99–790 

114TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 2d Session 114–532 

ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS 

BILL, 2017 

APRIL 26, 2016.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of 

the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. SIMPSON, from the Committee on Appropriations, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

together with 

ADDITIONAL VIEWS 

[To accompany H.R. 5055] 

The Committee on Appropriations submits the following report in 

explanation of the accompanying bill making appropriations for energy and water development for the fiscal year ending September 

30, 2017, and for other purposes. 

INDEX TO BILL AND REPORT 

Page Number 

Bill Report 

Introduction ................................................................................................ ........ 5 

I. Department of Defense—Civil: 2 10 

Corps of Engineers—Civil .................................................................. 2 10 

Investigations ............................................................................... 2 18 

Construction ................................................................................. 3 26 

Mississippi River and Tributaries .............................................. 5 32 

Operation and Maintenance ....................................................... 5 35 

Regulatory Program ..................................................................... 7 58 

Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program ................... 7 60 

Flood Control and Coastal Emergencies .................................... 7 60 

Expenses ....................................................................................... 8 61 

Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works) 9 62 

General Provisions .............................................................................. 9 62 

II. Department of the Interior: 14 63 

Central Utah Project ........................................................................... 14 63 

Central Utah Project Completion Account ................................ 14 63 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
2 

Page Number 

Bill Report 

Bureau of Reclamation: 15 63 

Water and Related Resources ..................................................... 15 64 

Central Valley Project Restoration Fund ................................... 17 75 

California Bay-Delta Restoration ............................................... 17 75 

Policy and Administration .......................................................... 18 76 

General Provisions ....................................................................... 19 76 

III. Department of Energy: 43 77 

Introduction ......................................................................................... ........ 77 

Committee Recommendations ............................................................ ........ 81 

Energy Programs: 43 82 

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy ................................. 43 82 

Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability ............................... 44 89 

Nuclear Energy ............................................................................ 44 90 

Fossil Energy Research and Development ................................. 45 93 

Office of Technology Transistions ............................................... 45 96 

Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves .................................. 46 97 

Strategic Petroleum Reserve ....................................................... 46 97 

Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve ........................................ 46 98 

Energy Information Administration ........................................... 46 98 

Non-Defense Environmental Cleanup ........................................ 47 98 

Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning 

Fund .......................................................................................... 47 99 

Science .......................................................................................... 48 100 

Nuclear Waste Disposal .............................................................. 48 105 

Advanced Research Projects Agency—Energy ........................... 49 105 

Title 17 Innovative Technology Loan Guarantee Program ...... 49 106 

Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Loan Program 50 106 

Departmental Administration ..................................................... 50 107 

Office of the Inspector General ................................................... 51 108 

Atomic Energy Defense Activities: 52 108 

National Nuclear Security Administration: 52 108 

Weapons Activities ....................................................................... 52 109 

Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation .............................................. 53 114 

Naval Reactors ............................................................................. 54 117 

Federal Salaries and Expenses ................................................... 54 117 

Environmental and Other Defense Activities: 54 118 

Defense Environmental Cleanup ................................................ 54 118 

Other Defense Activities ............................................................. 55 120 

Power Marketing Administrations: 56 120 

Bonneville Power Administration ............................................... 56 120 

Southeastern Power Administration .......................................... 56 121 

Southwestern Power Administration ......................................... 57 121 

Western Area Power Administration ......................................... 59 121 

Falcon and Amistad Operating and Maintenance Fund .......... 60 122 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ........................................... 62 123 

Committee Recommendation .............................................................. ........ 123 

General Provisions .............................................................................. 63 157 

IV. Independent Agencies: 70 157 

Appalachian Regional Commission ................................................... 70 157 

Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board ........................................... 71 158 

Delta Regional Authority ................................................................... 71 158 

Denali Commission ............................................................................. 71 159 

Northern Border Regional Commission ............................................ 72 159 

Southeast Crescent Regional Commission ........................................ 72 159 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission ....................................................... 72 159 

Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board ........................................... 75 162 

V. General Provisions: 77 163 

House of Representatives Report Requirements ..................................... ........ 163 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
3 

SUMMARY OF ESTIMATES AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee has considered budget estimates, which are contained in the Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 

2017. The following table summarizes appropriations for fiscal year 

2016, the budget estimates, and amounts recommended in the bill 

for fiscal year 2017. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
4 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 5 98534A.001
5 

INTRODUCTION 

The Energy and Water Development Appropriations bill for fiscal 

year 2017 totals $37,444,000,000, $259,010,000 above the amount 

appropriated in fiscal year 2016 and $167,815,000 above the President’s budget request. Total defense funding is $19,044,000,000, 

$184,010,000 above the amount appropriated in fiscal year 2016 

and $299,478,000 below the budget request. Total non-defense 

funding is $18,400,000,000, $75,000,000 above the amount appropriated in fiscal year 2016 and $467,293,000 above the budget request. 

Title I of the bill provides $6,089,330,000 for the Civil Works programs of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, $100,330,000 above 

fiscal year 2016 and $1,469,330,000 above the budget request. 

Total funding for activities eligible for reimbursement from the 

Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund is estimated at $1,263,000,000, 

which is the same as fiscal year 2016 and $312,000,000 above the 

budget request. The bill makes use of all estimated annual revenues from the Inland Waterways Trust Fund. 

Title II provides $1,144,578,000 for the Department of the Interior and the Bureau of Reclamation, $130,422,000 below fiscal year 

2016 and $32,819,000 above the budget request. The Committee 

recommends $1,133,578,000 for the Bureau of Reclamation, 

$131,422,000 below fiscal year 2016 and $27,419,000 above the 

budget request. The Committee recommends $11,000,000 for the 

Central Utah Project, $1,000,000 above fiscal year 2016 and 

$5,400,000 above the budget request. 

Title III provides $29,962,889,000 for the Department of Energy, 

$245,611,000 above fiscal year 2016 and $1,541,014,000 below the 

budget request. Funding for the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), which includes nuclear weapons activities, defense nuclear nonproliferation, naval reactors, and federal salaries 

and expenses, is $12,853,570,000, $327,058,000 above fiscal year 

2016 and $22,030,000 below the budget request. 

Funding for energy programs within the Department of Energy, 

which includes basic science research and the applied energy programs, is $11,082,635,000, $56,030,000 above fiscal year 2016 and 

$1,256,796,000 below the budget request. The Committee recommends $5,400,000,000 for the Office of Science, $1,825,000,000 

for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy; $1,011,616,000 for 

Nuclear Energy; $645,000,000 for Fossil Energy; and $305,889,000 

for the Advanced Research Projects Agency—Energy. 

Environmental management activities—non-defense environmental cleanup, uranium enrichment decontamination and decommissioning, and defense environmental cleanup—are funded at 

$6,152,235,000, $66,256,000 below fiscal year 2016 and 

$543,385,000 above the budget request. 

Funding for the Power Marketing Administrations is provided at 

the requested levels. 

Title IV provides $363,203,000 for several Independent Agencies, 

$21,491,000 above fiscal year 2016 and $51,580,000 above the 

budget request. Net funding for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is $149,268,000, $32,132,000 above fiscal year 2016 and 

$30,266,000 above the budget request. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
6 

OVERVIEW OF THE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation continues the strong investments in American infrastructure contained in the fiscal year 2016 

Act. The recommendation rejects the Administration’s ill-considered request to cut approximately $1,153,000,000 from critical 

Corps efforts to keep the nation’s rivers and ports dredged and to 

protect farmland and cities from flooding. Such a reduction would 

have a detrimental impact on the nation’s economic competitiveness and defenses against flooding. The Committee strongly encourages the Administration to request a fiscal year 2018 budget 

that recognizes and supports these critical missions of the Corps. 

The recommendation also includes significant support to ensure 

the short- and long-term supply of affordable, clean energy and the 

stability of the nation’s electrical infrastructure. This portfolio 

builds upon this country’s significant fossil, nuclear, and renewable 

energy resources to strengthen American energy independence. 

NATIONAL DEFENSE PROGRAMS

As in previous years, the Committee considers the national defense programs run by the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) to be the Department of Energy’s top priority. The recommendation strongly supports the Department’s proposals to 

modernize the nuclear weapons stockpile, increase investment in 

the NNSA’s infrastructure, prevent the proliferation of nuclear materials, and provide for the needs of the naval nuclear propulsion 

program. 

INVESTMENTS IN INFRASTRUCTURE

The water resource infrastructure funded by the recommendation 

is a critical component of ensuring a robust national economy and 

of supporting American competitiveness in international markets. 

The Corps is responsible for keeping our federal waterways open 

for business. The Corps also has been instrumental in reducing the 

risk of flooding for public safety, businesses, and much of this country’s food-producing lands. The Bureau of Reclamation supplies reliable water to approximately ten percent of this country’s population and to much of its fertile agricultural lands. Both agencies 

make significant contributions to national electricity production 

through hydropower facilities. 

The U.S. marine transportation industry supports 

$2,000,000,000,000 in commerce and creates employment for more 

than 13 million people. As the agency responsible for our nation’s 

federal waterways, the Corps maintains 1,067 ports and 25,000 

miles of commercial channels serving 40 states. The maintenance 

of these commercial waterways is directly tied to the ability of this 

country to ship its manufactured and bulk products, as well as to 

compete with the ports of neighboring countries for the business of 

ships arriving from around the world. These waterways handled 

foreign commerce valued at more than $1,774,000,000,000 in 2012 

alone. As a primary supporter of America’s waterway infrastructure, the Corps is ensuring that the nation has the tools to maintain a competitive edge in the global market. This recommendation 

makes key changes to the budget request to ensure that the Corps 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
7 

has the necessary tools to continue to support America’s shipping 

infrastructure. 

The flood protection infrastructure that the Corps builds or 

maintains reduces the risk of flooding to people, businesses, and 

other public infrastructure investments. In fact, Corps projects prevented damages of $14,800,000,000 in 2014 alone. Between 1928 

and 2014, each inflation-adjusted dollar invested in these projects 

prevented $7.95 in damages. The properties and investments protected by the Corps infrastructure would often be flooded without 

that infrastructure, destroying homes, businesses, and many valuable acres of cropland. 

The Bureau of Reclamation’s water infrastructure is a critical 

component of the agricultural productivity of this country. These 

facilities deliver water to one of every five western farmers resulting in approximately 10 million acres of irrigated land that produces 60 percent of the nation’s vegetables and 25 percent of its 

fruits and nuts. Additionally, these facilities deliver water to more 

than 31 million people for municipal, rural, and industrial uses. 

Without these dams and water supply facilities, American agricultural producers in the West would not be able to access reliable, 

safe water for their families and their businesses and many municipal and industrial users would face critical water shortages. 

The Corps and Reclamation are the nation’s largest and second 

largest producers of hydropower, respectively. Combined these federal hydropower facilities generate more than 112 billion kilowatthours, enough to power more than 10 million homes, annually. 

Gross revenues from the sale of this power reach nearly 

$6,000,000,000 annually. 

NATIONAL ENERGY POLICY

In 2012 the President unveiled an ‘‘all of the above’’ energy strategy designed to take advantage and utilize all sources of Americanmade energy. Since that time, each budget request has proposed increased funding for energy efficiency and renewable energy at the 

expense of more stable energy sources. While the American energy 

market has experienced production breakthroughs for every energy 

generation source, the budget request has continued its focus on 

those that provide only a fraction of the energy produced in this 

country. Fossil and nuclear sources provide 87 percent of the electricity generation in this nation. They will continue to provide the 

majority of the nation’s energy needs in the future. A budget request that fails to provide adequate funding for all energy sources 

within the nation’s energy portfolio does not represent a fair ‘‘all 

of the above’’ approach. The Administration’s severe regulations on 

carbon pollution from existing and new fossil-fueled electric power 

plants only further the inconsistencies in the budget request. 

The Committee notes that the fiscal year 2017 budget request 

also utilized a large amount of prior-year balances as an offset to 

the Fossil Energy Research and Development account. The Committee rejects this budgetary gimmick. 

A realistic national energy policy provides resources to ensure 

the nation can efficiently and safely utilize its abundant fossil resources while investing in research and development to advance 

technological breakthroughs in renewable resources. For any of 

these improvements to be successful, a reliable and resilient infraVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:33 Apr 27, 2016 Jkt 099790 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR532.XXX HR532

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
8 

structure must be the foundation. The nation’s electric grid was 

built to handle a different energy reality than the one we face 

today. Weather events, cyberattacks, and an increasing diversity of 

energy sources must be addressed to guarantee the continued operation of the electric grid. 

The Committee continues its long-standing support for the investment of taxpayer funds across the spectrum of all energy technologies. A national energy policy can only be successful if it maintains stability while planning for long-term strategic goals of energy security, independence, and prosperity for the nation. The 

Committee makes strategic choices, recommending a balanced approach to advancing research and development in all energy technologies and supporting a robust electric grid. 

COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT INITIATIVES

The highest priority mission of any federal agency is to be an effective steward of taxpayer dollars. Any waste, fraud, or abuse of 

taxpayer dollars is unacceptable. The Committee uses hearings, reviews by the Government Accountability Office, the Committee on 

Appropriations’ Surveys and Investigations staff, and its annual 

appropriations Act, including the accompanying report, to promote 

strong oversight of the agencies under its jurisdiction, with an emphasis on the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Bureau of Reclamation, and the Department of Energy. 

The recommendation continues the Committee’s responsibility to 

conduct in-depth oversight into all activities funded in this bill. 

Each agency shall designate a specific point of contact to track each 

report required in the bill and ensure its timely production and delivery. 

A summary of the major oversight efforts in the bill is provided 

below: 

Agency/Account Requirement 

Army Corps of Engineers .................................. Direction on seamless sequencing of IWTF projects 

Army Corps of Engineers .................................. Direction on Principles and Guidelines 

Army Corps of Engineers .................................. Guidance on ratings systems for allocating additional funds 

Army Corps of Engineers .................................. Direction on fiscal year 2017 work plan submission 

Army Corps of Engineers .................................. Direction on new starts 

Army Corps of Engineers .................................. Direction on work related to Asian Carp 

Army Corps of Engineers/Investigations ........... Guidance on allocating additional funding 

Army Corps of Engineers/Investigations ........... Report on Legacy Studies 

Army Corps of Engineers/Investigations ........... Briefing on flood control and wastewater treatment facilities 

Army Corps of Engineers/Construction ............. Guidance on allocating additional funding 

Army Corps of Engineers/Construction ............. Direction on management of the Continuing Authorities Program 

Army Corps of Engineers/Mississippi River and 

Tributaries.

Guidance on allocating additional funding 

Army Corps of Engineers/Mississippi River and 

Tributaries.

Direction on Mississippi River Commission costs 

Army Corps of Engineers/Operation and Maintenance.Report on Los Angeles County Drainage Area 

Army Corps of Engineers/Operation and Maintenance.Direction on Ririe Reservoir 

Army Corps of Engineers/Operation and Maintenance.Guidance on allocating additional funding 

Army Corps of Engineers/Regulatory ................ Guidance on congressional interpretation of Clean Water Act 

Army Corps of Engineers/Regulatory ................ Direction on implementation of a nationwide permit 

Army Corps of Engineers/FUSRAP ..................... Guidance on investigation and study at former Sylvania site 

Army Corps of Engineers/Expenses .................. Direction on public-private parnerships 

Army Corps of Engineers/General Provisions ... Reprogramming requirements 

Army Corps of Engineers/General Provisions ... Restriction on use of continuing contracts 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
9 

Agency/Account Requirement 

Army Corps of Engineers/General Provisions ... Restriction on changing certain Clean Water Act definitions 

Army Corps of Engineers/General Provisions ... Restriction on revising federal jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act 

Army Corps of Engineers/General Provisions ... Restriction on requiring permits for the discharge of dredged or fill material for certain agricultural activities 

Bureau of Reclamation/Water and Related Resources.Direction on Ririe Reservoir 

Bureau of Reclamation/Water and Related Resources.Direction on Mni Wiconi Project 

Bureau of Reclamation/Water and Related Resources.Guidance on allocating additional funding 

Bureau of Reclamation/Policy and Administration.Brief on status of analyses related to buried metallic water pipe 

Bureau of Reclamation/General Provisions ...... Reprogramming requirements 

Department of Energy ....................................... Guidance on reprorgramming of funds 

Department of Energy ....................................... Report on indirect laboratory costs 

Department of Energy ....................................... Report on alleviation of poverty 

Department of Energy ....................................... Direction on workplace diversity 

Department of Energy ....................................... Guidance on Administration’s Yucca Mountain policy 

Department of Energy ....................................... Guidance on inclusion of centers in future budget justifications 

Department of Energy ....................................... Direction on educational activities 

Department of Energy/Energy Efficiency .......... Direction on assistance to Puerto Rico 

Department of Energy/Energy Efficiency .......... Report on hydrogen infrastructure 

Department of Energy/Energy Efficiency .......... Direction on hydrokinetic power funding allocations 

Department of Energy/Energy Efficiency .......... Direction on additional CEMI Institutes 

Department of Energy/Energy Efficiency .......... Direction on building energy codes 

Department of Energy/Energy Efficiency .......... Direction on Weatherization Assistance Program 

Department of Energy/Fossil ............................. Direction on coal research and development 

Department of Energy/Fossil ............................. Direction on crude oil by rail 

Department of Energy/Fossil ............................. Report on ethane storage feasibility 

Department of Energy/Non-Defense Cleanup ... Direction on disposal of contaminated above-grade structures 

Department of Energy/UED&D .......................... Guidance on submission of legislative proposals 

Department of Energy/Science .......................... Report on Federal research public access policy 

Department of Energy/Science .......................... Report on fusion energy sciences 

Department of Energy/Science .......................... Report on ITER 

Department of Energy/Science .......................... Direction on Science Laboratories infrastructure 

Department of Energy/Nuclear Waste Disposal Direction on Yucca Mountain licensing process 

Department of Energy/Departmental Admin ..... Direction on renewable fuel standards 

Department of Energy/Weapons ........................ Guidance on outstanding recommendations for weapons surety 

Department of Energy/Weapons ........................ Guidance on definition of major items of equipment 

Department of Energy/Weapons ........................ Study on new radiographic capabilities 

Department of Energy/Weapons ........................ Direction on selected acquisiton reports 

Department of Energy/Weapons ........................ Report on expediting WEPAR project 

Department of Energy/Weapons ........................ Report on domestic uranium enrichment program 

Department of Energy/Weapons ........................ Direction on MSIPP funds 

Department of Energy/Weapons ........................ Direction on site-splits details for operating facilities 

Department of Energy/Weapons ........................ Direction on cost reporting for recapitilzation projects 

Department of Energy/Weapons ........................ Independent review of UPF project design 

Department of Energy/Weapons ........................ Direction on plutonium sub-projects 

Department of Energy/Weapons ........................ Direction on site-splits details for security operations 

Department of Energy/Nonproliferation ............ Guidance on new nonproliferation projects in Russia 

Department of Energy/Nonproliferation ............ Review of safety of MOX alternative 

Department of Energy/Nonproliferation ............ Roadmap of high performance research reactor R&D 

Department of Energy/Nonproliferation ............ Prohibition on use of MOX funds 

Department of Energy/Nonproliferation ............ Guidance on use of prior-year balances 

Department of Energy/Defense Environmental 

Cleanup.

Direction on cleanup project data sheets at Hanford 

Department of Energy/Defense Environmental 

Cleanup.

Direction on WIPP activities 

Department of Energy/Defense Environmental 

Cleanup.

Direction on use of prior-year balances 

Department of Energy/Western Area Power Administration.Briefing on increased staffing levels 

Department of Energy/General Provision .......... Reprogramming requirements 

Department of Energy/General Provision .......... Transfer authority specifications 

Department of Energy/General Provision .......... Prohibit funds for high hazard nuclear facilities construction unless cost 

estimates have been developed 

Department of Energy/General Provision .......... Prohibit funds approving CD–2 and CD–3 without separate cost estimates 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
10 

Agency/Account Requirement 

Department of Energy/General Provision .......... Restriction of certain activities in the Russian Federation 

Department of Energy/General Provision .......... Restriction of Strategic Petroleum Reserve activities and notification requirements 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission ....................... Establishment of new control point 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission ....................... Requirement for joint management of salaries and expenses 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission ....................... Prohibition on terminating programs without Commissioner approval 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission ....................... Notification requirement for use of emergency functions 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission ....................... Direction on Yucca Mountain license application and funding needs 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission ....................... Direction on rulemaking process and activities 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission ....................... Direction on meeting subsequent license renewal applications 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission ....................... Report on comprehensive workforce review and strategic plan 

Independent Agencies/General Provision .......... Requirement for NRC to comply with Congressional requests 

Independent Agencies/General Provision .......... Reprogramming requirements for the NRC 

General Provision .............................................. Prohibition of funds to influence congressional action 

General Provision .............................................. Consolidation of transfer authorities 

General Provision .............................................. Prohibition of funds in contravention of Executive Order 12898 

General Provision .............................................. Prohibition of funds for computer networks that don’t block pornography 

General Provision .............................................. Prohibition of funds to close Yucca Mountain application process

General Provision .............................................. Prohibition of funds to further implement Executive Order 13547 

General Provision .............................................. Prohibition of funds to remove or close federally owned or operated dams 

TITLE I—CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CIVIL 

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CIVIL

INTRODUCTION

The Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act funds 

the Civil Works missions of the Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). 

This program is responsible for activities in support of coastal and 

inland navigation, flood and coastal storm damage reduction, environmental protection and restoration, hydropower, recreation, 

water supply, and disaster preparedness and response. The Corps 

also performs regulatory oversight of navigable waters. Approximately 23,000 civilians and almost 300 military personnel located 

in eight Division offices and 38 District offices work to carry out 

the Civil Works program. 

FISCAL YEAR 2017 BUDGET REQUEST OVERVIEW AND ANALYSIS

The fiscal year 2017 budget request for the Civil Works program 

of the Corps of Engineers is $4,620,000,000, a decrease of 

$1,369,000,000 (¥23%) from fiscal year 2016. Each of the four 

main project-based accounts would see a sharp decrease under the 

budget request. The Construction account would see the largest 

dollar reduction (¥$772,250,000) and largest percentage reduction 

(¥41%). The Investigations, Mississippi River and Tributaries, and 

Operation and Maintenance accounts are reduced by 30, 36, and 14 

percent, respectively. 

Once again the Administration’s claims to understand the importance of infrastructure ring hollow when it comes to water resource 

infrastructure investments. In fact, if enacted, the budget request 

would represent the lowest level of funding for the Civil Works program since fiscal year 2004. Under the budget request, funding for 

both navigation and flood and storm damage reduction—the Committee’s two highest priorities for the Corps’ Civil Works program— 

is decreased significantly (¥26 and ¥28 percent, respectively). 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
11 

Within the navigation mission area, the budget request proposes to 

reduce funding for activities eligible for reimbursement from the 

Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund by $312,000,000 (¥25%) from fiscal year 2016. Capital improvements funded in part from the Inland Waterways Trust Fund are reduced by $178,600,000 (¥44%) 

from fiscal year 2016. Funding for flood and storm damage reduction activities at each stage of the process—studies, construction, 

and operation and maintenance—would be reduced below fiscal 

year 2016 if the budget request were enacted. 

Once again, however, the Committee rejects the low priority 

placed on infrastructure in the budget request. Instead, the Committee provides a total of $1,469,330,000 above the budget request, 

of which $1,326,049,000 is for additional investments in navigation 

and flood and storm damage reduction improvements. 

DEEP DRAFT NAVIGATION

The Committee remains mindful of the evolving infrastructure 

needs of the nation’s ports. Meeting these needs—including deeper 

drafts to accommodate the move towards larger ships—will be essential if the nation is to remain competitive in international markets and to continue advancing economic development and job creation domestically. 

Investigations and construction of port projects, including the 

deepening of existing projects, are cost-shared between the federal 

government and non-federal sponsors, often local or regional port 

authorities. The operation and maintenance of these projects are 

federal responsibilities and are funded as reimbursements from the 

Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund (HMTF), which is supported by 

an ad valorem tax on the value of imported and domestic cargo. 

Expenditures from the trust fund are subject to annual appropriations. The balance in the HMTF at the beginning of fiscal year 

2017 is estimated to be more than $9,000,000,000. 

The Water Resources Reform and Development Act (WRRDA) of 

2014 included target annual appropriations levels for use of HMTF 

receipts. The Committee remains committed to providing the maximum practicable amount of funding for HMTF-reimbursable activities consistent with annual allocations and after evaluating 

funding requirements for other priority activities within the Civil 

Works program. 

For fiscal year 2017, the Committee provides an estimated $1,263,000,000 for HMTF-related activities, the same as fiscal year 

2016, $312,000,000 above the budget request, and $122,000,000 

above the WRRDA target. This funding should allow the Corps to 

make significant progress on the backlog of dredging needs. 

INLAND WATERWAYS SYSTEM

The nation’s inland waterways system—consisting of approximately 12,000 miles of commercially navigable channels and 236 

lock chambers—also is essential to supporting the national economy. Freight transported on the inland waterways system includes 

a significant portion of the nation’s grain exports, domestic petroleum and petroleum products, and coal used in electricity generation. Much of the physical infrastructure of the system is aging, 

however, and in need of improvements. For example, commercial 

navigation locks typically have a design life of 50 years, yet nearly 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
12 

60 percent of these locks in the United States are more than 50 

years old, with the average age at almost 60 years old. 

Capital improvements to the inland waterways system generally 

are funded 50 percent from the General Treasury and 50 percent 

from the Inland Waterways Trust Fund (IWTF), while operation 

and maintenance costs are funded 100 percent from the General 

Treasury. The IWTF is supported by a tax on barge fuel. 

In recent years, the increasing rehabilitation and reconstruction 

needs and the escalating costs of those projects have far outstripped available revenues in the IWTF. Two statutory changes 

enacted in fiscal year 2015, however, will lead to the availability 

of additional revenues to stand as the required cost-share for some 

additional work on the inland waterways system. These changes 

were the reduction in the portion of the costs of the Olmsted Locks 

and Dam project that is to be derived from the IWTF to 15 percent 

and the increase in the fuel tax to $0.29 per gallon from $0.20 per 

gallon. 

The Corps is directed to take the preparatory steps necessary to 

ensure that new construction projects can be initiated as soon as 

can be supported under the larger capital program (i.e., as ongoing 

projects approach completion). For fiscal year 2017, the Committee 

provides appropriations making use of all estimated annual revenues from the IWTF. The final program level will depend on 

project-specific allocations to be made by the Corps, but will be at 

least $375,500,000. The Committee also allocates $48,000,000 

above the budget request for additional operation and maintenance 

activities on the inland waterways. The Committee rejects the Administration’s conceptual proposal to institute yet another fee on 

the inland waterways system and to require any operation and 

maintenance costs to be paid from the Inland Waterways Trust 

Fund. 

DAM SAFETY

It has long been the policy of both the Committee and the executive branch to give high priority to funding projects to address deficiencies at Dam Safety Action Classification (DSAC) I dams—those 

dams that pose the greatest risk to life and safety. The fiscal year 

2017 budget has been described as continuing that policy. The 

Committee has learned, however, that the Administration made a 

change in how that policy is carried out, yet did not communicate 

that change to the public or to the Committee. The budget request 

includes funding for DSAC I dams at ‘‘capability’’ funding levels. In 

previous years, ‘‘capability’’ was understood to mean the amount of 

funding that could reasonably be obligated within the fiscal year. 

This year, however, the Administration has defined ‘‘capability’’ as 

the amount of funding that could be expended within the fiscal 

year. Contracts that could be issued later in the fiscal year will be 

put off until the following fiscal year. By making this definitional 

change, the Administration is choosing to delay completion of important public safety improvements. The Committee strongly encourages the Administration to revert to the previous definition of 

capability funding in future budget requests. At a minimum, however, the Committee expects the Administration to clearly communicate what its budget requests do, and do not, represent. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
13 

PRINCIPLES AND REQUIREMENTS

Concerns persist that the effort to update the Water Resources 

Principles and Guidelines did not proceed consistent with the language or intent of section 2031 of the Water Resources Development Act of 2007. No funds provided to the Corps of Engineers 

shall be used to develop or implement rules or guidance to support 

implementation of the final Principles and Requirements for Federal Investments in Water Resources released in March 2013 or the 

final Interagency Guidelines released in December 2014. The Corps 

shall continue to use the document dated March 10, 1983, and entitled ‘‘Economic and Environmental Principles and Guidelines for 

Water and Related Land Resources Implementation Studies’’ during the fiscal year period covered by the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act for 2017. 

FIVE YEAR COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING

Historically, the Committee has encouraged the Administration 

to provide five-year investment plans for all the agencies within 

the Energy and Water Development jurisdiction, particularly the 

Corps. The five-year plan should be based on realistic assumptions 

of project funding needs. It is the Committee’s expectation that 

once projects have been initiated, the Administration will request 

responsible annual funding levels for them through completion. 

The executive branch has traditionally been unwilling to project 

five-year horizons for projects it has not previously supported 

through the budget process. Comprehensive planning is important 

for understanding future requirements of projects that have been 

supported through the appropriations process, as well. While this 

unwillingness to have a dialogue regarding additional investment 

might be reasonable under circumstances where there is no likelihood of additional investment, the Congress consistently has supported additional investment in the nation’s water resource infrastructure. The uncertainty caused by year-to-year federal planning 

leaves too many non-federal sponsors unable to make informed decisions regarding local funding. 

It would be beneficial for the Congress, the Administration, and 

project partners to have a comprehensive plan to outline requirements for all projects that have received an appropriation to date 

or are proposed to begin receiving funding this year. The Committee continues to welcome a dialogue to reach a mutually-agreeable way to comprehensively plan for all initiated projects. 

The Committee notes that in fiscal year 2014 the Corps was directed to prepare a comprehensive estimate of the optimum 

timeline and funding requirements to complete each of the ongoing 

projects that received construction funding in any of fiscal years 

2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, or 2013, but were not slated by the Administration for construction funding in the fiscal year 2014 budget request. This report was to have been submitted not later than 90 

days after the enactment of the fiscal year 2014 Act. As of the writing of this report, the Committee still has not received this information. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
14 

FORMAT OF FUNDING PRIORITIES

Traditionally, the President requested and the Congress appropriated funds for the Civil Works program on a project-level basis. 

Taken together, however, these funding decisions indicated programmatic priorities and policy preferences. As with non-projectbased programs, the Congress at times disagreed with the priorities stated in the President’s budget request and made its priorities known in appropriations bills. Final federal government priorities were established in Acts passed by both chambers of the Congress and signed by the President. 

Since the 112th Congress, congressional earmarks, as defined in 

House Rule XXI, have been prohibited. That definition encompasses project-level funding not requested by the President. As a 

result, the Committee reviewed the historical format of appropriations for the Corps to see if there was a more transparent way to 

highlight programmatic priorities without abandoning congressional oversight responsibilities. The fiscal year 2012 Act included 

a modification to the format used in previous years, and that format is continued for fiscal year 2017. As in previous years, the 

Committee lists in report tables the studies, projects, and activities 

within each account requested by the President along with the 

Committee-recommended funding level. To advance its programmatic priorities, the Committee has included additional funding for certain categories of projects. Project-specific allocations 

within these categories will be determined by the Corps based on 

further direction provided in this report. 

ADDITIONAL FUNDING

The fiscal year 2017 budget request significantly underfunds the 

Civil Works program of the Corps of Engineers. The Committee, 

however, includes funding in addition to the budget request to ensure continued improvements to our national economy, public safety, and environmental health that result from water resources 

projects. This funding is for additional work that either was not included in the Administration’s request or was inadequately budgeted. The Corps again is directed to develop rating systems for use 

in evaluating studies and projects for allocation of the additional 

funding provided in this title. These evaluation systems may be, 

but are not required to be, individualized for each account, category, or subcategory. Each study and project eligible for funding 

shall be evaluated under the applicable ratings system. A study or 

project may not be excluded from evaluation for being ‘‘inconsistent 

with Administration policy.’’ The Corps retains complete control 

over the methodology of these ratings systems. The executive 

branch retains complete discretion over project-specific allocation 

decisions within the additional funds provided, subject to only the 

direction here and under the heading ‘‘Additional Funding’’ or ‘‘Additional Funding for Ongoing Work’’ within each of the Investigations, Construction, Mississippi River and Tributaries, and Operation and Maintenance accounts. 

The Administration is reminded that these funds are in addition 

to its budget request, and Administration budget metrics shall not 

be a reason to disqualify a study or project from being funded. It 

is expected that all of the additional funding provided will be alloVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:33 Apr 27, 2016 Jkt 099790 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR532.XXX HR532

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
15 

cated to specific programs, projects, or activities. The focus of the 

allocation process shall favor the obligation, rather than expenditure, of funds for work in fiscal year 2017. With the significant 

backlog of work in the Corps’ inventory, there is no reason for 

funds provided above the budget request to remain unallocated. 

A project or study shall be eligible for additional funding within 

the Investigations, Construction, and Mississippi River and Tributaries accounts if: (1) it has received funding, other than through 

a reprogramming, in at least one of the previous three fiscal years; 

(2) it was previously funded and could reach a significant milestone, complete a discrete element of work, or produce significant 

outputs in fiscal year 2017; or (3) as appropriate, it is selected as 

one of the new starts allowed in accordance with this Act and the 

additional direction provided below. None of the additional funding 

in any account may be used for any item where funding was specifically denied or for projects in the Continuing Authorities Program. Funds shall be allocated consistent with statutory cost share 

requirements. 

Funding associated with each category may be allocated to any 

eligible study or project, as appropriate, within that category; funding associated with each subcategory may be allocated only to eligible studies or projects, as appropriate, within that subcategory. The 

list of subcategories is not meant to be exhaustive. 

Work plan.—Not later than 60 days after the enactment of this 

Act, the Corps shall provide to the Committees on Appropriations 

of both Houses of Congress a work plan including the following information: (1) a detailed description of the ratings system(s) developed and used to evaluate studies and projects; (2) delineation of 

how these funds are to be allocated; (3) a summary of the work to 

be accomplished with each allocation, including phase of work; and 

(4) a list of all studies and projects that were considered eligible 

for funding but did not receive funding, including an explanation 

of whether the study or project could have used funds in fiscal year 

2017 and the specific reasons each study or project was considered 

as being less competitive for an allocation of funds. 

New Starts.—The recommendation includes up to six new study 

starts and four new construction starts to be distributed across the 

three main mission areas of the Corps. Of the new study starts, 

two shall be for navigation studies, two shall be for flood and storm 

damage reduction studies, one shall be for an additional navigation 

or flood and storm damage reduction study, and one shall be for 

an environmental restoration study. Of the new construction starts, 

one shall be for a navigation project, one shall be for a flood and 

storm damage reduction project, one shall be for an additional 

navigation or flood and storm damage reduction project, and one 

shall be for an environmental restoration project. No funding shall 

be used to initiate new studies, programs, projects, or activities in 

the Mississippi River and Tributaries or Operation and Maintenance accounts. 

The Corps is directed to propose a single group of new starts as 

a part of the work plan. The Corps may not change or substitute 

the new starts selected once the work plan has been provided to 

the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress. 

Each new start shall be funded from the appropriate additional 

funding line item. Any project for which the new start requireVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:33 Apr 27, 2016 Jkt 099790 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR532.XXX HR532

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
16 

ments are not met by the end of fiscal year 2017, or by the earlier 

date as specified, shall be treated as if the project had not been selected as a new start; such a project shall be required to compete 

again for new start funding in future years. Consideration of studies and projects for selection as new starts shall not be limited to 

only those proposed in the Administration’s budget request. As all 

new starts are to be chosen by the Corps, all shall be considered 

of equal importance, and the expectation is that future budget submissions will include appropriate funding for all new starts selected. 

The Committee is disappointed that the Administration continues to obfuscate its policies and guidelines regarding which 

studies and projects require new start designations. Therefore, the 

Committee must address several recurring categories. The Committee reiterates previous congressional direction that neither 

study nor construction activities related to individual projects authorized under section 1037 of WRRDA 2014 shall require a new 

start or new investment decision; these activities shall be considered ongoing work. No new start or new investment decision shall 

be required when moving from feasibility to preconstruction engineering and design (PED). A new start designation shall be required to initiate construction of individually-authorized projects 

funded within programmatic line items. No new start or new investment decision shall be required to initiate work on a separable 

element of a project when construction of one or more separable 

elements of that project was initiated previously; it shall be considered ongoing work. 

In addition to the priority factors used to allocate all additional 

funding provided in the Investigations account, the Corps should 

give careful consideration to the out-year budget impacts of the 

studies selected and to whether there appears to be an identifiable 

local sponsor that will be ready and able to provide, in a timely 

manner, the necessary cost share for the feasibility and PED 

phases. The Committee reminds the Corps that the flood and storm 

damage reduction mission area can include instances where nonfederal sponsors are seeking assistance with flood control and unauthorized discharges from permitted wastewater treatment facilities. 

In addition to the priority factors used to allocate all additional 

funding provided in the Construction account, the Corps also shall 

consider the out-year budget impacts of the selected new starts and 

the cost sharing sponsor’s ability and willingness to promptly provide the cash contribution (if any), as well as required lands, easements, rights-of-way, relocations, and disposal areas. When considering new construction starts, only those that can execute a project 

cost sharing agreement not later than August 31, 2017, shall be 

chosen. 

To ensure that the new construction starts are affordable and 

will not unduly delay completion of any ongoing projects, the Secretary is required to submit to the Committees on Appropriations 

of both Houses of Congress a realistic out-year budget scenario 

prior to issuing a work allowance for a new start. It is understood 

that specific budget decisions are made on an annual basis and 

that this scenario is neither a request for nor a guarantee of future 

funding for any project. Nonetheless, this scenario shall include an 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
17 

estimate of annual funding for each new start utilizing a realistic 

funding scenario through completion of the project, as well as the 

specific impacts of that estimated funding on the ability of the 

Corps to make continued progress on each previously funded construction project (including impacts to the optimum timeline and 

funding requirements of the ongoing projects) and on the ability to 

consider initiating new projects in the future. The scenario shall 

assume a Construction account funding level at the average of the 

past three budget requests. 

ASIAN CARP

The threat of Asian Carp to the Great Lakes remains a concern 

for the Committee as this species has the potential to do irreparable harm to both an important source of freshwater, the Great 

Lakes, while also harming the economies of nearby communities by 

driving away the tourism, recreation, and fishing industries. The 

Corps continues to play a critical role in preventing, controlling, 

and managing the threat of Asian carp. The Committee expects the 

Corps to expedite authorized actions related to Asian Carp, in particular the Great Lakes and Mississippi River Interbasin Study 

(GLMRIS) Brandon Road study. Further, the Corps is directed to 

notify the Committee of any changes to the planned work related 

to Asian Carp as well as any changes to the findings regarding the 

migration of the fish toward the Great Lakes. 

CONGRESSIONAL DIRECTION AND REPROGRAMMING

To ensure that the expenditure of funds in fiscal year 2017 is 

consistent with congressional direction, to minimize the movement 

of funds, and to improve overall budget execution, the bill carries 

a legislative provision outlining the circumstances under which the 

Corps may reprogram funds. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $6,089,330,000 for the Corps, 

$100,330,000 above fiscal year 2016 and $1,469,330,000 above the 

budget request. 

A table summarizing the fiscal year 2016 enacted appropriation, 

the fiscal year 2017 budget request, and the Committee-recommended levels is provided below: 

(Dollars in thousands) 

Account FY 2016 

enacted FY 2017 request Cmte. rec. 

Investigations .............................................................................................. $121,000 $85,000 $120,000 

Construction ................................................................................................ 1,862,250 1,090,000 1,945,580 

Mississippi River and tributaries ............................................................... 345,000 222,000 345,000 

Operation and maintenance ....................................................................... 3,137,000 2,705,000 3,157,000 

Regulatory program .................................................................................... 200,000 200,000 200,000 

FUSRAP ........................................................................................................ 112,000 103,000 103,000 

Flood control and coastal emergencies ...................................................... 28,000 30,000 34,000 

Expenses ..................................................................................................... 179,000 180,000 180,000 

Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works .................. 4,750 5,000 4,750 

TOTAL, Corps of Engineers—Civil ............................................ 5,989,000 4,620,000 6,089,330 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
18 

INVESTIGATIONS

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $121,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 85,000,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 120,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... ¥1,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ +35,000,000 

This appropriation funds studies to determine the need for, the 

engineering and economic feasibility of, and the environmental and 

social suitability of solutions to water and related land resource 

problems; preconstruction engineering and design; data collection; 

interagency coordination; and research. 

The budget request for this account and the approved Committee 

allowance are shown on the following table: 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
19 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 17 here 98534A.002
20 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 18 here 98534A.003
21 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 19 here 98534A.004
22 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 20 here 98534A.005
23 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 21 here 98534A.006
24 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 22 here 98534A.007
25 

San Francisquito Creek, California.—The Committee is aware of 

repeated delays with the San Francisquito Creek flood control feasibility study, eighteen years after a significant flood event. The 

Committee encourages the Corps to continue working with the nonfederal sponsor to proceed to a chief’s report as expeditiously as 

possible. The Committee also encourages natural resources agencies to be engaged early in the study process to avoid permitting 

delays. 

Chacon Creek, Texas.—The Corps has multiple authorities to provide technical assistance to non-federal entities. The Committee encourages the Corps to review these authorities to identify opportunities to help advance the Chacon Creek, Texas, study, for which 

the Corps executed a feasibility cost sharing agreement in 2004. 

Additional Funding.—The Committee expects the additional 

funding provided in this account to be allocated primarily to specific feasibility and PED phases, rather than to Remaining Items 

line items as has been the case in the past few work plans. The 

activities funded under Remaining Items address core agency competencies, which means the budget request should reflect sufficient 

funding. When allocating the additional funding provided in this 

account, the Corps shall consider giving priority to completing or 

accelerating ongoing studies or to initiating new studies that will 

enhance the nation’s economic development, job growth, and international competitiveness; are for projects located in areas that have 

suffered recent natural disasters; or are for projects to address 

legal requirements. While the additional funding is shown in the 

feasibility column, the Corps shall use these funds for additional 

work in both the feasibility and PED phases. The recommendation 

includes sufficient additional funding to undertake a significant 

amount of feasibility and PED work. The Administration is reminded that a project study is not complete until the PED phase 

is complete. 

Research and Development, Partnerships.—The Corps is an instrumental partner in controlling invasive aquatic species in our 

nation’s waterways, including the Columbia River Basin with 

twelve listed salmon and steelhead species and more than 

$3,000,000,000 of goods transported for delivery around the world. 

The Committee recognizes the economic and environmental benefits of the Columbia River Basin and urges the Corps to utilize 

local and regional research partners, as appropriate, to address this 

serious issue. 

Water Resources Priorities Study.—No funding shall be used for 

this study. 

National Flood Risk Management Program.—The recommendation includes funding above the budget request for additional work 

within the Silver Jackets program. 

Impacts on Oyster Reefs.—The Committee supports Corps efforts, 

when conducting or reviewing environmental assessments or environmental impact statements for navigation or coastal restoration 

projects in areas where oyster reefs exist, to consider water quality 

and salinity impacts on those reefs and, when appropriate, to mitigate any negative impacts. 

Legacy Studies.—The Committee is encouraged by the Corps’ 

work on multiple studies, termed Legacy Studies, which were rightly not required to transition to the new SMART planning process. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
26 

The Corps shall report to the Committees on Appropriations of 

both Houses of Congress not later than 60 days after the enactment of this Act with an update on all Legacy Studies and the current schedule to bring them to completion. 

Flood Control and Wastewater Treatment Facilities.—The Corps 

shall be prepared to brief the Committees on Appropriations of 

both Houses of Congress not later than 120 days after the enactment of this Act regarding activities to address concerns about 

flooding and wastewater treatment facilities. Specifically, the briefing shall include: 1) a list of all municipal entities that have sought 

assistance from the Corps since December 2000, and to include an 

application through the annual report process established under 

section 7001 of WRRDA 2014, regarding flood control issues and simultaneous discharges that are not authorized by the discharge 

permits under which the facilities operate; and 2) a discussion of 

Corps authorities, funding sources, and technical assistance programs available to help address each such situation. 

CONSTRUCTION

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $1,862,250,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 1,090,000,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 1,945,580,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... +83,330,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ +855,580,000 

This appropriation funds construction, major rehabilitation, and 

related activities for water resource projects whose principal purpose is to provide commercial navigation, flood and storm damage 

reduction, or aquatic ecosystem restoration benefits to the nation. 

Portions of this account are funded from the Harbor Maintenance 

Trust Fund and the Inland Waterways Trust Fund. 

The budget request for this account and the approved Committee 

allowance are shown on the following table: 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
27 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 26 here 98534A.008
28 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 27 here 98534A.009
29 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 28 here 98534A.010
30 

Success Dam, California.—In fiscal year 2016, the Committee 

raised the importance of the Corps moving expeditiously on a 

project to increase the reservoir capacity, primarily for flood control 

but also for irrigation water storage, given this project had been on 

hold for more than a decade as seismic and seepage concerns were 

addressed. The non-federal sponsors of this project continue to remain very supportive of implementing this project. The Committee 

notes that in 2016 and 2017, this project will undergo several important reviews by the Senior Oversight Group in the Corps in 

order to move ahead. The Committee commends the Corps for its 

work on enlarging the reservoir this past year and continues to 

urge the Corps to move ahead expeditiously to update and finalize 

all documents related to this project so the reservoir capacity enlargement can finally be completed. 

Herbert Hoover Dike, Florida.—The Herbert Hoover Dike, which 

surrounds Lake Okeechobee, reduces impacts from flooding as a result of high lake levels for a large area of south Florida. Since 

2007, the Corps has made an investment of over $500,000,000 to 

reduce the risk of catastrophic failure of the aging structure. Recent historic rainfall, however, has put additional pressure on the 

dike, and the Corps has been forced to release water to the east 

and west of the lake to avoid catastrophic results. The Committee 

recognizes such water releases have had both ecological and economic effects, further demonstrating the need for the Dike’s repair. 

The Committee encourages the Corps to continue appropriate work 

to improve the stability of the Dike. 

South Florida Ecosystem Restoration, Florida.—The Committee 

is encouraged that the Corps has placed a high priority on the Big 

Cypress/L–28 Modifications Project by placing it on the Integrated 

Delivery Schedule with a 2016 start date for SMART planning. The 

Committee urges the Corps to continue to move forward on the 

planning of this important project according to the Integrated Delivery Schedule time lines and to continue consultation with stakeholders, including the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida, 

throughout the planning for this project. 

McCook and Thornton Reservoirs, Illinois.—The Committee is 

disappointed by the Administration’s inexplicable decision to end 

funding for McCook Reservoir. The project clearly is a flood risk 

management project, as stated in its 1988 authorization and confirmed by previous Administration statements and budget requests. 

By failing to continue to budget for the project, the Administration 

is ignoring both congressional intent and its own past support for 

the project. Given the project is 75 percent complete and both 

Phase 1 and Phase 2 have been budgeted and funded in the past, 

the Committee is at a loss to understand why the Administration 

chose not to support the project to its completion. 

Additional Funding.—The recommendation includes additional 

funds for projects and activities to enhance the nation’s economic 

growth and international competitiveness. Of the additional funds 

provided in this account, the Corps shall allocate not less than 

$12,450,000 to projects with riverfront development components. Of 

the additional funding provided in this account for flood and storm 

damage reduction and flood control, the Corps shall allocate not 

less than $18,000,000 to additional nonstructural flood control 

projects. Of the additional funds provided in this account for flood 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
31 

and storm damage reduction, navigation, and other authorized 

project purposes, the Corps shall allocate not less than $5,000,000 

to authorized reimbursements for projects with executed project cooperation agreements and that have completed construction or 

where non-federal sponsors intend to use the funds for additional 

water resources development activities. Of the additional funding 

provided in this account for flood and storm damage reduction and 

flood control, the Corps shall allocate not less than $10,000,000 to 

continue construction of projects that include improvements to 

rainfall drainage systems that address flood damages. 

When allocating the additional funding provided in this account, 

the Corps is encouraged to evaluate authorized reimbursements in 

the same manner as if the projects were being evaluated for new 

or ongoing construction and shall consider giving priority to the following: 

1. the benefits of the funded work to the national economy; 

2. extent to which the work will enhance national, regional, 

or local economic development; 

3. number of jobs created directly by the funded activity; 

4. ability to obligate the funds allocated within the fiscal 

year, including consideration of the ability of the non-federal 

sponsor to provide any required cost share; 

5. ability to complete the project, separable element, or 

project phase with the funds allocated; 

6. for flood and storm damage reduction projects (including 

authorized nonstructural measures and periodic beach renourishments), 

a. population, economic activity, or public infrastructure 

at risk, as appropriate; and 

b. the severity of risk of flooding or the frequency with 

which an area has experienced flooding; 

7. for navigation projects, the number of jobs or level of economic activity to be supported by completion of the project, 

separable element, or project phase; 

8. for projects cost shared with the Inland Waterways Trust 

Fund (IWTF), the economic impact on the local, regional, and 

national economy if the project is not funded, as well as discrete elements of work that can be completed within the funding provided in this line item; 

9. for other authorized project purposes and environmental 

restoration or compliance projects, to include the beneficial use 

of dredged material; and 

10. for environmental infrastructure, projects with the greater economic impact, projects in rural communities, projects in 

counties or parishes with high poverty rates, and projects in financially distressed municipalities. 

The recommendation provides funds making use of all estimated 

annual revenues in the IWTF. The Corps shall allocate all funds 

provided in the IWTF Revenues line item along with the statutory 

cost share from funds provided in the Navigation line item prior to 

allocating the remainder of funds in the Navigation line item. Although the report prepared pursuant to section 2002(d) of the 

Water Resources Reform and Development Act (WRRDA) of 2014 

recently was submitted to the Congress, the Committee has not 

had sufficient time to date to review it. Therefore, when allocating 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
32 

the additional funding provided for projects cost shared with the 

IWTF, the Corps shall continue to use, as appropriate, the Inland 

Marine Transportation System (IMTS) Capital Projects Business 

Model, Final Report published on April 13, 2010, as the applicable 

20-year plan. 

Aquatic Plant Control Program.—Funding is provided for 

watercraft inspection stations and related monitoring, as authorized by section 1039 of WRRDA 2014. 

Continuing Authorities Program (CAP).—The Committee continues to support all sections of the Continuing Authorities Program. Funding is provided for eight CAP sections at a total of 

$36,000,000, an increase of $32,500,000 above the budget request, 

which proposed funding for only four sections. This program provides a useful tool for the Corps to undertake small localized 

projects without the lengthy study and authorization process typical of most larger Corps projects. The management of the Continuing Authorities Program should continue consistent with direction provided in previous fiscal years. 

MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $345,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 222,000,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 345,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... – – – 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ +123,000,000 

This appropriation funds planning, construction, and operation 

and maintenance activities associated with projects to reduce flood 

damage in the lower Mississippi River alluvial valley below Cape 

Girardeau, Missouri. 

The budget request for this account and the approved Committee 

allowance are shown on the following table: 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
33 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 32 here 98534A.011
34 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 33 here 98534A.012
35 

Lower Mississippi River Main Stem.—The budget request proposes to consolidate several activities across multiple states into 

one line item. The Committee does not support this change and instead continues to fund these activities as separate line items. 

Additional Funding for Ongoing Work.—When allocating the additional funding provided in this account, the Corps shall consider 

giving priority to completing or accelerating ongoing work that will 

enhance the nation’s economic development, job growth, and international competitiveness, or are for studies or projects located in 

areas that have suffered recent natural disasters. While this funding is shown under remaining items, the Corps shall use these 

funds in investigations, construction, and operation and maintenance, as applicable. 

Mississippi River Commission.—No funding is provided for this 

new line item. The Corps is directed to continue funding the costs 

of the commission from within the funds provided for activities 

within the Mississippi River and Tributaries project. 

Operation of Floodways.—The Mississippi River and Tributaries 

System, protecting the 36,000 square-mile Lower Mississippi River 

Valley, is designed to be operated as an integrated system. The 

Corps must operate all features, including floodways, in accordance 

with statutory authorizations, approved Water Control Plans, and 

implementing project Operations Plans. Additionally, for flood 

events in which floodways must be operated, the Secretary is 

strongly encouraged to identify and utilize all authorities and funding sources available to restore the floodway features to pre-event 

conditions and authorized configurations as quickly as possible. 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $3,137,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 2,705,000,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 3,157,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... +20,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ +452,000,000 

This appropriation funds operation, maintenance, and related activities at water resource projects the Corps operates and maintains. Work to be accomplished consists of dredging, repair, and operation of structures and other facilities as authorized in various 

River and Harbor, Flood Control, and Water Resources Development Acts. Related activities include aquatic plant control, monitoring of completed projects, removal of sunken vessels, and the 

collection of domestic, waterborne commerce statistics. Portions of 

this account are financed through the Harbor Maintenance Trust 

Fund. 

The budget request for this account and the approved Committee 

allowance are shown on the following table: 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
36 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 36 here 98534A.013
37 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 37 here 98534A.014
38 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 38 here 98534A.015
39 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 39 here 98534A.016
40 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 40 here 98534A.017
41 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 41 here 98534A.018
42 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 42 here 98534A.019
43 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 43 here 98534A.020
44 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 44 here 98534A.021
45 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 45 here 98534A.022
46 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 46 here 98534A.023
47 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 47 here 98534A.024
48 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 48 here 98534A.025
49 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 49 here 98534A.026
50 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 50 here 98534A.027
51 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 51 here 98534A.028
52 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 52 here 98534A.029
53 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 53 here 98534A.030
54 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 54 here 98534A.031
55 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 55 here 98534A.032
56 

The Dalles Lock and Dam, Washington and Oregon.—The Committee is aware of a Corps legal analysis that finds that a new tribal village can be constructed pursuant to section 204 of the Flood 

Control Act of 1950, authorizing construction of The Dalles Dam, 

because this authority has not yet been used to construct a new 

tribal village. The Corps is encouraged to continue efforts for the 

construction of a new tribal village at The Dalles Dam in consultation with affected Columbia River Tribes and the Bureau of Indian 

Affairs. 

Los Angeles County Drainage Area, California.—The Corps shall 

provide to the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of 

Congress not later than 120 days after the enactment of this Act 

a report detailing the outstanding maintenance and repair needs 

within the Corps-maintained portion of the LACDA system. The report shall also include identification of opportunities for local agency maintenance of the Corps-maintained portion of the LACDA system that could more effectively utilize budgeted funds in a manner 

that reduces flood risk and increases stormwater capture, which 

would provide a more sustainable local source of water. 

Ririe Reservoir, Idaho.—The Committee appreciates the cooperation to date of the Corps and the Bureau of Reclamation to allow 

limited increases in the amount of water carried over through the 

winter flood season without increasing flood risk. With the West recently experiencing significant drought, it is important to identify 

ways to carry over and store as much water as possible to meet dry 

year challenges. Water users are interested in holding additional 

winter water storage during dry years or until sufficient snow in 

the watershed has accumulated to protect the storage water supplies, but the potential paths forward are not clear. The Corps and 

Reclamation are directed to work together with the water users on 

assessing any funding requirements, process challenges to be addressed, an approximate schedule through implementation, any 

policy or statutory changes necessary, and to develop any other relevant information the water users would need to make an informed 

decision on whether and how they might wish to proceed. 

Additional Funding for Ongoing Work.—When allocating the additional funding provided in this account, the Corps shall consider 

giving priority to the following: 

1. ability to complete ongoing work maintaining authorized 

depths and widths of harbors and shipping channels, including 

where contaminated sediments are present; 

2. ability to address critical maintenance backlog; 

3. presence of the U.S. Coast Guard; 

4. extent to which the work will enhance national, regional, 

or local economic development, including domestic manufacturing capacity; 

5. extent to which the work will promote job growth or international competitiveness; 

6. number of jobs created directly by the funded activity; 

7. ability to obligate the funds allocated within the fiscal 

year; 

8. ability to complete the project, separable element, project 

phase, or useful increment of work within the funds allocated; 

9. the risk of imminent failure or closure of the facility; and 

10. for harbor maintenance activities, 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
57 

a. total tonnage handled; 

b. total exports; 

c. total imports; 

d. dollar value of cargo handled; 

e. energy infrastructure and national security needs 

served; 

f. designation as strategic seaports; 

g. lack of alternative means of freight movement; and 

h. savings over alternative means of freight movement. 

Additional funding provided for donor ports and energy transfer 

ports shall be allocated in accordance with section 2106 of the 

WRRDA. Of the funds made available for donor ports, 50 percent 

of such funds shall be allocated equally among eligible donor ports 

and 50 percent shall be allocated based on each eligible donor 

port’s percentage of the total Harbor Maintenance Tax revenues 

generated at such ports. 

Small, Remote, or Subsistence Navigation.—Concerns persist 

that the Administration’s criteria for navigation maintenance do 

not allow small, remote, or subsistence harbors and waterways to 

properly compete for scarce navigation maintenance funds. The 

Committee notes that the budget request for this category of 

projects has increased over the past few years and urges the Corps 

to continue this effort to provide a reasonable and equitable allocation under this account. 

Facility Protection.—Given increased concerns related to the 

threat posed by cyber attacks, the Corps shall be prepared to brief 

the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress not 

later than 120 days after the enactment of this Act regarding actions that have been taken and are planned by the Corps to deploy 

and maintain cyber security solutions capable of continuously monitoring, detecting, and mitigating cyber attacks directed against industrial control systems and command and control systems at 

Corps facilities. 

Monitoring of Completed Navigation Projects.—Funding in addition to the budget request is included to continue collaborative research with state agencies to evaluate the impact of reduced lock 

operations on endangered, threatened, and game fish species in inland waterways and effective mitigation methods to ensure the viability of impacted fishes. Additional funding is also provided to support the structural health monitoring program to facilitate research 

to maximize operations, enhance efficiency, and protect asset life 

through catastrophic failure mitigation. 

Water Operations Technical Support (WOTS).—Funding in addition to the budget request is included to continue research into atmospheric rivers first funded in fiscal year 2015. 

Emerging Harbor Projects.—The recommendation includes funding for individual projects defined as emerging harbor projects (in 

section 210(f)(2) of the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) 

of 1986) that exceeds the funding levels envisioned in section 

210(c)(3) and 210(d)(1)(B)(ii) of WRDA 1986. 

Great Lakes Navigation System.—The recommendation includes 

funding for individual projects within this System that exceeds the 

funding level envisioned in section 210(d)(1)(B)(ii) of WRDA 1986. 

Gulf Intracoastal Waterway (GIWW) Assessment.—Section 2008 

of WRRDA 2014 directed the Secretary to conduct an assessment 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
58 

of the operation and maintenance needs of the GIWW. The Corps 

is encouraged to include funding to conduct this assessment in future budget requests. 

Pipelines.—The Committee is concerned that there is a lack of information regarding existing oil, chemical, and gas pipelines beneath authorized navigation channels. In order to improve executing the nation’s maintenance responsibilities, the Committee encourages the Corps to work with partner agencies to examine ways 

to collect information on active and retired pipelines. 

Shoreline Management Policy.—The Committee is aware of concerns regarding the new shoreline management policy for Corps 

reservoirs within the South Atlantic Division. The Corps is encouraged to continue working with affected local communities and 

stakeholders to address these concerns, including the use of nonpotable water from reservoirs. 

REGULATORY PROGRAM

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $200,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 200,000,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 200,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... – – – 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ – – – 

This appropriation provides funds to administer laws pertaining 

to the regulation of activities affecting U.S. waters, including wetlands, in accordance with the Rivers and Harbors Appropriation 

Act of 1899, the Clean Water Act, and the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972. Appropriated funds are used 

to review and process permit applications, ensure compliance on 

permitted sites, protect important aquatic resources, and support 

watershed planning efforts in sensitive environmental areas in cooperation with states and local communities. 

The Committee understands that the Corps is imposing requirements on applicants for permits issued under section 404 of the 

Clean Water Act that are not mandated by established regulatory 

policy or guidance. Specifically, the Committee is concerned about 

reports that the Corps has not adhered to established deadlines 

throughout the permitting process and that the Corps has asked 

applicants to produce information and deliver products that are not 

the responsibility of the applicant. These practices are burdensome 

to applicants, add uncertainty to the permitting process, and often 

result in substantial loss of time, jobs, and capital. The Committee 

encourages the Corps to adhere to established regulatory policies 

and guidance with respect to permits issued under section 404 of 

the Clean Water Act and to refrain from imposing additional requirements on permit applicants. 

In fiscal year 2014 and again in fiscal years 2015 and 2016, the 

Committee raised a concern with the Corps’ changed interpretation 

of Clean Water Act requirements related to the identification of a 

specified end-user. Congress rejected the new interpretation. Unfortunately, the Committee continues to hear concerns on this issue. 

The Committee again directs the Corps to ensure that all field offices adhere in all instances to the interpretations directed by the 

Congress. The previous direction is repeated here for emphasis and 

clarity. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
59 

The Committee is aware of at least two recent instances in which 

local economic development organizations have applied for permits 

to prepare sites to attract new economic activity but the Corps has 

denied or otherwise frustrated those efforts. Although the local organizations have established precedent by providing several examples of where similar applications were approved, the Corps now 

claims its regulations require the identification of a specified enduser of a proposed development so it can review final design plans 

and other exact specifications of the proposed development in order 

to issue a permit. The Committee strongly rejects this new interpretation of Clean Water Act requirements. The Corps is not a 

local land-use planning agency, and the Clean Water Act provides 

neither the directive nor the authority for the Corps to assume 

such responsibilities. The Committee encourages the Corps to work 

with these permit applicants, and any others with similar applications, to reach a better balance between allowing desperately needed economic development while still safeguarding important environmental resources. 

Public Safety Projects.—The Committee continues to hear that 

public safety infrastructure projects have been delayed due to excessive and repeated reviews. Many communities depend on these 

projects to protect their residents from natural disasters. Considering the risk to life and other damages that these disasters inflict 

upon communities, it is in the public interest to have local governments mitigate for this harm. Therefore, the Committee encourages 

the Corps to give the public safety aspects of a project sufficient 

and appropriate consideration when reviewing permit applications. 

Shellfish Aquaculture Activities.—The Committee is concerned 

that, for the past decade, the Seattle District’s implementation of 

Nationwide Permit (NWP) 48 has been ineffective. The shellfish industry is a critical economic driver in Washington State, and the 

Seattle District has an obligation to issue permits in a timely and 

transparent manner. Currently, a consultation under section 7 of 

the Endangered Species Act is underway between the Corps and 

relevant resource agencies; this programmatic consultation is intended to cover the majority of shellfish activities for a period of 

up to 20 years. The Committee expects the Corps to process all 

pending requests for verification under NWP 48 as soon as possible 

following resolution of the consultation process. The Corps is directed to notify the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses 

of Congress once the current consultation concludes and to provide 

thereafter monthly updates on the status of processing pending 

permits. Additionally, the Corps is directed to develop a communication protocol that clearly outlines how permittees will be consulted during development of the Corps’ programming permitting 

requirements for Washington State. 

Programmatic Consultations.—The Committee strongly supports 

efforts to reduce the amount of time it takes to process permit applications. Programmatic consultations, sometimes called Standard 

Local Operating Procedures for Endangered Species, can be particularly helpful, especially in regions like the Seattle District. The 

Committee encourages the Corps to continue exploring additional 

ways to improve the efficiency of the permit review process. 

Export Terminals.—The Committee encourages the Corps to complete environmental review for export terminal projects as expediVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:33 Apr 27, 2016 Jkt 099790 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR532.XXX HR532

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
60 

tiously as possible, in a transparent manner, and in a reasonable 

timeframe. In addition, the Committee directs the Corps to thoroughly consult with the Secretary of the Interior, and all affected 

tribal nations regarding the environmental and economic impacts 

as well as treaty rights of all Tribes affected by export terminal 

projects undergoing environmental review. 

FORMERLY UTILIZED SITES REMEDIAL ACTION PROGRAM

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $112,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 103,000,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 103,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... ¥9,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ – – – 

This appropriation funds the cleanup of certain low-level radioactive materials and mixed wastes located at sites contaminated as 

a result of the nation’s early efforts to develop atomic weapons. 

The Congress transferred the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial 

Action Program (FUSRAP) from the Department of Energy to the 

Corps in fiscal year 1998. In appropriating FUSRAP funds to the 

Corps, the Committee intended to transfer only the responsibility 

for administration and execution of cleanup activities at FUSRAP 

sites where the Department had not completed cleanup. The Committee did not transfer to the Corps ownership of and accountability for real property interests, which remain with the Department. The Committee expects the Department to continue to provide its institutional knowledge and expertise to ensure the success 

of this program and to serve the nation and the affected communities. 

The Committee continues to support the prioritization of sites, 

especially those that are nearing completion. Within the funds provided in accordance with the budget request, the Corps is directed 

to complete the Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study of the 

former Sylvania nuclear fuel site at Hicksville, New York, and, as 

appropriate, to proceed expeditiously to a Record of Decision and 

initiation of any necessary remediation in accordance with the 

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). 

FLOOD CONTROL AND COASTAL EMERGENCIES

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $28,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 30,000,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 34,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... +6,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ +4,000,000 

This appropriation funds planning, training, and other measures 

that ensure the readiness of the Corps to respond to floods, hurricanes, and other natural disasters, and to support emergency operations in response to such natural disasters, including advance 

measures, flood fighting, emergency operations, the provision of potable water on an emergency basis, and the repair of certain flood 

and storm damage reduction projects. 

Accurate information can reduce the time necessary to respond 

to storm damages in regions subject to significant erosion. The 

Committee understands that it is Corps practice to maintain mulVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:33 Apr 27, 2016 Jkt 099790 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR532.XXX HR532

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
61 

tiple options from which to draw borrow for periodic renourishment 

of shore protection projects. The Committee supports this practice 

and encourages the Corps to continue exploring ways to reduce response times, as appropriate. 

EXPENSES

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $179,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 180,000,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 180,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... +1,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ – – – 

This appropriation funds the executive direction and management of the Office of the Chief of Engineers, the Division Offices, 

and certain research and statistical functions of the Corps. 

Public-Private Partnerships.—As discussed in fiscal year 2016, 

there is strong support among many Members of the Congress and 

within the senior leadership of the Corps for public-private partnerships (P3). These arrangements have the potential to be project delivery tools to help sustain the performance of existing infrastructure and construct new infrastructure more quickly. Unfortunately, 

the Committee is concerned that the Administration’s actions to 

date will serve to undermine, rather than promote, the use of P3s. 

For instance, the Administration selected a P3 project as one of its 

fiscal year 2016 new starts, yet did not include funding for this 

project in its fiscal year 2017 budget request, claiming the project 

did not meet budget criteria. Without a clear signal from the federal government that it will honor its commitments under a P3 arrangement, it is unlikely that communities or private investors will 

put their resources at risk with a P3 arrangement. 

More broadly, the Committee is concerned that the Corps is attempting to develop individual, project-specific P3 arrangements, 

rather than developing the policy by which such arrangements, developed by project stakeholders and private investors, will be evaluated. The Committee believes that this program will generate 

stronger interest and allow all interested non-federal sponsors 

equal opportunity to develop P3 proposals for the Corps to review 

under established guidelines. An established policy would also ensure that selected projects will meet budget criteria. 

It was for these reasons that the Congress, in fiscal year 2016, 

directed the Corps to develop a policy on how proposals for publicprivate partnerships will be considered by the Corps and how these 

partnerships will be incorporated into the budget policy. The Committee is unaware of any work the Corps has done to comply with 

this direction. Therefore, due to the concerns detailed above and 

until such time as a comprehensive policy is established and provided to the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress, the Corps shall discontinue all work on project-specific public-private partnerships beyond the P3 project selected as a new 

start in fiscal year 2016. 

WRRDA Section 4001.—Congress has made clear its intent that 

the Susquehanna, Delaware, and Potomac River Basin Commissions be supported, and the Committee urges the Administration to 

follow through on the direction provided in section 4001 of WRRDA 

2014 to budget accordingly. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
62 

OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE ARMY FOR CIVIL WORKS

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $4,750,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 5,000,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 4,750,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... – – – 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ ¥250,000 

The Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works oversees the 

Civil Works budget and policy, whereas the Corps’ executive direction and management of the Civil Works program are funded from 

the Expenses account. 

The recommendation includes legislative language restricting the 

availability of 75 percent of the funding provided in this account 

until such time as at least 95 percent of the additional funding provided in each account has been allocated to specific programs, 

projects, or activities. This restriction shall not affect the roles and 

responsibilities established in previous fiscal years of the Office of 

the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works, the Corps 

headquarters, the Corps field operating agencies, or any other executive branch agency. 

The Committee counts on a timely and accessible executive 

branch in the course of fulfilling its constitutional role in the appropriations process. The requesting and receiving of basic, factual 

information is vital in order to maintain a transparent and open 

governing process. The Committee recognizes that some discussions 

internal to the executive branch are pre-decisional in nature and, 

therefore, not subject to disclosure. However, the access to facts, 

figures, and statistics that inform these decisions are not subject to 

this same sensitivity and are critical to the budget process. The Administration needs to do more to ensure timely and complete responses to these inquiries. 

GENERAL PROVISIONS—CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CIVIL 

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

The bill continues a provision that prohibits the obligation or expenditure of funds through a reprogramming of funds in this title 

except in certain circumstances. 

The bill continues a provision prohibiting the use of funds in this 

Act to carry out any contract that commits funds beyond the 

amounts appropriated for that program, project, or activity. 

The bill continues a provision authorizing the transfer of funds 

to the Fish and Wildlife Service to mitigate for fisheries lost due 

to Corps of Engineers projects. 

The bill includes a provision regarding certain dredged material 

disposal activities. 

The bill includes a provision regarding acquisitions. 

The bill includes a provision regarding reallocations at a project. 

The bill includes a provision regarding a water supply storage 

contract. 

The bill makes permanent a provision prohibiting funds from 

being used to develop or implement changes to certain definitions 

for the purposes of the Clean Water Act. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
63 

The bill includes a provision prohibiting the use of funds to require permits for the discharge of dredged or fill material for certain agriculture activities. 

The bill includes a provision prohibiting funds from being used 

to implement revised guidance on determining jurisdiction under 

the Clean Water Act. 

The bill contains a provision allowing the possession of firearms 

at water resources development projects under certain circumstances. 

TITLE II—DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

CENTRAL UTAH PROJECT

CENTRAL UTAH PROJECT COMPLETION ACCOUNT

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $10,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 5,600,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 11,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... +1,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ +5,400,000 

The Central Utah Project Completion Act (CUPCA) (Titles II–VI 

of P.L. 102–575) provides for the completion of the Central Utah 

Project by the Central Utah Water Conservancy District. The Act 

also authorizes the appropriation of funds for fish, wildlife, and 

recreation mitigation and conservation; establishes an account in 

the Treasury for the deposit of these funds and of other contributions for mitigation and conservation activities; and establishes a 

Utah Reclamation Mitigation and Conservation Commission to administer funds in that account. The Act further assigns responsibilities for carrying out the Act to the Secretary of the Interior and 

prohibits delegation of those responsibilities to the Bureau of Reclamation. 

The Committee is disappointed that the Department’s fiscal year 

2017 CUPCA program request has once again reduced construction 

funding for the Utah Lake System pipeline project. The Committee 

remains committed to completing the Central Utah Project, which 

would enable initiation of repayment to the federal treasury. 

The Committee recommendation includes a total of $11,000,000 

for the Central Utah Project Completion Account, which includes 

$8,350,000 for Central Utah Project construction, $1,300,000 for 

transfer to the Utah Reclamation Mitigation and Conservation Account for use by the Utah Reclamation Mitigation and Conservation Commission, and $1,350,000 for necessary expenses of the Secretary of the Interior. 

BUREAU OF RECLAMATION

INTRODUCTION

The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) is to 

manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of 

the American public. Since its establishment by the Reclamation 

Act of 1902, the Bureau of Reclamation has developed water supply 

facilities that have contributed to sustained economic growth and 

an enhanced quality of life in the western states. Lands and comVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:33 Apr 27, 2016 Jkt 099790 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR532.XXX HR532

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
64 

munities served by Reclamation projects have been developed to 

meet agricultural, tribal, urban, and industrial needs. Reclamation 

continues to develop authorized facilities to store and convey new 

water supplies and is the largest supplier and manager of water in 

the 17 western states. Reclamation maintains 337 reservoirs with 

the capacity to store 245 million acre-feet of water. 

As Reclamation’s large impoundments and appurtenant facilities 

reach their design life, the projected cost of operating, maintaining, 

and rehabilitating Reclamation infrastructure continues to grow, 

yet Reclamation has not budgeted funding sufficient to implement 

a comprehensive program to reduce its maintenance backlog. At 

the same time, Reclamation is increasingly relied upon to provide 

water supply to federally-recognized Indian Tribes through water 

settlements, rural communities through its Title I Rural Water 

Program, and municipalities through its Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program. Balancing these competing priorities will 

be challenging and requires active participation and leadership on 

the part of Reclamation and its technical staff. 

FISCAL YEAR 2017 BUDGET REQUEST AND COMMITTEE

RECOMMENDATION

The fiscal year 2017 budget request for the Bureau of Reclamation totals $1,106,159,000. The Committee recommendation totals 

$1,133,578,000, $131,422,000 below fiscal year 2016 and 

$27,419,000 above the budget request. 

A table summarizing the fiscal year 2016 enacted appropriation, 

the fiscal year 2017 budget request, and the Committee recommendation is provided below: 

(Dollars in thousands) 

Account FY 2016 

enacted 

FY 2017 

request Cmte rec. 

Water and Related Resources ................................................................................ $1,118,972 $813,402 $982,972 

Central Valley Project Restoration Fund ................................................................. 49,528 55,606 55,606 

California Bay-Delta Restoration ............................................................................ 37,000 36,000 36,000 

Policy and Administration ....................................................................................... 59,500 59,000 59,000 

Indian Water Rights Settlements ........................................................................... – – – 106,151 – – – 

San Joaquin River Restoration Fund ...................................................................... – – – 36,000 – – – 

Total, Bureau of Reclamation ........................................................................ 1,265,000 1,106,159 1,133,578 

WATER AND RELATED RESOURCES

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $1,118,972,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 813,402,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 982,972,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... ¥136,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ +169,570,000 

The Water and Related Resources account supports the development, construction, management, and restoration of water and related natural resources in the 17 western states. The account includes funds for operating and maintaining existing facilities to obtain the greatest overall levels of benefits, to protect public safety, 

and to conduct studies on ways to improve the use of water and 

related natural resources. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
65 

The Committee recommendation includes in this account certain 

Indian Water Rights Settlements proposed for funding under a separate account in the President’s budget request. No funding is included for the San Joaquin River Restoration Fund, which the 

President’s request also proposed as a new separate account. Adjusted for this change in account structure, the recommendation is 

$27,419,000 above the budget request. 

The budget request for this account and the approved Committee 

allowance are shown on the following table: 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
66 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 66 98534A.033
67 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 67 98534A.034
68 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 68 98534A.035
69 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 69 98534A.036
70 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 70 98534A.037
71 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 71 98534A.038
72 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 72 98534A.039
73 

San Joaquin River Restoration Fund.—The budget request again 

proposes an account separate from the Water and Related Resources account for discretionary funding of San Joaquin River Restoration activities. As in past years, the Committee includes this 

line item within the Water and Related Resources account, although no funding is provided. 

Indian Water Rights Settlements.—The budget request again proposes a new appropriations account for certain Indian water rights 

settlements. As in prior fiscal years, however, the Committee includes funding for these settlements in the Water and Related Resources account. 

Central Valley Project, San Luis Unit, California.—The Committee is aware that Reclamation and the Western Area Power Administration are evaluating the possible construction of a transmission line to directly serve the San Luis Unit from the Central 

Valley Project system as an alternative to receiving service under 

the California Independent System Operator’s Tariff. The agencies 

are encouraged to continue to work together and with the affected 

Central Valley Project water contractors to ensure the most efficient and cost-effective process for implementation. 

Ririe Reservoir, Idaho.—The Committee appreciates the cooperation to date of the Corps and the Bureau of Reclamation to allow 

limited increases in the amount of water carried over through the 

winter flood season without increasing flood risk. With the West recently experiencing significant drought, it is important to identify 

ways to carry over and store as much water as possible to meet dry 

year challenges. Water users are interested in holding additional 

winter water storage during dry years or until sufficient snow in 

the watershed has accumulated to protect the storage water supplies, but the potential paths forward are not clear. The Corps and 

Reclamation are directed to work together with the water users on 

assessing any funding requirements, process challenges to be addressed, an approximate schedule through implementation, any 

policy or statutory changes necessary, and to develop any other relevant information the water users would need to make an informed 

decision on whether and how they might wish to proceed. 

Tualatin Project, Scoggins Dam, Oregon.—The Committee supports the budget request of $2,000,000 for Safety of Dams 

preconstruction activities at Scoggins Dam. Consistent with existing authorities, the Committee encourages Reclamation to evaluate 

alternatives, including new or supplementary works, to address 

dam safety modifications and additional benefits. Considering the 

high risk associated with Scoggins Dam, the Committee urges Reclamation to maintain its schedule to begin drafting the Modification Report for authorization to construct the recommended dam 

safety modifications in fiscal year 2017. The Committee has been 

told that a replacement structure downstream could significantly 

reduce project costs for both the federal government and local 

stakeholders. 

Mni Wiconi Project, South Dakota.—Reclamation is directed to 

continue working with the Tribes and relevant Federal agencies, 

such as the Department of Agriculture, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Indian Health Service, and the Department of Housing and Urban Development to coordinate use of all existing authorities and funding sources to finVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:33 Apr 27, 2016 Jkt 099790 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR532.XXX HR532

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
74 

ish needed community system upgrades and connections, as well as 

any transfers of those systems, as quickly as possible. The Administration is encouraged to include appropriate funding for upgrades 

in future budget requests. 

Yakima River Basin Water Enhancement Project Integrated Plan, 

Washington.—The Committee is aware of the Integrated Plan that 

has been developed by the Yakima River Basin Water Enhancement Project Working Group, including the Bureau of Reclamation, 

to address water storage and water supply needs for agriculture, 

fish, and municipalities within the Yakima River Basin in Central 

Washington. The Committee is supportive of the Plan and encourages the Bureau to move forward on implementing authorized components of the Plan. 

WaterSMART Program.—The Committee continues to focus on 

efforts to combat the drought situation in the Western U.S. and 

recognizes the important role the Commercial, Industrial and Institutional (CII) business sectors can have in water efficiency and conservation efforts. The Committee encourages the Bureau of Reclamation to continue prioritization of programs, including CII sector programs, that are the most cost effective in addressing water 

conservation needs. 

WaterSMART Program, Title XVI Water Reclamation/Reuse 

Projects.—The Committee has heard from numerous stakeholders 

who believe the program’s effectiveness could be enhanced through 

expanding the pool of projects eligible to compete for funding for 

planning, design, or construction activities. The Committee encourages Reclamation to develop and propose to the authorizing committees of both Houses of Congress recommendations for improvements, which may include programmatic changes and project-specific authorizations. 

Additional Funding for Water and Related Resources Work.—The 

recommendation includes funds in addition to the budget request 

for Water and Related Resources studies, projects, and activities. 

Priority in allocating these funds should be given to advance and 

complete ongoing work, including preconstruction activities and 

where environmental compliance has been completed; improve 

water supply reliability; improve water deliveries; enhance national, regional, or local economic development; promote job growth; 

advance tribal and nontribal water settlement studies and activities; or address critical backlog maintenance and rehabilitation activities. Not later than 45 days after the enactment of this Act, 

Reclamation shall provide to the Committees on Appropriations of 

both Houses of Congress a report delineating how these funds are 

to be distributed, in which phase the work is to be accomplished, 

and an explanation of the criteria and rankings used to justify each 

allocation. 

Aquifer Recharge.—The Committee is aware that many states 

are exploring new methods of recharging aquifers for increased 

water storage and drought mitigation. The Committee expects the 

Bureau of Reclamation to work closely with project beneficiaries to 

identify and resolve any barriers to aquifer recharge projects when 

appropriate. 

Sierra Nevada Forest Watershed.—The Committee is aware that 

the Bureau of Reclamation, the U.S. Forest Service, Stanislaus National Forests, and others partnered in fiscal year 2016 to initiate 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
75 

a multi-year study to generate new knowledge to quantitatively establish the co-benefits of forest management practices in the Sierra 

Nevada that could potentially generate water supply and other 

benefits to the Central Valley Project and the State Water Project. 

The Committee supports Reclamation’s continued participation, 

through the Western Watershed Enhancement Partnership program within the Resilient Infrastructure program as appropriate, 

in analysis of science-based fuels reductions that are mutually beneficial to national forest health and water supply yield and, if merited, recommendations for further congressional action. 

CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT RESTORATION FUND

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $49,528,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 55,606,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 55,606,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... +6,078,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ – – – 

This fund was established to carry out the provisions of the Central Valley Project Improvement Act and to provide funding for 

habitat restoration, improvement and acquisition, and other fish 

and wildlife restoration activities in the Central Valley area of 

California. Resources are derived from donations, revenues from 

voluntary water transfers and tiered water pricing, and Friant Division surcharges. The account also is financed through additional 

mitigation and restoration payments collected on an annual basis 

from project beneficiaries. 

Within available funds, the Committee provides funding for programs and activities according to the Administration’s request. The 

Committee notes that the decrease for this account in the budget 

request and recommendation is based on a three-year rolling average of collections, in accordance with the authorizing statute. 

Anadromous Fish Screen Program.—The Committee notes the 

progress being made to screen the high priority unscreened diversions on the Sacramento River under the Bureau of Reclamation’s 

Anadromous Fish Screen Program. The Committee encourages Reclamation to continue its focus on screening of the remaining high 

priority diversions from within funds made available under the 

Central Valley Project Restoration Fund in future budget requests. 

CALIFORNIA BAY-DELTA RESTORATION

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $37,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 36,000,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 36,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... ¥1,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ – – – 

The California Bay-Delta Restoration account funds the federal 

share of water supply and reliability improvements, ecosystem improvements, and other activities being developed for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and associated watersheds by a state 

and federal partnership (CALFED). Federal participation in this 

program was initially authorized in the California Bay-Delta Environmental and Water Security Act enacted in 1996. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
76 

POLICY AND ADMINISTRATION

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $59,500,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 59,000,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 59,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... ¥500,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ – – – 

The Policy and Administration account provides for the executive 

direction and management of all Reclamation activities, as performed by the Commissioner’s office in Washington, D.C.; the Technical Service Center in Denver, Colorado; and in five regional offices. The Denver and regional offices charge individual projects or 

activities for direct beneficial services and related administrative 

and technical costs. These charges are covered under other appropriations. 

Buried Metallic Water Pipe.—The Committee reiterates previous 

congressional direction that Reclamation shall not use Technical 

Memorandum 8140–CC 2004 1 (‘‘Corrosion Considerations for Buried Metallic Water Pipe’’) as the sole basis to deny funding or approval of a project or to disqualify any material from use in highly 

corrosive soils. The Committee is concerned with the length of time 

Reclamation is taking to comply with other directives to conduct an 

objective, independently peer-reviewed analysis of pipeline reliability standards and to contract with a Department of Energy national laboratory to develop performance data for zinc-coated ductile iron pipe applications in highly- or severely-corrosive soils. The 

analysis of pipeline reliability standards was first required in the 

fiscal year 2012 Act, yet Reclamation’s current completion date is 

estimated to be December 31, 2017—six years after enactment. It 

is the Committee’s understanding that Reclamation is still in the 

process of developing an agreement with the Department of Energy 

for the performance data work—putting at risk the laboratory’s 

ability to provide its findings and recommendations to the Committee by September 30, 2016, as directed. The Committee directs 

Reclamation to provide monthly briefings on the status of both 

study efforts, until each effort is completed. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISION

The bill includes an administrative provision allowing for the 

purchase of passenger motor vehicles. 

GENERAL PROVISIONS—DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

The bill continues a provision regarding the circumstances in 

which the Bureau of Reclamation may reprogram funds. 

The bill continues a provision regarding the San Luis Unit and 

Kesterson Reservoir in California. 

The bill includes a provision regarding completion of certain 

water storage feasibility studies. 

The bill includes a provision related to the Old and Middle River 

reverse flow operations in California. 

The bill includes a provision authorizing increased Old and Middle River reverse flows in California during certain times. 

The bill includes a provision regarding certain water rights and 

water supply deliveries in California. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
77 

The bill includes a provision prohibiting the use of funds for the 

San Joaquin River Restoration program. 

The bill includes a provision prohibiting the use of funds for 

instream flow purchases in California carried out by the Bureau of 

Reclamation at certain times. 

The bill includes a provision regarding water storage at New 

Melones reservoir. 

TITLE III—DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

INTRODUCTION 

Funds recommended in Title III provide for all Department of 

Energy (DOE) programs, including Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, Nuclear 

Energy, Fossil Energy Research and Development, Office of Technology Transitions, Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves, the 

Strategic Petroleum Reserve, the Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve, the Energy Information Administration, Non-Defense Environmental Cleanup, the Uranium Enrichment Decontamination 

and Decommissioning Fund, Science, Nuclear Waste Disposal, the 

Advanced Research Projects Agency—Energy, Innovative Technology Loan Guarantee Program, Advanced Technology Vehicle 

Manufacturing Loans Program, Departmental Administration, Office of the Inspector General, the National Nuclear Security Administration (Weapons Activities, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation, 

Naval Reactors, and Federal Salaries and Expenses), Defense Environmental Cleanup, Other Defense Activities, the Power Marketing 

Administrations, and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Department of Energy has requested a total budget of 

$31,503,903,000, as estimated by the Congressional Budget Office, 

in fiscal year 2017 to fund programs in its four primary mission 

areas: science, energy, environment, and national security. The Department of Energy budget request is $1,786,625,000 above fiscal 

year 2016. 

The Committee’s recommendation restructures the balance of the 

bill to ensure inherently federal responsibilities, such as national 

security, basic science activities, and environmental cleanup, are 

supported, while investing in long-term research to improve existing forms of energy production and to develop new and innovative 

forms of energy for the nation’s long-term energy independence and 

prosperity. 

CONGRESSIONAL DIRECTION

Article I, section 9 of the United States Constitution states ‘‘No 

money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in consequence of Appropriations made by law’’. 

The Committee continues the Department’s reprogramming authority in statute to ensure that the Department carries out its 

programs consistent with congressional direction. This reprogramming authority is established at the program, project, or activity 

level, whichever is the most specific included in the table detailing 

the Committee’s recommendation for the Department of Energy’s 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
78 

various accounts. The Committee also prohibits new starts through 

the use of reprogramming and includes other direction to improve 

public oversight of the Department’s actions. In addition, the recommendation continues a general provision specifying which transfer authorities may be used for accounts funded by this Act. 

FINANCIAL REPORTING AND MANAGEMENT

The Department is still not in full compliance with its statutory 

requirement to submit to Congress, at the time that the President’s 

budget request is submitted, a future-years energy program that 

covers the fiscal year of the budget submission and the four succeeding years, as directed in the fiscal year 2012 Act. In addition, 

the Department has an outstanding requirement from fiscal year 

2016 to submit a plan to become fully compliant with this requirement. 

Indirect Cost Reporting.—In the fiscal year 2014 Act, the Congress directed an independent review of the effectiveness of the national laboratories and provided several recommendations to improve the Department’s ability to meet current and future energy 

and national security challenges. The reviewing commission recommended that the Department provide greater transparency into 

laboratory indirect costs by generating an annual report on those 

costs. Such reporting, if used properly, has the ability to improve 

management efficiency through more rigorous analysis of indirect 

costs and enabling actions to better control costs. In order to meet 

these goals to improve efficiency and promote the transparency, accuracy, and completeness of costs incurred at its national laboratories, the Department is directed to provide to the Committees on 

Appropriations of both Houses of Congress, on a semi-annual basis 

using data from mid-fiscal year, and on an annual basis using yearend data, a report that includes the following elements: actual cost 

pool expense (beginning year estimate), allocation base, overhead 

rate, actual cost pool revenue (or recovery), the change in the rate, 

and surplus or deficit variance in dollars of each of the indirect cost 

pools at each of its national laboratories. The report shall cover the 

entirety of the indirect cost pools used at each national laboratory, 

including an accounting of these elements for management fee, 

taxes, and laboratory-directed research and development. The Committee expects this process will also have the benefit of providing 

a complete and accurate allocation of direct vs. indirect costs at 

each laboratory. 

Alleviation of Poverty.—In its fiscal year 2016 report, the Committee directed the Department to provide a report detailing all domestic and international projects and programs within its jurisdiction that contribute to the alleviation of poverty. The Department 

is reminded that the Committee continues to expect the report to 

be provided expeditiously. 

Workplace Diversity.—The Committee recognizes the importance 

of workplace diversity in the Department of Energy’s national laboratories. The Committee directs the Department to provide a detailed plan on recruitment and retention of diverse talent that includes outreach and recruitment programs at Historically Black 

Colleges and Universities, Hispanic-Serving Institutions, Asian and 

Pacific Islander Serving Institutions, Predominantly Black Institutions, and other Minority Serving Institutions. The plan shall be 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
79 

sent to the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress within 120 days after the enactment of this Act. 

MANAGEMENT OF SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL AND DEFENSE WASTE

Despite the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that the Administration’s refusal to finish the Yucca Mountain license application 

was illegal, the Administration continues to disregard current law 

regarding Yucca Mountain. The federal government has a legal obligation to take responsibility for civilian spent nuclear fuel and 

these actions to delay progress toward Yucca Mountain increase 

the financial penalties taxpayers will ultimately bear. 

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has completed the 

Safety Evaluation Report for the project finding no substantive reasons that the Yucca Mountain Site cannot be completed. In Volume 

2, which covers safety before permanent closure, the NRC concludes that with reasonable assurance, subject to proposed conditions, the Department’s application meets the NRC regulatory requirements. The NRC is on track to deliver a supplement this year 

to the Department’s environmental impact statement (EIS) on the 

proposed geologic repository for spent nuclear fuel and high-level 

radioactive waste at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. Previously, the 

NRC staff found the EIS prepared by the Department did not adequately address all of the repository-related effects on groundwater, 

or from surface discharges of groundwater. In 2013, the Commission asked the Department to prepare a supplement. Rather than 

comply with the Court Order, the Department updated its analysis 

of potential groundwater impacts after closure of a repository at 

the site. The NRC staff will use this analysis to complete the supplemental EIS that the Department refused to address. 

Rather than comply with current law, the Administration’s fiscal 

year 2017 budget request once again attempts to fund unauthorized alternatives for used nuclear fuel disposition instead of moving 

forward with Yucca Mountain. The Department requests funding to 

implement selected recommendations of the Department’s Strategy 

for the Management and Disposal of Used Nuclear Fuel and HighLevel Radioactive Waste, which was informed by the Administration’s Blue Ribbon Commission that by its very charter did not examine the suitability of Yucca Mountain as a permanent repository. This strategy is estimated to cost $5,700,000,000 over the 

next ten years and proposes to reform the current funding arrangement for the Department’s nuclear waste fund management program. The recommendation rejects these non-Yucca proposals and 

makes clear that any activities funded from the Nuclear Waste 

Fund must be in support of Yucca Mountain. 

To address the Administration’s failure to execute current law, 

the recommendation provides $150,000,000 within Nuclear Waste 

Disposal to support the Yucca Mountain High-Level Waste Geologic 

Repository and $20,000,000 within the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to support the continued adjudication of the Yucca Mountain license application. The Committee notes that geological repositories in addition to Yucca Mountain will be needed. If the Congress provides the authority for such repositories, as well as for a 

consent-based siting process, the Committee will consider support 

for such activities at that time. In the meantime, the bill contains 

a prohibition on using funds to close the Yucca Mountain license 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
80 

application or to take actions that would irrevocably remove Yucca 

Mountain as an option for a repository. 

PROLIFERATION OF CENTERS

The Committee remains concerned with the Department’s continual proposals to establish new research centers reliant on outyear funding commitments subject to future appropriations. In fiscal year 2017, the Department proposed funding two new Clean 

Energy Manufacturing Innovation Institutes and a new Energy Innovation Hub. Furthermore, the Department is requesting continued additional funding for the BioEnergy Research Centers and the 

Energy Frontier Research Centers. The funding of institutes constitutes a growing portion of the Department’s budget and represents a significant out-year investment. 

The Committee continues to support the ongoing review of all existing research centers and urges the Department to take a critical 

look at its portfolio to determine where improvements can be made 

in its existing inventory of research centers. Increasing budgets are 

not a guarantee. The Department must be vigilant in ensuring that 

the out-year costs of these centers do not diminish the Department’s flexibility in pursuing other research and development outside the scope of existing centers. 

The Committee reiterates its previous direction for the Department to explicitly include in future budget justifications for all centers, hubs, institutes, facilities, and any other persistent, locationbased grantees current and proposed funding levels, expected outyear commitments, and details on their programmatic and technical goals. 

COMMONLY RECYCLED PAPER

The Department shall not expend funds for projects that knowingly use as a feedstock commonly recycled paper that is segregated from municipal solid waste or collected as part of a collection system that commingles commonly recycled paper with other 

solid waste at any point from the time of collection through materials recovery. 

EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITIES

The Department is prohibited from funding fellowship and scholarship programs in fiscal year 2017 unless the programs were explicitly included in the budget justification or funded within this 

recommendation. Any new or ongoing programs that the Department chooses to fund in fiscal year 2017 must be detailed in the 

fiscal year 2017 budget justifications. This direction shall be followed in future fiscal years unless contradicted by the Committee. 

REPROGRAMMING AND TRANSFER GUIDELINES

The Committee requires the Department to inform the Committee promptly and fully when a change in program execution and 

funding is required during the fiscal year. The Department’s reprogramming requirements are detailed in statute. To assist the 

Department in this effort, the following guidance is provided for 

programs and activities. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
81 

Definition.—A reprogramming includes the reallocation of funds 

from one activity to another within an appropriation. The recommendation includes a general provision providing internal reprogramming authority to the Department, as long as no program, 

project, or activity is increased or decreased by more than 

$5,000,000 or 10 percent, whichever is less, compared to the levels 

in the table detailing the Committee’s recommendations for the Department’s various accounts. For construction projects, a reprogramming constitutes the reallocation of funds from one construction project to another project or a change of $2,000,000 or 10 

percent, whichever is less, 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 activity until the next fiscal year would result in a 

detrimental impact to an agency program or priority. A reprogramming 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 a factor for consideration. A reprogramming may not be employed to initiate new 

programs, or to change program, project, or activity allocations specifically denied, limited, or increased by the Congress in the Act or 

report. 

Reporting and Approval Procedures.—In recognition of the security missions of the Department, the legislative guidelines allow 

the Secretary and the Administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration jointly to waive the reprogramming restriction 

by certifying to the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses 

of Congress that it is in the nation’s security interest to do so. The 

Department shall not deviate from the levels for activities specified 

in the report that are below the level of the detail table, except 

through the regular notification procedures of the Committee. No 

funds may be added to programs for which funding has been denied. Any reallocation of new or prior-year budget authority or 

prior-year de-obligations, or any request to implement a reorganization which includes moving previous appropriations between 

appropriations accounts must be submitted to the Committees on 

Appropriations of both Houses of Congress in writing and may not 

be implemented prior to approval by the Committees. 

Transfers.—As in fiscal year 2016, funding actions into or out of 

accounts funded by this Act may only be made by transfer authorities provided by this or other Appropriations Acts. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS 

The Committee’s recommendations for Department of Energy 

programs in fiscal year 2017 are described in the following sections. 

A detailed funding table is included at the end of this title. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
82 

ENERGY PROGRAMS 

ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE ENERGY

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $2,073,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 2,898,400,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 1,825,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... ¥248,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ ¥1,073,400,000 

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) programs include research, development, demonstration, and deployment activities advancing energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies, as well as federal energy assistance programs. The EERE 

program is divided into three portfolios: sustainable transportation, 

renewable energy, and energy efficiency. The sustainable transportation portfolio, which consists of the vehicles, bioenergy, and hydrogen and fuel cell programs, advances the development of plugin electric and other alternative fuel vehicles, high-efficiency advanced combustion engines, and the replacement of oil with clean 

domestic transportation fuels. The renewable energy portfolio, 

which consists of the solar, wind, water, and geothermal programs, 

aims to develop innovative technologies to make renewable electricity generation cost competitive with traditional sources of energy. The energy efficiency portfolio, which consists of the advanced 

manufacturing, buildings, and federal energy assistance programs, 

seeks cost-effective solutions to reduce energy consumption in 

plants, buildings, and homes. 

The Committee directs EERE to offer technical and other programmatic assistance to the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico to support investment in innovative technologies to effectively reduce 

power system emissions, efficiently treat wastewater, and generate 

power from solid waste. 

The Committee recognizes the importance of the Department’s 

work on the Energy-Water Nexus and as part of that effort, the 

Committee encourages the Department to enter into an interdepartmental agreement with the Department of Agriculture for research to address the energy and water challenges inherent in fourseason production systems. This interdepartmental agreement 

should integrate ongoing research projects at the various DOE 

Labs and the Agricultural Research Service to develop affordable, 

deployable, energy- and water-efficient food production platforms, 

beginning in food-insecure communities across the country. By 

working together, DOE and the Department of Agriculture can 

bring respective strengths and resources to designing the most desirable low-cost and efficient production system. 

Social Cost of Carbon.—The Department should not promulgate 

any regulations in fiscal year 2017 using the May 2013 estimates 

for the social cost of carbon until a new working group is convened. 

The working group should include the relevant agencies and affected stakeholders, re-examine the social cost of carbon using the 

best available science, and revise the estimates using an accurate 

discount rate and domestic estimate in accordance with E.O. 12866 

and OMB Circular A–4. To increase transparency, the working 

group should solicit public comment prior to finalizing any updates. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
83 

SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORTATION

The Vehicle, Bioenergy, and Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technologies programs fund activities that can reduce American exposure to future high oil prices. Research into cutting-edge technologies that will increase the fuel economy of gasoline and diesel 

fuel vehicles—the vast majority of today’s fleet—will allow Americans to spend less on fuel while traveling the same distance. Research into next-generation automotive and fuel cell technologies 

that power vehicles with domestic energy sources such as natural 

gas, electricity, biofuels, and hydrogen can likewise dramatically 

lower the impact of future high gas prices on Americans. 

The Committee recommends $533,500,000 for Sustainable Transportation, $102,450,000 below fiscal year 2016 and $319,400,000 

below the budget request. 

Vehicle Technologies.—The Committee recommends $268,000,000 

for Vehicle Technologies, $42,000,000 below fiscal year 2016 and 

$200,500,000 below the budget request. Within available funds, the 

recommendation includes $20,000,000 to continue the SuperTruck 

II program to further improve the efficiency of heavy-duty class 8 

long- and regional-haul vehicles through up to four multi-year 

awards subject to future availability of funds. 

The recommendation provides $95,000,000 for Batteries and 

Electric Drive Technology, of which $42,000,000 is for advanced 

battery development, including up to $7,000,000 to continue national laboratory performance testing and life cycle diagnostic assessment activities that validate and verify advanced battery performance. 

The recommendation provides $42,500,000 for Outreach and Development, of which $34,000,000 is for Deployment to support ongoing alternative fuel, infrastructure, and vehicle deployment activities. When issuing competitive grants in support of these activities, 

the Department is encouraged to focus on awards that range from 

$500,000 to $1,000,000 each and include at least one Clean Cities 

coalition partner. 

Within available funds, the recommendation includes up to 

$15,000,000 for medium and heavy-duty on-road natural gas engine research and development, including energy efficiency improvements, emission after-treatment technologies, fuel system enhancements, and new engine development. Additionally, the Department is encouraged to address technical barriers to the increased use of alternative fuel vehicles, including the development 

of novel compression and liquefaction technologies, advanced materials, and improvements in processes for conditioning and dispensing natural gas. 

Bioenergy Technologies.—The Committee recommends 

$168,500,000 for Bioenergy Technologies, $56,500,000 below fiscal 

year 2016 and $110,400,000 below the budget request. 

Within available funds, the recommendation includes 

$50,000,000 for Feedstocks, of which not less than $20,000,000 is 

for feedstock supply and logistics to address issues limiting production and conversion systems at large. No funding is for the joint 

initiative with the Navy and the Department of Agriculture to develop commercial diesel and jet biofuels production capacity for defense purposes. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
84 

The Committee encourages the Department to target technologies that utilize biosolids that have the potential to reduce the 

volume of waste materials, can produce byproducts to meet chemical supply shortages, such as phosphorous, and can enhance the 

subsequent development of technologies to deliver important chemical feedstocks, including hydrogen. 

The Committee directs the Department to provide funds, within 

competitive procurements, for programs of scale-up and demonstration of technology particularly suited to extract fuels and fuel precursors from biosolids residue of wastewater treatment plants serving small- and medium-sized urban areas. 

The Committee notes the Department’s efforts to develop a Synthetic Biology Foundry and encourages the Department to focus on 

research and development within the Bioenergy Technologies Office 

that supports the Synthetic Biology Foundry’s strategic goals. 

Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technologies.—The Committee recommends $97,000,000 for Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technologies, 

$3,950,000 below fiscal year 2016 and $8,500,000 below the budget 

request. 

Within available funds, the recommendation includes 

$13,000,000 for Technology Validation, of which $2,000,000 is for 

the EERE share of the integrated energy systems work with the 

Office of Nuclear Energy and $7,000,000 is to enable integrated energy systems using high and low temperature electrolyzers with 

the intent of advancing the H2@Scale concept. 

The Committee recognizes the progress of the program and expresses continued support for stationary, vehicle, motive, and portable power applications of this technology. The Department is encouraged to explore technologies that advance the storage and 

transportation fuel distribution and retailing systems. 

The Committee recognizes the need to support the development 

of alternative fueling infrastructure for U.S. consumers. Accordingly, the Department is encouraged to collaborate with the National Institute of Standards and Technology to allow accurate 

measurement of hydrogen at fueling stations. 

The Department is encouraged to engage the appropriate national laboratories to pursue novel advanced demonstrations that 

validate how integrated, renewable hydrogen production and storage infrastructure supports transportation and non-transportation 

applications. The Department is directed to submit not later than 

180 days after the enactment of this Act a report on its efforts to 

deploy hydrogen infrastructure. The report should include a discussion of the Department’s coordination with other relevant agencies. 

RENEWABLE ENERGY

The Solar Energy, Wind Energy, Water Power, and Geothermal 

Technologies programs fund applied research, development, and 

demonstration to reduce the cost of renewable energy to economically competitive levels. Research into innovative technologies, such 

as photovoltaic and concentrating solar technologies, offshore wind, 

hydropower, and ground heat, can expand energy production from 

our domestic resources and reduce our dependence on foreign oil. 

The Committee recommends $398,000,000 for Renewable Energy, 

$80,050,000 below fiscal year 2016 and $222,600,000 below the 

budget request. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
85 

Solar Energy.—The Committee recommends $197,000,000 for 

Solar Energy, $44,600,000 below fiscal year 2016 and $88,100,000 

below the budget request. Within available funds, the recommendation provides $64,000,000 for Photovoltaic Research and Development and $15,000,000 for Balance of Systems Soft Cost Reduction. 

The Committee encourages the Department to research high efficiency thin-film photovoltaics and processes for high-speed, low-cost 

processing to produce stable and durable materials. Research programs are encouraged to include cooperation between industry and 

academia, and to include advanced characterization, including optical characterization, that enables development of strong correlations between materials and device properties, and the photovoltaic 

power performance of the working solar cells. 

Wind Energy.—The Committee recommends $90,000,000 for 

Wind Energy, $5,450,000 below fiscal year 2016 and $66,000,000 

below the budget request. Within available funds, the recommendation provides $40,000,000 for the Offshore Wind Advanced Technology Demonstration Project and $1,000,000 for the Wind for 

Schools program. 

The Committee recognizes the enormous potential of offshore 

wind as a secure energy source for our country and encourages the 

Department to prioritize the establishment of the proposed Offshore Wind Research and Development Consortium to accelerate 

fundamental offshore-specific research and development activities. 

The Committee is aware of efforts by the Wind Technologies Office to work with U.S. industry to support the development of main 

shaft and gearbox bearing technologies. The Committee encourages 

the Department to collaborate with industry and to consider investment into the development of new technologies that advance critical bearing and gearbox technologies used in wind turbines. 

Water Power.—The Committee recommends $55,000,000 for 

Water Power, $15,000,000 below fiscal year 2016 and $25,000,000 

below the budget request. Within available funds, the recommendation provides $37,000,000 for marine and hydrokinetic technologies 

and $18,000,000 for conventional hydropower, of which $6,600,000 

is for the purposes of Section 242 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005. 

The Committee appreciates the Department’s ongoing exploration of marine and hydrokinetic technologies research. The Committee directs the Department to submit not later than 120 days 

after the enactment of the Act a report on the past allocation of 

funds, including demonstrating diversity in possible public and private partnerships, and diversity in regional locations for siting 

these new methods and technologies. 

The Committee supports the Hydropower Technologies subprogram’s HydroNEXT Initiative, including efforts to address technology development challenges and critical environmental and market challenges, such as permitting new hydropower projects. 

Geothermal Technologies.—The Committee recommends 

$56,000,000 for Geothermal Technologies, $15,000,000 below fiscal 

year 2016 and $43,500,000 below the budget request. Within available funds, the recommendation provides $35,000,000 for ongoing 

activities for the Frontier Observatory for Research in Geothermal 

Energy project. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
86 

ENERGY EFFICIENCY

The Advanced Manufacturing, Building Technologies, Federal 

Energy Management, and Weatherization and Intergovernmental 

programs advance cost-effective solutions to reduce energy consumption through increased efficiency. Research into cutting-edge 

technologies that enhance manufacturing processes, develop advanced materials, and reduce energy use in buildings, homes, and 

factories can serve the national interest by greatly reducing our energy needs, while also giving American manufacturers an advantage to compete in the global marketplace. 

The Committee recommends $642,000,000 for Energy Efficiency, 

$79,000,000 below fiscal year 2016 and $277,000,000 below the 

budget request. 

Advanced Manufacturing.—The Committee recommends 

$214,000,000 for Advanced Manufacturing, $14,500,000 below fiscal 

year 2016 and $47,000,000 below the budget request. Within available funds, the recommendation provides not less than $4,205,000 

for improvements in the steel industry; not less than $20,000,000 

for combined heat and power activities relevant to industrial applications and energy savings in manufacturing processes; and not 

less than $500,000 to continue efforts furthering improvements in 

mechanical insulation. 

For subprograms within Advanced Manufacturing, the recommendation provides $124,000,000 for Advanced Manufacturing 

Research and Development Facilities, of which $20,000,000 is for 

the Critical Materials Energy Innovation Hub, $20,000,000 is for 

the Manufacturing Demonstration Facility and the Carbon Fiber 

Test Facility, and $84,000,000 is for six Clean Energy Manufacturing Innovation (CEMI) Institutes. No funding is provided for the 

establishment of a Water Desalination Hub. 

The recommendation supports the establishment of one new 

CEMI Institute in fiscal year 2017, in addition to the five established using fiscal years 2013, 2014, 2015, and 2016 funding. 

Should the Department propose funding for additional CEMI Institutes in the future, the Committee directs that all future budget 

justifications include a specific research topic associated with a 

CEMI Institute, which will provide the Committee with the necessary transparency to evaluate and prioritize funding to ensure 

that only highly-effective centers closely aligned with Advanced 

Manufacturing program missions are funded. 

The Committee urges the Department to continue its focus on 

high temperature superconductors in light of their potential for efficiently transmitting power over long distances from remote energy generation sources, delivering more power to metropolitan 

areas, and improving production of unconventional petroleum reserves. 

The Committee recognizes the importance of the textile sector 

and believes that federal support for advanced textile research is 

essential to maintaining the competitiveness of the domestic textile 

and apparel industry. The Committee believes that advanced textile research can develop more sustainable manufacturing processes and technologies that will benefit producers, foster the reshoring of textile jobs to the United States, and reduce the global 

environmental impact of textile manufacturing. The Committee 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
87 

therefore encourages the Department to consider the need for competitively-funded advanced textile manufacturing process research. 

In the fiscal year 2016 report, the Committee directed the Department to analyze the impact federal investment may have in 

strengthening the availability and usage of lithium, including lowsodium lithium metal. As the Committee awaits the results of this 

study the Department is encouraged to explore ways in which these 

upcoming recommendations can increase U.S. domestic supply of 

lithium and low-sodium lithium metal. 

Building Technologies.—The Committee recommends 

$143,000,000 for Building Technologies, $57,500,000 below fiscal 

year 2016 and $146,000,000 below the budget request. 

Within available funds, the recommendation includes $5,000,000 

for research and development activities for small scale combined 

heat and power systems that can be used for residential and small 

commercial settings. 

For the subprograms within Building Technologies, the recommendation provides $28,000,000 for Commercial Buildings Integration; $60,000,000 for Emerging Technologies, of which 

$25,000,000 is for solid state lighting and, if the Secretary finds 

solid-state lighting technology eligible for the twenty-first century 

lamp prize, specified under Section 655 of the Energy Independence 

and Security Act of 2007, $5,000,000 is provided in addition to 

funds recommended for lighting research and development; and 

$35,000,000 for Equipment and Buildings Standards. The Committee encourages the Department to continue to support the 

Building America program. 

Commercial buildings account for 19 percent of the energy consumed in the United States.In order to improve energy efficiency 

within this important market, a national program to improve the 

energy efficiency of small- and medium-sized commercial buildings 

is needed.Within available funds, the Department is encouraged to 

support a competitive funding opportunity for proposals that would 

test and replicate innovative, cost-effective technologies and programs to achieve deeper energy efficiency improvements in smalland medium-sized commercial buildings. 

The Committee notes that natural gas plays an important role in 

meeting the energy needs of U.S. homes and commercial buildings. 

In particular, the Committee is aware of research opportunities related to the use of natural gas in water heating, space conditioning, 

furnace venting, and combined heat and power systems. The Committee encourages the Department to explore research and development that can advance future natural gas systems and appliances 

to meet consumer demand for high efficiency and environmentally 

friendly products. 

The Committee is interested in understanding how the Department plans to implement the energy conservation standard for external power supplies (EPS). The Department’s standard resulted 

in certain products being brought into scope, even though these 

products were not intended by Congress to be included when Congress directed the Department to establish energy conservation 

standards for EPS. The Committee will be monitoring how the Department works with manufacturers and Congress to resolve this 

issue. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
88 

Consistent with current policy, of the funds made available for 

Building Technologies, the Department is directed not to advocate, 

promote, or discourage the adoption or inclusion of a particular 

building energy code or code provision, other than the technical 

and economic analysis work required by statutory mandate, or to 

provide funding to private third parties or non-governmental organizations that engage in this type of advocacy. 

The Committee appreciates the work the Department has done 

to date to consider the potential energy savings from increasing energy efficiency of consumer electronic devices. The Committee urges 

the Department to explore research and development that would 

further reduce the energy consumption of consumer electronics. 

Federal Energy Management Program.—The Committee recommends $20,000,000 for the Federal Energy Management Program, $7,000,000 below fiscal year 2016 and $23,000,000 below the 

budget request. 

Weatherization and Intergovernmental Programs.—The Committee recommends $265,000,000 for Weatherization and Intergovernmental Programs, the same as fiscal year 2016 and $61,000,000 

below the budget request. The recommendation provides $212,000,000 for Weatherization 

Assistance Grants, all of which is for formula grants; $3,000,000 for 

Training and Technical Assistance; and $50,000,000 for the State 

Energy Program. 

The Committee directs the Department to develop guidance 

under the Weatherization Assistance Program that approves solar 

and other renewable energy systems as allowable weatherization 

measures that States, Territories, and tribal governments may include as part of their programs. 

CORPORATE SUPPORT

The Program Direction, Strategic Programs, and Facilities and 

Infrastructure budgets provide the necessary resources for program 

and project management across all of EERE’s technology programs, 

for the adoption of technologies to market, and for the operation 

and upkeep of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. 

The Committee recommends $251,500,000 for Corporate Support 

programs, $13,500,000 above fiscal year 2016 and $39,400,000 

below the budget request. 

Program Direction.—The Committee recommends $149,500,000 

for Program Direction, $5,500,000 below fiscal year 2016 and 

$21,400,000 below the budget request. 

Strategic Programs.—The Committee recommends $10,000,000 

for Strategic Programs, of which $2,000,000 is for the U.S.-Israel 

energy cooperative agreement. The Committee supports expanded 

models of research and development cooperation under the U.S.- 

Israel energy cooperative agreement and understands there are 

commercially available technologies that use CO2 as an input and 

that have the potential to create a market for utility and industrial 

CO2. For example, the use of captured CO2 as a feedstock to 

produce algae-based fuels, plastics, chemicals, and other algaebased products is among the most promising methods of beneficial 

utilization. The Committee encourages the Department to implement policies that encourage and incentivize the utilization of CO2 

to make valuable products and to support new models of jointly 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
89 

supported research and development cooperation among government agencies and through competitive programs. 

Facilities and Infrastructure.—The Committee recommends 

$92,000,000 for Facilities and Infrastructure, of which $26,000,000 

is for Operations and Maintenance, $36,000,000 is for Facility 

Management, and $30,000,000 is for NREL Site-wide Facility Support. 

ELECTRICITY DELIVERY AND ENERGY RELIABILITY

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $206,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 262,300,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 225,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... +19,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ ¥37,300,000 

The Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability program advances technologies and provides operational support to increase 

the efficiency, resilience, and security of the nation’s electricity delivery system. The power grid employs aging technologies at a time 

when power demands, the deployment of new intermittent technologies, and rising security threats are imposing new stresses on 

the system. The Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability aims to develop a modern power grid by advancing cyber security technologies, intelligent and high-efficiency grid components, 

and energy storage systems. 

Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability Research and Development.—The Committee recommends $181,500,000 for Electricity 

Delivery and Energy Reliability Research and Development, 

$20,000,000 above fiscal year 2016 and $16,200,000 above the 

budget request. Within available funds, the recommendation provides $36,000,000 for Clean Energy Transmission and Reliability, 

of which $4,000,000 is for the Energy Systems Predictive Capability activity; $50,000,000 for Smart Grid, including $15,000,000 

for regional demonstrations of on-site generation and micro grids; 

$31,000,000 for Energy Storage; and $62,000,000 for cyber security 

for energy delivery systems, of which $12,000,000 is to continue development of the industry-scale electric grid test bed. 

The Committee supports the Department’s efforts to improve 

electricity reliability and grid integration initiatives. Accordingly, 

the Committee recommends the Department continue efforts to establish one or more grid integration demonstration modules. These 

projects should include a utility that has experienced reliability 

problems in the past and serves a large population; industrial and 

academic partners with appropriate engineering capabilities in grid 

and energy storage technologies in an area that could incorporate 

opportunities to include solar and wind elements; and national laboratories involved in the grid integration consortium. 

The Committee is encouraged by the efforts of the Department 

to develop the grid modernization crosscut activity and is supportive of the valuable role of the Grid Modernization Laboratory 

Consortium. The Committee encourages the Department’s continued coordination with the national laboratories to ensure grid-related research is not duplicative. 

The Committee encourages the Department to prioritize the development of computer simulation tools that can predict the behavVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:33 Apr 27, 2016 Jkt 099790 PO 00000 Frm 00089 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR532.XXX HR532

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
90 

ior of new technologies, such as variable generation and electronic 

controls, on the grid. 

The Committee notes the Department’s past support in advancing the grid using advanced semiconductor technology and encourages the Department to continue this support. 

Within Smart Grid Research and Development, the Committee 

encourages the Department to explore options that promote regional demonstration of new, utility-led, residential Connected 

Communities for the purpose of advancing smart grid systems. 

NUCLEAR ENERGY

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $986,161,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 993,896,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 1,011,616,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... +25,455,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ +17,720,000 

Nuclear power generates approximately one-fifth of the nation’s 

electricity and will continue to be an important base-load energy 

source in the future. The Department of Energy’s Nuclear Energy 

program invests in research, development, and demonstration activities that develop the next generation of clean and safe reactors, 

further improve the safety of our current reactor fleet, and contribute to the nation’s long-term leadership in the global nuclear 

power industry. 

NUCLEAR ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

The Committee provides $549,228,000 for Nuclear Energy Research and Development, $16,610,000 above fiscal year 2016 and 

$6,920,000 above the budget request. 

Nuclear Energy Enabling Technologies.—The Committee recommends $121,400,000 for Nuclear Energy Enabling Technologies, 

$9,800,000 above fiscal year 2016 and $31,890,000 above the budget request, of which not less than $9,800,000 shall be to support 

the implementation of the GAIN initiative. Within available funds, 

the recommendation provides $28,000,000 for Crosscutting Technology Development, of which funding above the request is provided for GAIN management, nuclear knowledge and validation 

work, nuclear cyber activities, and integrated energy systems and 

not less than $11,000,000 is provided for advanced instrumentation; $28,200,000 for Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling and Simulation, of which funding above the request is to increase TREAT 

validation efforts; $24,300,000 for the third year of the second fiveyear term of the Energy Innovation Hub for Modeling and Simulation; and $31,100,000 for the Nuclear Science User Facilities. Within available funds for the Nuclear Science User Facilities, the Department shall continue the focus on irradiation testing and examinations of irradiated materials and is also encouraged to assess research in thermal hydraulics, multi-physics code validation, and 

advancements in instrumentation and data control systems. 

Integrated University Program.—The Committee recommends 

$5,000,000 to continue the Integrated University Program, which is 

critical to ensuring the nation’s nuclear science and engineering 

workforce in future years. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
91 

Small Modular Reactor (SMR) Licensing Technical Support.— The Committee recommends $96,600,000 for SMR Licensing Technical Support, $34,100,000 above fiscal year 2016 and $7,000,000 

above the budget request. Within funds above the budget request 

the Committee encourages the Department to continue to support 

design certification, site permitting, first of a kind engineering, and 

related licensing activities necessary to support the development 

and initial deployment of small modular reactor technologies. 

Reactor Concepts Research, Development, and Demonstration.— The Committee recommends $140,000,000 for Reactor Concepts Research, Development, and Demonstration, $1,718,000 below fiscal 

year 2016 and $31,240,000 above the budget request. Within available funds, the recommendation provides $40,000,000 for Light 

Water Reactor Sustainability to continue research and development 

work on the technical basis for subsequent license renewal; and 

$100,000,000 for Advanced Reactor Technologies to consist of the 

following activities: $33,000,000 is for research of the fuel and 

graphite qualification program for the High Temperature Gas Reactor; $18,000,000 is follow-on funding for the continued development of two performance-based advanced reactor concepts; and not 

less than $5,000,000 is to support industry and national laboratories collaborations to develop an advanced reactor regulatory 

framework. The Department is encouraged to work with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in support of these activities. 

The Department shall continue to work with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to ensure an adequate 

supply of plutonium-238 is available for future NASA space exploration missions. 

Fuel Cycle Research and Development.—The Committee recommends $177,228,000 for Fuel Cycle Research and Development, 

$26,572,000 below fiscal year 2016 and $72,710,000 below the 

budget request. Within available funds, the recommendation provides $62,100,000 for the Advanced Fuels Program, of which 

$15,000,000 is for additional support of feasibility studies for accident tolerant light water reactor fuels and $20,000,000 is for additional support of capability development of transient testing, including test design, modeling, and simulation; $33,000,000 for Material Recovery and Waste Form Development to maintain U.S. 

competency in the area of fuel cycle technologies; and $13,000,000 

for Systems Analysis and Integration, of which funding above the 

request is to assess advanced nuclear energy deployment scenarios. 

The recommendation provides $61,128,000 for Used Nuclear Fuel 

Disposition (UNFD), $23,872,000 below fiscal year 2016 and 

$89,510,000 below the budget request. The recommendation provides $61,128,000 to continue generic UNFD research and development activities, $872,000 below fiscal year 2016 and $13,210,000 

below the budget request. Within available funds, the recommendation provides $6,000,000 to support activities to design and certify 

a rail car or cars for use with licensed and anticipated transportation casks; and $12,000,000 to support preparation activities for 

testing of high burnup fuel and post-irradiation examination of 

spent fuel rods for the high burnup demonstration project. 

Yucca remains the law of the land yet the Department has requested no funding for its development. Instead, the Department 

has again proposed large increases for new activities that ignore 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
92 

the significant investments made to ensure that the plans for 

Yucca enable safe and reliable storage for high-level waste and 

spent nuclear fuel. The Committee rejects this approach and provides no funds for integrated waste management system activities. 

Furthermore, within the amounts for UNFD, the recommendation 

does not include defense funds. 

RADIOLOGICAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT

The Committee recommends $7,000,000 for Radiological Facilities Management, $17,800,000 below fiscal year 2016 and the same 

as the budget request, to support the continued operation of U.S. 

research reactors by providing research reactor fuel services and 

maintenance of fuel fabrication equipment. 

IDAHO FACILITIES MANAGEMENT

The Committee recommends $246,085,000 for Idaho Facilities 

Management, $23,503,000 above fiscal year 2016 and $19,500,000 

above the budget request. 

INL Operations and Infrastructure.—The Committee recommends $240,085,000 for INL Operations and Infrastructure, 

$19,503,000 above fiscal year 2016 and $19,500,000 above the 

budget request. Within available funds, the recommendation includes the requested level of defense funding; $10,000,000 for design and construction of the Advanced Test Reactor technical support building to support reactor core internal change-out, reliability 

improvement, and provide mock-up space for the nuclear demonstration platform; $5,000,000 to implement MFC Five Year Plan 

life cycle management activities for the resolution of age related 

issues to improve facility reliability and utilization; and $5,000,000 

for engineering and technical activities required to advance fuel 

and materials post irradiation examination capabilities. 

Construction.—The Committee recommends $6,000,000 for Construction, $4,000,000 above fiscal year 2016 and the same as the 

request. 

IDAHO SITEWIDE SAFEGUARDS AND SECURITY

The Committee recommends $129,303,000 for Idaho Sitewide 

Safeguards and Security, $3,142,000 above fiscal year 2016 and the 

same as the budget request. 

SUPERCRITICAL TRANSFORMATIONAL ELECTRIC POWER GENERATION

The Committee recommends $6,000,000 for the Supercritical 

Transformational Electric Power (STEP) Generation Initiative, 

$1,000,000 above fiscal year 2016, to develop and scale up advanced supercritical carbon dioxide Brayton Cycle energy conversion technologies to pre-commercial pilot demonstration to facilitate 

commercial development. This is a joint initiative with the Office 

of Fossil Energy and the Solar Energy program within the Office 

of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
93 

FOSSIL ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $632,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 360,000,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 645,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... +13,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ +285,000,000 

Fossil energy resources, such as coal, oil, and natural gas, generate approximately 67 percent of the nation’s electricity and will 

continue to provide for the majority of our needs for the foreseeable 

future. The Fossil Energy Research and Development program 

funds research, development, and demonstration activities to improve existing technologies and to develop next-generation systems 

in the full spectrum of fossil energy areas. At a time when fossil 

fuel power generation is expanding around the globe, the activities 

funded within this program advance our nation’s position as a leader in fossil energy technologies and ensure that we use the full extent of our domestic resources safely and efficiently. 

In order to ensure the efficient use of existing fossil energy resources and to deliver safe and responsible uses of untapped domestic resources, the Office of Fossil Energy must remain one of 

the highest priorities of the Department. The Department’s past research and development efforts have helped usher in technological 

developments responsible for the production increases seen today. 

The Committee recommendation increases funding in these areas 

to ensure these technological advances continue to occur and help 

American industry maintain leadership in the global marketplace 

for fossil energy technologies. 

COAL—CCS AND POWER SYSTEMS

The Committee recommends $442,000,000 for Coal Carbon Cap- ture and Storage (CCS) and Power Systems, $12,000,000 above fiscal year 2016 and $70,323,000 above the budget request. The Department is directed to use funds within the coal program only for 

coal research and development, with the exception of the Supercritical Transformational Electric Power Generation Initiative, which 

has applications to all high-temperature fossil heat sources. 

The Committee notes the Department proposed a reorganization 

of the Fossil Energy account that combines the coal and natural 

gas research and development activities into one program and proposed moving other activities into new budget lines called ‘‘NETL 

Research and Operations’’ and ‘‘NETL Infrastructure’’. The recommendation rejects the proposed combination and continues its 

separation of fuel categories in different accounts but accepts some 

of the proposed accounting changes to the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) in order to better display the total funding that the Fossil Energy Research and Development program 

provides to NETL. 

Carbon Capture.—The Committee recommends $109,200,000 for 

Carbon Capture, $8,200,000 above fiscal year 2016 and the same 

as the budget request. 

Carbon Storage.—The Committee recommends $85,500,000 for 

Carbon Storage, $20,500,000 below fiscal year 2016 and $5,375,000 

below the budget request. Within available funds, the recommendation provides $25,000,000 for Geologic Storage Technologies; 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
94 

$2,000,000 for Carbon Use and Reuse; $13,500,000 for Carbon Sequestration Science; and $45,000,000 for Storage Infrastructure, of 

which funding above the request is for additional support of detailed site assessments for potential storage sites. 

Advanced Energy Systems.—The Committee recommends 

$110,000,000 for Advanced Energy Systems, $5,000,000 above fiscal 

year 2016 and $56,348,000 above the budget request. Within available funds, the recommendation provides $30,000,000 for Advanced 

Combustion Systems; $30,000,000 for Gasification Systems, of 

which $8,000,000 is for the Advanced Air Separation Program to 

continue activities improving advanced air separation technologies; 

$15,000,000 for Advanced Turbines; $5,000,000 for coal-biomass to 

liquids activities, which seek to produce liquid fuels from blends of 

domestic coal and biomass resources with reduced emissions and 

land and water use through integration of carbon capture and 

other technologies; and $30,000,000 for Solid Oxide Fuel Cells, to 

focus on research and development to enable efficient, cost-effective 

electricity generation with minimal use of water, and the use of 

abundant domestic coal and natural gas resources with near-zero 

atmospheric emissions of CO2 and pollutants. The Committee urges 

the Department to fund research and development activities to improve the efficiency of gas turbines used in power generation systems, working cooperatively with industry, small business, universities, and other appropriate parties. 

The Committee recognizes and commends the Department on its 

efforts to date to develop step change solid state reforming technology that promises to make utilization of fossil fuels like coal and 

natural gas more efficient. In order to advance the application of 

solid state reforming technology, the Committee recommends the 

Department support field pilot programs to advance this technology 

to commercial success. 

Crosscutting Research.—The Committee recommends $60,000,000 

for Crosscutting Research, $10,000,000 above fiscal year 2016 and 

$1,350,000 above the budget request. Within available funds, the 

recommendation provides $24,000,000 for Coal Utilization Science 

and $31,050,000 for Plant Optimization Technologies, of which 

$9,000,000 is for the Advanced Ultrasupercritical Program to identify, test, qualify, and develop domestic suppliers capable of producing components from high temperature materials and 

$15,800,000 is for water management research and development. 

The Committee encourages the Department to advance technologies that address near-term water needs to treat wastewater or 

other alternate water sources from operating coal power plants. 

The Committee supports the Department’s Historically Black 

Colleges and Universities and Hispanic-Serving Institutions education and training program and recommends $1,000,000, the same 

as the budget request, to award research grants to qualifying universities and institutions. 

The Committee is pleased with the Department’s progress to 

date on studying the volatility of crude oil and methods to reduce 

volatility before shipping. The Committee directs the Department 

of Energy to continue this research in partnership with the Department of Transportation to improve the safety of crude oil transported by rail in this country. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
95 

NETL Coal Research and Development.—The Committee recommends $53,000,000 for NETL Coal Research and Development, 

the same as fiscal year 2016 and $18,000,000 above the budget request. The recommendation includes $15,000,000 for the Department to 

expand its external agency activities to develop and test commercially viable advanced separation technologies at proof-of-concept or 

pilot scale that can be deployed near term for the extraction and 

recovery of rare earth elements and minerals from U.S. coal and 

coal byproduct sourceshaving the highest potential for success. The 

Committee encourages the Department to leverage the capabilities 

of outside applied researchers in implementing these activities. 

Supercritical Transformational Electric Power (STEP) Generation 

Initiative.—The Committee recommends $24,300,000 within Fossil 

Energy for the STEP Initiative, a joint initiative with the Office of 

Nuclear Energy and the Solar Energy program within the Office of 

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy to spur the development 

of the necessary designs, materials, components, operation and control systems, sensors, and understanding and characterization for 

large scale supercritical carbon dioxide power conversion. 

The supercritical carbon dioxide Brayton cycle energy conversion 

system transforms heat energy through use of a supercritical fluid 

medium with no condensation rather than through steam and 

water and offers the possibility of higher cycle efficiency over steam 

turbines by increasing turbine inlet temperatures. Funding for fiscal year 2017 will support design and construction activities for the 

STEP facility and develop a targeted research and development 

program plan. In addition to funds provided for the Office of Fossil 

Energy for the STEP Initiative, $6,000,000 is included for the Office of Nuclear Energy to support the technology development of 

supercritical carbon dioxide-based power conversion from nuclear 

energy. Previous funds were utilized by the Solar Energy program 

to assist with coordination activities. 

NATURAL GAS TECHNOLOGIES

The Committee recommends $24,700,000 for Natural Gas Technologies, $18,300,000 below fiscal year 2016 and $32,800,000 below 

the budget request. 

Natural Gas Carbon Capture.—The Committee provides no funds 

for this new activity. 

Research.—The Committee recommends $24,700,000 for Natural 

Gas Technologies Research. Within available funds, the recommendation provides $10,000,000 for research into the cost-effective and responsible extraction of methane hydrates, a vast but 

currently inaccessible resource with total energy reserves that rival 

those from all other known fossil fuels combined; $6,000,000 for 

Environmentally Prudent Development; $5,200,000 for the Risk 

Based Data Management System; and $3,500,000 for midstream 

natural gas infrastructure research and development. The Committee encourages the Department to examine activities within 

midstream natural gas infrastructure research and development 

that curtail methane gas emissions from flaring and venting in 

shale formations. Additionally, the Department is encouraged to 

explore methane leakage technologies, including acoustic monitoring, in planned research. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
96 

UNCONVENTIONAL FOSSIL ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES

The Committee recommends $20,000,000 for Unconventional Fossil Energy Technologies, $321,000 below fiscal year 2016 and 

$20,000,000 above the budget request. Within available funds, the 

recommendation provides $10,000,000 for two or more research 

awards to address issues associated with emerging shale plays in 

the U.S. The funding shall be awarded to either a not-for-profit or 

university based consortium. The consortium must be comprised of 

industry, academia, and stakeholder groups which may include 

NGOs. The projects shall include research studies to improve environmental, water quality, infrastructure, and societal impacts of oil 

and gas development in these emerging plays. These plays shall include unconventional or shale formations where there is currently 

less than 50,000 barrels per day (equivalent) production. The objective of the awards is to encourage prudent development, provide 

cost effective solutions, and develop best practices and tools. 

The Committee encourages the Department to explore the demonstration and deployment of new materials-based technologies 

that improve multiple mechanisms for enhanced oil recovery at any 

depth while also reducing environmental impacts. 

Prior investment has led to the current shale gas revolution and 

continued research and development is vital for the environmentally responsible development of this resource. Therefore, the 

Committee urges the Department to continue the successful work 

at the existing field test sites. 

The Department is directed to issue a report on the feasibility of 

establishing an ethane storage and distribution hub in the United 

States, given the increased production of natural gas liquids 

(NGLs) from shale developments and recognizing that ethane is the 

largest component of those NGLs. The report should examine potential locations, economic feasibility, economic benefits, geologic 

storage capabilities, above ground storage capabilities, infrastructure needs, and benefits to energy security. 

NETL RESEARCH AND OPERATIONS

The Committee recommends $44,984,000 for NETL Research and 

Operations. This new budget line includes funds that were formerly 

in the Program Direction account for the Office of Fossil Energy 

Research and Development. 

NETL INFRASTRUCTURE

The Committee recommends $53,141,000 for NETL Infrastructure. Within available funds, the recommendation provides 

$5,500,000 for NETL’s Supercomputer, Joule. The Committee notes 

that the Department requested $16,500,000 to purchase all of 

Joule’s hardware upgrades in fiscal year 2017, rather than spread 

these purchases out over a three year period. 

OFFICE OF TECHNOLOGY TRANSITIONS

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $– – – 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 8,400,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 7,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... +7,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ ¥1,400,000 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
97 

The mission of the Office of Technology Transitions is to expand 

the commercial impact of the Department’s research, development, 

demonstration, and deployment activities over the short, medium, 

and long term. The Office of Technology Transitions coordinates 

early-stage technology transition activities within the Department 

to improve the eventual deployment and commercialization of energy technologies by the private sector. These activities span the 

work of the national laboratories and external stakeholders conducting research funded by the Department. 

NAVAL PETROLEUM AND OIL SHALE RESERVES

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $17,500,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 14,950,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 14,950,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... ¥2,550,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ – – – 

The Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves no longer serve the 

national defense purpose envisioned in the early 1900’s, and consequently the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 

1996 required the sale of the Government’s interest in the Naval 

Petroleum Reserve 1 (NPR 1). To comply with this requirement, 

the Elk Hills field in California was sold to Occidental Petroleum 

Corporation in 1998. Following the sale of Elk Hills, the transfer 

of the oil shale reserves, and transfer of administrative jurisdiction 

and environmental remediation of the Naval Petroleum Reserve 2 

(NPR 2) to the Department of the Interior, the Department retained one Naval Petroleum Reserve property, the Naval Petroleum 

Reserve 3 (NPR 3) in Wyoming (Teapot Dome field). The Department issued a disposition plan for NPR 3 in June 2013 and began 

implementation of the plan in fiscal year 2014. Transfer of NPR 3 

to a new owner occurred in fiscal year 2015. 

The fiscal year 2017 budget request supports post-sale legacy environmental clean-up and remediation, contract closeout, and 

records disposition at NPR 1. It also supports landfill remediation 

and closure at NPR 3. 

STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $212,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 257,000,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 257,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... +45,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ – – – 

The mission of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve is to store petroleum to reduce the adverse economic impact of a major petroleum 

supply interruption to the U.S. and to carry out obligations under 

the international energy program. The current capacity of the Reserve is 714 million barrels. The current inventory is approximately 695 million barrels or approximately 149 days of net import 

protection for the United States economy. 

The Committee recommendation for the Strategic Petroleum Reserve is $257,000,000. The funding increase above fiscal year 2016 

is primarily for the major maintenance program, to address aging 

infrastructure and deferred maintenance backlog. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
98 

On April 5, 2016, the Administration submitted a budget amendment proposing to drawdown and sell oil from the Reserve, deposit 

the proceeds into the Energy Security and Infrastructure Modernization Fund, and use the funds to carry out construction, maintenance, repair, and replacement activities of the Reserve. The 

Committee needs sufficient time to review this proposal, and, 

therefore, it is not included in the recommendation at this time. 

The Committee may consider inclusion at a later date, if additional 

review shows it to be advisable. 

NORTHEAST HOME HEATING OIL RESERVE

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $7,600,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 6,500,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 6,500,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... ¥1,100,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ – – – 

The acquisition and storage of heating oil for the Northeast 

began in August 2000 when the Department of Energy, through 

the Strategic Petroleum Reserve account, awarded contracts for the 

lease of commercial storage facilities and acquisition of heating oil. 

The purpose of the reserve is to assure home heating oil supplies 

for the Northeastern States during times of very low inventories 

and significant threats to the immediate supply of heating oil. The 

Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve was established as a separate 

entity from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve on March 6, 2001. The 

reserve contains one million barrels of Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel 

which is the equivalent of three to four days of emergency stocks 

in the Northeast. 

The Committee recommendation for the Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve is $6,500,000. The Department also plans to use 

$4,000,000 in prior-year balances to help fund the costs associated 

with newly awarded commercial storage contracts. 

ENERGY INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $122,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 131,125,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 122,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... – – – 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ ¥9,125,000 

The Energy Information Administration is a quasi-independent 

agency within the Department of Energy established to provide 

timely, objective, and accurate energy-related information to the 

Congress, the executive branch, state governments, industry, and 

the public. 

NON-DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $255,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 218,400,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 226,745,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... ¥28,255,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ +8,345,000 

Non-Defense Environmental Cleanup includes funds to manage 

and remediate sites used for civilian, energy research, and non-deVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:33 Apr 27, 2016 Jkt 099790 PO 00000 Frm 00098 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR532.XXX HR532

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
99 

fense related activities. These past activities resulted in radioactive, hazardous, and mixed waste contamination that requires remediation, stabilization, or some other action. 

Small Sites.—Within Small Sites, $5,500,000 is provided to complete a pilot project to decommission and decontaminate the Southwest Experimental Fast Oxide Reactor, as authorized by the Energy Policy Act of 2005. As previously directed in fiscal year 2016, 

the Department is directed to utilize innovative contracting strategies to demolish, dismantle, and dispose of contaminated abovegrade structures for the purposes of minimizing annual site maintenance requirements in order to meet the intent of the authorized 

project while containing costs within the authorized limit of 

$16,000,000. 

Also within Small Sites, $37,629,000 is for the Moab Uranium 

Mill Tailings Remedial Action roject, the same as fiscal year 2016 

and $2,845,000 above the request. 

URANIUM ENRICHMENT DECONTAMINATION AND DECOMMISSIONING

FUND

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $673,749,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... – – – 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 698,540,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... +24,791,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ +698,540,000 

The Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning Fund was established by the Energy Policy Act of 1992 to 

pay for the cleanup of gaseous diffusion plants at Portsmouth, 

Ohio; Paducah, Kentucky; and the East Tennessee Technology 

Park, in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. The recommendation does not include a legislative provision to revise the authorized purposes of 

the mandatory USEC Privatization Fund in lieu of providing discretionary funds to support ongoing cleanup activities of the Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning Fund in 

fiscal year 2017. The Committee rejects the Administration’s request to zero out discretionary funding for such necessary activities 

without an authorized source of funds that is already established 

in law. If similar legislative proposals are sought in the future, the 

Department is directed to ensure sufficient funds are included in 

the budget request to provide continuity of operations while the 

committees of jurisdiction consider such proposals. 

Decontamination and Decommissioning (D&D).—The Committee 

recommendation includes an overall increase above the fiscal year 

2016 amounts for D&D activities to support increases needed to expeditiously complete transition activities at Paducah, to support operations and accelerate the completion of the On-Site Waste Disposal Facility at Portsmouth, and to sustain momentum at the 

East Tennessee Technology Park. 

Paducah.—The Committee encourages the Department to develop plans for the contract period beyond July 2017 when the current deactivation contract is scheduled to expire. The Committee 

urges the Department to act quickly to obtain a new contract for 

D&D to ensure continuity and reduce local economic uncertainty. 

The Committee has heard from national and local stakeholders 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
100 

that longer-term contracts, rather than the three year contract currently issued for Paducah, would be of value to all parties. 

Title X Uranium/Thorium Reimbursements.—The Committee 

recommends $32,959,000, to reimburse private licensees for the 

cost of cleaning up uranium and thorium processing sites in accordance with Title X of the Energy Policy Act of 1992, the same as fiscal year 2016. Fulfilling the obligation to fully reimburse licensees 

is important to the health and safety of the impacted communities. 

Moving forward, the Committee expects the Department of Energy 

to continue to provide sufficient resources within future budgets to 

reimburse licensees for approved claim balances in a timely manner and to avoid accumulating balances and liabilities. 

SCIENCE

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $5,350,200,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 5,572,069,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 5,400,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... +49,800,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ ¥172,069,000 

The Office of Science funds basic science research across national 

laboratories, universities, and other research institutions in support of American innovation and the Department’s energy-focused 

missions. Through research in physics, biology, chemistry, and 

other science disciplines, these activities expand scientific understanding and secure the nation’s leadership in energy innovation. 

The Office of Science is the nation’s largest supporter of basic research in the physical sciences. 

The Science program office includes Advanced Scientific Computing Research, Basic Energy Sciences, Biological and Environmental Research, Fusion Energy Sciences, High Energy Physics, 

Nuclear Physics, Workforce Development for Teachers and Scientists, Science Laboratories Infrastructure, Safeguards and Security, and Program Direction. The Committee has placed a high priority on funding these activities in fiscal year 2017, given the private sector is not likely to fund research whose findings either have 

high non-commercial value or are not likely to be commercialized 

in the near or medium term. However, this work is vital to sustaining the scientific leadership of the United States and can provide the underpinnings for valuable intellectual property in the 

coming decades. 

The Committee is concerned that despite significant federal investments in scientific research, public access to the published results of this taxpayer-funded research is limited. The Committee 

directs the Department to adopt a federal research public access 

policy that is consistent with and advances the purposes of the Department. The Department shall submit to the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress not later than 60 days 

after the enactment of this Act a report regarding the appropriate 

efforts to adopt this Federal research public access policy. 

The Committee recognizes the importance of workplace diversity 

in the Department of Energy’s national laboratories. The Committee encourages the Department to continue to develop and 

broaden partnerships with minority serving institutions, including 

Hispanic-Serving Institutions and Historically Black Colleges and 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
101 

Universities. In particular, the Committee encourages programs involving undergraduate research experiences and high-speed computing access and education. 

ADVANCED SCIENTIFIC COMPUTING RESEARCH

The Advanced Scientific Computing Research program develops 

and hosts some of the world’s fastest computing and network capabilities to enable science and energy modeling, simulation, and research. The Committee recommends $621,000,000 for Advanced 

Scientific Computing Research, the same as fiscal year 2016 and 

$42,180,000 below the budget request. 

Exascale Computing.—The recommendation includes 

$151,000,000 for exascale activities. 

High Performance Computing and Network Facilities.—In addition to the long-term exascale intiative, the Committee supports 

continued upgrade and operation of the Leadership Computing Facilities at Argonne and Oak Ridge national laboratories and of the 

High Performance Production Computing capabilities at Lawrence 

Berkeley national laboratory. The recommendation includes 

$80,000,000 for the Argonne Leadership Computing Facility, 

$110,000,000 for the Oak Ridge Leadership Computing Facility, 

and $92,145,000 for the National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. Within 

available funds, the recommendation includes $8,000,000 for the 

Computational Science Graduate Fellowship Program and 

$45,000,000 for ESnet. 

The Committee notes that reducing the energy cost of data movement from memory and storage is of key importance to the evolution of high performance computing. Within available funds, up 

to $20,000,000 shall be focused on meeting the challenges surrounding memory and storage architecture. 

The Committee encourages the Department to further the development of cryptographic systems that are secure against both 

quantum and classical computers and can interoperate with existing communications protocols and networks. 

Brain Initiative.—The Committee encourages the Department to 

work with the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health on a national brain observatory to leverage its high 

performance computing capabilities in order to advance a deeper 

understanding of the brain and how it works. This collaboration 

will lead to novel brain imaging technologies and brain inspired 

computing applications that will improve the Department’s high 

performance computing capabilities and expertise. However, while 

the Committee supports this collaboration, the recommendation 

does not include the requested $9,000,000 to support the Brain Initiative. The Department’s request would displace other activities 

and the Committee prefers that research awards in support of the 

Brain Initiative follow the same competitive process as other research proposals given the high demand for experimentation time 

on the Department’s high performance computing facilities. 

BASIC ENERGY SCIENCES

The Basic Energy Sciences program funds basic research in materials science, chemistry, geoscience, and bioscience. The science 

breakthroughs in this program enable a broad array of innovation 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
102 

in energy technologies and other industries critical to American 

economic competitiveness. The Committee recommends 

$1,859,972,000 for Basic Energy Sciences, $10,972,000 above fiscal 

year 2016 and $76,758,000 below the budget request. 

The program’s budget consists of funding for research, the operation of existing user facilities, and the design, procurement, and 

construction of new facilities and equipment. The long-term success 

of the program hinges on striking a careful balance among these 

three areas. However, the increasing level of research commitments 

and completion of new facilities make it difficult to adequately fund 

all three components of the Basic Energy Sciences program within 

existing budgetary constraints. The Committee strongly cautions 

the Department against assuming an ever-increasing budget when 

planning the balance among facility runtime, construction, and research funding. 

Research.—The Committee recommends $1,669,972,000 for Basic 

Energy Sciences research, $21,272,000 above fiscal year 2016 and 

$76,758,000 below the budget request. 

Within available funds for materials science and engineering re- search, the recommendation includes $97,800,000 for Energy Frontier Research Centers; $10,000,000 for the Experimental Program 

to Stimulate Competitive Research; $12,000,000 for Computational 

Materials Sciences; and the requested level of $24,088,000 for the 

fifth year of the Batteries and Energy Storage Innovation Hub. 

The Committee encourages the Department to support ongoing 

research in polymers and optoelectronics. 

Within available funds for chemical sciences, geosciences, and 

biosciences, the recommendation includes the requested level of 

$15,000,000 for the second year of the second five-year term of the 

Fuels from Sunlight Innovation Hub. 

For scientific user facilities, the recommendation includes 

$978,529,000, of which $35,000,000 is for the Advanced Photon 

Source upgrade. The recommendation includes the requested levels 

for facilities operations of the nation’s synchrotron radiation light 

sources, high flux neutron sources, and nanoscale science research 

centers. 

Construction.—The Committee recommends $190,000,000 for 

Basic Energy Sciences construction. 

BIOLOGICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH

The Biological and Environmental Research (BER) program supports advances in energy technologies and related science through 

research into complex biological and environmental systems. The 

Committee recommends $595,000,000 for Biological and Environmental Research, $14,000,000 below fiscal year 2016 and 

$66,920,000 below the budget request. The Committee encourages 

the Department to give priority to optimizing the operation of BER 

user facilities. 

The recommendation includes $80,000,000 for the final year of 

the second five-year term of the three Bioenergy Research Centers. 

The Committee continues to support the Department’s funding 

for academia to perform climate model studies that include the collection and evaluation of atmospheric data from satellite observations obtained in cooperation with NASA. Satellite observations of 

the atmosphere within the context of the Earth as a global system 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
103 

provide information that is critical in the interpretation of earthbased observations. 

FUSION ENERGY SCIENCES

The Fusion Energy Sciences program supports basic research 

and experimentation aiming to harness nuclear fusion for energy 

production. The Committee recommends $450,000,000 for Fusion 

Energy Sciences, $12,000,000 above fiscal year 2016 and 

$51,822,000 above the budget request. Within available funds, the 

recommendation provides not less than $74,090,000 for the National Spherical Torus Experiment (NSTX) and not less than 

$82,100,000 for DIII–D. 

University-led research helps further U.S. research in fusion energy and trains the next generation of scientists. The Department 

shall submit not later than 180 days after the enactment of this 

Act a report summarizing the Fusion Energy Sciences program’s 

current collaboration with universities and an explanation for its 

relevant funding allocations. 

Research.—The Committee recommends $207,027,000 for burning plasma science foundations; $41,569,000 for burning plasma 

science long pulse; and $76,404,000 for discovery plasma science. 

Within available funds, the recommendation provides $15,000,000 

for International Research; $18,000,000 for High Energy Density 

Laboratory Plasmas; $25,000,000 for Theory; and $15,000,000 for 

Scientific Discovery through Advanced Computing. 

The Committee supports the fusion energy science community’s 

continued efforts hosting workshops to advance and plan for the 

long term vision of the fusion energy sciences field. The Department is directed to hold additional workshops and submit not later 

than 180 days after the enactment of this Act a report summarizing these efforts. 

Construction.—The Committee recommends $125,000,000 for the 

U.S. contribution to the ITER project. 

The Committee continues to believe the ITER project represents 

an important step forward for energy sciences and has the potential to revolutionize the current understanding of fusion energy. 

However, cost increases and major schedule delays have brought 

uncertainty as to whether the project may still be completed within 

a reasonable baseline. The fiscal year 2016 Act included language 

directing the Secretary to recommend by May 2, 2016, that the 

U.S. either remain a partner in the ITER project or terminate its 

participation. The Committee notes that the Secretary’s recommendation may require a change to the recommended level of 

funding for the ITER project and awaits the decision. 

The Committee directs the Department to submit not later than 

December 1, 2016, a follow-up report to its May 2, 2016, report updating findings on its ITER recommendations. 

HIGH ENERGY PHYSICS

The High Energy Physics program supports fundamental research into the elementary constituents of matter and energy, and 

ultimately into the nature of space and time. The program focuses 

on particle physics theory and experimentation in three areas: the 

energy frontier, which investigates new particles and fundamental 

forces through high-energy experimentation; the intensity frontier, 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
104 

which focuses on rare events to better understand our fundamental 

model of the universe’s elementary constituents; and the cosmic 

frontier, which investigates the nature of the universe and its form 

of matter and energy on cosmic scales. The Committee recommends 

$823,009,000 for High Energy Physics, $28,009,000 above fiscal 

year 2016 and $5,012,000 above the budget request. 

Research.—The Committee recommends $729,509,000 for High Energy Physics research, $609,000 above fiscal year 2016 and 

$33,000 above the budget request. 

The Committee strongly supports the Department’s efforts to advance the recommendations of the Particle Physics Prioritization 

Panel and urges the Department to maintain a careful balance 

among competing priorities and among small, medium, and large 

scale projects. 

For energy frontier experimental physics, the recommendation provides $151,031,000. 

For intensity frontier experimental physics, the recommendation provides $234,144,000. Within available funds, the recommendation 

provides $15,220,000 for PIP–II. 

For cosmic frontier experimental physics, the recommendation provides $130,069,000. Within available funds, the recommendation 

provides $70,200,000 for Projects, of which $45,000,000 is for the 

Large Synoptic Survey Telescope Camera and $23,500,000 is for 

the dark energy and dark matter experiments. 

Construction.—The Committee recommends $93,500,000 for High 

Energy Physics construction. Within available funds, the recommendation includes $43,500,000 for the Muon to Electron Conversion Experiment and $50,000,000 for the Long Baseline Neutrino Facility (LBNF). The Committee recognizes the importance of 

LBNF to maintaining American leadership in the intensity frontier 

and to basic science discovery of neutrino and standard model 

physics. However, the Committee also recognizes that LBNF construction must be affordable under existing budgetary constraints. 

NUCLEAR PHYSICS

The Nuclear Physics program supports basic research into the 

fundamental particles that compose nuclear matter, how they 

interact, and how they combine to form the different types of matter observed in the universe today. The Committee recommends 

$620,000,000 for Nuclear Physics, $2,900,000 above fiscal year 

2016 and $15,658,000 below the budget request. 

Operations and Maintenance.—The Committee recommends 

$520,000,000 for Nuclear Physics Operations and Maintenance. 

Within available funds, the Department is encouraged to fund optimal operations at Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility 

to support runtime at the 12GeV Continuous Electron Beam Accelerator Facility and at Brookhaven National Laboratory to support 

runtime at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider. 

Construction.—The Committee recommends $100,000,000 for the 

Facility for Rare Isotope Beams at Michigan State University. 

WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT FOR TEACHERS AND SCIENTISTS

The Committee recommends $20,925,000 for workforce development for teachers and scientists, $1,425,000 above fiscal year 2016 

and the same as the budget request. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
105 

SCIENCE LABORATORIES INFRASTRUCTURE

The Committee recommends $122,397,000 for Science Laboratories Infrastructure, $8,797,000 above fiscal year 2016 and 

$7,603,000 below the budget request. 

Construction.—The Committee recommends $63,451,000 for 

Science Laboratories Infrastructure construction. The Department 

is directed to invest in new construction and infrastructure improvements that save money over the long term, modernize outdated facilities, and optimize scientific output. 

SAFEGUARDS AND SECURITY

The Committee recommends $103,000,000 to meet safeguards 

and security requirements at Office of Science facilities, the same 

as fiscal year 2016 and the budget request. 

SCIENCE PROGRAM DIRECTION

The Committee recommends $184,697,000 for Science Program Direction, $303,000 below fiscal year 2016 and $19,784,000 below 

the request. 

NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $– – – 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... – – – 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 150,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... +150,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ +150,000,000 

The Committee recommendation includes $150,000,000 for Nuclear Waste Disposal to continue the Department of Energy’s statutorily required activities for the Yucca Mountain license application. Within available funds, the Department is directed to reestablish its capability to respond to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

during the adjudicatory process, and to otherwise fully support the 

Yucca Mountain licensing process. The recommendation includes 

support for affected units of local government who have formally 

consented to host Yucca Mountain. 

The Committee reiterates that the Administration’s repeated 

statements that Yucca Mountain is not a ‘‘workable option’’ ignores 

both the consent of the host community and the expressed intent 

of Congress. 

ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY—ENERGY

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $291,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 350,000,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 305,889,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... +14,889,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ ¥44,111,000 

The Advanced Research Projects Agency—Energy (ARPA–E) supports research aimed at rapidly developing energy technologies 

whose development and commercialization are too risky to attract 

sufficient private sector investment but are capable of significantly 

changing the energy sector to address our critical economic and energy security challenges. Projects funded by ARPA–E include such 

wide-ranging areas as production processes for transportation fuel 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
106 

alternatives that can reduce our dependence on imported oil, heating and cooling technologies with exceptionally high energy efficiency, and improvements in petroleum refining processes. 

TITLE 17 INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY LOAN GUARANTEE PROGRAM

ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES 

GROSS APPROPRIATION

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $42,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 37,000,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 37,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... ¥5,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ – – – 

OFFSETTING COLLECTIONS

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $¥25,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... ¥30,000,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... ¥30,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... ¥5,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ – – – 

PROPOSED CHANGE IN SUBSIDY COST

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $– – – 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 1,020,000,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... – – – 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... – – – 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ ¥1,020,000,000 

NET APPROPRIATION

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $17,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 1,027,000,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 7,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... ¥10,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ ¥1,020,000,000 

The Committee recommends administrative expenses of 

$37,000,000, which are offset by fees collected pursuant to section 

1702(h) of the Energy Policy Act, for a final net appropriation of 

$7,000,000. The Committee does not provide the additional loan authority requested in the budget and provides support for administrative operations only. 

ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY VEHICLES MANUFACTURING LOAN

PROGRAM

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $6,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 5,000,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 5,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... ¥1,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ – – – 

The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 established 

a direct loan program to support the development of advanced technology vehicles and associated components in the United States. 

The program provides loans to automobile and automobile part 

manufacturers for the cost of re-equipping, expanding, or estabVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:33 Apr 27, 2016 Jkt 099790 PO 00000 Frm 00106 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR532.XXX HR532

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
107 

lishing manufacturing facilities in the United States to produce advanced technology vehicles or qualified components, and for associated engineering integration costs. The funds provided support administrative operations only. 

DEPARTMENTAL ADMINISTRATION

GROSS APPROPRIATION

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $248,142,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 270,037,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 233,971,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... ¥14,171,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ ¥36,066,000 

REVENUES

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $¥117,171,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... ¥103,000,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... ¥103,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... +14,171,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ – – – 

NET APPROPRIATION

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $130,971,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 167,037,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 130,971,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... – – – 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ ¥36,066,000 

Funding recommended for Departmental Administration provides 

for general management and program support functions benefiting 

all elements of the Department of Energy, including the National 

Nuclear Security Administration. The account funds a wide array 

of Headquarters activities not directly associated with the execution of specific programs. 

Office of Indian Energy Policy and Programs.—The Committee 

recommends $21,330,000, to coordinate and implement energy 

management, conservation, education, and delivery systems for Native Americans. Within this amount, $18,130,000 is included for 

the Tribal Energy Program and $3,200,000 for Program Direction. 

The Committee includes funding for the Department’s request in 

this account rather than in a new account, as requested. 

Economic Impact and Diversity.—The recommendation includes 

$11,319,000 for Economic Impact and Diversity, $1,319,000 more 

than fiscal year 2016 and the same as the budget request. 

Office of Management.—The recommendation includes 

$59,657,000 for the Office of Management. The recommendation includes $5,000,000 for cost estimating and $18,000,000 for Project 

Management Oversight and Assessments. 

Chief Information Officer.—The recommendation includes 

$73,218,000 of which, not less than $21,006,000 shall be for Cybersecurity and secure information and $3,000,000 shall be for activities related to implementation of the Digital Accountability and 

Transparency Act. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
108 

Renewable Fuel Standard.—The Department shall continue to 

operate in accordance with the direction provided in the explanatory statement that accompanied P.L. 114–113. 

Support for Ukraine.—The Committee looks forward to receiving 

the Department’s report examining the potential for leveraging its 

expertise in support of energy-related issues in Ukraine as directed 

in the explanatory statement that accompanied P.L. 114–113. 

OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $46,424,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 44,424,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 44,424,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... ¥2,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ – – – 

The Office of the Inspector General performs agency-wide audit, 

inspection, and investigative functions to identify and correct management and administrative deficiencies that create conditions for 

existing or potential instances of fraud, waste, and mismanagement. The audit function provides financial and performance audits 

of programs and operations. The inspections function provides independent inspections and analyses of the effectiveness, efficiency, 

and economy of programs and operations. The investigative function provides for the detection and investigation of improper and illegal activities involving programs, personnel, and operations. 

Carryover balances in excess of $2,000,000 will allow the Office 

of the Inspector General to continue operations at fiscal year 2016 

levels. 

To the extent possible, the Inspector General shall ensure the 

findings of its investigative reports are made available to the Committee and the public. Revised reports may be required in order to 

protect information that would otherwise limit distribution to Internal Official Use Only. 

ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES 

The Atomic Energy Defense Activities programs of the Department of Energy in the National Nuclear Security Administration 

(NNSA) consist of Weapons Activities, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation, Naval Reactors, and Federal Salaries and Expenses; 

outside of the NNSA, these include Defense Environmental Cleanup and Other Defense Activities. Descriptions of each of these accounts are provided below. 

NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION 

The Department of Energy is responsible for enhancing U.S. national security through the military application of nuclear technology and reducing the global danger from the proliferation of 

weapons of mass destruction. The NNSA, a semi-autonomous agency within the Department, carries out these responsibilities. Established in March 2000 pursuant to Title 32 of the National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000, the NNSA is responsible 

for the management and operation of the nation’s nuclear weapons 

complex, naval reactors, and nuclear nonproliferation activities. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
109 

The recommendation includes $12,853,570,000 for the NNSA, 

$327,058,000 above fiscal year 2016 and $22,030,000 below the 

budget request. 

WEAPONS ACTIVITIES

(INCLUDING RESCISSION OF FUNDS)

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $8,846,948,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 9,285,147,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 9,285,147,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... +438,199,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ – – – 

Weapons Activities ensures the safety, security, reliability, and 

effectiveness of the nation’s nuclear weapons stockpile without nuclear testing by providing funding to four main elements: Directed 

Stockpile Work; Research, Development, Technology and Engineering; Infrastructure and Operations; and Security. 

Integrated Surety Solutions for Transportation.—The budget request included plans to implement an Integrated Surety Solutions 

for Transportation program for the W88 warhead and deferred previous plans to develop such a system for the W76 and B61 warheads. Given that the benefits of the requested funds are limited 

to only one warhead type and the cost for development is approximately $287,900,000 through fiscal year 2021, the recommendation 

does not include the $26,000,000 within W88 Stockpile Systems 

and $7,500,000 within R&D Certification and Safety to initiate 

those efforts in fiscal year 2017. The recommendation fully funds 

the budget request for the next-generation transporter within Secure Transportation Asset, which will improve the security of all 

warhead types in transit. Prior to submitting future funding requests, the NNSA shall ensure it has first satisfied an outstanding 

reporting requirement on implementing recommendations made in 

the 2010 JASONs Surety Study that would improve the safety and 

security of warheads in transit at little to no cost. 

Enhanced Capabilities for Subcritical Experiments.—The budget 

request included line-item and operating funds to support the construction of an advanced radiographic facility at the Nevada National Security Site. The recommendation includes no funding for 

this facility. The new facility is a substantial investment, with total 

costs currently reported to be upwards of $342,000,000, and the 

Committee is concerned that the NNSA is not utilizing best practices in managing these investments. The NNSA did not provide a 

project data sheet for the experimental facility in the Science program that would outline the cost, scope, and schedule for the capability and it is not clear whether the entirety of the project is being 

carried out in accordance with DOE Order 413.3B. To improve 

practices, the NNSA is directed to fully implement guidelines established by the DOE Office of Science that clearly define requirements for major items of equipment (MIE). Specifically, if the associated civil construction is less than the limit for general plant 

projects and is less than 20 percent of the equipment costs, the 

project is to be considered an MIE. If either of these thresholds is 

exceeded, the project would be considered line-item construction. 

To improve its justification of the mission need for the new capability, the NNSA is directed to commission the JASONs Defense 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
110 

Advisory Group to investigate the need for new radiographic facilities, independently validate any gaps between experimental needs 

to certify the nuclear weapons stockpile and present experimental 

capabilities, and determine whether there is adequate planning to 

justify investing in those capabilities. A report of the findings shall 

be provided to the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses 

of Congress in sufficient time to support consideration of future requests for funding. 

West End Protected Area Reduction.—The West End Protected 

Area Reduction (WEPAR) project will construct an interim PIDAS 

to reduce the size of the protected area at the Y–12 National Security Complex from 150 acres to 90 acres. In the wake of the 2012 

security incursion, the NNSA implemented a number of organizational reforms, but most of those changes have since been reversed. 

Maintenance needs remain high and the outdated systems continue 

to generate an excessive amount of false alarms, problems that directly contributed to the poor performance of protective forces during the incident. Shrinking the protective area footprint will not 

only reduce costs, but it will greatly improve security effectiveness 

and is therefore a high priority for the Committee. In fiscal year 

2014, the NNSA included $24,000,000 for the WEPAR project within the budget request for the Uranium Processing Facility (UPF) 

project. The NNSA later desegregated the WEPAR scope, but kept 

the funding previously allocated to WEPAR within the UPF project 

for other activities. While the Committee supports the decision to 

desegregate the project scope, it is concerned by the NNSA’s subsequent actions to push aside plans for the relocation and redirect 

those funds to other activities. The Administrator is directed to 

provide, not later than 30 days after the enactment of this Act, to 

the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress a 

plan that will expedite completion of the project. 

DIRECTED STOCKPILE WORK

Directed Stockpile Work includes all activities that directly support weapons in the nuclear stockpile, including maintenance, research, development, engineering, certification, dismantlement, and 

disposal activities. The Committee recommends $3,294,527,000 for 

Directed Stockpile Work, $93,265,000 below fiscal year 2016 and 

$36,000,000 below the budget request. 

Life Extension Programs.—The recommendation provides full 

funding for the NNSA’s life extension programs, including the ongoing refurbishment efforts for the B61, W76, W88, and W80 warheads. The Committee remains concerned about the aggressive 

schedule to accomplish the delivery of concurrent life extension programs for the B61 and W88 in the 2020–2025 timeframe. In fiscal 

year 2016, the Committee directed the NNSA to investigate work 

levelling strategies for the W88 that would help alleviate these 

pressures and the Committee expects the NNSA to continue to 

make progress on these efforts. 

Life Extension Program Reporting.—The present format of the 

Selected Acquisition Reports submitted to the Committees provides 

little, if any, explanatory information on the progress and planning 

of the NNSA’s life extension and major refurbishment programs. 

The NNSA is directed to provide to the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress a classified summary of each onVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:33 Apr 27, 2016 Jkt 099790 PO 00000 Frm 00110 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR532.XXX HR532

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
111 

going life extension and major refurbishment beginning with the 

award of the phase 6.3 milestone and annually thereafter until 

completion of the program. 

Uranium Sustainment.—The recommendation includes an additional $3,000,000 above the budget request to support material consolidation and planning activities needed to expedite the West End 

Protective Area Reduction Project at Y–12. 

Domestic Uranium Enrichment.—The NNSA is currently undertaking a new down-blending campaign and is bartering proceeds 

from the sale of unencumbered low-enriched uranium to meet its 

down-blending costs. According to the NNSA, the amounts planned 

to be bartered could fuel up to five single-reactor reloads for tritium production. The NNSA is directed to provide the Committees 

on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress updated costs to implement Option 2 as soon as possible. In addition, the NNSA is directed to provide to the Committees on Appropriations of both 

Houses of Congress, not later than 30 days after the enactment of 

this Act a report that describes clear milestones for activities to be 

carried out by the domestic uranium enrichment program, including a roadmap for any centrifuge technology research and development that might contribute to establishing a domestic uranium enrichment capability in order to meet U.S. national security needs. 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TECHNOLOGY, AND ENGINEERING

The NNSA’s Research, Development, Technology, and Engineering (RDT&E) activities focus on the development and maintenance 

of critical capabilities, tools, and processes that support sciencebased stockpile stewardship and continued certification of the 

stockpile in the absence of underground nuclear testing. For 

RDT&E, the Committee recommends $1,818,035,000, $513,000 

below fiscal year 2016 and $36,684,000 below the budget request. 

Science.—The Committee recommendation fully funds the subcritical experiments that are necessary to gather data and improve 

the physics-based computational models used for the annual assessment and certification of the nuclear weapons stockpile. Within 

Advanced Radiography, up to $5,000,000 is available to support development activities that could significantly reduce the cost of new 

radiographic drivers, including activities to reduce x-ray spot size 

and improve existing pulsed power components. The recommendation does not include $7,500,000 requested within Advanced Radiography for Enhanced Capabilities for Subcritical Experiments. 

Academic Alliances and Partnerships.—The recommendation includes $18,956,000 for the Minority Serving Institution Partnerships Program (MSIPP), including funding for the Tribal College 

Initiative. The MSIPP remains a high priority for the Committee 

and the NNSA did not provide adequate detail in its budget request for the program. The NNSA is directed to clearly account for 

MSIPP funds within Academic Alliances and Partnerships in its 

budget request. 

Inertial Confinement Fusion and High Yield.—The Committee 

recommends $522,959,000, $11,909,000 above fiscal year 2016 and 

the same as the budget request. Within this amount, $68,000,000 

is for the OMEGA Laser Facility at the University of Rochester, 

$330,000,000 is for the National Ignition Facility, and $8,500,000 

is for the Naval Research Laboratory. The Committee recognizes 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
112 

the need of pursuing complementary approaches to a fusion demonstration and high energy density physics research in order to ensure the long term viability of the Stockpile Stewardship Program. 

In addition, the Committee encourages the Department to develop 

a strategy and appropriate funding for next generation pulsed 

power technology and mission applications, including support for 

university-based research. 

INFRASTRUCTURE AND OPERATIONS

Infrastructure and Operations provides funding for the operations, maintenance, and recapitalization of NNSA facilities and infrastructure. The Committee recommends $2,771,318,000 for Infrastructure and Operations, $492,194,000 above fiscal year 2016 and 

$49,366,000 above the budget request. 

Operations of Facilities.—In recognition of the improved transparency in the NNSA’s budget request for Infrastructure and Operations, the Committee provides funding for Operations of Facilities 

within one reprogramming control point. The NNSA is directed to 

continue to provide the details of its site-splits in its budget request 

and to provide an explanation of changes for any significant sitespecific variations. 

Maintenance and Repair of Facilities.—The Committee recommends $400,000,000, $123,000,000 above fiscal year 2016 and 

$106,000,000 above the budget request. The Committee continues 

to place a strong emphasis on reducing the growing backlog of deferred maintenance. 

Recapitalization.—Within Capability-Based Investments, the recommendation includes an increase of $5,800,000 for pre-conceptual 

design and other project costs of the lithium production capability 

project. The NNSA is directed to provide the Total Estimated Cost 

of each Recapitalization project in its budget request. 

Facility Disposition.—The recommendation includes $235,400,000 

within a new reprogramming control point to support the NNSA’s 

request to allocate funding in order to eliminate excess facilities 

through either demolition, transfer, or sale. Undertaking disposition activities will enable a reduction in the NNSA’s footprint, reduce operating costs, and improve the vitality of the nuclear enterprise. The NNSA is directed to separately budget for facility disposition activities in future budget requests. 

06–D–141, Uranium Processing Facility (UPF), Y–12.—The Committee recommends $530,000,000, $100,000,000 above fiscal year 

2016 and $45,000,000 below the budget request. The viability of 

the NNSA’s redesigned project is heavily dependent on achieving a 

lower hazard categorization for certain subprojects and safety-related design issues have been significant cost drivers for the Department’s major projects. The NNSA is directed to conduct, in consultation with the Office of Enterprise Assessments and the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, an independent design review of the UPF project that will assess the adequacy of the design 

to meet nuclear safety requirements and to submit a design report 

to the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress 

not later than 90 days after the enactment of this Act. 

04–D–125, Chemistry and Metallurgy Research (CMR) Replacement Project, LANL.—The Committee recommends $150,615,000, 

$4,995,000 below fiscal year 2016 and $9,000,000 below the reVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:33 Apr 27, 2016 Jkt 099790 PO 00000 Frm 00112 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR532.XXX HR532

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
113 

quest. The remaining funds requested within 04–D–125 have been 

provided separately, as described below. The Committee supports 

the NNSA’s efforts to refine the scope required to cease all operations at the legacy CMR building in 2019, a deteriorating and obsolete facility built in 1952 that no longer provides adequate space 

to meet the NNSA’s mission needs. In House Report 113–486, the 

Committee provided clear direction to the NNSA regarding the conduct of follow-on work that is needed to recapitalize the plutonium 

infrastructure at Los Alamos National Laboratory. The Committee 

limited the scope of activities to be conducted under the existing 

CMR Replacement Project to that of the original mission need for 

the project, that is, to relocate existing analytic chemistry and materials characterization capabilities from the legacy facility. The 

Committee provided further guidance that the construction of new 

modular facilities and installation of equipment within PF–4 to increase pit production were not sufficiently related to the original 

mission need of the existing authorized project and stated its opposition to including these activities as additional subprojects. Each 

of these projects are major undertakings in their own right and 

represent new starts that should be managed in full accordance 

with DOE Order 413.3B. If the requested change in scope were approved, the CMR Replacement project would be stretched out until 

fiscal year 2024, twenty years after its start date of fiscal year 2004 

and thirteen years beyond the original completion date of fiscal 

year 2011. Such a tortured and drawn-out replacement of a single 

legacy facility over a twenty-year time period is hardly a statement 

of project success. 

17–D–125, PF–4 Reconfiguration Project, LANL.—The Committee 

recommends $8,000,000, the same amount as requested for these 

activities within project 04–D–125. The project will maximize the 

use of PF–4 and establish enduring capabilities that support 

NNSA’s actinide-based mission. The project is currently estimated 

to cost approximately $685,000,000. The NNSA is directed to submit a separate project data sheet and clear mission statement that 

describes the need for the project in its fiscal year 2018 budget request. 

17–D–126, RLUOB Reconfiguration Project, LANL.—The Committee recommends $1,000,000, the same amount as requested for 

these activities within project 04–D–125. The project will maximize 

the use of the Radiological Laboratory Office Building (RLUOB) by 

reconfiguring existing laboratory space and re-categorizing the 

building to a hazard category-3 facility. This project is estimated to 

cost approximately $365,000,000. The NNSA is directed to submit 

a separate project data sheet and clear mission statement that describes the need for the project in its fiscal year 2018 budget request. 

SECURITY

Defense Nuclear Security.—The Committee recommends increases in funding for protective forces in order to ramp up production operations at Y–12 and Pantex. The NNSA did not include any 

site specific funding information in its budget request as in previous years. The NNSA shall provide a clear accounting of security 

funds by site in future requests. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
114 

17–D–710 West End Protected Area Reduction Project, Y–12.— The Committee recommends $24,000,000 to initiate the WEPAR 

project in fiscal year 2017. 

Secure Transportation Asset.—The Committee supports increases 

needed to ramp up the size of the federal agent workforce, but 

there is currently an excessive amount of prior-year carryover 

available to meet fiscal year 2017 needs. The Committee will continue to monitor spending rates to assess whether additional funds 

are needed to support manning requirements. 

LEGACY CONTRACTOR PENSIONS

The Committee provides $248,492,000 for payments into the legacy University of California contractor employee defined benefit 

pension plans, $35,395,000 below fiscal year 2016 and the same as 

the budget request. 

DEFENSE NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION

(INCLUDING RESCISSION OF FUNDS)

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $1,940,302,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 1,821,916,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 1,821,916,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... ¥118,386,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ – – – 

The Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation account provides funding 

to programs of the National Nuclear Security Administration that 

prevent, counter, and respond to global nuclear threats. 

Continuing U.S. Nonproliferation Activities in Russia.—The recommendation includes no new funds to enter into contracts and 

agreements with Russia in fiscal year 2017, the same as fiscal year 

2016. 

DEFENSE NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION

Funding for the Office of Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation is 

provided across five programmatic areas: Global Material Security, 

Material Management and Minimization, Nonproliferation and 

Arms Control, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation R&D, and Nonproliferation Construction. The Committee commends the Secretary 

for the Department’s leading role in conducting a multi-agency review of nonproliferation programs and recommends that this process be formalized with findings communicated to the Committee for 

consideration. 

National Academy of Sciences Review.—The Secretary of Energy 

is proposing to move forward with a concept to emplace large quantities of pit and non-pit plutonium in order to support U.S. commitments under the Plutonium Management Disposition Agreement 

(PMDA) with Russia. The amount of radioactive materials under 

consideration may exceed the authorized disposal limits of the 

WIPP Land Withdrawal Act (LWA) and the NNSA has not yet conducted the required safety and environmental analyses required to 

support the alternative. Section 17 of the LWA provides a process 

to evaluate and publish analyses of plans for operating WIPP with 

respect to health, safety, and environmental issues. In accordance 

with this established statutory mandate, the NNSA shall commisVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:33 Apr 27, 2016 Jkt 099790 PO 00000 Frm 00114 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR532.XXX HR532

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
115 

sion the National Academy of Sciences to conduct a review of the 

Secretary’s conceptual plans to dispose of surplus plutonium to include considerations of transportation, operations, performance assessment, compliance with Environmental Protection Agency and 

other regulations, safety analyses, and any other activities required 

to carry out this alternative that are pertinent to the operation of 

WIPP. Not later than 30 days after the enactment of this Act, the 

NNSA shall provide to the Committees on Appropriations of both 

Houses of Congress an update of the status of the study and an estimated date of completion for its review. 

Global Material Security.—Within Global Material Security, the recommendation includes $20,000,000 above the budget request for 

International Nuclear Security. 

Material Management and Minimization.—A significant portion 

of the highly-enriched uranium (HEU) minimization efforts going 

forward will involve multi-year research and development activities. To better align research and development-related activities 

with resident expertise for managing such activities within the Office of Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation, the recommendation 

shifts funding responsibility for the development of fuel for high 

performance research reactors and for demonstrating and commercially deploying domestic-based technologies for the production of 

the medical isotope Molybdenum-99 (Mo-99) to Defense Nuclear 

Nonproliferation Research and Development. Within Conversion, 

the recommendation includes funding requested for the conversion 

of international research reactors, including activities for Mo-99 

production by international suppliers, at the full amounts requested for those activities. 

Within Material Disposition, the recommendation includes $5,000,000, the same as in fiscal year 2016, to continue to develop 

the conceptual plans of the MOX Alternative and to support independent reviews. The agreement prohibits funds from being used 

to dilute plutonium that could otherwise be used for MOX feedstock 

or to meet U.S. commitments under the PMDA. The recommendation does not include $1,000,000 requested for the Uranium Lease 

and Takeback Program (ULTP). The NNSA did not submit a legislative proposal required to use the proceeds generated by ULTP to 

meet the disposition costs of the program. 

Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Research and Development.— 

The Committee recommends $491,566,000, $72,233,000 above fiscal 

year 2016 and $97,644,000 above the budget request. Within that 

amount, the recommendation includes $97,644,000, $14,000,000 

above the budget request, to develop fuels for high performance research reactors and to demonstrate domestic-based technologies for 

Mo-99 production that utilize low-enriched uranium. 

High Performance Research Reactors.—A recent National Academies study of the NNSA’s HEU minimization program found that 

the highest performance research reactors will require new low-enriched fuels to maintain performance and that the timeline for development of those fuels will take much longer than expected due 

to obstacles that are primarily technical. Considering the extended 

timelines, the NNSA is directed to provide to the Committees on 

Appropriations of both Houses of Congress, not later than 180 days 

after the enactment of this Act, a long-term roadmap with clear 

milestones and off-ramps for the development of fuels that are 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
116 

needed to support conversion goals. The roadmap shall incorporate 

regular independent technical and programmatic evaluations, as 

recommended by the National Academies. 

Domestic Production of Mo-99.—The Committee recommendation 

includes $44,900,000, $14,000,000 above the budget request. The 

NNSA’s nonproliferation program has spearheaded efforts to support domestic Mo-99 production without the use of HEU, but its 

program has not met timelines in the American Medical Isotopes 

Production Act (AMIPA) and the cooperative agreements closest to 

production rely on the use of research reactors that use HEU. Furthermore, the U.S. may continue to rely on the purification services 

of other nations to meet U.S. demand. While the National Academy 

of Sciences is undertaking a review that will help provide direction, 

independent reviews conducted to date have recommended lifting 

the nominal $25,000,000 cap imposed by the NNSA. The Committee encourages the NNSA to use these and unencumbered prioryear balances for HEU minimization activities to competitively 

award new cooperative agreements that are funded up to the full 

amount of the 50/50 government/industry cost share authorized by 

AMIPA. In particular, the NNSA is encouraged to consider the 

needs of green-field projects that may require a higher initial investment to be viable, but that do not rely on HEU and that may 

provide a more stable long-term domestic supply through diversification. 

Nonproliferation Construction.—The Committee recommends 

$340,000,000 for the Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility project, 

the same as fiscal year 2016 and $70,000,000 above the budget request. The recommendation provides sufficient funding to sustain 

the current pace of construction on the MOX facility in fiscal year 

2017 and includes a provision that prohibits the use of MOX funding to place the project in cold standby. The recommendation directs the use of $70,000,000 in prior-year balances that remain 

unexecuted because of the moratorium on new nonproliferation activities in Russia, in order to fully offset those costs in fiscal year 

2017. The Committee remains concerned that scuttling the MOX 

project prior to commencing negotiations on modifications to the 

agreement will limit U.S. options and will lead to further cost 

growth if the project is later restarted. Furthermore, without a legislative proposal that would describe the legal foundation needed 

for carrying out the proposed alternative, the Department may 

incur fines that were not accounted for in the NNSA’s cost analysis, costs which could surpass any savings assumed to be generated in this budget request by terminating construction in fiscal 

year 2017. 

NUCLEAR COUNTERTERRORISM AND INCIDENT RESPONSE

The NNSA’s Nuclear Counterterrorism and Incident Response 

programs respond to and mitigate nuclear and radiological incidents worldwide in order to defend the nation from the threat of 

nuclear terrorism. The Committee recommends $271,881,000, 

$37,491,000 above fiscal year 2016 and the same as the budget request. Within that amount, the recommendation includes 

$34,775,000 for the Emergency Management and Operations Center. The recommendation directs the use of $22,000,000 in prioryear balances. The NNSA is directed to provide an interagency 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
117 

plan and cyber assessment for deploying a new secure communications system to support incident response activities not later than 

September 30,2016. 

LEGACY CONTRACTOR PENSIONS

The Committee provides $83,208,000 for payments into the legacy University of California contractor employee defined benefit 

pension plans, $11,409,000 below fiscal year 2016 and the same as 

the budget request. 

NAVAL REACTORS

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $1,375,496,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 1,420,120,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 1,420,120,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... +44,624,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ – – – 

The Naval Reactors (NR) program is responsible for all aspects 

of naval nuclear propulsion from technology development through 

reactor operations to ultimate reactor plant disposal. The program 

provides for the design, development, testing, and evaluation of improved naval nuclear propulsion plants and reactor cores. The recommendation fully funds the request to develop the Ohio-Replacement ballistic missile submarine and refuel the S8G prototype, 

which is closely linked to the Ohio-Replacement. 

Ohio-Replacement Reactor Systems Development.—The Committee recommends $213,700,000, $26,900,000 above fiscal year 

2016 and the same as the budget request. 

S8G Prototype Refueling.—The Committee recommends 

$124,000,000, $9,000,000 below fiscal year 2016 and the same as 

the budget request. 

Naval Reactors Development.—The Committee recommends 

$442,838,000, $4,058,000 below fiscal year 2016 and $5,500,000 

above the budget request. Within this amount, $75,100,000 is provided for Advanced Test Reactor operations. 

Spent Fuel Handling Recapitalization Project.—The Committee 

recommends $100,000,000, $14,000,000 above fiscal year 2016 and 

the same as the budget request. 

FEDERAL SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $383,666,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 412,817,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 382,387,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... ¥1,279,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ ¥30,430,000 

The Federal Salaries and Expenses account provides corporate 

planning and oversight for Defense Programs, Defense Nuclear 

Nonproliferation, and Naval Reactors, including the NNSA field offices in New Mexico, Nevada, and California. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
118 

ENVIRONMENTAL AND OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES 

DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $5,289,742,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 5,235,350,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 5,226,950,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... ¥62,792,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ ¥8,400,000 

The Defense Environmental Cleanup account provides funding 

for identifying and reducing risks and managing waste at sites 

where the nation carried out defense-related nuclear research and 

production activities that resulted in radioactive, hazardous, and 

mixed waste contamination requiring remediation, stabilization, or 

some other cleanup action. 

Hanford Site.—The Committee recommendation includes an additional $17,000,000 above the budget request to assist in the treatment of uranium in the groundwater and an additional $20,947,000 

above the budget request to expedite cleanup activities on the 

River Corridor. The Department is directed to submit a new project 

data sheet for the KW Basin Sludge Removal Project following 

completion of the planned external independent review of the 

project, as stated in the budget request. For project 15–D–409 Low 

Activity Waste Pretreatment System, none of the funds may be 

available to award a CD–3 or CD–3a until an independent cost estimate has been performed, in accordance with the provisions in 

this Act, and a complete project data sheet is provided to the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress. 

Idaho Site.—The Committee recommendation includes 

$20,000,000 above the budget request to support commissioning 

and startup activities at the Integrated Waste Treatment Unit and 

to complete the Advanced Mixed Waste Treatment Infrastructure 

Reliability Project ensuring equipment availability to support 

transuranic waste commitments. 

Oak Ridge Reservation.—The Committee recommendation includes an increase of $13,107,000 above the budget request to expedite decontamination and decommissioning of high-risk excess facilities of the Oak Ridge Reservation and an increase of $6,989,000 

above the budget request to accelerate U233 processing campaign 

preparations. The recommendation includes a new start for the Environmental Management Waste Management Facility. Expediting 

the design, construction, and operation of the new landfill is critical 

to providing a cost-effective waste disposal option in support of the 

decontamination and decommissioning of excess facilities on the 

site. 

Savannah River Site.—Within Site Risk Management, the Committee sustains funding for operations and maintenance at the fiscal year 2016 level and provides an increase of $18,000,000 above 

last year’s level that is needed to pay for increased contractor pension costs. Within available funds for Site Risk Management, the 

Committee includes $3,000,000 to support the disposition of spent 

fuel from the High Flux Isotope Reactor. While the Committee recommendation continues to provide funding for Site Risk Management within one reprogramming control point, that does not preclude the Office of Environmental Management from executing 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
119 

those funds within its new sub-activities proposed in the budget request. 

No funds are provided to support a new start for Saltstone Disposal Unit #7. The Department does not have an approved mission 

need or pre-conceptual design for this project and did not provide 

the basic details of its project plans in its budget request justifications. 

Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP).—The Committee recommends 

$292,720,000, $7,258,000 below fiscal year 2016 and $30,467,000 

above the budget request. Within this amount, $3,887,000 is for 

general plant projects. The Department is directed to proceed expeditiously with the testing and qualification of continuous air monitors and dampers to validate they will perform as designed. The 

readiness of these technologies is essential to finalizing the safety 

basis of the new ventilation system, which must be done to advance 

the project. Separate funding requested for payments to the State 

of New Mexico within WIPP operations and maintenance is provided in a separate line, as described below. 

While the Department has been pursuing an aggressive plan to 

resume limited waste emplacement operations at WIPP, the Committee is concerned that the Department has pushed back investments that are needed to attain full recovery of the facility. Operating WIPP at substandard ventilation rates for an extended period 

of time is not acceptable and full recovery needs to remain a high 

priority for the Department. Additional funding above the budget 

request is provided to the 15–D–412 Exhaust Shaft project, which 

does not have outstanding design issues and can proceed quickly 

once adequate funding is provided. 

CB–0101 Economic Assistance to the State of New Mexico.—The 

Committee recommends $26,800,000 to fulfill commitments made 

by the Department of Energy to the State of New Mexico as agreed 

to in the Settlement Agreement and Stipulated Final Order, No. 

HWB–14–21 (CO) approved by the New Mexico Environment Department on January 22, 2016. The WIPP Land Withdrawal Act 

(LWA) (P.L. 102–579) authorized payments to the State of New 

Mexico in the amount of $20,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) for 

each of the 14 fiscal years beginning with fiscal year 1998 under 

section 15(a) of the Act. The last authorized payment under the Act 

was completed in fiscal year 2011. The LWA does not include specific authorized amounts for subsequent payments under Sec. 15(b). 

The bill includes a provision that specifies by what authority and 

the specific amounts to be provided for additional payments under 

Sec.15(b) in fiscal year 2017 and ensures those funds are separate 

from any funds for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, consistent with 

previous authorizations under 15(a). 

Technology Development.—Within funding for technology development and deployment, $4,000,000 is provided for the National 

Spent Fuel Program to lead nuclear material treatment, storage 

and disposition activities of DOE-owned and managed used fuel. 

The Committee encourages the Department to ensure that technology development funds are competitively awarded. 

Use of prior-year balances.—The Committee directs the use of 

$5,921,000 in unobligated prior-year balances greater than five 

years old and $8,400,000 in unexpended prior-year balances from 

Los Alamos National Laboratory. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
120 

OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $776,425,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 791,552,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 776,425,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... – – – 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ ¥15,127,000 

The Other Defense Activities account provides funding for the 

Office of Environment, Health, Safety and Security; the Office of 

Independent Enterprise Assessments; the Office of Legacy Management; Specialized Security Activities; Defense Related Administrative Support; and the Office of Hearings and Appeals. 

POWER MARKETING ADMINISTRATIONS 

Management of the federal power marketing functions was transferred from the Department of the Interior to the Department of 

Energy in the Department of Energy Organization Act of 1977 

(P.L. 95–91). These functions include the power marketing activities authorized under section 5 of the Flood Control Act of 1944 

and all other functions of the Bonneville Power Administration, the 

Southeastern Power Administration, the Southwestern Power Administration, and the power marketing functions of the Bureau of 

Reclamation that have been transferred to the Western Area Power 

Administration. 

All four power marketing administrations give preference in the 

sale of their power to publicly-owned and cooperatively-owned utilities. Operations of the Bonneville Power Administration are financed principally under the authority of the Federal Columbia 

River Transmission System Act (P.L. 93–454). Under this Act, the 

Bonneville Power Administration is authorized to use its revenues 

to finance the costs of its operations, maintenance, and capital construction, and to sell bonds to the Treasury if necessary to finance 

any additional capital program requirements. 

Beginning in fiscal year 2011, power revenues from the Southeastern, Southwestern, and Western Area Power Administrations, 

which were previously classified as mandatory offsetting receipts, 

were reclassified as discretionary offsetting collections to directly 

offset annual expenses. The capital expenses of Southwestern and 

Western Area Power Administrations are appropriated annually. 

BONNEVILLE POWER ADMINISTRATION FUND

The Bonneville Power Administration is the Department of Energy’s marketing agency for electric power in the Pacific Northwest. 

Bonneville provides electricity to a 300,000 square mile service 

area in the Columbia River drainage basin. Bonneville markets the 

power from federal hydropower projects in the Northwest, as well 

as power from non-federal generating facilities in the region, and 

exchanges and markets surplus power with Canada and California. 

The Committee appreciates the Northwest Power and Conservation Council’s advisory role to the Bonneville Power Administration. The Committee reminds the Council that its sole mission is 

development of the domestic Northwest Power Plan and Columbia 

River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program. The Council has no formal 

role in consultation and negotiations of the Columbia River Treaty. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
121 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, SOUTHEASTERN POWER

ADMINISTRATION

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $– – – 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... – – – 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... – – – 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... – – – 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ – – – 

The Southeastern Power Administration (SEPA) markets hydroelectric power produced at 22 Corps Projects in 11 states in the 

southeast. Southeastern does not own or operate any transmission 

facilities, so it contracts to ‘‘wheel’’ its power using the existing 

transmission facilities of area utilities. 

The total program level for SEPA in fiscal year 2017 is 

$84,929,000, with $78,929,000 for purchase power and wheeling 

and $6,000,000 for program direction. The purchase power and 

wheeling costs will be offset by collections of $60,760,000, and annual expenses will be offset by collections of $1,000,000 provided in 

this Act and the use of prior-year balances of $5,000,000. Additionally, SEPA has identified $18,169,000 in alternative financing for 

purchase power and wheeling. The net appropriation, therefore, is 

$0 in the recommendation and the budget request. 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, SOUTHWESTERN POWER

ADMINISTRATION

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $11,400,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 11,057,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 11,057,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... ¥343,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ – – – 

The Southwestern Power Administration (SWPA) markets hydroelectric power produced at 24 Corps projects in the six-state area 

of Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Texas. 

SWPA operates and maintains 1,380 miles of transmission lines, 

along with supporting substations and communications sites. 

The Committee recommendation for the Southwestern Power Administration is a net appropriation of $11,057,000. The total program level for Southwestern in fiscal year 2017 is $140,898,000, including $13,896,000 for operation and maintenance expenses, 

$83,000,000 for purchase power and wheeling, $31,516,000 for program direction, and $12,486,000 for construction. Offsetting collections total $107,586,000, including $5,315,000 for operations and 

maintenance, $73,000,000 for purchase power and wheeling, and 

$29,271,000 for program direction. Southwestern estimates it will 

secure alternative financing from customers in the amount of 

$22,255,000. 

CONSTRUCTION, REHABILITATION, OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, WESTERN AREA POWER ADMINISTRATION

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $93,372,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 95,581,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 95,581,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... +2,209 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ – – – 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
122 

The Western Area Power Administration is responsible for marketing the electric power generated by the Bureau of Reclamation, 

the Corps, and the International Boundary and Water Commission. 

Western also operates and maintains a system of transmission 

lines nearly 17,000 miles long. Western provides electricity to 15 

western states over a service area of 1.3 million square miles. 

The Committee recommendation for the Western Area Power Administration is a net appropriation of $95,581,000, the same as the 

budget request. The total program level for Western in fiscal year 

2017 is recommended at $947,270,000, which includes $62,442,000 

for construction and rehabilitation, $76,697,000 for system operation and maintenance, $581,634,000 for purchase power and 

wheeling, and $226,497,000 for program direction. Offsetting collections include $578,572,000 for purchase power and wheeling and 

annual expenses, and the use of $8,265,000 of offsetting collections 

from the Colorado River Dam Fund (as authorized in P.L. 98–381). 

Western Area estimates it will secure alternative financing from 

customers in the amount of $264,852,000. 

The Committee continues to hear strong concern about the transparency of Western’s budget and expenditures by it. In particular, 

there is concern that staffing levels have grown significantly in recent years, including an additional 51 full-time equivalents proposed for fiscal year 2017. In response to these concerns, Western 

shall not proceed with the staffing level increase proposed in the 

fiscal year 2017 budget request until such time as Western has provided to the Committee a briefing on the need for increased staffing 

levels over the past five years. The briefing shall include a comparison of staffing levels at non-federal entities responsible for the 

marketing of power and operation and maintenance of transmission systems. 

FALCON AND AMISTAD OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE FUND

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $228,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 232,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 232,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... +4,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ – – – 

Falcon Dam and Amistad Dam are two international water 

projects located on the Rio Grande River between Texas and Mexico. Power generated by hydroelectric facilities at these two dams 

is sold to public utilities through the Western Area Power Administration. The Foreign Relations Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 

1994 and 1995 created the Falcon and Amistad Operating and 

Maintenance Fund to defray the costs of operation, maintenance, 

and emergency activities. The Fund is administered by the Western 

Area Power Administration for use by the Commissioner of the 

U.S. Section of the International Boundary and Water Commission. 

The budget request includes a proposal for authority to accept 

contributed funds in fiscal year 2017 for use in fulfilling duties associated with the Falcon and Amistad Dams. This authority would 

be equivalent to the authority used throughout the Western Area 

Power Administration to secure alternative financing. The Committee includes this proposal. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
123 

The Committee recommendation is a net appropriation of $232,000, the same as the budget request. The total program level 

is $4,393,000, with $3,838,000 of offsetting collections applied toward annual expenses and $323,000 of alternative financing. 

The Committee continues to hear concerns that additional infrastructure investments are necessary at these dams, yet nothing is 

included in the budget request. Western is directed to coordinate 

with the International Boundary and Water Commission to determine a plan for addressing any needed improvements. 

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $319,800,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 346,800,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 346,800,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... +27,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ – – – 

REVENUES

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $¥319,800,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... ¥346,800,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... ¥346,800,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... ¥27,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ – – – 

The Committee recommendation for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) is $346,800,000, the same as the budget 

request. Revenues for FERC are established at a rate equal to the 

budget authority, resulting in a net appropriation of $0. 

The Committee is aware that concerns remain about the degree 

of consideration given by FERC to the rights and concerns of private property owners during the process for developing, reviewing, 

and approving shoreline management plans. The Committee reiterates its support for the expeditious development and implementation of innovative and mutually agreeable solutions to resolve conflicts among project purposes and private property at specific locations. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee’s detailed funding recommendations for programs 

in Title III are contained in the following table. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
124 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 08 here 98534A.040
125 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 09 here 98534A.041
126 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 010 here 98534A.042
127 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 011 here 98534A.043
128 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 012 here 98534A.044
129 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 013 here 98534A.045
130 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 014 here 98534A.046
131 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 015 here 98534A.047
132 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 016 here 98534A.048
133 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 017 here 98534A.049
134 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 018 here 98534A.050
135 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 019 here 98534A.051
136 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 020 here 98534A.052
137 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 021 here 98534A.053
138 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 022 here 98534A.054
139 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 023 here 98534A.055
140 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 024 here 98534A.056
141 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 025 here 98534A.057
142 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 026 here 98534A.058
143 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 027 here 98534A.059
144 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 028 here 98534A.060
145 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 029 here 98534A.061
146 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 030 here 98534A.062
147 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 031 here 98534A.063
148 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 032 here 98534A.064
149 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 033 here 98534A.065
150 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 034 here 98534A.066
151 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 035 here 98534A.067
152 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 036 here 98534A.068
153 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 037 here 98534A.069
154 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 038 here 98534A.070
155 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 039 here 98534A.071
156 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 040 here 98534A.072
157 

GENERAL PROVISIONS—DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

(INCLUDING TRANSFER AND RESCISSION OF FUNDS)

The bill includes a provision that prohibits the use of funds provided in this title to initiate requests for proposals, other solicitations or arrangements for new programs or activities that have not 

yet been approved and funded by the Congress; requires notification or a report for certain funding actions; prohibits funds to be 

used for certain multi-year ‘‘Energy Programs’’ activities without 

notification; and prohibits the obligation or expenditure of funds 

provided in this title through a reprogramming of funds except in 

certain circumstances. 

The bill continues a provision that permits the transfer and 

merger of unexpended balances of prior appropriations with appropriation accounts established in this bill. 

The bill continues a provision that authorizes intelligence activities of the Department of Energy for purposes of section 504 of the 

National Security Act of 1947. 

The bill continues a provision that prohibits the use of funds in 

this title for capital construction of high hazard nuclear facilities, 

unless certain independent oversight is conducted. 

The bill continues a provision that prohibits the use of funds provided in this title to approve critical decision-2 or critical decision3 for certain construction projects, unless a separate independent 

cost estimate has been developed for that critical decision. 

The bill continues a provision restricting certain activities in the 

Russian Federation. 

The bill continues a provision regarding management of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. 

The bill includes a provision rescinding unobligated balances. 

The bill includes a provision that allows funding to be allocated 

to certain project engineering and design activities. 

TITLE IV—INDEPENDENT AGENCIES 

APPALACHIAN REGIONAL COMMISSION

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $146,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 120,000,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 146,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... – – – 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ +26,000,000 

The Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) is a regional economic development agency established in 1965 by the Appalachian 

Regional Development Act (P.L. 89–4). It is composed of the governors of the 13 Appalachian States and a federal co-chair appointed by the President. Each year, the ARC provides funding for 

several hundred projects in the Appalachian Region in areas such 

as business development, education and job training, telecommunications, infrastructure, community development, housing, and 

transportation. 

To diversify and enhance regional business development, $10,000,000 is provided to continue the program of high-speed 

broadband deployment in distressed counties within the Central 

Appalachian region that have been most negatively impacted by 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
158 

the downturn in the coal industry. This funding shall be in addition to the 30 percent directed to distressed counties. 

Within available funds, the Committee directs $50,000,000 for 

activities in support of the POWER+ Plan. 

The ARC targets 50 percent of its funds to distressed counties or 

distressed areas in the Appalachian region. The Committee continues to believe this should be the primary focus of the ARC. 

DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $29,150,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 31,000,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 31,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... +1,850,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ – – – 

The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) was created by the fiscal year 1989 National Defense Authorization Act. 

The Board, composed of five members appointed by the President, 

provides advice and recommendations to the Secretary of Energy 

regarding public health and safety issues at the Department’s defense nuclear facilities. The DNFSB is responsible for reviewing 

and evaluating the content and implementation of the standards 

relating to the design, construction, operation, and decommissioning of the Department of Energy’s defense nuclear facilities. 

The Committee expects the DNFSB to continue to play a significant role in scrutinizing the Department’s safety and security activities, including the reform initiatives underway in the Department that may impact projects under its jurisdiction. 

DELTA REGIONAL AUTHORITY

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $25,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 15,936,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 15,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... ¥10,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ ¥936,000 

The Delta Regional Authority (DRA) is a federal-state partnership established by the Delta Regional Authority Act of 2000 (P.L. 

106–554) that serves a 252-county/parish area in an eight-state region near the mouth of the Mississippi River. Led by a federal cochair and the governors of each participating state, the DRA is designed to remedy severe and chronic economic distress by stimulating economic development and fostering partnerships that will 

have a positive impact on the region’s economy. The DRA seeks to 

help local communities leverage other federal and state programs 

that are focused on basic infrastructure development, transportation improvements, business development, and job training services. Under federal law, at least 75 percent of appropriated funds 

must be invested in distressed counties and parishes, with 50 percent of the funds earmarked for transportation and basic infrastructure improvements. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
159 

DENALI COMMISSION

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $11,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 15,000,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 11,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... – – – 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ ¥4,000,000 

The Denali Commission is a regional development agency established by the Denali Commission Act of 1998 (P.L. 105–277) to provide critical utilities, infrastructure, health services, and economic 

support throughout Alaska. To ensure that local communities have 

a stake in Commission-funded projects, local cost-share requirements for construction and equipment have been established for 

both distressed and non-distressed communities. 

NORTHERN BORDER REGIONAL COMMISSION

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $7,500,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 5,000,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 5,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... ¥2,500,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ – – – 

The Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-234) 

authorized the establishment of the Northern Border Regional 

Commission as a federal-state partnership intended to address the 

economic development needs of distressed portions of the four-state 

region of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, and New York. The 

Committee has continued legislative language addressing the Commission’s administrative expenses. 

SOUTHEAST CRESCENT REGIONAL COMMISSION

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $250,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... – – – 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 250,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... – – – 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ +250,000 

The Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (P.L. 110–234) 

authorized the establishment of the Southeast Crescent Regional 

Commission as a federal-state partnership intended to address the 

economic development needs of distressed portions of the sevenstate region in the southeastern United States not already served 

by a regional development agency. 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $990,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 970,163,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 936,121,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... ¥53,879,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ ¥34,042,000 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
160 

REVENUES

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $¥872,864,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... ¥851,161,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... ¥786,853,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... +86,011,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ +64,308,000 

NET APPROPRIATION

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $117,136,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 119,002,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 149,268,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... +32,132,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ +30,266,000 

The Committee recommendation for the Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) provides the following amounts: 

(Dollars in thousands) 

Account FY 2016 enacted FY 2017 request Cmte. rec. 

Nuclear Reactor Safety ............................................................. $501,702 $506,900 $483,802 

Nuclear Materials and Waste Safety ........................................ 113,658 116,400 113,173 

Decommissioning and Low-Level Waste ................................... 28,404 27,800 26,690 

Integrated University Program .................................................. 15,000 0 15,000 

Yucca licensing ......................................................................... 0 0 20,000 

Corporate Support ..................................................................... 331,236 319,100 305,456 

Total, Program Level ............................................... 990,000 970,200 964,121 

Use of carryover balances ........................................................ – – – – – – ¥25,000 

Reduction to International Activities ........................................ – – – – – – ¥3,000 

Total ........................................................................ 990,000 970,200 936,121 

The recommendation includes $31,079,000 in rebaselining savings for fiscal year 2017 that was not included in the budget request. The Committee directs the Commission to apply these savings in a manner that continues to ensure the protection of public 

health and safety and maintains the effectiveness of the current inspection program. The recommendation provides for the use of 

$25,000,000 in estimated carryover balances in lieu of new appropriation and reduces international activities by $3,000,000 from the 

level proposed in the budget request. 

The recommendation establishes Corporate Support as a new 

control point. The funds provided for Corporate Support have been 

reduced by $3,644,000 as a result of the savings identified in the 

rebaselining process and by $10,000,000 to further accelerate the 

right-sizing of Corporate Support activities. While the Committee 

notes that the Commission has adopted many of the recommendations proposed by the independent review of corporate support requirements, more needs to be done to reduce corporate support 

costs. 

Within available funds, not more than $7,500,000 is included for 

salaries, travel, and other support costs for the Office of the Commission. These salaries and expenses shall include only salaries 

and benefit and travel costs, and are not to include general and administrative and infrastructure costs. The Committee directs that 

these funds are to be jointly managed by the Commissioners, and 

the bill requires that the use and expenditure of these salaries and 

expenses shall only be by a majority vote of the Commission. The 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
161 

NRC shall continue to include a breakout and explanation of the 

Commission salaries and expenses in its annual budget requests. 

If the Commission wishes to change the composition of the funds 

requested for its salaries and expenses in future years, it must do 

so in an annual budget request or through a reprogramming. The recommendation directs $20,000,000 to continue adjudication 

of the Yucca Mountain license application and does not include the 

savings from the rebaselining proposal to reduce resources devoted 

to maintaining expertise in deep geological repository analysis. The 

Committee reiterates that the Administration’s refusal to move forward with the Yucca Mountain license application ignores current 

law and does not advance the nation’s need for a permanent repository. The recommendation continues language prohibiting the 

Chairman of the NRC from terminating any program, project, or 

activity without the approval of a majority of the Commissioners. 

The NRC is directed to report to the Committees on Appropriations 

of both Houses of Congress, not later than January 5, 2017, on the 

plan to complete the license application and additional funding 

needs as necessary. In addition, the recommendation requires the 

NRC to notify and report to the Committees on Appropriations of 

both Houses of Congress on the use of emergency functions. 

Integrated University Program.—The Committee recommendation includes $15,000,000 to provide financial support for the university education programs, as the Commission continues to be reliant on a pipeline of highly trained nuclear engineers and scientists and benefits substantially from this university program. 

Not less than $5,000,000 of this amount is to be used for grants 

to support research projects that do not align with programmatic 

missions, but are critical to maintaining the discipline of nuclear 

science and engineering. 

Rulemaking.—The authority to compel and bind private entities 

and individuals to certain actions is a significant authority under 

the law. The Committee commends the Commission for establishing a rulemaking plan that is in alignment with the direction 

provided by Congress but notes that the Commission ‘‘has neither 

approved nor disapproved reaffirming the current role of the Committee to Review Generic Requirements’’. The Committee directs 

the Commission to report by August 1, 2016 on how the rulemaking process will adhere to the backfit rule and on the roles of 

the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safety and the Committee to 

Review Generic Requirements. The Commission needs to continue 

to aggressively monitor the rulemaking process and also ensure 

that the Committee receives accurate reports on rulemaking activities. The Commission shall list all rulemaking activities planned, 

to include their priority and schedule in the annual budget request 

and the semi-annual report to Congress on licensing and regulatory 

activities. 

Digital Instrumentation and Control.—The future of commercial 

nuclear power in the 21st century depends, in part, on the NRC’s 

ability to keep pace with innovation and technological developments. NRC has demonstrated its capacity to adapt to new technology and innovation in its decision to issue a construction license 

for a first-of-a-kind medical isotope production facility. In a similar 

vein, NRC should endeavor to ensure that it establishes an efficient, reliable, and predictable licensing process for power reactors 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
162 

to transition from analog to digital instrumentation and control 

systems for safety-related applications. 

Subsequent License Renewal.—The Committee has received the 

March 15, 2016, report on the plan and timetable for completing 

the remaining activities necessary to accept, docket, and support 

the review of the first application for subsequent license renewal. 

The report states that the NRC will ‘‘be fully prepared to effectively 

and efficiently review any subsequent license renewal applications 

that are submitted’’ by mid-2017. The Committee directs the Commission to report by March 15, 2017, on the NRC’s progress to 

meet this mid-2017 goal. 

Reporting Requirements.—The Committee directs the Commission to continue to provide quarterly reports on licensing goals and 

right-sizing commitments as described in the explanatory statement for P.L. 114–113. 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

GROSS APPROPRIATION

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $12,136,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 12,129,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 12,129,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... ¥7,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ – – – 

REVENUES

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $¥10,060,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... ¥10,044,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... ¥10,044,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... +16,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ – – – 

NET APPROPRIATION

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $2,076,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 2,085,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 2,085,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... +9,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ – – – 

The Committee has included $969,000 within this appropriation 

for Inspector General services for the Defense Nuclear Facilities 

Safety Board from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Inspector 

General. 

NUCLEAR WASTE TECHNICAL REVIEW BOARD

Appropriation, 2016 ............................................................................ $3,600,000 

Budget estimate, 2017 ....................................................................... 3,600,000 

Recommended, 2017 ........................................................................... 3,600,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2016 .................................................................... – – – 

Budget estimate, 2017 ................................................................ – – – 

The Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board (NWTRB) was established by the 1987 amendments to the Nuclear Waste Policy Act 

of 1982 to provide independent technical oversight of the Department of Energy’s nuclear waste disposal program. The Committee 

expects the NWTRB to continue its active engagement with the DeVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:33 Apr 27, 2016 Jkt 099790 PO 00000 Frm 00162 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR532.XXX HR532

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
163 

partment and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission on issues involving nuclear waste disposal. 

GENERAL PROVISIONS—INDEPENDENT AGENCIES 

The bill continues a provision requiring the Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission to fully comply with Congressional requests for information. 

The bill continues a provision regarding the circumstances in 

which the Nuclear Regulatory Commission may reprogram funds. 

TITLE V—GENERAL PROVISIONS 

The bill continues a provision that prohibits the use of funds provided in this Act to, in any way, directly or indirectly influence congressional action on any legislation or appropriation matters pending before the Congress, other than to communicate to Members of 

Congress as described in section 1913 of Title 18, United States 

Code. 

The bill continues a provision consolidating the transfer authorities into and out of accounts funded by this Act. No additional 

transfer authority is implied or conveyed by this provision. For the 

purposes of this provision, the term ‘‘transfer’’ shall mean the shifting of all or part of the budget authority in one account to another. 

The bill continues a provision prohibiting funds in contravention 

of E.O. 12898 of February 11, 1994, regarding environmental justice. 

The bill includes a provision prohibiting funds in this Act from 

being used to maintain or establish computer networks unless such 

networks block the viewing, downloading, or exchange of pornography. 

The bill continues a provision prohibiting funds in this Act from 

being used to close the Yucca Mountain license application process 

or for actions that would remove the possibility that Yucca Mountain might be an option in the future. 

The bill includes a provision prohibiting the use of funds to further implementation of components of the National Ocean Policy 

developed under E.O. 13547. 

The bill includes a provision prohibiting the use of funds for the 

removal of any federally-owned or operated dam. 

The bill includes a provision setting at $0 the amount that the 

proposed new budget authority in this recommendation exceeds the 

allocation made by the Committee on Appropriations under section 

302(b) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORT REQUIREMENTS 

The following items are included in accordance with various requirements of the Rules of the House of Representatives. 

STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

Pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following is a statement of general performance goals and objectives for which this measure authorizes funding: 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
164 

The Committee on Appropriations considers program performance, including a program’s success in developing and attaining 

outcome-related goals and objectives, in developing funding recommendations. 

TRANSFER OF FUNDS

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following is submitted describing the transfer of funds provided in the accompanying bill. 

TITLE I—CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CIVIL

Under section 103, ‘‘General Provisions, Corps of Engineers— Civil’’, $5,400,000 under the heading ‘‘Operation and Maintenance’’ 

may be transferred to the Fish and Wildlife Service to mitigate for 

fisheries lost due to Corps projects. 

TITLE II—BUREAU OF RECLAMATION

Under ‘‘Water and Related Resources’’, $22,000 is available for 

transfer to the Upper Colorado River Basin Fund and $5,551,000 

is available for transfer to the Lower Colorado River Basin Development Fund. Such funds as may be necessary may be advanced 

to the Colorado River Dam Fund. The amounts of transfers may be 

increased or decreased within the overall appropriation under the 

heading. 

Under ‘‘California Bay Delta Restoration’’, such sums as may be 

necessary to carry out authorized purposes may be transferred to 

appropriate accounts of other participating federal agencies. 

TITLE III—DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Under section 302, ‘‘General Provisions—Department of Energy’’, 

unexpended balances of prior appropriations provided for activities 

in this Act may be transferred to appropriation accounts for such 

activities established pursuant to this title. Balances so transferred 

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. 

DISCLOSURE OF EARMARKS AND CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED

SPENDING ITEMS

Neither the bill nor the report contains any congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in 

clause 9 of rule XXI. 

CHANGES IN THE APPLICATION OF EXISTING LAW

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1)(A) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, the following statements are submitted 

describing the effect of provisions in the accompanying bill which 

directly or indirectly change the application of existing law. 

TITLE I—CORPS OF ENGINEERS 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, Investigations, providing for detailed studies and plans and specifications of projects prior to construction. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
165 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, Investigations, providing for a limited number of new starts. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, Construction, stating that funds can be used for the construction of river 

and harbor, flood and storm damage reduction, shore protection, 

aquatic ecosystem restoration, and related projects authorized by 

law, and for detailed studies and plans and specifications of such 

projects. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, Construction, permitting the use of funds from the Inland Waterways Trust 

Fund and the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, Construction, providing for a limited number of new starts. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, Mississippi River and Tributaries, permitting the use of funds from the 

Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund. 

Language has been included under the Corps of Engineers, Operation and Maintenance, stating that funds can be used for: the operation, maintenance, and care of existing river and harbor, flood 

and storm damage reduction, aquatic ecosystem restoration, and 

related projects authorized by law; providing security for infrastructure owned or operated by the Corps, including administrative 

buildings and laboratories; maintaining authorized harbor channels 

provided by a State, municipality, or other public agency that serve 

essential navigation needs of general commerce; surveying and 

charting northern and northwestern lakes and connecting waters; 

clearing and straightening channels; and removing obstructions to 

navigation. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, Operation and Maintenance, permitting the use of funds from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund; providing for the use of funds from 

a special account for resource protection, research, interpretation, 

and maintenance activities at outdoor recreation areas; and allowing use of funds to cover the cost of operation and maintenance of 

dredged material disposal facilities for which fees have been collected. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, Operation and Maintenance, providing that one percent of the total 

amount of funds provided for each of the programs, projects, or activities funded under the Operation and Maintenance heading shall 

not be allocated to a field operating activity until the fourth quarter of the fiscal year and permitting the use of these funds for 

emergency activities as determined by the Chief of Engineers to be 

necessary and appropriate. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, Expenses, regarding support of the Humphreys Engineer Support 

Center 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. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, Expenses, providing that funds are available for official reception and 

representation expenses. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, Expenses, prohibiting the use of other funds in Title I of this Act for 

the activities funded in Expenses. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
166 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, Expenses, permitting any Flood Control and Coastal Emergency appropriation to be used to fund the supervision and general administration of emergency operations, repairs, and other activities in response to any flood, hurricane or other natural disaster. 

Language has been included to provide for funding for the Office 

of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, General 

Provisions, section 101, providing that none of the funds may be 

available for obligation or expenditure through a reprogramming of 

funds except in certain circumstances. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, General 

Provisions, section 102, prohibiting the execution of any contract 

for a program, project or activity which commits funds in excess of 

the amount appropriated (to include funds reprogrammed under 

section 101) that remain unobligated. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, General 

Provisions, section 103, providing for transfer authority to the Fish 

and Wildlife Service for mitigation for lost fisheries. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, General 

Provisions, section 104, prohibiting certain dredged material disposal activities. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, General 

Provisions, section 105, prohibiting any acquisition that is not consistent with a certain federal regulation. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, General 

Provisions, section 106, prohibiting certain activities at a Corps of 

Engineers project. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, General 

Provisions, section 107, providing authority to the Secretary of the 

Army regarding a water supply storage contract. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, General 

Provisions, section 108, prohibiting certain actions related to the 

definition of fill material or discharge of fill material for purposes 

of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, General 

Provisions, section 109, prohibiting requirement of a permit for the 

discharge of dredged or fill material under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act for certain activities. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, General 

Provisions, section 110, prohibiting certain actions related to the 

definition of waters under the jurisdiction of the Federal Water 

Pollution Control Act. 

Language has been included under Corps of Engineers, General 

Provisions, section 111 allowing the possession of firearms at water 

resources development projects under certain circumstances. 

TITLE II—DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Language has been included under Bureau of Reclamation, 

Water and Related Resources, providing that funds are available 

for fulfilling federal responsibilities to Native Americans and for 

grants to and cooperative agreements with State and local governments and Indian tribes. 

Language has been included under Bureau of Reclamation, 

Water and Related Resources, allowing fund transfers within the 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
167 

overall appropriation to the Upper Colorado River Basin Fund and 

the Lower Colorado River Basin Development Fund; providing that 

such sums as necessary may be advanced to the Colorado River 

Dam Fund; and, transfers may be increased or decreased within 

the overall appropriation. 

Language has been included under Bureau of Reclamation, 

Water and Related Resources, providing for funds to be derived 

from the Reclamation Fund or the special fee account established 

by 16 U.S.C. 6806; that funds contributed under 43 U.S.C. 395 by 

non-federal entities shall be available for expenditure; and that 

funds advanced under 43 U.S.C. 397a are to be credited to the 

Water and Related Resources account and available for expenditure. 

Language has been included under Bureau of Reclamation, 

Water and Related Resources, providing that funds may be used for 

high priority projects carried out by the Youth Conservation Corps, 

as authorized by 16 U.S.C. 1706. 

Language has been included under Bureau of Reclamation, Central Valley Project Restoration Fund, directing the Bureau of Reclamation to assess and collect the full amount of additional mitigation and restoration payments authorized by section 3407(d) of 

Public Law 102–575. 

Language has been included under Bureau of Reclamation, Central Valley Project Restoration Fund, providing that none of the 

funds under the heading may be used for the acquisition or lease 

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

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

Language has been included under Bureau of Reclamation, California Bay-Delta Restoration, permitting the transfer of funds to 

appropriate accounts of other participating federal agencies to 

carry out authorized programs; allowing funds made available 

under this heading to be used for the federal share of the costs of 

the CALFED Program management; and requiring that CALFED 

implementation be carried out with clear performance measures 

demonstrating concurrent progress in achieving the goals and objectives of the program. 

Language has been included under Bureau of Reclamation, Policy and Administration, providing that funds are to be derived from 

the Reclamation Fund and prohibiting the use of any other appropriation in the Act for activities budgeted as policy and administration expenses. 

Language has been included under Bureau of Reclamation, Administrative Provision, providing for the purchase of motor vehicles 

for replacement. 

Language has been included under General Provisions, Department of the Interior, section 201, providing that none of the funds 

may be available for obligation or expenditure through a reprogramming of funds except in certain circumstances. 

Language has been included under General Provisions, Department of the Interior, section 202, regarding the San Luis Unit and 

the Kesterson Reservoir in California. 

Language has been included under General Provisions, Department of the Interior, section 203, regarding the deadline for completion of certain water storage feasibility studies. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
168 

Language has been included under General Provisions, Department of the Interior, section 204, related to the Old and Middle 

River reverse flow operations in California. 

Language has been included under General Provisions, Department of the Interior, section 205, authorizing increased Old and 

Middle River reverse flows in California during certain times. 

Language has been included under General Provisions, Department of the Interior, section 206, regarding certain water rights 

and water supply deliveries in California. 

Language has been included under General Provisions, Department of the Interior, section 207, prohibiting funds to implement 

the San Joaquin River Restoration program. 

Language has been included under General Provisions, Department of the Interior, section 208, prohibiting funds for instream 

flow purchases in California carried out by the Bureau of Reclamation at certain times. 

Language has been included under General Provisions, Department of the Interior, section 209, regarding water storage at New 

Melones reservoir. 

TITLE III—DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Language has been included under Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy for the purchase, construction, and acquisition of plant 

and capital equipment. 

Language has been included under Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability for the purchase, construction, and acquisition of 

plant and capital equipment. 

Language has been included under Nuclear Energy for the purchase, construction, and acquisition of plant and capital equipment; 

and for the purchase of motor vehicles. 

Language has been included under Fossil Energy Research and 

Development for the acquisition of interest, including defeasible 

and equitable interest in any real property or any facility or for 

plant or facility acquisition or expansion, and for conducting inquires, technological investigations, and research concerning the 

extraction, processing, use and disposal of mineral substances without objectionable social and environmental cost under 30 U.S.C. 3, 

1602 and 1603. 

Language has been included under the Naval Petroleum and Oil 

Shale Reserves, permitting the use of unobligated balances. 

Language has been included under Science providing for the purchase, construction, and acquisition of plant and capital equipment; 

and for the purchase of motor vehicles. 

Language has been included under Nuclear Waste Disposal for 

the acquisition of real property or facility construction or expansion. 

Language has been included under Innovative Technology Loan 

Guarantee Program crediting fees collected pursuant to section 

1702(h) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 as offsetting collections to 

this account and making fees collected under section 1702(h) in excess of the appropriated amount unavailable for expenditure until 

appropriated. 

Language has been included under Innovative Technology Loan 

Guarantee Program prohibiting the subordination of certain interests. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
169 

Language has been included under Departmental Administration 

providing for the hire of passenger vehicles and for official reception and representation expenses. 

Language has been included under Departmental Administration 

providing, notwithstanding the provisions of the Anti-Deficiency 

Act, such additional amounts as necessary to cover increases in the 

estimated amount of cost of work for others, as long as such increases are offset by revenue increases of the same or greater 

amounts. 

Language has been included under Departmental Administration, notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 3302, and consistent with the authorization in Public Law 95–238, to permit the Department of Energy to use revenues to offset appropriations. The appropriations 

language for this account reflects the total estimated program 

funding to be reduced as revenues are received. 

Language has been included under Weapons Activities for the 

purchase, construction, and acquisition of plant and capital equipment; and for the purchase of motor vehicles. 

Language has been included under Weapons Activities rescinding 

funds that were not designated by the Congress as emergency 

funding. 

Language has been included under Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation for the purchase, construction, and acquisition of plant 

and capital equipment and other incidental expenses. 

Language has been included under Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation restricting the use of funds provided for a specific 

project. 

Language has been included under Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation rescinding funds that were not designated by the Congress as emergency funding. 

Language has been included under Naval Reactors for the purchase, construction, and acquisition of plant and capital equipment, 

facilities, and facility expansion. 

Language has been included under Federal Salaries and Expenses providing funding for official reception and representation 

expenses. 

Language has been included under Defense Environmental 

Cleanup for the purposes of providing amounts for certain payments under the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Land Withdrawal Act. 

Language has been included under Defense Environmental 

Cleanup for the purchase, construction, and acquisition of plant 

and capital equipment; and for the purchase of motor vehicles. 

Language has been included under Other Defense Activities for 

the purchase, construction, and acquisition of plant and capital 

equipment. 

Language has been included under Bonneville Power Administration Fund providing funding for official reception and representation expenses and precluding any new direct loan obligations. 

Language has been included under Southeastern Power Administration providing funds for official reception and representation expenses. 

Language has been included under Southeastern Power Administration providing that, notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 3302 and 16 

U.S.C. 825s, amounts collected from the sale of power and related 

services shall be credited to the account as discretionary offsetting 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
170 

collections and remain available until expended for the sole purpose of funding the annual expenses of the Southeastern Power Administration; amounts collected to recover purchase power and 

wheeling expenses shall be credited to the account as offsetting collections and remain available until expended for the sole purpose 

of making purchase power and wheeling expenditures. 

Language has been included under Southwestern Power Administration providing funds for official reception and representation 

expenses. 

Language has been included under Southwestern Power Administration providing that, notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 3302 and 16 

U.S.C. 825s, amounts collected from the sale of power and related 

services shall be credited to the account as discretionary offsetting 

collections and remain available until expended for the sole purpose of funding the annual expenses of the Southwestern Power 

Administration; amounts collected to recover purchase power and 

wheeling expenses shall be credited to the account as offsetting collections and remain available until expended for the sole purpose 

of making purchase power and wheeling expenditures. 

Language has been included under Construction, Rehabilitation, 

Operation and Maintenance, Western Area Power Administration, 

providing funds for official reception and representation expenses. 

Language has been included under Construction, Rehabilitation, 

Operation and Maintenance, Western Area Power Administration 

providing that, notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 3302, 16 U.S.C. 825s, 

and 43 U.S.C. 392a, amounts collected from the sale of power and 

related services shall be credited to the account as discretionary 

offsetting collections and remain available until expended for the 

sole purpose of funding the annual expenses of the Western Area 

Power Administration; amounts collected to recover purchase 

power and wheeling expenses shall be credited to the account as 

offsetting collections and remain available until expended for the 

sole purpose of making purchase power and wheeling expenditures. 

Language has been included under Falcon and Amistad Operating and Maintenance Fund providing that, notwithstanding 68 

Stat. 255 and 31 U.S.C. 3302, amounts collected from the sale of 

power and related services shall be credited to the account as discretionary offsetting collections and remain available until expended for the sole purpose of funding the annual expenses of the 

hydroelectric facilities of those dams and associated Western Area 

Power Administration activities. 

Language has been included under Falcon and Amistad Operating and Maintenance Fund providing that the Western Area 

Power Administration may accept a limited amount of contributions from the United States power customers of the Falcon and 

Amistad Dams for use by the Commissioner of the United States 

Section of the International Boundary and Water Commission for 

operating and maintenance of hydroelectric facilities. 

Language has been included under Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission to permit the hire of passenger motor vehicles, to provide official reception and representation expenses, and to permit 

the use of revenues collected to reduce the appropriation as revenues are received. 

Language has been included under Department of Energy, General Provisions, section 301, prohibiting the use of funds to prepare 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
171 

or initiate requests for proposals or other solicitations or arrangements for programs that have not yet been fully funded by the 

Congress; requiring notification and reporting requirements for certain funding awards; limiting the use of multi-year funding mechanisms; and providing that none of the funds may be available for 

obligation or expenditure through a reprogramming of funds except 

in certain circumstances. 

Language has been included under Department of Energy, General Provisions, section 302, providing that unexpended balances of 

prior appropriations may be transferred and merged with new appropriation accounts established in this Act. 

Language has been included under Department of Energy, General Provisions, section 303, providing that funds for intelligence 

activities are deemed to be specifically authorized for purposes of 

section 504 of the National Security Act of 1947 during fiscal year 

2017 until enactment of the Intelligence Authorization Act for fiscal 

year 2017. 

Language has been included under Department of Energy, General Provisions, section 304, prohibiting the use of funds for capital 

construction of high hazard nuclear facilities unless certain independent oversight is conducted. 

Language has been included under Department of Energy, General Provisions, section 305, prohibiting the use of funds to approve 

critical decision-2 or critical decision-3 for certain construction 

projects, unless a separate independent cost estimate has been developed for that critical decision. 

Language has been included under Department of Energy, General Provisions, section 306, prohibiting nonproliferation activities 

in the Russian Federation until certain reporting requirements are 

met. 

Language has been included under Department of Energy, General Provisions, section 307, limiting the authority of the Secretary 

of Energy to establish regional petroleum product reserves. 

Language has been included under Department of Energy, General Provisions, section 308, rescinding certain funds that were not 

designated by the Congress as emergency funding. 

Language has been included under Department of Energy, General Provisions, section 309, making funds available for project engineering and design of the Consolidated Emergency Operations 

Center. 

TITLE IV—INDEPENDENT AGENCIES 

Language has been included under Appalachian Regional Commission providing for the hire of passenger vehicles and allowing 

the expenditure of funds as authorized by the Appalachian Regional Development Act of 1965, without regard to section 14704 of 

title 40, United States Code. 

Language has been included under Delta Regional Authority allowing the expenditure of funds as authorized by the Delta Regional Authority Act without regard to section 382C(b)(2), 382F(d), 

382M and 382N of said Act. 

Language has been included under Denali Commission allowing 

the expenditure of funds notwithstanding section 306(g) of the 

Denali Commission Act of 1998, and providing for cost-share requirements for Commission-funded construction projects in disVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:33 Apr 27, 2016 Jkt 099790 PO 00000 Frm 00171 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR532.XXX HR532

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
172 

tressed and non-distressed communities, as defined by section 307 

of the Denali Commission Act of 1998 (Division C, Title III, Public 

Law 105–277), and an amount not to exceed 50 percent for non-distressed communities. 

Language has been included under Northern Border Regional 

Commission for expenditure as authorized by subtitle V of title 40, 

United States Code, without regard to section 15751(b). 

Language has been included under Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Salaries and Expenses that provides for salaries and other 

support costs for the Office of the Commission, to be controlled by 

majority vote of the Commission. 

Language has been included under Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Salaries and Expenses that provides for official representation 

expenses and permits the use of revenues from licensing fees, inspections services, and other services for salaries and expenses to 

reduce the appropriation as revenues are received. Funding is provided to support university research and development, and for a 

Nuclear Science and Engineering Grant Program. 

Language has been included under the Nuclear Regulatory Commission providing funds that are not derived from fee revenues. 

Language has been included under Office of Inspector General 

that provides for the use of revenues from licensing fees, inspections services, and other services for salaries and expenses, notwithstanding section 3302 of title 31, United States Code, to reduce 

the appropriation as revenues are received. 

Language has been included under Independent Agencies, General Provisions, section 401, requiring the NRC to comply with certain procedures when responding to Congressional requests for information. 

Language has been included under Independent Agencies, General Provision, section 402, providing that none of the funds may 

be available for obligation or expenditure through a reprogramming 

of funds except in certain circumstances. 

TITLE V—GENERAL PROVISIONS 

Language has been included under General Provisions, section 

501, prohibiting the use of funds in this Act to influence congressional action on any legislation or appropriation matters pending 

before the Congress. 

Language has been included under General Provisions, section 

502, prohibiting the transfer of funds except pursuant to a transfer 

made by, or transfer authority provided in this or any other appropriations Act, or certain other authorities, and requiring a report. 

Language has been included under General Provisions, section 

503, prohibiting funds in contravention of Executive Order No. 

12898 of February 11, 1994, regarding environmental justice. 

Language has been included under General Provisions, section 

504, prohibiting funds from being used to maintain or establish 

computer networks unless such networks block the viewing, 

downloading, or exchange of pornography. 

Language has been included under General Provisions, section 

505, prohibiting funds in this Act from being used to close the 

Yucca Mountain license application process, or for actions that 

would remove the possibility that Yucca Mountain might be an option in the future. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
173 

Language has been included under General Provisions, section 

506, prohibiting the use of funds to further implementation of components of the National Ocean Policy developed under Executive 

Order 13547. 

Language has been included under General Provisions, section 

507, prohibiting the use of funds for the removal of any federallyowned or operated dam. 

Language has been included under General Provisions, section 

508, setting at $0 the amount that the proposed new budget authority exceeds the allocation made by the Committee on Appropriations under section 302(b) of the Congressional Budget Act of 

1974. 

PROGRAM DUPLICATION

No provision of this bill establishes or reauthorizes a program of 

the Federal Government known to be duplicative of another Federal program, a program that was included in any report from the 

Government Accountability Office to Congress pursuant to section 

21 of Public Law 111–139, or a program related to a program identified in the most recent Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance. 

DIRECTED RULE MAKING

The bill does not direct any rule making. 

COMPLIANCE WITH RULE XIII, CL. 3(e) (RAMSEYER RULE) 

In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the bill, 

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

existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman): 

SECTION 205 OF DIVISION D OF THE CONSOLIDATED 

APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2016 

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

Commissioner of Reclamation, shall— 

(1) complete the feasibility studies described in clauses 

(i)(I) and (ii)(II) of section 103(d)(1)(A) of Public Law 108–361 

(118 Stat. 1684) and submit such studies to the appropriate 

committees of the House of Representatives and the Senate not 

later than December 31, 2015; 

(2) complete the feasibility studies described in clauses 

(i)(II) and (ii)(I) of section 103(d)(1)(A) of Public Law 108–361 

and submit such studies to the appropriate committees of the 

House of Representatives and the Senate not later than November 30, ø2016¿ 2017; 

(3) complete the feasibility study described in section 

103(f)(1)(A) of Public Law 108–361 (118 Stat. 1694) and submit 

such study to the appropriate committees of the House of Representatives and the Senate not later than December 31, 2017; 

and 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
174 

(4) provide a progress report on the status of the feasibility 

studies referred to in paragraphs (1) through (3) to the appropriate committees of the House of Representatives and the 

Senate not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment 

of this Act and each 180 days thereafter until December 31, 

2017, as applicable. The report shall include timelines for 

study completion, draft environmental impact statements, final 

environmental impact statements, and Records of Decision. 

APPROPRIATIONS NOT AUTHORIZED BY LAW

Pursuant to clause 3(f) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 

Representatives, the following table lists the appropriations in the 

accompanying bill which are not authorized: 

(thousand dollars) 

Agency/Program Last Year of Authorization Authorization Level Appropriation in Last 

Year of Authorization 

Net Appropriation in 

this Bill 

Corps FUSRAP ........................................ .............................. 1 .............................. 103,000 

EERE Program Direction ........................ 2006 110,500 164,198 149,500 

EERE Weatherization Activites ............... 2012 1,400,000 68,000 215,000 

EERE State Energy Programs ................ 2012 125,000 50,000 50,000 

EERE Marine and Hydrokinetic R&D ...... 2012 50,000 34,000 37,000 

Nuclear Energy ....................................... 2009 495,000 792,000 1,011,616 

Nuclear Energy Infrastructure and Facilities ................................................ 2009 145,000 245,000 253,085 

Fossill Energy ......................................... 2009 641,000 727,320 645,000 

Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves ................................................ 2014 20,000 20,000 14,950 

Strategic Petroleum Reserve .................. 2003 not specified 172,856 257,000 

Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve .... 2003 not specified 6,000 6,500 

Energy Information Administration ........ 1984 not specified 55,870 122,000 

Office of Science .................................... 2013 6,007,000 4,876,000 5,400,000 

Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy .................................................... 2013 312,000 265,000 305,889 

Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing Program .................................. 2012 not specified 6,000 5,000 

Non-Defense Environmental Cleanup: 

West Valley Demonstration ........... 1981 5,000 5,000 61,613 

Departmental Administration ........ 1984 246,963 185,682 130,971 

Atomic Energy Defense Activities: 

National Nuclear Security Administration: 

Weapons Activities ............... 2016 8,802,797 8,846,948 9,285,147 

Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation ..................... 2016 1,941,500 1,940,302 1,821,916 

Naval Reactors ..................... 2016 1,359,996 1,375,496 1,420,120 

Federal Salaries and Expenses ............................. 2016 388,000 383,666 382,387 

Defense Environmental Cleanup ............ 2016 5,130,550 5,289,742 5,226,950 

Other Defense Activities ........................ 2016 770,522 776,425 776,425 

Power Marketing Administrations: 

Southwestern ................................. 1984 40,254 36,229 11,057 

Western Area ................................. 1984 259,700 194,630 95,581 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 1984 not specified 29,582 0 

Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board 2016 29,150 29,150 31,000 

Denali Commission ................................ 2008 not specified 21,800 11,000 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission ............ 1985 460,000 448,200 149,268 

1 Program was initiated in 1972 and has never received a separate authorization 

RESCISSIONS

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following table is submitted describing the 

rescissions recommended in the accompanying bill: 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
175 

Department or Activity Amount 

Department of Energy: Weapons Activities ...................................................106,126,393 

Department of Energy: Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation .......................... 33,127,803 

Department of Energy: Naval Reactors ......................................................... 307,262 

COMPARISON WITH THE BUDGET RESOLUTION

Pursuant to clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives and section 308(a)(1)(A) of the Congressional 

Budget Act of 1974, the following table compares the levels of new 

budget authority provided in the bill with the appropriate allocation under section 302(b) of the Budget Act. 

[In millions of dollars] 

302 (b) Allocation This Bill 

Budget Authority Outlays Budget Authority Outlays 

Mandatory .............................................. 0 0 0 0 

Discretionary .......................................... 37,444 37,625 37,444 1 37,625 

1 Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority. 

FIVE-YEAR OUTLAY PROJECTIONS

Pursuant to section 308(a)(1)(B) of the Congressional Budget Act 

of 1974, the following table contains five-year projections prepared 

by the Congressional Budget Office of outlays associated with the 

budget authority provided in the accompanying bill: 

[In millions of dollars] 

Projection of outlays associated with the recommendation: 

2017 ...................................................................................................................................................... 2 21,939 

2018 ...................................................................................................................................................... 10,578 

2019 ...................................................................................................................................................... 3,559 

2020 ...................................................................................................................................................... 832 

2021 and future years .......................................................................................................................... 433 

2 Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority. 

ASSISTANCE TO STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

Pursuant to section 308(a)(1)(C) of the Congressional Budget Act 

of 1974, the amount of financial assistance to State and local governments is as follows: 

[In millions of dollars] 

Budget 

Authority Outlays 

Financial assistance to State and local governments for 2017 ................................ 157 2 31 

2 Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority. 

FULL COMMITTEE VOTES

Pursuant to the provisions of clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the House 

of Representatives, the results of each rollcall vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with the names of those 

voting for and those voting against, are printed below: 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
176 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 045 here HR532.001
177 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 172 here 98534A.073
178 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 173 here 98534A.074
179 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 174 here 98534A.075
180 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 175 here 98534A.076
181 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 176 here 98534A.077
182 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 177 here 98534A.078
183 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 178 here 98534A.079
184 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 179 here 98534A.080
185 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 180 here 98534A.081
(186) 

ADDITIONAL VIEWS 

We commend Chairman Rogers and Chairman Simpson for their 

efforts to assemble this bill in an inclusive manner. The bill funds 

critical water resource projects, supports science activities necessary for American competitiveness and contributes to our national defense through vital weapons, naval reactor research, and 

nonproliferation funding, all priorities that unite rather than divide 

us. Chairman Simpson has worked hard to incorporate the interests of Members from both parties. As a result, much of the funding in this bill is a reflection of priorities from both sides of the 

aisle. 

It is sad that the Majority would jeopardize this good start by 

adding ideological riders on the Clean Water Act, guns on Corps 

lands and the California drought. We should not have to remind 

our Majority colleagues that similar provisions have imperiled passage of this bill in the past. In fiscal year 2016, nearly all of the 

Democratic Members of the House voted against this bill with far 

fewer poison pill riders. The Administration has been on record 

with veto threats over nearly identical language in the past. 

The subcommittee’s allocation is $37,444,000,000, $167,815,000 

above the Administration’s budget request and $259,010,000 above 

the 2016 level. The defense allocation is $184,010,000 above 2016, 

while the non-defense allocation is $75,000,000 above 2016. 

We commend the Chairman for increasing Corps of Engineers’ 

funding by $1,469,330,000 above the President’s inadequate request, ensuring that some ongoing projects will continue. The bill 

provides $6,089,330,000 for the Army Corps of Engineers, representing the highest funding level the agency has ever received. 

The bill provides approximately $1,263,000,000 for projects funded 

from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund, approximately the same 

as 2016. This funding will allow preventive and proactive investments necessary for the economy and the safety of American citizens. The funding above the request will also allow investments in 

the nation’s ports and waterways, which are critical to ensuring 

that American made goods can move to market, both domestically 

and abroad. We firmly believe that our underinvestment in infrastructure continues to hamper economic gains and prolongs the 

underemployment plaguing our middle class. 

While this bill ensures increased investment beyond that included in the budget request, we should be doing even more to 

build infrastructure and create jobs. Federal support of water resource projects creates construction jobs and indirect economic benefits that encourage local businesses and individuals to embrace 

risk and make critical investments in their communities. The inclusion of six new study starts and four new construction projects will 

allow incremental progress in addressing the tens of billions in 

projects awaiting funding. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
187 

Every year, this important bill sets the path for America’s energy 

future and we note that, more than ever before, our course is set 

towards the true North of energy independence. Research at the 

Department of Energy has led to technological advances that have 

drastically altered global energy markets. Whereas we were once 

subject to the whims of OPEC and completely reliant on their supply of crude, new drilling techniques developed with government 

support have revitalized the domestic oil and gas industry. This 

American energy resurgence has led to a 19% decrease in the volume of crude imports since 2011 and a dramatic fall in the price, 

which together have slashed our energy trade deficit. In January 

2012, America spent roughly $36 billion on net energy imports, but 

thanks to the innovation spurred by the Department of Energy, by 

December of last year, that number had fallen to less than $12 billion. While the low prices of the last few months have squeezed 

American producers, our new capacity to quickly ramp up production has allowed the United States to replace Saudi Arabia as the 

swing producer in the global oil market. This dramatic shift will 

shield us from future price shocks while also causing significant 

budget shortfalls for oil-dependent nations, including Russia, Iran, 

Saudi Arabia, and Venezuela as well as the terrorist organization, 

ISIS. 

These significant strides towards America’s energy security 

should be applauded, but we must not lose our momentum by resting on our laurels. To finally free ourselves from our energy dependence, as well as to drastically cut our dangerous carbon emissions, we must continue to strongly fund DOE’s efforts. Unfortunately, constraints on the allocation did not allow additional funding for Mission Innovation—an effort to double clean energy research and development by 2021. This lack of resources will necessarily delay progress on breakthroughs in energy efficiency and 

clean energy and hinder innovation to drive sustained economic 

growth in the clean energy economy of the future. 

The Science and ARPA–E accounts, critical to the competitiveness of our nation, are $49,800,000 and $14,889,000 above the level 

of funding provided in 2016 respectively. With a return on investment of 20 to 67 percent, publicly funded research grows our economy and helps the United States maintain its position as the global 

leader in innovation. If the U.S. is to truly achieve energy independence and tackle the challenges posed by climate change, the 

federal government must continue to prioritize investments in cutting edge research at our national laboratories and universities 

along with supporting advancements in high-potential, high-impact 

energy technologies that are too early for private-sector investment. 

With regard to the applied energy programs at the Department 

of Energy, investments in energy technology programs are once 

again skewed too heavily toward nuclear and fossil fuels though we 

recognize that the level of renewable energy funding is higher than 

that of any recent year. We must provide for critical research and 

development for the nuclear and fossil energy sectors to increase efficiency and reduce emissions of those sources that currently provide the bulk of our electricity generation, but continued and sustained research and development programs in renewable energy 

are necessary and appropriate. Renewable energy has achieved cost 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
188 

competitiveness in some areas, yet further investment can drive 

down the costs of existing technology and provide breakthroughs in 

others. Investment in portfolio diversity remains necessary for the 

long term, particularly given the rapidly shifting energy outlook. 

The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) continues 

to be plagued by breathtaking cost overruns and schedule delays, 

and the Chairman continues the strong oversight of the NNSA. 

While we understand the need to modernize a complex built substantially in the 1950s, we continue to question whether the organization has the necessary tools and processes to continue to manage large increases in these activities year after year. Within the 

Weapons account, we commend the Chairman for his strong support of the dismantlement activities, which will not only contribute 

to the dismantlement of weapons retired prior to 2009, it will bring 

additional needed workforce to the Pantex facility in Texas in support of the larger mission of maintaining our nuclear stockpile. 

Nonproliferation programs are our first line of defense and the 

most cost-effective way to achieve the urgent goal of securing and 

reducing the amount of vulnerable bomb-grade material. The bill 

includes $1,807,916,000 for these critical programs, $132,386,000 

below 2016. While we understand the Chairman met the Administration’s budget request for non-proliferation, the recent terror attacks in Paris and Belgium are proof that we should be increasing 

our expenditures on proliferation risks. In March 2015, the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board recommended that the Department expand its nonproliferation efforts and augment existing 

funding and expressed concern about the recent trend of falling 

budgets for the core non-proliferation efforts. 

While the funding levels of the bill would be a basis for negotiation, the inclusion of controversial riders is an unnecessary diversion from our primary responsibility—ensuring that taxpayer funds 

are invested wisely in Federal programs that will contribute to the 

economic vitality of our nation. The Administration has issued a 

veto threat on the Senate fiscal year 2017 Energy and Water Development bill if the final bill includes ideological riders that are 

beyond the scope of the funding legislation. 

Four of the water riders taken together risk protection of the 

world’s most precious resource: water. The first Clean Water Act 

provision prevents the Corps of Engineers from taking steps to 

clarify which waters are protected by the Clean Water Act and 

keeps in place a widely-acknowledged state of confusion about the 

scope of the law’s pollution control programs. The second prevents 

the Corps of Engineers from using funds to ‘‘develop, adopt, implement, administer, or enforce any change’’ to regulations pertaining 

to the definitions of the terms ‘‘fill material’’ or ‘‘discharge of fill 

material’’ under the Clean Water Act. This rider would lock in industry loopholes, leaving many of our nation’s waterways vulnerable to harmful pollution. Finally, the bill includes provisions regarding agricultural exemptions to the Clean Water Act and a prohibition of activities related to the National Ocean Policy. 

An additional six riders related to California’s complex water 

challenges were added this year to the Committee’s mark, injecting 

ill-considered and controversial language which should be considered in the appropriate authorizing committees under regular 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
189 

order. The language preempts state water law, court decisions and 

statutory environmental protections and has no place on an appropriations bill. 

The inclusion of the rider allowing guns to be carried on all 

Corps of Engineers lands injects into the bill an unnecessarily partisan topic that is unwarranted. We disagree with the notion that 

reasonable limits on where guns can be carried are an infringement upon the Second Amendment. We see no need to contribute 

to an environment where guns are commonplace in recreational 

areas where families are trying to escape the pressures of everyday 

life. 

Finally, this bill is another reminder of Congress’s failure to invest adequately in the development and upkeep of water systems 

serving American communities, exemplified by the tragedy that occurred in Flint, Michigan, where thousands of children and other 

residents were poisoned by contaminated water as a result of corroding lead pipes. Compounded by the inaction of state officials and 

an apparent cover-up to hide the extent of the danger from residents, the full scale of this tragedy will likely be unknown for 

years. A Federal State of Emergency was declared for Flint. Congress has a responsibility to provide critical resources to help repair decaying infrastructure, to support services for those affected, 

including the children whose physical and cognitive development 

has been harmed from lack of access to safe drinking water, and 

to protect other communities from the experience of Flint. Yet the 

Committee voted down an amendment offered by Representatives 

DeLauro and McCollum to provide emergency funding to begin to 

address these responsibilities. 

In spite of these concerns, we would like to reiterate our appreciation for the Chairman’s work with us on many issues, continuing 

the Energy and Water Development Subcommittee’s tradition of a 

collegial and bipartisanship process. The Subcommittee has operated collaboratively and effectively for many years and, within the 

constraints facing the bill, it addresses many of the interests we 

have expressed. The Energy and Water bill’s allocation seemingly 

comes at the expense of critical investments in other Subcommittees, as we still do not have a full set of Subcommittee allocations. 

We look forward to the day when allocations across all Subcommittees are returned to acceptable levels and to working with the 

Chairman and the members of this Committee to advance the process. However, we cannot support this bill given the ideological riders currently included in the Committee product. 

NITA M. LOWEY. 

MARCY KAPTUR. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS