbor, Hawaii: Provided further, That the Chief of 

Engineers is directed to use $4,000,000 of the funds provided herein 

for the Dam Safety and Seepage/Stability Correction Program for 

seepage control features and repairs to the tainter gates at Waterbury Dam, Vermont: Provided further, That $600,000 of the funds 

provided herein for the Dam Safety and Seepage/Stability Correction Program shall be available for Dover Dam, Ohio: Provided further, That the Chief of Engineers is directed to use $9,500,000 of the 

funds appropriated herein for planning, engineering, design or construction of the Grundy, Buchanan County, and Dickenson County, 

Virginia, elements of the Levisa and Tug Forks of the Big Sandy 

River and Upper Cumberland River Project: Provided further, That 

the Chief of Engineers is directed to use $5,600,000 of the funds appropriated herein for planning, engineering, design or construction 

of the Lower Mingo County, Upper Mingo County, Wayne County, 

McDowell County, West Virginia, elements of the Levisa and Tug 

Forks of the Big Sandy River and Upper Cumberland River Project: 

Provided further, That the Chief of Engineers is directed to use 

$5,600,000 of the funds appropriated herein for planning, engineering, design or construction of the Lower Mingo County, Upper 

Mingo County, Wayne County, McDowell County, West Virginia, elements of the Levisa and Tug Forks of the Big Sandy River and 

Upper Cumberland River Project: Provided further, That the Chief 

of Engineers is directed to continue the Dickenson County Detailed 

Project Report as generally defined in Plan 4 of the Huntington District Engineer’s Draft Supplement to the section 202 General Plan 

for Flood Damage Reduction dated April 1997, including all Russell 

Fork tributary streams within the County and special considerVerDate Aug 31 2005 01:52 Nov 09, 2005 Jkt 024421 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6603 E:\HR\OC\HR275.XXX HR275
4 

ations as may be appropriate to address the unique relocations and 

resettlement needs for the flood prone communities within the County: Provided further, That the Secretary of the Army, acting through 

the Chief of Engineers, is directed to use $16,000,000 of the funds 

appropriated herein for the Clover Fork, City of Cumberland, Town 

of Martin, Pike County (including Levisa Fork and Tug Fork Tributaries), Bell County, Harlan County in accordance with the Draft 

Detailed Project Report dated January 2002, Floyd County, Martin 

County, Johnson County, and Knox County, Kentucky, detailed 

project report, elements of the Levisa and Tug Forks of the Big 

Sandy River and Upper Cumberland River: Provided further, That 

the Chief of Engineers is directed to proceed with work on the permanent bridge to replace Folsom Bridge Dam Road, Folsom, California, as authorized by the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act, 2004 (Public Law 108–137), and, of the $15,000,000 

available for the American River Watershed (Folsom Dam MiniRaise), California, project, $10,000,000 of those funds be directed 

for the permanent bridge, with all remaining devoted to the MiniRaise: Provided further, That $300,000 is provided for the Chief of 

Engineers to conduct a General Reevaluation Study on the Mount 

St. Helens project to determine if ecosystem restoration actions are 

prudent in the Cowlitz and Toutle watersheds for species that have 

been listed as being of economic importance and threatened or endangered: Provided further, That $35,000,000 shall be available for 

projects and activities authorized under 16 U.S.C. 410–r–8: Provided further, That the Secretary is directed to use $2,000,000 of the 

funds appropriated herein to provide a grant to the City of Caliente, 

Nevada, for the City to expend for the purpose of purchasing construction equipment to be used by the City in constructing local 

flood control measures. 

FLOOD CONTROL, MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, ARKANSAS, IL- LINOIS, KENTUCKY, LOUISIANA, MISSISSIPPI, MISSOURI, AND TEN- NESSEE

For expenses necessary for the flood damage reduction program 

for the Mississippi River alluvial valley below Cape Girardeau, Missouri, as authorized by law, $400,000,000, to remain available until 

expended, of which such sums as are necessary to cover the Federal 

share of operation and maintenance costs for inland harbors shall 

be derived from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund: Provided, 

That the Chief of Engineers is directed to use $20,000,000 of the 

funds provided herein for design and real estate activities and 

pump supply elements for the Yazoo Basin, Yazoo Backwater Pumping Plant, Mississippi: Provided further, That the Secretary of the 

Army, acting through the Chief of Engineers is directed to use 

$9,000,000 appropriated herein for construction of water withdrawal features of the Grand Prairie, Arkansas, project, of which 

such sums as are necessary to cover the Federal share of operation 

and maintenance costs for inland harbors shall be derived from the 

Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund. 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

For expenses necessary for the operation, maintenance, and care 

of existing river and harbor, flood and storm damage reduction, 

aquatic ecosystem restoration, and related projects authorized by 

5 

law; for providing security for infrastructure owned and operated 

by, or on behalf of, the United States Army Corps of Engineers (the 

‘‘Corps’’), including administrative buildings and facilities, laboratories, and the Washington Aqueduct; for the maintenance of harbor 

channels provided by a State, municipality, or other public agency 

that serve essential navigation needs of general commerce, where 

authorized by law; and for surveys and charting of northern and 

northwestern lakes and connecting waters, clearing and straightening channels, and removal of obstructions to navigation, 

$1,989,000,000, to remain available until expended, of which such 

sums to cover the Federal share of operation and maintenance costs 

for coastal harbors and channels, and inland harbors shall be derived from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund, pursuant to Public 

Law 99–662 may be derived from that fund; of which such sums as 

become available from the special account for the Corps established 

by the Land and Water Conservation Act of 1965, as amended (16 

U.S.C. 460l–6a(i)), may be derived from that account for resource 

protection, research, interpretation, and maintenance activities related to resource protection in the areas at which outdoor recreation 

is available; and of which such sums as become available under section 217 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996, Public 

Law 104–303, shall be used to cover the cost of operation and maintenance of the dredged material disposal facilities for which fees 

have been collected: Provided, That utilizing funds appropriated 

herein, for the Intracoastal Waterway, Delaware River to Chesapeake Bay, Delaware and Maryland, the Chief of Engineers, is directed to reimburse the State of Delaware for normal operation and 

maintenance costs incurred by the State of Delaware for the SR1 

Bridge from station 58∂00 to station 293∂00 between October 1, 

2005, and September 30, 2006: Provided further, That the Chief of 

Engineers is authorized to undertake, at full Federal expense, a detailed evaluation of the Albuquerque levees for purposes of determining structural integrity, impacts of vegetative growth, and performance under current hydrological conditions: Provided further, 

That using $275,000 provided herein, the Chief of Engineers is authorized to remove the sunken vessel State of Pennsylvania from the 

Christina River in Delaware. 

REGULATORY PROGRAM

For expenses necessary for administration of laws pertaining to 

regulation of navigable waters and wetlands, $160,000,000, to remain available until expended. 

REVOLVING FUND

None of the funds in title I of this Act or otherwise available 

to the Corps of Engineers shall be available for the rehabilitation 

and lead and asbestos abatement of the dredge McFarland. 

FORMERLY UTILIZED SITES REMEDIAL ACTION PROGRAM

For expenses necessary to clean up contamination from sites in 

the United States resulting from work performed as part of the Nation’s early atomic energy program, $140,000,000, to remain available until expended. 

6 

GENERAL EXPENSES

For expenses necessary for general administration and related 

civil works functions in the headquarters of the United States Army 

Corps of Engineers, the offices of the Division Engineers, the Humphreys Engineer Center Support Activity, the Institute for Water Resources, the United States Army Engineer Research and Development Center, and the United States Army Corps of Engineers Finance Center, $154,000,000, to remain available until expended: 

Provided, That no part of any other appropriation provided in title 

I of this Act shall be available to fund the civil works activities of 

the Office of the Chief of Engineers or the civil works executive direction and management activities of the division offices: Provided 

further, That the Secretary is directed to use $4,500,000 of the funds 

appropriated herein to conduct, at full federal expense and in close 

cooperation with state and local governments, comprehensive analyses that examine multi-jurisdictional use and management of 

water resources on a watershed or regional scale. 

OFFICE OF ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE ARMY (CIVIL WORKS)

For expenses necessary for the Office of Assistant Secretary of 

the Army (Civil Works), as authorized by 10 U.S.C. 3016(b)(3), 

$4,000,000. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISION

Appropriations in this title shall be available for official reception and representation expenses not to exceed $5,000; and during 

the current fiscal year the Revolving Fund, Corps of Engineers, 

shall be available for purchase not to exceed 100 for replacement 

only and hire of passenger motor vehicles. 

GENERAL PROVISIONS, CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CIVIL

SEC. 101. (a) None of the funds provided in title I of this Act, 

or provided by previous appropriations Acts to the agencies or entities funded in title I of this Act that remain available for obligation 

or expenditure in fiscal year 2006, shall be available for obligation 

or expenditure through a reprogramming of funds that: 

(1) creates or initiates a new program, project, or activity; 

(2) eliminates a program, project or activity; 

(3) increases funds or personnel for any program, project or 

activity for which funds have been denied or restricted by this 

Act; 

(4) proposes to use funds directed for a specific activity by 

either the House or the Senate Committees on Appropriations 

for a different purpose; 

(5) augments existing programs, projects or activities in excess of $2,000,000 or 50 percent, whichever is less, unless prior 

approval is received from the House and Senate Committees on 

Appropriations; 

(6) reduces existing programs, projects or activities in excess 

of $2,000,000 or 50 percent, whichever is less, unless prior approval is received from the House and Senate Committees on 

Appropriations; or 

(7) creates, reorganizes, or restructures a branch, division, 

office, bureau, board, commission, agency, administration, or 

7 

department different from the budget justifications submitted to 

the Committees on Appropriations or the table accompanying 

the Statement of Managers accompanying this Act, whichever is 

more detailed, unless prior approval is received from the House 

and Senate Committees on Appropriations. 

(b) Subsection (a)(1) shall not apply to any project or activity 

authorized under section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948; section 14 of the Flood Control Act of 1946; section 208 of the Flood 

Control Act of 1954; section 107 of the River and Harbor Act of 

1960; section 103 of the River and Harbor Act of 1962; section 111 

of the River and Harbor Act of 1968; section 1135 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986; section 206 of the Water Resources 

Development Act of 1996; sections 204 and 207 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 or section 933 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986. 

(c) Not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this 

Act, the Corps of Engineers shall submit a report to the Committees 

on Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives 

to establish the baseline for application of reprogramming and 

transfer authorities for the current fiscal year: Provided, That the 

report shall include: 

(1) a table for each appropriation with a separate column 

to display the President’s budget request, adjustments made by 

Congress, adjustments due to enacted rescissions, if appropriate, and the fiscal year enacted level; 

(2) a delineation in the table for each appropriation both by 

object class and program, project and activity as detailed in the 

budget appendix for the respective appropriations; and 

(3) an identification of items of special congressional interest: Provided further, That the amount appropriated for salaries and expenses of the Corps of Engineers shall be reduced by 

$100,000 per day for each day after the required date that the 

report has not been submitted to the Congress. 

(d) None of the funds received as a non-federal share for project 

costs by any agency funded in title I of this Act shall be available 

for reprogramming. 

SEC. 102. Beginning in fiscal year 2006 and thereafter, agreements proposed for execution by the Assistant Secretary of the Army 

for Civil Works or the United States Army Corps of Engineers after 

the date of the enactment of this Act pursuant to section 4 of the 

River and Harbor Act of 1915, Public Law 64–291; section 11 of the 

River and Harbor Act of 1925, Public Law 68–585; the Civil Functions Appropriations Act, 1936, Public Law 75–208; section 215 of 

the Flood Control Act of 1968, as amended, Public Law 90–483; sections 104, 203, and 204 of the Water Resources Development Act of 

1986, as amended, Public Law 99–662; section 206 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992, as amended, Public Law 102–580; 

section 211 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996, Public 

Law 104–303; and any other specific project authority, shall be limited to total credits and reimbursements for all applicable projects 

not to exceed $100,000,000 in each fiscal year. 

SEC. 103. In order to protect and preserve the integrity of the 

water supply against further degradation, none of the funds made 

available under this Act and any other Act hereafter may be used 

by the Army Corps of Engineers to support activities related to any 

8 

proposed new landfill in the Muskingum Watershed if such landfill— (1) has not received a permit to construct from the State 

agency with responsibility for solid waste management in the 

watershed; 

(2) has not received waste for disposal during 2005; and 

(3) is not contiguous or adjacent to a portion of a landfill 

that has received waste for disposal in 2005 and each landfill 

is owned by the same person or entity. 

SEC. 104. None of the funds appropriated in this or any other 

Act shall be used to demonstrate or implement any plans divesting 

or transferring any Civil Works missions, functions, or responsibilities of the United States Army Corps of Engineers to other government agencies without specific direction in a subsequent Act of Congress. 

SEC. 105. ST. GEORGES BRIDGE, DELAWARE.—None of the funds 

made available in this Act may be used to carry out any activity relating to closure or removal of the St. Georges Bridge across the Intracoastal Waterway, Delaware River to Chesapeake Bay, Delaware 

and Maryland, including a hearing or any other activity relating to 

preparation of an environmental impact statement concerning the 

closure or removal. 

SEC. 106. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the requirements regarding the use of continuing contracts under the authority of section 206 of the Water Resources Development Act of 

1999 (33 U.S.C. 2331) shall apply only to projects funded under the 

Operation and Maintenance account and the Operation and Maintenance subaccount of the Flood Control, Mississippi River and Tributaries account. 

SEC. 107. Within 75 days of the date of the Chief of Engineers 

Report on a water resource matter, the Assistant Secretary of the 

Army (Civil Works) shall submit the report to the appropriate authorizing and appropriating committees of the Congress. 

SEC. 108. None of the funds made available in title I of this Act 

may be used to award any continuing contract or to make modifications to any existing continuing contract that commits an amount 

for a project in excess of the amount appropriated for such project 

pursuant to this Act: Provided, That the amounts appropriated in 

this Act may be modified pursuant to the authorities provided in 

section 101 of this Act or through the application of unobligated 

balances for such project. 

SEC. 109. Within 90 days of the date of enactment of this Act, 

the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works) shall transmit to 

Congress his report on any water resources matter on which the 

Chief of Engineers has reported. 

SEC. 110. Section 123 of Public Law 108–137 (117 Stat. 1837) 

is amended by striking ‘‘in accordance with the Baltimore Metropolitan Water Resources-Gwynns Falls Watershed Feasibility Report’’ and all that follows and inserting the following language in 

lieu thereof: ‘‘in accordance with the Baltimore Metropolitan Water 

Resources Gwynns Falls Watershed Study—Draft Feasibility Report 

and Integrated Environmental Assessment prepared by the Corps of 

Engineers and the City of Baltimore, Maryland, dated April 2004. 

The non-Federal sponsor shall receive credit toward its share of 

project costs for work carried out by the non-Federal sponsor prior 

9 

to execution of a project cooperation agreement, if the Secretary determines that the work is integral to the project. The non-Federal 

sponsor may also receive credit for any work performed by the nonFederal sponsor pursuant to a project cooperation agreement. The 

non-Federal sponsor shall be reimbursed for any work performed by 

the non-Federal sponsor that is in excess of the non-Federal share 

of project costs.’’. SEC. 111. None of the funds in this Act may be expended by the 

Secretary of the Army to construct the Port Jersey element of the 

New York and New Jersey Harbor or to reimburse the local sponsor 

for the construction of the Port Jersey element until commitments 

for construction of container handling facilities are obtained from 

the non-Federal sponsor for a second user along the Port Jersey element. 

SEC. 112. MARMET LOCK, KANAWHA RIVER, WEST VIRGINIA.—

Section 101(a)(31) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 

(110 Stat. 3666), is amended by striking ‘‘$229,581,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$358,000,000’’. 

SEC. 113. TRUCKEE MEADOWS FLOOD CONTROL PROJECT, NEVADA.—The non-federal funds expended for purchase of lands, easements and rights-of-way, implementation of project monitoring and 

assessment, and construction and implementation of recreation, ecosystem restoration, and water quality improvement features, including the provision of 6700 acre-feet of water rights no later than the 

effective date of the Truckee River Operating Agreement for re-vegetation, reestablishment and maintenance of riverine and riparian 

habitat of the Lower Truckee River and Pyramid Lake, whether expended prior to or after the signing of the Project Cooperation 

Agreement (PCA), shall be fully credited to the non-federal sponsor’s 

share of costs for the project: Provided, That for the purposes of benefit-cost ratio calculations in the General Reevaluation Report 

(GRR), the Truckee Meadows Nevada Flood Control Project shall be 

defined as a single unit and non-separable. 

SEC. 114. WATER REALLOCATION, LAKE CUMBERLAND, KENTUCKY. (a) IN GENERAL.—Subject to subsection (b), none of the 

funds made available by this Act may be used to carry out any 

water reallocation project or component under the Wolf Creek 

Project, Lake Cumberland, Kentucky, authorized under the Act of 

June 28, 1938 (52 Stat. 1215, chapter 795) and the Act of July 24, 

1946 (60 Stat. 636, chapter 595). 

(b) EXISTING REALLOCATIONS.—Subsection (a) shall not apply 

to any water reallocation for Lake Cumberland, Kentucky, that is 

carried out subject to an agreement or payment schedule in effect on 

the date of enactment of this Act. 

SEC. 115. Section 529(b)(3) of Public Law 106–541 is amended 

by striking ‘‘$10,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$20,000,000’’ in lieu thereof. 

SEC. 116. YAZOO BASIN, BIG SUNFLOWER RIVER, MISSISSIPPI.—

The Yazoo Basin, Big Sunflower River, Mississippi, project authorized by the Flood Control Act of 1944, as amended and modified, 

is further modified to include the design and construction at full 

Federal expense of such measures as determined by the Chief of Engineers to be advisable for the control and reduction of sedimentation, erosion and headcutting in watersheds of the Yazoo Basin: 

Yazoo Headwater and Big Sunflower. 

10 

SEC. 117. LOWER MISSISSIPPI RIVER MUSEUM AND RIVERFRONT

INTERPRETIVE SITE, MISSISSIPPI.—The Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4811) is amended by—

(1) in section 103(c)(2) by striking ‘‘property currently held 

by the Resolution Trust Corporation in the vicinity of the Mississippi River Bridge’’ and inserting ‘‘riverfront property’’; and 

(2) in section 103(c)(7)—

(A) by striking ‘‘There is’’ and inserting the following: 

‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—There is’’; and 

(B) by striking ‘‘$2,000,000’’ and all that follows and 

inserting the following: ‘‘$15,000,000 to plan, design, and 

construct generally in accordance with the conceptual plan 

to be prepared by the Corps of Engineers. 

‘‘(B) FUNDING.—The planning, design, and construction of the Lower Mississippi River Museum and Riverfront 

Interpretive Site shall be carried out using funds appropriated as part of the Mississippi River Levees feature of 

the Mississippi River and Tributaries Project, authorized 

by the Act of May 15, 1928 (45 Stat. 534, chapter 569).’’. 

SEC. 118. Section 593(h) of Public Law 106–541 is amended by 

striking ‘‘$25,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$50,000,000’’ in lieu thereof. 

SEC. 119. The project for navigation, Los Angeles Harbor, California, authorized by section 101(b)(5) of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2577) is modified to authorize the 

Chief of Engineers to carry out the project at a total cost of 

$222,000,000. 

SEC. 120. Section 219(f) of the Water Resources Development 

Act of 1992 (Public Law 102–580; 106 Stat. 4835), as amended by 

section 502(b) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (Public Law 106–53) and section 108(d) of title I of division B of the 

Miscellaneous Appropriations Act, 2001 (as enacted by Public Law 

106–554; 114 Stat. 2763A–220), is further amended by adding at 

the end the following: 

‘‘(72) ALPINE, CALIFORNIA.—$10,000,000 is authorized for a 

water transmission main, Alpine, CA.’’. 

SEC. 121. (a) The Secretary of the Army may carry out and 

fund projects to comply with the 2003 Biological Opinion described 

in section 205(b) of the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act, 2005 (Public Law 108–447; 118 Stat. 2949) as amended 

by subsection (b) and may award grants and enter into contracts, 

cooperative agreements, or interagency agreements with participants 

in the Endangered Species Act Collaborative Program Workgroup 

referenced in section 209(a) of the Energy and Water Development 

Appropriations Act, 2004 (Public Law 108–137; 117 Stat. 1850) in 

order to carry out such projects. Any project undertaken under this 

subsection shall require a non-Federal cost share of 25 percent, 

which may be provided through in-kind services or direct cash contributions and which shall be credited on a programmatic basis instead of on a project-by-project basis, with reconciliation of total 

project costs and total non-Federal cost share calculated on a three 

year incremental basis. Non-Federal cost share that exceeds that 

which is required in any calculated three year increment shall be 

credited to subsequent three year increments. 

11 

(b) Section 205(b) of Public Law 108–447 (118 Stat. 2949) is 

amended by adding ‘‘and any amendments thereto’’ after the word ‘‘2003’’. SEC. 122. BLUESTONE, WEST VIRGINIA.—Section 547 of the 

Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 2676) is 

amended—

(1) in subsection (b)(1)(A) by striking ‘‘4 years’’ and inserting ‘‘5 years’’; 

(2) in subsection (b)(1)(B)(iii) by striking ‘‘if all’’ and all 

that follows through ‘‘facility’’ and inserting ‘‘assurance project’’; 

(3) in subsection (b)(1)(C) by striking ‘‘and construction’’ and inserting ‘‘, construction, and operation and maintenance’’; 

(4) by adding at the end of subsection (b) the following: 

‘‘(3) OPERATION AND OWNERSHIP.—The Tri-Cities Power 

Authority shall be the owner and operator of the hydropower facilities referred to in subsection (a).’’; 

(5) in subsection (c)(1)—

(A) by striking ‘‘No’’ and inserting ‘‘Unless otherwise 

provided, no’’; 

(B) by inserting ‘‘planning,’’ before ‘‘design’’; and 

(C) by striking ‘‘prior to’’ and all that follows through 

‘‘subsection (d)’’; 

(6) in subsection (c)(2) by striking ‘‘design’’ and inserting 

‘‘planning, design,’’; 

(7) in subsection (d)—

(A) by striking paragraphs (1) and (2) and inserting 

the following: 

‘‘(1) APPROVAL.—The Secretary shall review the design and 

construction activities for all features of the hydroelectric project 

that pertain to and affect stability of the dam and control the 

release of water from Bluestone Dam to ensure that the quality 

of construction of those features meets all standards established 

for similar facilities constructed by the Secretary.’’; 

(B) by redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (2); 

(C) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (2) 

(as so redesignated) and inserting ‘‘, except that hydroelectric power is no longer a project purpose of the facility 

so long as Tri-Cities Power Authority continues to exercise 

its responsibilities as the builder, owner, and operator of 

the hydropower facilities at Bluestone Dam. Water flow releases and flood control from the hydropower facilities shall 

be determined and directed by the Corps of Engineers.’’; 

and 

(D) by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘(3) COORDINATION.—Construction of the hydroelectric generating facilities shall be coordinated with the dam safety assurance project currently in the design and construction 

phases.’’; 

(8) in subsection (e) by striking ‘‘in accordance’’ and all that 

follows through ‘‘58 Stat. 890)’’; 

(9) in subsection (f)— (A) by striking ‘‘facility of the interconnected systems of 

reservoirs operated by the Secretary’’ each place it appears 

and inserting ‘‘facilities under construction under such 

agreements’’; and 

12 

(B) by striking ‘‘design’’ and inserting ‘‘planning, design’’; 

(10) in subsection (f)(2)— (A) by ‘‘Secretary’’ each place it appears and inserting ‘‘Tri-Cities Power Authority’’; and 

(B) by striking ‘‘facilities referred to in subsection (a)’’ and inserting ‘‘such facilities’’; 

(11) by striking paragraph (1) of subsection (g) and inserting the following: ‘‘(1) to arrange for the transmission of power to the market 

or to construct such transmission facilities as necessary to market the power produced at the facilities referred to in subsection 

(a) with funds contributed by the Tri-Cities Power Authority; 

and’’; 

(12) in subsection (g)(2) by striking ‘‘such facilities’’ and all 

that follows through ‘‘the Secretary’’ and inserting ‘‘the generating facility’’; and 

(13) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘(i) TRI-CITIES POWER AUTHORITY DEFINED.—In this section, 

the ‘Tri-Cities Power Authority’ refers to the entity established by the 

City of Hinton, West Virginia, the City of White Sulphur Springs, 

West Virginia, and the City of Philippi, West Virginia, pursuant to 

a document entitled ‘Second Amended and Restated Intergovernmental Agreement’ approved by the Attorney General of West Virginia on February 14, 2002.’’. 

SEC. 123. (a) IN GENERAL.— (1) After the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of 

the Army shall carry out the project for wastewater infrastructure, DeSoto County, Mississippi, authorized by section 

219(f)(30) of Public Law 102–580, as amended, in accordance 

with the provisions of this subsection. 

(2) The non-Federal interest shall be primarily responsible 

for carrying out work on the project referred to in paragraph (1) 

that is not covered by the Project Cooperation Agreement executed on May 13, 2002 or any amendments thereto, including 

work associated with the design, construction, management, 

and administration of the project. The non-Federal interest may 

carry out work on the project subject to obtaining any permits 

required pursuant to Federal and State laws and subject to 

general supervision and administrative oversight by the Secretary of the Army. 

(3) The Federal share of project costs incurred by the nonFederal interest in carrying out work on the project as provided 

for in paragraph (2) shall equal 75 percent of the total cost of 

the work and shall be in the form of grants or reimbursements, 

except that the total amount of Federal funds available for the 

project, including that portion of the project carried out as provided for in paragraph (2), may not exceed $55,000,000. 

(b) TECHNICAL AMENDMENT.—Section 6006 of the Emergency 

Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2005 (119 Stat. 282) is amended 

by striking ‘‘between May 13, 2002, and September 30, 2005’’ and 

inserting ‘‘after May 13, 2002’’ in lieu thereof. 

SEC. 124. The project for flood control, Las Vegas Wash and 

Tributaries (Flamingo and Tropicana Washes), Nevada, authorized 

by section 101(13) of Public Law 102–580 and modified by Public 

13 

Law 108–7 (H.J. Res. 2) Consolidated Appropriations Resolution, 

2003, section 107 is further modified to provide that the costs incurred for design and construction of the project channel crossings 

in the reach of the channels from Shelbourne Avenue proceeding 

north along the alignment of Durango Drive and continuing east 

along the Southern Beltway to Martin Avenue shall be added to the 

authorized cost of the project and such costs shall be cost shared 

and shall not be considered part of the non-Federal sponsor’s responsibility to provide lands, easements, and rights-of-way, and to 

perform relocations for the project. 

SEC. 125. RESTORATION OF THE LAKE MICHIGAN WATERFRONT

AND RELATED AREAS, LAKE AND PORTER COUNTIES, INDIANA.—The 

Secretary of the Army, acting through the Chief of Engineers is authorized and directed to carry out a continuing program for the restoration of the Lake Michigan Waterfront and Related Areas, Lake 

and Porter Counties, Indiana. 

(1) DEFINITIONS.—

(A) Related areas are defined as adjacent or close sites 

that have an impact or influence on the waterfront areas or 

aquatic habitat. 

(B) Restore is defined as—

(i) activities that improve a site’s ecosystem function, structure, and dynamic processes to a less degraded and more natural condition, and/or 

(ii) the management of contaminants that allow 

the site to be safely used for ecological and/or economic 

purposes. 

(2) JUSTIFICATION.—Projects can be justified by ecosystem 

benefits, clean-up of contaminated sites, public health, safety, 

economic benefits or any combination of these. Sites restored for 

economic purposes can be redeveloped by others. Restoration 

sites may include compatible recreation facilities that do not diminish the restoration purpose and do not increase the Federal 

cost share by more than 10 percent. 

(3) COST SHARING.—The construction of projects are cost 

shared at 65 percent Federal and 35 percent non-Federal except 

when there is a demonstration of innovative technology. The 

cost share is then 85 percent Federal and 15 percent non-Federal. 

(4) CREDIT.—

(A) The Secretary shall credit the non-Federal interest 

for the value of any lands, easements, rights-of-way, relocations, excavated and/or dredged material disposal areas required for carrying out a project. When the cost of the provision of all lands, easements, rights-of-way, relocations, excavated and/or dredged material disposal areas exceeds 

the non-Federal share, as identified in paragraph (3), the 

non-Federal interest may waive any right under Federal 

cost-sharing policy to receive cash reimbursement for any 

such value in excess of the non-Federal share as identified 

in paragraph (3). 

(B) The non-Federal interest may provide up to 100 

percent of the non-Federal share required under paragraph 

(3) in the form of services, materials, supplies, or other inkind contributions including monies paid pursuant to, or 

14 

the value of any in-kind service performed under, an administrative order on consent or jurisdictional consent decree but may not include any monies paid pursuant to, or 

the value of any in-kind service performed under, a unilateral administrative order or court order. 

(C) The total of non-Federal credit for services, materials, supplies, or other in-kind contributions when combined with lands, easements, rights-of-way, relocations, excavated and/or dredged material disposal areas shall not 

exceed the non-Federal share identified in paragraph (3). 

(5) OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, REPAIR, REPLACEMENT AND

REHABILITATION.—Operation, maintenance, repair, replacement 

and rehabilitation is 100 percent non-Federal cost. 

(6) HOLD HARMLESS.—Non-Federal interests hold and save 

harmless the United States free from claims or damages due to 

implementation of the project except for negligence of the government. 

(7) AUTHORIZED APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized to 

be appropriated to carry out this program $20,000,000 for each 

fiscal year. 

SEC. 126. CHESAPEAKE BAY OYSTER RESTORATION, MARYLAND

AND VIRGINIA.—The second sentence of section 704(b) of the Water 

Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2263(b)) is amended 

by striking ‘‘$20,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$30,000,000’’. SEC. 127. The project for flood control, Little Calumet River, Indiana, authorized by section 401(a) of Public Law 99–662 (100 Stat. 

4115) is modified to authorize the Secretary of the Army to complete 

the project in accordance with the post authorization change report 

dated August 2000 at a total cost of $198,000,000 with an estimated 

Federal cost of $148,500,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of 

$49,500,000. 

SEC. 128. AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED, CALIFORNIA (FOLSOM

DAM AND PERMANENT BRIDGE).—(a) COORDINATION OF FLOOD DAM- AGE REDUCTION AND DAM SAFETY.—The Secretary of the Army and 

the Secretary of the Interior are directed to collaborate on authorized activities to maximize flood damage reduction improvements 

and address dam safety needs at Folsom Dam and Reservoir, California. The Secretaries shall expedite technical reviews for flood 

damage reduction and dam safety improvements. In developing improvements under this section, the Secretaries shall consider reasonable modifications to existing authorized activities, including a potential auxiliary spillway. In conducting such activities, the Secretaries are authorized to expend funds for coordinated technical reviews and joint planning, and preliminary design activities. 

(b) SECRETARY’S ROLE.—Section 134 of Public Law 108–137 

(117 Stat. 1842) is modified to read as follows: 

‘‘SEC. 134. BRIDGE AUTHORIZATION. 

‘‘There is authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of the 

Army $30,000,000 for the construction of the permanent bridge described in section 128(a), above the $36,000,000 provided for in the 

recommended plan for bridge construction. The $30,000,000 shall 

not be subject to cost sharing requirements with non-Federal interests.’’. 

(c) CONFORMING CHANGE.—Section 128(a) of Public Law 108–

137 (117 Stat. 1838) is modified by deleting ‘‘above the $36,000,000 

15 

provided for in the recommended plan for bridge construction,’’ and 

inserting in lieu thereof the following: ‘‘above the sum of the $36,000,000 provided for in the recommended plan for bridge construction and the amount authorized to be appropriated by section 

134, as amended,’’. (d) MAXIMUM COST OF PROJECT.—The costs cited in subsections 

(b) and (c) shall be adjusted to allow for increases pursuant to section 902 of Public Law 99–662 (100 Stat. 4183). For purposes of 

making adjustments pursuant to this subsection, the date of authorization of the bridge project shall be December 1, 2003. 

(e) EXPEDITED CONSTRUCTION.—The Secretary, in coordination 

with the Secretary of the Interior and affected non-federal officials 

(including the City of Folsom, California), shall expedite construction of a new bridge and associated roadway authorized in Public 

Law 108–137. The Secretary, to the extent practicable, may construct such work in a manner that is compatible with the design 

and construction of authorized projects for flood damage reduction 

and dam safety. The Secretary and the Secretary of the Interior 

shall expedite actions under their respective jurisdictions to facilitate timely completion of construction. 

(f) REPORT TO CONGRESS.—The Secretary of the Army, in consultation with the Secretary of the Interior and non-federal interests, shall report to Congress within ninety days of the date of enactment of this Act, and at four-month intervals thereafter, on the status and schedule of planning, design and construction activity. 

SEC. 129. JACKSONVILLE HARBOR, FLORIDA.—(a) The project for 

navigation, Jacksonville Harbor, Florida, authorized by section 

101(a)(17) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 

Stat. 276), is modified to authorize the Secretary to extend the navigation features in accordance with the Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated July 22, 2003, at a total cost of $14,658,000, with an 

estimated Federal cost of $9,636,000 and an estimated non-Federal 

cost of $5,022,000. 

(b) The non-Federal share of the costs of the General Reevaluation Reports on the Jacksonville Harbor which were begun prior to 

August 2004, shall be consistent with the non-Federal costs in implementing the overall construction project. 

SEC. 130. Section 594(g) of the Water Resources Development 

Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 383) is amended by striking ‘‘$60,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$240,000,000’’. SEC. 131. ONONDAGA LAKE, NEW YORK.—Section 573 of the 

Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 372) is amended—

(1) in subsection (f) by striking ‘‘$10,000,000’’ and inserting 

‘‘$30,000,000’’; 

(2) by redesignating subsections (f) and (g) as subsections 

(g) and (h), respectively; and 

(3) by inserting after subsection (e) the following: 

‘‘(f) NONPROFIT ENTITIES.—Notwithstanding section 221(b) of 

the Flood Control Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d–5b(b)), for any 

project carried out under this section, a non-Federal interest may include a nonprofit entity, with the consent of the affected local government.’’. SEC. 132. WHITE RIVER BASIN, ARKANSAS.—(a) MINIMUM

FLOWS.—

16 

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary is authorized and directed 

to implement alternatives BS–3 and NF–7, as described in the 

White River Minimum Flows Reallocation Study Report, Arkansas and Missouri, dated July 2004. 

(2) COST SHARING AND ALLOCATION.—Reallocation of storage and planning, design and construction of White River Minimum Flows project facilities shall be considered fish and wildlife enhancement that provides national benefits and shall be a 

Federal expense in accordance with section 906(e) of the Water 

Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2283(e)). The 

non-Federal interests shall provide relocations or modifications 

to public and private lakeside facilities at Bull Shoals Lake and 

Norfork Lake to allow reasonable continued use of the facilities 

with the storage reallocation as determined by the Secretary in 

consultation with the non-Federal interests. Operations and 

maintenance costs of the White River Minimum Flows project 

facilities shall be 100 percent Federal. All Federal costs for the 

White River Minimum Flows project shall be considered non-reimbursable. 

(3) IMPACTS ON NON-FEDERAL PROJECT.—The Administrator of Southwestern Power Administration, in consultation 

with the project licensee and the relevant state public utility 

commissions, shall determine any impacts on electric energy 

and capacity generated at Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Project No. 2221 caused by the storage reallocation at Bull 

Shoals Lake, based on data and recommendations provided by 

the relevant state public utility commissions. The licensee of 

Project No. 2221 shall be fully compensated by the Corps of Engineers for those impacts on the basis of the present value of the 

estimated future lifetime replacement costs of the electrical energy and capacity at the time of implementation of the White 

River Minimum Flows project. Such costs shall be included in 

the costs of implementing the White River Minimum Flows 

project and allocated in accordance with subsection (a)(2) 

above. 

(4) OFFSET.—In carrying out this subsection, losses to the 

Federal hydropower purpose of the Bull Shoals and Norfork 

Projects shall be offset by a reduction in the costs allocated to 

the Federal hydropower purpose. Such reduction shall be determined by the Administrator of the Southwestern Power Administration on the basis of the present value of the estimated future lifetime replacement cost of the electrical energy and capacity at the time of implementation of the White River Minimum 

Flows project. 

(b) FISH HATCHERY.—In constructing, operating, and maintaining the fish hatchery at Beaver Lake, Arkansas, authorized by section 105 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1976 (90 Stat. 

2921), losses to the Federal hydropower purpose of the Beaver Lake 

Project shall be offset by a reduction in the costs allocated to the 

Federal hydropower purpose. Such reduction shall be determined by 

the Administrator of the Southwestern Power Administration based 

on the present value of the estimated future lifetime replacement 

cost of the electrical energy and capacity at the time operation of the 

hatchery begins. 

17 

(c) REPEAL.—Section 374 of the Water Resources Development 

Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 321) and section 304 of the Water Resources 

Development Act of 2000 (Public Law 106–541) are repealed. 

SEC. 133. CALCASIEU SHIP CHANNEL, LOUISIANA.—(a) IN GEN- ERAL.—At such time as Pujo Heirs and Westland Corporation convey all right, title, and interest in and to the real property described 

in paragraph (b)(1) to the United States, the Secretary shall convey 

all right, title, and interest of the United States in and to the real 

property described in paragraph (b)(2) to Pujo Heirs and Westland 

Corporation. 

(b) LAND DESCRIPTION.—The parcels of land referred to in 

paragraph (a) are the following: 

(1) NON-FEDERAL INTEREST IN LAND.—An easement for 

placement of dredged materials over a contiguous equivalent 

area to the real property described in subparagraph (2). The 

parcels on which such an easement may be exchanged is all of 

the area within the diked or confined boundaries of the Corps 

of Engineers Dredge Material Placement Area M comprising 

Tract 128E, Tract 129E, Tract 131E, Tract 41A, Tract 42, Tract 

132E, Tract 130E, Tract 134E, Tract 133E–3, Tract 140E, or 

some combination thereof. 

(2) FEDERAL INTEREST IN LAND.—An easement for placement of dredged materials over an area in Cameron Parish, 

Louisiana, known as portions of Government Tract Numbers 

139E–2 and 48 (both tracts on the west shore of the Calcasieu 

Ship Channel), and other tracts known as Corps of Engineers 

Dredge Material Placement Area O. 

(c) CONDITIONS.—The exchange of real property under paragraph (a) shall be subject to the following conditions: 

(1) DEEDS.—

(A) NON-FEDERAL LAND.—The conveyance of the real 

property described in paragraph (b)(1) to the Secretary 

shall be by a warranty deed acceptable to the Secretary. 

(B) FEDERAL LAND.—The conveyance of the real property described in paragraph (b)(2) to Pujo Heirs and 

Westland Corporation shall be by a quitclaim deed. 

(2) TIME LIMIT FOR EXCHANGE.—The land exchange under 

paragraph (a) shall be completed not later than six months 

after the date of enactment of this Act. 

(3) INCREMENTAL COSTS.—As determined by the Secretary, 

incremental costs to the Lake Charles Harbor and Terminal 

District associated with the preparation of the area and the 

placement of dredge material in the new disposal easement 

area, paragraph (b)(1), including, site preparation costs, associated testing, permitting, mitigation and diking costs associated 

with such new disposal easement over the costs that would have 

been incurred in the placement of dredge material in the old 

disposal easement area, paragraph (b)(2) (comprising all of 

Corps of Engineers Dredge Material Placement Area O) up to 

the disposal capacity equivalent of the property described in 

paragraph (b)(2), shall be made available by the Owners. Owners shall make appropriated guarantees, as agreed to by the 

Secretary, that funds will be available as needed to cover such 

incremental costs. The Lake Charles Harbor and Terminal District, as local sponsor for the Calcasieu Ship Channel Project, 

18 

shall not be assessed or caused to incur any costs arising out 

of, associated with or as a consequence of the land exchange authorized under paragraph (a). 

(d) VALUE OF PROPERTIES.—If the appraised fair market value, 

as determined by the Secretary, of the real property conveyed to Pujo 

Heirs and Westland Corporation by the Secretary under paragraph 

(a) exceeds the appraised fair market value, as determined by the 

Secretary, of the real property conveyed to the United States by Pujo 

Heirs and Westland Corporation under paragraph (a), Pujo Heirs 

and Westland Corporation shall make a payment to the United 

States equal to the excess in cash or a cash equivalent that is satisfactory to the Secretary. 

SEC. 134. PROJECT MODIFICATION.—(a) IN GENERAL.—The 

project for flood damage reduction, environmental restoration, recreation, Johnson Creek, Arlington, Texas, authorized by section 

101(b)(14) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 

Stat. 280–281) is modified—

(1) to deauthorize the ecosystem restoration portion of the 

project that consists of approximately 90 acres of land located 

between Randol Mill and the Union Pacific East/West line; and 

(2) to authorize the Secretary of the Army to design and 

construct an ecosystem restoration project on lands identified in 

subsection (c) that will provide the same or greater level of national ecosystem restoration benefits as the portion of the project 

described in paragraph (1). 

(b) CREDIT TOWARD FEDERAL SHARE.—The Secretary of the 

Army shall credit toward the Federal share of the cost of the modified project the costs incurred by the Secretary to carry out the 

project as originally authorized under section 101(b)(14) of the 

Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 280). The nonFederal interest shall not be responsible for reimbursing the Secretary for any amount credited under this subsection. 

(c) COMPARABLE PROPERTY.—Not later than 6 months after the 

date of enactment of this Act, the City of Arlington, Texas, shall 

identify lands, acceptable to the Secretary of the Army, amounting 

to not less than 90 acres within the City, where an ecosystem restoration project may be constructed to provide the same or greater 

level of National ecosystem restoration benefits as the land described in subsection (a)(1). 

SEC. 135. Funds made available in Public Law 105–62 and 

Public Law 105–245 for Hudson River, Athens, New York, shall be 

available for projects in the Catskill/Delaware watersheds in Delaware and Greene Counties, New York, under the authority of the 

New York City Watershed Environmental Assistance Program. 

SEC. 136. None of the funds contained in title I of this Act shall 

be available to permanently reassign or to temporarily reassign in 

excess of 180 days personnel from the Charleston, South Carolina 

district office: Provided, That this limitation shall not apply to voluntary change of station. 

SEC. 137. The Secretary of the Army, acting through the Chief 

of Engineers, is hereby authorized and directed to design and construct until hereafter completed, the recreation and access features 

designated as Phase II of the Louisville Waterfront Park, Kentucky, 

as described in the Louisville Waterfront Park, Phases II and III, 

Detailed Project Report, by the Louisville District of the Corps of 

19 

Engineers dated May 2002. The project shall be cost shared 50 percent Federal and 50 percent non-Federal. The cost of project work 

undertaken by the non-Federal interests, including but not limited 

to prior planning, design, and construction, shall be credited toward 

the non-Federal share of project design and construction costs. 

SEC. 138. AKUTAN, ALASKA.—(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary 

of the Army is authorized to carry out the project for navigation, 

Akutan, Alaska, substantially in accordance with the plans, and 

subject to the conditions, described in the Report of the Chief of Engineers dated December 20, 2004, at a total cost of $19,700,000. 

(b) TREATMENT OF CERTAIN DREDGING.—The headlands dredging for the mooring basin shall be considered a general navigation 

feature for purposes of estimating the non-Federal share of the cost 

of the project. 

SEC. 139. (a) IN GENERAL.—The project for the beneficial use of 

dredged material at Poplar Island, Maryland, authorized by section 

537 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 

3776) shall be known as and designated as the ‘‘Paul S. Sarbanes 

Ecosystem Restoration Project at Poplar Island’’. 

(b) REFERENCE.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper or other record of the United States (including reference 

by the Corps of Engineers) to the project referred to in subsection 

(a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Paul S. Sarbanes Ecosystem Restoration Project at Poplar Island’’. 

(c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The project designation in this section 

shall become effective on January 4, 2007. 

TITLE II 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

CENTRAL UTAH PROJECT

CENTRAL UTAH PROJECT COMPLETION ACCOUNT

For carrying out activities authorized by the Central Utah 

Project Completion Act, $32,614,000, to remain available until expended, of which $946,000 shall be deposited into the Utah Reclamation Mitigation and Conservation Account for use by the Utah 

Reclamation Mitigation and Conservation Commission. 

In addition, for necessary expenses incurred in carrying out related responsibilities of the Secretary of the Interior, $1,736,000, to 

remain available until expended. 

BUREAU OF RECLAMATION

The following appropriations shall be expended to execute authorized functions of the Bureau of Reclamation: 

WATER AND RELATED RESOURCES

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

For management, development, and restoration of water and related natural resources and for related activities, including the operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation of reclamation and other 

facilities, participation in fulfilling related Federal responsibilities 

to Native Americans, and related grants to, and cooperative and 

20 

other agreements with, State and local governments, Indian tribes, 

and others, $883,514,000, to remain available until expended, of 

which $59,544,000 shall be available for transfer to the Upper Colorado River Basin Fund and $21,998,000 shall be available for 

transfer to the Lower Colorado River Basin Development Fund; of 

which such amounts as may be necessary may be advanced to the 

Colorado River Dam Fund; of which not more than $500,000 is for 

high priority projects which shall be carried out by the Youth Conservation Corps, as authorized by 16 U.S.C. 1706: Provided, That 

such transfers may be increased or decreased within the overall appropriation under this heading: Provided further, That of the total 

appropriated, the amount for program activities that can be financed by the Reclamation Fund or the Bureau of Reclamation special fee account established by 16 U.S.C. 460l–6a(i) shall be derived 

from that Fund or account: Provided further, That funds contributed under 43 U.S.C. 395 are available until expended for the purposes for which contributed: Provided further, That funds advanced 

under 43 U.S.C. 397a shall be credited to this account and are 

available until expended for the same purposes as the sums appropriated under this heading: Provided further, That funds available 

for expenditure for the Departmental Irrigation Drainage Program 

may be expended by the Bureau of Reclamation for site remediation 

on a non-reimbursable basis: Provided further, That $500,000 of the 

funds provided herein shall be used on a non-reimbursable basis to 

fund the collection of technical and environmental data to be used 

to evaluate potential rehabilitation of the St. Mary Storage Unit facilities, Milk River Project, Montana, and that Reclamation shall 

enter into cooperative agreements with the State of Montana or the 

Blackfeet Tribe to carry out such work if the Secretary determines 

such agreements would be cost-effective and efficient. 

CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT RESTORATION FUND

For carrying out the programs, projects, plans, and habitat restoration, improvement, and acquisition provisions of the Central 

Valley Project Improvement Act, $52,219,000, to be derived from 

such sums as may be collected in the Central Valley Project Restoration Fund pursuant to sections 3407(d), 3404(c)(3), 3405(f), and 

3406(c)(1) of Public Law 102–575, to remain available until expended: Provided, That the Bureau of Reclamation is directed to assess and collect the full amount of the additional mitigation and 

restoration payments authorized by section 3407(d) of Public Law 

102–575: Provided further, That none of the funds made available 

under this heading may be used for the acquisition or leasing of 

water for in-stream purposes if the water is already committed to 

in-stream purposes by a court adopted decree or order. 

CALIFORNIA BAY-DELTA RESTORATION

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

For carrying out activities authorized by the Water Supply, Reliability, and Environmental Improvement Act, consistent with 

plans to be approved by the Secretary of the Interior, $37,000,000, 

to remain available until expended, of which such amounts as may 

be necessary to carry out such activities may be transferred to appropriate accounts of other participating Federal agencies to carry 

21 

out authorized purposes: Provided, That funds appropriated herein 

may be used for the Federal share of the costs of CALFED Program 

management: Provided further, That the use of any funds provided 

to the California Bay-Delta Authority for program-wide management and oversight activities shall be subject to the approval of the 

Secretary of the Interior: Provided further, That CALFED implementation shall be carried out in a balanced manner with clear performance measures demonstrating concurrent progress in achieving 

the goals and objectives of the Program: Provided further, That 

$500,000 shall be transferred to the Army Corps of Engineers to 

carry out the report on levee stability reconstruction projects and 

priorities authorized under section 103(f)(3) of Public Law 108–361. 

POLICY AND ADMINISTRATION

For necessary expenses of policy, administration, and related 

functions in the office of the Commissioner, the Denver office, and 

offices in the five regions of the Bureau of Reclamation, to remain 

available until expended, $57,917,000, to be derived from the Reclamation Fund and be nonreimbursable as provided in 43 U.S.C. 

377: Provided, That no part of any other appropriation in this Act 

shall be available for activities or functions budgeted as policy and 

administration expenses. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISION

Appropriations for the Bureau of Reclamation shall be available for purchase of not to exceed 14 passenger motor vehicles, of 

which 11 are for replacement only. 

GENERAL PROVISIONS, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

SEC. 201. (a) None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made 

available by this Act may be used to determine the final point of 

discharge for the interceptor drain for the San Luis Unit until development by the Secretary of the Interior and the State of California of a plan, which shall conform to the water quality standards 

of the State of California as approved by the Administrator of the 

Environmental Protection Agency, to minimize any detrimental effect of the San Luis drainage waters. 

(b) The costs of the Kesterson Reservoir Cleanup Program and 

the costs of the San Joaquin Valley Drainage Program shall be classified by the Secretary of the Interior as reimbursable or nonreimbursable and collected until fully repaid pursuant to the 

‘‘Cleanup Program-Alternative Repayment Plan’’ and the ‘‘SJVDPAlternative Repayment Plan’’ described in the report entitled ‘‘Repayment Report, Kesterson Reservoir Cleanup Program and San 

Joaquin Valley Drainage Program, February 1995’’, prepared by the 

Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation. Any future obligations of funds by the United States relating to, or providing for, 

drainage service or drainage studies for the San Luis Unit shall be 

fully reimbursable by San Luis Unit beneficiaries of such service or 

studies pursuant to Federal reclamation law. 

SEC. 202. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made 

available by this or any other Act may be used to pay the salaries 

and expenses of personnel to purchase or lease water in the Middle 

Rio Grande or the Carlsbad Projects in New Mexico unless said 

22 

purchase or lease is in compliance with the purchase requirements 

of section 202 of Public Law 106–60. 

SEC. 203. (a) Section 1(a) of the Lower Colorado Water Supply 

Act (Public Law 99–655) is amended by adding at the end the following: ‘‘The Secretary is authorized to enter into an agreement or 

agreements with the city of Needles or the Imperial Irrigation District for the design and construction of the remaining stages of the 

Lower Colorado Water Supply Project on or after November 1, 2004, 

and the Secretary shall ensure that any such agreement or agreements include provisions setting forth: (1) the responsibilities of the 

parties to the agreement for design and construction; (2) the locations of the remaining wells, discharge pipelines, and power transmission lines; (3) the remaining design capacity of up to 5,000 acrefeet per year which is the authorized capacity less the design capacity of the first stage constructed; (4) the procedures and requirements for approval and acceptance by the Secretary of the remaining stages, including approval of the quality of construction, measures to protect the public health and safety, and procedures for protection of such stages; (5) the rights, responsibilities, and liabilities 

of each party to the agreement; and (6) the term of the agreement.’’. (b) Section 2(b) of the Lower Colorado Water Supply Act (Public 

Law 99–655) is amended by adding at the end the following: ‘‘Subject to the demand of such users along or adjacent to the Colorado 

River for Project water, the Secretary is further authorized to contract with additional persons or entities who hold Boulder Canyon 

Project Act section 5 contracts for municipal and industrial uses 

within the State of California for the use or benefit of Project water 

under such terms as the Secretary determines will benefit the interest of Project users along the Colorado River.’’. SEC. 204. Funds under this title for Drought Emergency Assistance shall be made available primarily for leasing of water for specified drought related purposes from willing lessors, in compliance 

with existing State laws and administered under State water priority allocation. Such leases may be entered into with an option to 

purchase: Provided, That such purchase is approved by the State in 

which the purchase takes place and the purchase does not cause economic harm within the State in which the purchase is made. 

SEC. 205. The Secretary of the Interior, acting through the 

Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation, is authorized to enter 

into grants, cooperative agreements, and other agreements with irrigation or water districts and States to fund up to 50 percent of the 

cost of planning, designing, and constructing improvements that 

will conserve water, increase water use efficiency, or enhance water 

management through measurement or automation, at existing water 

supply projects within the States identified in the Act of June 17, 

1902, as amended, and supplemented: Provided, That when such 

improvements are to federally owned facilities, such funds may be 

provided in advance on a non-reimbursable basis to an entity operating affected transferred works or may be deemed non-reimbursable for non-transferred works: Provided further, That the calculation of the non-Federal contribution shall provide for consideration 

of the value of any in-kind contributions, but shall not include 

funds received from other Federal agencies: Provided further, That 

the cost of operating and maintaining such improvements shall be 

the responsibility of the non-Federal entity: Provided further, That 

23 

this section shall not supercede any existing project-specific funding 

authority: Provided further, That the Secretary is also authorized to 

enter into grants or cooperative agreements with universities or nonprofit research institutions to fund water use efficiency research. 

SEC. 206. WATER DESALINATION ACT.—Section 8 of Public Law 

104–298 (The Water Desalination Act of 1996) (110 Stat. 3624) as 

amended by section 210 of Public Law 108–7 (117 Stat. 146) and 

by section 6015 of Public Law 109–13 is amended by—

(1) in paragraph (a) by striking ‘‘2005’’ and inserting in 

lieu thereof ‘‘2006’’; and 

(2) in paragraph (b) by striking ‘‘2005’’ and inserting in 

lieu thereof ‘‘2006’’. 

SEC. 207. Section 17(b) of the Colorado Ute Indian Water 

Rights Settlement Act of 1988 as amended (Public Law 100–585, 

102 Stat. 2973; Public Law 106–554, 114 Stat. 2763A–266) is 

amended by striking ‘‘within 7 years’’ and all that follows through 

‘‘following the date of enactment of this section’’ and inserting ‘‘for 

each of fiscal years 2006 through 2012’’. 

SEC. 208. (a)(1) Using amounts made available under section 

2507 of the Farm and Security Rural Investment Act of 2002 (43 

U.S.C. 2211 note; Public Law 107–171), the Secretary shall provide 

not more than $70,000,000 to the University of Nevada—

(A) to acquire from willing sellers land, water appurtenant 

to the land, and related interests in the Walker River Basin, 

Nevada; and 

(B) to establish and administer an agricultural and natural resources center, the mission of which shall be to undertake research, restoration, and educational activities in the 

Walker River Basin relating to—

(i) innovative agricultural water conservation; 

(ii) cooperative programs for environmental restoration; 

(iii) fish and wildlife habitat restoration; and 

(iv) wild horse and burro research and adoption marketing. 

(2) In acquiring interests under paragraph (1)(A), the University of Nevada shall make acquisitions that the University determines are the most beneficial to—

(A) the establishment and operation of the agricultural and 

natural resources research center authorized under paragraph 

(1)(B); and 

(B) environmental restoration in the Walker River Basin. 

(b)(1) Using amounts made available under section 2507 of the 

Farm and Security Rural Investment Act of 2002 (43 U.S.C. 2211 

note; Public Law 107–171), the Secretary shall provide not more 

than $10,000,000 for a water lease and purchase program for the 

Walker River Paiute Tribe. 

(2) Water acquired under paragraph (1) shall be—

(A) acquired only from willing sellers; 

(B) designed to maximize water conveyances to Walker 

Lake; and 

(C) located only within the Walker River Paiute Indian 

Reservation. 

(c) Using amounts made available under section 2507 of the 

Farm and Security Rural Investment Act of 2002 (43 U.S.C. 2211 

24 

note; Public Law 107–171), the Secretary, acting through the Commissioner of Reclamation, shall provide—

(1) $10,000,000 for tamarisk eradication, riparian area restoration, and channel restoration efforts within the Walker 

River Basin that are designed to enhance water delivery to 

Walker Lake, with priority given to activities that are expected 

to result in the greatest increased water flows to Walker Lake; 

and 

(2) $5,000,000 to the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, the Walker River Paiute Tribe, and the Nevada Division of 

Wildlife to undertake activities, to be coordinated by the Director of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, to complete 

the design and implementation of the Western Inland Trout Initiative and Fishery Improvements in the State of Nevada with 

an emphasis on the Walker River Basin. 

(d) For each day after June 30, 2006, on which the Bureau of 

Reclamation fails to comply with subsections (a), (b), and (c), the 

total amount made available for salaries and expenses of the Bureau of Reclamation shall be reduced by $100,000 per day. 

SEC. 209. (a) The Secretary of the Interior is authorized to complete a special report to update the analysis of costs and associated 

benefits of the Auburn-Folsom South Unit, Central Valley Project, 

California authorized under Federal reclamation laws and the Act 

of September 2, 1965, P.L. 89–161, 79 Stat. 615 in order to—

(1) identify those project features that are still relevant; 

(2) identify changes in benefit values from previous analyses and update to current levels; 

(3) identify design standard changes from the 1978 Reclamation design which require updated project engineering; 

(4) assess risks and uncertainties associated with the 1978 

Reclamation design; 

(5) update design and reconnaissance-level cost estimate for 

features identified under paragraph (1); and 

(6) perform other analyses that the Secretary deems appropriate to assist in the determination of whether a full feasibility 

study is warranted. 

(b) There are authorized to be appropriated $1,000,000 to carry 

out this section. The cost of completing this update shall be non-reimbursable. 

TITLE III 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

ENERGY PROGRAMS 

ENERGY SUPPLY AND CONSERVATION

For Department of Energy expenses including the purchase, 

construction, and acquisition of plant and capital equipment, and 

other expenses necessary for energy supply and energy conservation 

activities in carrying out the purposes of the Department of Energy 

Organization Act (42 U.S.C. 7101 et seq.), including the acquisition 

or condemnation of any real property or any facility or for plant or 

facility acquisition, construction, or expansion, $1,830,936,000, to 

remain available until expended. 

25 

CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY

(DEFERRAL AND RESCISSION)

Of the funds made available under this heading for obligation 

in prior years, $257,000,000 shall not be available until October 1, 

2006: Provided, That funds made available in previous appropriations Acts shall be made available for any ongoing project regardless of the separate request for proposal under which the project was 

selected: Provided further, That $20,000,000 of uncommitted balances is rescinded. 

FOSSIL ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

For necessary expenses in carrying out fossil energy research 

and development activities, under the authority of the Department 

of Energy Organization Act (Public Law 95–91), including the acquisition of interest, including defeasible and equitable interests in 

any real property or any facility or for plant or facility acquisition 

or expansion, the hire of passenger motor vehicles, the hire, maintenance, and operation of aircraft, the purchase, repair, and cleaning 

of uniforms, the reimbursement to the General Services Administration for security guard services, and for conducting inquiries, technological investigations and research concerning the extraction, 

processing, use, and disposal of mineral substances without objectionable social and environmental costs (30 U.S.C. 3, 1602, and 

1603), $597,994,000, to remain available until expended, of which 

$18,000,000 is to continue a multi-year project coordinated with the 

private sector for FutureGen, without regard to the terms and conditions applicable to clean coal technological projects: Provided, That 

the initial planning and research stages of the FutureGen project 

shall include a matching requirement from non-Federal sources of 

at least 20 percent of the costs: Provided further, That any demonstration component of such project shall require a matching requirement from non-Federal sources of at least 50 percent of the 

costs of the component: Provided further, That of the amounts provided, $50,000,000 is available, after coordination with the private 

sector, for a request for proposals for a Clean Coal Power Initiative 

providing for competitively-awarded research, development, and 

demonstration projects to reduce the barriers to continued and expanded coal use: Provided further, That no project may be selected 

for which sufficient funding is not available to provide for the total 

project: Provided further, That funds shall be expended in accordance with the provisions governing the use of funds contained under 

the heading ‘‘Clean Coal Technology’’ in 42 U.S.C. 5903d as well as 

those contained under the heading ‘‘Clean Coal Technology’’ in prior 

appropriations: Provided further, That the Department may include 

provisions for repayment of Government contributions to individual 

projects in an amount up to the Government contribution to the 

project on terms and conditions that are acceptable to the Department including repayments from sale and licensing of technologies 

from both domestic and foreign transactions: Provided further, That 

such repayments shall be retained by the Department for future 

coal-related research, development and demonstration projects: Provided further, That any technology selected under this program 

shall be considered a Clean Coal Technology, and any project seVerDate Aug 31 2005 21:24 Nov 08, 2005 Jkt 024421 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6603 E:\HR\OC\HR275.XXX HR275
26 

lected under this program shall be considered a Clean Coal Technology Project, for the purposes of 42 U.S.C. 7651n, and chapters 

51, 52, and 60 of title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations: Provided further, That no part of the sum herein made available shall 

be used for the field testing of nuclear explosives in the recovery of 

oil and gas: Provided further, That up to 4 percent of program direction funds available to the National Energy Technology Laboratory may be used to support Department of Energy activities not included in this account: Provided further, That for fiscal year 2006 

salaries for Federal employees performing research and development 

activities at the National Energy Technology Laboratory can continue to be funded from program accounts: Provided further, That 

the Secretary of Energy is authorized to accept fees and contributions from public and private sources, to be deposited in a contributed funds account, and prosecute projects using such fees and contributions in cooperation with other Federal, State, or private agencies or concerns: Provided further, That revenues and other moneys 

received by or for the account of the Department of Energy or otherwise generated by sale of products in connection with projects of the 

Department appropriated under the Fossil Energy Research and Development account may be retained by the Secretary of Energy, to 

be available until expended, and used only for plant construction, 

operation, costs, and payments to cost-sharing entities as provided 

in appropriate cost-sharing contracts or agreements. 

NAVAL PETROLEUM AND OIL SHALE RESERVES

For expenses necessary to carry out naval petroleum and oil 

shale reserve activities, including the hire of passenger motor vehicles, $21,500,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, 

That, notwithstanding any other provision of law, unobligated 

funds remaining from prior years shall be available for all naval 

petroleum and oil shale reserve activities. 

ELK HILLS SCHOOL LANDS FUND

For necessary expenses in fulfilling installment payments under 

the Settlement Agreement entered into by the United States and the 

State of California on October 11, 1996, as authorized by section 

3415 of Public Law 104–106, $48,000,000, for payment to the State 

of California for the State Teachers’ Retirement Fund, of which 

$46,000,000 will be derived from the Elk Hills School Lands Fund. 

STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE

For necessary expenses for Strategic Petroleum Reserve facility 

development and operations and program management activities 

pursuant to the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, as 

amended (42 U.S.C. 6201 et seq.), including the hire of passenger 

motor vehicles, the hire, maintenance, and operation of aircraft, the 

purchase, repair, and cleaning of uniforms, the reimbursement to 

the General Services Administration for security guard services, 

$166,000,000, to remain available until expended. 

27 

ENERGY INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION

For necessary expenses in carrying out the activities of the En- ergy Information Administration, $86,176,000, to remain available 

until expended. 

NON-DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP

For Department of Energy expenses, including the purchase, 

construction, and acquisition of plant and capital equipment and 

other expenses necessary for non-defense environmental cleanup activities in carrying out the purposes of the Department of Energy 

Organization Act (42 U.S.C. 7101 et seq.), including the acquisition 

or condemnation of any real property or any facility or for plant or 

facility acquisition, construction, or expansion, and the purchase of 

not to exceed six passenger motor vehicles, of which five shall be for 

replacement only, $353,219,000, to remain available until expended. 

URANIUM ENRICHMENT DECONTAMINATION AND DECOMMISSIONING

FUND

For necessary expenses in carrying out uranium enrichment facility decontamination and decommissioning, remedial actions, and 

other activities of title II of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as 

amended, and title X, subtitle A, of the Energy Policy Act of 1992, 

$562,228,000, to be derived from the Fund, to remain available 

until expended, of which $20,000,000 shall be available in accordance with title X, subtitle A, of the Energy Policy Act of 1992. 

SCIENCE

For Department of Energy expenses including the purchase, 

construction and acquisition of plant and capital equipment, and 

other expenses necessary for science activities in carrying out the 

purposes of the Department of Energy Organization Act (42 U.S.C. 

7101 et seq.), including the acquisition or condemnation of any real 

property or facility or for plant or facility acquisition, construction, 

or expansion, and purchase of not to exceed forty-seven passenger 

motor vehicles for replacement only, including not to exceed one ambulance and two buses, $3,632,718,000, to remain available until 

expended. 

NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL

For nuclear waste disposal activities to carry out the purposes 

of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, Public Law 97–425, as 

amended (the ‘‘Act’’), including the acquisition of real property or facility construction or expansion, $150,000,000, to remain available 

until expended, of which $100,000,000 shall be derived from the 

Nuclear Waste Fund: Provided, That of the funds made available 

in this Act for Nuclear Waste Disposal, $2,000,000 shall be provided 

to the State of Nevada solely for expenditures, other than salaries 

and expenses of State employees, to conduct scientific oversight responsibilities and participate in licensing activities pursuant to the 

Act: Provided further, That notwithstanding the lack of a written 

agreement with the State of Nevada under section 117(c) of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, Public Law 97–425, as amended, not 

less than $500,000 shall be provided to Nye County, Nevada, for onVerDate Aug 31 2005 21:24 Nov 08, 2005 Jkt 024421 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6603 E:\HR\OC\HR275.XXX HR275
28 

site oversight activities under section 117(d) of that Act: Provided 

further, That $7,500,000 shall be provided to affected units of local 

government, as defined in the Act, to conduct appropriate activities 

and participate in licensing activities: Provided further, That 7.5 

percent of the funds provided shall be made available to affected 

units of local government in California with the balance made 

available to affected units of local government in Nevada for distribution as determined by the Nevada units of local government: 

Provided further, That notwithstanding the provisions of Chapters 

65 and 75 of Title 31, the Department shall have no monitoring, auditing or other oversight rights or responsibilities over amounts provided to affected units of local government under this heading: Provided further, That the funds for the State of Nevada shall be made 

available solely to the Nevada Division of Emergency Management 

by direct payment and units of local government by direct payment: 

Provided further, That within 90 days of the completion of each 

Federal fiscal year, the Nevada Division of Emergency Management 

and the Governor of the State of Nevada shall provide certification 

to the Department of Energy that all funds expended from such payments have been expended for activities authorized by the Act and 

this Act: Provided further, That failure to provide such certification 

shall cause such entity to be prohibited from any further funding 

provided for similar activities: Provided further, That none of the 

funds herein appropriated may be: (1) used directly or indirectly to 

influence legislative action on any matter pending before Congress 

or a State legislature or for lobbying activity as provided in 18 

U.S.C. 1913; (2) used for litigation expenses; or (3) used to support 

multi-State efforts or other coalition building activities inconsistent 

with the restrictions contained in this Act: Provided further, That 

all proceeds and recoveries realized by the Secretary in carrying out 

activities authorized by the Act, including but not limited to, any 

proceeds from the sale of assets, shall be available without further 

appropriation and shall remain available until expended: Provided 

further, That no funds provided in this Act may be used to pursue 

repayment or collection of funds provided in any fiscal year to affected units of local government for oversight activities that had 

been previously approved by the Department of Energy, or to withhold payment of any such funds. 

DEPARTMENTAL ADMINISTRATION

For salaries and expenses of the Department of Energy necessary for departmental administration in carrying out the purposes 

of the Department of Energy Organization Act (42 U.S.C. 7101 et 

seq.), including the hire of passenger motor vehicles and official reception and representation expenses not to exceed $35,000, 

$252,817,000, to remain available until expended, plus such additional amounts as necessary to cover increases in the estimated 

amount of cost of work for others notwithstanding the provisions of 

the Anti-Deficiency Act (31 U.S.C. 1511 et seq.): Provided, That such 

increases in cost of work are offset by revenue increases of the same 

or greater amount, to remain available until expended: Provided 

further, That moneys received by the Department for miscellaneous 

revenues estimated to total $123,000,000 in fiscal year 2006 may be 

retained and used for operating expenses within this account, and 

may remain available until expended, as authorized by section 201 

29 

of Public Law 95–238, notwithstanding the provisions of 31 U.S.C. 

3302: Provided further, That the sum herein appropriated shall be 

reduced by the amount of miscellaneous revenues received during 

2006, and any related appropriated receipt account balances remaining from prior years’ miscellaneous revenues, so as to result in 

a final fiscal year 2006 appropriation from the general fund estimated at not more than $129,817,000: Provided further, That not 

later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the 

Secretary of Energy shall submit to the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate and the Committee on Appropriations of the 

House of Representatives a report, in unclassified form but with a 

classified appendix if necessary, on the Department of Energy’s plan 

to bring security for Building 3019 at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, into full compliance with the Department’s Design Basis Threat Policy: Provided further, That the report 

shall include— (1) a detailed description of any element of the Department’s Design Basis Threat Policy that is not to be fully addressed throughout the remaining lifetime of Building 3019; 

(2) a detailed description of the security implementation 

plan, including security personnel, perimeter detection capability, response capabilities, use of security technology, and 

methods of meeting physical standoff requirements; 

(3) a schedule with specific dates describing the milestones 

to achieve compliance with the Department’s Design Basis 

Threat Policy; 

(4) a security management plan signed by the Secretary of 

Energy specifying the program secretarial offices responsible for 

implementing and funding the security program, including any 

incremental funding requirements to upgrade security levels for 

the period during the material handling and processing activities leading to complete disposition of the stored inventory of 

special nuclear material; and 

(5) the justification for failing to fully comply with the Design Basis Threat Policy, if the Secretary does not intend to implement a security program at Building 3019 that fully complies with the Department’s Design Basis Threat requirements 

for new, continuing operations. 

OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL

For necessary expenses of the Office of the Inspector General in 

carrying out the provisions of the Inspector General Act of 1978, as 

amended, $42,000,000, to remain available until expended. 

ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES 

NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

WEAPONS ACTIVITIES

For Department of Energy expenses, including the purchase, 

construction, and acquisition of plant and capital equipment and 

other incidental expenses necessary for atomic energy defense weapons activities in carrying out the purposes of the Department of Energy Organization Act (42 U.S.C. 7101 et seq.), including the acquisition or condemnation of any real property or any facility or for 

30 

plant or facility acquisition, construction, or expansion; and the 

purchase of not to exceed 40 passenger motor vehicles, for replacement only, including not to exceed two buses; $6,433,936,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, That $81,350,000 is authorized to be appropriated for Project 01–D–124 HEU materials facility, Y–12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee: Provided further, That 

$7,000,000 is authorized to be appropriated for Project 05–D–140 

Project engineering and design (PED), various locations. 

DEFENSE NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION

For Department of Energy expenses, including the purchase, 

construction, and acquisition of plant and capital equipment and 

other incidental expenses necessary for atomic energy defense, defense nuclear nonproliferation activities, in carrying out the purposes of the Department of Energy Organization Act (42 U.S.C. 

7101 et seq.), including the acquisition or condemnation of any real 

property or any facility or for plant or facility acquisition, construction, or expansion, $1,631,151,000, to remain available until expended. 

NAVAL REACTORS

For Department of Energy expenses necessary for naval reactors 

activities to carry out the Department of Energy Organization Act 

(42 U.S.C. 7101 et seq.), including the acquisition (by purchase, condemnation, construction, or otherwise) of real property, plant, and 

capital equipment, facilities, and facility expansion, $789,500,000, 

to remain available until expended. 

OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR

For necessary expenses of the Office of the Administrator in the 

National Nuclear Security Administration, including official reception and representation expenses not to exceed $12,000, 

$341,869,000, to remain available until expended. 

ENVIRONMENTAL AND OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES 

DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP

For Department of Energy expenses, including the purchase, 

construction, and acquisition of plant and capital equipment and 

other expenses necessary for atomic energy defense environmental 

cleanup activities in carrying out the purposes of the Department of 

Energy Organization Act (42 U.S.C. 7101 et seq.), including the acquisition or condemnation of any real property or any facility or for 

plant or facility acquisition, construction, or expansion, 

$6,192,371,000, to remain available until expended. 

OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES

For Department of Energy expenses, including the purchase, 

construction, and acquisition of plant and capital equipment and 

other expenses, necessary for atomic energy defense, other defense 

activities, and classified activities, in carrying out the purposes of 

the Department of Energy Organization Act (42 U.S.C. 7101 et seq.), 

including the acquisition or condemnation of any real property or 

31 

any facility or for plant or facility acquisition, construction, or expansion, and the purchase of not to exceed ten passenger motor vehicles for replacement only, including not to exceed two buses; 

$641,998,000, to remain available until expended. 

DEFENSE NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL

For nuclear waste disposal activities to carry out the purposes 

of Public Law 97–425, as amended, including the acquisition of real 

property or facility construction or expansion, $350,000,000, to remain available until expended. 

POWER MARKETING ADMINISTRATIONS 

BONNEVILLE POWER ADMINISTRATION FUND

Expenditures from the Bonneville Power Administration Fund, 

established pursuant to Public Law 93–454, are approved for official reception and representation expenses in an amount not to exceed $1,500. During fiscal year 2006, no new direct loan obligations 

may be made. 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, SOUTHEASTERN POWER

ADMINISTRATION

For necessary expenses of operation and maintenance of power 

transmission facilities and of electric power and energy, including 

transmission wheeling and ancillary services pursuant to section 5 

of the Flood Control Act of 1944 (16 U.S.C. 825s), as applied to the 

southeastern power area, $5,600,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, That, notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 3302, up to 

$32,713,000 collected by the Southeastern Power Administration 

pursuant to the Flood Control Act of 1944 to recover purchase power 

and wheeling expenses shall be credited to this account as offsetting 

collections, to remain available until expended for the sole purpose 

of making purchase power and wheeling expenditures. 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, SOUTHWESTERN POWER

ADMINISTRATION

For necessary expenses of operation and maintenance of power 

transmission facilities and of marketing electric power and energy, 

for construction and acquisition of transmission lines, substations 

and appurtenant facilities, and for administrative expenses, including official reception and representation expenses in an amount not 

to exceed $1,500 in carrying out section 5 of the Flood Control Act 

of 1944 (16 U.S.C. 825s), as applied to the southwestern power administration, $30,166,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, That, notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 3302, up to $3,000,000 collected by the Southwestern Power Administration pursuant to the 

Flood Control Act to recover purchase power and wheeling expenses 

shall be credited to this account as offsetting collections, to remain 

available until expended for the sole purpose of making purchase 

power and wheeling expenditures. 

32 

CONSTRUCTION, REHABILITATION, OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, 

WESTERN AREA POWER ADMINISTRATION

For carrying out the functions authorized by title III, section 

302(a)(1)(E) of the Act of August 4, 1977 (42 U.S.C. 7152), and 

other related activities including conservation and renewable resources programs as authorized, including official reception and 

representation expenses in an amount not to exceed $1,500; 

$233,992,000, to remain available until expended, of which 

$229,596,000 shall be derived from the Department of the Interior 

Reclamation Fund: Provided, That of the amount herein appropriated, $6,700,000 is for deposit into the Utah Reclamation Mitigation and Conservation Account pursuant to title IV of the Reclamation Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992: Provided 

further, That of the amount herein appropriated, $6,000,000 shall 

be available until expended on a nonreimbursable basis to the Western Area Power Administration for Topock-Davis-Mead Transmission Line Upgrades: Provided further, That notwithstanding the 

provision of 31 U.S.C. 3302, up to $279,000,000 collected by the 

Western Area Power Administration pursuant to the Flood Control 

Act of 1944 and the Reclamation Project Act of 1939 to recover purchase power and wheeling expenses shall be credited to this account 

as offsetting collections, to remain available until expended for the 

sole purpose of making purchase power and wheeling expenditures. 

FALCON AND AMISTAD OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE FUND

For operation, maintenance, and emergency costs for the hydroelectric facilities at the Falcon and Amistad Dams, $2,692,000, to 

remain available until expended, and to be derived from the Falcon 

and Amistad Operating and Maintenance Fund of the Western Area 

Power Administration, as provided in section 423 of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1994 and 1995. 

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

For necessary expenses of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to carry out the provisions of the Department of Energy Organization Act (42 U.S.C. 7101 et seq.), including services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, the hire of passenger motor vehicles, and 

official reception and representation expenses not to exceed $3,000, 

$220,400,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, That 

notwithstanding any other provision of law, not to exceed 

$220,400,000 of revenues from fees and annual charges, and other 

services and collections in fiscal year 2006 shall be retained and 

used for necessary expenses in this account, and shall remain available until expended: Provided further, That the sum herein appropriated from the general fund shall be reduced as revenues are received during fiscal year 2006 so as to result in a final fiscal year 

2006 appropriation from the general fund estimated at not more 

than $0. 

33 

GENERAL PROVISIONS 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

SEC. 301. (a)(1) None of the funds in this or any other appropriations Act for fiscal year 2006 or any previous fiscal year may 

be used to make payments for a noncompetitive management and 

operating contract unless the Secretary of Energy has published in 

the Federal Register and submitted to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate a written 

notification, with respect to each such contract, of the Secretary’s decision to use competitive procedures for the award of the contract, 

or to not renew the contract, when the term of the contract expires. 

(2) Paragraph (1) does not apply to an extension for up to 2 

years of a noncompetitive management and operating contract, if 

the extension is for purposes of allowing time to award competitively 

a new contract, to provide continuity of service between contracts, or 

to complete a contract that will not be renewed. 

(b) In this section: 

(1) The term ‘‘noncompetitive management and operating 

contract’’ means a contract that was awarded more than 50 

years ago without competition for the management and operation of Ames Laboratory, Argonne National Laboratory, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, and Los Alamos National Laboratory. 

(2) The term ‘‘competitive procedures’’ has the meaning provided in section 4 of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy 

Act (41 U.S.C. 403) and includes procedures described in section 303 of the Federal Property and Administrative Services 

Act of 1949 (41 U.S.C. 253) other than a procedure that solicits 

a proposal from only one source. 

(c) For all management and operating contracts other than 

those listed in subsection (b)(1), none of the funds appropriated by 

this Act may be used to award a management and operating contract, or award a significant extension or expansion to an existing 

management and operating contract, unless such contract is awarded using competitive procedures or the Secretary of Energy grants, 

on a case-by-case basis, a waiver to allow for such a deviation. The 

Secretary may not delegate the authority to grant such a waiver. At 

least 60 days before a contract award for which the Secretary intends to grant such a waiver, the Secretary shall submit to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the 

Senate a report notifying the Committees of the waiver and setting 

forth, in specificity, the substantive reasons why the Secretary believes the requirement for competition should be waived for this particular award. 

SEC. 302. None of the funds appropriated by this Act may be 

used to—

(1) develop or implement a workforce restructuring plan 

that covers employees of the Department of Energy; or 

(2) provide enhanced severance payments or other benefits 

for employees of the Department of Energy, under section 3161 

of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1993 

(Public Law 102–484; 42 U.S.C. 7274h). 

SEC. 303. None of the funds appropriated by this Act may be 

used to augment the funds made available for obligation by this Act 

34 

for severance payments and other benefits and community assistance grants under section 3161 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1993 (Public Law 102–484; 42 U.S.C. 

7274h) unless the Department of Energy submits a reprogramming 

request to the appropriate congressional committees. 

SEC. 304. None of the funds appropriated by this Act may be 

used to prepare or initiate Requests For Proposals (RFPs) for a program if the program has not been funded by Congress. 

SEC. 305. The unexpended balances of prior appropriations provided for activities in this Act may be available to the same appropriation accounts for such activities established pursuant to this 

title. Available balances may be merged with funds in the applicable established accounts and thereafter may be accounted for as one 

fund for the same time period as originally enacted. 

SEC. 306. None of the funds in this or any other Act for the Administrator of the Bonneville Power Administration may be used to 

enter into any agreement to perform energy efficiency services outside the legally defined Bonneville service territory, with the exception of services provided internationally, including services provided 

on a reimbursable basis, unless the Administrator certifies in advance that such services are not available from private sector businesses. 

SEC. 307. When the Department of Energy makes a user facility 

available to universities or other potential users, or seeks input from 

universities or other potential users regarding significant characteristics or equipment in a user facility or a proposed user facility, the 

Department shall ensure broad public notice of such availability or 

such need for input to universities and other potential users. When 

the Department of Energy considers the participation of a university 

or other potential user as a formal partner in the establishment or 

operation of a user facility, the Department shall employ full and 

open competition in selecting such a partner. For purposes of this 

section, the term ‘‘user facility’’ includes, but is not limited to: (1) 

a user facility as described in section 2203(a)(2) of the Energy Policy 

Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C. 13503(a)(2)); (2) a National Nuclear Security 

Administration Defense Programs Technology Deployment Center/ 

User Facility; and (3) any other Departmental facility designated by 

the Department as a user facility. 

SEC. 308. Funds appropriated by this or any other Act, or made 

available by the transfer of funds in this Act, for intelligence activities are deemed to be specifically authorized by the Congress for 

purposes of section 504 of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 

U.S.C. 414) during fiscal year 2006 until the enactment of the Intelligence Authorization Act for fiscal year 2006. 

SEC. 309. None of the funds in this Act may be used to dispose 

of transuranic waste in the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant which contains concentrations of plutonium in excess of 20 percent by weight 

for the aggregate of any material category on the date of enactment 

of this Act, or is generated after such date. For the purpose of this 

section, the material categories of transuranic waste from the Rocky 

Flats Environmental Technology Site include: (1) ash residues; (2) 

salt residue; (3) wet residues; (4) direct repackage residues; and (5) 

scrub alloy as referenced in the ‘‘Final Environmental Impact Statement on Management of Certain Plutonium Residues and Scrub 

Alloy Stored at the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site’’. 

35 

SEC. 310. RENO HYDROGEN FUEL PROJECT FUNDING.—(a) The 

non-Federal share of project costs shall be 20 percent. 

(b) The cost of project vehicles, related facilities, and other activities funded from the Federal Transit Administration Sections 

5307, 5308, 5309, and 5314 program, including the non-Federal 

share for the FTA funds, is an eligible component of the non-Federal 

share for this project. 

(c) Contribution of the non-Federal share of project costs for all 

grants made for this project may be deferred until the entire project 

is completed. 

(d) All operations and maintenance costs associated with vehicles, equipment, and facilities utilized for this project are eligible 

project costs. 

(e) This section applies to project appropriations beginning in 

fiscal year 2004. 

SEC. 311. LABORATORY DIRECTED RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT.—Of the funds made available by the Department of Energy 

for activities at government-owned, contractor-operator operated laboratories funded in this Act or subsequent Energy and Water Development Appropriations Acts, the Secretary may authorize a specific 

amount, not to exceed 8 percent of such funds, to be used by such 

laboratories for laboratory-directed research and development: Provided, That the Secretary may also authorize a specific amount not 

to exceed 3 percent of such funds, to be used by the plant manager 

of a covered nuclear weapons production plant or the manager of 

the Nevada Site Office for plant or site-directed research and development: Provided further, That notwithstanding Department of Energy order 413.2A, dated January 8, 2001, beginning in fiscal year 

2006 and thereafter, all DOE laboratories may be eligible for laboratory directed research and development funding. 

SEC. 312. Of amounts appropriated to the Secretary of Energy 

for the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site for fiscal year 

2006, the Secretary may provide, subject to authorization, up to 

$10,000,000 for the purchase of mineral rights at the Rocky Flats 

Environmental Technology Site. 

SEC. 313. Section 4306 of the Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 

U.S.C. 2566) is amended—

(1) in subsection (a)—

(A) in paragraph (2)(A), by striking ‘‘2009’’ each place 

it appears and inserting ‘‘2012’’; and 

(B) in paragraph (3)—

(i) in subparagraph (B)(ii), by striking ‘‘2009’’ and 

inserting, ‘‘2012’’; and 

(ii) in subparagraph (C), by striking ‘‘2009’’ and 

inserting ‘‘2012’’; 

(2) in subsection (b)—

(A) in paragraph (1)—

(i) by striking ‘‘(a)(2)’’ and inserting ‘‘(g)’’; and 

(ii) by striking ‘‘2009’’ and inserting ‘‘2012’’; 

(B) in paragraph (4), by striking ‘‘2009’’ each place it 

appears and inserting ‘‘2012’’; and 

(C) in paragraph (5), by striking ‘‘2009’’ and inserting 

‘‘2012’’; 

(3) in subsection (c)—

36 

(A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking, 

‘‘2009’’ and inserting ‘‘2012’’; 

(B) in paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘2011’’ and inserting 

‘‘2014’’; and 

(C) in paragraph (2), by striking ‘‘2017’’ each place it 

appears and inserting ‘‘2020’’; 

(4) in subsection (d)—

(A) in paragraph (1)—

(i) by striking ‘‘2011’’ and inserting ‘‘2014’’; 

(ii) by striking ‘‘from funds available to the Secretary’’ and inserting ‘‘subject to the availability of appropriations’’; and 

(iii) by striking ‘‘2016’’ and inserting ‘‘2019’’; and 

(B) in paragraph (2)(A), by striking ‘‘2017’’ each place 

it appears and inserting ‘‘2020’’; 

(5) in subsection (e), by striking ‘‘2020’’ and inserting 

‘‘2023’’; 

(6) by redesignating subsection (g) as subsection (h); and 

(7) by inserting after subsection (f) the following: 

‘‘(g) BASELINE.—Not later than December 31, 2006, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report on the construction and operation of the MOX facility that includes a schedule for revising the 

requirements of this section during fiscal year 2007 to conform with 

the schedule established by the Secretary for the MOX facility, 

which shall be based on estimated funding levels for the fiscal 

year.’’. 

SEC. 314. SALES OF URANIUM.—(a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provision of Federal law, including section 3112 

of the USEC Privatization Act (42 U.S.C. 2297h–2) and section 

3302 of Title 31, United States Code, the Secretary of Energy is authorized to barter, transfer or sell uranium (including natural uranium concentrates, natural uranium hexafluoride, or in any form or 

assay) and to use any proceeds, without fiscal year limitation, to remediate uranium inventories held by the Secretary. 

(b) ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS.—Any barter, transfer or sale of 

uranium under subsection (a) shall to the extent possible, be competitive and comply with all applicable Federal procurement laws 

(including regulations); and shall not exceed 10 percent of the total 

annual fuel requirements of all licensed nuclear power plants located in the United States for uranium concentrates, uranium conversion, or uranium enrichment. 

SEC. 315. Section 130 of Division H (Miscellaneous Appropriations and Offsets) of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2004, 

Public Law 108–199, is hereby amended by striking ‘‘is provided for 

the Coralville, Iowa, project’’ and all that follows and inserting: ‘‘is 

provided for the Iowa Environmental and Education project to be 

located in Iowa. No further funds may be disbursed by the Department of Energy until a one hundred percent non-Federal cash and 

in-kind match of the appropriated Federal funds has been secured 

for the project by the non-Federal project sponsor: Provided, That 

the match shall exclude land donations: Provided further, That if 

the match is not secured by the non-Federal project sponsor by December 1, 2007, the remaining Federal funds shall cease to be available for the Iowa Environmental and Education project.’’. 

37 

TITLE IV 

INDEPENDENT AGENCIES 

APPALACHIAN REGIONAL COMMISSION

For expenses necessary to carry out the programs authorized by 

the Appalachian Regional Development Act of 1965, as amended, 

for necessary expenses for the Federal Co-Chairman and the alternate on the Appalachian Regional Commission, for payment of the 

Federal share of the administrative expenses of the Commission, including services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, and hire of passenger motor vehicles, $65,472,000, to remain available until expended. 

DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

For necessary expenses of the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety 

Board in carrying out activities authorized by the Atomic Energy 

Act of 1954, as amended by Public Law 100–456, section 1441, 

$22,032,000, to remain available until expended. 

DELTA REGIONAL AUTHORITY

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

For necessary expenses of the Delta Regional Authority and to 

carry out its activities, as authorized by the Delta Regional Authority Act of 2000, as amended, notwithstanding sections 382C(b)(2), 

382F(d), and 382M(b) of said Act, $12,000,000, to remain available 

until expended. 

DENALI COMMISSION

For expenses of the Denali Commission including the purchase, 

construction and acquisition of plant and capital equipment as necessary and other expenses, $50,000,000, to remain available until 

expended, nothwithstanding the limitations contained in section 

306(g) of the Denali Commission Act of 1998. 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

For necessary expenses of the Commission in carrying out the 

purposes of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended, 

and the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, including official 

representation expenses (not to exceed $15,000), purchase of promotional items for use in the recruitment of individuals for employment, $734,376,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, 

That of the amount appropriated herein, $46,118,000 shall be derived from the Nuclear Waste Fund: Provided further, That revenues from licensing fees, inspection services, and other services and 

collections estimated at $617,182,000 in fiscal year 2006 shall be retained and used for necessary salaries and expenses in this account, 

notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 3302, and shall remain available until 

expended: Provided further, That the sum herein appropriated shall 

38 

be reduced by the amount of revenues received during fiscal year 

2006 so as to result in a final fiscal year 2006 appropriation estimated at not more than $117,194,000: Provided further, That section 6101 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 is 

amended by inserting before the period in subsection (c)(2)(B)(v) the 

words ‘‘and fiscal year 2006’’. 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector General Act of 1978, as 

amended, $8,316,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, 

That revenues from licensing fees, inspection services, and other 

services and collections estimated at $7,485,000 in fiscal year 2006 

shall be retained and be available until expended, for necessary salaries and expenses in this account, notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 3302: 

Provided further, That the sum herein appropriated shall be reduced by the amount of revenues received during fiscal year 2006 

so as to result in a final fiscal year 2006 appropriation estimated 

at not more than $831,000. 

NUCLEAR WASTE TECHNICAL REVIEW BOARD

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

For necessary expenses of the Nuclear Waste Technical Review 

Board, as authorized by Public Law 100–203, section 5051, 

$3,608,000, to be derived from the Nuclear Waste Fund, and to remain available until expended. 

TITLE V 

GENERAL PROVISIONS 

SEC. 501. None of the funds appropriated by this Act may be 

used in any way, directly or indirectly, to influence congressional 

action on any legislation or appropriation matters pending before 

Congress, other than to communicate to Members of Congress as described in 18 U.S.C. 1913. 

SEC. 502. None of the funds made available in this Act may be 

transferred to any department, agency, or instrumentality of the 

United States Government, except pursuant to a transfer made by, 

or transfer authority provided in this Act or any other appropriation 

Act. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Energy and Water Development 

Appropriations Act, 2006’’. 

And the Senate agree to the same. 

DAVID L. HOBSON, 

RODNEY P. FRELINGHUYSEN, 

TOM LATHAM, 

ZACH WAMP, 

JO ANN EMERSON, 

JOHN DOOLITTLE, 

MICHAEL K. SIMPSON, 

DENNIS R. REHBERG, 

JERRY LEWIS, 

PETER J. VISCLOSKY, 

39 

CHET EDWARDS, ED PASTOR, JAMES E. CLYBURN, MARION BERRY, DAVID R. OBEY, Managers on the Part of the House. 

PETE V. DOMENICI, 

THAD COCHRAN, 

MITCH MCCONNELL, 

ROBERT F. BENNETT, 

CONRAD BURNS, 

LARRY E. CRAIG, 

CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, 

KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, 

WAYNE ALLARD, 

HARRY REID, 

ROBERT C. BYRD, 

PATTY MURRAY, 

BYRON L. DORGAN, 

DIANNE FEINSTEIN, 

TIM JOHNSON, 

MARY L. LANDRIEU, 

DANIEL K. INOUYE, 

Managers on the Part of the Senate. 

(41) 

JOINT EXPLANATORY STATEMENT OF THE COMMITTEE OF 

CONFERENCE 

The managers on the part of the House and the Senate at the 

conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the 

amendment of the Senate to the bill (H.R. 2419) making appropriations for energy and water development for the fiscal year ending 

September 30, 2006, and for other purposes, submit the following 

joint statement to the House and Senate in explanation of the action agreed upon by the managers and recommend in the accompanying conference report. 

The language and allocations set forth in House Report 109– 86 and Senate Report 109–84 should be complied with unless specifically addressed to the contrary in the conference report and 

statement of managers. Report language included by the House 

which is not contradicted by the report of the Senate or the conference, and Senate report language which is not contradicted by 

the report of the House or the conference is approved by the committee of conference. The statement of managers, while repeating 

some report language for emphasis, does not intend to negate the 

language referred to above unless expressly provided herein. In 

cases where both the House report and Senate report address a 

particular issue not specifically addressed in the conference report 

or joint statement of managers, the conferees have determined that 

the House report and Senate report are not inconsistent and are 

to be interpreted accordingly. In cases in which the House or Senate have directed the submission of a report, such report is to be 

submitted to both House and Senate Committees on Appropriations. 

Senate amendment: The Senate deleted the entire House bill 

after the enacting clause and inserted the Senate bill. The conference agreement includes a revised bill. 

TITLE I—DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE—CIVIL DEPARTMENT 

OF THE ARMY 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CIVIL

The summary tables included in this title set forth the conference agreement with respect to the individual appropriations, 

programs, and activities of the Corps of Engineers. Additional 

items of the conference agreement are discussed below. 

WATER RESOURCE NEEDS IN THE WAKE OF HURRICANES KATRINA AND

RITA

The conferees’ funding recommendations in this statement of 

managers have been shaped by the occurrence of Hurricanes 

Katrina and Rita, their profound effects on the Gulf Coast of the 

United States, and what these storms revealed about our country’s 

42 

vulnerability to natural disasters. Accordingly, total funding levels 

for Energy and Water Development Appropriations for fiscal year 

2006 are $749,000,000 above the levels requested by the Administration, and the conferees have designated almost all of this increase for strengthening the water infrastructure of our nation. 

Dam safety, flood protection, and maintenance of vital navigation 

systems have been given priority. 

The situation on the Gulf Coast in the wake of the 2005 hurricanes requires balance among competing forces. There is an urgent 

need for rapid restoration of flood control measures before the next 

storm season. The US Army Corps of Engineers has testified that 

it can accomplish these repairs by June 2006. However, extensive 

flooding occurred in the region despite the existence of flood control 

measures designed to withstand Category 3 hurricanes. Fully understanding what caused the flooding will require time, and the design and implementation of an improved protection system will 

take years. This means that some interim protection will be in 

place soon and better protection will be provided later. 

This Act provides considerable support for on-going improvements to flood control projects along the Gulf Coast, particularly in 

Louisiana and Mississippi. The hurricanes have altered the underlying justifications for these projects and brought into question existing approaches and designs. The physical situation on the 

ground has changed, the nature and value of the communities and 

infrastructure to be protected have changed, and the engineering 

requirements for providing given levels of flood protection have 

changed. While the Corps of Engineers proceeds to reestablish preexisting flood control works using funds provided on an emergency 

basis, a revised plan for providing an improved flood control system 

for the future is needed. Accordingly, the conferees direct the Secretary of the Army, acting through the Chief of Engineers, to provide the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations with a 

report detailing an integrated approach to flood control, navigation, 

and environmental restoration for the Gulf Coast region of Louisiana and Mississippi within 120 days of enactment. This report 

should present the overall approach for future spending and identify specific changes to on-going projects as well as proposals for future work. Hopefully, this vision can be in place to guide appropriations for next year and inform the five-year funding plan that is 

to accompany the Administration’s fiscal year 2007 budget request. 

The conferees expect additional resources will be provided in 

subsequent supplemental appropriations bills to respond to the 

aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and shall be considered in the 

broader context of flood reduction for and reconstruction of the City 

of New Orleans as hurricane data analysis is completed and as a 

consensus on how best to protect the City of New Orleans emerges. 

The budget request from the Administration recommended 

funding various projects based on seven performance guidelines, 

based principally on the ratio of remaining-benefits-to-remainingcosts. The conferees have endeavored to identify the most critical 

flood damage reduction and navigation projects in the allocation of 

resources provided, but in the absence of the Corps of Engineers 

being able to provide to the Congress its professional engineering 

judgment on which priority infrastructure needs should be adVerDate Aug 31 2005 21:24 Nov 08, 2005 Jkt 024421 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR275.XXX HR275
43 

dressed this fiscal year, the conferees have largely provided the 

budget request for individual water resource projects. 

PROGRAM MANAGEMENT AND EXECUTION

The conferees agree that improvements in the Corps’ program 

management and execution are necessary and appropriate. The 

conferees expect the civilian and military leadership of the Corps 

of Engineers to manage the Corps of Engineers and the Civil 

Works program. 

Five-year comprehensive budget planning.—The Corps is directed to submit to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations concurrent with each annual budget hereafter an updated 

five-year development plan, as delineated in the House report. 

Emphasis on expenditures.—The Corps is directed to adopt a 

fiscal management practice that fully honors Congressional direction and accepts a higher level of carryover funds in order to 

achieve greatly increased transparency into project costs and 

multiyear funding commitments. 

Congressional justification materials.—The conferees direct the 

Corps to improve its annual congressional budget submission by 

expanding the information presented to the Congress each year 

and to present its budget estimate by mission area. That information shall include, but not be limited to, those items more fully discussed in the House report. Such information shall include a detailed analysis of activities and projects funded in the current year 

but for which no funds are requested in the budget estimate. It is 

incumbent upon the Administration and the Corps of Engineers to 

disclose fully how it plans to carry out the current year appropriation. Inclusion of such information in the budget justification materials in no way implies continuing support of such projects or activities by the Administration or the Corps of Engineers but is 

needed by Congress to determine if the Executive Branch is executing fully its appropriation by program, project and activity consistent with Congressional direction and intent. The conferees note 

that similar information is provided in other executive branch 

agencies’ budget submissions and fail to understand why such information is not provided by the Corps of Engineers or cleared by 

the Office of Management and Budget for transmittal to the Congress. 

Performance-based budgeting.—The conferees acknowledge the 

efforts of the Administration to develop a methodology for focusing 

limited federal resources on water resource projects, but recognize 

that the remaining-costs-to-remaining-benefits ratio used by the 

Administration has its limitations. In addition, the conferees note 

the inability of the Corps of Engineers to produce at the request 

of Congress a list of the ten most critical water resources needs in 

the country that need to be addressed given the Nation’s experience with Hurricane Katrina. Accordingly, the Corps of Engineers 

is directed to contract with the National Academy of Public Administration to study and recommend factors, perhaps to include remaining-costs-to-remaining-benefits, which should be used in determining the allocation of limited resources for the construction of 

water resource projects. 

44 

Savings and slippage.—The conferees acknowledge the existence of traditional savings and slippage, which may accrue either 

from unfavorable construction schedules and/or seasons or from 

delays in a project’s delivery because of environmental issues, litigation or local financial limitations. Such funds may be available 

for reallocation, only on a project-by-project basis, within the reprogramming limitation contained in section 101 in title I of this 

Act. 

In recent years the Congress has artificially increased the historical savings and slippage estimate, thereby increasing the 

across-the-board reduction. The conferees have discontinued this 

practice. The conference agreement eliminates the need for an 

across-the-board reduction resulting from project allocations in excess of the amount appropriated for such account. In addition, an 

across-the-board reduction for historical savings and slippage shall 

not be assessed. Savings and slippage shall be taken on a projectby-project basis, recognizing the unique characteristics of each 

project and its total annual funding requirements. 

Reprogramming.—The conference agreement modifies section 

101 of the House bill, which provides very specific instances and 

procedures by which the Corps may reprogram funds. The Senate 

bill contained no similar guidance. The guidance contained herein 

shall supercede all previous Congressional direction with respect to 

the reprogramming of appropriated funds and shall apply to all 

available balances in the Corps’ accounts. For the purposes of carrying out this section, a reprogramming of funds is defined as any 

reallocation of funds into or from a line item set forth in the statement of managers accompanying this Act. No distinctions are to be 

made by the Corps for transfers or movements of funds, such as 

restorations or revocations, as has been the past practice. Any 

funds proposed for reprogramming shall be deemed to be excess to 

project needs, and shall be considered on a project-by-project basis. 

Consistent with the recommendations found in a recent GAO 

report entitled ‘‘Improved Planning and Financial Management 

Should Replace Reliance on Reprogramming Actions to Manage 

Project Funds,’’ the Corps is directed to develop immediately a financial planning and management system for the investigations, 

construction, and operation and maintenance appropriations that 

changes the way the Corps allocates funds from an annual basis 

to a quarterly basis that reflects actual schedule and project performance. This recommendation is most crucial to ensure increased 

certainty in execution of projects. Accordingly, the conferees expect 

that project funds shall be allocated to the field operating agencies 

by the headquarters office on a quarterly basis on the expected rate 

of execution for each quarter. 

Not later than 60 days following the enactment of this Act, the 

Corps shall submit a report to the House and Senate Committees 

on Appropriations to establish the baseline for application of reprogramming and transfer authorities for the current fiscal year. 

That report shall contain a table for each appropriation, showing 

among other items, each program, project and activity in each appropriation. For each day after the required date that the report 

has not been submitted to Congress, the amount appropriated for 

salaries and expenses of the Corps of Engineers shall be reduced 

45 

by $100,000 per day for each day after the required date that the 

report has not been submitted to the Congress. In addition, the 

conferees direct the Corps to provide quarterly reports to the House 

and Senate Committees on Appropriations detailing all projects 

from which and to which funds were reprogrammed pursuant to 

the authorities provided in this Act. The report shall also include 

reasons for the transfer of funds. The thresholds contained in section 101 shall apply to cumulative totals on a project-by-project 

basis. 

Further, the conferees direct that, when the Corps executes a 

reprogramming pursuant to the authorities of this Act, the Corps 

and the project sponsor shall treat each reprogramming as a one 

time transaction with no commitment or expectation to return 

funds to that project. 

The conferees expect the reprogramming authorities provided 

in this Act will improve the fiscal management of the Corps’ program. The conferees expect the Corps of Engineers to adhere to the 

letter and spirit of these reprogramming authorities. To the extent 

that the Corps is unable to improve its financial planning and 

management systems by the adoption of these authorities, the conferees will consider further restrictions in the Corps’ reprogramming authorities in the context of the fiscal year 2007 Energy and 

Water Development Appropriations Act. 

Continuing contracts.—The conference agreement modifies two 

provisions proposed by the House regarding continuing contracts. 

These provisions are discussed in greater detail under General Provisions. 

INVESTIGATIONS

The conference agreement provides $164,000,000 for Investigations, instead of $100,000,000 as provided by the House and 

$180,000,000 as proposed by the Senate. The conference agreement 

deletes a provision proposed by the House, which incorporates by 

reference the projects and activities specified in the statement of 

managers accompanying this Act. The Senate bill contained no 

similar provision. 

The conference agreement includes a provision relating to 

planning assistance to the State of Ohio. In addition, the conference agreement includes a provision providing $8,000,000 to conduct, at full federal expense, a comprehensive hurricane protection 

study. 

The conference agreement deletes a provision proposed by the 

Senate relating to funding for a project in Laupahoehoe Harbor, 

Hawaii. The House bill contained no similar provision. 

The conference agreement for investigations is shown in the 

following table: 

46 


Insert graphic folio 429/115 HR275.053
47 


Insert graphic folio 429/116 HR275.054
48 


Insert graphic folio 429/117 HR275.055
49 


Insert graphic folio 429/118 HR275.056
50 


Insert graphic folio 429/119 HR275.057
51 


Insert graphic folio 429/120 HR275.058
52 


Insert graphic folio 429/121 HR275.059
53 


Insert graphic folio 429/122 HR275.060
54 


Insert graphic folio 429/123 HR275.061
55 


Insert graphic folio 429/124 HR275.062
56 


Insert graphic folio 429/125 HR275.063
57 


Insert graphic folio 429/126 HR275.064
58 


Insert graphic folio 429/127 HR275.065
59 


Insert graphic folio 429/128 HR275.066
60 


Insert graphic folio 429/129 HR275.067
61 


Insert graphic folio 429/130 HR275.068
62 


Insert graphic folio 429/131 HR275.069
63 


Insert graphic folio 429/132 HR275.070
64 


Insert graphic folio 429/133 HR275.071
65 


Insert graphic folio 429/134 HR275.072
66 

Matilija Dam, California.—The Secretary shall credit the nonFederal share of the cost of the Matilija Dam ecosystem project the 

cost of design and construction work carried out by the non-Federal 

interest before the date of execution of a cooperation agreement for 

the project. 

San Joaquin Valley Region, California.—The conferees have 

provided funding for studies of the San Joaquin Valley region in 

California (consisting of Stanislaus, Madera, Merced, Fresno, 

Kings, Tulare, and Kern Counties). 

Whitewater River Basin, California.—The conference agreement includes $100,000 to continue the design phase of the project. 

Minnesota River Basin, Minnesota and South Dakota.—Within 

the funds provided for Minnesota River Basin, Minnesota and 

South Dakota, $80,000 has been provided for Blue Earth River ecosystem restoration in Minnesota, South Dakota, Iowa and North 

Dakota. 

Louisiana Coastal Area, Louisiana.—For Louisiana coastal 

area ecosystem restoration area, the conferees have provided a 

total of $10,000,000 to further studies in mitigating wetlands loss 

in coastal Louisiana. 

Great Lakes Navigation Study, MI, IL, IN, MN, NY, OH, PA 

and WI.—The conferees have included $1,285,000 for continued 

work on the Great Lakes Navigation Study, the scope of which is 

to be in accordance with the bi-national agreement between the 

United States and Canada. The conferees understand that the 

study is near completion and encourage the study sponsors and the 

Corps to move forward as swiftly as is practicable without compromising the scope or quality of the work. With the funds provided 

for fiscal year 2006, the conferees expect that the Secretary, acting 

through the Corps of Engineers, will be able to budget for completion in fiscal year 2007. 

Red River of the North Basin, Minnesota, North and South Dakota.—Within the funds provided for Red River of the North Basin, 

Minnesota and North and South Dakota, $60,000 has been provided for Crookston. 

Truckee Meadows, Nevada.—Funds are provided to continue 

planning, engineering and design activities for this flood control 

project. The conferees expect the Corps to complete the necessary 

studies as soon as practicable. 

Edisto, South Carolina.—The conference agreement includes 

funds to complete the reconnaissance phase of the project. 

Norfolk Harbor and Channels, Craney Island, Virginia.—

Funds are provided to complete the feasibility study for this 

project. 

Little Kanawha, West Virginia.—The conference agreement includes funds to complete the feasibility study for this project. 

Coastal field data collection.—The conference agreement provides $4,125,000 for coastal field data collection. Within the funds 

provided, the Corps is directed to undertake the following activities 

with the amounts allocated below: 

Coastal Data Information Program ...................................................... $500,000 

Southern California Beach Processes Study ....................................... 650,000 

Pacific Island Land Typhoon Experiment (PILOT) ............................ 650,000 

Surge and Wave Island Modeling Studies (SWIMS) .......................... 750,000 

67 

Remaining items, flood plain management services.—The conference agreement includes $6,407,000 for flood plain management 

services, instead of $5,625,000 as proposed by the House and 

$8,935,000 as proposed by the Senate. Within the funds provided, 

the Corps is directed to undertake the following activities with the 

amounts allocated below: 

Hurricane evacuation studies, HI ........................................................ $500,000 

Livingston Parish, LA geographic information system ...................... 625,000 

Rancocas Creek, NJ ............................................................................... 200,000 

Jackson, TN geographic information system ....................................... 250,000 

Remaining items, planning assistance to states.—The conference agreement provides $5,727,000 for planning assistance to 

states, instead of $4,650,000 as proposed by the House and 

$7,550,000 as proposed by the Senate. Within the funds provided, 

the Corps is directed to undertake the following activities with the 

amounts allocated below: 

Assabet River sediment remediation study, MA ................................. $300,000 

Bartlesville, Oklahoma water study ..................................................... 100,000 

Lake Rogers, Creedmoor, North Carolina water quality study ......... 30,000 

Pike River, Wisconsin hydraulic and hydrological study ................... 20,000 

La Mirada, California flood control and drainage study .................... 125,000 

Memphis, Tennessee riverfront development ...................................... 200,000 

Lafayette Wabash River waterfront development, IN ........................ 50,000 

Delaware recreation supply and demand study .................................. 75,000 

Delaware groundwater investigation ................................................... 75,000 

Hilo Bay, Hawaii water quality model ................................................. 125,000 

Rock Creek, Kansas basin stormwater project .................................... 200,000 

New Mexico photogrammetric mapping .............................................. 500,000 

Mangum, OK Lake Phase V study ....................................................... 50,000 

Waccamaw River, SC watershed modeling .......................................... 25,000 

Surfside Beach, SC stormwater drainage study ................................. 25,000 

Stark County, OH watershed drainage basin ..................................... 1,000,000 

New Mexico photogrammetric mapping.—The conferees have 

provided $500,000 for New Mexico photographic mapping to be conducted utilizing the Corps’ Center of Expertise for Photogrammetric Mapping in St. Louis, Missouri. 

Remaining items, research and development.—The conference 

agreement includes $26,583,000 for research and development activities, instead of $19,643,000 as proposed by the House and 

$34,500,000 as proposed by the Senate. Within the funds provided, 

the Corps is directed to undertake the following activities with the 

amounts allocated below: 

Chesapeake Bay submerged aquatic vegetation research .................. $500,000 

National Cooperative Modeling Demonstration Program .................. 500,000 

Innovative technology demonstrations for urban flooding and channel restoration, New Mexico and Nevada ........................................ 1,750,000 

Southwest Urban Flood Damage Program Research, New Mexico ... 375,000 

Collaborative Planning and Management Demonstration Program 375,000 

Advanced polymer technologies compliance activities ........................ 500,000 

The conferees further direct the Corps to begin pilot testing of 

rapid deployment flood walls, within available funds, not later than 

30 days after enactment of this Act. 

CONSTRUCTION

The conference agreement provides $2,372,000,000 for Construction, instead of $1,900,000,000 as proposed by the House and 

$2,086,664,000 as proposed by the Senate. The conference agreeVerDate Aug 31 2005 21:24 Nov 08, 2005 Jkt 024421 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR275.XXX HR275
68 

ment includes a provision as proposed by the Senate that derives 

amounts to cover one-half of the costs of construction and rehabilitation of certain inland waterways projects from the Inland Waterways Trust Fund. The House bill contained a provision that specified the amount to be derived from the Inland Waterways Trust 

Fund. 

The conference agreement deletes a provision proposed by the 

House, which would have incorporated by reference the projects 

and activities specified in the statement of managers accompanying 

this Act. The Senate bill contained no similar provision. 

The conference agreement modifies several provisions proposed 

by the House that set aside specific funds for the various sections 

of the continuing authorities program. The Senate bill contained no 

similar provisions. 

The conference agreement modifies several provisions relating 

to specific projects as proposed in the Senate bill. The House bill 

contained no similar provisions. 

The conference agreement includes an appropriation of $35,000,000 for Modified Water Delivery for the Everglades National Park. The House bill contained an appropriation of 

$137,000,000 for the South Florida Ecosystem Everglades Restoration Program, which included several other projects and Modified 

Water Delivery. The Senate bill contained no similar appropriation. 

Funding for the Central and South Florida project, the Kissimmee 

River Restoration project, and the Everglades and South Florida 

Restoration project is provided as separate projects. 

The conference agreement includes a provision providing funds 

to the City of Caliente, Nevada, to construct local flood control 

measures. 

The conference agreement for construction is shown in the following table: 

69 


Insert graphic folio 429/141 HR275.073
70 


Insert graphic folio 429/142 HR275.074
71 


Insert graphic folio 429/143 HR275.075
72 


Insert graphic folio 429/144 HR275.076
73 


Insert graphic folio 429/145 HR275.077
74 


Insert graphic folio 429/146 HR275.078
75 


Insert graphic folio 429/147 HR275.079
76 


Insert graphic folio 429/148 HR275.080
77 

American River watershed.—The conference agreement in- cludes a total of $28,960,000 for American River watershed 

projects. These funds are to be available as follows: 

Common features ................................................................................... $4,405,000 

Folsom Dam modifications .................................................................... 9,555,000 

(Permanent dam below Folsom Dam) .................................................. (10,000,000) 

Folsom Dam mini-raise ......................................................................... 15,000,000 

Santa Ana River mainstem, California.—A total of $61,650,000 

is provided for the Santa Ana River mainstem in California. Funds 

are to be distributed as delineated in the House report. 

Central and South Florida.—Within the funds provided, work 

shall continue on the Upper St. Johns River project. 

Rural Idaho environmental infrastructure, Idaho.—The conference agreement includes $5,000,000 for rural Idaho environmental infrastructure. Within the funds provided, the Corps is directed to give consideration to projects at Emmett, Burley, Rupert, 

Bonners Ferry, Donnelly, Eastern Idaho Regional Water Authority, 

Driggs and Smelterville. Other communities that meet the program 

criteria may be considered as funding allows. 

Olmstead Locks and Dam, Ohio River, Illinois and Kentucky.— Neither funds provided for Olmstead Locks and Dam project nor 

funds available within this account are available to reimburse the 

Claims and Judgment Fund. 

Upper Mississippi River restoration, IL, IA, MN, MO and WI.— The conference agreement includes $20,000,000 for Upper Mississippi River restoration, which shall be available only to continue 

ongoing projects and shall not be available to initiate any new 

projects. 

Missouri fish and wildlife mitigation, IA, KS, MO, MT, NE, 

ND, and SD.—The conference agreement includes funds for only 

those specifically authorized Missouri fish and wildlife and mitigation activities, namely along the lower Missouri River. The conferees agree that the Administration should submit a legislative 

proposal for habitat recovery for the upper reaches of the river for 

consideration by the appropriate authorizing committees before 

funds are expended on these additional mitigation activities. 

Louisville Waterfront Park, Kentucky.—The Corps of Engineers 

is directed to use funds appropriated in Public Law 107–66, Public 

Law 108–7 and Public Law 108–137, to continue with design and 

construction of Phase II of the Louisville Waterfront Park, specifically the Big Four Bridge and Spiral. 

J. Bennett Johnston Waterway, Louisiana.—The conferees have 

provided $13,000,000 for navigation channel refinement features, 

land purchases and development for mitigation of project impacts, 

and construction of project recreation features and appurtenant 

features. 

Chesapeake Bay environmental program, MD, PA, and VA.—

Within the funds provided, $273,000 is included to continue the environmental studies concerning non-native oysters. 

Rural Montana.—Within the funds provided, the Corps is directed to give consideration to the projects at Livingston, Missoula 

(Grant Creek), Meagher County, Stevensville, Helena, Wisdom, 

Bigfork, Sheridan, Butte and Drummond. Other communities that 

meet the program criteria should be considered as funding allows. 

78 

Fire Island Inlet to Montauk Point, New York.—The conference 

agreement includes $1,075,000 for the reformulation study. 

New York and New Jersey Harbor, New York and New Jersey.—Within the funds provided for New York and New Jersey 

Harbor, New York and New Jersey, the conferees direct the Corps 

to use up to $2,000,000 to plan for and enter into an agreement 

with a state or non-Federal sponsor to develop a dredged material 

processing facility that would accomplish the objectives of reducing 

the cost of dredged material management in the port, preparing 

dredged material for beneficial uses, and implementing innovative 

dredged material management technologies. 

Rural Nevada.—Within the funds provided, the Corps is directed to give consideration to projects of Douglas County, Battle 

Mountain, North Lemmon Valley, Spanish Valley Phase II, 

Huffaker Hills Water Conservation, Lawton-Verdi, Boulder City, 

Lyon County, Gerlach, Searchlight, Incline Village, Esmeralda 

County, Churchill County, West Wendover, Yearlington, Virgin 

Valley Water District, Lovelock, Lander County, Round Hill Phase 

II and Carson City. Other communities that meet the program criteria should be considered as funding allows. 

Tropicana and Flamingo Washes, Nevada.—Within the funds 

provided, $3,000,000 is provided for work performed in accordance 

with Section 211 of Public Law 104–303. 

Wrightsville Beach, North Carolina.—Funds are provided for 

beach restoration efforts resulting from natural erosion and navigation activities. 

Ohio environmental infrastructure.—The bill provides $13,000,000 for Ohio environmental infrastructure for fiscal year 

2006. These funds, together with $3,849,000 from Clark County 

(Ohio) and Lower Mad River Valley Sewer Infrastructure and 

Storm Water Management projects remaining unobligated from fiscal year 2004, shall be distributed as follows: 

Benton Ridge wastewater treatment ................................................... $500,000 

Brookfield Center South sanitary sewer .............................................. 250,000 

Cambridge sewer system east of I–77 .................................................. 425,000 

Cuyahoga River environmental restoration ........................................ 500,000 

Elyria water treatment plant ............................................................... 200,000 

Franklin County, Village of New Albany environmental restoration 1,000,000 

Fulton County Elmira/Burlington wastewater collection and treatment .................................................................................................... 300,000 

Gallia County water and sewer ............................................................ 300,000 

Higginsport sanitary sewer ................................................................... 750,000 

Lake County Madison Township Chapel Road Interceptor sewer ..... 505,000 

Licking County, Village of Hanover wastewater collection ................ 325,000 

Marysville water treatment facility upgrades ..................................... 1,000,000 

Norwalk wastewater treatment plant .................................................. 300,000 

Rushsylvania wastewater treatment ................................................... 500,000 

Springfield Hospital water and sewer project ..................................... 3,025,000 

Springfield Nextedge Technology Park water and sewer ................... 750,000 

Southern Franklin County and Northern Pickaway County sewer 

line expansion project ........................................................................ 1,000,000 

Toledo wastewater treatment plant ..................................................... 250,000 

Trotwood storm drain and stream relocation ...................................... 750,000 

University of Dayton, Brown and Stewart Streets water and sewer 1,000,000 

Village of Ottawa regional waterline ................................................... 300,000 

Yellow Springs McGregor Center for Business and Education Park, 

water and sewer ................................................................................. 450,000 

Parma water and sewer project ............................................................ 150,000 

Springfield AirPark water project ........................................................ 1,500,000 

79 

Clark County Park I–675 water and sewer project ............................ 324,000 

Summit County, City of Hudson, Seasons Road sanitary sewer 

pump station ....................................................................................... 495,000 

Southeastern Pennsylvania infrastructure program, Pennsylvania.—Within the funds provided for Southeastern Pennsylvania 

infrastructure program, the conferees have provided $300,000 for 

Cobbs Creek Park and $300,000 for Tacony Creek. 

Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, Lower Brule Sioux, South Dakota.—Within the funds provided, the conferees direct that not 

more than $1,000,000 shall be provided for administrative expenses, and that the Corps is to distribute the remaining funds as 

directed by Title IV of the Water Resources Act of 1999 to the State 

of South Dakota, the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe and the Lower 

Brule Sioux Tribe. 

Columbia River fish mitigation, WA, OR and ID.—The conferees have chosen not to combine the various, separately authorized components of the project into a single line item and believe 

it is prudent to maintain visibility and transparency in the various 

project elements throughout budget execution. 

Mt. St. Helens, Washington.—Additional funds have been provided to initiate a general reevaluation report to determine if ecosystem restoration actions are prudent in the Cowlitz and Toutle 

watersheds for species that have been listed as being of economic 

importance and threatened or endangered. 

Mud Mountain, Washington.—Out of the funds provided, the 

Corps is directed to use up to $600,000 to study fish passage. 

Levisa and Tug Forks and Upper Cumberland River, WV, VA 

and KY.—The conference agreement includes $31,100,000 for 

Levisa and Tug Forks and Upper Cumberland River, WV, VA and 

KY. Within the amounts provided, $16,000,000 shall be for elements of the project in the Commonwealth of Kentucky, $5,600,000 

shall be for elements within the State of West Virginia and 

$9,500,000 shall be for Virginia elements. 

Robert C. Byrd Locks and Dam, Ohio River, West Virginia and 

Ohio.—The conference agreement includes funds to continue Jenkins preservation and contract management but excludes funds for 

planning, engineering and design. 

Aquatic Plant Control Program.—The conference agreement includes $4,000,000 for this program. Within the funds provided, the 

conferees have provided $100,000 for Lake Gaston, North Carolina, 

and $400,000 for Lake Champlain, Vermont. 

Beneficial Uses of Dredged Material.—Within the funds provided, $3,000,000 is for Morehead City, North Carolina, and 

$200,000 for Dauphin Island, Alabama. 

Dam Safety and Seepage/Stability Corrective Program.—The 

conference agreement includes $15,000,000, of which $4,000,000 is 

to complete the Waterbury dam repairs in Vermont, and $600,000 

is for Dover Dam in Ohio. 

Shore Line Erosion Control Development and Demonstration 

Program.—Within the funds provided, $1,725,000 shall be available 

for the alternative sand test beach and breakwater project in Florida and $1,250,000 for the Sacred Falls demonstration project in 

Hawaii. 

80 

Estuary Restoration Program.—The conference agreement in- cludes $1,000,000 for the estuary restoration program. The Corps 

is directed to provide the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations a spending plan for the program in fiscal year 2005 and 

2006 prior to the expenditure of funds. 

Tribal partnership.—Within the funds provided, $300,000 shall be for efforts in New Mexico and $300,000 shall be for cultural resource restoration on historic Washoe lands. 

CONTINUING AUTHORITIES PROGRAM

The Act contains several provisions specifying the amount of 

funds made available for each of the continuing authorities programs (CAP), as proposed by the House. The Senate bill contained 

no similar provisions. 

The conference agreement includes the following amounts for 

each of the specific program authorities of the continuing authorities program: 

Section 107 ............................................................................................. $12,000,000 

Section 103 ............................................................................................. 7,000,000 

Section 205 ............................................................................................. 40,000,000 

Section 14 ............................................................................................... 15,000,000 

Section 1135 ........................................................................................... 30,000,000 

Section 206 ............................................................................................. 30,000,000 

Section 204 ............................................................................................. 5,000,000 

Section 208 ............................................................................................. 300,000 

Section 111 ............................................................................................. 500,000 

In an effort to reduce the current backlog of CAP projects, the 

conferees have endeavored to provide sufficient appropriations to 

continue various Corps-initiated CAP projects while also allocating 

funds for Congressionally-directed projects. For example, the conference agreement includes appropriations for sections 1135 and 

206 in excess of the annual authorized level so as to reduce the significant unfunded backlog of projects. These appropriations levels 

are a one-time event; neither the Corps nor its stakeholders should 

expect funding at these levels to continue and should plan their 

programs and projects accordingly. 

The conferees agree that significant management reform of the 

CAP program is necessary. Therefore, within 60 days of enactment 

of this Act, and annually thereafter concurrent with the budget 

submission, the Corps is directed to submit to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations a program management plan detailing the specific actions the Corps will take to prioritize projects 

and to manage the program in the future. This management plan 

shall include at least a five-year time horizon consistent with the 

Five-Year Comprehensive Budget Plan and may, after the initial 

submission, be incorporated into the larger planning effort. Additionally, the Corps shall provide to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations, concurrent with the annual budget submission, a status report delineating all ongoing projects, identifying on 

a project-by-project basis the annual out-year budgetary requirements to complete each project. 

In developing its management plan and in an effort to reduce 

the backlog of projects, the Corps is directed to prioritize projects 

in the following manner: first, funding should be available for construction projects for which an executed project cooperation agreeVerDate Aug 31 2005 21:24 Nov 08, 2005 Jkt 024421 PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR275.XXX HR275
81 

ment is in place; second, funding should be available for projects 

with executed feasibility cost sharing agreements. The conferees direct the Corps to place a moratorium on the execution of any new 

project cooperation agreements or feasibility cost sharing agreements in fiscal year 2006. Work may continue on any phase of a 

particular project as funding and priority allows, but no project 

shall advance to the next stage during fiscal year 2006 unless such 

project can be completed within the funds specified or can advance 

into the design phase in fiscal year 2006. 

The Corps is directed not to initiate any new project or re-start 

a project within any CAP program in fiscal year 2006 unless such 

project is specifically named in an Energy and Water Development 

Appropriations Act or its accompanying statement of managers 

from fiscal year 2001 through 2006. Within 60 days of enactment 

of this Act, the Corps shall submit to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations a report detailing those CAP projects 

that have not been named in an Energy and Water Development 

Appropriations Act from fiscal year 2001 through 2006 or for which 

no funds have been expended in fiscal years 2001 through 2005. 

The conferees further direct the Corps to implement guidelines 

to require feasibility study cost sharing from non-Federal sources 

for all CAP authorities, to be effective October 1, 2006. The conferees note that this is the current practice in all but the environmental authorities. 

The following table includes the name of the project, the CAP 

authority under which the project is authorized and the amount of 

funding included in the conference agreement: 

82 


Insert graphic folio-429/158 HR275.081
83 


Insert graphic folio-429/159 HR275.082
84 


Insert graphic folio-429/160 HR275.083
85 


Insert graphic folio-429/161 HR275.084
86 


Insert graphic folio-429/162 HR275.085
87 


Insert graphic folio-429/163 HR275.086
88 

Reno flood warning system.—Within the funds provided for section 205, the Corps shall close out the Reno flood warning system. 

Santa Venetia flood control, California.—Within the funds provided for section 205, the Corps shall close out the Santa Venetia 

flood control project. 

Stevenson Creek estuary, Florida, section 206.—The Corps is directed to return funds reprogrammed from Stevenson Creek estuary, Florida forthwith. 

Within the funds provided for sections of the continuing authorities programs, the Corps is directed to give priority consideration to the following projects: 

Section 107: 

Gustavis Harbor, AK 

Nanwalek, AK 

Woods Hole Great Harbor, MA 

Section 205: 

City of Las Vegas, NV 

Gila River, Grants and Hidalgo Counties, NM 

Elsmere, DE 

West Virginia Statewide Flood Warning System, WV 

Winnebago River Levee Improvement, IA 

Keshequa Creek, Nunda, NY 

Limestone Creek, Fayetteville, NY 

South Suburban Areas of Chicago, IL 

Upper Delaware River Watershed Flood Mitigation, NY 

FLOOD CONTROL, MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, ARKANSAS, 

ILLINOIS, KENTUCKY, LOUISIANA, MISSISSIPPI, MISSOURI, AND

TENNESSEE

The conference agreement provides $400,000,000 for Flood 

Control, Mississippi River and Tributaries instead of $290,000,000 

as proposed by the House and $433,336,000 as proposed by the 

Senate. 

The conference agreement deletes a provision proposed by the 

House, which would have incorporated by reference the projects 

and activities specified in the statement of managers accompanying 

this Act. The Senate bill contained no similar provision. 

The conference agreement modifies a provision proposed by the 

Senate relating to various activities of the Yazoo Basin backwater 

pumping plant in Mississippi. The House bill contained no similar 

provision. 

The conference agreement deletes a provision proposed by the 

Senate relating to the pump supply contract for the Yazoo Basin, 

Yazoo Backwater Pumping Plant, Mississippi. The House bill contained no similar provision. 

The conference agreement for projects to reduce flood control 

in the lower Mississippi River alluvial valley below Cape Giradeau, 

Missouri is shown in the following table: 

89 


Insert graphic folio-429/166 HR275.087
90 


Insert graphic folio-429/167 HR275.088
91 

CONSTRUCTION

Mississippi River Levees, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO and TN.—

Additional funds have been provided to continue construction of the 

St. Johns-New Madrid Levee Closure/Box Culvert, Missouri as well 

as other levee items and for the Lower Mississippi River Interpretive Center. 

Yazoo Basin, Backwater Pumping Plant, Mississippi.—Within 

the funds provided, $150,000 is provided for the Teddy Roosevelt 

Environmental Education Center. 

Yazoo Basin, Big Sunflower River, Mississippi.—The conferees 

recognize the need to prevent erosion, reduce sedimentation and 

head-cutting in watersheds of the Yazoo Basin for purposes of improving water quality, fisheries and reducing maintenance. The 

conferees have provided $4,000,000 for continued construction of 

the project. Within these funds, not more than $1,500,000 shall be 

used for these water quality and sediment reduction measures and 

$500,000 shall be used for establishment of water quality reference 

indicators for use as appropriate on Yazoo Basin Projects. 

MAINTENANCE

Mississippi River Levees AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO and TN.— Additional funds have been provided for delivery of levee gravel in 

AR, LA, MS and MO as determined by need. 

Additional funding has been provided for deferred maintenance 

at the four Mississippi Lakes. 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

The conference agreement provides $1,989,000,000 for operation and maintenance, instead of $2,000,000,000 as proposed by 

the House and $2,100,000,000 as proposed by the Senate. 

The conference agreement deletes a provision proposed by the 

House, which would have incorporated by reference the projects 

and activities specified in the statement of managers accompanying 

this Act. The Senate bill contained no similar provision. 

The conference agreement includes several provisions proposed 

by the Senate relating to certain projects. The House bill contained 

no similar provisions. 

The conference agreement for operation and maintenance is 

shown in the following table: 

92 


Insert graphic folio-429/169 HR275.089
93 


Insert graphic folio-429/170 HR275.090
94 


Insert graphic folio-429/171 HR275.091
95 


Insert graphic folio-429/172 HR275.092
96 


Insert graphic folio-429/173 HR275.093
97 


Insert graphic folio-429/174 HR275.094
98 


Insert graphic folio-429/175 HR275.095
99 


Insert graphic folio-429/176 HR275.096
100 


Insert graphic folio-429/177 HR275.097
101 


Insert graphic folio-429/178 HR275.098
102 


Insert graphic folio-429/179 HR275.099
103 


Insert graphic folio-429/180 HR275.100
104 


Insert graphic folio-429/181 HR275.101
105 


Insert graphic folio-429/182 HR275.102
106 


Insert graphic folio-429/183 HR275.103
107 


Insert graphic folio-429/184 HR275.104
108 

Emergency maintenance, restoration and repairs.—The conference agreement does not include a reserve fund for emergency 

maintenance, restoration and repairs. Further, the conferees direct 

the Corps to discontinue the practice of taxing all operation and 

maintenance projects each year to create an emergency reserve 

fund, from which funds have been expended by the Corps without 

knowledge or approval from the House and Senate Committees on 

Appropriations. Beginning in fiscal year 2006, the conferees expect 

the Corps to allocate funds by project on a quarterly basis across 

all its accounts (as discussed earlier in this statement). This action 

will enable the Corps to address any identified unforeseen requirements, consistent with the reprogramming guidelines contained in 

this Act. In addition, the Corps shall provide to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations within 30 days of enactment of 

this Act the definition of qualifying emergencies and guidelines to 

reprogram funds for emergency maintenance, restoration and repairs. 

Alamo Dam and Lake, Arizona.—An additional $450,000 has 

been included to substantiate the effectiveness of the Alamo Dam 

re-operation and to develop and implement an associated adaptive 

management strategy. 

Dry Creek (Warm Springs) Dam, California.—The conference 

agreement includes additional funding to complete a major rehabilitation report necessary for installation of a pipeline to supply 

cool water for rearing threatened coho salmon now housed in temporary facilities at Warm Springs Dam. 

Cherry Creek, Chatfield and Trinidad Lakes, Colorado.—The 

conference agreement includes an additional $1,380,000 for continued repairs at these three lakes. This action is not intended to 

alter the Corps’ lease and property accountability policies. It is the 

conferees’ understanding that the State of Colorado has agreed to 

cost share this project on a 50/50 basis, and that the Secretary is 

not to assume, nor share in the future, the operation and maintenance of these recreation facilities. Of the funds provided, the 

Corps is directed to conduct a reallocation study for the Chatfield 

Reservoir project. 

Intracoastal Waterway, Delaware River to Chesapeake Bay, DE 

and MD.—Additional funds are included for maintenance costs for 

the SR–1 Bridge. 

Miami River, Florida.—The Corps is directed to complete its 

analysis of the Miami River maintenance project and to submit the 

final report to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations not later than 30 days after enactment of this Act. 

Apalachiacola, Chattahoochee and Flint Rivers, GA, AL and 

FL.—The conferees understand that the State of Florida has denied 

the Corps a State Water Quality Certification; therefore, no funds 

are provided for dredging this waterway in Florida. 

Lake Shelbyville, Illinois.—Additional funds have been provided for deferred maintenance at public use facilities. 

Saylorville Lake, Iowa.—Additional funds have been provided 

to maintain the project’s basic level of service. 

Barren River Lake, Kentucky.—Additional funds have been provided for repair and upgrade of public use facilities. 

109 

Mississippi River Gulf Outlet.—The conferees are aware of current discussions among the Port of New Orleans, St. Bernard Parish Administration officials and other key stakeholders to confect 

a closure plan for the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet (MRGO) to 

deep draft navigation and to provide coastal restoration and enhanced hurricane and flood protection to the residents of St. Bernard and Orleans Parishes. This agreement may require a 

shallower depth than is presently authorized. The conferees support this initiative and urge the parties to reach an agreement as 

soon as possible. 

Duluth-Superior Harbor, Minnesota and Wisconsin.—Within 

the funds provided for Duluth-Superior Harbor, $300,000 shall be 

available for a freshwater corrosion study. 

Albuquerque levees, New Mexico.—The conference agreement 

includes funds to assess impacts and to make immediate repairs to 

levees. 

Conchas Lake, New Mexico.—Additional funds have been provided for rehabilitation of public use facilities. 

Upper Rio Grande Water Operations Model, New Mexico.—

Within the funds provided, $500,000 is for New Mexico photographic mapping to be conducted utilizing the Corps’ Center of Expertise for Photogrammetric Mapping in St. Louis. 

Garrison Dam and Lake Sakakawea, North Dakota.—Within 

the funds provided, $250,000 shall be available for the removal of 

noxious weeds, and $100,000 shall be for mosquito control. 

Columbia and Lower Willamette River below Vancouver, Washington and Portland, Oregon.—The conference agreement includes 

$750,000 for continued work at the Astoria Boat Basin. 

Fern Ridge Dam, Oregon.—The conference agreement includes 

funds to operate and maintain Fern Ridge Dam. The conferees are 

aware that no additional funds are required for emergency repairs 

at the dam as such expenses have been fully covered in fiscal year 

2005. 

Kinzua Dam and Allegheny Reservoir, Pennsylvania.—Within 

the funds provided, $300,000 shall be available for recreational improvements to include visitor center and fishing access improvements. 

Ohio River, Pittsburgh to Huntington, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Ohio.—Within the funds provided, the Corps is directed 

to utilize $2,500,000 in cooperation with Operation Respond, a nonprofit organization, to implement a demonstration project developing and testing software and message/alert systems for use by 

emergency responders as they prepare for and respond to commercial transportation incidents on the Nation’s waterways. This 

project is to be coordinated with the U.S. Coast Guard, commercial 

transportation carriers, ports, emergency responders and other 

stakeholders along this segment of the Ohio River. 

Oahe Dam, Lake Oahe, South Dakota and North Dakota.—The 

conferees urge the Corps to take all necessary steps to relocate the 

Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe’s water intake on the Missouri River 

to ensure continued operation of the water system and an uninterrupted water supply for the Reservation. 

110 

Whitney Lake, Texas.—Within the funds provided, not less 

than $900,000 shall be for Ham Creek Park and not less than 

$300,000 shall be available for Kimball Park Bend. 

Mud Mountain, Washington.—Within the funds provided, up to 

$903,000 is available to satisfy Federal fish passage obligations for 

the term of the cooperative agreement with Puget Sound Energy. 

The Dalles Lock and Dam, Washington and Oregon.—Funds 

are provided for Lewis and Clark activities at Celilo Park. 

Chinook, Head of Sand Island and Baker Bay, Washington.—

The conferees note the proximity of Corps navigation facilities on 

the Columbia River between Chinook and the Head of Sand Island, 

Washington, and at Baker Bay, Washington, and encourage the 

Corps of Engineers to seek ways to achieve cost savings and efficiency, such as by utilizing appropriate contracting methods while 

having these two projects be considered together when seeking bids 

and awarding contracts. 

Remaining items, regional sediment management support program.—Within the funds provided, the amounts are to be allocated 

as follows: 

Fletcher Cove, Solona Beach, California .............................................. $300,000 

Southeast Coast of Oahu, Hawaii ........................................................ 400,000 

Littoral Drift Restoration Program, Benson Beach, WA .................... 1,584,000 

Lido Key, Sarasota, and vicinity and central and southern Brevard 

County to Dade ................................................................................... 325,000 

South Jetty and Clatsop Spit, Oregon ................................................. 300,000 

Coastal zone mapping and imaging laser, University of Southern 

Mississippi .......................................................................................... 4,500,000 

Removal of sunken vessels.—The conference agreement includes $775,000 for the removal of sunken vessels, of which 

$275,000 shall be for the removal of the State of Pennsylvania from 

the Christina River at Wilmington, Delaware. 

Centrally-funded activities.—The conferees agree that centralized management of project funds is efficient and is allowed under 

current guidelines for certain activities. These activities include, 

but are not limited to: the program development system known as 

the Automated Budget System; the National Recreation Reservation System; the provision of uniforms for those required to wear 

them; the Volunteer Clearinghouse; the Water Safety program; the 

transition from government owned/contractor-operated to private 

ownership and operation of the National Coastal Mapping Program; and the Sign Standards Program. Significant cost savings 

can be realized from funding these activities centrally by withholding the necessary amounts from the affected projects’ appropriations prior to allocation. It is critical that cost efficient management strategies, such as the above, be employed by the Corps in 

accomplishing its mission at least cost, when such strategies support the appropriated program. The conferees direct the Corps of 

Engineers to disclose the costs of these activities in its budget justifications. 

FLOOD CONTROL AND COASTAL EMERGENCIES

The conference agreement provides no appropriation for Flood 

Control and Coastal Emergencies, as proposed by the House, instead of $43,000,000 as proposed by the Senate. The conferees note 

111 

the significant appropriations made to the Corps in fiscal years 

2005 and 2006 to respond to Hurricane Katrina and other natural 

disasters, which are available to maintain its readiness posture. 

REGULATORY PROGRAM

The conference agreement provides $160,000,000 for the Regulatory Program as proposed by the House instead of $150,000,000 

as proposed by the Senate. 

The conferees are concerned with the growing backlog and the 

delay in approving various permits, particularly in the Jacksonville, Florida and Sacramento, California offices. Accordingly, the 

conferees expect that not less than ten percent of the increase over 

these offices’ fiscal year 2005 district-specific allocation be directed 

to each of these offices from the funds provided above the fiscal 

year 2005 level. 

The conferees encourage the Army Corps of Engineers to conduct a balanced and comprehensive review of the Champlin’s Marina Application #CENAE–R–2003–00648 for the Great Salt Pond, 

Block Island, Rhode Island. This review should include all relevant 

information pertaining to navigation, safety, competing uses and 

cumulative impact on the Great Salt Pond, including consideration 

of the Corps-permitted mooring field as delineated in Army Corps 

Permit No. 1987–00012 issued to the Town of New Shoreham in 

July, 1998. 

REVOLVING FUND

The conferees agree that costs of the CFO audit may be funded 

from the revolving fund. However, given the delay in award and 

the unknown out-year costs associated with the CFO study, the 

conferees direct the Corps to provide the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations, not later than 60 days after enactment 

of this Act, a complete scope, cost allocation and out-year funding 

requirements of the CFO study. Such analysis shall also include 

comparative information on other Federal agencies’ costs of similar 

CFO studies. The Corps is further directed not make an award for 

the CFO study until the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations have approved the scope and cost of the proposed CFO 

study. 

The conference agreement includes a provision that prohibits 

the expenditure of funds from the plant replacement and improvement program to rehabilitate or to abate lead and asbestos from 

the Dredge McFarland. The House bill included a similar provision 

that reduced funds included in title I of the Act. No similar provision was included in the Senate bill. The conferees are frustrated 

that a final report required by the conference agreement accompanying the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act of 

2004 detailing the recommendations on investment decisions on the 

Corps’ dredge fleet has yet to be delivered to Congress. Accordingly, 

the Corps is directed to submit the report to Congress not later 

than 30 days after enactment of this Act, after which the appropriate authorizing committees should determine the appropriate 

Federal dredge fleet. 

112 

FORMERLY UTILIZED SITES REMEDIAL ACTION PROGRAM

The conference agreement provides $140,000,000 for the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program as proposed by both 

the House and Senate. The conferees direct the Corps during fiscal 

year 2006 to prepare design specifications for the Shallow Land 

Disposal Area, Parks Township, Pennsylvania, and to complete investigations and initiate cleanup expeditiously for the former Sylvania nuclear fuel site in Hicksville, New York, and for the Luckey, 

Ohio, site. 

GENERAL EXPENSES

The conference agreement includes $154,000,000 for general expenses, instead of $152,021,000 as proposed by the House and 

$165,000,000 as proposed by the Senate. In addition, the conference agreement assumes that $8,000,000 in unobligated balances carried forward into fiscal year 2006, namely to fund the 

CFO study, shall be applied to fund personnel and other administrative activities, so that total appropriations available in fiscal 

year 2006 equal the budget estimate. The conference agreement 

stipulates that the total cost of the CFO study be funded from the 

revolving fund. 

The amounts available for general expenses in fiscal year 2006 

shall be available as follows: 

GENERAL EXPENSES ($000) 

Major subordinate command FY 06 

FTE 

FY 2006 

allocation 

Great Lakes & Ohio River Division .................................................................................................. 69 $9,561 

Mississippi River Valley Division ..................................................................................................... 73 9,589 

North Atlantic Division .................................................................................................................... 62 9,071 

Northwestern Division ...................................................................................................................... 68 8,866 

Pacific Ocean Division ..................................................................................................................... 19 3,177 

South Atlantic Division .................................................................................................................... 63 9,264 

South Pacific Division ..................................................................................................................... 62 9,900 

Southwestern Division ..................................................................................................................... 60 8,268 

Headquarters ................................................................................................................................... 402 56,852 

Hydrologic Engineering Center—HQ ............................................................................................... 0 7,564 

Hydrologic Engineer Center ............................................................................................................. 81 7,741 

Engineering Research and Development Center ............................................................................. 2 204 

Institute for Water Resources .......................................................................................................... 27 4,108 

Finance Center ................................................................................................................................. 9 824 

Program Accounts ............................................................................................................................ .................... 12,600 

Commander’s withholding ............................................................................................................... .................... 4,411 

Subtotal .................................................................................................................................. .................... 162,000 

Use of prior year balances .............................................................................................................. .................... ¥8,000 

Total ........................................................................................................................................ .................... 154,000 

The conference agreement includes the following adjustments 

to the budget estimate: 

Civil Works program accounts: 

Decrease in implementing competitive sourcing .......................... ¥$2,000,000 

Decrease in e-government initiatives ............................................ ¥500,000 

Undistributed reduction ................................................................. ¥2,000,000 

Other activities ............................................................................... +4,500,000 

113 

The conference agreement includes a provision making $4,500,000 available for analyses on water resource management 

on a watershed or regional scale as proposed by the House. 

The conferees urge the Chief Information Officer of the Corps 

to study a program to modernize and fully integrate the Corps’ water management system and supervisory control data acquisition 

program to reduce costs of the on-going improvements, maintenance, and technical support and to provide improved data sharing 

and management decision making. 

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

The conference agreement includes $4,000,000 for the Office of 

the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works as proposed by 

the House. The Senate bill contained no similar appropriation. The 

conferees agree with the direction of the House with respect to indirect costs and the budgeting thereof. The conferees further note 

that funding for this office is within the jurisdiction of Energy and 

Water Development Subcommittees of both the House and Senate 

Committees on Appropriations, and none other. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISION

The conference agreement includes a provision proposed by 

both the House and Senate relating to reception and representation 

expenses and the replacement and hire of passenger motor vehicles. 

GENERAL PROVISIONS

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CIVIL

The conference agreement modifies a provision proposed by the 

House relating to reprogramming. The Senate bill contained no 

similar provision. Reprogrammings are discussed in greater detail 

earlier in this statement of managers. 

The conference agreement includes a provision proposed by the 

Senate relating to credits and reimbursements. The House bill contained no similar provision. 

The conference agreement modifies a provision proposed by the 

House relating to the Muskingum Watershed in Ohio. The Senate 

bill contained no similar provision. 

The conference agreement includes a provision as proposed by 

the Senate relating to Civil Works functions. The House bill contained no similar provision. 

The conference agreement includes a provision as proposed by 

the Senate relating to St. George’s Bridge, Delaware. The House 

bill contained no similar provision. 

The conference agreement deletes language proposed by the 

House relating to continuing contracts and includes a provision 

that limits the availability of funds for certain continuing contracts 

authorized by section 206 of the Water Resources Development Act 

of 1999 (33 U.S.C. 2331). The Rivers and Harbors Appropriations 

Act of 1922 (33 U.S.C. 621) provides authority for the Corps of Engineers to use continuing contracts for ‘‘public work on canals, rivers, and harbors adopted by Congress.’’ Section 206 of the Water 

114 

Resources Development Act of 1999 (33 U.S.C. 2331) requires the 

use of a continuing contract for a certain set of water resources 

projects, i.e., those for which initiation of construction has occurred 

(defined as the date of enactment of an Act that appropriates funds 

for the project in one of three appropriations accounts: Construction, General; Operation and Maintenance, General; and Flood 

Control, Mississippi River and Tributaries). The conference agreement narrows the applicability of Section 206 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999, so that the Corps is only required to use continuing contracts for projects that are funded 

under the Operation and Maintenance account and the Operation 

and Maintenance subaccount of the Flood Control, Mississippi 

River and Tributaries account. The permissive authority established in Rivers and Harbors Appropriations Act of 1922 remains 

unaltered, so the Corps may use, but is not required to use, continuing contracts. 

The Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works may approve the use of continuing contracts in limited circumstances. The 

Assistant Secretary for Civil Works shall: 

(1) Provide within 60 days of enactment of this Act to the 

House and Senate Committees on Appropriations a report identifying all existing continuing contracts and the amounts, by fiscal 

year, of the out-year funding requirements; and 

(2) Provide a quarterly update to the report identified above in 

item (1). 

In the execution of any new continuing contract or modifications to 

an existing continuing contract, the Corps shall not commit an 

amount in excess of the amounts appropriated for such project in 

this Act or otherwise available for the project, as provided in sections 101 and 105 of this Act. The conference agreement affirms 

the management reforms undertaken by the Corps and the directions of the House relating to management and execution of continuing contracts. 

The conference agreement includes a provision as proposed by 

the Senate relating to Chief of Engineers reports. The House bill 

contained no similar provision. 

The conference agreement modifies a provision as proposed by 

the House relating to continuing contracts. The Senate bill contained no similar provision. 

The conference agreement includes a provision as proposed by 

the Senate relating to transmittal of certain reports of the Chief of 

Engineers. The House bill contained no similar provision. 

The conference agreement modifies a provision proposed by the 

Senate relating to Baltimore Metropolitan Water ResourcesGwynns Falls Watershed. The House bill contained no similar provision. 

The conference agreement includes a provision relating to New 

York and New Jersey Harbor as proposed by the House. The Senate bill contained no similar provision. 

The conference agreement includes a provision relating to 

Marmet Lock, Kanawha River, West Virginia, as proposed by the 

Senate. The House bill contained no similar provision. 

The conference agreement includes a provision relating to 

Truckee Meadows Flood Control Project, Nevada. 

115 

The conference agreement includes a provision relating to Lake 

Cumberland, Kentucky, as proposed by the Senate. The House bill 

contained no similar provision. 

The conference agreement includes a provision relating to 

Lower Las Vegas Wash, Nevada, as proposed by the Senate. The 

House bill contained no similar provision. 

The conference agreement includes a provision relating to 

Yazoo Basin, Big Sunflower River, Mississippi, as proposed by the 

Senate. The House bill contained no similar provision. 

The conference agreement includes a provision relating to 

Lower Mississippi River Museum and Interpretive Site, Mississippi, as proposed by the Senate. The House bill contained no 

similar provision. 

The conference agreement includes a provision relating to the 

Central New Mexico project, as proposed by the Senate. The House 

bill contained no similar provision. 

The conference agreement includes a provision relating to Los 

Angeles Harbor, California, as proposed by the Senate. The House 

bill contained no similar provision. 

The conference agreement includes a provision relating to Alpine, California, as proposed by the Senate. The House bill contained no similar provision. 

The conference agreement modifies a provision proposed by the 

Senate relating to a biological opinion in New Mexico. The House 

bill contained no similar provision. 

The conference report includes a provision relating to 

Bluestone, West Virginia, as proposed by the Senate. The House 

bill contained no similar provision. 

The conference agreement includes a provision relating to a 

wastewater infrastructure project in DeSoto County, Mississippi. 

The conference agreement includes a provision relating to a 

flood control project in Las Vegas Wash and Tributaries, Nevada. 

The conference agreement includes a provision relating to Lake 

Michigan Waterfront and related areas, Lake and Porter Counties, 

Indiana. 

The conference agreement includes a provision relating to 

Chesapeake Bay oyster restoration. 

The conference agreement includes a provision relating to a 

flood control project at Little Calumet River, Indiana. 

The conference agreement includes a provision relating to the 

American River watershed in California. This section adds new language to previously authorized flood damage reduction work at Folsom Dam and encourages the joint efforts currently being pursued 

by the Corps of Engineers, Bureau of Reclamation, the State of 

California, and the Sacramento Flood Control Agency (SAFCA) to 

address both flood damage reduction and dam safety needs at Folsom Dam, California. It also clarifies language in the fiscal year 

2004 Energy & Water Development Appropriations Act regarding 

the new bridge below Folsom Dam. This bridge is an integral and 

necessary component of any flood damage or dam safety work that 

is to be accomplished at the dam. The Corps of Engineers has primary federal responsibility for the bridge but the Bureau of Reclamation, which operates Folsom Dam, also plays an integral role. 

The two agencies must work cooperatively to implement the work 

116 

in a timely manner. Subsection (a) directs the Corps of Engineers 

and Bureau of Reclamation to coordinate technical reviews, joint 

planning, and preliminary design work for flood damage reduction 

improvements and dam safety needs at Folsom Dam and Reservoir. 

Subsections (b) and (c) clarify congressional intent by designating 

the Corps as the federal agency responsible for implementing the 

bridge and specifying that any additional funding requirement associated with converting the bridge from a temporary structure to 

a permanent one is to be a federal responsibility. This is in recognition of the fact that the road currently on top of Folsom Dam, 

which has been open for public use for most of the time since the 

dam was constructed, will ultimately be closed permanently for security reasons. Subsection (d) allows ‘‘902’’ cost increase provisions 

to apply to bridge costs just as it does for any other Corps project. 

This normal and customary application of existing law, when applied to the original costs cited in the fiscal year 2004 Act and updated to current conditions, will increase amounts available for estimates of both temporary and permanent bridge costs. Subsection 

(e) directs the Corps and the Bureau to proceed with expedited construction of the bridge and associated roadways, and encourages 

the Corps to make efforts to implement and project in a manner 

that is compatible with future improvements for flood control. The 

conferees understand that related efforts are underway to address 

potential structural changes to Folsom Dam to address flood control and dam safety concerns; however, these related efforts should 

not needlessly delay timely construction of the bridge/roadway 

project. If modifications to the completed bridge/roadway project 

are deemed necessary to accomplish flood control and dam safety 

objectives, Congress will authorize modifications to the project that 

may be necessary. The conferees direct both the Corps and the Bureau to work expeditiously to complete reviews, approvals and 

other administrative actions that may be necessary to expedite this 

work, including providing necessary easements and rights-of-way. 

A reporting requirement is included in subsection (f). 

The conference agreement includes a provision relating to 

Jacksonville Harbor, Florida. 

The conference agreement includes a provision relating to environmental infrastructure in the State of Ohio. 

The conference agreement includes a provision relating to Onondaga Lake, New York. 

The conference agreement includes a provision relating to 

White River Basin, Arkansas. 

The conference agreement includes a provision relating to the 

Calcasieu ship channel, Louisiana. 

The conference agreement includes a provision relating to a 

flood damage reduction project at Johnson Creek, Texas. 

The conference agreement includes a provision relating to previously appropriate funds for Hudson River, Athens, New York. 

The conference agreement includes a provision relating to the 

Corps of Engineers district office in Charleston, South Carolina. 

The conference agreement includes a provision relating to the 

Louisville, Kentucky Waterfront Park. 

The conference agreement includes a provision relating to a 

navigation project in Akutan, Alaska. 

117 

The conference agreement includes a provision relating to Poplar Island, Maryland. 

The conference agreement deletes a provision relating to a disposal barrier in Vermont and New York. 

The conference agreement deletes several provisions relating to 

the Missouri and Middle Mississippi Rivers Enhancement Project. 

The conference agreement deletes a provision proposed by the 

Senate relating to Lower Mud River, Milton, West Virginia. The 

House bill contained no similar provision. 

The conference agreement deletes a provision proposed by the 

Senate relating to regulatory permitting. 

TITLE II—DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

CENTRAL UTAH PROJECT COMPLETION ACCOUNT

The conference agreement includes a total of $32,614,000 as 

proposed by both the House and the Senate. Within the funds appropriated, the conference agreement includes $31,668,000 for Central Utah project construction; $946,000 for fish, wildlife, and recreation mitigation and conservation; and $1,736,000 for program 

oversight and administration. 

BUREAU OF RECLAMATION

WATER AND RELATED RESOURCES

The conference agreement includes an appropriation of 

$883,514,000 for water and related resources, instead of 

$832,000,000 as proposed by the House and $899,569,000 as proposed by the Senate. The conference agreement deletes provisions 

proposed by the Senate relating to the Snyderville Basin Water 

Supply Study Special Report in the State of Utah. The House bill 

contained no similar provision. 

The conference agreement for water and related resources is 

shown in the following table: 

118 


Insert graphic folio 429/210 HR275.105
119 


Insert graphic folio 429/211 HR275.106
120 


Insert graphic folio 429/212 HR275.107
121 


Insert graphic folio 429/213 HR275.108
122 


Insert graphic folio 429/214 HR275.109
123 


Insert graphic folio 429/215 HR275.110
124 


Insert graphic folio 429/216 HR275.111
125 


Insert graphic folio 429/217 HR275.112
126 


Insert graphic folio 429/218 HR275.113
127 


Insert graphic folio 429/219 HR275.114
128 


Insert graphic folio 429/220 HR275.115
129 

Central Arizona project, Arizona.—The conference agreement 

includes additional funds to continue a biological assessment or 

other appropriate evaluation of environmental impact from the potential diversions of flow from the Gila River consistent with the 

terms of the consumptive use and forbearance agreement ratified 

by Congress in the Arizona Water Settlements Act in order to receive a biological opinion or other appropriate determination by December 2008. 

Colorado Front Work and Levee System, Arizona.—The conferees have provided additional funds for continued work on the 

regulating reservoirs on the All American Canal and for initiation 

of appropriate studies to determine if additional capacity can be 

economically realized behind Laguna Dam if sediment is removed. 

The conferees understand that these projects have the potential of 

saving as much as 300,000 acre-feet of Colorado River System 

water that would otherwise be over-delivered to Mexico. Because of 

the potential for such water savings (essentially Nevada’s entire 

annual share of Colorado River Water), the conferees strongly recommend that Reclamation proceed aggressively with this work and 

to reflect the urgency of completing these projects in future budget 

requests. Because the regulating reservoir and Laguna Dam sediment removal provide needed improvements in river control, management and river system efficiencies, all of which are Federal responsibilities, the conferees believe that they should be undertaken 

at full Federal expense. 

Within the funds provided, the conference agreement includes $4,750,000 to continue planning and design of regulating reservoirs 

near the All American Canal. 

South/central Arizona investigations program.—Within the 

funds provided, $109,000 is available to complete the final report 

of phase II of the central Arizona salinity study and $250,000 for 

the West Salt River Management Study. 

Yuma area projects, Arizona and California.—The conference 

agreement includes $22,019,000 for the Yuma area projects in Arizona and California. Within the funds provided, $500,000 is available for renovation and refurbishment of the City of Needles, California Bureau Bay Reclamation Project site. 

Cachuma Project, California.—$500,000 is provided for the 

Lake Cachuma Water and Sewerage Plant. 

Central Valley Project, California.—Auburn/Folsom South 

Unit, California.—The Auburn-Folsom South Unit was authorized 

for construction by Congress by the Act of September 2, 1965, P.L. 

89–161, 79 Stat. 615. No construction on Auburn Dam has occurred 

since August of 1975. The costs and associated benefits of the Auburn-Folsom South Unit were last calculated in 1962. To determine 

whether a full feasibility study is warranted, these values must be 

updated to current levels. The conference agreement includes 

$1,000,000 for the Bureau of Reclamation to complete a special report to update the analysis of costs and associated benefits of the 

Auburn-Folsom South Unit of the Central Valley Project. The report is due to the committees of jurisdiction by August 30, 2006. 

American River Division.—Within the funds provided, 

$1,000,000 shall be available for the El Dorado Temperature Control Device. 

130 

Friant Division.—$200,000 has been provided for appraisal 

level studies of the Madera Irrigation District Water Supply Enhancement and $200,000 is provided for the Semitropic Groundwater Storage Project. 

Miscellaneous project programs.—Additional funds above the 

budget request are provided to complete phase II of the Kaweah 

River Delta Corridor Enhancement Study ($63,000) and $2,000,000 

is provided for the Sacramento Valley Water Management Program, which shall be made available for a cooperative agreement 

or agreements with the Northern California Water Association or 

its member agencies for the completion of the necessary environmental documents, and development and implementation of 

projects in support of the Sacramento Valley Water Management 

Plan, including those projects that will integrate the Lower Tuscan 

Groundwater Formation into the Sacramento Valley surface water 

system through conjunctive water management. 

Sacramento River Division.—Additional funds above the budget request are provided to complete the Glen Colusa Irrigation District Fish Screen Improvement Project. 

Trinity River Division.—The conference agreement provides $500,000 above the budget request for the Fishery Restoration program. These funds are to be used in concert with the $2,000,000 

provided in the Central Valley Project Restoration Program to meet 

Federal trust responsibilities to protect the fishery resources of the 

Hoopa Valley Tribe. The Commissioner is urged to continue to support a Co-Management Agreement between the Hoopa Valley Tribe 

and the Bureau of Reclamation. 

In addition, the conferees have provided $500,000 for the acquisition and/or modification of floodplain structures necessary for 

release of 11,000 cubic feet per second in an extremely wet water 

year. 

Salton Sea research project.—The conference agreement in- cludes $4,828,000 for the Salton Sea research project, including 

$1,500,000 to continue environmental restoration efforts at the 

Alamo and New Rivers, and for other authorized pilot projects. The 

Bureau is encouraged to work jointly with the Salton Sea Authority 

and assist the Authority in running its own pilot projects. 

Southern California investigations program.—The conference 

agreement includes $766,000 for the Southern California investigations program. Within the funds provided, $100,000 has been included to assist the Western Municipal Water District in general 

planning and associated environmental compliance activities related to the Riverside-Corona Feeder project; $300,000 to assist the 

Lake Arrowhead Community Services District to develop a groundwater management plan; and $100,000 to assist the City of Apple 

Valley, California to develop an appraisal study of the water reclamation portion of the City of Apple Valley’s sewage treatment 

and reclamation project. 

Lahontan Basin Project, Nevada.—The conferees have learned 

that dam safety issues have arisen concerning Tahoe Dam. As this 

dam provides more than 70 percent of the water supply for the 

area, it is imperative that safety remediation activities be undertaken as soon as possible. The conferees understand that preliminary investigations are underway and will be continued with budgVerDate Aug 31 2005 21:24 Nov 08, 2005 Jkt 024421 PO 00000 Frm 00130 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR275.XXX HR275
131 

eted funds in fiscal year 2006. The conferees expect Reclamation to 

ask for the appropriate funding level in the fiscal year 2007 budget 

to address safety issues. 

Middle Rio Grande Project, New Mexico.—The conferees support the reorganization of the Endangered Species Act Collaborative Program resulting in the Army Corps of Engineers, in collaboration with the Fish and Wildlife Service, taking responsibility 

to provide the administrative support for the program and the 

Army Corps of Engineers taking responsibility to meet the Reasonable and Prudent Alternative of the 2003 Biological Opinion required by section 205 of Public Law 108–447 (118 Stat. 2949) other 

than the water acquisition and management functions set out in 

the Reasonable and Prudent Alternative. Additionally, the Army 

Corps of Engineers will assume responsibility for providing a detailed spending plan for fiscal year 2006 funds to the House and 

Senate Appropriations Committees for approval; complete the baseline Long-Term Plan and complete the Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement before the end of fiscal year 2006. The 

Bureau of Reclamation retains responsibility to meet the Reasonable and Prudent Alternative regarding water acquisition and management, including acquisition of water to meet the flow requirements articulated in the 2003 Biological Opinion and development 

of a long-term plan to meet these flow requirements. The conferees 

expect the Bureau of Reclamation to facilitate a smooth transition 

of administrative functions for the program to the Army Corps of 

Engineers and the Fish and Wildlife Service within three months 

of the beginning of fiscal year 2006. Of the total $28,076,000 provided for the Middle Rio Grande Project, the conferees have provided $12,900,000 for the collaborative program. Of these funds, 

the Bureau of Reclamation is provided $5,000,000 for water acquisition and associated administrative support within the Bureau; 

the Bureau is to transfer $7,500,000 to the Army Corps of Engineers to fund population management, habitat restoration, water 

management studies, fish passage and river connectivity, minnow 

management, water quality, science and monitoring, biological 

opinion monitoring, and program management to meet the 2003 Biological Opinion Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives; and to provide $400,000 to the Fish and Wildlife Service for program management support. The cost-share requirements of the program remain 

75 percent Federal/25 percent non-Federal for all activities except 

water acquisition and program administration. Non-Federal cost 

share may be provided through in-kind services and participation 

on the administration team. The conferees have provided 

$1,000,000 above the request for the further refinement of the 

Upper Rio Grande Water Operations Model in collaboration with 

the Army Corps of Engineers, Sandia National Laboratories and 

the other partners. Additionally, $2,000,000 is provided for completion of construction and initial operation of the off-channel sanctuary authorized under section 6014 of Public Law 109–13. 

Deschutes ecosystem restoration project, Oregon.—The conferees 

have provided $1,000,000 to continue this project. 

Northern Utah investigations program, Utah.—Additional 

funds are for the Rural Water Technology Alliance. 

132 

Washington investigations program, Washington.—Within the 

funds provided, $118,000 is for the Odessa Sub Area study, and 

$50,000 is for the West Canal study. 

Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Project, Title I.—The 

conferees note that weather modification is but one way to augment and maximize flows in the river, and direct the Department 

of the Interior and the Bureau to begin processes to produce augmentation strategies. 

The conferees understand that Reclamation has initiated a 

public process to solicit information about potential methods to recover or replace agricultural return flows from the Wellton-Mohawk Irrigation and Drainage District that bypass the Colorado 

River and are discharged to the Cienega de Santa Clara in Mexico 

(bypass flows). The U.S. has bypassed highly saline agricultural return flows to the Cienega to help meet Colorado River water quality obligations to Mexico. However, the bypass flows are not included in the 1.5 million acre-feet of water that the U.S. is required 

to deliver annually to Mexico. Consequently, system storage from 

the Colorado River has been used to make up for the bypass flow. 

The current drought and projected long-term water demands have 

heightened concern about this demand on the river system. The 

Yuma Desalting Plant was originally constructed to recover part of 

the bypass flows and return them to the river. Various other methods for recovering or replacing the flows have been proposed including options that address potential impacts to the wetlands in the 

Cienega de Santa Clara. The conferees believe that this public 

process is a positive step in attempting to address this complex hydrologic problem and encourage Reclamation to continue this stakeholder process. Recognizing that the Yuma Desalting Plant may be 

one part of the solution to the return flow issue, the conferees believe that it is prudent to reiterate the direction from previous Acts 

that sufficient resources be dedicated to the Yuma Desalting Plant 

so that one-third operational capacity may be achieved by the end 

of calendar year 2006. 

El Paso, Water Reclamation and Reuse, Texas.—The conference 

agreement includes $103,000 to complete the project as currently 

authorized. 

Native American Affairs program.—Additional funds provided 

above the budget request are for continued work on the AAMODT 

settlement. 

Research and development, desalination research and development program.—The conferees urge the Bureau of Reclamation to 

place a higher priority on desalination activities in future budgets 

given the importance of sustainable water supplies to the West and 

to other regions of the country. The conference agreement provides 

$7,000,000 for the completion of construction of the Tularosa Basin 

Desalination Facility, New Mexico, and initial operation. Upon 

completion of the facility, the Bureau is directed to select an organization to operate the facility under Bureau direction. In this selection, the Bureau should give priority to local educational institutions with expertise, do not need to relocate and have on-going 

water research activities. 

Title XVI, Water Reclamation and Reuse.—The conference 

agreement includes $3,729,000 for this program, of which 

133 

$2,500,000 shall be for the WateReuse Foundation. These funds 

shall be available to support the Foundation’s research priorities. 

Departmental irrigation program.—The conference agreement provides $1,818,000 for this program, of which $150,000 shall be 

for the Uncompaghre selenium control project and $1,668,000 for 

irrigation modernization activities for Elephant Butte Irrigation 

District. 

Water 2025.—The conferees have included $1,000,000 to provide for continued efficiency and water improvements related to the 

Middle Rio Grande Conservancy District and $1,000,000 for work 

related to water efficiency and supply supplementation in the Pecos 

consistent with the partnership between the Carlsbad Irrigation 

District and the New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission. A critical component of reducing tension among multiple water users is 

collaborative planning and joint operations. Within the funds provided, $2,000,000 is for the Desert Research Institute to address 

water quality and environmental issues in ways that will bring industry and regulators to mutually acceptable answers. Funding of 

$1,000,000 for the alliance with the International Center for Water 

Resources Management at Central State University, OH, is also 

provided herein. 

Building and site security.—The conference agreement includes $40,000,000 for building and site security activities, as proposed by 

the House, instead of $50,000,000 as proposed by the Senate. The 

amount provided recognizes that the Bureau of Reclamation is expected to receive approximately $10,000,000 in reimbursements for 

additional security guards and patrols, which are considered 

project O&M costs. The conferees agree, however, that all project 

beneficiaries that benefit from an enhanced security posture at the 

Bureau’s facilities should pay a share of the security costs. Accordingly, the Bureau is directed to provide to the House and Senate 

Committees on Appropriations, not later than 60 days after the enactment of this Act, a delineation of planned reimbursable security 

costs by project pro-rated by all project purposes. 

Water conservation field service program.—Within the amounts 

provided, $1,000,000 shall be allocated for the Many Farms Irrigation Water Conservation project; $300,000 shall be allocated for 

urban water conservation projects identified through the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California Innovative Conservation 

Program; and $100,000 shall be allocated to initiate a study to 

identify concurrent and overlapping government programs aimed at 

improving water resource efficiency. 

CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT RESTORATION FUND

The conference agreement provides $52,219,000 for the Central 

Valley Project Restoration Fund as proposed by both the House and 

the Senate. 

CALIFORNIA BAY—DELTA RESTORATION

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

The conference agreement includes $37,000,000 for the CalFed 

Delta Restoration program, as proposed by the Senate, instead of 

$35,000,000 as proposed by the House. 

134 

The funds provided are intended to support the following activities, as delineated below: 

Environmental water account ............................................................... $8,800,000 

CALFED 180 Day Study ................................................................ (500,000) 

Storage program .................................................................................... 11,500,000 

San Joaquin River basin ................................................................ (4,000,000) 

Los Vaqueros ................................................................................... (3,200,000) 

Shasta enlargement ........................................................................ (4,000,000) 

Sites ................................................................................................. (300,000) 

Conveyance ............................................................................................. 4,800,000 

San Luis Reservoir Low Point ....................................................... (2,000,000) 

Frank Tract ..................................................................................... (500,000) 

Planning and management activities ................................................... 500,000 

Water use efficiency ............................................................................... 5,900,000 

Westside regional drainage program ............................................ (1,650,000) 

Butte County Groundwater Model ................................................ (250,000) 

Inland Empire Utilities Agency regional water recycling project (1,000,000) 

Ecosystem restoration ........................................................................... 2,500,000 

Sacramento River small diversion fish screen program .............. (500,000) 

Water Quality: Contra Costa Water District alternative intake 

project .................................................................................................. 2,000,000 

Science program: Interagency ecological program .............................. 1,000,000 

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

CALFED 180 Day Study.—The conference agreement includes $500,000, to be transferred to the Corps of Engineers, which shall 

be available to complete a report describing the Federal levee stability reconstruction projects and priorities that will be carried out 

through 2010. The conferees expect the Corps to budget appropriately for these activities in future budget submissions. 

POLICY AND ADMINISTRATION

The conference agreement includes $57,917,000 for policy and 

administration as proposed by both the House and the Senate. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISION

The conference agreement includes a provision limiting the 

purchase of not to exceed 14 passenger vehicles, as proposed by 

both the House and the Senate. 

GENERAL PROVISIONS

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

The conference agreement includes a provision regarding the 

San Luis Unit and Kesterson Reservoir in California, as proposed 

by both the House and the Senate. 

The conference agreement includes a provision prohibiting the 

use of funds for any water acquisition or lease in the Middle Rio 

Grande or Carlsbad Projects in New Mexico unless the acquisition 

is in compliance with existing state law and administered under 

state priority allocation. This provision was contained in both the 

House and Senate bills. 

The conference agreement includes a provision proposed by the 

House relating to agreements with the City of Needles, California 

or the Imperial Irrigation District for the design and construction 

of stages of the Lower Colorado Water Supply Project. No similar 

provision was contained in the Senate bill. 

135 

The conference agreement includes a provision as proposed by 

the Senate related to drought emergency assistance. No similar 

provision was contained in the House bill. 

The conference agreement modifies a provision proposed in the 

Senate bill relating to Water 2025. The House bill contained no 

similar provision. 

The conference agreement deletes a provision related to the 

Rio Grande Collaborative Water Operations Team. 

The conference agreement modifies a provision proposed by the 

Senate relating to the Desalination Act. The House bill contained 

no similar provision. 

The conference agreement includes a provision as proposed by 

the Senate relating to Animas-La Plata. The House bill contained 

no similar provision. 

The conference agreement includes a provision proposed by the 

Senate relating to Desert Terminus Lakes. The House bill contained no similar provision. 

The conference agreement includes a provision relating to a 

special report to update the analysis of costs and associated benefits of the Auburn-Folsom South Unit, Central Valley Project, California. 

The conference agreement deletes a provision proposed by the 

Senate relating to Humbolt Project Title transfer. 

The conference agreement deletes a provision proposed by the 

Senate relating to a feasibility study for Norman, Oklahoma. 

The conference agreement deletes a provision relating to 

Animas-La Plata. 

TITLE III—DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

The summary tables at the end of this title set forth the conference agreement with respect to the individual appropriations, 

programs, and activities of the Department of Energy. Additional 

items of conference agreement are discussed below. The allocations 

for specific projects and earmarks that were provided in the separate House and Senate reports are superceded by this conference 

report. Other programmatic guidance and reporting requirements 

identified in the separate House and Senate reports remain effective unless modified by the conference report. 

The conferees are aware that the Energy Policy Act of 2005 

(Public Law 109–58) imposed a number of new requirements on the 

Department. Unfortunately, these requirements were not included 

in the fiscal year 2006 budget request nor in the conference allocation. For urgent needs associated with the Energy Policy Act of 

2005, the Department should submit a reprogramming request to 

the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations. The conferees expect the Department to budget fully for these new requirements in the fiscal year 2007 request. 

SPECIAL NUCLEAR MATERIAL CONSOLIDATION

The conferees support the House language regarding the complex wide consolidation of special nuclear materials (SNM). The 

conferees are disappointed with the lack of urgency demonstrated 

by the Department when it comes to addressing the security and 

136 

cost liability of having significant quantities of special nuclear materials at multiple departmental facilities across the complex. Unfortunately, the Department has indicated that it will not be able 

to bring all of its facilities and operations into compliance with the 

latest Design Basis Threat until 2008. This delay is unacceptable. 

With the MOX project starting construction at the Savannah River 

Site, the Department should move forward aggressively to develop 

a complex wide plan to achieve the significant cost and security 

benefits of material consolidation. The conferees direct the Secretary of Energy to provide a report to the Committees on Appropriations on the nuclear material consolidation activities, including 

detailed cost, scope, and schedule of consolidation activities, and facilities targeted for deinventorying of SNM and sites and facilities 

available to support the consolidation mission. The report to the 

Committees is due by July 1, 2006. 

CONGRESSIONAL DIRECTION

The conferees support the House language requiring the Secretary to submit to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Energy and Water, a quarterly report 

on the status of all projects, reports, fund transfers, and other actions directed in the separate House and Senate reports for fiscal 

year 2006 and in this conference agreement. 

BUDGET REQUIREMENTS

The conferees agree with the House language regarding budget 

justification requirements and five-year budget planning. 

SAFEGUARDS AND SECURITY IMPLEMENTATION

The conferees agree with the House report language regarding 

problems with the Design Basis Threat (DBT) for DOE sites. The 

conferees expect the Department to adopt a postulated threat, a 

DBT, and a DBT implementation strategy that is consistent with 

that used by other federal agencies. 

AUGMENTING FEDERAL STAFF

The conferees continue to be concerned about the numbers of 

management and operating contractor employees assigned to the 

Washington metropolitan area. However, the conferees do not impose a numerical ceiling for fiscal year 2006, as has been the case 

in previous fiscal years. Instead, the conferees expect the Secretary 

and the responsible program offices to manage this issue closely 

and avoid excessive growth in the number of contractor personnel 

assigned to the Washington area. The conferees maintain the reporting requirements contained in the House report. 

LABORATORY DIRECTED RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT (LDRD)

The conferees are concerned with the level of overhead charges 

applied to programs funded in this bill and urge the Department 

to continue to work to minimize the overhead burden on all program activities. In order to ensure an equitable allocation of overhead costs the Secretary should apply overhead charges to LDRD 

activities consistent with cost accounting practices applied to proVerDate Aug 31 2005 21:24 Nov 08, 2005 Jkt 024421 PO 00000 Frm 00136 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR275.XXX HR275
137 

gram activities that are direct funded. The conference agreement 

increases the allowable percentage for LDRD, PDRD and SDRD activities to allow this accounting change without harming the underlying discretionary research activities. The change in accounting 

practices should be implemented with no net reduction in LDRD 

levels below 6 percent of the funds provided by the Department of 

Energy to such labs for national security activities and 2 percent 

for PDRD and SDRD activities at the appropriate plants and sites. 

Within 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Energy shall submit a report to the Committees on Appropriations detailing how the accounting change will be implemented 

without impacting the basic research and the change shall be implemented within 180 days of enactment. 

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY AT DOE LABORATORIES

Based on the recommendations of the GAO report (GAO–05– 190) regarding equal employment opportunity within the Department of Energy, the conferees direct the Department of Energy to 

determine the causes of such disparities and take necessary corrective steps to address the problems identified. 

REPROGRAMMING GUIDELINES

The conferees require the Department to inform the Appropriations Committees promptly and fully when a change in program 

execution and funding is required during the fiscal year. To assist 

the Department in this effort, the following guidance is provided 

for programs and activities funded in the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act. 

Definition.—A reprogramming includes the reallocation of 

funds from one activity to another within an appropriation, or any 

significant departure from a program, project, or activity described 

in the agency’s budget justification as presented to and approved 

by Congress. For construction projects, a reprogramming constitutes the reallocation of funds from one construction project 

identified in the justifications to another project or a significant 

change in the scope of an approved project. 

Criteria for Reprogramming.—A reprogramming should be 

made only when an unforeseen situation arises, and then only if 

delay of the project or the activity until the next appropriations 

year would result in a detrimental impact to an agency program or 

priority. Reprogrammings may also be considered if the Department can show that significant cost savings can accrue by increasing funding for an activity. Mere convenience or preference should 

not be factors for consideration. 

Reprogrammings should not be employed to initiate new programs or to change program, project, or activity allocations specifically denied, limited, or increased by Congress in the Act or this 

statement. In cases where unforeseen events or conditions are 

deemed to require such changes, proposals shall be submitted in 

advance to the Appropriations Committees and be fully explained 

and justified. 

Reporting and Approval Procedures.—The conferees have not 

provided statutory language to define reprogramming guidelines, 

but expect the Department to follow the letter and spirit of the 

138 

guidance provided in this statement. Consistent with prior years, 

the conferees have not provided the Department with any internal 

reprogramming flexibility in fiscal year 2006, unless specifically 

identified in the conference report for particular programs, projects, 

or activities. Any reallocation of new or prior year budget authority 

or prior year deobligations must be submitted to the Appropriations Committees in writing and may not be implemented prior to 

approval by the Committees on Appropriations. 

ENERGY SUPPLY AND CONSERVATION

The conference agreement provides $1,830,936,000 for Energy 

Supply and Conservation. The conferees direct that the Office of 

Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability function as the principal 

DOE liaison with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. 

Congressionally directed projects.—The conference agreement 

includes a list of Congressionally directed projects, within available 

funds, at the end of the Energy Supply and Conservation section. 

In the event the project totals exceed twenty percent of a subaccount, the Department has the discretion to fund these projects 

within other Energy Supply and Conservation subaccounts than 

those identified in the table. The conferees remind recipients that 

statutory cost sharing requirements may apply to these projects. 

ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE ENERGY RESOURCES

The conference agreement provides $1,185,700,000 for energy 

efficiency and renewable energy resources. The conferees provide 

$4,000,000 for the National Center on Energy Management and 

Building Technologies, and direct that this project shall be subject 

to the cost-sharing requirements of a research project rather than 

a demonstration project. 

The conferees support DOE’s efforts to strengthen project management within the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) with the establishment of the Project Management 

Center (PMC). With the success of the PMC, the conferees see no 

need for third-party contracting agents, and discourage the Department from engaging in third-party arrangements for the award and 

distribution of federal funds. 

Hydrogen Technology.—The conference agreement includes 

$157,199,000 for hydrogen technology, of which $76,100,000 is designated for fuel cell technologies. The conferees provide the budget 

request for distributed reforming and electricity development, and 

no funds for recapturing heat from PEM fuel cells within distributed energy systems. The conferees provide $14,900,000 for infrastructure and $24,000,000 for vehicles for the demonstration 

projects in the budget request. 

Biomass and Biorefinery Systems R&D.—The conference agreement includes $91,634,000 for integrated research and development 

on biomass and biorefinery systems. The conferees provide 

$3,500,000 for the Consortium for Plant Biotechnology Research. 

Solar Energy.—The conference agreement includes $83,953,000 

for solar energy programs, which includes $11,000,000 for concentrating solar power. 

139 

Wind energy.—The conference agreement includes $39,249,000 

for wind energy programs. 

Geothermal Technology.—The conference agreement includes $23,299,000 for geothermal technology, to include continued funding at current year levels for GeoPowering the West. 

Hydropower.—The conferees recommend $500,000 for hydropower research. The Department should complete integration studies and close out outstanding contracts in advanced hydropower 

technology. 

Vehicle Technologies.—The conferees recommend $183,943,000, 

which includes an increase of $1,000,000 for Advanced Combustion 

R&D, Combustion and Emission Control. The conferees provide 

$19,000,000 for the Automotive Lightweight Materials program; 

$500,000 for the hydrogen natural gas vehicles cylinder safety, inspection and maintenance program; and $3,500,000 for the OffHighway Program. The conference agreement provides $10,000,000 

to Oak Ridge National Laboratory to be divided evenly between 

materials development and computational modeling to develop 

highway transportation technologies. 

Building Technologies.—The conferees recommend 

$69,966,000, to include $10,256,000 for equipment standards and 

analysis, an increase of $7,000,000 for lighting R&D, and a 

$3,000,000 increase for thermal insulation and building materials. 

Within the $20,000,000 provided for lighting R&D, $5,000,000 is to 

support a National Center for solid state lighting research and development through the Office of Science, to be competed among the 

centers for nanotechnologies. The conferees provide $1,000,000 for 

Oil Heat Research for residential buildings. The conferees encourage the Department to support energy efficiency research for affordable, factory-built housing through the Manufactured Housing 

Research Alliance. 

Report Requirement.—The conferees request a report on appliance efficiency standards as directed in the House report. 

Industrial Technologies.—The conference agreement includes 

$57,429,000 for industrial technologies, to include an increase of 

$2,402,000 for Industries of the Future, and a decrease of 

$1,642,000 for combustion R&D. 

Distributed Energy and Electricity Reliability Program.—The 

conferees direct the activities within this account be merged within 

the Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability (OE), and 

the conference agreement includes $60,666,000 within OE to support these activities. 

Federal Energy Management Programs.—The conferees provide 

$19,166,000 for the Federal Energy Management Programs, including $2,019,000 for the Departmental Energy Management Program. 

Facilities and Infrastructure.—The conferees provide 

$26,315,000 for renewable energy Facilities and Infrastructure. 

This amount includes $5,800,000 for operations and maintenance of 

the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) in Golden, Colorado; $10,515,000 to continue construction of the new Science and 

Technology facility at NREL (project 02–E–001); and $10,000,000 

for the design and construction of the already approved research 

support facilities at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. 

140 

The conferees direct that the design of the facilities should be bid 

competitively, and should demonstrate the use of state of the art 

renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies in the design 

of the buildings. 

Weatherization and Intergovernmental activities.—The conferees provide $240,400,000 for weatherization assistance program 

grants, $4,600,000 for training and technical assistance, 

$36,000,000 for state energy program grants, $500,000 for state energy activities and $25,657,000 for gateway deployment. The conferees recommend that gateway deployment funds be distributed as 

follows: $3,807,000 for Rebuild America, $350,000 for energy efficiency information and outreach, $4,500,000 for building codes 

training and assistance, $8,000,000 for Clean Cities of which an additional $1,490,000 is provided above the budget request to expand 

E–85 fueling capacity, $6,000,000 for Energy Star, and $3,000,000 for inventions and innovations. The conferees include $3,910,000 

for the international renewable energy program, $4,000,000 for 

tribal energy to include $1,000,000 for the Council of Renewable 

Energy Resource Tribes (CERT), and $5,000,000 for the Renewable 

Energy Production Incentive (REPI). 

Program Support.—The conferees provide is $13,456,000 for 

Program Support, to include $3,500,000 to continue the efforts of 

the National Renewable Energy Laboratory to develop renewable 

energy resources uniquely suited to the Southwestern United 

States through its virtual site office in Nevada. 

Program Direction.—The conferees provide $99,524,000 for 

Program Direction. The reduction of $2,000,000 from the request 

reflects the transfer of program direction funds to the Office of 

Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability. 

Regional Offices.—The conferees provide full funding for the 

six regional offices in fiscal year 2006. However, the conferees understand that the Administration is unlikely to request funding for 

the regional offices in the fiscal year 2007 budget request. In light 

of this, the conferees direct the regional offices be consolidated into 

the Project Management Center at the Golden Field Office and the 

National Energy Technology Laboratory not later than September 

30, 2006. 

OFFICE OF ELECTRICITY DELIVERY AND ENERGY RELIABILITY

The conferees provide $163,513,000 for Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability. The conferees direct that the activities within the Distributed Energy and Electricity Reliability Program, previously funded in the Energy Conservation account, be 

merged within the Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability. The conference agreement includes $60,666,000 for the 

transferred activities. Within available funds, the conference recommendation includes $2,000,000 for Thermal Energy Technologies; $2,000,000 for gas engine-driven heat pump development; 

$2,000,000 to complete the on-going Ammonia Absorption Technology Development for HVAC&R activity; $2,500,000 for a CHP 

engineering prototype and field test activity of ammonia absorption 

technology; continuation of desiccant research at a level of 

$1,500,000; and continuation of heat and mass transfer activities at 

a level of $2,000,000. The conference agreement includes 

141 

$5,000,000 to conduct electricity transmission, distribution and energy assurance research and development activities at the National 

Energy Technology Laboratory and $10,000,000, equally divided between Idaho and Sandia National Laboratories, to support activities at the SCADA test facilities. The conference agreement includes $3,000,000 for deployment testing and analysis of advanced 

energy storage systems for telecommunication applications in Kansas. Detailed subprogram allocations are shown in the table at the 

end of Title III. 

Program Direction.—The conference agreement includes 

$13,447,000 for program direction. 

NUCLEAR ENERGY PROGRAMS

The conference agreement provides a total of $557,574,000 for 

nuclear energy programs. The Office of Nuclear Energy, Science 

and Technology is the lead office with landlord responsibilities for 

the Idaho site. Because this site provides considerable support to 

defense activities and naval nuclear reactors, $123,873,000 of costs 

is allocated to Other Defense Activities and $13,500,000 is allocated to Naval Reactors. Both programs are in the 050 budget function. 

University Reactor Fuel Assistance and Support.—The conference agreement includes $27,000,000. The conferees support the 

inclusion of the Institute of Nuclear Science and Engineering at 

Idaho National Laboratory in this program. 

Nuclear Energy Research and Development.—The conference 

agreement provides $226,000,000 for nuclear energy research and 

development. The conference agreement provides $66,000,000 for 

Nuclear Power 2010. 

For Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems, the conferees provide $55,000,000, of which $40,000,000 is provided for the Next 

Generation Nuclear Power Plant program. Within available funds, 

$4,000,000 is provided for the development of multiple high temperature fuel fabrication techniques in support of the Generation 

IV Nuclear Energy Systems. 

The conferees provide $25,000,000 for the Nuclear Hydrogen 

Initiative. The conferees provide an additional $5,000,000 over the 

request to accelerate essential materials research and development 

and component design, test and evaluation for implementing the 

high temperature sulfuriodine water splitting process for hydrogen 

production necessary to the advanced reactor hydrogen co-generation project at Idaho National Laboratory. 

The conferees provide $80,000,000 for the Advanced Fuel Cycle 

Initiative (AFCI), $10,000,000 over the request. The additional 

funds are to be used to accelerate the design activities associated 

with a proposed Engineering Scale Demonstration (ESD). This 

funding will allow completion of the conceptual design in fiscal year 

2006 and enable pre-engineering design to commence in fiscal year 

2007. The conferees direct the Department to accelerate the development of a separations technology that can address the current inventories of commercial spent nuclear fuel and select the preferred 

technology no later than the end of fiscal year 2007. The conferees 

direct the Department to submit the spent nuclear fuel recycling 

142 

technology plan to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations by March 1, 2006. 

Reporting requirement.—The conferees direct the Department 

to submit to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations 

a report on sodium bonded spent fuel, as outlined in the Senate report, no later than March 1, 2006. 

Radiological Facilities Management.—The purpose of the Radiological Facilities Management program is to maintain the critical 

infrastructure necessary to support users from the defense, space, 

and medical communities on a reimbursable basis. The conference 

agreement provides $54,595,000 for this work. 

The conferees provide $39,700,000 for Space and Defense Infrastructure. This includes the requested amounts to operate radioisotope power systems at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL), 

maintain iridium capabilities at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 

and maintain and operate the Pu-238 mission at Los Alamos. The 

conferees recognize the need to free up floor space in TA–55 for pit 

production, and direct the Department to develop a strategy to relocate expeditiously the mission for Pu-238 processing from Los Alamos to INL. The conferees provide an increase of $8,500,000 for 

INL to plan and build the capability to assume the Pu-238 mission, 

so there is no gap in capability during the mission transfer. The 

conferees direct the Department to provide a mid-year report by 

March 31, 2006, on the transfer strategy and associated costs. 

The conferees provide $14,395,000 for Medical Isotopes Infrastructure, and $500,000 for Enrichment Facility Infrastructure. 

The conferees provide no funding for the Medical Isotope Production and Building 3019 Complex Shutdown project. The conferees 

direct the Department to terminate promptly the Medical Isotope 

Production and Building 3019 Complex Shutdown project. The responsibility for disposition of the U–233 is transferred to the Defense Environmental Management program per DOE’s recommendation, and the conferees have provided funds in the Defense Environmental Management appropriation for disposition of 

the material stored in Building 3019. 

Idaho Facilities Management.—The conference agreement provides $113,862,000 for Idaho National Laboratory (INL) operations 

and infrastructure. Of this total, $82,600,000 is allotted to the 270 

budget function and the balance, $31,262,000, is allotted to the 050 

function and funded under Other Defense Activities and Naval Reactors. The conferees provide $102,907,000 for INL operations, 

$69,145,000 from function 270 Energy Supply, $17,762,000 from 

Other Defense Activities, and an increase of $13,500,000 from the 

Office of Naval Reactors to support the Idaho National Laboratory’s 

Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) life extension program. The conferees 

also provide an additional $2,500,000 for the utility corridor extension project at the Idaho National Laboratory. The conferees provide $10,955,000 for Idaho facilities construction. This includes the 

requested amounts for the Gas Test Loop in the Advanced Test Reactor. 

Idaho Site-wide Safeguards and Security.—The conferees provide $75,008,000 for Idaho sitewide safeguards and security as an 

050 Defense Activity under the Other Defense Activities account. 

143 

Program Direction.—The conference agreement includes $61,109,000 for program direction. Of this amount, $30,006,000 is 

funded in the Energy Supply appropriation under budget function 

270, and $31,103,000 is funded in the Other Defense Activities appropriation under budget function 050. 

ENVIRONMENT, SAFETY AND HEALTH

The conference agreement provides $28,000,000 for non-defense environment, safety and health activities. The conference 

agreement includes $20,900,000 for program direction, the same as 

the budget request. 

LEGACY MANAGEMENT

The conference agreement provides $33,522,000 for the Energy 

Supply-related activities of the Office of Legacy Management. 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED ENERGY SUPPLY & CONSERVATION PROJECTS 

Sub-accounts Project Conference 

recommendations 

Biomass .......................................... Univ. of Georgia Biomass Pyrolysis Biorefinery Project (GA) ................ $1,250,000 

National Biofuel Energy Laboratory, NextEnergy Center (MI) ................ 2,000,000 

Biomass Research Agricultural Development Ctr. (OH) ........................ 1,500,000 

Texas A&M Renewable Energy Animal Waste Project (TX) .................... 1,000,000 

Wood Debris Bioenergy Project (CO) ...................................................... 1,000,000 

Clarkson Univ. Dairy Waste Public/Private Partnership (NY) ................ 250,000 

Madison County Landfill Gas to Energy Project (NY) ............................ 1,000,000 

Asphalt Roofing Shingles into Energy Project, Xenia (OH) ................... 1,000,000 

Ohio State University 4–H ‘‘Green’’ Building Project (OH) ................... 1,000,000 

University of Iowa National Ag-Based Industrial Program (IA) ............ 500,000 

Solid Waste Authority Pyramid Resource Center (OH) ........................... 2,000,000 

City of Stamford Waste-to-Energy Project (CT) ..................................... 1,500,000 

Iowa State Univ. Biomass Energy Conversion Project (IA) .................... 500,000 

Louisiana State Univ. Sugar Base Ethanol (LA) ................................... 500,000 

Iroquois Bio-Energy Consortium Ethanol Project (IN) ............................ 3,500,000 

Biotech to Ethanol Project (CO) ............................................................. 1,000,000 

New York Biomass/Methane Gas Power Fuel Cell Project (NY) ............ 2,000,000 

Western Massachusetts Biomass Project (MA) ..................................... 500,000 

Greenville Composite Biomass Project (ME) .......................................... 750,000 

Research Triangle Institute Biomass Project (NC) ................................ 1,250,000 

Chariton Biomass Project (IA) ............................................................... 750,000 

Laurentian Bio-Energy Project (MN) ...................................................... 1,250,000 

Kona Carbon Biomass Project (HI) ........................................................ 1,000,000 

Mississippi State University Sustainable Energy Center (MS) .............. 11,000,000 

Missouri Biodiesel Demonstration Project (MO) .................................... 1,000,000 

Auburn Alternative Fuel Source Study of Cement Kilns (AL) ................ 1,000,000 

Canola-based Automotive Oil R&D (PA) ................................................ 1,000,000 

Center for Advanced Bio-based Binders (IA) ........................................ 800,000 

Devel. of Applied Membrane Technology for Processing Ethanol from 

Biomass (DE).

500,000 

Univ. of N. Iowa National Ag-Based Industrial Lubriant Center (IA) ... 500,000 

Michigan Biotechnology Institute (MI) ................................................... 1,000,000 

Washington State Ferries Biodiesel Demonstration Project (WA) .......... 500,000 

Oxydiesel demonstration project in California and Nevada (NV) .......... 500,000 

LSU Biorefinery for Ethanol Chemicals, Animal Feed and Biomaterials 

(LA).

500,000 

Vermont Biomass Energy Resource Center (VT) .................................... 500,000 

UNLV Research Foundation Development of Biofuels Utilizing Ionic 

Transfer Membranes (NV).

3,000,000 

Building tech .................................. Carnegie Mellion Univ. Advanced Building Testbed (PA) ...................... 1,000,000 

National Center on Energy Management & Building Tech. (NV) .......... 4,000,000 

University of Louisville Sustainable Buildings Project (KY) .................. 400,000 

Weath. ............................................. Office of International Energy Market Development (WV) ..................... 600,000 

144 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED ENERGY SUPPLY & CONSERVATION PROJECTS—Continued 

Sub-accounts Project Conference 

recommendations 

Clean Cities .................................... E–85 Ethanol Vehicle Refueling Expansion (multi state) ..................... 500,000 

Int-Govt ........................................... International Utility Electricity Partnership (IUEP) ................................ 3,500,000 

Prog. Supp ...................................... NREL virtual site office in Nevada (NV) ................................................ 3,500,000 

Geothermal ..................................... Ohio Wesleyan Univ. Geothermal Demonstration Project (OH) .............. 750,000 

Springfield Equestrian Center Energy Efficiency Project (OH) .............. 1,500,000 

Lipscomb University Geothermal System (TN) ....................................... 500,000 

Geothermal and Renewable Energy Laboratory of Nevada (NV) ........... 1,000,000 

Hydrogen ......................................... University of South Carolina Fuel Cell Design Project (SC) .................. 2,000,000 

Fuel Cell Freeze/Cold Start Program (CT) .............................................. 1,000,000 

Center for Intelligent Fuel Cell Materials Design (multi-state) ............ 1,500,000 

Hydrogen Fuel Cell Project Edison Materials Technology (OH) ............. 2,500,000 

Indigenous Energy Development Center (PA) ........................................ 1,000,000 

Delaware State University Center for Hydrogen Storage (DE) ............... 1,000,000 

Florida Int’l Univ. Cntr for Energy & Tech. of the Americas (FL) ......... 1,000,000 

City of Auburn Energy Production Issues at Wastewater Plant (NY) .... 900,000 

Hydrogen Fleet Infrastructure Demonstration Project (MI) .................... 2,000,000 

Purdue Hydrogen Technologies Program (IN) ........................................ 1,000,000 

Detroit Commuter Hydrogen Project (MI) ............................................... 1,300,000 

City of Chicago Ethanol to Hydrogen Project (IL) ................................. 2,000,000 

California Hydrogen Storage and Systems Technologies (CA) .............. 1,000,000 

Univ. of Arkansas at Little Rock Hydrogen Storage Project (AR) ......... 400,000 

Univ. of Akron Fuel Cell Laboratory (OH) .............................................. 500,000 

Kettering Univ. Fuel Cell Project (MI) .................................................... 500,000 

Hydrogen Optical Fiber Sensors (CA) ..................................................... 500,000 

UNLV Research Foundation solar-powered thermochemical prod. of 

hydrogen (NV).

3,400,000 

UNLV Research Foundation hydrogen fuel cell & storage R&D (NV) .... 3,400,000 

Montana Palladium Research Center (MT) ............................................ 2,500,000 

Regional Transportation Commission of Washoe Co. Hydrogen Fuel 

Cell Project (NV).

2,500,000 

U. of Arkansas Little Rock Nanotechnology Center production of Hydrogen (AR).500,000 

UNLV Research Foundation renewable hydrogen fueling station system, including development of high pressure electrolysis using 

photovoltaics (NV).

3,400,000 

UNLV Research Foundation development of photoelectric chemical 

production of hydrogen (NV).

2,500,000 

Univ. of S. Mississippi’s School of Polymers and High Performance 

Materials Improved Materials for Fuel Cell Membranes Program 

(MS).

500,000 

Univ. of Nevada-Reno Photoelectrochemical generation of hydrogen 

by solid nanoporous titanium dioxide project (NV).

3,000,000 

California Hydrogen Infrastructure Project (CA) .................................... 400,000 

Southern Nevada Alternative Fuels Demonstration Project (NV) ........... 500,000 

Hydrogen Mine Loader Project (CO) ....................................................... 250,000 

Solar Energy ................................... Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst. Syracuse Univ. ‘‘Green Building’’ (NY) .... 750,000 

Crowder College Alternative Renewable Energy Center (MO) ................ 1,000,000 

Univ. of Arkansas Research in Solar Energy Field (AK) ........................ 500,000 

Oregon Nanoscience and Microtechnologies Institute (OR) .................. 1,500,000 

Conductive Coating Solar Cell Research Project (MA) .......................... 1,500,000 

Ultra Thin Film Photo Voltaic Charging System (FL) ............................ 1,000,000 

Brightfield Solar Energy (MA) ................................................................ 700,000 

National Orange Photovoltaic Demonstration (CA) ................................ 450,000 

Sandia National Lab. Development of advanced cells and modules 

(NM).

1,000,000 

Sandia National Lab. Megawatt demonstration concentrating solar 

project (NM).

3,500,000 

UNLV Research Foundation for photonics research, including evaluation of advanced fiber optics for hybrid solar lighting (NV).2,500,000 

Vehicle Tech ................................... Phase II Heavy Vehicle Hybrid Propulsion (WI) ..................................... 3,000,000 

High Temperature Material Laboratory (TN) .......................................... 1,000,000 

Turbocharger Diesel Engine R&D (multi-state) ..................................... 4,000,000 

National Hybrid Truck Manufacturing Program (CA) ............................. 2,000,000 

145 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED ENERGY SUPPLY & CONSERVATION PROJECTS—Continued 

Sub-accounts Project Conference 

recommendations 

Vehicle Test Strip Equipment Demonstration (NC) ............................... 1,500,000 

Oak Ridge National Lab highway transportation technologies (TN) ..... 10,000,000 

Mississippi State University CAVS Center (MS) .................................... 4,000,000 

VULCAN Beam Line (TN) ........................................................................ 2,000,000 

Transportable Emissions Testing Laboratory ......................................... 1,500,000 

Wind Energy .................................... Mt. Wachusett Community College Wind Project (MA) .......................... 1,000,000 

Wyandotte Wind Energy on Brownfields Initiative (MI) ......................... 1,000,000 

Illinois State University Wind Energy Resources (IL) ............................ 1,000,000 

Texas Tech. Univ. Great Plains Wind Power Facility (TX) ..................... 500,000 

Brigham City Turbine (UT) ..................................................................... 500,000 

TowerPower Wind Project (MD) .............................................................. 750,000 

White Earth Tribal Nation Wind Project (MN) ........................................ 1,000,000 

Coastal Ohio Wind Project (OH) ............................................................. 1,000,000 

Randall’s and Ward’s Island Wind Project (NY) ................................... 1,000,000 

Brigham City, UT Wind Energy Project (UT) .......................................... 500,000 

Alaska Wind Energy (AK) ....................................................................... 1,500,000 

Renewable Energy for Rural Economic Development Program (UT) ..... 500,000 

Synchronous Wind Turbines (ID) ............................................................ 500,000 

Texas Tech. Great Plains Wind Power Test Facility (TX) ....................... 1,000,000 

North Dakota Hydrogen Wind Pilot Project (ND) .................................... 500,000 

Fox Ridge Renewable Energy Education Center (SD) ............................ 500,000 

PowerJet Wind Turbine Project (NV) ....................................................... 250,000 

OE ................................................... Iowa Stored Energy Plant Project (IA) ................................................... 1,500,000 

University of Louisville Electric Grid Monitoring (KY) ........................... 1,000,000 

Gonzaga University electric utility transformation program (WA) ......... 800,000 

Emerson Network Power, Columbus Ohio (OH) ...................................... 2,000,000 

Energy Security and diversification at Savannah River National Lab 

(SC).

1,000,000 

City of Nome power generation replacement project (AK) .................... 1,000,000 

Gridwise Northwest Demonstration Project (WA) ................................... 1,500,000 

Juneau-Green Creek-Hoonah intertie for Juneau area power system 

(AK).

1,000,000 

Complete of bi-polar wafer cell Ni-MH electric energy storage system 

(CT).

1,500,000 

Connecticut Demand Response Technologies Project (CT) ................... 1,000,000 

Notre Dame University Ionic Liquids Research collaboration (IN) ........ 1,500,000 

Advanced Grid Application Consortium (PA) ......................................... 2,000,000 

Pilot Energy Cost Control Evaluation Project at NETL (WV) .................. 2,000,000 

Green Island Power Authority, Advanced Transmission Project (NY) .... 1,000,000 

Cleveland State Ctr. for Research in Electric and Aerospace Tech. 

(OH).

1,000,000 

Advanced Energy Storage, PCRT(MA) .................................................... 1,000,000 

Tennessee Tech. Univ. Optimization of High Voltage lines (TN) ........... 1,000,000 

Advanced Technology Center (IL) ........................................................... 1,000,000 

Continued Development of an energy information training facility at 

Camp Dawson (WV).

2,500,000 

West Virginia Univ. Integrated control of next generation power systems project (WV).1,000,000 

Deployment testing and analysis of advanced energy storage systems 

for telecommunications applications in Kansas (KS).

2,500,000 

Hawaii/New Mexico Sustainable Energy Security Partnership (HI/NM) 3,000,000 

Navajo Electrification Project (NM) ........................................................ 1,000,000 

Load Control System Reliability (MT) .................................................... 2,000,000 

University of Missouri-Rolla for electric grid modernization (MO) ........ 1,000,000 

Integrated Distribution Management Systems in Alabama (AL) ........... 800,000 

Houston Advanced Research Center for Second generation dish temperature super conductor devekopment (TX).250,000 

Nuclear Energy ............................... Transfer of Nuclear Safety Technologies in Lithuania .......................... 3,000,000 

Utility Corridor Extension Project at the Idaho National Lab (ID) ........ 2,500,000 

146 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED ENERGY SUPPLY & CONSERVATION PROJECTS—Continued 

Sub-accounts Project Conference 

recommendations 

UNLV Research Foundation 5-year cooperative agreement to study 

deep burn-up of nuclear fuel and other fuel cycle research to 

eliminate the need for multiple spent nuclear fuel repositories, to 

eliminate weapons useable materials from disposed spent fuel, 

and to maintain forever potential radiological releases from a repository below currently legislated limits (NV).

5,000,000 

Idaho Accelerator Center (ID) ................................................................ 2,000,000 

Nuclear Energy Materials Test Station at Los Alamos Neutron Science 

Center (NM).

3,500,000 

University of Nevada Reno Center for Materials Reliability (NV) ......... 1,000,000 

Univ. of Nevada Reno Nuclear Transportation Hazard Research (NV) 750,000 

CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY

(DEFERRAL AND RESCISSION)

The conference agreement provides for the deferral of 

$257,000,000 in clean coal technology funding until fiscal year 

2007. These balances are no longer needed to complete active 

projects in this program. These funds are to be used for costs associated with the FutureGen program in fiscal year 2007 and beyond, 

to develop a coal-fired, nearly emissions-free electricity and hydrogen generation plant. The conference agreement rescinds 

$20,000,000 of prior year uncommitted balances from excess contingency estimates in demonstration projects. This rescission was misapplied to Fossil Energy Research and Development in both the 

House and Senate reports, and is now correctly applied to Clean 

Coal Technology. 

FOSSIL ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

The conference agreement provides $597,994,000 for fossil energy research and development. Bill language is included providing 

that Federal employees in fiscal year 2006 performing research and 

development activities at the National Energy Technology Laboratory can be funded from program accounts. The conferees direct the 

Department to budget for the salaries and expenses of federal employees in program direction accounts, and the fiscal year 2007 

budget request should reflect this adjustment. 

Clean coal power initiative.—The conference agreement provides $50,000,000, the amount of the budget request for the Clean 

Coal Power Initiative (CCPI). The $50,000,000 request from the 

Administration in fiscal year 2006 is woefully short of the 

$200,000,000 commitment made by the Administration. The conferees direct the Administration to fulfill the commitments made to 

CCPI. Funds remaining from the termination of the low emission 

boiler project are to be transferred to the Clean Coal Power Initiative. 

FutureGen.—The conference agreement provides $18,000,000, 

the amount of the request for FutureGen. The conferees understand and recognize the value of the FutureGen project. However, 

the conferees are concerned about maintaining adequate funding 

for the core fossil energy research, development, and demonstration 

programs, especially with the new programmatic demands of the 

147 

Energy Policy Act of 2005. The conferees will continue to give full 

consideration to the FutureGen project, contingent upon the Administration maintaining adequate funding requests for other related fossil energy programs. 

Fuels and Power Systems.—The conference agreement provides a total of $311,998,000 for Fuels and Power Systems. Within the 

funds provided, the conferees provide $25,400,000 for innovations 

at existing plants; $56,450,000 for advanced Integrated Gas Combined Cycle; $18,000,000 for advanced turbines; $67,000,000 for 

carbon sequestration (including $6,000,000 for Center for Zero 

Emissions Research and Technology of which $1,500,000 is for the 

Los Alamos National Laboratory); $29,000,000 for fuels; 

$62,000,000 for fuel cells including $8,000,000 for high temperature 

electrochemistry; and $53,154,000 for advanced research. The conferees provide $4,000,000, the amount of the budget request, for 

the Focus Area for the Computational Energy Science. The conferees provide $994,000 for the U.S./China Energy and Environmental Center. The conferees direct that any hydrogen research 

and development funded under Fossil Energy be focused on fossil 

fuels research and development. The conferees are aware of the 

work conducted by C1Chemistry, and encourage the Department to 

consider proposals for additional research by the consortium. 

Natural Gas Technologies.—The conference agreement pro- vides $33,000,000 for natural gas technologies, an increase of 

$23,000,000 over the budget request. The conferees provide 

$9,000,000 for advanced drilling, completion and stimulation, including Deep Trek; $4,000,000 to continue work aimed at expanding the recoverability of natural gas from low-permeability formations; $2,000,000 for stripper wells and technology transfer; 

$1,000,000 to improve the reliability and efficiency of gas storage 

systems; and $2,000,000 for liquid natural gas technologies. Within 

the funds provided, the conference agreement includes $12,000,000 

for gas hydrates, and $3,000,000 to continue research to develop 

treatment technologies that will allow water from conventional gas 

wells or coal bed methane wells to be put to beneficial use or to 

be safely discharged to the surface. 

Petroleum-Oil Technologies.—The conference agreement provides $32,000,000 for petroleum-oil technologies, an increase of 

$22,000,000 over the budget request. The conferees provide 

$4,000,000 for enhancing utilization of industrial carbon dioxide; 

$4,000,000 for drilling and completion enhancements that support 

microhole exploration; $4,000,000 for reservoir imaging; $3,000,000 

for improved gas flooding recovery methods; $6,000,000 reservoir 

life extension; $10,000,000 for environmental protection; and, 

$1,000,000 for the Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission. 

Program Direction.—The conference agreement includes 

$106,941,000, an increase of $8,000,000 above the budget request, 

for the National Energy Technology Laboratory to maintain the 

personnel that otherwise would have been lost as the result of the 

proposed gas and petroleum-oil program reductions in the budget 

request. 

Plant and Capital Equipment.—The conference agreement includes $20,000,000 for plant and capital equipment, an increase of 

$20,000,000 above the budget request. Within these funds, 

148 

$18,000,000 is for the infrastructure improvement program at the 

National Energy Technology Laboratory and $2,000,000 is for general plant projects. 

Other programs.—The conference agreement includes $9,600,000 for fossil energy environmental restoration; $1,799,000 

for import/export authorization; $8,000,000 for advanced metallurgical research; $656,000 for special recruitment programs; and 

$6,000,000 for the Energy and Environmental Research Center 

under cooperative research and development. 

Prior year balances.—The conference agreement recommends no reduction in prior year balances, instead of the $20,000,000 reduction as proposed by the House and by the Senate. 

Congressionally Directed Projects.—The conferees’ recommendation includes the following Congressionally directed 

projects, within available funds. The conferees remind recipients 

that statutory cost sharing requirements may apply to these 

projects. 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED FUELS & POWER PROJECTS 

Accounts Project Conference 

recommendation 

Fuels & Power ................................ Ramgen engine development (multi state) ........................................... $2,500,000 

MW-Scale oxide fuel cell gas turbine hybrid system (multi state) ...... 2,500,000 

MW-Scale Solid oxide fuel cell stat. power generation (OH) ................ 3,000,000 

Jupiter Oxy Fuel Tech (multi state) ....................................................... 7,800,000 

Solid oxide fuel cell tech. Stat power applications project (NC) .......... 1,000,000 

Powerspan Electro Catalytic Oxidation project (OH) ............................. 1,000,000 

New York City Parks Randall’s Island (NY) ........................................... 1,000,000 

Center for Advanced Separation Technologies (VA) .............................. 1,000,000 

Power Plant Flue Gas Cleaning/Poll Elimination project (VA) .............. 2,200,000 

GEDAC packaged Gas Engine-Driven Heat Pump (multi state) ........... 2,200,000 

Planar Solid Oxide Fuel Cell Project (CA) .............................................. 1,500,000 

Advanced Metallurgical Process, Albany Research Center (OR) ........... 1,300,000 

Energy and Environmental Research Center (EERC) (ND) .................... 1,000,000 

Development of continuous solvent extraction processes for coal derived carbon products (WV).700,000 

West Virginia Univ. study of long-term environmental and economic 

impacts of the development of coal liquefaction in China (WV).

500,000 

WVU Lightweight composite materials for heavy duty vehicles program (WV).500,000 

Coal to Liquids Program—Phase II (MT) .............................................. 2,000,000 

Utah Center for Ultra-Clean Coal Utilization (UT) ................................ 1,900,000 

Coal-Waste Slurry Reburn Project (PA) .................................................. 500,000 

Univ. of Wyoming Multi-Disciplinary Coal-bed Natural Gas Research 

Center (WY).

1,500,000 

National Center for Hydrogen Technology (ND) ..................................... 2,500,000 

ITM/Syngas Project (PA) ......................................................................... 2,000,000 

Solid Oxide Fuels Cells (PA) .................................................................. 4,000,000 

National Biofuel Energy Laboratory (MI) ................................................ 2,000,000 

Arctic Energy Office (AK) ....................................................................... 7,000,000 

Risk Base Data Management System (AK) ........................................... 400,000 

Utah Center for Heavy Oil Research (UT) .............................................. 1,500,000 

University of Mississippi hydrates research (MS) ................................. 1,000,000 

NAVAL PETROLEUM AND OIL SHALE RESERVES

The conference agreement provides $21,500,000, the same as the Senate, and an increase of $3,000,000 over the House, to support the activities under the Naval Petroleum Reserve (NPR) Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming program. 

149 

Reporting requirements.—Within available funds, the conferees 

direct the Department to conduct a study on the environmental liabilities at the Rocky Mountain Oilfield Testing Center (RMOTC) 

in Wyoming. The study should include field work to determine the 

scope of the contamination and the life cycle cost to remediate the 

site. The report is due to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations by May 1, 2006. 

ELK HILLS SCHOOL LANDS FUND

The conferees provide $48,000,000, the same as the budget request, for the Elk Hills School Lands Fund. Combined with the fiscal year 2005 advance appropriation of $36,000,000, this will make 

available a total of $84,000,000 in fiscal year 2006, as proposed by 

both the House and the Senate. 

STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE

The conference agreement provides $166,000,000, for the strategic petroleum reserve as proposed by both the House and the 

Senate. The conferees recognize the Department will be conducting 

a site selection process for the expansion of the strategic petroleum 

reserve as provided in the Energy Policy Act of 2005. 

NORTHEAST HOME HEATING OIL RESERVE

The conference agreement provides no new funding, consistent 

with the budget request, for the Northeast Home Heating Oil reserve, because the Department has confirmed that sufficient carryover balances exist. 

ENERGY INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION

The conference agreement provides $86,176,000, $250,000 

above the request, for the Energy Information Administration. The 

increase above the request is to fund increased requirements for 

cybersecurity measures to safeguard computer systems and data 

integrity. 

NON-DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP

The conference agreement provides $353,219,000 for Non-Defense Environmental Cleanup, an increase of $3,285,000 over the 

budget request. This increase is for the East Tennessee Technology 

Park at Oak Ridge National Laboratory. 

Milestone report.—While the budget structure has changed, the 

conferees remain interested in whether the Department has met its 

goals for completion for years 2006, 2012, and 2035. The conferees 

request a report by site that tracks accelerated clean-up milestones, whether they are being met or not, and includes annual 

budget estimates and life-cycle costs, due to the House and Senate 

Committees on Appropriations by March 1 and September 1 of 

each year. 

Reprogramming Authority.—The conferees continue to support 

the need for flexibility to meet changing funding requirements at 

sites. In fiscal year 2006, the Department may transfer up to 

$2,000,000 within accounts, and between accounts, to reduce health 

or safety risks or to gain cost savings as long as no program or 

150 

project is increased or decreased by more than $2,000,000 once during the fiscal year. The account control points for reprogramming 

are the Fast Flux Test Reactor Facility, West Valley Demonstration 

Project, Gaseous Diffusion Plants, Small Sites, and construction 

line-items. This reprogramming authority may not be used to initiate new programs or to change the funding levels for programs 

specifically denied, limited, or increased by Congress in the Act or 

statement. The Committees on Appropriations in the House and 

Senate must be notified within thirty days of the use of this reprogramming authority. 

URANIUM ENRICHMENT DECONTAMINATION AND DECOMMISSIONING

FUND

The conference agreement provides $562,228,000 for activities 

funded from the Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning (UED&D) Fund. This amount includes $542,228,000 

for decontamination and decommissioning activities at the gaseous 

diffusion plants and $20,000,000 for Title X uranium and thorium 

reimbursements. For the decontamination and decommissioning of 

the gaseous diffusion plants, the conferees provide $192,157,000 for 

Portsmouth, Ohio; $105,000,000 for Paducah, Kentucky; and 

$245,071,000 for East Tennessee Technology Park in Oak Ridge. 

The conferees direct the Government Accountability Office 

(GAO) to investigate the contamination of phosgene at the gaseous 

diffusion plants. 

SCIENCE

The conference agreement provides $3,632,718,000, instead of 

$3,666,055,000 as proposed by the House and $3,702,718,000 as 

proposed by the Senate. Specific funding allocations and earmarks 

proposed by the House and Senate are superceded by the allocations and earmarks listed in this joint explanatory statement. 

High Energy Physics.—The conference agreement provides 

$723,933,000 for high energy physics research. The control level is 

at the High Energy Physics level. An additional $10,000,000 is provided for research on the international linear collider and for upgrades to the neutrino research program. The conferees support the 

DOE/NASA Joint Dark Energy Mission (JDEM) and encourage the 

Department to move JDEM forward aggressively to accomplish this 

important research. 

Nuclear Physics.—The conference agreement provides 

$370,741,000 for nuclear physics research, including $2,000,000 of 

construction funds for project engineering and design of the electron beam ion source at Brookhaven National Laboratory (project 

06–SC–02). The conferees support the Rare Isotope Accelerator 

(RIA) but are concerned that the Department does not seem to be 

making tangible progress toward realization of RIA. The conferees 

reiterate the reporting requirement, as outlined in Senate Report 

109–84, for the Department to define a specific path forward on 

RIA. The conferees also recognize the importance of the 12 GeV upgrade of the Continuous Electron Beam Accelerator Facility at the 

Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility and support initiation of project engineering and design within available funds. 

151 

Biological and Environmental Research.—The conference 

agreement includes $585,688,000 for biological and environmental 

research, an increase of $130,000,000 over the budget request. This 

increase is provided to fund Congressionally-directed projects as 

listed in the table below. Within available funds, the conferees direct the Department to provide an additional $3,500,000 for upgrades to instrumentation at the Environmental Molecular 

Sciences Laboratory (EMSL). The conferees support the development of the proposed Genomes to Life (GTL) facilities, and encourage the Department to budget for the first of these GTL facilities, 

for the production and characterization of proteins and molecular 

tags, in fiscal year 2007. The conferees encourage the Department 

to reduce the cost of the GTL facilities to accelerate deployment of 

all four proposed GTL centers. Due to the nature of this research, 

there is a need for all of the facilities to be deployed to meet the 

scientific challenge of molecular characterization. The conferees 

recommend that the Department conduct an open competition for 

the siting of these GTL facilities. 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED OFFICE OF SCIENCE PROJECTS

Conference 

recommendation 

Project 

BER Univ. of Alabama Dept. of Neurobiology to purchase a FMRI (AL) $300,000 

BER Baylor University Lake Whitney Assessment (TX) ........................... 500,000 

BER SUNY IT Nano-Bio-Molecular Technical Incubator (NY) ................. 750,000 

BER San Antonio Cancer Center (TX) ........................................................ 500,000 

BER University of South Alabama Cancer Research Institute (AL) ........ 500,000 

BER Indiana Wesleyan University Marion for a registered nursing program (IN) ...................................................................................................... 500,000 

BER Virginia Commonwealth University Massey Cancer Center (VA) ... 1,000,000 

BER Construction of new science facility at Bethel College (IN) .............. 300,000 

BER University of Wyoming Coalbed Methane research center (WY) ..... 500,000 

BER Hampton University Cancer Treatment Center (VA) ....................... 500,000 

BER George Mason University research against Biological Agents (VA) 1,000,000 

BER Lehigh University Critical Infrastructure Lab. (PA) ........................ 400,000 

BER St. Thomas University Minority Science center (FL) ........................ 400,000 

BER Seton Hall Science/Tech Center (NJ) ................................................. 500,000 

BER Alvernia College for a Science and Health Building (PA) ................ 500,000 

BER Institute for Advanced Learning Research Dansville (VA) .............. 400,000 

BER Galileo Magnet High School Danville (VA) ........................................ 100,000 

BER Washington & Jefferson science initiative (PA) ................................ 400,000 

BER Science building at Waubonsee Community College (IL) ................. 2,000,000 

BER AVETeC data mamt.electronics and comm. NextEdge Tech.Park 

(OH) ............................................................................................................... 3,000,000 

BER Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy research Univ. of Washington 

School of Med. (WA) ..................................................................................... 300,000 

BER Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy research Children’s National Medical Ctr. (DC) ................................................................................................ 300,000 

BER Ohio State University for Earth University (OH) ............................. 300,000 

BER Northeast Regional Cancer Institute (PA) ......................................... 300,000 

BER Centenary College laboratory (NJ) ..................................................... 500,000 

BER Construction of Science Center at Midwestern Univ. (IL) ................ 300,000 

BER Univ. of Oklahoma Center Applications Single-Walled Nanotubes 

(OK) ............................................................................................................... 1,000,000 

BER University of Connecticut live cell molecular imaging (CT) ............. 300,000 

BER University of Central Florida for optics tech in X-Ray (FL) ............. 700,000 

BER North Shore-Long Island Jewish Health System Breast Cancer 

Research (NY) ............................................................................................... 500,000 

BER Michigan Research Institute Life Science Research Center (MI) .... 1,350,000 

BER Univ. of Arizona Environmental and Natural Resources Phase II 

(AZ) ................................................................................................................ 1,000,000 

BER Children’s Hospital of Illinois (IL) ...................................................... 500,000 

152 

Conference 

recommendation 

Project 

BER Research Equipment Coe College (IA) ................................................ 300,000 

BER Loma Linda University Medical Center (CA) .................................... 2,000,000 

BER Triology Linear Accelerator at Owensboro Medical Health System 

(KY) ............................................................................................................... 300,000 

BER Burpee Museum of Natural History (IL) ............................................ 500,000 

BER Rockford Health Council (IL) .............................................................. 700,000 

BER Henry Mayo Hospital to purchase new equipment (CA) .................. 400,000 

BER Washington State University Radio Chemistry (WA) ....................... 300,000 

BER Lapeer Regional Medical Center linear accelerator (MI) .................. 300,000 

BER University of Nebraska at Kearney (NE) ........................................... 400,000 

BER Science Media program at Ball State University (IN) ...................... 400,000 

BER Franklin and Marshall life science building (PA) ............................. 500,000 

BER Boulder City Hospital (NV) ................................................................. 300,000 

BER Grady Health system disaster preparedness center project (GA) .... 300,000 

BER Great Lakes Science Center (OH) ....................................................... 750,000 

BER Cleveland Clinic Brain Mapping (OH) ............................................... 1,000,000 

BER Roswell Park Cancer Center (NY) ...................................................... 500,000 

BER St. Marys Cancer Center Long Beach (CA) ....................................... 500,000 

BER National Polymer Center at the University of Akron (OH) .............. 500,000 

BER Biological and Environmental Center at Mystic Aquarium (CT) ..... 500,000 

BER Riverview Medical Center oncology program (NJ) ............................ 300,000 

BER Saratoga Hospital Radiation Therapy Center (NY) .......................... 750,000 

BER State University of New York-Delhi (NY) .......................................... 750,000 

BER Kern Medical Center to purchase and install MRI machine (CA) 1,000,000 

BER Western Michigan University Geosciences Initiative (MI) ............... 100,000 

BER Environmental System Center at Syracuse University (NY) ........... 700,000 

BER SUNY-ESF Woody Biomass Project (NY) .......................................... 700,000 

BER ORNL Supercomputer Connectivity NextEdge Technology Park 

(TN) ............................................................................................................... 900,000 

BER Oliveit Nazarene University Science Lab (IL) ................................... 300,000 

BER Northern Virginia Comm. College training biotechnology workers 

(VA) ............................................................................................................... 500,000 

BER Recording for the Blind and Dyslexic (FL) ......................................... 500,000 

BER Eckerd College Science Center (FL) ................................................... 500,000 

BER Notre Dame Ecological Genomics Research Institute (IN) ............... 1,750,000 

BER Inland Water Environmental Institute (ID,WA,UT) ......................... 1,000,000 

BER St. Francis Science Center (IN) .......................................................... 250,000 

BER Medical Research and Robotics, University of Southern California 

(CA) ............................................................................................................... 1,000,000 

BER Hampshire College National Center for Science Education (MA) .... 500,000 

BER Pioneer Valley Life Science Initiative Univ. of Massachusetts (MA) 750,000 

BER MidAmerica Nazarene Univ. nursing biological science program 

(KS) ............................................................................................................... 750,000 

BER Westminster College Science Center (UT) ......................................... 750,000 

BER City College of San Francisco-Health Related Equipment (CA) ...... 750,000 

BER Science South Development (SC) ........................................................ 1,000,000 

BER St. Joseph Science Center (PA) ........................................................... 750,000 

BER University North Carolina Biomedical Imaging (NC) ....................... 750,000 

BER Augsburg College (MN) ........................................................................ 1,000,000 

BER Morehouse School of Medicine (GA) ................................................... 1,000,000 

BER Jersey City Medical Center (NJ) ......................................................... 1,000,000 

BER University of Rochester James P. Wilmot Cancer Center (NY) ....... 1,000,000 

BER Bronx Community College Center for Sustainable Energy (NY) ..... 1,000,000 

BER Texas A&M Lake Granbury and Bosque River Assesment (TX) ..... 500,000 

BER Methodist College Environmental Simulation Research (NC) ......... 500,000 

BER Brooklyn College Microscope and Imaging Center (NY) ................... 750,000 

BER Warner Robins Air Logistics Center (GA) .......................................... 750,000 

BER University of Chicago Comer Children’s Hospital (IL) ..................... 1,000,000 

BER Martha’s Vineyard Hospital (MA) ....................................................... 750,000 

BER Joint environmental stewardship at SUNY New Paltz and Ulster 

CC (NY) ......................................................................................................... 750,000 

BER Central Arkansas Radiation Therapy Institute/Mountain Home 

(AR) ............................................................................................................... 500,000 

BER Children’s Hospital of Los Angles (CA) .............................................. 750,000 

BER Wake Forest University Institute for Regenerative Medicine (NC) 750,000 

153 

Conference 

recommendation 

Project 

BER Indianapolis Energy Conversion Institute (IN) ................................. 1,000,000 

BER Philadelphia Educational Advancement Alliance (PA) ..................... 450,000 

BER Barry University-Miami Shores (FL) ................................................. 300,000 

BER Montgomery College Biotechnology Project (MD) ............................. 500,000 

BER Purdue Calument Water Institute (IN) .............................................. 500,000 

BER University of Chicago Integrated Bioengineering Institute (IL) ...... 750,000 

BER Mind Institute in New Mexico (NM) .................................................. 11,000,000 

BER Mississippi State University Bio-fuel Application (MS) .................... 1,000,000 

BER University of Louisville Institute for Advanced Materials (KY) ...... 1,500,000 

BER Center for River Dynamics and Restoration at Utah State University (UT) ........................................................................................................ 400,000 

BER Texas Metroplex Comprehensive Imaging Center (TX) .................... 2,500,000 

BER Ultra Dense Memory Storage for Supercomputing in Colorado 

(CO) ............................................................................................................... 1,000,000 

BER Health Sciences Research and Education Facility (MO) .................. 1,500,000 

BER National Center for Regenerative Medicine (OH) ............................. 1,500,000 

BER U. of Alabama at Birmingham-Radiation Oncology Functional Imaging Program (AL) ..................................................................................... 1,000,000 

BER University City Science Park, Philadelphia (PA) .............................. 1,500,000 

BER Jackson State University Bioengineering Complex (MS) ................. 2,000,000 

BER Regis University Science Building Renovation Project (CO) ............ 800,000 

BER St. Jude’s Children’s Research Hospital (TN) .................................... 500,000 

BER California Hospital Medical Center PET/CT Fusion Imaging System (CA) ........................................................................................................ 500,000 

BER Mount Sinai Medical Center Imaging and Surgical Equipment 

(FL) ................................................................................................................ 1,000,000 

BER Benedictine University Science Lab & Research Equipment (IL) ... 350,000 

BER Swedish American Health Systems (IL) ............................................. 350,000 

BER La Rabida Children’s Hospital, Chicago (IL) ..................................... 350,000 

BER Edward Hospital, Plainfield, IL (IL) ................................................... 500,000 

BER Rush Medical Center (IL) .................................................................... 250,000 

BER Morgan State University Center for Environmental Toxicology 

(MD) .............................................................................................................. 800,000 

BER Mt. Sinai Hospital Cardiac Catherization Lab (MD) ........................ 350,000 

BER U. of Mass. at Boston Multi-Disciplinary Research Facility & Library (MA) .................................................................................................... 500,000 

BER CIBS Solar Cell Development (NE) .................................................... 400,000 

BER University Medical Center of S. Nevada Radiology/Oncology 

Equip. (NV) ................................................................................................... 1,000,000 

BER Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe Energy Project (NV) .............................. 250,000 

BER University of Delaware Medical Research Facility (DE) .................. 550,000 

BER St. Francis Hospital, Delaware Linear Accelerator (DE) .................. 500,000 

BER Wastewater Pollution and Incinerator Plant in Auburn, NY (NY) 250,000 

BER South Nassau Hospital Green Building (NY) .................................... 1,500,000 

BER ViaHealth/Rochester General Hospital Emergency Department 

(NY) ............................................................................................................... 400,000 

BER University of Vermont Functional MRI Research (VT) .................... 400,000 

BER Vermont Institute of Natural Sciences (VT) ...................................... 1,000,000 

BER Castleton State College Math and Science Center (VT) ................... 2,000,000 

BER Nevada Cancer Institute (NV) ............................................................ 1,000,000 

BER Queen’s Medical Center Telemedicine Project (HI) ........................... 500,000 

BER Michigan Technological University Fuel Cell Research (MI) ........... 500,000 

BER St. Francis Hospital Escanaba, Michigan (MI) .................................. 250,000 

BER Sarcoma Alliance for Research through Collaboration (MI) ............. 250,000 

BER Hackensack University Medical Center Green Building (NJ) .......... 1,000,000 

BER Hackensack U. Medical Center Ambulatory Adult Cancer Center 

(NJ) ............................................................................................................... 250,000 

BER College of New Jersey Genomic Analysis Facility (NJ) .................... 250,000 

BER W. Michigan U. Expanded Energy & Natural Resources Learning 

Ctr (MI) ......................................................................................................... 500,000 

BER Arnold Palmer Prostate Center (CA) .................................................. 500,000 

BER LA Immersive Tech. Enterprise program at the U. of LA-Lafayette 

(LA) ............................................................................................................... 400,000 

BER Brown University MRI Scanner (RI) .................................................. 1,000,000 

BER University of Dubuque Environmental Science Center (IA) ............. 700,000 

154 

Conference 

recommendation 

Project 

BER New School University in New York City (NY) ................................. 500,000 

BER Oregon Nanoscience and Microbiologies Institute (OR) .................... 400,000 

BER GeoHeat Center at the Oregon Renewable Energy Center (OR) ..... 500,000 

BER Portland Center Stage Armory Theater Energy Conservation 

Project (OR) .................................................................................................. 500,000 

BER U. of Massachusetts Medical School NMR Spectrophotometer (MA) 250,000 

BER Mojave Bird Study (NV) ...................................................................... 250,000 

BER Minnesota Center for Renewable Energy ........................................... 500,000 

BER Science Center at Malby Nature Preserve in Minnesota (MN) ........ 250,000 

BER Existing Business Enhancement Program Building, U. of N. Iowa 

(IA) ................................................................................................................ 1,000,000 

BER Medical University of South Carolina (SC) ........................................ 500,000 

BER Community College of Southern Nevada Transportation Academy 

(NV) ............................................................................................................... 500,000 

BER South Dakota State University (SD) .................................................. 1,000,000 

BER Univ. of Arkansas Cancer Research Center (AR) .............................. 1,000,000 

BES Altair Nanotech (NV) ........................................................................... 2,500,000 

MM UCLA Institute for Molecular Medicine (CA) ..................................... 7,000,000 

MM New York Structural Biology Center (NY) .......................................... 750,000 

BER University of North Dakota Center for Biomass Utilization (ND) 1,000,000 

BER St. Joseph College, West Hartford alternative sources of energy 

dem.project (CT) ........................................................................................... 500,000 

BER Portland State University’s Solar Photovoltaic Test Facility System (OR) ....................................................................................................... 150,000 

BER Brockton Photovoltaic Initiative (MA) ................................................ 100,000 

Basic Energy Sciences.—The conferees provide $1,146,017,000 

for basic energy sciences, the same as the budget request. The conference agreement includes $746,143,000 for materials sciences and 

engineering research, and $221,801,000 for chemical sciences, geosciences, and energy biosciences. All basic energy science construction projects are funded at the request level: $41,744,000 for the 

Spallation Neutron Source (99–E–334) at Oak Ridge National Laboratory; $2,544,000 for Title I and Title II design work (03–SC–002) 

and $83,000,000 to initiate construction (05–R–320) for the Linac 

Coherent Light Source at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center; 

$36,553,000 for the Center for Functional Nanomaterials (05–R–

321) at Brookhaven National Laboratory; $9,606,000 for the Molecular Foundry (04–R–313) at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory; and $4,626,000 for the Center for Integrated 

Nanotechnologies (03–R–313) at Los Alamos and Sandia National 

Laboratories. Also included at the request level is $7,280,000 for 

the Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research 

(EPSCoR). Within available funds, the conferees encourage the Department to continue the purchase of fuel for the High Flux Isotope 

Reactor. The conferees note the recent CD–0 decision on the National Synchrotron Light Source-II at Brookhaven National Laboratory, and encourage the Department to fund expeditiously the 

project engineering and design for this facility. 

Advanced Scientific Computing Research.—The conference 

agreement includes $237,055,000 for advanced scientific computing 

research, an increase of $30,000,000 over the budget request. This 

increase is provided to the Center for Computational Sciences to 

accelerate the efforts to develop a leadership-class supercomputer 

to meet scientific computational needs. Of this $30,000,000, 

$25,000,000 should be dedicated to hardware and $5,000,000 to 

competitive university research grants. 

155 

Science Laboratories Infrastructure.—The conferees provide a total of $42,105,000 for science laboratories infrastructure, an increase of $2,000,000 over the budget request. The additional funds 

are provided to complete project engineering and design and initiate construction for the 300 Area capability replacement laboratory at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (project MEL–001– 046). Within available funds, the conferees direct the Department 

to continue to make PILT payments associated with Argonne National Laboratory at the fiscal year 2005 level. 

Fusion Energy Sciences.—The conferees provide $290,550,000 

for fusion energy sciences, the same as the budget request. The 

conferees direct the Department to utilize $29,900,000 of funding 

proposed for ITER work in fiscal year 2006 to restore U.S.-based 

fusion funding to fiscal year 2005 levels as follows: $7,300,000 for 

high performance materials for fusion; $8,700,000 to restore operation of the three major user facilities to fiscal year 2005 operating 

levels; $7,200,000 for intense heavy ion beams and fast ignition 

studies; $5,100,000 for compact stellarators and small-scale experiments; and $1,600,000 for theory. As in previous years, the conferees direct the Department to fund the U.S. share of ITER in fiscal year 2007 through additional resources rather than through reductions to domestic fusion research or to other Office of Science 

programs. Within available funds, the conferees include $1,000,000 

for non-defense research activities at the Atlas Pulse Power facility. 

In addition, the conferees direct the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to undertake a study of the Office of Science Fusion Energy Sciences program in order to define the role of the major domestic facilities in support of the ITER, including recommendations 

on the possible consolidation or focus of operations to maximize 

their research value in support of ITER. The GAO shall also evaluate the opportunities to leverage the National Nuclear Security Administration investment as an alternative to the tokamak concept. 

Safeguards and Security.—The conference agreement includes $74,317,000 for safeguards and security, the same as the requested 

amount. 

Science Workforce Development.—The conference agreement in- cludes $7,192,000 for Science Workforce Development, the same as 

the budget request. 

Science Program Direction.—The conferees provide $160,725,000 for Science Program Direction. The control level for 

fiscal year 2006 is at the program account level of Science Program 

Direction. 

Funding Adjustments.—The conference agreement includes an 

offset of $5,605,000 for the safeguards and security charge for reimbursable work. 

NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL

The conference agreement provides $150,000,000 for Nuclear 

Waste Disposal. When combined with the $350,000,000 provided in 

the Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal account, this makes a total of 

$500,000,000 available in fiscal year 2006 for activities related to 

nuclear waste disposal. 

Repository program.—During 2005, the Department was unable to complete the License Support Network and faced problems 

156 

in the quality assurance for water modeling done by the U.S. Geological Survey, several significant legal setbacks, and a major, controversial proposed change to the radiation standard for the repository. These events impact on the Department’s ability to submit a 

quality License Application during fiscal year 2006, as originally 

scheduled. Further significant schedule slippages are likely. While 

the Department claims to be taking a number of corrective actions 

to address these problems, these changes mean that the Department will not be performing all of the license preparation and license defense activities that were originally envisioned when the 

fiscal year 2006 budget request of $651,000,000 was developed. The 

conferees believe that $450,000,000 will be sufficient in fiscal year 

2006. 

Assistance to affected units of local government.—Within the 

funds made available for the repository program, the conferees provide $2,000,000 to the State of Nevada; $7,500,000 for the affected 

units of local government; and $500,000 for Nye County, Nevada, 

as authorized under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act for appropriate 

oversight actions. These funds for Nye County shall be separate 

and apart from oversight funding under Section 116(c) of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act. The conferees have included bill language 

reducing the Department’s fiduciary responsibility for this oversight funding in light of the adversarial nature of the license application process. Additionally, the conferees direct the Department to 

renew, as appropriate, existing cooperative agreements with affected units of local government. The Department is specifically directed to enter into a three-year cooperative agreement with Inyo 

County, California, to complete the study of groundwater connections between Yucca Mountain and Death Valley National Park. 

The conferees expect this agreement to be in place in time to enable winter test drilling in Death Valley during the winter of 2005– 2006. 

Integrated spent fuel recycling.—Given the uncertainties surrounding the Yucca Mountain license application process, the conferees provide $50,000,000, not derived from the Nuclear Waste 

Fund, for the Department to develop a spent nuclear fuel recycling 

plan. Under the Nuclear Energy account, the conferees provide additional research funds to select one or more advanced recycling 

technologies and to complete conceptual design and initiate pre-engineering design of an Engineering Scale Demonstration of advanced recycling technology. Coupled with this technology research 

and development effort, funds are provided under the Nuclear 

Waste Disposal account to prepare the overall program plan and to 

initiate a competition to select one or more sites suitable for development of integrated recycling facilities (i.e., separation of spent 

fuel, fabrication of mixed oxide fuel, vitrification of waste products, 

and process storage) and initiate work on an Environmental Impact 

Statement. The site competition should not be limited to DOE sites, 

but should be open to a wide range of other possible federal and 

non-federal sites on a strictly voluntary basis. The conferees remind the Department that the Nuclear Waste Policy Act prohibits 

interim storage of nuclear waste in the State of Nevada. To support 

the development of detailed site proposals for this competition, the 

conferees make a total of $20,000,000 available to the site offerors, 

157 

with a maximum of $5,000,000 available per site. To be eligible to 

receive these funds, each applicant site must be able to identify all 

state, regulatory, and environmental permits required for permitting this facility, including identifying any legislative or regulatory 

prohibitions that might prevent siting such a facility. The conferees 

direct the Secretary to submit a detailed program plan to the 

House and Senate Committees on Appropriations not later than 

March 31, 2006, and to initiate the site selection competition not 

later than June 30, 2006. The target for site selection is fiscal year 

2007, and the target for initiation of construction of one or more 

integrated spent fuel recycling facilities is fiscal year 2010. Any 

funds deemed to be in excess of the needs for the integrated recycling program plan may only be diverted to other activities after 

submittal and approval of a formal reprogramming to Congress. 

DEPARTMENTAL ADMINISTRATION

The conference agreement provides a net appropriation of 

$129,817,000 for Departmental Administration expenses. This 

amount includes a transfer of $87,575,000 from Other Defense Activities for defense-related Departmental Administration activities 

and the Congressional Budget Office estimate of $123,000,000 for 

revenues. Specific funding levels for each organization funded 

under the Departmental Administration account are detailed in the 

accompanying table. The conferees include bill language requiring 

a report on security at Building 3019, Oak Ridge National Laboratory. 

Chief Information Officer.—The conferees provide $39,385,000, 

an increase of $1,418,000 over the current year level. The conferees 

do not support the proposed 63 percent growth in support services 

contracts for the Chief Information Officer. 

Congressional and intergovernmental affairs.—The conference 

agreement provides $4,826,000, the same as the current year funding level. The conferees expect that the Department will continue 

the long-standing practice that the primary channel for Departmental liaison with the House Appropriations Committee shall be 

the Chief Financial Officer. 

Policy and international affairs.—The conference agreement 

provides $14,993,000, the same as the current year funding level. 

Office of Engineering and Construction Management.—The conferees support the House report language regarding the importance 

of improving project management within the Department. 

Cybersecurity and secure communications.—The conference 

agreement provides $24,733,000, the same as the current year 

funding level. 

Corporate management information program.—The conference 

agreement provides the requested level of $23,055,000. However, 

the conferees are concerned about the recent failures of STARS and 

remind the Department of the importance of having a system that 

provides timely and accurate accounting information. 

Working Capital Fund.—The conferees renew the guidance 

provided in House Report 107–681 regarding management of the 

Working Capital Fund. 

158 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

The conference agreement provides $42,000,000 for the Office 

of the Inspector General, a slight decrease from the request but an 

increase over the current year funding level. 

ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES

NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), a semiautonomous agency within the Department of Energy, manages the 

Nation’s nuclear weapons, nuclear nonproliferation, and naval reactors activities. 

The conference agreement does not include the proposed cleanup transfer from Environmental Management to the NNSA and the 

conference recommendation assumes the EM program retains the 

cleanup program scope. 

Availability of funds.—The conference agreement makes funds 

available until expended. 

WEAPONS ACTIVITIES

The conference agreement provides $6,433,936,000 for Weapons Activities instead of $6,574,024,000 as proposed by the Senate 

and $6,181,121,000 as proposed by the House. The conferees agree 

with the House language regarding reprogramming authority for 

weapons activities. 

Sustainable Stockpile Initiative.—The conferees support the 

basic tenets of the House language on a Sustainable Stockpile Initiative, including support for the reliable replacement warhead program, an accelerated warhead dismantlement program, and a reconfiguration of the weapons complex to create a responsive infrastructure that maximizes special nuclear material consolidation. 

The conferees appreciate the significant effort by the members of 

the Secretary of Energy’s Advisory Board Infrastructure Task Force 

that produced the Nuclear Weapons Complex Infrastructure Study 

and expect the Secretary to give serious consideration to the recommendations in the fiscal year 2007 budget request. 

DIRECTED STOCKPILE WORK

Directed stockpile work (DSW).—The conference agreement includes $1,386,189,000 for directed stockpile work. The conference 

agreement provides $300,818,000 for DSW Life Extension Programs. The conference agreement provides $311,804,000 for DSW 

Stockpile Systems and $60,000,000 for DSW Warhead Dismantlement. The conferees note the importance of an aggressive warhead 

dismantlement program as part of the mission of the NNSA and 

direct the Administrator to submit a report to the Committees on 

Appropriations addressing the cost, scope and schedule of expanding the NNSA infrastructure to increase the dismantlement capacity of the complex. The report is due on March 1, 2006. 

Reliable Replacement Warhead (RRW).—The conferees have 

provided $25,000,000 for the RRW program. The conferees expect 

that the laboratories and plants will also utilize the existing reVerDate Aug 31 2005 21:24 Nov 08, 2005 Jkt 024421 PO 00000 Frm 00158 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR275.XXX HR275
159 

sources in the Directed Stockpile, Campaigns, and Readiness in 

Technical Base and Facilities accounts where applicable to further 

the RRW design options to support a Nuclear Weapons Council determination in November 2006. The conferees reiterate the direction provided in fiscal year 2005 that any weapon design work done 

under the RRW program must stay within the military requirements of the existing deployed stockpile and any new weapon design must stay within the design parameters validated by past nuclear tests. The conferees expect the NNSA to build on the success 

of science-based stockpile stewardship to improve manufacturing 

practices, lower costs and increase performance margins, to support 

the Administration’s decision to significantly reduce the size of the 

U.S. nuclear stockpile. 

The conference agreement provides $688,567,000 for DSW 

Stockpile services. From within the funds provided in DSW Stockpile services, the conferees direct the NNSA to provide $40,000,000 

to fund the Nevada Test Site, $5,000,000 above the request, to 

maintain the Subcritical Experiment Program, including the Phoenix Explosive Pulse Power program. From within available funds, 

the conferees provide $6,000,000 to Los Alamos National Laboratory to conduct hydrodynamic testing in support of the Stockpile 

Stewardship program and $3,000,000 above the request to fund 

independent assessments of the safety of the stockpile and secure 

information exchange within the weapons complex. 

The conference agreement provides no funds for the Robust 

Nuclear Earth Penetrator (RNEP) feasibility study. 

The conferees support a degree of flexibility in executing this 

budget by providing limited reprogramming authority within Directed Stockpile Work [DSW]. The control levels for the Directed 

Stockpile Work are: 

(1) Life Extension Programs; 

(2) Stockpile Systems; 

(3) Reliable Replacement Warhead; 

(4) Warhead Dismantlement; and 

(5) Stockpile Services. 

CAMPAIGNS

Campaigns.—The conferees support the Senate language directing the Department to renew for 5 years the existing cooperative agreements with the University of Nevada Las Vegas and the 

University of Nevada Reno. The Department is also directed to provide funding of $3,000,000 to each institution per year. 

For science campaigns, the conference agreement provides 

$279,464,000. The conference agreement provides $49,718,000 for 

primary assessment technologies and $20,000,000 for Test Readiness, a reduction of $5,000,000 from the budget request. The conferees direct the Department to maintain the current 24-month test 

readiness posture. The conferees include $12,500,000, an increase 

of $2,500,000, to fund the Nevada Test Site to support dynamic experiments, diagnostics, and data analysis, including past UGT 

analysis. The conferees direct the NNSA to conduct a study to 

evaluate the capability of proton radiography of the LANSCE facilities to support stockpile stewardship activities. The report is due 

160 

to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations by July 1, 

2006. 

The conference agreement provides $83,894,000 for dynamic 

materials properties, an increase of $3,000,000 above the budget request to support additional experiments at the Joint Actinide 

Shock Physics Experimental Research facility and at the Atlas facility. The conferees provide $1,000,000 for the LCS laser upgrade 

at the Idaho Accelerator Center. The conferees provide $49,520,000 

for advanced radiography, the same as the budget request. The 

conferees direct the JASONS to undertake a study of the Dual Axis 

Radiographic Hydro Test Facility (DARHT) to evaluate the DARHT 

2nd axis refurbishment plan and to validate the current schedule 

and cost baseline. The conferees expect the JASONS to consider 

whether or not the NNSA has taken the appropriate steps to resolve the technical difficulties associated with the induction linac 

technology and whether or not the second axis is expected to return 

to service as currently planned in 2008 in order to meet the National Hydrotest Plan requirements. The conferees recommend 

$76,332,000 for secondary assessment technologies, an increase of 

$15,000,000 over the budget request. The conferees provide the additional funds to Los Alamos National Laboratory to restore highenergy-density experimental capabilities. 

The conference agreement provides $250,411,000 for engineering campaigns. The conference agreement for the enhanced surety 

campaign is $40,000,000. The conferees direct NNSA to utilize the 

MESA facility to develop micro-technology for surety architecture. 

The conference agreement for the weapons system engineering assessment technology is $17,540,000. The conference agreement for 

nuclear survivability is $22,386,000 and the conference recommendation for enhanced surveillance campaign is $100,207,000. 

From within available funds, the conferees provide $4,465,000 to 

continue the grant-funded University Research Program in Robotics. 

Engineering campaign construction projects.—The conference 

agreement provides $65,564,000 for Project 01–D–108, Microsystem 

and engineering science applications (MESA) at SNL, in New Mexico and $4,714,000 in operating funds. 

Inertial Confinement Fusion (ICF) Ignition and High Yield.—

The conference agreement includes $549,073,000 for the inertial 

confinement fusion ignition and high yield program. The conferees 

support the House language regarding project management control 

systems for managing the ICF program. The conferees direct the 

NNSA Administrator to issue a report by March 1, 2006 that identifies the scientific and stockpile stewardship value of the National 

Ignition Facility if the project fails to achieve the ignition demonstration by 2011, or at any time in the future. 

Ignition.—The conference agreement recommends $75,615,000, 

the same as budget request. 

Support for Other Stockpile Programs.—The conference agreement includes $19,872,000, an increase of $10,000,000 over the 

budget request, to perform experiments on the Z-machine to validate computer models as well as experiments on OMEGA at the 

University of Rochester. 

161 

NIF Diagnostics, Cryogenics and Experimental Support.—The 

conference agreement provides $43,008,000, the same as the budget 

request. 

Pulsed Power Inertial Confinement Fusion.—The conference 

recommendation includes $11,012,000, a $901,000 increase over the 

budget request, for pulsed power ICF to assess Z pinches as drivers 

for ignition and high yield fusion. 

University Grants/Other ICF Support.—The conference recommendation includes $7,700,000 for research assistance in high 

energy density science, a level consistent with fiscal year 2005. The 

conference agreement includes $5,000,000 for the Nevada Terawatt 

Facility. Within the funds provided, $3,000,000 is for research into 

strongly magnetized high energy density matter and $2,000,000 is 

for construction of the high energy, short-pulse laser system. 

Facility Operations and Target Production.—The conference 

agreement includes $64,623,000, an additional $10,000,000 over 

the request, for facility operations and target production. The conferees provide the additional $10,000,000 to accelerate target fabrication. 

Inertial Fusion Technology.—The conference agreement re- stores $48,000,000 of funding for the Inertial Fusion Technology 

program. Within the funds provided, $25,000,000 is for continuing 

development of high average power lasers, $2,000,000 for the high 

density matter laser at the Ohio State University Technology Park, 

$15,000,000 for the Naval Research Laboratory, and $6,000,000 to 

prepare Z-machine to support extended operations. 

NIF Demonstration.—The conference agreement includes $102,330,000 to support the NIF Demonstration program. 

High Energy Petawatt Laser Development.—The conferees pro- vide $35,000,000 for high energy petawatt laser development, an 

increase of $32,000,000 above the request. The conference recommendation includes an additional $4,000,000 for OMEGA operations to provide additional shots to support ignition demonstration 

in 2011 and an additional $22,000,000 to accelerate the OMEGA 

Extended Performance capability project, a four beam super-highintensity, high-energy laser facility. Within the available funds, 

$2,000,000 is provided for continued development of petawatt laser 

at the University of Texas at Austin; $2,000,000 is provided to the 

University of Nevada, Reno to continue its collaboration with 

Sandia National Laboratories on highly diagnosed studies of exploding wire arrays and implosion dynamics. The conferees provide 

$2,000,000 to Sandia National Laboratories for Z-Petawatt Consortium experiments using the Sandia Z-Beamlet and Z petawatt lasers. 

Construction—Project 96–D–111.—The conferees provide 

$141,913,000 for construction of the National Ignition Facility 

(NIF), the same as the budget request. 

Advanced Simulation and Computing (ASCI).—The conference 

agreement provides $605,830,000 for Advanced Simulation and 

Computing. The conferees recognize that the modern networking 

technologies employed by the ASC program enable effective longdistance access to high-end computing. The conferees urge the ASC 

program to provide adequate federal oversight to ensure that the 

capability supercomputers are used as a national resource, shared 

162 

by the three weapons laboratories, and are applied to the highest 

priority weapons systems requirements that cannot be solved in a 

timely manner on capacity computers. The conferees direct the 

NNSA to allocate capacity computing funds to each lab based on 

the pending or projected highest priority stockpile workload. The 

conference recommendation includes the following projects from 

within available funds: Nonprofit AVETeC for Nextedge Technology 

Park, Springfield (OH), $10,000,000; Wittenberg University supercomputer (OH), $1,000,000; Notre Dame/Purdue Supercomputer 

Grid (IL, IN), $5,000,000; and $6,000,000 provided to continue the 

demonstration at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory of advanced electronics packaging and thermal engineering for thermally-efficient electronics related to high performance data servers 

using three dimensional chip scale packaging integrated with spray 

cooling (WA). 

For the pit manufacturing and certification campaign, the conference agreement provides $241,074,000. The conference agreement provides $120,926,000 for W88 pit manufacturing and 

$61,895,000 for W88 pit certification, the same as the budget request. The conference agreement provides $23,071,000 for Pit Manufacturing Capability and $35,182,000 for Pit campaign support at 

the Nevada Test Site. The conference agreement provides no funding for the modern pit facility. The conferees direct the Administrator of the NNSA to undertake a review of the pit program to 

focus on improving the manufacturing capability at TA–55. The 

conferees also direct the Department to develop a report as to how 

the NNSA intends to address the radiological mission and security 

needs of category III/IV material currently housed at TA–18 at Los 

Alamos. This report shall be provided to the Committees on Appropriations by February 1, 2006. 

For readiness campaigns, the conference agreement provides 

$218,755,000. The conference agreement provides $31,400,000 for 

the Stockpile readiness campaign. The conference agreement provides $17,097,000 for High explosives weapons operations. The conference agreement provides $28,630,000 for the non-nuclear readiness campaign. The conference agreement provides $54,040,000 for 

the advanced design and production technologies campaign. Funding for the tritium readiness campaign is the same as the budget 

request. 

READINESS IN TECHNICAL BASE AND FACILITIES

Readiness in technical base and facilities.—For readiness in 

technical base and facilities, the conference agreement provides 

$1,647,885,000, an increase of $16,499,000 over the budget request, 

and includes several funding adjustments. 

Within funds provided for operations of facilities, the conferees 

direct that, at a minimum, an additional $51,000,000 be provided 

for the Pantex Plant in Texas and an additional $40,000,000 for the 

Y–12 Plant in Tennessee as proposed by the House and 

$15,000,000 for the Kansas City Plant in Kansas as proposed by 

the Senate. The conference agreement provides the budget request 

of $25,000,000 for Lawrence Livermore Laboratory and $21,997,000 

for the Y–12 plant to address newly generated waste activities. 

163 

The conferees provide the funding adjustments proposed by the Senate: $7,500,000 to support operation and recapitalization of facilities at the Nevada Test Site; $11,000,000 for modification of the 

Z-Beamlet laser at the Z Pinch at Sandia National Laboratories; 

$12,000,000 to support MESA Operations; $2,500,000 for the 

UNLV Research Foundation to support the ongoing programs of 

the Institute for Security Studies; $3,000,000 for the Advanced 

Monitoring Systems Initiative at the NTS to continue micro-sensing technology deployment and prototype deployment of remote 

monitoring systems for the underground test area; $7,500,000 to 

improve and upgrade existing roads at the Nevada Test Site and 

an additional $4,000,000 to install two new water storage tanks in 

Area 6 of the NTS; $1,000,000 to purchase and install a Geographic 

Information Center at the NTS; $4,000,000 to install a 17-mile 

fiber optic link between the Nevada Test Site and Indian Springs 

Air Force Base; and $4,500,000 to upgrade the Emergency Operations Center within the Nevada Support Facility to meet national 

program goals. The recommendation also includes, within funds 

provided, $3,000,000 for the Consortium on Terrorism and Fire 

Science at UNR; $500,000 for the continuing operations and security at the Atomic Testing History Institute; $2,000,000 to the 

UNLV Research Foundation to continue support of the 

radioanalytical services laboratory; $3,500,000 to the not-for-profit 

Technology Ventures Corporation to continue the successful technology transfer and commercialization efforts at the National Laboratories and the Nevada Test Site; $1,750,000 for the National 

Museum of Nuclear Science and History; $2,000,000 for the Arrowhead Center at New Mexico State University; $2,000,000 for Rapid 

Prototyping activities at the Special Technology Laboratory in 

Santa Barbara, (CA) to accelerate development of sensor and live 

plume tracking capabilities at the Nevada Test Site; $2,000,000 for 

a public-private partnership to continue the test and evaluation of 

water filtration technology to protect the public against nuclear, biological, and chemical threats; and $1,000,000 to continue the ongoing administration infrastructure support grant for the UNLV Research Foundation. 

Nanotechnology.—The conferees provide $15,000,000 from 

within available funds for the establishment of the National 

Nanotechnology Enterprise Development Center (NNEDC), to be 

managed by the Center for Integrated Nanotechnologies. The 

NNEDC will assist in the technology maturation of 

nanotechnologies developed at each of the National Nanoscience 

Initiative Facilities and to assist in their transition to the marketplace, while emphasizing opportunities for industrial partnerships 

with the Center for Integrated Nanotechnologies. Proposals to the 

NNEDC will be considered by a board of experts qualified to evaluate proposals based on both their scientific merit and their commercial potential, including a representative from each of the National Nanoscience Initiative Facilities, and a similar number of 

representatives from economic development and commercial sectors 

to be selected by the Department of Energy’s Office of Science. 

Advanced Computing.—The conferees provide $35,000,000 to 

Los Alamos National Laboratory to acquire additional computing 

capacity. 

164 

Within funds provided, the conferees provide the funding adjustments proposed by the House: $1,150,000 for risk based data 

management in Oklahoma (OK); $2,000,000 for Robotics repetitive 

system technology (OH); $3,750,000 for Plasma Separation Process 

High Energy Storage Isotope research (TN); $1,500,000 for MultiPlatform dosimeter radiation detection devices (WA); $2,000,000 for 

Secure Wireless Technologies at Y–12 (TN); $2,000,000 for Airborne Particulate Threat Assessment (PA); $2,000,000 for command and control of Vulnerable Materials Security System (PA, 

NJ); $1,000,000 for Advanced Engineering Environment at Sandia, 

Livermore (CA). 

The conference agreement includes the budget request of 

$105,738,000 for Program Readiness, $72,730,000 for material recycle and recovery, $17,247,000 for containers, and $25,222,000 for 

storage. The conference recommendation provides the budget request for the activities under special projects within the funds provided for operations of facilities. 

Construction projects.—For RTBF construction projects, the 

conference agreement includes the budget request, except for the 

following adjustments: an additional $2,000,000 for Project 05–D–

140, Project Engineering and Design for Test Capabilities Revitalization project at Sandia National Laboratory and an additional 

$11,000,000 for Project 01–D–124, HEU materials facility at the Y–

12 Plant, Oak Ridge, TN. 

FACILITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE RECAPITALIZATION

Facilities and infrastructure recapitalization.—The conference 

agreement includes $150,873,000 for the facilities and infrastructure (F&I) recapitalization program. 

SECURE TRANSPORTATION ASSET

Secure Transportation Asset.—The conference agreement provides $212,100,000 for secure transportation asset. The conference 

agreement provides $68,334,000 for program direction. 

NUCLEAR WEAPONS INCIDENT RESPONSE

Nuclear Weapons Incident Response.—The conference agreement provides $118,796,000 for nuclear weapons incident response. 

SAFEGUARDS AND SECURITY

Safeguards and security.—The conference agreement includes 

$805,486,000, an increase of $65,008,000 over the budget request, 

for safeguards and security activities at laboratories and facilities 

managed by the National Nuclear Security Administration. Within 

funds provided for safeguards and security, the conferees direct 

that, at a minimum, an additional $25,000,000 be provided for the 

Pantex plant in Texas and an additional $60,000,000 for the Y–12 

Plant in Tennessee, as proposed by the House, and $20,000,000 to 

complete the expansion of the red network at Los Alamos as proposed by the Senate. The conferees provide $1,900,000 to demonstrate an enterprise PKI for secure communication at Sandia National Lab. The conferees direct the NNSA to fund the protective 

165 

force at the Device Assembly Facility, including full implementation of the protective force Special Response Team program at the 

Nevada Test Site. 

FUNDING ADJUSTMENTS

Funding adjustments.—The conference agreement includes an 

adjustment of $32,000,000 for a security charge for reimbursable 

work, as proposed in the budget. 

DEFENSE NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION

The conference agreement provides $1,631,151,000 for Defense 

Nuclear Nonproliferation. 

NONPROLIFERATION AND VERIFICATION RESEARCH AND

DEVELOPMENT

Nonproliferation and Verification Research and Development.—

The conference agreement provides $322,000,000 for nonproliferation and verification research and development, an increase of 

$49,782,000 over the budget request. The conferees provide 

$177,471,000 for proliferation detection, an increase of $25,000,000 

over the budget request; and $125,424,000 for nuclear explosion 

monitoring, an increase of $16,782,000 over the request, of which 

$24,000,000 is for ground-based systems for treaty monitoring; and 

$6,105,000 for supporting activities. The Committee provides 

$13,000,000 for Project 06–D–180, National Security Laboratory at 

the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), an increase of 

$8,000,000 over the budget request. The additional $8,000,000 is to 

complete project engineering and design and initiate construction 

on 300 Area capability replacement laboratory. 

The conferees direct the Department to conduct a free and 

open competitive process for at least $7,500,000 of its research and 

development activities during fiscal year 2006 for ground-based 

systems treaty monitoring. From within available funds, the conference agreement includes the following projects: $2,500,000 for 

the UNLV Research Foundation to support nonproliferation activities at the Institute for Security Studies; $4,000,000 for portable 

high purity germanium detectors for incident response and radiation detection applications; $1,000,000 for the National Center for 

Biodefense at George Mason University (VA); $1,000,000 for the 

Offshore Detection Integrated System (OH); $750,000 for developing neutron dosimeter and Gamma-Beta Survey meter (OH); 

$300,000 for the Texas A&M Moscow Physics Institute-Nonproliferation and International Security Program (TX); and 

$500,000 for Mega Cargo Imaging program at the Nevada Test Site 

(NV). From within available funds, the conference agreement includes up to $5,000,000 to support a chemical and biological detection research and development program in the NNSA. 

NONPROLIFERATION AND INTERNATIONAL SECURITY

Nonproliferation and International Security.—The conference 

agreement provides $75,000,000 for nonproliferation and international security, a reduction of $5,173,000 below the budget reVerDate Aug 31 2005 21:24 Nov 08, 2005 Jkt 024421 PO 00000 Frm 00165 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR275.XXX HR275
166 

quest. The conferees provide $10,000,000 for initiatives focused on 

removing nuclear weapons-usable materials from vulnerable sites 

around the world. The conferees direct the Department to provide 

$3,000,000 in grants to institutions of higher learning and nonprofit entities for research related to nuclear nonproliferation and 

chemical and biological weapons detection. Each individual grant 

provided shall not exceed $250,000. 

NONPROLIFERATION PROGRAMS WITH RUSSIA

INTERNATIONAL NUCLEAR MATERIALS PROTECTION AND

COOPERATION

International Materials Protection, Control and Cooperation 

(MPC&A).—The conference recommendation is $427,000,000 for 

the MPC&A program, an increase of $83,565,000 over the budget 

request. The conferees provide the additional funds to accelerate 

the new opportunities to secure nuclear warhead storage sites resulting from the Bratislava Summit agreement. The conference 

agreement provides the budget request within the Second Line of 

Defense program for the MegaPorts initiative. 

GLOBAL INITIATIVE FOR PROLIFERATION PREVENTION

Global Initiative for Proliferation Prevention.—The conference 

agreement provides $40,000,000 for the Initiatives for Proliferation 

Prevention (IPP) program and the Nuclear Cities Initiative (NCI). 

HIGHLY ENRICHED URANIUM (HEU) TRANSPARENCY

IMPLEMENTATION

HEU Transparency Implementation.—The conference agreement provides $19,483,000, a reduction of $1,000,000 from the 

budget request. 

ELIMINATION OF WEAPONS-GRADE PLUTONIUM PRODUCTION

Elimination of Weapons-Grade Plutonium Production.—The 

conference agreement provides $176,185,000, an increase of 

$44,185,000 over the budget request, for the elimination of weapons-grade plutonium production program. The conferees provide 

the additional funds to maintain the schedule to shutdown the 

Zheleznogorsk reactor by 2011 and expect the Department to fully 

fund the outyear budget requirement in the Future Years Nuclear 

Security Program five year budget plan to accomplish the reactor 

shutdown milestone. 

FISSILE MATERIALS DISPOSITION

Fissile Materials Disposition.—The conference agreement provides $473,508,000 for fissile materials disposition, a reduction of 

$179,557,000 from the budget request. Funding of $195,000,000 is 

provided for U.S. surplus materials disposition and $34,508,000 for 

the Russian plutonium disposition program. The conferees have included language modifying the statutory provision allowing for significant fines against the Department of Energy if the MOX production schedule slips in future years. Since fiscal year 2001, ConVerDate Aug 31 2005 21:24 Nov 08, 2005 Jkt 024421 PO 00000 Frm 00166 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR275.XXX HR275
167 

gress has provided in excess of $1.1 billion for the MOX construction project. Recognizing that the liability impasse has been resolved with the Russian Federation, the conferees expect the MOX 

facility construction activity at the Savannah River Site will proceed on schedule. 

Construction projects.—The conference recommendation includes $220,000,000 for Project 99–D–143, the Mixed Oxide Fuel 

Fabrication facility project, a reduction of $118,565,000 from the 

budget request. The conferees expect the Department to utilize 

fully the available prior year balances in the Mixed Oxide (MOX) 

construction project to begin construction before requesting significant additional budget authority. Funding of $24,000,000 is provided for Project 99–D–141, the Pit Disassembly and Conversion 

Facility project. 

GLOBAL THREAT REDUCTION INITIATIVE

Global Threat Reduction Initiative.—The conference agreement provides $97,975,000, the same as the budget request, for the Global Threat Reduction Initiative program. The conference agreement 

provides the budget request for the Kazakhstan Spent Fuel Disposition program. The conference agreement provides up to 

$7,000,000 from within available funds, to support the conversion 

of university research reactors from a highly enriched uranium core 

to a low enriched uranium core, for as many as four research reactors located in the United States. The reactors targeted for conversion are Purdue University, Oregon State University, University of 

Wisconsin and Washington State University. The conferees encourage the Department to fund the Radiological Threat Reduction program to establish a pilot program to utilize commercial or non-governmental resources for recovery, storage, monitoring and disposal 

of domestic high-risk radioactive sealed sources and to provide a report to the House and Senate Appropriations Committees on these 

activities by the end of fiscal year 2006. 

NAVAL REACTORS

The conference agreement provides $789,500,000 for Naval Reactors, an increase of $3,500,000 over the budget request. The conferees agree to transfer $13,500,000 to the Office of Nuclear Energy 

to support the Idaho National Laboratory’s Advanced Test Reactor. 

OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR

The conference agreement provides $341,869,000 for the Office 

of the Administrator. 

From within available funds, the conference agreement provides $15,000,000 to continue the support to the HBCUs’ scientific 

and technical programs in fiscal year 2006. The Committee expects 

the Department to provide financial support in rough parity to both 

HBCUs and the Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSI). The Committee recommendation includes $2,000,000 each for Wilberforce 

University and Central State University in Wilberforce, Ohio; 

$2,000,000 for Claflin College in Orangeburg, SC; $4,000,000 for 

Allen University in Columbia, SC; and $1,000,000 each for Voorhees College in Denmark, SC and South Carolina State University 

168 

in Orangeburg, SC, and Florida Memorial University for the Carrie 

Meek Health and Science Complex in Miami Gardens, FL; 

$500,000 each for Cheyney University, Cheyney (PA) and Lincoln 

University, Lincoln University of Pennsylvania (PA); and 

$1,000,000 for the ACE program at Maricopa Community Colleges 

in Phoenix, Arizona. The conferees agree with the House language 

that directs the Department to provide funds to HBCU institutions 

to allow for infrastructure improvements and technical programs 

and expects the Department to ensure the Dr. Samuel P. Massie 

Chairs of Excellence are fully supported within the HBCU program. 

ENVIRONMENTAL AND OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES

DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP

The conference agreement for the Defense Environmental Cleanup (EM) program totals $6,192,371,000. The conferees recommend that the Department carry over balances for WERC, a 

consortium for environmental education and technology development, to support an educational foundation within that organization. Within the amounts provided, the Department is directed to 

fund hazardous waste worker training at $10,000,000. 

Energy and Water Technology.—Within the amounts provided, the Department is directed to fund $12,500,000 for energy and 

water resource management, including $7,000,000 for advanced 

concept desalination and arsenic treatment in partnership with 

American Water Works Research Foundation and WERC; 

$2,000,000 for water supply technology development and 

$3,500,000 for water management decision support including demonstration programs in partnership with the New Mexico Office of 

the State Engineer and international water partnerships. 

Milestone report.—While the budget structure has changed, the 

conferees remain interested in whether the Department has met its 

goals for completion for years 2006, 2012, and 2035. The conferees 

request a report by site that tracks accelerated clean-up milestones, whether they are being met or not, and includes annual 

budget estimates and life-cycle costs, due to the House and Senate 

Committees on Appropriations by March 1 and September 1 of 

each year. 

NNSA Transfers.—The conferees did not support the transfer 

of environmental cleanup responsibilities to the National Nuclear 

Security Administration (NNSA), consistent with the House and 

Senate reports. However, responsibility for NNSA newly generated 

waste will remain in NNSA. The conferees provide no funding in 

the defense EM program for newly generated waste at Lawrence 

Livermore Laboratory and the Y–12 Plant. 

Low level/mixed low level (LLW/MLW) waste Report Requirement.—Consistent with the House report, the conferees direct the 

Secretary to report to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations, within 90 days of enactment of this Act, on the specific 

steps the Department will take to ensure that life-cycle cost guidance is implemented in the consideration of LLW/MLW options by 

DOE contractors, and that a robust federal cadre of employees will 

oversee the implementation of such guidance. 

169 

EM Subproject Report Requirement.—The conferees are concerned that the Environmental Management program continues to 

aggregate multiple project activities within the Project Baseline 

Summaries (PBS) contained in its annual budget request. When 

EM initially ‘‘projectized’’ its work in the FY 2001 budget request, 

program activities were aggregated into approximately 430 PBS’s 

that were used as the basis for the programs budget justification 

and execution reporting. The number of PBSs now stands at 89. 

Since these PBSs are the basis for ‘‘project’’ baselines and performance tracking within the Department, it leads the conferees to 

question the Department’s ability to meaningfully analyze its costs 

and work accomplishment. The conferees direct the Department to 

provide a report by March 1, 2006, to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations with additional information on large 

PBSs (requests of more than $100,000,000) in the form of detailed 

justification by subprojects to provide more visability and specificity to the planned activities within those PBSs. This report 

should be prepared for the scope planned for the fiscal year 2006 

appropriations and the fiscal year 2007 request. These new subproject groupings should be used as a basis for quarterly reporting 

of financial data (unobligated and uncosted balances), and project 

variance reports. 

Reprogramming Authority.—The conferees continue to support 

the need for flexibility to meet changing funding requirements at 

sites. In fiscal year 2006, the Department may transfer up to 

$5,000,000 within accounts, and between accounts, as noted in the 

table below, to reduce health or safety risks or to gain cost savings 

as long as no program or project is increased or decreased by more 

than $5,000,000 once during the fiscal year. This reprogramming 

authority may not be used to initiate new programs or to change 

funding levels for programs specifically denied, limited, or increased by Congress in the Act or statement. The Committees on 

Appropriations in the House and Senate must be notified within 

thirty days of the use of this reprogramming authority. The following is a list of control levels for reprogramming: 

Closure sites 

Savannah River site, 2012 accelerations 

Savannah River site, 2035 accelerations 

Savannah River Tank Farm 

Waste Isolation Pilot Plant 

Idaho National Laboratory 

Oak Ridge Reservation 

Hanford site 2012 accelerated completions 

Hanford site 2035 accelerated completions 

Office of River Protection (ORP) Waste Treatment & Immobilization (WTP) Pretreatment facility 

ORP WTP High-level waste facility 

ORP WTP Low activity waste facility 

ORP WTP Analytical laboratory 

ORP WTP Balance of facilities 

Program Direction 

Program Support 

UE D&D Fund contribution 

Technology Development 

170 

All Construction Line Items 

NNSA sites and Nevada off-sites 

Safeguards and Security 

Guaranteed Fixed Priced Remediation (GFPR).—Public Law 

108–447 directed the Department to submit a report to the Committees on Appropriations on the feasibility of applying GFPR to 

remediation activities. The Department has completed its evaluation and has concluded that remediation projects at DOE sites or 

portions of sites that historically did not involve high risk materials 

could be potential candidates for GFPR contracts. The conferees are 

encouraged by this report, and direct the Department to identify at 

least two remediation projects or portions of projects as candidates 

for a pilot use of GFPR in fiscal year 2006. 

Closure Sites.—The conference agreement provides $1,028,589,000, reflecting a decrease of $10,000,000 to litigation 

contingency monies held in reserve for Rocky Flats. The conferees provide an increase of $30,000,000 to complete 

remedies at Mound Operable Unit 1 (OU–1), and direct the Department to work with the Miamisburg Mound Community Improvement Corporation in developing a mutually acceptable remedy. The 

remedy shall meet the spirit and intent of the ‘‘Sales Contract by 

and between the U.S. DOE and the Miamisburg Community Improvement Corporation, January 23, 1998’’, permit industrial reuse 

of OU–1, and be consistent with past site cleanup practices and 

cleanup levels and objectives. Agreement on the remedy shall be 

completed by March 1, 2006. DOE shall report to Congress the 

progress of the remedy development by December 1, 2005. If substantial progress has not been made in the development of the remedy by this time, DOE shall engage the services of a mediator, mutually acceptable to the parties, to facilitate the remedy selection 

for the OU–1 waste disposal area. 

Savannah River Site.—The conference agreement provides $1,170,582,000 for the Savannah River Site. The conferees provide 

$10,000,000 for the melt and dilute technology for excess weaponsgrade plutonium. The conferees provide $500,000 for project 05–D–

405, salt waste processing facility, and reduce prior year balances 

for this project by $20,000,000 because the construction is held up 

due to unresolved seismic issues. 

Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP).—The conference agreement 

provides $230,629,000 for the Waste Isolation Pilot Project. Within 

available funds, the conference agreement provides $6,000,000 for 

the purchase of TRUPACT–III shipping containers, $3,500,000 for 

educational support, infrastructure improvements, and related initiatives for the Carlsbad community, $5,000,000 to consolidate all 

record archives relevant to the operations of WIPP at Carlsbad, 

and to provide these records in a format that is user friendly and 

supports timely access to information, $2,000,000 for the Office of 

Environmental Management to support the Center for Excellence 

in Hazardous Materials, and $1,500,000 for neutrino research in 

the WIPP environment, which is relatively pristine in terms of 

background radiation. 

Idaho National Laboratory.—The conference agreement provides $538,225,000. The conferees direct that the unexpended balances of up to $68,000,000 previously appropriated as Defense PriVerDate Aug 31 2005 21:24 Nov 08, 2005 Jkt 024421 PO 00000 Frm 00170 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR275.XXX HR275
171 

vatization for the Advanced Mixed Waste Treatment Plant be 

merged with other maintenance and operating funds available 

within the Defense Environmental Cleanup account, Solid Waste 

Stabilization and Disposition project activity, for the Idaho site to 

continue processing of transuranic waste for disposal at the WIPP. 

Oak Ridge Reservation.—The conferees provide $240,812,000 

for the Oak Ridge Reservation. The conference agreement includes 

$18,000,000 for disposition of material in Building 3019, consistent 

with the Department’s decision to transfer this responsibility to the 

defense EM program. The conferees direct the Department to provide a report within 60 days of enactment of this Act, that details 

the Department’s path forward in managing this material. 

Hanford Site.—The conference agreement provides $780,653,000 for the Hanford Site. The conferees provide 

$1,000,000 for B-reactor preservation and $500,000 each for preservation of ETTP and LANL former Manhattan Project sites. The 

conferees provide $7,500,000 for the Volpentest Hazardous Materials Management and Emergency Response (HAMMER) training 

and education center. The Department is expected to continue 

making PILT payments at last year’s level to counties that have 

the Hanford reservation within their boundaries. 

Office of River Protection.—The conference agreement provides $329,471,000 for Tank Farm activities, and $526,000,000 for construction project 01–D–416, the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant. 

The high-level waste vitrification program at Hanford has had 

a long history of failure—more than $9,000,000,000 has been spent 

over the last 15 years. Based on a report by the Corps of Engineers, the estimated cost of the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP), originally $4,300,000,000, may rise to as much 

as $9,300,000,000, and the schedule may slip four more years to 

2015. Reasons for these increases include: contractor estimating 

problems, technical problems, and insufficient project contingency. 

It is unclear what steps DOE will take to better ensure effective 

management and oversight of the project in the longer term. 

Based on this troubled history, the conferees provide 

$526,000,000, for the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant, 

a reduction of $99,893,000 from the request. The conferees understand that $98,000,000 remains available from fiscal year 2005 to 

be used in fiscal year 2006 for this project. The Department needs 

better control and oversight of the scope, cost and schedule of this 

project, and the conferees direct the Department to report to the 

House and Senate Committees on Appropriations by December 1, 

2005, on the actions taken to rectify the management failures of 

this project, and to report quarterly, beginning on January 1, 2006, 

on the activities and financial status of each of the subprojects 

within WTP. 

Program Direction.—The conference agreement provides 

$243,816,000 for program direction. Of the total amount, 

$82,924,000 is available for obligation only after the report delivery 

to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations by the Secretary on the specific steps the Department will take to ensure that 

life-cycle cost guidance is implemented in the consideration of 

LLW/MLW options by DOE contractors. The conferees support the 

172 

termination of the A–76 contracting out of the duties of federal employees for the Environmental Cleanup program. 

Program Support.—The conference recommendation provides $32,846,000. 

Federal Contribution to Uranium Enrichment Decontamination 

and Decommissioning Fund.—The Energy Policy Act of 1992, Public Law 102–486, created the Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning Fund to pay for the cost of cleanup of 

the gaseous diffusion facilities located in Oak Ridge, Tennessee; Paducah, Kentucky; and Portsmouth, Ohio. The conference agreement 

includes the budget request of $451,000,000 for the Federal contribution to the Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning Fund as authorized in Public Law 102–486. 

Technology Development and Deployment.—The conference 

agreement provides $30,065,000. The conferees are concerned about 

DOE’s efforts to protect contaminants from reaching the Columbia 

River. Technology used in several remedies is not performing satisfactorily, and there is a lack of new technologies to address contamination issues. The conferees provide $10,000,000 for analyzing 

contaminant migration to the Columbia River, and for the introduction of new technology approaches to solving contamination migration issues. The conferees understand that the various program 

groups managing the groundwater and vadose zone cleanup program are fragmented, and not well coordinated. The conferees direct the Department to report to the House and Senate Committees 

on Appropriations on the organization and operations of these 

groups, and how they will be better coordinated, within 60 days of 

enactment of this Act. The conferees provide $5,000,000 for AEA 

Technology to address alternative cost effective technologies for 

cleaning up legacy waste. Within available funds, the conferees direct the Department to fund the real-time identification warning 

system at $250,000, the Hanford Tank Waste Operations Simulator 

at $2,000,000, and the Mid-Atlantic Recycling Center for End of 

Life Electronics at $1,000,000. 

NNSA sites and Nevada off-sites.—The conference agreement 

provides $302,460,000, reflecting the return of cleanup activities to 

the Environmental Cleanup program that otherwise would have 

transferred to the NNSA. The conferees provide no funding in the 

defense EM program for newly generated waste at Lawrence Livermore Laboratory and the Y–12 plant. 

Safeguards and Security.—The conference agreement provides 

$287,223,000, the same as the budget request. 

Congressionally Directed Projects.—The conferees’ recommendation includes the following Congressionally directed 

projects, within available funds. The conferees remind recipients 

that statutory cost sharing requirements may apply to these 

projects. 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PROJECTS

Project Conference 

recommendation 

Western Environmental Technology Office (multi-state) ................... $5,000,000 

University of Nevada-Reno School of Medicine Core Facilities 

equipment (NV) .................................................................................. 4,000,000 

Great Basin Science Sample and Records Library (NV) .................... 3,500,000 

173 

Project Conference 

recommendation 

Desert Research Institute’s CAVE project (NV) .................................. 2,000,000 

UNLV Research Foundation to continue earthquake hazard and 

seismic risk research (NV) ................................................................ 1,000,000 

Diagnostic Instrumentation and Analysis Library (MS) .................... 5,000,000 

Electrochemical system utilizing ceramic ionic transport membranes for the recycle and disposal of radioactive sodium ion 

waste (ID) ........................................................................................... 3,000,000 

Desert Research Institute’s Environmental Monitoring Program 

(NV) ..................................................................................................... 2,750,000 

Nye County Groundwater Evaluation Program (NV) ......................... 1,500,000 

Emergency and Non-emergency communications systems upgrades 

in Nye County (NV) ........................................................................... 1,500,000 

Stabilization of Los Alamos Airport Landfill (NM) ............................. 5,000,000 

Energy & Environmental Hispanic Community Participation 

Project (NM) ....................................................................................... 750,000 

OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES

The conference agreement provides $641,998,000 for Other Defense Activities. 

OFFICE OF SECURITY AND PERFORMANCE ASSURANCE

The conference agreement provides $307,095,000, an increase of $6,000,000 over the budget request. The conference agreement 

includes $186,878,000 for nuclear safeguards and security; and 

$46,725,000 for security investigations; and $73,492,000 for program direction. The conferees provide an additional $5,000,000 for 

Project Engineering and Design (PED) funding to begin a new construction project to upgrade CPP–651 and CPP–691 at the Idaho 

National Laboratory for complex-wide material consolidation of 

special nuclear material. The conferees direct the Department to 

include a PED line item project to continue this activity in the fiscal year 2007 budget request. The conferees support the House request for a report detailing the security requirements of the special 

nuclear material disposition activity at the Oak Ridge National 

Laboratory and have included the report description and deadline 

in bill language. 

ENVIRONMENT, SAFETY AND HEALTH (DEFENSE) 

The conference agreement provides $77,029,000 for defense-related environment, safety and health activities, of which 

$19,546,000 is for program direction. From within available funds, 

the conference agreement provides $5,000,000 to undertake the 

Chernobyl Research and Service Project. The conference recommendation includes $4,000,000 for the DOE Worker Records 

Digitization project in Nevada. 

The Former Worker Medical Screening.—The conference agreement provides $12,500,000 for Former Worker Program. From 

within available funds, the following projects are provided: 

$465,000 to extend medical screening at the three gaseous diffusion 

plants; $2,000,000 to be evenly divided to initiate medical screening 

of former workers at the Mound facility in Miamisburg, Ohio, and 

the Fernald Facility in Harrison, Ohio. The conferees direct the 

Secretary to initiate early lung cancer detection screening at the Y–

12 and X–10 facilities, Tennessee. To offset these activities the conVerDate Aug 31 2005 01:41 Nov 09, 2005 Jkt 024421 PO 00000 Frm 00173 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR275.XXX HR275
174 

ferees allocate $2,700,000 in fiscal year 2006 for activities under 

the DOE–HHS MOU and direct the Department to prioritize funds 

for the National Center for Environmental Health at Los Alamos 

and research work at the Health Energy Related Branch at 

NIOSH. 

LEGACY MANAGEMENT

The conference agreement provides a total of $78,598,000 for 

the Office of Legacy Management to manage the long-term stewardship responsibilities at the Department of Energy clean up 

sites. The conference recommendation provides $45,076,000 in 

Other Defense Activities and the balance of $33,522,000 is provided 

in the non-defense Energy Supply account. 

FUNDING FOR DEFENSE ACTIVITIES IN IDAHO

The conference agreement provides $123,873,000 for defenserelated activities at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) and associated Idaho cleanup sites. 

DEFENSE RELATED ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT

The conference agreement provides $87,575,000 for national security programs administrative support. 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

The conference agreement provides $4,353,000 for the Office of 

Hearings and Appeals, the same as the budget request. 

DEFENSE NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL

The conference agreement provides $350,000,000 for the defense contribution to the nuclear waste repository program. 

POWER MARKETING ADMINISTRATIONS

BONNEVILLE POWER ADMINISTRATION

The conference recommendation provides no new borrowing authority for BPA during fiscal year 2006. The Bonneville Power Administration may make no new obligations in support of the Fish 

Passage Center. The conferees call upon Bonneville Power Administration and the Northwest Power and Conservation Council to ensure that an orderly transfer of the Fish Passage Center functions 

(warehouse of smolt monitoring data, routine data analysis and reporting and coordination of the smolt monitoring program) occurs 

within 120 days of enactment of this legislation. These functions 

shall be transferred to other existing and capable entities in the region in a manner that ensures seamless continuity of activities. 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, SOUTHEASTERN POWER

ADMINISTRATION

The conference agreement includes $5,600,000 for the Southeastern Power Administration. The conference agreement provides 

$32,713,000 for purchase power and wheeling in fiscal year 2006. 

175 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, SOUTHWESTERN POWER

ADMINISTRATION

The conference agreement includes $30,166,000 for the Southwestern Power Administration. The conference agreement provides 

$3,000,000 for purchase power and wheeling in fiscal year 2006. 

CONSTRUCTION, REHABILITATION, OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, 

WESTERN AREA POWER ADMINISTRATION

The conference agreement provides $233,992,000, an increase 

of $180,035,000 over the budget request for Western Area Power 

Administration. The conference agreement provides $279,000,000 

for purchase power and wheeling in fiscal year 2006. The total 

O&M program level for Western in fiscal year 2006 is 

$517,154,000, which includes $53,957,000 for construction and rehabilitation, $47,295,000 for system operation and maintenance, 

$279,000,000 for purchase power and wheeling, and $130,202,000 

for program direction. Offsetting collections total $283,162,000; 

with the use of $4,162,000 of offsetting collections from the Colorado River Dam Fund (as authorized in P.L. 98–381), this requires 

a net appropriation of $233,992,000. Within available funds, the 

conference recommendation includes $6,000,000 to complete the 

Topock-Davis section of the Topock-Davis-Mead line including the 

interconnection and extension to Needles, CA, to provide additional 

transmission capacity by using aluminum matrix composite conductor technology. The conferees are disappointed that the funding 

for the South of Phoenix portion of the Parker-Davis project in 

Pinal County has been delayed and recommend that the project 

funding be reinstated without any further delay or interruption. 

The conferees agree with the House language regarding the SierraNevada Region’s Post–2004 Power Marketing Plan and Transmission Operations and direct WAPA to submit the requested report to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations by 

May 1, 2006. The conference agreement includes $6,700,000 for the 

Utah Mitigation and Conservation fund. 

FALCON AND AMISTAD OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE FUND

The conference agreement includes $2,692,000, the same as the 

budget request, for the Falcon and Amistad Operating and Maintenance Fund. 

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

The conference agreement includes $220,400,000 for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Revenues for FERC 

are set at an amount equal to the budget authority, resulting in a 

net appropriation of $0. 

The conferees are aware that the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission has begun requiring the collection of wholesale electric 

charges to address costs associated with crossing ‘‘seams’’ between 

neighboring Regional Transmission Organizations, also known as 

‘‘Seams Elimination Cost Adjustment’’. While recognizing that legitimate costs should be recovered, the conferees are troubled about 

176 

whether the Commission has applied these fees without a clear accounting of actual costs or proper allocation, permitted SECA 

charges to go into effect without those charges having been filed or 

even disclosed, used ‘‘baselines’’ that may not reflect actual power 

flows and otherwise failed to provide proper and appropriate procedural protections to all parties. The conferees expect the Commission to review its SECA policies and take expeditious and appropriate remedial steps. 

GENERAL PROVISIONS 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Sec. 301. The conference agreement includes language regarding competition of certain management and operating contracts. 

Sec. 302. The conference agreement includes a provision regarding workforce restructuring plans, enhanced severance payments, and other benefits and community assistance grants for 

Federal employees of the Department of Energy. 

Sec. 303. The conference agreement includes a provision regarding augmentation of funds for severance payments and other 

benefits and community assistance grants. 

Sec. 304. The conference agreement includes a provision regarding Requests for Proposals for programs that have not been 

funded by Congress in the current fiscal year. 

Sec. 305. The conference agreement includes a provision regarding the use of unexpended balances of prior appropriations. 

Sec. 306. The conference agreement includes a provision prohibiting the Bonneville Power Administration from performing energy efficiency services outside the legally defined Bonneville service territory unless the Administrator certifies in advance that such 

services are not available from private sector businesses. 

Sec. 307. The conference agreement includes a provision establishing certain notice and competition requirements for Department 

of Energy user facilities. 

Sec. 308. The conference agreement includes a provision authorizing intelligence activities of the Department of Energy for 

purposes of section 504 of the National Security Act of 1947 until 

enactment of the Intelligence Authorization Act for fiscal year 

2006. 

Sec. 309. The conference agreement includes a provision limiting the types of waste that may be disposed of in the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. 

Sec. 310. The conference agreement includes a provision dealing with the Reno Hydrogen Fuel Project. 

Sec. 311. The conference agreement includes a provision authorizing maximum percentages for laboratory directed research 

and development and plant- or site-directed research and development. 

Sec. 312. The conference agreement includes a provision dealing with the purchase of mineral rights at the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site. 

Sec. 313. The conference agreement includes a provision dealing with the Mixed Oxide Fuel Facility at the Savannah River Site. 

177 

Sec. 314. The conference agreement includes a provision authorizing the Secretary to barter, transfer or sell uranium. 

Sec. 315. The conference agreement includes a provision requiring non-federal matching funds for the Coralville, Iowa, project. 

The conference agreement deletes a provision proposed by the 

House relating to Laboratory Directed Research and Development 

(LDRD) and Plant Directed Research and Development (PDRD) activities. 

The conference agreement deletes a provision proposed by the 

House relating to LDRD and PDRD activities for project costs incurred as Indirect Costs by Major Facility Operating Contractors 

under OMB’s Federal Cost Accounting Standards (FAR Part 9900) 

or the Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. 

The conference agreement deletes a provision proposed by the 

House relating to laboratory directed research and development activities at Department of Energy laboratories on behalf of other 

Federal agencies. 

The conference agreement deletes a provision proposed by the 

House relating to price supports and loan guarantee programs. 

The conference agreement deletes a provision proposed by the 

House relating to the siting of a modern pit facility. 

The conference agreement deletes a provision proposed by the 

Senate relating to the Advanced Simulation Computing program. 

The conference agreement deletes a provision proposed by the 

Senate relating to eligibility of costs incurred by DOE contractors 

for LDRD, SDRD, and PDRD. 

The conference agreement deletes a provision proposed by the 

Senate relating to direct and indirect costs of LDRD, SDRD, and 

PDRD. 

The conference agreement deletes a provision proposed by the 

Senate relating to funding National Nuclear Security Administration Weapons Complex reforms. 

The conference agreement deletes a provision proposed by the 

Senate relating to fusion energy science. 

The conference agreement deletes a provision proposed by the 

Senate relating to retirement benefits for Rocky Flats site workers. 

The conference agreement deletes a provision proposed by the 

Senate relating to Savannah River National Laboratory eligibility 

for LDRD. 

CONFERENCE RECOMMENDATIONS

The conference agreement’s detailed funding recommendations 

for programs in Title III are contained in the following table. 

178 


Insert graphic folio 429/309 HR275.116
179 


Insert graphic folio 429/310 HR275.117
180 


Insert graphic folio 429/311 HR275.118
181 


Insert graphic folio 429/312 HR275.119
182 


Insert graphic folio 429/313 HR275.120
183 


Insert graphic folio 429/314 HR275.121
184 


Insert graphic folio 429/315 HR275.122
185 


Insert graphic folio 429/316 HR275.123
186 


Insert graphic folio 429/317 HR275.124
187 


Insert graphic folio 429/318 HR275.125
188 


Insert graphic folio 429/319 HR275.126
189 


Insert graphic folio 429/320 HR275.127
190 


Insert graphic folio 429/321 HR275.128
191 


Insert graphic folio 429/322 HR275.129
192 


Insert graphic folio 429/323 HR275.130
193 

TITLE IV 

INDEPENDENT AGENCIES 

APPALACHIAN REGIONAL COMMISSION

The conference agreement includes $66,472,000 for the Appalachian Regional Commission, instead of $38,500,000 as proposed 

by the House and $65,482,000 as proposed by the Senate. Within 

the funds provided, the conference agreement includes the following activities: 

Central West Virginia public water and wastewater facilities .......... $2,000,000 

Southern West Virginia public water and wastewater treatment facilities .................................................................................................. 2,000,000 

Scioto County, Ohio sanitary sewer pump station renovations and 

improvements ..................................................................................... 750,000 

Copeland low water bridge, Breathitt County, Kentucky .................. 1,800,000 

Watershed coordination activities, Athens, Meigs, Gallia, Lawrence 

and Scioto counties, Ohio .................................................................. 500,000 

Logan County, West Virginia flood warning system .......................... 305,000 

Perry County, Ohio, State Route 13 railroad crossing ....................... 500,000 

DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

The conference agreement provides $22,032,000 for the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB), the same as the request. 

The conferees support the mission of the DNFSB, notably the 

providing of advice and recommendations to the Secretary of Energy regarding public health and safety issues at the Department’s 

defense nuclear facilities. However, the conferees are concerned regarding DNFSB’s opinions on seismic criteria, especially the timing 

and emphasis to which these concerns have been communicated 

over the past two years to the Department. As recent as the October 17, 2005 letter from the DNFSB to the Secretary of Energy regarding the Hanford Waste Treatment Plant (WTP), DNFSB notes 

that ‘‘some important uncertainties remain’’, that can only be resolved by measurement under the WTP site—which will take up to 

two years. However, the DNFSB concludes in the same letter this 

does not ‘‘preclude continuing with the design and construction’’ of 

the facilities. The DNFSB cannot have it both ways. Such guidance 

leaves the Department vulnerable to continuing a multi-billion dollar project only to have DNFSB decide in two years that criteria 

must change again. The conferees remind the DNFSB of its authorizing legislation, 42 U.S.C. 2286a.(a)(5), which states, ‘‘In making 

its recommendations, the Board shall consider the technical and 

economic feasibility of implementing the recommended measures.’’

DELTA REGIONAL AUTHORITY

The conference agreement includes $12,000,000 for the Delta 

Regional Authority as proposed by the Senate instead of $6,000,000 

as proposed by the House. 

194 

DENALI COMMISSION

The conference agreement includes $50,000,000 for the Denali 

Commission, instead of $2,562,000 as proposed by the House and 

$60,000,000 as proposed by the Senate. 

The conferees acknowledge our country faces difficult fiscal circumstances. Hurricanes Katrina and Rita and the on-going war on 

terrorism have impacted the amount of federal funding available 

for the Denali Commission. The conferees expect the Denali Commission to continue to fund projects which provide: community 

showers and washeterias in villages with homes with no running 

water; multi-purpose community facilities; teacher housing in remote villages where there is limited housing available for teachers; 

facilities serving Native elders and senior citizens; and to fund 

projects which allow (1) the Rural Communications Service to provide broadcast facilities in communities with no television or radio 

station; (2) the Public Broadcasting Digital Distribution Network to 

link rural broadcasting facilities together to improve economies of 

scale, share programming, and reduce operating costs; and (3) rural 

public broadcasting facilities and equipment upgrades. Priority consideration should be given to the Juneau/Green’s Creek/Hoonah 

Intertie project; the Fire Island Transmission line project; the 

Humpback Creek Hydroelectric project; and the Falls Creek Hydroelectric project. The Denali Commission is instructed to prepare a 

report to be submitted to the Senate and House Appropriations 

Committees, which details how the fiscal year 2006 funds are to be 

allocated. The conferees request this report no later than July 1, 

2006. 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

The conference agreement provides $734,376,000 for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission salaries and expenses, an increase of 

$41,000,000 over the budget request. This amount is offset by estimated revenues of $617,182,000, resulting in a net appropriation of 

$117,194,000. The fee recovery is consistent with that authorized 

by Section 637 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (Public Law 109–

58). The recommendation includes $46,118,000 to be made available from the Nuclear Waste Fund to support the Department of 

Energy’s effort to develop a permanent geologic repository for spent 

nuclear fuel and high-level waste. This amount is reduced from the 

request because the appropriation for the repository program is reduced. 

The conferees provide an additional $21,000,000, as proposed 

by the House and Senate, to conduct site-specific assessments of 

spent fuel pools at reactor sites consistent with the recommendations of the National Academy of Sciences. The conferees also provide an additional $20,000,000, as proposed by the Senate, to support preparatory activities and pre-application consultations for expected combined license applications. 

The conferees are aware that the Energy Policy Act of 2005 

places additional responsibilities on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Funds to execute these additional responsibilities were not 

195 

included in the budget request and are not provided in this conference report. However, to the extent that the Commission may be 

able to execute some of these new responsibilities through the reprogramming of available fiscal year 2006 funds, the conferees encourage the Commission to submit promptly a reprogramming request to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations. 

The conferees direct the Commission to provide a report on the 

status of its licensing and regulatory activities on a quarterly basis. 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

The conference agreement includes $8,316,000 for the Office of 

the Inspector General in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. This 

amount is offset by revenues of $7,485,000, for a net appropriation 

of $831,000. 

NUCLEAR WASTE TECHNICAL REVIEW BOARD

The conference agreement provides $3,608,000 for the Nuclear 

Waste Technical Review Board, the same as the request. 

TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY

OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL

The conference agreement does not include the requested 

$9,000,000 to establish a Congressionally-funded Office of the Inspector General for the Tennessee Valley Authority. The conferees 

support continuation of the existing arrangement for funding this 

office. 

TITLE V—GENERAL PROVISIONS 

Sec. 501. The conference agreement includes language directing that none of the funds appropriated in this Act may be used 

in any way, directly or indirectly, to influence congressional action 

on any legislation or appropriation matters pending before Congress except to communicate with Members of Congress. 

Sec. 502. The conference agreement includes language regarding the transfer of funds made available in this Act to other departments or agencies of the federal government. 

The conference agreement does not include a provision proposed by the House regarding the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

The conference agreement does not include a provision proposed by the House dealing with the International Thermonuclear 

Experimental Reactor. 

The conference agreement does not include a provision proposed by the Senate regarding fully funded continuing contracts. 

196 


Insert graphic folio 429/330 HR275.131
197 


Insert graphic folio 429/331 HR275.132
198 


Insert graphic folio 429/332 HR275.133
199 

CONFERENCE TOTAL—WITH COMPARISONS

The total new budget (obligational) authority for the fiscal year 

2006 recommended by the Committee of Conference, with comparisons to the fiscal year 2005 amount, the 2006 budget estimates, 

and the House and Senate bills for 2006 follow: 

[In thousands of dollars] 

New budget (obligational) authority, fiscal year 2005 ........................ $31,166,027 

Budget estimates of new (obligational) authority, fiscal year 2006 29,730,600 

House bill, fiscal year 2006 ................................................................... 30,283,530 

Senate bill, fiscal year 2006 .................................................................. 31,763,050 

Conference agreement, fiscal year 2006 .............................................. 31,009,000 

Conference agreement compared with: 

New budget (obligational) authority, fiscal year 2005 ................ ¥157,027 

Budget estimates of new (obligational) authority, fiscal year 

2006 .............................................................................................. +1,278,400 

House bill, fiscal year 2006 ............................................................ +725,470 

Senate bill, fiscal year 2006 ........................................................... ¥754,050 

DAVID L. HOBSON, 

RODNEY P. FRELINGHUYSEN, 

TOM LATHAM, 

ZACH WAMP, 

JO ANN EMERSON, 

JOHN DOOLITTLE, 

MICHAEL K. SIMPSON, 

DENNIS R. REHBERG, 

JERRY LEWIS, 

PETER J. VISCLOSKY, 

CHET EDWARDS, 

ED PASTOR, 

JAMES E. CLYBURN, 

MARION BERRY, 

DAVID R. OBEY, 

Managers on the Part of the House. 

PETE V. DOMENICI, 

THAD COCHRAN, 

MITCH MCCONNELL, 

ROBERT F. BENNETT, 

CONRAD BURNS, 

LARRY E. CRAIG, 

CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, 

KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, 

WAYNE ALLARD, 

HARRY REID, 

ROBERT C. BYRD, 

PATTY MURRAY, 

BYRON L. DORGAN, 

DIANNE FEINSTEIN, 

TIM JOHNSON, MARY L. LANDRIEU, 

DANIEL K. INOUYE, 

Managers on the Part of the Senate. 

Æ