California Institute for Federal Policy Research
1608 Rhode Island Avenue, NW, Suite 213, Washington, D.C. 20036
Phone: 202-546-3700 Fax: 202-223-2330 E-mail: [email protected] Web: http://www.calinst.org
Articles ~ Topics ~ Bulletins ~ Publications ~ Formulas ~ Events ~ Video/Audio ~ Transpo ~ Defense ~ Search ~ CA Delegation ~ About Us ~ Our Supporters
SPECIAL REPORT: Senate FY 2007 Energy & Water Appropriations and California Implications — September 2006
On June 29, 2006, the Senate Energy and Water Appropriations Committee reported H.R. 5427 (S.Rpt. 109-274), the Fiscal Year 2007 Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act. The $31.2 billion bill makes appropriations for the Department of Energy, the Corps of Engineers, and the Department of Interior Bureau of Reclamation, as well as related independent agencies. The bill exceeds the Presidents request and the House-passed bill by about $1.25 billion, but is about $6 billion less than the current year funding level.
The following is a quick analysis of the bill from a California perspective as prepared by the California Institute. We apologize for any errors or omissions in our discussion of these documents, and would appreciate any input/feedback on how to make improving corrections. The ordering of items generally reflects their presence in the bill and does not mean to imply any relative importance.
ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
The Committee Report contains a lengthy discussion on the Corps budget, contracting and reprogramming process. Although the Committee notes that improvements in processing times have occurred for newly forwarded documents, it "is not pleased that this improved review time only applies to new documents that have been forwarded for review. Many documents have been languishing for 3 to 4 years. This is unacceptable to the Committee and should be to OMB as well." Among the examples the Report gives of unacceptable review times are the following California projects that are still pending:
– Whitewater River Basin, CA – Sent to OMB on 9 May 02
– American River Watershed, Long-Term Study, CA – Sent to OMB on 8 Oct 04
As a result, the Committee "directs the Chief of Engineers to work with the ASA[CW] and OMB to develop a plan to complete these policy compliance reviews as expeditiously as possible and forward the recommendations of these reports to Congress. This plan should be presented to the appropriate House and Senate authorizing and Appropriations Committees no later than September 30, 2006. The Committee directs that reviews of all of these documents should be completed no later than December 31, 2007."
The Committee recommends $168,517,000, as opposed to the $162,360,000 in FY06 funding, and the Budget request of $94,000,000.
General Investigations (in thousands)
Arroyo Seco Watershed – $0 requested, $200 House, $300 Senate
Ballonna Creek Ecosystem Restoration – $0 requested, $0 House, $450 Senate
Big Bear Lake, Santa Anna River – $0 requested, $850 House, $0 Senate
Bolinas Lagoon Ecosystem Restoration – $0 requested, $0 House, $597 Senate
California Coastal Sediment Master Plan – $300 requested, $300 House, $300 Senate
Carpinteria Shoreline Study – $0 requested, $0 House, $200 Senate
City of Inglewood – $0 requested, $175 House, $175 Senate
City of Norwalk – $0 requested, $0 House, $200 Senate
City of Santa Clarita – $0 requested, $0 House, $550 Senate
Coast of CA, South Coast Region (LA County) – $0 requested, $0 House, $200 Senate
Cornfields, CA – $0 requested, $500 House, $0 Senate
Corte Madera Creek Watershed, CA – $0 requested, $200 House, $0 Senate
Coyote Creek – $0 requested, $0 House, $100 Senate
Desert Hot Springs – $0 requested, $600 House recommended, $0 Senate
Estudillo Canal – $600 requested, $600 House recommended, $600 Senate
Grayson and Murderers Creek – $0 requested, $200 House, $200 Senate
Hamiliton City – $0 Requested, $0 House, $600 Senate
Humbolt Bay Long Term Shoal Mgmt – $0 requested, $0 House, $250 Senate
Imperial Beach, Silver Strand Shoreline, CA – $0 requested, $0 House, $167 Senate
Laguna De Santa Rosa – $0 requested, $200 House, $0 Senate
Llagas Creek, CA – $0 requested, $250 House, $250 Senate
Los Angeles County Drainage Area, Cornfields – $0 requested, $0 House, $500 Senate
Los Angeles County – $0 requested, $200 House, $300 Senate recommended
Los Angeles River Restoration, CA – $0 requested, $200 House, $300 Senate recommended
LA River Watercourse Improvement, Headworks CA – $0 requested, $0 House, $562 Senate
Malibu Creek Watershed – $0 requested, $0 House, $608 Senate recommended
Matilija Dam – $400 requested, $500 recommended, $1,000 Senate
Middle Creek, CA – $0 requested, $0 House, $500 Senate recommended
Morro Bay Estuary, CA – $0 requested, $0 House, $275 Senate recommended
Napa River Salt Marsh Restoration – $300 requested, $300 House, $300 Senate recommended
Ocean Beach, San Francisco – $0 requested, $500 House, $300 Senate
Pajaro River at Watsonville – $0 requested, $750 House, $750 Senate recommended
Riverside County Samp, CA- $0 requested, $0 House, $250 Senate recommended
Russian River Ecosystem Restoration – $0 requested, $200 House, $0 Senate
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, Islands and Levees – $0 requested, $0 House, $2,000 Senate
San Bernardo Lakes and Streams – $0 requested, $1,000 recommended, $0 Senate
San Clemente Shoreline – $0 requested, $300 House recommended, $329 Senate
San Diego Samp – $0 requested, $0 House, $250 Senate
San Francisquito Creek – $0 requested, $225 recommended, $225 Senate
San Jacinto River – $0 requested, $1000 House, $0 Senate recommended
San Joaquin River Basin, W. Stanislaus – $0 requested, $200 House, $100 Senate
Santa Ana River & Tributaries, Big Bear Lake – $0 requested, $0 House, $200 Senate
Seven Oaks & Prado Dams Water Cons., CA – $0 requested, $1,500 House, $0 Senate
Solana Beach/Encinitas Shoreline Protection Study – $0 requested, $0 House, $500 Senate
South San Francisco Shoreline Study – $0 requested, $0 House, $1,000 Senate recommended
Sun Valley Watershed – $0 requested, $200 House, $200 Senate recommended
Sutter County – $339 requested, $400 House, $339 Senate recommended
Tahoe Basin – $0 requested, $0 House, $1,000 Senate recommended
Upper Penitencia Creek- $319 requested, $319 House, $319 Senate recommended
Westminster, East Garden Grove – $0 requested, $0 House, $300 Senate recommended
West Stanislaus County, Orestimba Creek – $0 requested, $0 House, $400 Senate
Wilson and Oak Glen Creeks, San Bernardino – $0 requested, $800 House, $0 Senate
– Coyote Creek Watershed – $100,000 has been provided to initiate reconnaissance studies;
– Los Angeles River Watercourse Improvement, Headworks – $ 562,000 is provided to complete the feasibility studies;
– Malibu Creek Watershed – The Committee recommendation includes $608,000 to complete the feasibility study;
– Morro Bay Estuary – $275,000 is provided to complete the feasibility study; and
– San Clemente Shoreline – The Committee included $329,000 to complete the feasibility study.
– Other Coordination Programs – Within the funds provided, $600,000 is provided for Lake Tahoe coordination activities.
Coastal Field Data Collection – The Committee has provided $4,900,000 for this nationwide program. Within the funds provided $1,000,000 is for the Southern California Beach Processes Study.
Construction (in thousands)
American River Wtrshd (Common Features) – $17,400 Senate
American River Wtrshd (Folsom Dam Modifications) – $6,000 Senate
American River Wtrshd (Folsom Dam Mini Raise) – $23,400 Senate
American River Watershed (Combined) -$ 46,800 requested, $49,800 House
CALFED Levee Stability Program – $6,000 Senate
City of Santa Clarita, CA – $1,000, $0 Senate
City of Coronado Transbay Project, CA – $500 Senate
Corte Madera Creek Flood Control – $200 House, $200 Senate
Farmington Groundwater, CA – $300 House, $0 Senate
Guadalupe River – $5,000 requested, $6,700 House, $3,000 Senate
Hamilton Airfield Wetlands Restoration – $11,7000 requested, $11,700 House, $10,000 Senate
Harbor/S. Bay Wtr Recycling Prjct, LA – $0 requested, $800 House, $4,000 Senate
Heacock & Cactus Channels – $900 House, $0 Senate
Los Angeles County Drainage Area – $5,564 requested, $5,564 House $5,564 Senate
LA Harbor Main Channel Deepening $2,000 House, $1,000 Senate
Mid-valley Area Levee Reconstruction – $475 Senate
Murrieta Creek – $2,000 House, $2,000 Senate
Napa River – $9,000 requested, $11,000 House, $11,000 Senate recommended
Oakland Harbor (50 Foot Project) – $43,500 requested, $43,500 House, $36,000 recommended
Petaluma River- $3,200 House, $0 Senate
Placer County Sub-regional Wastewater Treatment – $2,000 House, $0 Senate
Port of Long Beach (Deepening) – $5,700 requested, $0 House, $5,000 Senate
Sacramento Area – $7,000 House, $0 recommended
Sacramento River Bank Protection Project – $10,960 requested, $15,000 House, $10,960 Senate
Sacramento River Deep Water Ship Channel – $0 requested, $500 recommended
San Francisco Bay to Stockton – $0 requested, $700 recommended
San Lorenzo River – $500 House, $0 Senate recommended
San Luis Rey – $0 requested, $1,000 recommended
San Ramon Valley Recycled Water – $0 requested, $3,000 recommended
Santa Ana River Mainstem – $54,080 requested, $56,080 House, $46,000 recommended
Santa Maria River Levee – $0 requested, $300 recommended
South Perris Project -$2,000 House, $0 recommended
South Sacramento County Streams – $7,313 requested, $9,700 House, $7,313 recommended
Stockton Metropolitan Flood Cntrl Reimbursement – $1,500 House, $0 recommended
Success Dam, Tule River – $25,000 requested, $25,000 House, $25,000 recommended
Surfside-Sunset-Newport Beach – $1,200 House, $1,200 Senate
Upper Guadalupe River – $1,000 Senate
Upper Newport Bay Ecosystem Restoration – $5,000 House, $5,000 recommended
Yuba River Basin – $1,500 House, $1,500 recommended
American River Watershed – The Report states: "The Committee has chosen not to combine the various, separately authorized, components of the project into a single line item as was proposed in the budget. The Committee believes that it is prudent to maintain visibility of the various project elements in the budget process."
American River Watershed (Folsom Dam Miniraise) – The Committee provides $23,400,000. Within the funds provided, $15,000,000 is for construction of the bridge.
CALFED Levee Stability Program – The Committee recommendation includes $6,000,000 to initiate this program. Within the funds provided, the Committee has provided $500,000 for the Corps to coordinate and complete within 6 months a review of Delta levees emergency preparedness and response planning with appropriate Federal and State agencies. The review will address preparation and response to protect (1) life and property within the Delta and (2) statewide interests reliant on water and other resources of the Delta, including measures to prevent salt water contamination of fresh water supplies consistent with the Delta Levee Stability Program High Priority, Priority Group A projects.
Mid Valley Area Levee Reconstruction – The Committee recommendation includes $475,000 for a limited reevaluation report as well as other necessary studies in advance of reconstruction.
Oakland Harbor – The Committee recommends $36,000,000 to continue construction of this project. The Report states that the "reduction made to this project should not be viewed as any diminution of support for this project, rather an attempt to balance out the Corps of Engineers nationwide program among the various missions of the Corps."
Santa Ana River – The Committee provides $46,000,000 to continue construction of this project. Again, the Report states "The reduction made to this project should not be viewed as any diminution of support for this project, rather an attempt to balance out the Corps of Engineers nationwide program among the various missions of the Corps."
Upper Guadalupe River – The Committee recommendation includes $5,000,000 to continue construction of this project.
Continuing Authorities Programs (CAP)
The Committee Report contains a long discussion of CAP projects and the need for the Corps to prioritize these projects. The following are CAP projects in California:
Section 103 Shoreline Protection:
– Bay Farm Island Dike; and
– Goleta Beach
Section 205 Small Flood Control Projects:
– Cosgrove Creek, California;
– Heacock and Cactus Channels, California; and
– New Hogan Reservoir Re-operation, California
Section 206 Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration:
– Upper York Creek Dam Removal and Restoration, California
– Tujunga Wash, California
Operations and Maintenance (in Thousands)
Black Butte Lake -, $2,156 Senate recommended
Buchanan Dam HV Eastman Lake – $2,287 Senate recommended
Channel Islands Harbor – $5,086 Senate recommended
Coyote Valley Dam, Lake Mendocino – $3,314 Senate
Crescent City Harbor – $500 Senate
Dry Creek (Warm Springs) Lake and Channel – $5,895 Senate
Farmington Dam – $350 Senate recommended
Hidden Dam, Hensley Lake – $2,427 Senate recommended
Humboldt Harbor and Bay – $4,916 Senate recommended
Inspection of Completed Works – $1,534 Senate recommended
Isabella Lake – $4,050 Senate recommended
Jack Maltester Channel (San Leandro) – $500 Senate recommended
Los Angeles County Drainage Area – $4,071 Senate
Los Angeles-Long Beach Harbor – $4,000 Senate
Lower Petaluma River – $500 Senate recommended
Marina Del Ray – $1,460 Senate recommended
Merced County Streams – $331 Senate recommended
Mojave River Dam – $204 Senate recommended
Morro Bay Harbor -$1,300 Senate recommended
Napa River – $1,000 Senate recommended
New Hogan Lake – $2,226 Senate recommended
New Melones Lake, Downstream Channel – $1,843 Senate
Oakland Harbor – $8,543 Senate recommended
Oceanside Harbor – $700 Senate recommended
Pillar Point Harbor – $1,000 Senate recommended
Pine Flat Lake – $3,760 Senate recommended
Pinole Shoal management study -$500 Senate recommended
Port Hueneme – $500 Senate recommended
Project Condition Surveys – $2,069 Senate recommended
Redwood City Harbor – $1,000 Senate recommended
Richmond Harbor – $7,377 Senate recommended
Sacramento River (30 Foot Project) – $3,124 Senate
Sacramento River and Tributaries (Debris Control) – $1,418 Senate recommended
Sacramento River Shallow Draft Channel – $93 Senate
San Francisco Bay, Delta Model Structure – $1,124 Senate
San Francisco Harbor and Bay (Drift Removal) – $2,000 Senate
San Francisco Harbor – $2,447 Senate recommended
San Joaquin River – $3,070 Senate recommended
San Pablo Bay and Mare Island Strait -$2,498 Senate
Santa Ana River Basin – $3,526 Senate recommended
Santa Barbara Harbor – $1,200 Senate recommended
Scheduling Reservoir Operations – $1,593 Senate recommended
Success Lake – $2,308 Senate recommended
Suisun Bay Channel – $2,833 Senate recommended
Terminus Dam, Lake Kaweah – $2,349 Senate recommended
Upper Petaluma Harbor – $0 requested, $0 House, $300 Senate recommended
Ventura Harbor – $2,700 Senate recommended
Yuba River – $83 Senate recommended
California Operation & Maintenance Region Total (in thousands) – $98,232 requested, $102,461House recommendation.
Crescent City – The Committee has provided $500,000 for dredging.
Oakland Harbor – The Committee recommendation includes $8,543,000 for dredging the Inner and Outer Harbors.
Los Angeles-Long Beach Harbor – $4,000,000 is provided for dredging the Los Angeles River Estuary.
Section 115. The bill includes language regarding the Santa Ana, California, project.
Section 116. The bill includes language regarding the Upper Guadalupe, California, project.
Section 134. The bill includes language regarding the San Lorenzo River, California.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Reclamation
An appropriation of $888,994,000 is recommended by the Committee for general investigations of the Bureau of Reclamation.
Water and Related Resources (in Thousands)
The Committee recommendations for specific California projects are as follows (Resources Management = RM; Facilities OM&R= FOM&R):
Cachuma Project – RM $1521 FOM&R $558
California Investigations Programs – RM $574; FOM&R $0
Calleguas Mun.Water Dis. Recycling Project – RM $1200; FOM&R $0
Central Valley Project:
American River Division – RM $1,815; FOM&R $7,158
Auburn-Folsom South Unit – RM $4,025; FOM&R $0
Delta Division – RM $10,819; OM&R $5,840
East Side Division – RM $1,598; FOM&R $2,523
Friant Division – RM $1,894; FOM&R $3,814
Miscellaneous Project Programs – RM $13,658; FOM&R $1,259
Replacement Adds. & Extraordinary Maint. – RM $0; FOM&R $18,315
Sacramento River Division – RM $4,395; FOM&R $1,740
San Felipe Division – RM $1,015; FOM&R $0
San Joaquin Division – RM $309; FOM&R $0
Shasta Division – RM $802; FOM&R $7,625
Trinity River Division – RM $9,379; FOM&R $3,318
Water and Power Operations – RM $1,648; FOM&R $9,483
West San Joaquin Div., San Luis Unit – RM $3,921; FOM&R $6,992
Yield Feasibility Investigation – RM $792; FOM&R $0
Hi-desert Wastewater Collection and Reuse – RM $0; FOM&R $0
Lake Tahoe Regional Wetlands Development – RM $4,500; FOM&R $0
Long Beach Area Water Reclamation & Reuse Proj. – RM $907; FOM&R $0
Long Beach Desalination Project – RM $1,000; FOM&R $0
Irvine Basin Ground and Surface Water Improvement – RM $250; FOM&R $0
Napa, Sonoma, Marin Agricultural Reuse Project – RM $200; FOM&R $0
N. San Diego Co. Area Water Recycling Proj. – RM $1,238; FOM&R $0
Orange Co. Reg. Water Reclam. Proj. – RM $2,500; FOM&R $0
Orland Project – RM $14; FOM&R $674
Sacramento River Diversion Study – RM $0; FOM&R $0
Salton Sea Research Project – RM $743; FOM&R $0
San Diego Area Water Reclamation Proj. – RM $3,465; FOM&R $0
San Gabriel Basin Project – RM $743; FOM&R $0
San Gabriel Basin Restoration – RM $0; FOM&R $0
San Jose Water Reclamation and Reuse Project – RM $495; FOM&R $0
Santa Margarita River Conjunctive Use Proj. – RM $0; FOM&R $0
Solano Project – RM $1,287; FOM&R $2,558
Southern California Investigations Program – RM $406; FOM&R $0
Ventura River Project – RM $824; FOM&R $0
Central Valley Project/Sacramento River Division – The Committee recommendation includes $450,000 for the Colusa Basin Integrated Resources Management Plan.
Miscellaneous Project Programs – An additional $1,500,000 above the budget request is provided for the Sacramento Valley Integrated Regional Water Management Program, $735,000 of which shall be made available for a cooperative agreement or agreements with the Northern California Water Association to be provided to the Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District for continued work on the Stony Creek Fan Conjunctive Water Management Program, $240,000 of which shall be available in the same manner for the Sacramento Valley Conjunctive Water Management Technical Investigation to be provided to the Stony Creek Fan Partnership and the Natural Heritage Institute, and $525,000 of which shall be made available in the same manner for the Lower Tuscan Formation Aquifer System Recharge Investigation and Environmental Monitoring Program to be provided to the counties of Butte and Tehama, California.
Trinity River Division – The Committee has provided $2,000,000 above the budget request to accelerate implementation of the Trinity River Restoration Program.
Water Conservation Field Service Program – The Committee has provided $8,421,000 for the Water Conservation Field Services Program. Within the amounts provided, $400,000 shall be allocated for urban water conservation projects identified through the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California Innovative Conservation Program, including the California Friendly program for water conservation in new home construction.
Central Valley Project
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $41,478,000, the same as the budget request for the Central Valley Project Restoration Fund.
CALFED Bay-Delta Restoration Project
The Committee recommends $38,610,000, the same as the budget request, but lower than the House recommendation of $40,110,000. The FY2006 Appropriation was $36,630,000.
Section 201. The bill includes language regarding the San LuisUnit and the Kesterson Reservoir in California.
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Programs
The Committee recommendation provides $1,410,254,000 for renewable energy resources, an increase of $211,660,000 from the current year level. Within the funds provided, $4,000,000 is for the National Center on Energy Management and Building Technologies and $3,000,000 for the UNR Renewable Energy Center for Geothermal Energy and Hydrogen.
Hydrogen – The Committee recommends $189,860,000, an increase of $34,233,000 above current year levels. The Presidents budget also provides additional R&D support to the hydrogen program through the Office of Science, Office of Nuclear Energy, and Fossil Energy for a total of just under $290,000,000 in fiscal year 2007.
Congressionally Directed Energy Supply and Conservation Projects
– Ohlone College Energy Innovation & Conservation, California (Solar) – $250,000
Elk Hills School Lands Fund
The Committee requests no funds for the Elk Hills School Lands Fund for fiscal year 2007, consistent with the budget request. The State of California is to receive 9 percent of the net sales proceeds generated from the sale of Elk Hills. The level of future budget requests is dependent on the results of the equity finalization process. The Committee Report states: "The State of California maintains that they are due $9,000,000 under the Elk Hills program in fiscal year 2007. The Department disagrees. If this legal dispute is resolved prior to the completion of the conference report, this issue may be re-visited."
Non-Defense Environmental CleanUp
The Committee recommendation provides $5,720,000 for Stanford Linear Accelerator Center.
The Committee recommendation for the Office of Science is $4,241,062,000, $240 million above the Presidents request. The Committee Report states: "Economists estimate that about half of U.S. economic growth since World War II has been the result of technological innovation. Basic research and science education lay the groundwork for tomorrows technology breakthroughs. The DOE Office of Science is the largest Federal provider of research in the physical sciences. In July 2005, the Congress passed and the President signed the Energy Policy Act of 2005. This directed the Department to increase its investment in funding for basic physical sciences. In his State of the Union address, the President unveiled his vision for science, embodied in the American Competitiveness Initiative [ACI], which proposes doubling the appropriation to the Office of Science over 10 years. Congressional initiatives such as the PACE-Energy Act propose a similar objective. The fiscal year 2007 request will put the Office of Science on course to doubling the funding over the next decade."
High Energy Physics
The Committee recommendation provides $766,789,000. The Committee fully funds the investments at the user facilities including the B-Factor at Stanford Linear Accelerator Center.
Joint Dark Energy Mission – The Committee Report states: "The Committee has consistently demonstrated its support of the Departments initiative to launch a space probe to answer the fundamental physics question of our timewhat is the dark energy that constitutes the majority of the universe? The Committee strongly believes that this initiative should move forward. Unfortunately, the multi-agency aspect of this initiative faces insurmountable problems that imperil its future, and the Department risks losing a world-class scientific team. The Committee is concerned that the joint mission between the Department of Energy and NASA is untenable because of NASAs reorganization and change in focus toward manned space flight. The Committee directs the Department to immediately begin planning for a single-agency space-based dark energy mission and to conduct a peer-reviewed competition to select a single winning proposal based both upon the quality of the science and the overall cost to the Department. The competition should be initiated by the end of the calendar year 2006 and completed in 2007 with the goal of a launch in fiscal year 2013. The Committee encourages the Department to aggressively explore potential domestic and international partnerships and launch options to help defray the cost of the missions. The Committee provides $74,271,000 for Non-Accelerator Physics, an increase of $15,000,000 above the request to support the Joint Dark Energy Mission. The Committee has moved $8,310,000 from Theoretical Physics to the High Energy Density Physics account."
Biological and Environmental Research
Congressionally Directed Projects
The Committee recommendation includes the following Congressionally directed projects:
– UCLA Institute for Molecular Medicine – $3,700,000
– Oakland Childrens Hospital – $225,000
– St. Mary Medical Center, California – $225,000
– UCSDNEES/NSF Outdoor Shake Table – $600,000
– St. Johns Hospital Center, Santa Monica, Womens Health Center – $200,000
Basic Energy Sciences
The Committee recommendation provides $1,445,930,000 for Basic Energy Sciences, an increase of $24,950,000 from the budget request.
Construction – The Committee recommends $148,269,000 to support construction activities within the Basic Energy Science activities, as requested. Full funding is provided to the Nanocenters and the Linac Coherent Light Source at SLAC.
Fusion Energy Sciences
For Fusion Energy Sciences, the Committee recommends $307,001,000. Consistent with budget descriptions, the Committee has shifted $11,949,000 provided for High Energy Density Science to the new office within the Department of Energy. California consistently wins the lion’s share of federal expenditures for fusion energy sciences projects and programs
Inertial Confinement Fusion and High Yield Campaign
The Committee recommends $412,256,000, a reduction of $38,935,000 from the budget request. The Report states: "The NNSA has implemented the National Ignition Campaign and declared it an enhanced management activity, which appears to be nothing more than a NIF at-all-costs-strategy. The NNSA has pursued this agenda as a means to justify an aggressive spending baseline at the expense of other compelling stewardship responsibilities in the ICF campaign. The NNSA has proven unable to maintain a balanced ICF and high yield research program. As such the Committee has reallocated funding out of NIF demonstration and Construction activities to ensure that there is adequate program balance."
Ignition – The Committee recommends $69,763,000, a reduction of $10,000,000, from the budget request.
Support of Other Stockpile Programs – The Committee recommends $25,872,000. The Report states: "This account has also suffered as a result of the NIF program. The additional funding provides for the support of research into high energy density physics within other campaigns."
NIF Diagnostics, Cryogenics and Experimental Support – The budget request provides a slight increase from the current year levels. However, the Committee recommends $42,578,000, the same level as current year, a reduction of $3,381,000. These funds will be applied toward the joint HEDP program.
University Grants – The Report states: "The Committee believes these activities would be better supported in a broader program that would provide students and faculty broader research and experimental opportunities."
NIF Demonstration Program – The Report states: "The remaining work under the Demonstration program activities includes assembly and installation of optics into the remaining roughly 180 of the 192 beamlines. The Department is directed to work to find cost savings by increasing the efficiency and productivity for assembly activities. The Committee recommends $129,000,000 for demonstration activities."
High-Energy Petawatt Laser Development – The Committee recommends no funding for this activity as the funds that were budgeted for this account, according to the Committee Report, have been shifted to the Office of Science High Energy Density Physics program, an increase of $27,693,000 above current year levels.
Defense Environmental Cleanup
The Committee provides the requested funding of $29,283,000 for Lawrence Livermore and $545,000 for other California Sites.
Return to California Institute Home Page