|
Printable Version
FY2007 Department of Energy Appropriations (3-21-07)
Untitled Document
The Department of Energy (DOE)
programs of interest to the geosciences include programs for renewable
energy and activities within the Office
of Science, such as the Basic
Energy Science program which has a geoscience division. Also of
interest is the Yucca Mountain site
characterization activities and environmental remediation of the nuclear
weapons complex.
The priorities of the Department of Energy's (DOE) energy program
are to: increase domestic energy production; revolutionize our approach
to energy conservation and efficiency; and promote the development
of renewable and alternative energy sources. Fossil fuels coal,
oil and natural gas -- currently provide more than 85% of all the
energy consumed in the United States, nearly two-thirds of our electricity,
and virtually all of our transportation fuels. Moreover, it is likely
that the nations reliance on fossil fuels to power an expanding
economy will increase over at least the next two decades even with
aggressive development and deployment of new renewable and nuclear
technologies. Because our economic health depends on the continued
availability of reliable and affordable fossil fuels, the Department
of Energys Office of Fossil Energy oversees two major fossil
fuel efforts: emergency stockpiles of crude oil and heating oil and
research and development of future fossil energy technologies.
For analysis of hearings held by Congress on Energy appropriations,
click here.
|
Fiscal Year (FY)
2007 Department of Energy Appropriations Process
|
|
Account
|
FY06 Enacted
($million)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Department of Energy (total)
|
23,563
|
23,557
|
24,373
|
|
24,373
|
|
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
|
1,173.8
|
1,176.4
|
1,319.4
|
NA
|
1,500
|
|
--Geothermal
|
23
|
0
|
0
|
NA
|
0
|
|
--Hydropower
|
0.5
|
0
|
0
|
NA
|
0
|
|
--Hydrogen
|
155.6
|
195.8
|
195.8
|
NA
|
155
|
|
Fossil Energy
|
842
|
649
|
737
|
NA
|
737
|
|
-- Natural Gas Technologies
|
32.6
|
0
|
0
|
NA
|
0
|
|
-- Petroleum - Oil Technology
|
31
|
0
|
2.7
|
NA
|
0
|
|
-- Coal Technology
|
376
|
330
|
|
NA
|
|
|
---Clean Coal Power Initiative/FutureGen
|
67.3
|
59
|
90.4
|
NA
|
67
|
|
Office of Science
|
3,596.4
|
4,101.7
|
4,131.7
|
NA
|
3,796
|
|
--Basic Energy Sciences
|
1,135
|
1,421
|
1,421
|
NA
|
1,421
|
|
---Chemical Sciences, Geosciences, and Energy
Biosciences
|
220.5
|
268.5
|
268.5
|
NA
|
268
|
|
--Biological and Environmental Research
|
580
|
510
|
540
|
NA
|
540
|
|
---Climate Change Research
|
141.5
|
135
|
|
NA
|
|
|
Environmental Management
|
6,590.3
|
5,828
|
6,441
|
NA
|
6,441
|
|
--Defense Environmental Clean-up
|
6,150.4
|
5,390.3
|
5,551.8
|
NA
|
5,551
|
|
--Non-Defense Environmental Clean-up
|
349.7
|
310.4
|
309.9
|
NA
|
309
|
|
---Uranium Enrichment D&D Funding
|
556.6
|
579.4
|
579.4
|
NA
|
556
|
|
Civilian Radioactive Waste Management
|
|
|
|
NA
|
|
|
--Nuclear Waste Disposal*
|
148.5
|
156.4
|
186.4
|
NA
|
148
|
|
--Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal*
|
346.5
|
388
|
388
|
NA
|
346
|
* These two accounts combined fund the Yucca Mountain project. **
Numbers are approximate and may change.
Samuel Bodman, the Secretary of the Department of Energy (DOE), unveiled
the President's budget request for the Department of Energy at a press
conference on February 6. He noted the importance of the President's
initiatives on American competitiveness and energy that were discussed
in the State of the Union address on January 31. For DOE, the American
Competitiveness Initiative would mean an increase of $505 million
to the $3.5 billion Office of Science budget in fiscal year 2007 (FY
2007) to begin to achieve a doubling of basic research funding over
the next 10 years.
The Advanced Energy Initiative would increase funding for clean energy
research by 22% with most of the increased funds going to solar, biomass/biofuels,
hydrogen fuel, FutureGen and nuclear power. Research for geothermal
and hydropower would be zeroed out of the FY 2007 appropriations.
The initiative would also establish a new international program, Global
Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) at a cost of $250 million. GNEP
will reduce the threat of nuclear proliferation and anticipate a 50%
increase in energy demand over the next 20 years. Bodman emphasized
that the United States will work to reduce its dependency on foreign
oil by developing "safe, emissions-free nuclear power" and
"by emphasizing the potential of U.S. coal reserves". GNEP
represents a change in U.S. policy regarding the recycling of nuclear
waste. GNEP will work to develop proliferation-resistant recycling
of nuclear fuel for greater efficiency and less waste and to develop
a new generation of small scale reactors to utilize recycled fuel
in developing countries. Bodman concluded his introduction to the
energy budget by emphasizing the department's commitment to Yucca
Mountain and improved management of programs and people. DOE is now
planning programs on a multiple year time scale to ensure that the
department honors its commitments in a timely fashion.
Overall DOE funding for FY 2007 would remain flat at $23.6 billion,
but in terms of real dollars it would represent a $500 million decrease
compared to FY 2006 appropriations. Science would receive a boost
from $3.6 billion in FY06 to $4.1 billion, Energy and Environment
would receive a decrease from $9.9 billion to $9.2 billion and National
Security would receive an increase from $9.1 billion to $9.3 billion.
Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
The overall budget of this office would increase by 0.2% to $1.176
billion. Spending on Hydrogen Technology would increase 25.8% from
$155.6 million last year to $195.8 million in FY 2007, Wind Energy
would increase by 12.8% from $38.8 million last year to $43.8 million,
Biomass and Biorefinery Systems R&D would increase by 65% from
roughly $91 million last year to about $150 million and Solar Energy
would increase by 78.5% from $83 million to $148 million.Geothermal
Technology and Hydropower would receive no funds and both program
would be terminated.
Office of Fossil Energy
Within the Office of Fossil Energy, research for natural gas technologies
and petroleum/oil technologies would be zeroed out as in previous
years because the administration believes that energy companies should
be conducting this research with the large profits from the recent
high prices of gasoline and other fossil fuel commodities. In addition
the programs have received Office of Management and Budget assessments
that are scored as "ineffective". Besides eliminating oil
and gas research, the President requests that the Ultra-Deepwater
and Unconventional Natural Gas and Other Petroleum Research Fund passed
as a mandatory funding program with revenues through oil and gas leases
in the Energy Policy Act of 2005 be repealed by future legislation.
The program was meant to fund ultra-deep research at $50 million per
year over 5 years. Cooperative research and development and advanced
metallurgical research were also zeroed out of the President's budget
request. Most of the funding in this office would be concentrated
in coal research ($330 million), program direction ($129 million)
and the strategic petroleum reserve ($155 million) and except for
program direction these other programs would see decreases in their
budgets of more than 20%. The total budget for the office would fall
from $841 million in FY 2006 to $649 million, a 22% cut.
Office of Science
The Office of Science would receive an increase of 14% compared to
FY 2006 appropriations, consistent with the American Competitiveness
Initiative, for a total budget of $4.1 billion. All programs would
see increases except for Biological and Environmental Research (BER),
which would receive a 12% cut. Climate Change Research within BER
would be reduced by 5% from $142 million in FY 2006 to $135 million
in FY 2007. The Basic Energy Sciences (BES) would remain the largest
program in the office with an increase of 25% from $1.134 billion
in FY 2006 to $1.420 billion in FY 2007. Within the BES, Chemical
Sciences, Geosciences and Biosciences would receive a $47.9 million
increase over their FY 2006 budget. About half of this increase would
go toward the President's Hydrogen Initiative ($6 million increase)
and basic research related to energy technologies ($22.4 million increase)
and the other half would go toward nanoscale science research ($22.2
million increase). Other programs would be reduced by $3.2 million
to make up the difference between these increases and the overall
budget.
Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (OCRWM)
The primary mission of OCRWM is to develop a geologic repository,
Yucca Mountain, for spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive
waste from commercial reactors and atomic energy defense activities.
OCRWM receives funds from defense and non-defense waste disposal programs
within DOE. The Nuclear Waste Disposal program contains funding for
Yucca Mountain, Transportation, Program Management and Program Direction,
while the Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal program only contains funding
for Yucca Mountain. The Nuclear Waste Disposal program would increase
by 5.3% from $148.5 million last year to $156.4 million, while the
Defense Nuclear Waste Program would rise by 12% from $346.5 million
last year to $388 million.
Yucca Mountain was approved for development in 2002 and DOE had to
delay their request for a site license for construction in 2004. Submission
of a license application was delayed for several reasons, however,
two primary and persistent problems are a court ruling that invalidates
the EPA compliance period for waste disposal and under funding of
the Yucca Mountain project by about $1 billion over the past 10 years.
Spending within OCRWM will focus on defending the department's license
application at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, improving decaying
site infrastructure, planning facilities for the receipt of spent
waste and developing a transportation infrastructure for spent waste.
Overall the Yucca Mountain project would receive $355.4 million,
an increase of $49.5 million over FY 2006 funding. Transportation
development would increase from $19.9 million in FY 2006 to $67.8
million and the President's request eliminates funding for the Integrated
Spent Fuel Recycling program that Congress appropriated $49.5 million
for in FY 2006.
Office of Environmental Management
The Office of Environmental Management was established in 1989 to
clean up the waste and contamination from nuclear weapons development
and energy research. It includes an environmental clean-up account
for defense and non-defense activities. Non-Defense Environmental
Clean-up would be decrease by 11.2% from $349.6 million appropriated
in FY 2006 to $310 million. Defense Environmental Clean-up would decrease
by 12% from $6,130 million last year to $5,390 million. The Uranium
Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning Fund would increase
by 4% from $556.6 million in FY 2006 to $579.4 million.
The House passed its version of the fiscal year 2007 Department of
Energy Appropriations bill (H.R.
5427) on May 24th by a 404-20 vote. The House recommended a total
budget of $24.373 billion, about $327 million more than the fiscal
year 2006 enacted level and $299 million more than the President's
request. The bill would fully fund the President's American Competitive
Initiative request for a 14 percent increase for the Office of Science
and the President's Advanced Energy Initiative for increased funding
for clean energy technologies, including hydrogen, solar, wind and
clean coal.
During floor debate, several amendments were passed, including an
amendment (H.Amdt.916) by Rep. Juanita Millender-McDonald (D-CA) that
would increase the funding for the Geothermal Technology Program by
$5 million and another amendment by Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) that
would increase funding for the State Energy program by $25 million.
The accompanying report to the House bill (H.
Rept. 109-474) includes a section on the proposed Advanced Research
Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) that has been suggested as a part
of the response to the National Academies "Rising Above the Gathering
Storm" report. The House notes that while it recognizes the importance
and value of research at the Department of Energy, "the proposal
is not yet ripe" and does not recommend any funds for this program.
Funding for the Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Resources
activities would receive a total of $1.3 billion, which is an increase
of $143 million more than the President's budget request. Within this
amount, Hydrogen Technology would receive the requested $196 million,
Biomass and Biorefinery Systems Research and Development would receive
$150 million, and Wind Energy would receive the requested $44 million.
The President's budget request recommended the elimination of the
Geothermal Technology and Hydropower programs, and the House committee
agreed with this recommendation by providing no funds for either program.
When the bill was brought to the full House for debate, however, the
Millender-McDonald amendment passed by a voice vote and would provide
$5 million for the Geothermal Technology program. The House would
also terminate funding for the state energy activities (about $49.5
million in fiscal year 2006) because the committee believes this money
is going to state employees for salaries, meetings and travel rather
than applied research and technology transfer. During the floor debate,
however, Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) offered an amendment (H. Amdt. 915)
that would provide $25 million for State Energy Programs and the amendment
was passed by a vote of 217-204. The bill would increase the budgets
of the Vehicle Technologies, Building Technologies and Industrial
Technologies activities above the President's request. These activities
promote partnerships and technology transfer between research and
industry to increase energy efficiency.
The House would provide $500 million for Nuclear Energy programs,
which includes $18.7 million for the Nuclear Hydrogen Initiative,
$27 million for nuclear science and engineering education (a $24 million
increase compared to the request) and $120 million for the Advanced
Fuel Cycle Initiative. The Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP)
is a proposed new initiative on developing small nuclear reactors
that use recycled fuel for power generation that could be shared with
developing countries. GNEP received a lukewarm reception in the House
because the details of the initiative are not well defined and funding
related to parts of this initiative were incorporated into the Advanced
Fuel Cycle budget. The House requested that the funds be used in the
following manner:
The statutory authorization level established in the Energy Policy
Act of 2005, Section 951(d)(1)(A) for the Advanced Fuel Cycle Initiative
is $120,000,000. As such, the Committee's recommendation of $120,000,000
should be allocated as follows: $11,000,000 for separations technology
development; $9,000,000 for advanced fuels development; $6,000,000
for transmutation engineering; $10,000,000 for systems analysis; $20,000,000
for the advanced fuel cycle facility; $39,000,000 for technology development
in support of the several UREX+ processes; and $25,000,000 for the
advanced burner reactor. No funds have been provided for transmutation
education. The Committee does not at this time support the development
of small modular reactors for export.
Funding for the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository would receive
$574 million, with $186.4 million of those funds coming from the Nuclear
Waste Disposal account (an increase of $38 million above the budget
request) and $388 million from the Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal
account. Most of these funds will be used by the agency to prepare
another license application for the repository to the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission. The report includes a long discussion on the committee's
view of the current planning path of the repository, noting:
The Department has made a number of significant technical and management
changes to the repository. In general, the Committee views these as
positive changes that will put the repository program on a more secure
foundation, will provide a clearer path to repository licensing, and
will increase public and Congressional confidence in the safety and
efficiency of the final repository. The Committee supports the adoption
of the phased approach to repository licensing and construction. Such
an approach is consistent with the "adaptive staging" recommended
by the National Research Council in its 2003 report, "One Step
at a Time: The Staged Development of Geologic Repositories for High-Level
Radioactive Waste."
Funding for programs within the Office of Fossil Energy would receive
an increase of $89 million above the request to total $737.4 million.
This amount would include $558 million for research and development
programs, which is an increase of $89 million from the budget request
but a $34 million decrease from last year's allocation. The bill would
terminate the Natural Gas Technologies activity ($20 million in fiscal
year 2006) and would provide only $2.7 million for the Petroleum Oil
Technologies activity ($33 million in fiscal year 2006). The committee
noted that the Energy Policy Act of 2005 authorizes $50 million in
mandatory spending for oil and gas research and therefore these other
activities do not need funding. The $2.7 million in the Petroleum
Oil Technologies activity would be divided between $1.5 million for
the Stripper Well Consortium and $1.2 million for the states Risk
Based Data Management System, two activities the committee did not
believe were covered by the funding provided in the Energy Policy
Act of 2005. The Clean Coal Power Initiative would receive an increase
of $36.4 million over the President's request and the Fuels and Power
Systems activity also would receive an increase of $25 million over
the President's request. The $1 billion FutureGen project to build
"the world's first coal-fired, zero emissions, electricity, heat
and hydrogen producing power plant" would receive $54 million,
same as requested, to continue design and licensing. Finally the House
would provide $12 million for gas hydrates research, funded under
the Natural Gas Technology program.
The Office of Science would receive even more than the requested
14% increase related to the President's American Competitiveness Initiative.
Funding for this office would total $4.13 billion, which is $535 million
above last year's funded level and $30 million above the budget request.
Within this account, High Energy Physics program would receive $775
million, Nuclear Physics programs would receive $454 million, Biological
and Environmental Research programs would receive $540 million, Advanced
Scientific Computing Research programs would receive $319 million,
and Fusion Energy Sciences programs would receive $319 million. Funding
for the Basic Energy Sciences program would total $1.4 billion, which
includes $286 million for chemical sciences, geosciences, and energy
biosciences research.
The Energy and Water Subcommittee of the House
Appropriations Committee is chaired by Representative Hobson
(R-OH) other members include Frelinghuysen
(R-NJ), Latham (R-IA),
Wamp (R-TN), Emerson
(R-MO), Doolittle (R-CA),
Simpson (R-ID), Rehberg
(R-MT), Visclosky (D-IN),
Edwards (D-TX), Pastor
(D-AZ), Clyburn (D-SC)
and Berry (B-AR).
The Senate did not complete action on the Energy and Water Appropriations
Act, 2007 before the 109th Congress adjourned on December 15, 2006.
Instead Congress passed four continuing resolutions to keep the agencies
affected by this bill running on either fiscal year 2006 or the House-approved
funding levels, whichever was the lower amount of the two. See the
continuing resolution action below for more details on how the fiscal
year 2007 budget was eventually finished by the 110th Congress.

The Energy and Water Subcommittee is chaired by Senator Domenici
(R-NM). Other members include Senators Cochran
(R-MS), McConnell (R-KY),
Bennett (R-UT), Burns
(R-MT), Craig (R-ID), Bond
(R-MO), Hutchison (R-TX),
Allard (R-CO), Reid
(D-NV), Byrd (D-WV), Murray
(D-WA), Dorgan (D-ND),
Feinstein (D-CA), Johnson
(D-SD), Landrieu (D-LA)
and Inouye (D-HI)
|
Continuing
Resolution Action
|
The 110th Congress Finishes the Fiscal Year 2007 Budget
The Senate passed a year-long continuing resolution for the 9 unfinished
appropriations bills for fiscal year 2007 (H.J. Res. 20) on February
14, 2007 without any significant changes to the House version of this
continuing resolution (see below). The President signed the bill into
law (Public Law 110-5) on February 15, 2007. All federal agencies,
except the Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security,
will have their budgets defined by this continuing resolution through
September 30, 2007. Departments with potential unstipulated funds
have 30 days to inform Congress how they will distribute these funds.
House Passes Fourth Continuing Resolution with Some Increases for
Science and Education
Even though the President released his fiscal year 2008 budget request
on February 5th, Congress still has to finish work on the budget for
fiscal year 2007. The nascent 110th Congress decided in January to
consider passing another continuing resolution for the full year rather
than try to pass 9 separate appropriation bills leftover from the
109th Congress.
On January 30th, the House passed a new continuing resolution (H.J.
Res. 20) that would fund most of the government at the lowest of two
possible levels either the fiscal year 2006 or the House-approved
levels. The resolution worked out jointly by House Appropriations
Chairman David Obey (D-WI) and Senate Appropriations Chairman, Robert
Byrd (D-WV) added some adjustments that would increase funding for
some research and education. The resolution explicitly eliminates
earmarks and hopes to put a moratorium on earmarking until a reformed
process is put in place.
The adjustments would include a proposed 6 percent increase compared
to fiscal year 2006 funding for the National Science Foundation, so
the agency would receive an increase of $335 million for a total budget
of $5,916.2 million and $4,665.95 million would be allocated for Research
and Related Activities, a 7.7 percent increase for that account. The
Office of Science in the Department of Energy would receive a 5.6
percent increase compared to fiscal year 2006 funding for a total
budget of $3,796.4 million. The Office would see a $200 million increase
plus $130 million of previously earmarked funds that can be re-allocated
for other purposes. Also within the Department of Energy, the Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy Resources program would receive $1.5
billion, an increase of $300 million to accelerate research and development
activities for renewable energy and energy efficiency programs.
No adjustments for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration
(NASA) or the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
were included in the joint resolution, so NOAA and NASA would have
flat budgets. However, some funds for research and development would
be available because earmarks would be eliminated. In addition, the
resolution specifies funding levels for NASA's science mission as
follows: Science, Aeronautics and Exploration would receive $10 billion,
of which $5.2 billion would be for science, $890 million would be
for aeronautics research and $3.4 billion would be for exploration
systems.
The U. S. Geological Survey would receive $977.6 million, which includes
a restoration of the President's requested cut to the Mineral Resources
Program (about a $22 million increase) and a small increase over the
fiscal year 2006 budget. The Smithsonian Institution would receive
$533 million, a decrease compared to a budget of $618 million for
fiscal year 2006. Congress did specify, however, that the Smithsonian
would not be required to fund a specific grant for the Council of
American Overseas Research Centers or the reopening of the Patent
Office Building. This may free up some funds for research, infrastructure
and fixed costs.
The resolution also would include increases for Pell Grants for undergraduate
education, the Clean Water State Revolving Fund for water and wastewater
infrastructure projects in every state, for parks and other lands
to cover budget shortfalls and for the Forest Service/Wildland fire
management account to meet shortfalls caused by the intense 2006 wildfire
season.
The legislation now must be considered by the Senate and then if
necessary voted on again by both chambers. If the legislation passes,
it would then need to be signed by the President. The current continuing
resolution expires on February 15th, so Congress does not have much
time left. If Congress is unable to pass this legislation or some
amended resolution, the government will shut down the day after Valentine's
Day.
More information about the federal research and development budget
for fiscal year 2007 is available at the American
Association for the Advancement of Science.
New 110th Congress Considers Fiscal Year 2007 Budget
The 110th Congress, which started their first session on January
4, 2007, has indicated that they plan to extend the continuing resolution
(CR) passed by the 109th Congress for the full year, rather than trying
to work out a new budget for the 9 unfinished bills. This means that
the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy's
Office of Science and the National Institute of Standards and Technology
have started FY 2007 without the potential budget increases proposed
by the President and the previous Congress. The 109th Congress had
supported the President's American Competitiveness Initiative by increasing
funding for the Department of Energy's Office of Science by 15 percent,
the National Science Foundation by almost 8 percent and the National
Institute of Standards and Technology laboratories by 21 percent in
appropriations work.
These proposed increases will be lost if the CR is extended for a
full year. The 110th Congress has indicated that it might consider
"limited adjustments" to some appropriations when they bring
forward a new CR that will be extended until September 30, 2007. Adjustments
might include bringing all programs to at least their FY 2006 funding
levels to avoid some of the steep cuts proposed by the House or Senate
or providing specific funding increases for some specific programs.
If the CR is extended for a full year without any adjustments, here
is how federal agencies that support Earth science research and development
would be affected. The National Science Foundation would see a reduction
in funding of about $439 million and this reduction would translate
into a loss of about 800 new research grants for FY 2007. The National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) would be funded at the
House-proposed level of $3.4 billion, which is $288 million below
the President's request, almost $1 billion below the Senate-proposed
level and more than $500 million below the FY 2006 budget. Such a
significant reduction for NOAA would impede progress for core programs,
such as the National Weather Service functions and stifle the development
of new programs, such as the National Water Quality Monitoring Network,
a national Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS) and the implementation
of the recently updated Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration
(NASA), the United States Geological Survey (USGS) and the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) would receive almost the same funding as they
received in FY 2006 with no significant increases or decreases to
research and development funding.
The American Association for the Advancement of Science has a useful
summary of the affect of the CR on the FY 2007 budget for research
and development (R&D) that is available online.
The AAAS analysis concludes that the federal investment in basic and
applied research funding will decrease for the third straight year,
that the federal investment for development is increasing, and that
the increases for research and development will go primarily to the
Department of Defense. The Department of Defense research and development
budget for FY 2007 is a record-breaking $76.8 billion, thanks to a
4.8 percent increase (about $3.5 billion). The Department of Homeland
Security research and development funding will be slashed by 22 percent,
giving them a FY 2007 budget of about $1.0 billion.
Please see the American
Association for the Advancement of Science, R&D Budget and Policy
Program for more details on the federal budget for R&D.
Third Continuing Resolution: December 8, 2006 to February 15, 2007
The 109th Congress returned from the mid-term election recess and
was unable to complete any of the unfinished appropriation bills.
Only the appropriations for the Department of Defense and the Department
of Homeland Security were finished in September and only these large
departments started fiscal year 2007 on October 1, 2006 with new budgets.
Before turning out the lights, Congress did pass another continuing
resolution (H.J. Res. 102) through February 15, 2007. The continuing
resolution (CR) means that all of the other federal agencies will
be funded at the lowest funding level of three options, the fiscal
year 2006 budget, the House approved FY 2007 budget or the Senate
committee approved FY 2007 budget.
One quirk of the current CR is that congressionally-designated FY
2007 funding for specific projects (earmarks) are not specified, allowing
the funds designated for these earmarks to be used for other projects.
This gives federal agencies with earmarks some flexibility in transferring
funds to alleviate shortfalls in core programs.
H.J. Res. 102 is available from Thomas, thomas.loc.gov
Second Continuing Resolution: November 17, 2006 to December 8, 2006
The 109th Congress was unable to reach any agreements or compromises
on the 9 unfinished appropriations bills and passed a second continuing
resolution to keep the government funded at some level before adjourning
for the Thanksgiving holiday.
H.J. Res.100 is available from Thomas, thomas.loc.gov
First Continuing Resolution: October 1, 2006 to November 17, 2006
The 109th Congress adjourned on September 29th with lots of work
left to complete when they return after the mid-term elections for
at least one lame duck session from November 13-17. The biggest task
to complete is the fiscal year 2007 budget for much of the federal
government. Congress is likely to try to combine many separate bills
into one large appropriation bill called an omnibus and if this happens,
then policymakers are also likely to try to balance budget priorities
for such an omnibus by applying a small rescission (probably about
1%) across all programs. It is also possible that Congress will not
be able complete their budget work in November and may return for
an additional lame duck session in December.
Congress passed only two of 12 fiscal year 2007 appropriation bills
- one for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and one for the
Department of Defense. The DHS appropriations bill contains a continuing
resolution for the other appropriation bills that have not been completed.
The resolution extends to November 17 and maintains the funding of
all government agencies, except DHS and DOD, at the lower value of
three possible levels: the fiscal year 2006 budget, the House-approved
funding or the Senate committee approved funding. The House completed
work on all 11 of their appropriation bills, however, the 12 Senate
bills have not been considered by the full chamber and thus remain
with their respective committees.
- April 5, 2006: House Committee on Appropriations,
Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development, hearing on "DOE
Energy Supply and Conservation, Fossil Energy"
|
House
Committee on Appropriations
Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development
Hearing on "DOE Energy Supply and Conservation, Fossil
Energy"
April 5, 2006
|
Witnesses:
David K. Garman, Undersecretary of Energy, U.S. Department of Energy
(DOE)
Kevin Kolevar, Director of the Office of Electricity Delivery and
Energy Reliability
Alexander Karsner, Assistant Secretary of Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy
Dennis Spurgeon, Assistant Secretary of Nuclear Energy
George Rudins, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Clean Coal
On April 5, 2006, the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy
and Water Development held a hearing to discuss the proposed fiscal
year (FY) 2007 budget for energy supply, energy conservation, and
fossil energy programs at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). Nearly
every subcommittee member attended the three-hour hearing, peppering
DOE officials with questions about coal, the Yucca Mountain nuclear
waste repository, and the proposed Global Nuclear Energy Partnership
(GNEP). "The budget request for FY 2007 appears very aggressive
for renewables," said Subcommittee Chair David Hobson (R-OH),
adding that the increase has come at the expense of other DOE programs.
"I don't think that's going to hold," he said.
Undersecretary of Energy David Garman stressed that the DOE budget
had been crafted to reflect the priorities of the President's American
Competitiveness Initiative and Advanced Energy Initiative. "This
is a budget that begins to put the 'energy' back in the Department
of Energy," Garman said, adding that a key focus of the budget
is to "strengthen connections between basic and applied"
energy research.
Appropriators remained skeptical about the budgetary priorities in
the DOE request. Ranking Member Pete Visclosky (D-IN) and Representative
Dennis Rehberg (R-MT) questioned the logic of a twelve percent cut
in the Clean Coal Power Initiative. Garman justified the reduction
by pointing out that clean coal plants have been very successful in
the market. He added DOE is emphasizing diversifying the country's
primary energy sources rather than focusing on any one technology.
Rehberg also expressed his displeasure at the elimination of funds
for oil and gas research and development.
Members also touched on conservation and efficiency issues. Representative
Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-NJ) noted that the DOE budget placed little
emphasis on conservation. "Conservation is fundamental and implicit
if not explicit," Garman responded. "Energy efficiency is
the most affordable and quickest energy resource we as a nation can
tap." Nonetheless, Representative Ed Pastor (D-AZ) pointed out
that the efficiency-increasing State Weatherization Assistance Program
is slated for a 78 percent cut. Garman agreed that the program was
"very dependable" and "low risk," but explained
that the administration has chosen to invest in programs that are
higher-risk but could carry a higher payoff.
Several representatives expressed significant interest in the progress
of biofuels, including bio-diesel and cellulosic ethanol. In response
to questioning from Representatives Tom Latham (R-IA) and Jo Ann Emerson
(R-MO), Garman told appropriators that the U.S. currently produces
about four billion gallons of ethanol from corn each year, and that
DOE is looking to cellulosic ethanol to raise that number to sixty
billion gallons per year. To be competitive in the market, however,
ethanol prices would have to decrease from current levels of roughly
two dollars per gallon to around one dollar per gallon. Garman added
that funding for cellulosic ethanol research and development increased
by 65 percent in the President's FY 2007 request.
The hearing concluded with a heated discussion of GNEP and the Yucca
Mountain project. Hobson grilled Garman and Assistant Secretary of
Nuclear Energy Dennis Spurgeon about interim storage facilities for
nuclear waste. He cited information that despite guidelines requiring
all nuclear waste recycling sites to include interim storage facilities,
DOE is considering awarding a recycling project to a site that refuses
to store waste. Furthermore, GNEP lacks provisions for interim storage.
Hobson and Visclosky also criticized the administration's treatment
of the Yucca Mountain project. Visclosky accused DOE of "legislating
away" Yucca's problems without solving the nuclear waste issue.
Hobson remained unconvinced by Garman's assertions that the administration
is continuing to emphasize Yucca. He noted that the Yucca project
has been flat-funded for the past five years, and that by the time
Yucca opens there will already be enough nuclear waste to fill the
repository. DOE has no plan to "open the other seven Yuccas that
you need," he added. Hobson stressed that "the committee
is united" in dealing with the issue of interim waste. "I
would propose allowing interim storage in any state that wants to
take it except Nevada," he said.
To read Undersecretary Garman's written testimony, click
here.
-JAF
Sources: Department of Energy; Environment and Energy Daily; Greenwire;
U.S. House of Representatives; United States Senate; Hearing testimony.
Please send any comments or requests for information to the AGI Government
Affairs Program at govt@agiweb.org.
Contributed by Linda Rowan, AGI Director of Government Affairs and
Jenny Fisher, 2006 AGI/AAPG Spring Intern.
Last Update March 21, 2007
|