The Energy and Water Development appropriations bill includes funding for civil works projects of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), the Department of the Interior's Central Utah Project (CUP) and Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), the Department of Energy (DOE), and a number of independent agencies, including the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC). President Obama's FY2016 budget request, released February 2, 2015, would have provided $36.04 billion for agencies in the Energy and Water Development bill—3.6% above the $34.78 billion appropriated for FY2015. The FY2016 request for DOE was up by 8.4%, led by a proposed 13.0% increase in energy programs. The Corps would have been reduced by 13.2%, and the Bureau of Reclamation would have received a 3.0% cut. Figure 1 compares the major components of the Energy and Water Development bill. The House approved its version of the FY2016 Energy and Water Development Appropriations Bill ( H.R. 2028 , H.Rept. 114-91 ) May 1, 2015, by a vote of 244-177. Total funding in the bill, including rescissions, was $35.4 billion, 1.8% below the Administration's request. The House provided $5.64 billion for the Corps, 19.2% above the request, and $28.97 billion for DOE, 5.1% below the request. The House total for the Bureau of Reclamation was nearly the same as the request. The Senate Appropriations Committee reported its version of H.R. 2028 ( S.Rept. 114-54 ) on May 21, 2015. Total funding in the bill was $35.37 billion, including rescissions, slightly below the House-passed level. Compared with the House level, the Senate committee bill increased DOE funding by $333 million (1.2%) and decreased the Corps by $268 million (4.7%). The Senate measure did not include the House amendments discussed below. Congress enacted an omnibus funding measure for the entire federal government on December 18, 2015, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016 ( P.L. 114-113 ). The omnibus measure provided a total of $37.3 billion for energy and water programs for FY2016, an increase of 7.3% over FY2015. Funding in the omnibus measure included $29.7 billion for DOE (up 5.7%), $6.0 billion for the Corps (up 9.8%), $1.3 billion for Reclamation (up 11.8%), and $342 million for independent agencies (up 27.0%). President Obama strongly opposed the House Appropriations Committee bill in an April 28, 2015, Statement of Administration Policy. The Administration particularly criticized the bill's reductions in the President's budget request for energy efficiency and renewable energy and strongly objected to a prohibition on the Corps rulemaking on the definition of "waters of the United States." According to the Administration statement, the President's senior advisors would have recommended a veto of the House Committee bill. Several amendments generated substantial debate and were adopted by the House after recorded votes: Prohibiting DOE from using funds in the bill to enforce light bulb efficiency standards. Offered by Representative Michael C. Burgess; adopted 232-189. This prohibition was included in Division D, Sec. 312 of P.L. 114-113 . Prohibiting DOE from using a report on lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions when making determinations on liquefied natural gas exports. Offered by Representative Keith J. Rothfus; adopted 232-172. It was not included in P.L. 110-114 . Prohibiting funds in the bill from being used for DOE's Climate Model Development and Validation program. Offered by Representative Paul A. Gosar; adopted 224-184. It was not included in P.L. 110-114 . Prohibiting funds in the bill from being used to purchase water to meet stream flow requirements in California. Offered by Representative Tom McClintock; adopted 228-183. It was not included in P.L. 110-114 . Prohibiting funds in the bill from being used to limit Clean Water Act exemptions for certain agricultural activities. Offered by Representative Doug LaMalfa; adopted 239-174. Similar language was included in Division D, Sec. 110 of P.L. 114-113 . Prohibiting funds in the bill from being used to deliver water to the Trinity River above minimum requirements or to supplement flows in the Klamath River. Offered by Representative Doug LaMalfa; adopted 228-183. It was not included in P.L. 110-114 . Congressional consideration of the annual Energy and Water Development appropriations bill is affected by certain procedural and statutory budget enforcement measures. The procedural budget enforcement is primarily through limits associated with the budget resolution on total discretionary spending and spending under the jurisdiction of each appropriations subcommittee. Statutory budget enforcement is derived from the Budget Control Act of 2011 (BCA; P.L. 112-25 ). The BCA established limits on defense and nondefense discretionary spending. These limits are in effect for each of the fiscal years between FY2012 and FY2021, and are primarily enforced by an automatic spending reduction process called sequestration. The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013 ( P.L. 113-67 ) established higher levels for the FY2014 and FY2015 spending limits than what would have otherwise been in effect. The original BCA process to calculate the limits would have again become effective starting in FY2016, but higher limits were enacted by the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 ( P.L. 114-74 ). (For more information on discretionary spending limits, see CRS Report CRS Report R44062, Congressional Action on FY2016 Appropriations Measures , by [author name scrubbed].) For FY2015, appropriations for Energy and Water Development programs were included in the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015 ( H.R. 83 ). Energy and Water funding totaled $519 million above the request and $653 million above FY2014, including rescissions. The consolidated appropriations measure passed the House on December 11, 2014, and the Senate on December 13, 2014, and was signed by the President on December 16, 2014 ( P.L. 113-235 ). For details, see CRS Report CRS Report R43567, Energy and Water Development: FY2015 Appropriations , coordinated by [author name scrubbed]. The Administration's FY2016 Energy and Water Development appropriations request and subsequent congressional action have highlighted several significant areas of debate. The issues described in this section—listed approximately in the order they appear in the Energy and Water Development bill—were selected based on the total funding involved and the percentage of increases or decreases, the amount of congressional attention, and their impact on broader public policy considerations. The Corps requested but did not receive a $5 million increase for Clean Water Act (CWA) rulemaking activities, including developing a final rule to define "waters of the United States (WOTUS)" jointly with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). While FY2016 funding was being considered in Congress, the Corps and EPA promulgated the final rule on June 29, 2015. Waters under CWA jurisdiction are subject to CWA regulatory requirements; for example, they cannot be dredged or filled without a Corps permit. H.R. 2028 , as approved by the House, would have barred the Corps from developing, adopting, implementing, or enforcing any change to rules or guidance pertaining to the CWA definition of "waters of the United States," but the restriction was not included in the Senate bill or the final omnibus act. Similar provisions were included in proposed FY2015 appropriations bill language during the 113 th Congress, but were not enacted. For more information, see CRS Report R43943, EPA and the Army Corps' "Waters of the United States" Rule: Congressional Response and Options , by [author name scrubbed]. DOE's energy efficient manufacturing research funding would have more than doubled under the Administration request, with most of the increase going to the establishment of two new Clean Energy Manufacturing Institutes as part of the National Network for Manufacturing Innovation. Research on energy efficient vehicles would have risen 59% under the FY2016 budget request. The main activity increased under the vehicles program would have been the Electric Vehicle Everywhere Grand Challenge Program, a 10-year program announced in March 2012 to encourage production of cost-competitive plug-in electric vehicles. The funding request was included in DOE's Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy program, which would have seen a total increase of 42%, from $1.914 billion in FY2015 to $2.723 billion in FY2016. The proposed increases were largely rejected by the House and by the Senate committee. The enacted omnibus funding measure provided $2.073 billion for energy efficiency and renewables, including a 14% increase in manufacturing research and a 10% boost in vehicle technologies. Funding for the disposition of highly radioactive "spent," or "used," fuel from nuclear power plants would have risen 52%—from $71.5 million to $108.4 million—in the Administration's request. The additional funding would have expanded DOE's efforts to develop a "consent based" waste management system as an alternative to a planned repository at Yucca Mountain, NV, which the Administration is no longer pursuing. But the House, as it has in the past, rejected funding for the Administration's nuclear waste management program and provided $175 million to continue the Yucca Mountain licensing process. Following the pattern of recent years, the Senate committee did not include funding for Yucca Mountain but authorized a pilot consolidated nuclear waste surface storage facility.