Mr. Chairman. I rise today in support of this legislation, but as chairman of the Strategic Forces Subcommittee on Armed Services, I must express my concerns about some of the funding levels for important National Nuclear Security…
Mr. Chairman. I rise today in support of this legislation, but as chairman of the Strategic Forces Subcommittee on Armed Services, I must express my concerns about some of the funding levels for important National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) programs that are authorized within my subcommittee. The Fiscal Year 2005 Energy and Water Appropriations bill provides no funds for the robust nuclear earth penetrator (RNEP), advanced concepts, modern pit facility, nor enhanced test readiness. The Fiscal Year 2005 National Defense Authorization bill, which passed this House overwhelmingly just weeks ago, fully funded the President's request for these important initiatives. Furthermore, this elimination of funding for these programs jeopardizes our country's ability to respond to future national security threats, as pointed out in the Statement of Administration Policy. I now include that complete Statement of Administration in this Record.
Of particular concern to me is the $27.6 million authorized in the House-passed bill for RNEP would support the Air Force-led study concerning the feasibility of modifying an existing nuclear weapon to destroy what are known as hardened and deeply buried targets. It has long been recognized that these hardened targets are increasingly being used by potential adversaries to conceal and protect leadership, command and control, weapons of mass destruction, and ballistic missiles. I believe it is imperative that we finish this review as part of a larger effort to ensure that we further our technological edge.
Critics of RNEP say that they are not convinced that this money will only fund a study. This simply is not the case. This funding does not authorize the production of any weapons. In fact, Section 3117 of Fiscal Year 2004 National Defense Authorization Act (Public Law 108- 136) clearly states and I quote, ``The Secretary of Energy may not commence the engineering development phase (phase 6.3) of the nuclear weapons development process, or any subsequent phase, of a Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator weapon unless specifically authorized by Congress.''
Opponents also point to the NNSA Future Years Security Plan inclusion of $484.7 million for RNEP in the future. This budget estimation is required by congressional direction, and represents a placeholder should Congress and the President decide to go any further than a study. Without the placeholders by both NNSA and the Department of Defense (DoD) in the out year budgets, if authorized, the start of the RNEP's next phase would be delayed until funding was appropriated. This would nullify the schedule and cost estimates and require the costing and schedule to be redone causing additional taxpayer cost. Moreover, by the statute cited earlier, these funds could not be used for anything other than basic research without subsequent approval by Congress.
Although I plan to support this legislation, as chairman of the subcommittee of jurisdiction, I felt it necessary to set the record straight concerning this program, and I am hopeful that the House/ Senate conference will provide a reasonable level of funding for these programs.
Statement of Administration Policy
The Administration supports House passage of the FY 2005
Energy and Water Development Appropriations Bill.
The President supports a discretionary spending total of
not more than $819 billion, in addition to the $2.5 billion
in advance appropriations for Project BioShield, consistent
with his FY 2005 Budget. The President's Budget
responsibility holds the growth in total discretionary
spending to less than four percent and the growth in non-
security spending to less than one percent, while providing
the critical resources needed for our Nation's highest
priorities: fighting the War on Terror, strengthening our
homeland defenses, and sustaining the momentum of our
economic recovery.
Consistent with the need for responsible spending
restraint, the Administration urges the Congress to fully
fund unavoidable obligations and not to include any emergency
funding, including contingent emergencies, unless mutually
agreed upon in advance by both the Congress and the
Administration. Within this context, the Administration urges
the House to fully fund Presidential priorities, such as the
Nuclear Waste Repository at Yucca Mountain, NV and the
Hydrogen Fuel initiative.
The Administration is pleased that the Committee-reported
bill is consistent with the overall $819 billion
discretionary total and looks forward to working with the
House to address the following concerns.
administration priorities
Nuclear Waste Repository. It is vital to secure nuclear
waste now scattered at 126 sites in 39 States in one
appropriate underground facility. Further delay increases the
costs and security risk of storing materials at these various
sites. Therefore, it is imperative that the Department of
Energy (DOE) have the necessary resources for licensing and
constructing the repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. The
President's Budget contains a proposal to facilitate the
long-term financing for this project and the Energy and
Commerce Committee has reported a bill consistent with the
proposal. We strongly urge the House to adopt this financing
proposal and will continue to work with the Congress to
ensure its enactment.
Hydrogen Fuel Initiative. The Administration strongly urges
the House to fund the President's Hydrogen Fuel Initiative,
which will reduce the Nation's dependence on foreign oil and
provide cleaner air. The Committee's $31 million reduction
for fuel cell technologies should be restored by redirecting
funds from the Corps of Engineers, which is funded well above
the President's request.
National Security. The Administration strongly opposes the
elimination of funding for the Advanced Concepts Initiative,
the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator study, and planning for
the Modern Pit Facility. These reductions, if sustained,
would diminish the Nation's ability to respond to future
national security threats. Once again, this reduction could
be restored by redirecting some of the funds from the Corps
of Engineers or DOE's nuclear energy research and development
program.
army corps of engineers--civil works
The Administration commends the Committee for focusing the
Civil Works program on completing projects already under
construction and limiting new starts. These efforts are
consistent with the Administration's policy to reduce the
backlog of ongoing civil works construction projects. We urge
the House to eliminate funding and cancel balances for
projects that have low estimated economic or environmental
returns or
that are outside the Corps main mission, as requested.
We urge the House to restore funding that is necessary to
sustain operations on four nationally significant Corps
projects: $18 million for Columbia River fish recovery to
comply with a biological opinion pursuant to the Endangered
Species Act (ESA); $12 million to revitalize the side
channels of the Upper Mississippi River; $8 million for
Everglades Restoration; and $51 million to improve Missouri
River habitat and support continued operation of the river in
compliance with the ESA. We also request that the House
restore $10 million to the Regulatory Program to avoid delays
in the permitting process and ensure effective enforcement.
Department of Energy
The Administration strongly opposes reductions to the
National Nuclear Security Administration's (NNSA)
Nonproliferation programs to eliminate weapons-grade
plutonium production in Russia and to dispose of 68 metric
tons of surplus weapons-usable plutonium in the Russian
Federation and the United States. The proposed reductions
could delay the programs and escalate their costs, thereby
damaging critical components of the Nation's comprehensive
nonproliferation strategy.
The Administration objects to the bill's reductions to
important nuclear stockpile stewardship programs, such as the
Life Extension Programs, Directed Stockpile Work, and the
science and engineering campaigns. Furthermore, the
Committee's restrictive funding controls for the complex
Inertial Confinement Fusion National Ignition Facility
program may prevent NNSA from achieving the milestones the
Congress has directed for the program.
The Administration is concerned with the $76 million
reduction to the high-level waste proposal. The Defense
Nuclear Facilities Safety Board has recently communicated to
DOE its view that the safety consequences of delaying
radioactive waste disposition activities at the Savannah
River site are unacceptable. Moreover, the Administration and
the State of South Carolina have reached agreement on
radioactive waste disposal and underground storage tank
closure at DOE's Savannah River site. While we share the
Committee's preference for a legislative solution that
extends beyond the Savannah River site and are continuing to
pursue a consensus with all affected States on such
legislation, the funds are crucial to allowing the clean up
of the Savannah River tanks.
The Administration rejects the Committee's suggestion to
reduce spending on the International Thermonuclear
Experimental Reactor in FY 2005, as well as its shift in
funding for the Gridwise and Gridworks programs from the
Office of Electric Transmission and Distribution (OETD) to
the Office of Energy Assurance. OETD was established to
provide a single, focused organization to strengthen Federal
leadership on electricity reliability.
While we understand the need to restrain expenses for
departmental overhead, the funding reductions to the
Department Administration account in the House bill would
hinder the Secretary's ability to manage the Department.
bureau of reclamation and the central utah project
The Administration appreciates the Committee's support for
fully funding the Water 2025 Initiative and for directly
funding the Utah mitigation and conservation activities
through the Central Utah Project rather than indirectly
through the Western Area Power Administration. However, we
urge the House to include the Administration's proposal to
make a corresponding transfer of authority for project
mitigation from the Secretary of Energy to the Secretary of
the Interior.
tennessee valley authority (TVA)
The Administration is disappointed that the Committee did
not provide, as the Subcommittee did, the requested
appropriation of $9 million for TVA's Office of Inspector
General (OIG) to be derived from the TVA Fund. This proposal
would allow the OIG to conduct its duties in a more
independent manner, similar to the Inspectors General of
other Federal agencies.
constitutional concerns
Section 501 of the bill purports to limit the use of
appropriated funds by the Executive Branch in communicating
with the Congress. To the extent this provision would
preclude the President or his subordinates from initiating
communications with the Congress, it would interfere with the
Executive Branch's ability to influence congressional action
and would violate the Recommendations Clause of the
Constitution. The Administration urges the House to remove
this provision or amend it to allow normal and necessary
Executive Branch communications.