write_parts.c-54 : failed to open = [/local/etc/httpd/cgi-lis/txt_templates/compr_reg_crumb.txt]

Committee Reports

108th Congress (2003-2004)

House Report 108-128 - Part 1

House Report 108-128 - Part 1 1 of 1

This Report: To Accompany H.R.238     Printer Friendly: HTML  |  PDF




{link: 'http://www.congress.gov:80/cgi-bin/cpquery?',title: 'THOMAS - Committee Report - House Report 108-128 - Part 1' }

ENERGY RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, DEMONSTRATION, AND COMMERCIAL APPLICATION ACT OF 2003

19-006

108TH CONGRESS

REPT. 108-128

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

1st Session

Part 1
ENERGY RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, DEMONSTRATION, AND COMMERCIAL APPLICATION ACT OF 2003

MAY 22, 2003- Ordered to be printed
Mr. BOEHLERT, from the Committee on Science, submitted the following
R E P O R T
together with
AN ADDITIONAL VIEW
[To accompany H.R. 238]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

CONTENTS Page
I. Amendment 2
II. Purpose of the Bill 54
III. Background and Need for Legislation 54
IV. Summary of Hearings 57
V. Committee Actions 57
VI. Summary of Major Provisions of Bill 62
VII. Section-by-Section Analysis 63
VIII. Committee Views 78
IX. Cost Estimate 94
X. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate 95
XI. Compliance with Public Law 104-4 99
XII. Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations 99
XIII. Constitutional Authority Statement 100
XIV. Federal Advisory Committee Statement 100
XV. Congressional Accountability Act 101
XVI. Statement on Preemption of State, Local, or Tribal Law 101
XVII. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, As Reported 101
XVIII. Committee Recommendations 121
XIX. Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives 121
XX. Exchange of Committee Correspondence 121
XXI. Additional View 124
XXII. Proceedings of Full Committee Markup 125

I. AMENDMENT

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Purposes.
Sec. 3. Goals.
Sec. 4. Definitions.
TITLE I--RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
Subtitle A--Energy Efficiency
Part 1--Authorization of Appropriations
Sec. 104. Energy efficiency.
Part 2--Lighting Systems
Sec. 105. Next Generation Lighting Initiative.
Part 3--Buildings
Sec. 106. National Building Performance Initiative.
Sec. 106A. Electric motor control technology.
Part 4--Vehicles
Sec. 107. Definitions.
Sec. 108. Establishment of secondary electric vehicle battery use program.
Part 5--Energy Efficiency Science Initiative
Sec. 110. Energy Efficiency Science Initiative.
Part 6--Advanced Energy Technology Transfer Centers
Sec. 110A. Advanced energy technology transfer centers.
Subtitle B--Distributed Energy and Electric Energy Systems
Part 1--Authorization of Appropriations
Sec. 111. Distributed energy and electric energy systems.
Sec. 111A. Demonstration and field test.
Part 2--Distributed Power
Sec. 112. Strategy.
Sec. 113. High power density industry program.
Sec. 114. Micro-cogeneration energy technology.
Part 3--Transmission Systems
Sec. 115. Transmission infrastructure systems research, development, demonstration, and commercial application.
Part 4--General Provisions
Sec. 116. Definitions.
Sec. 117. Voluntary consensus standards.
Subtitle C--Renewable Energy
Part 1--Authorization of Appropriations
Sec. 121. Renewable energy.
Part 2--Bioenergy
Sec. 122. Bioenergy programs.
Part 3--Miscellaneous Projects
Sec. 126. Miscellaneous projects.
Sec. 127. Renewable energy in public buildings.
Subtitle D--Nuclear Energy
Part 1--Authorization of Appropriations
Sec. 131. Nuclear energy.
Part 2--Nuclear Energy Research Programs
Sec. 132. Nuclear energy research programs.
Part 3--Advanced Fuel Recycling
Sec. 133. Advanced fuel recycling program.
Part 4--University Programs
Sec. 134. University nuclear science and engineering support.
Part 5--Geological Isolation of Spent Fuel
Sec. 135. Geological isolation of spent fuel.
Subtitle E--Fossil Energy
Part 1--Authorization of Appropriations
Sec. 141. Fossil energy.
Part 2--Research Programs
Sec. 142. Fossil energy research programs.
Sec. 143. Research and development for coal mining technologies.
Part 3--Ultra-deepwater and Unconventional Natural Gas and Other Petroleum Resources
Sec. 144. Program authority.
Sec. 145. Ultra-deepwater program.
Sec. 146. Unconventional natural gas and other petroleum resources program.
Sec. 147. Additional requirements for awards.
Sec. 148. Advisory committees.
Sec. 149. Limits on participation.
Sec. 150. Fund.
Sec. 150A. Transfer of advanced oil and gas exploration and production technologies.
Sec. 151. Sunset.
Sec. 152. Definitions.
Subtitle F--Science
Part 1--Authorization of Appropriations
Sec. 161. Science.
Part 2--Fusion Energy Sciences
Sec. 161A. ITER.
Sec. 162. Plan for fusion experiment.
Sec. 163. Plan for fusion energy sciences program.
Part 3--Spallation Neutron Source
Sec. 164. Definition.
Sec. 165. Report.
Sec. 166. Limitations.
Part 4--Miscellaneous
Sec. 167. Facility and infrastructure support for nonmilitary energy laboratories.
Sec. 168. Research regarding precious metal catalysis.
Sec. 169. Nanotechnology research and development.
Sec. 170. Advanced scientific computing for energy missions.
Sec. 170A. Nitrogen fixation.
Part 5--Genomes to Life
Sec. 170B. Genomes to Life.
Sec. 170C. Department of Energy Science and Technology Scholarship Program.
Subtitle G--Energy and Environment
Sec. 171. Authorization of appropriations.
Sec. 172. United States-Mexico energy technology cooperation.
Sec. 173. Waste reduction and use of alternatives.
Sec. 174. Coal gasification.
Sec. 175. Petroleum coke gasification.
Sec. 176. Other biopower and bioenergy.
Sec. 177. Coal technology loan.
Sec. 178. Fuel cell test center.
Subtitle H--Hydrogen
Sec. 181. Short title.
Sec. 182. Matsunaga Act amendment.
Sec. 183. Repeal of Hydrogen Future Act of 1996.
Subtitle I--Management
Sec. 184. Availability of funds.
Sec. 185. Cost sharing.
Sec. 186. Merit review of proposals.
Sec. 187. External technical review of departmental programs.
Sec. 188. Improved coordination of technology transfer activities.
Sec. 189. Small business advocacy and assistance.
Sec. 190. Mobility of scientific and technical personnel.
Sec. 191. National Academy of Sciences report.
Sec. 192. Outreach.
Sec. 193. Limits on use of funds.
Sec. 194. Reprogramming.
Sec. 195. Construction with other laws.
Sec. 196. University collaboration.
Sec. 197. Federal laboratory educational partners.
Sec. 198. Interagency cooperation.
TITLE II--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY MANAGEMENT
Sec. 201. Improved coordination and management of civilian science and technology programs.
Sec. 202. Report on equal employment opportunity practices.
Sec. 203. External regulation of Department of Energy.
TITLE III--CLEAN SCHOOL BUSES
Sec. 301. Establishment of pilot program.
Sec. 302. Fuel cell bus development and demonstration program.
Sec. 303. Diesel retrofit program.
Sec. 304. Authorization of appropriations.
TITLE IV--ALTERNATIVE FUELED AND ADVANCED VEHICLES
Sec. 401. Definitions.
Sec. 402. Pilot program.
Sec. 403. Reports to Congress.
Sec. 404. Fuel cell transit bus demonstration.
Sec. 405. Authorization of appropriations.
TITLE V--CLEAN COAL
Sec. 501. Authorization of appropriations.
Sec. 502. Project criteria.
Sec. 503. Report.
Sec. 504. Clean coal centers of excellence.

SEC. 2. PURPOSES.

SEC. 3. GOALS.

SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS.

TITLE I--RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

Subtitle A--Energy Efficiency

PART 1--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS

SEC. 104. ENERGY EFFICIENCY.

PART 2--LIGHTING SYSTEMS

SEC. 105. NEXT GENERATION LIGHTING INITIATIVE.

PART 3--BUILDINGS

SEC. 106. NATIONAL BUILDING PERFORMANCE INITIATIVE.

SEC. 106A. ELECTRIC MOTOR CONTROL TECHNOLOGY.

PART 4--VEHICLES

SEC. 107. DEFINITIONS.

SEC. 108. ESTABLISHMENT OF SECONDARY ELECTRIC VEHICLE BATTERY USE PROGRAM.

PART 5--ENERGY EFFICIENCY SCIENCE INITIATIVE

SEC. 110. ENERGY EFFICIENCY SCIENCE INITIATIVE.

PART 6--ADVANCED ENERGY TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER CENTERS

SEC. 110A. ADVANCED ENERGY TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER CENTERS.

Subtitle B--Distributed Energy and Electric Energy Systems

PART 1--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS

SEC. 111. DISTRIBUTED ENERGY AND ELECTRIC ENERGY SYSTEMS.

SEC. 111A. DEMONSTRATION AND FIELD TEST.

PART 2--DISTRIBUTED POWER

SEC. 112. STRATEGY.

SEC. 113. HIGH POWER DENSITY INDUSTRY PROGRAM.

SEC. 114. MICRO-COGENERATION ENERGY TECHNOLOGY.

PART 3--TRANSMISSION SYSTEMS

SEC. 115. TRANSMISSION INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEMS RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, DEMONSTRATION, AND COMMERCIAL APPLICATION.

PART 4--GENERAL PROVISIONS

SEC. 116. DEFINITIONS.

SEC. 117. VOLUNTARY CONSENSUS STANDARDS.

Subtitle C--Renewable Energy

PART 1--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS

SEC. 121. RENEWABLE ENERGY.

PART 2--BIOENERGY

SEC. 122. BIOENERGY PROGRAMS.

PART 3--MISCELLANEOUS PROJECTS

SEC. 126. MISCELLANEOUS PROJECTS.

SEC. 127. RENEWABLE ENERGY IN PUBLIC BUILDINGS.

Subtitle D--Nuclear Energy

PART 1--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS

SEC. 131. NUCLEAR ENERGY.

PART 2--NUCLEAR ENERGY RESEARCH PROGRAMS

SEC. 132. NUCLEAR ENERGY RESEARCH PROGRAMS.

PART 3--ADVANCED FUEL RECYCLING

SEC. 133. ADVANCED FUEL RECYCLING PROGRAM.

PART 4--UNIVERSITY PROGRAMS

SEC. 134. UNIVERSITY NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING SUPPORT.

PART 5--GEOLOGICAL ISOLATION OF SPENT FUEL

SEC. 135. GEOLOGICAL ISOLATION OF SPENT FUEL.

Subtitle E--Fossil Energy

PART 1--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS

SEC. 141. FOSSIL ENERGY.

PART 2--RESEARCH PROGRAMS

SEC. 142. FOSSIL ENERGY RESEARCH PROGRAMS.

SEC. 143. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT FOR COAL MINING TECHNOLOGIES.

PART 3--ULTRA-DEEPWATER AND UNCONVENTIONAL NATURAL GAS AND OTHER PETROLEUM RESOURCES

SEC. 144. PROGRAM AUTHORITY.

SEC. 145. ULTRA-DEEPWATER PROGRAM.

SEC. 146. UNCONVENTIONAL NATURAL GAS AND OTHER PETROLEUM RESOURCES PROGRAM.

SEC. 147. ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR AWARDS.

SEC. 148. ADVISORY COMMITTEES.

SEC. 149. LIMITS ON PARTICIPATION.

SEC. 150. FUND.

SEC. 150A. TRANSFER OF ADVANCED OIL AND GAS EXPLORATION AND PRODUCTION TECHNOLOGIES.

SEC. 151. SUNSET.

SEC. 152. DEFINITIONS.

Subtitle F--Science

PART 1--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS

SEC. 161. SCIENCE.

PART 2--FUSION ENERGY SCIENCES

SEC. 161A. ITER.

SEC. 162. PLAN FOR FUSION EXPERIMENT.

SEC. 163. PLAN FOR FUSION ENERGY SCIENCES PROGRAM.

PART 3--SPALLATION NEUTRON SOURCE

SEC. 164. DEFINITION.

SEC. 165. REPORT.

SEC. 166. LIMITATIONS.

PART 4--MISCELLANEOUS

SEC. 167. FACILITY AND INFRASTRUCTURE SUPPORT FOR NONMILITARY ENERGY LABORATORIES.

SEC. 168. RESEARCH REGARDING PRECIOUS METAL CATALYSIS.

SEC. 169. NANOTECHNOLOGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT.

SEC. 170. ADVANCED SCIENTIFIC COMPUTING FOR ENERGY MISSIONS.

SEC. 170A. NITROGEN FIXATION.

PART 5--GENOMES TO LIFE

SEC. 170B. GENOMES TO LIFE.

SEC. 170C. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM.

Subtitle G--Energy and Environment

SEC. 171. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

SEC. 172. UNITED STATES-MEXICO ENERGY TECHNOLOGY COOPERATION.

SEC. 173. WASTE REDUCTION AND USE OF ALTERNATIVES.

SEC. 174. COAL GASIFICATION.

SEC. 175. PETROLEUM COKE GASIFICATION.

SEC. 176. OTHER BIOPOWER AND BIOENERGY.

SEC. 177. COAL TECHNOLOGY LOAN.

SEC. 178. FUEL CELL TEST CENTER.

Subtitle H--Hydrogen

SEC. 181. SHORT TITLE.

SEC. 182. MATSUNAGA ACT AMENDMENT.

`SEC. 102. FINDINGS AND DEFINITIONS.

`SEC. 103. PROGRAM.

`SEC. 104. FREEDOM CAR.

`SEC. 105. PLAN.

`SEC. 106. EDUCATION, OUTREACH, AND TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER.

`SEC. 107. INTERAGENCY TASK FORCE.

`SEC. 108. ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

`SEC. 109. EXTERNAL REVIEW.

`SEC. 110. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.

`SEC. 111. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

SEC. 183. REPEAL OF HYDROGEN FUTURE ACT OF 1996.

Subtitle I--Management

SEC. 184. AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS.

SEC. 185. COST SHARING.

SEC. 186. MERIT REVIEW OF PROPOSALS.

SEC. 187. EXTERNAL TECHNICAL REVIEW OF DEPARTMENTAL PROGRAMS.

SEC. 188. IMPROVED COORDINATION OF TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER ACTIVITIES.

SEC. 189. SMALL BUSINESS ADVOCACY AND ASSISTANCE.

SEC. 190. MOBILITY OF SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL PERSONNEL.

SEC. 191. NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES REPORT.

SEC. 192. OUTREACH.

SEC. 193. LIMITS ON USE OF FUNDS.

SEC. 194. REPROGRAMMING.

SEC. 195. CONSTRUCTION WITH OTHER LAWS.

SEC. 196. UNIVERSITY COLLABORATION.

SEC. 197. FEDERAL LABORATORY EDUCATIONAL PARTNERS.

SEC. 198. INTERAGENCY COOPERATION.

TITLE II--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY MANAGEMENT

SEC. 201. IMPROVED COORDINATION AND MANAGEMENT OF CIVILIAN SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY PROGRAMS.

`OFFICE OF SCIENCE

SEC. 202. REPORT ON EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY PRACTICES.

SEC. 203. EXTERNAL REGULATION OF DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY.

TITLE III--CLEAN SCHOOL BUSES

SEC. 301. ESTABLISHMENT OF PILOT PROGRAM.

SEC. 302. FUEL CELL BUS DEVELOPMENT AND DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM.

SEC. 303. DIESEL RETROFIT PROGRAM.

SEC. 304. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

TITLE IV--ALTERNATIVE FUELED AND ADVANCED VEHICLES

SEC. 401. DEFINITIONS.

SEC. 402. PILOT PROGRAM.

SEC. 403. REPORTS TO CONGRESS.

SEC. 404. FUEL CELL TRANSIT BUS DEMONSTRATION.

SEC. 405. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

TITLE V--CLEAN COAL

SEC. 501. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

SEC. 502. PROJECT CRITERIA.

SEC. 503. REPORT.

SEC. 504. CLEAN COAL CENTERS OF EXCELLENCE.

II. PURPOSE OF THE BILL

The purpose of H.R. 238, the Energy Research, Development, Demonstration, and Commercial Application Act of 2003, is to authorize appropriations for scientific and energy research, development, and demonstration (RD&D), and commercial application of energy technology programs, projects, and activities of the Department of Energy (Department or DOE), and for other purposes.

III. BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

Affordable energy is essential to the Nation's continued prosperity. Volatile world oil markets, along with soaring natural gas and electricity prices, have replaced the relatively low energy prices enjoyed over most of the past two decades. In addition, there are increasing concerns about the environmental impacts of energy use. Consequently, energy is again on the front burner of the Nation's agenda.

The Committee on Science has a significant role in the legislative implementation of energy policy. Under rule X, clause 1(n)(1) of the Rules of the House, the Committee on Science has jurisdiction over `all bills, resolutions, and other matters relating to * * * [all] energy research, development, and demonstrations, and projects therefor, * * *'. Similarly, the Committee has jurisdiction over environmental research and development (R&D) under rule X, clause 1(n)(4); over the commercial application of energy technology under rule X, clause 1(n)(6); and over scientific RD&D under rule X, clause 1(n)(14).

H.R. 238 focuses on DOE's support of major energy RD&D and commercial application activities, including those related to solar and renewable energy, energy efficiency, fossil energy, and nuclear and fusion energy. DOE also is a major funding source for basic research in the physical sciences.

DOE's general authority lies in several statutes--including the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (P.L. 83-703), the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 (P.L. 93-438), the Federal Nonnuclear Energy Research and Development Act of 1974 (P.L. 93-577), and the Department of Energy Organization Act (P.L. 95-91), which established DOE in the Executive Branch on October 1, 1977 as a cabinet-level agency. Beyond this general authority, statutes such as the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (P.L. 102-486) authorize numerous specific RD&D and commercial application activities. However, with two exceptions--methane hydrate R&D and Renewable Indian Energy Resources--none of the Department's existing civilian programs has specific fiscal authorizations for fiscal year 2004 and beyond. As a consequence, there is a need for a comprehensive authorization bill to provide guidance and direction to the Department that will preserve and strengthen the Nation's energy future and science base.

H.R. 238 as introduced is virtually identical to the provisions related to DOE's science and technology programs that were negotiated in the conference conducted in the 107th Congress in connection with H.R. 4, the Securing America's Future Energy Act of 2001. These negotiations were conducted by conferees and staff from the Committee on Science of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate, with the participation of the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives, which managed the bill.

H.R. 4 was omnibus energy legislation intended `[t]o enhance energy conservation, research and development and to provide for security and diversity in the energy supply for the American people, and for other purposes.' The Science Committee developed the legislative provisions in Division B, relating to energy RD&D. It also developed the provisions in Division E, relating to clean coal technology, in conjunction with the Committee on Energy and Commerce. Division B was taken from the text of H.R. 2460, the Comprehensive Energy Research and Technology Act of 2001, introduced by Science Committee Chairman Sherwood Boehlert (NY-23) on July 11, 2001. H.R. 2460 was based on information gathered at a series of hearings by the Committee on Science and on the recommendations of the Administration's National Energy Policy Development Group, published in May, 2001. The bill was referred solely to the Committee on Science, which marked up the bill on July 18, 2001 and reported the bill to the full House on July 31, 2001 (H. Rept. 107-177). Division E, relating to Federal clean coal technology program authorizations, also originated as the text of H.R. 2460, with changes negotiated with the Committee on Energy and Commerce.

H.R. 4 was introduced in the House on July 27, 2001. It was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce and, in addition, to the Committees on Science, Ways and Means, Resources, Education and the Workforce, Transportation and Infrastructure, the Budget, and Financial Services. The Science Committee discharged the bill on July 31, 2001, on which date the Committee on Rules filed H. Rept. 107-178 on H. Res. 216, providing for consideration of H.R. 4.

On August 2, 2001, the House passed H.R. 4, as amended, by the Yeas and Nays: 240-189 (Roll Call No. 320).

On April 25, 2002, the Senate passed H.R. 4, by the Yeas and Nays: 88-11 (Roll Call No. 94) after striking all after the enacting clause and inserting the text of S. 517, the Senate companion measure, as amended. The Senate Amendment contained several titles and provisions falling within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Science, including provisions related to energy research, development, demonstration and commercial application of energy technology (Sections 513-516, 770-772, 807-809, 814--816, 824, 832, Titles XII, Title XIV, Sections 1502, 1504-1505, Title XVI and Sections 1801-1805), indemnification of nuclear energy programs (Sections 501-507, and 509), and global climate change policy and climate science and technology (Sections 1001-1022 and Titles XI and XIII).

On May 1, 2002, the Senate Majority Leader appointed Mr. Bingaman, Mr. Hollings, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Rockefeller, Mr. Breaux, Mr. Reid (NV), Mr. Jeffords, Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Murkowski, Mr. Domenici, Mr. Grassley, Mr. Nickles, Mr. Lott, Mr. Craig, Mr. Campbell and Mr. Thomas to the Committee on Conference on H.R. 4.

The House disagreed with the Senate amendment to H.R. 4 and agreed to a conference, ultimately naming 48 conferees from the House. From the Committee on Science, the Speaker appointed Mr. Boehlert, Mr. Bartlett (MD), and Mr. Hall (TX), provided that Mr. Costello be appointed in lieu of Mr. Hall for consideration of Division E and Ms. Woolsey be appointed in lieu of Mr. Hall for consideration of sections 2001-2178 and 2201-2261 of Division B of the House bill and modifications committed to conference.

The Conferees met on June 27, July 25, September 12, 19, 25 and 26, and October 2 and 3, of 2002 and reached agreement on a number of key provisions in the Conference, including provisions related to Clean Coal RD&D. In addition, in discussions on the remainder of the bill's provisions relating to energy RD&D and the commercial application of energy technology, conferees reached consensus on the overwhelming majority of issues, with the House and Senate exchanging offers that were identical on all but a few issues. However, the Conferees were unable to resolve differences on the remainder of the bill and the legislation died with the adjournment of the 107th Congress.

H.R. 238, as introduced, reflects the final House position on energy science and technology issues in the unconcluded conference on H.R. 4. As such, H.R. 238 represents, in many instances, compromise positions negotiated between the House and Senate aimed at developing a balanced energy RD&D program.

IV. SUMMARY OF HEARINGS

During the 107th Congress, the Full Committee on Science held four hearings, and the Subcommittee on Energy held nine hearings relevant to H.R. 238. Those hearings are described in the Summary of Activities, Committee on Science, U.S. House of Representatives for the 107th Congress (H. Rept. 107-809).

Thus far, during the 108th Congress, the Full Committee on Science has held three hearings relevant to H.R. 238:

1. February 13, 2003 hearing on `An Overview of the Federal R&D Budget for Fiscal Year 2004.' Appearing as witnesses were (1) Dr. John Marburger, Director, Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP); (2) Dr. Samuel W. Bodman, Deputy Secretary, Department of Commerce; (3) Dr. Rita R. Colwell, Director, National Science Foundation (NSF); and (4) Mr. Robert Card, Under Secretary of Energy for Energy, Science and Environment, DOE.

2. March 5, 2003 hearing on `The Path to a Hydrogen Economy.' Appearing as witnesses were (1) Mr. David Garman, Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy; (2) Dr. Allan C. Lloyd, Chairman, California Fuel Cell Partnership; (3) Dr. Joan Ogden, Research Scientist, Princeton Environmental Institute; (4) Dr. Larry Burns, Vice President, Research, Development and Planning, General Motors; and (5) Mr. Don Huberts, Chief Executive Officer, Shell Hydrogen.

3. March 19, 2003 hearing on `H.R. 766, The Nanotechnology Research and Development Act of 2003.' Appearing as witnesses were (1) Senator George Allen (R-VA); (2) Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR); (3) Mr. Richard M. Russell, Associate Director for Technology, OSTP; (4) Dr. Thomas N. Theis, Director of Physical Sciences, IBM Research Division, Thomas J. Watson Research Center in Yorktown, New York; (5) Dr. James Roberto, the Associate Laboratory Director for Physical Sciences, Oak Ridge National Laboratory; (6) Dr. Carl A. Batt, Co-Director, Nanobiotechnology Center, Cornell University; and (7) Mr. Alan Marty, executive-in-residence, JP Morgan.

V. COMMITTEE ACTIONS

As summarized in H. Rept. 107-809, the Full Committee on Science heard testimony in the 107th Congress relevant to the programs authorized in H.R. 238 at hearings held on February 28, May 23, and June 21, 2001, and on February 2, 2002; the Subcommittee on Energy heard testimony relevant to the programs authorized in H.R. 238 at hearings held on March 22, April 26, May 3, May 17, May 24, June 12, and June 14, 2001, and on June 24 and June 26, 2002.

On January 8, 2003, Chairman Sherwood L. Boehlert of the Committee on Science introduced H.R. 238, the Energy Research, Development, Demonstration, and Commercial Application Act of 2003, a bill to provide for Federal energy research, development, demonstration, and commercial application activities, and for other purposes.

As summarized above, the Full Committee heard testimony in the 108th Congress relevant to the programs authorized in H.R. 238 at hearings held on February 13, March 5, and March 19, 2003.

The Subcommittee on Energy was discharged from further consideration of H.R. 238 on March 20, 2003.

The Committee on Science met to consider H.R. 238 on Wednesday, April 2, 2003, and considered the following amendments to the bill:

1. Mr. Miller offered an amendment to allow DOE to make grants to nonprofit institutions to establish a nationwide network of Advanced Energy Technology Transfer Centers. The amendment was adopted by voice vote.

2. Mr. Matheson offered an amendment to require the demonstration and field testing of distributed generation systems. He asked for unanimous consent to offer his amendment out of order, not to the bill, but to the en bloc amendments (number 8) to be offered by Chairman Boehlert and Ranking Member Hall. The unanimous consent request was agreed to and the amendment was adopted as part of the en bloc amendments.

3. Mr. Costello and Mr. Calvert offered an amendment to the bill to require the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to regulate nuclear and worker safety and health at DOE's non-military laboratories. The amendment was adopted by voice vote.

4. Mrs. Biggert, Mr. Davis (TN) and Mr. Smith (MI) offered an amendment to authorize the Genomes to Life program. The amendment was adopted by voice vote.

5. Mr. Udall (CO) offered an amendment regarding Federal Laboratory Educational Partners. The amendment was adopted by voice vote.

6. Ms. Jackson-Lee offered an amendment to promote interagency cooperation between the Department of Energy and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The amendment was adopted by voice vote.

7. Mr. Rohrabacher offered an amendment to authorize a DOE graduate scholarship program for U.S. citizens. The amendment was adopted by voice vote.

8. Chairman Boehlert and Mr. Hall offered amendments en bloc to various portions of the bill. The en bloc amendments, which were accepted en bloc and agreed to by voice vote, comprised many technical, clarifying and conforming changes, as well as a number of substantive changes to the underlying bill as follows:

9. Mr. Wu offered an amendment to the en bloc amendments (number 8) to direct the Secretary to work with the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), and other standards development organizations to develop voluntary consensus standards for distributed energy systems. The amendment was adopted as part of the en bloc by voice vote.

10. Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson offered an amendment to the en bloc amendments (number 8) to establish a timeframe for the safe and convenient commercial production and delivery of hydrogen. The amendment was adopted as part of the en bloc by voice vote.

11. Mr. Sherman and Mr. Bell offered an amendment to the en bloc amendments (number 8) to specify research to be conducted by DOE on the societal and ethical aspects of nanotechnology. Chairman Boehlert asked for unanimous consent that the amendment be incorporated into the en bloc amendments (number 8). The request was agreed to and the amendment was adopted as part of the en bloc amendments by voice vote.

12. Mr. Udall (CO) offered an amendment regarding Global Change Research and Data Management. The amendment was withdrawn.

With a quorum present, Mr. Hall moved that the Committee favorably report the bill, H.R. 238, as amended, to the House with the recommendation that the bill as amended do pass; that the staff be instructed to prepare the legislative report and make necessary technical and conforming changes; and that the Chairman take all necessary steps to bring the bill before the House for consideration. The motion was agreed to by voice vote.

Mr. Boehlert moved that: (1) Members have two subsequent calendar days in which to submit supplemental, minority or additional views on the measure; and (2) pursuant to clause 1 of rule XXII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the Chairman may offer such motions as may be necessary in the House to go to conference with the Senate on H.R. 238 or a similar Senate bill.

VI. SUMMARY OF MAJOR PROVISIONS OF BILL

Sections 1 through 4 of the bill contain a short title, purposes, goals and definitions. The goals section includes quantitative near-term and long-term goals for energy efficiency, distributed energy and electric energy systems, renewable energy, fossil energy, nuclear energy, and hydrogen.

TITLE I--RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

Subtitle A (Energy Efficiency) authorizes $2.9 billion for fiscal years 2004-2007 including $200 million for a Next Generation Lighting Initiative, $25 million for secondary electric vehicle battery recycling and $110 million for the Energy Efficiency Science Initiative.

Subtitle B (Distributed Energy and Electric Energy Systems) authorizes $850 million for fiscal years 2004-2007, including authorization for a strategy to develop renewable-fossil distributed hybrid power systems and programs relating to high power density industries, and $23 million for micro-cogeneration and authorization for transmission infrastructure system RD&D and commercial application programs.'

Subtitle C (Renewable Energy) authorizes $1.8 billion for fiscal years 2004-2007 including $639 million for bioenergy, and $120 million for grants to local governments for use of renewables in public buildings.

Subtitle D (Nuclear Energy) authorizes $1.7 billion for fiscal years 2004-2007, including authorizations for Nuclear Power 2010, the `Gen IV' program, and the Proliferation Resistant Advanced Fuel Recycling and University Nuclear Science and Engineering Programs.

Subtitle E (Fossil Energy) authorizes $2.3 billion for fiscal years 2004-2007 (not including a separate authorization for Clean Coal Power Initiative) for power technologies, oil and gas technologies, fuel cells, and coal mining technology and for an Arctic Energy Office. It also includes an authorization enabling 7.5 percent of oil and gas royalty funds (estimated by the Congressional Budget Office to be $1.9 billion for fiscal years 2004 through 2007) to be used for ultra-deepwater and unconventional oil and gas research.

Subtitle F (Science) authorizes $17.9 billion for fiscal years 2003-2007, including $1.4 billion for Fusion, $349 million for the Spallation Neutron Source, and $1.23 billion for Nanotechnology. It also authorizes a graduate fellowship program for U.S. citizens and a program in the genetics, protein science and computational biology of microbes and plants, which is authorized at $100 million for fiscal year 2004 and such sums as are necessary through fiscal year 2007. It also requires a Facilities Infrastructure Plan for the National Laboratories.

Subtitle G (Energy and Environment) authorizes $24 million for various specified projects.

Subtitle H (Hydrogen) authorizes $1.8 billion through fiscal year 2008 to carry out the President's Hydrogen Initiative, including research, development, demonstration and commercial application of fuel cells, hydrogen production and FreedomCAR vehicle technology.

Subtitle I (Management) includes general requirements relating to expenditure and reprogramming of funding, cost sharing, merit and external technical review, small and minority businesses, mobility of scientific and tech personnel at labs, outreach and competitive awards.

TITLE II--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY MANAGEMENT

This Title Designates the head of the Office of Science as an Assistant Secretary and transfers health and nuclear regulation at DOE non-military labs to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). It includes a section requiring a report on equal opportunity practices at DOE labs.

TITLE III--CLEAN SCHOOL BUSES

This title establishes a three-year, $300 million demonstration program of alternative fuel, clean diesel and fuel cell school buses. It includes an additional authorization for a clean diesel school bus retrofit demonstration program.

TITLE IV--ALTERNATIVE FUELED AND ADVANCED VEHICLES

This title establishes a $200 million demonstration program of alternative fueled and advanced vehicles and supporting infrastructure used in intermodal transportation.

TITLE V--CLEAN COAL

This title authorizes $200 million per year for fiscal years 2003 through 2011 for a Clean Coal Initiative involving projects that meet technical, environmental, and financial criteria. It also establishes centers of excellence.

VII. SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Summary: The purpose of H.R. 238, the Energy Research, Development, Demonstration, and Commercial Application Act of 2003, is to provide for Federal energy research, development, and demonstration, and commercial application of energy technology programs, projects, and activities of DOE, and for other purposes.

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents

This section specifies that this Act may be cited as the `Energy Research, Development, Demonstration, and Commercial Application Act of 2003' and also lists the table of contents for the bill.

Sec. 2. Purposes

This section lists six purposes relating to energy savings and production, national security, environmental impacts, and economic growth in connection with energy research programs and activities.

Sec. 3. Goals

This section describes quantitative goals for the various programs of the Department in energy efficiency, distributed energy and electric energy systems, renewable energy, nuclear energy, fossil energy and hydrogen. It requires the Secretary to periodically review the goals and report on any proposed modifications to the goals. In addition, it specifies that stated goals do not create or limit any authority for Federal agencies or create any new requirements and cannot be used to support the establishment of regulatory standards or requirements.

Sec. 4. Definitions

This section defines various terms commonly used in the bill.

TITLE I--RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

SUBTITLE A--ENERGY EFFICIENCY

PART 1--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS

Sec. 104. Energy efficiency

This section authorizes $2.9 billion for Energy Efficiency programs at the Department for fiscal years 2004-2007. Of this amount, $200 million is for a Next Generation Lighting Initiative, $8 million for an Electric Motor Control Technology Program, $25 million for a Secondary Electric Vehicle Battery Program, and $110 million for the Energy Efficiency Science Initiative. This section also provides an additional $250 million authorization for fiscal years 2008 through 2012 for the Lighting Initiative and includes a subsection preventing the use of funds for developing energy efficiency regulations or for programs funded under other authorities.

PART 2--LIGHTING SYSTEMS

Sec. 105. Next Generation Lighting Initiative

This section requires the Secretary to carry out a Next Generation Lighting Initiative to be jointly funded by industry and the Federal government and largely carried out by a competitively-selected industry consortium. The section specifies government and private sector roles.

PART 3--BUILDINGS

Sec. 106. National Building Performance Initiative

This section requires the Director of OSTP to establish an interagency group to integrate Federal, State and voluntary private sector cost reduction efforts for buildings and to develop a plan for a public-private program to improve building performance.

Sec. 106A. Electric motor control technology

This section requires the Secretary to conduct a program of research, development, demonstration and commercial application on advanced control technologies for increasing the efficiency of electric motors.

PART 4--VEHICLES

Sec. 107. Definitions

This section provides definitions for section 108, Establishment of Secondary Electric Battery Use Program.

Sec. 108. Establishment of secondary electric battery use program

This section requires the Secretary to establish a research program to facilitate the reuse of batteries from electric vehicles for other purposes, such as bulk power and commercial power storage.

PART 5--ENERGY EFFICIENCY SCIENCE INITIATIVE

Sec. 110. Energy Efficiency Science Initiative

This section requires the Secretary to establish an energy efficiency research program run jointly by the Director of the Office of Science and the Assistant Secretary of Energy with responsibility for energy conservation.

PART 6--ADVANCED ENERGY TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER CENTERS

Sec. 110A. Advanced Energy Technology Transfer Centers

This section requires the Secretary to make grants to non-profits or State and local governments or universities or consortia thereof to establish a nationwide network of at least ten Advanced Energy Technology Transfer Centers to encourage demonstration and commercial application of energy efficiency technologies.

SUBTITLE B--DISTRIBUTED ENERGY AND ELECTRIC ENERGY SYSTEMS

PART 1--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS

Sec. 111. Distributed Energy and Electric Energy Systems

This section authorizes $850 million for the Distributed Energy and Electric Energy Systems programs for fiscal years 2004-2007, including $23 million for Micro-cogeneration.

Sec. 111A. Demonstration and field test

This section requires the Secretary to demonstrate and field test distributed generation systems.

PART 2--DISTRIBUTED POWER

Sec. 112. Strategy

This section requires the Secretary to develop a hybrid distributed power research strategy to be transmitted to Congress within one year.

Sec. 113. High power density industry program

This section requires the Secretary to establish a comprehensive research, development, demonstration and commercial application program to improve the energy efficiency of facilities such as data centers, `server farms,' and telecommunications facilities.

Sec. 114. Micro-cogeneration energy technology

This section requires the Secretary to make competitive merit-based grants to consortia for the development of residential combined heat and power technologies.

PART 3--TRANSMISSION SYSTEMS

Sec. 115. Transmission infrastructure systems research, development, demonstration, and commercial application

This section requires the Secretary to develop and implement a research, development, demonstration and commercial application program to promote improved efficiency and reliability of electrical transmission systems.

PART 4--GENERAL PROVISIONS

Sec. 116. Definitions

This section lists technologies that could comprise distributed hybrid technologies.

Sec. 117. Voluntary consensus standards

This section requires the Secretary to work with IEEE and others towards the development and implementation of voluntary consensus standards for the manufacture and use of distributed energy systems for connection with electric distribution systems.

SUBTITLE C--RENEWABLE ENERGY

PART 1--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS

Sec. 121. Renewable energy

This section authorizes $1.8 billion for the Renewable Energy programs at the Department for fiscal years 2004-2007. Of this amount, $639 million is authorized for bioenergy and $120 million for renewable energy in public buildings. Within the bioenergy authorization, not less than $5 million is for Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Hispanic Serving Institutions. No less than $4 million per year is authorized for field verification of wind turbines.

PART 2--BIOENERGY

Sec. 122. Bioenergy programs

This section requires that the Secretary conduct a research, development, demonstration, and commercial application program on biopower and biofuels, including integrated, cross-cutting and economic analysis programs.

PART 3--MISCELLANEOUS PROJECTS

Sec. 126. Miscellaneous projects

This section requires the Secretary to establish programs of research, development, demonstration, and commercial application in ocean energy (including wave energy), hybrid wind-coal gasification energy technologies, combined use of renewable energy and other energy technologies and hydrogen carrier fuels. It also directs the Secretary to request that the National Academy of Sciences conduct a study on renewable generation of ocean energy including wave, tidal, current and thermal energy.

Sec. 127. Renewable energy in public buildings

This section requires the Secretary to establish a program for the demonstration of innovative renewable energy technologies in State and local government buildings.

SUBTITLE D--NUCLEAR ENERGY

PART 1--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS

Sec. 131. Nuclear energy

This section authorizes $1.7 billion for fiscal years 2004-2007 for the nuclear energy research, development, demonstration, and commercial application programs, including programs that are authorized in the parts of this subtitle that follow. In fiscal years 2004-2007, it authorizes $530 million for infrastructure support programs, $399 million for advanced fuel recycling, $184 million for university programs, and $34 million for geologic isolation of spent fuel.

PART 2--NUCLEAR ENERGY RESEARCH PROGRAMS

Sec. 132. Nuclear energy research programs

This section requires the Secretary to carry out five nuclear energy research programs at the Department: the Nuclear Energy Research Initiative, the Nuclear Energy Plant Optimization Program, the Nuclear Power 2010 Program, the Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems Initiative and research on Reactor Production of Hydrogen. It also authorizes Infrastructure Support.

PART 3--ADVANCED FUEL RECYCLING

Sec. 133. Advanced fuel recycling program

This section requires the Secretary to carry out a nuclear fuel recycling technology research and development program on proliferation-resistant technologies. This research will focus on technologies that also minimize environmental and public health and safety impacts.

PART 4--UNIVERSITY PROGRAMS

Sec. 134. University nuclear science and engineering support

This section requires the Secretary to support new and existing programs to promote university research and education in nuclear engineering.

PART 5--GEOLOGICAL ISOLATION OF SPENT FUEL

Sec. 135. Geological isolation of spent fuel

This section requires that the Secretary carry out a program to determine the feasibility of deep-borehole disposition of high-level radioactive waste.

SUBTITLE E--FOSSIL ENERGY

PART 1--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS

Sec. 141. Fossil energy

This section authorizes $2.3 billion for fiscal years 2004-2007 to carry out the fossil energy, research, development, demonstration, and commercial application programs of the Department, excluding programs that are authorized in title V--Clean Coal. It also requires that the coal program authorized under section 142(a) comprise at least 60 percent of this total. Of the $2.3 billion total, this section authorizes $112 million for proton exchange membrane fuel cells, $27 million for coal mining technologies and $100 million for Office of Arctic Energy programs. This section also authorizes $100 million in fiscal years 2008-2012 for Office of Arctic Energy programs. In addition to the $2.3 billion authorization, this section also authorizes funding for the ultra-deepwater and unconventional resources programs, with the funds coming from 7.5 percent of the royalties, rents, and bonuses derived from Federal onshore and offshore oil and gas leases, with priority given to prior distributions required by law; such funding would be subject to appropriations Acts. The CBO estimates the revenue from these sources available to carry out the program will be $1.9 billion for fiscal years 2004-2007.

PART 2--RESEARCH PROGRAMS

Sec. 142. Fossil energy research programs

This section requires the Secretary to conduct a program of fossil energy research, development, demonstration and commercial application, including research on coal, oil, natural gas, and fuel cells. It also includes subsections requiring the Secretary of the Interior to transmit a report on natural gas and oil deposits off of the Louisiana and Texas coasts every two years and mandating the use of existing technology transfer mechanisms.

Sec. 143. Research and development for coal mining technologies

This section requires the Secretary to establish a program of research and development with Federal agencies, coal producers, trade associations, equipment manufacturers, institutions of higher education and others to develop new mining technologies.

PART 3--ULTRA-DEEPWATER AND UNCONVENTIONAL NATURAL GAS AND OTHER PETROLEUM RESOURCES

Sec. 144. Program authority

This section requires the Secretary to conduct programs of research, development, demonstration, and commercial application on ultra-deepwater and unconventional natural gas and other petroleum resource exploration, production and environmental mitigation. It also limits the programs to work in areas currently eligible to be leased for exploration and requires consultation with the Secretary of the Interior.

Sec. 145. Ultra-deepwater program

This section describes how the ultra-deepwater program should be carried-out, assigning responsibilities to the Secretary and a private consortium selected by the Secretary to help manage the program. It also establishes procedures to address conflicts of interest.

Sec. 146. Unconventional natural gas and other petroleum resources program

This section requires the Secretary to establish a research, development, demonstration and commercial application program for onshore unconventional oil and gas exploration for resources in economically inaccessible geographical areas.

Sec. 147. Additional requirements for awards

This section places requirements on applicants to the ultra-deepwater program to describe the intended commercial use of any technology to be demonstrated under the Act, and provides flexibility concerning the location of demonstration projects in deepwater depths of less than 1,500 meters and cost sharing for independent producers.

Sec. 148. Advisory committees

This section requires the Secretary to establish advisory committees for ultra-deepwater and unconventional resource programs and specifies their duties and compensation levels for their members.

Sec. 149. Limits on participation

This section provides for limits on the entities entitled to participate in the program.

Sec. 150. Fund

This section establishes in the Treasury an Ultra-Deepwater and Unconventional Natural Gas and Other Petroleum Resources Fund.

Sec. 150A. Transfer of advanced oil and gas exploration and production technologies

The section requires the Secretary to assess Federal technology programs and issue a solicitation to manage a technology transfer program of such technologies.

Sec. 151. Sunset

The section terminates the ultra-deepwater and unconventional research programs on September 30, 2010.

Sec. 152. Definitions

This section provides seven definitions for terms used in this part.

SUBTITLE F--SCIENCE

PART 1--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS

Sec. 161. Science

This section authorizes $17.9 billion for fiscal years 2004-2007 to carry out the research, development, demonstration, and commercial application programs of the Office of Science, including programs that are authorized in the parts of this subtitle that follow. From this amount, the section authorizes $1.27 billion for Fusion Energy Sciences, $157 million for the ITER fusion experiment, $349 million for the Spallation Neutron Source, $1.23 billion for nanotechnology, $100 million in fiscal year 2004 and additional sums in fiscal years 2005-2007 for the Genomes to Life Program, and $6.4 million for a new graduate scholarship program for U.S. citizens.

PART 2--FUSION ENERGY SCIENCES

Sec. 161A. ITER

This section authorizes the Secretary to join the international fusion experiment, known as ITER and requires that any agreement into which the U.S. enters meet specific requirements to protect U.S. economic and scientific interests. It also requires the Department to submit a research plan to Congress and for that plan to be reviewed by the National Academy of Sciences. Finally, it prohibits any U.S. funding for ITER construction until the Secretary has submitted to Congress the research plan, the international agreement for U.S. participation in ITER, a description of ITER's management structure, and a report describing how ITER will be funded without reducing funding for other programs, including other fusion programs, in the Office of Science.

Sec. 162. Plan for fusion experiment

This section requires the Secretary to restart planning for the domestic magnetic fusion burning plasma experiment (called the Fusion Ignition Research Experiment or `FIRE') if the Secretary determines during the negotiations on ITER that construction and operation of ITER is unlikely or infeasible.

Sec. 163. Plan for fusion energy sciences program

This section requires the Secretary to develop a program and submit a plan to Congress to provide a strong scientific base for Fusion Energy Sciences and the experiments described in Secs. 161A and 162.

PART 3--SPALLATION NEUTRON SOURCE

Sec. 164. Definition

This section provides a definition for `Spallation Neutron Source.'

Sec. 165. Report

This section requires the Secretary to report on the Spallation Neutron Source as part of its annual budget submission.

Sec. 166. Limitations

This section provides limitations for the amounts obligated for Spallation Neutron Source.

PART 4--MISCELLANEOUS

Sec. 167. Facility and infrastructure support for non-military energy laboratories

This section requires the Secretary to develop and implement a policy for maintaining, closing, modifying, or constructing new facilities and infrastructure at non-military energy laboratories. The policy must be communicated in a report transmitted to Congress by 2005.

Sec. 168. Research regarding precious metal catalysis

This section authorizes research on the use of precious metals in catalysis.

Sec. 169. Nanotechnology research and development

This section requires the Secretary to support a program of research, development, demonstration, and commercial application of technology in nanoscale science and engineering within the Office of Science. The section also requires the program to (a) support nanotechnology R&D through grants and interdisciplinary research centers and advanced technology user facilities; (b) encourage interdisciplinary research; (c) expand education and training; (d) accelerate commercial application of nanotechnology innovations; and, (c) ensure that societal and ethical concerns are addressed.

Sec. 170. Advanced scientific computing for energy missions

This section requires the Secretary to support a program to advance high performance computing and requires a report to Congress before the Department can undertake an initiative on new computer architecture. It also amends the definitions and the general responsibilities of DOE in the High-Performance Computing Act of 1991 (P.L. 108-3 Title 15, Chapter 81).

Sec. 170A. Nitrogen fixation

This section requires the Secretary to support an R&D program on biological nitrogen fixation, including plant genomics research.

PART 5--GENOMES TO LIFE

Sec. 170B. Genomes to life

This section requires the Secretary to authorize within the Office of Science a research, development, demonstration, and commercial application program known as the `Genomes to Life' program. The program builds on the Department's work on the human genome project and expands research into proteomics. This section directs the program to identify biological processes that could be developed for energy- and environment-related applications. It also authorizes grants to construct Genomes to Life research facilities.

Sec. 170C. Department of Energy science and technology scholarship program

This section requires the Secretary to create a scholarship program in which students receive scholarships in exchange for a commitment to work for the Department upon completion of their degrees. Scholarship recipients are obligated to work two years for each year of scholarship they receive.

SUBTITLE G--ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT

Sec. 171. Authorization of appropriations

This section authorizes $23 million for U.S.-Mexico Energy Technology, and $500,000 for waste carpet incineration studies.

Sec. 172. United States-Mexico energy technology cooperation

This section requires the Secretary to establish a collaborative research, development, demonstration, and commercial application program to promote efficient, environmentally sound development along the U.S.-Mexico border.

Sec. 173. Waste reduction and use of alternatives

This section authorizes the Secretary to make a single university grant to examine and develop the feasibility of burning post-consumer carpet in cement kilns as an alternative energy source.

Sec. 174. Coal gasification

This section authorizes loan guarantees for an energy project using integrated gasification combined cycle technology.

Sec. 175. Petroleum coke gasification

This section authorizes loan guarantees for at least one petroleum coke gasification project.

Sec. 176. Other biopower and bioenergy

This section requires the Secretary to assist in the planning, design and implementation of several identified projects to produce biopower and biofuels.

Sec. 177. Coal technology loans

This section authorizes $125 million to provide a loan for an experimental plant constructed under a Department of Energy cooperative agreement.

Sec. 178. Fuel cell test center

This section requires the Secretary to transmit to Congress a study of the establishment of a test center for next-generation fuel cells at an institution of higher education and authorizes $500,000 to carry out the section.

SUBTITLE H--HYDROGEN

Sec. 181. Short title

This section designates the subtitle as the `George E. Brown, Jr. and Robert S. Walker Hydrogen Future Act of 2003.'

Sec. 182. Matsunaga Act amendment

This section amends the text of the `Matsunaga Hydrogen Research, Development and Demonstration Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12401)' as follows:

SEC. 102. FINDINGS AND DEFINITIONS.

This section includes findings and definitions used in the subtitle.

SEC. 103. PROGRAM.

This section requires that the Secretary carry out a research, development, demonstration, and commercial application program for hydrogen-powered fuel cell vehicles and the refueling infrastructure to support them, with the goal of enabling the automotive industry to make a decision to bring such vehicles to market by 2015. The section specifies activities related to hydrogen production, delivery, and storage and the development of fuel cell technologies and the necessary codes and standards. It establishes project selection criteria for a hydrogen demonstration program. It also requires a competitive merit review process and specifies cost sharing requirements.

SEC. 104. FREEDOM CAR.

This section requires that the Secretary carry out a research, development, demonstration and commercial application program for advanced vehicle technologies and specifies activities and requirements for the program.

SEC. 105. PLAN.

This section requires the Department to submit a detailed plan to Congress describing the program's research agenda, the technical milestones used to evaluate the performance of the program, and the role that national laboratories, universities, small businesses and other partners will play.

SEC. 106. EDUCATION, OUTREACH AND TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER.

This section includes requirements for education, outreach and technology transfer.

SEC. 107. INTERAGENCY TASK FORCE.

This section creates an interagency task force, chaired by the Director of OSTP, to assist in the implementation of the program.

SEC. 108. ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

This section creates an advisory committee, comprised of representatives from domestic industry, academia, professional societies, government agencies, and other organizations, to provide advice to the Secretary.

SEC. 109. EXTERNAL REVIEW.

This section requires a competitively-selected non-governmental body, such as the National Academy of Sciences, to review the program's research plan and conduct a biennial review of the progress made by the program.

SEC. 110. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.

This section requires the Secretary to avoid unnecessary duplication when carrying out the activities under this Act, authorizes the Secretary to enter into cost-sharing agreements with other governments, authorizes the Secretary to represent the United States, and provides that nothing in the Act alters the Department's regulatory authority.

SEC. 111. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

This section authorizes $1.8 billion for the program for fiscal years 2004-2008.

Sec. 183. Repeal of Hydrogen Future Act of 1996

This section repeals the Hydrogen Future Act of 1996.

SUBTITLE I--MANAGEMENT

Sec. 184. Availability of funds

This section provides that funds appropriated to the Department under this title shall remain available until expended.

Sec. 185. Cost sharing

This section requires minimum non-Federal contributions of 20 percent of the cost of research and development, and 50 percent for demonstration and commercial application projects. It allows the Secretary to reduce these requirements based on either the technical barriers or the fundamental nature of the research.

Sec. 186. Merit review of proposals

This section requires an impartial review of the scientific and technical merit of project proposals.

Sec. 187. External technical review of departmental programs

This section requires the Secretary to establish new or designate existing advisory committees to review research, development, demonstration, and commercial application programs for energy efficiency, renewable energy, nuclear energy and fossil energy. It also requires the Secretary to establish a Science Advisory Committee for the Office of Science and to contract with the National Academy of Sciences for periodic review and assessment of programs.

Sec. 188. Improved coordination of technology transfer activities

This section requires the Secretary to establish a Technology Transfer Coordinator for the Department and a Technology Transfer Working Group comprising representatives from all the National Laboratories and single-purpose research facilities.

Sec. 189. Small business advocacy and assistance

This section requires National Laboratories and facilities to establish an outreach program for small and minority businesses.

Sec. 190. Mobility of scientific and technical personnel

This section requires the Secretary to report to Congress on any disincentives to sharing staff among National laboratories and single-purpose research facilities.

Sec. 191. National Academy of Sciences report

This section requires the National Academy of Sciences to study the impediments to decreasing the time to commercial application of new energy technology innovations, and ways to improve the Department's technology transfer activities.

Sec. 192. Outreach

This section requires the Secretary to ensure that each program authorized by this title includes an outreach component.

Sec. 193. Limits on use of funds

This section prohibits award of management and operations contracts for federal non-military energy laboratories unless they are made on a competitive basis, or unless the Secretary provides a waiver and Congress is notified two months in advance.

Sec. 194. Reprogramming

This section requires the Secretary to issue a report 60 days after appropriations are enacted of how appropriated funds will be distributed under this authorization. It also requires a 30-day Congressional review for any reprogramming that exceeds 5 percent of any individual distribution.

Sec. 195. Construction with other laws

This section lists other laws that grant relevant authority to the Secretary.

Sec. 196. University collaboration

This section requires the Secretary to report to Congress on promoting collaborations between large and small institutions of higher education.

Sec. 197. Federal laboratory educational partners

This section amends the Stevenson-Wydler Act (15 U.S.C. 3710c) to broaden the activities the Department's National Laboratories may conduct with income generated through their intellectual property rights to include educational assistance.

Sec. 198. Interagency cooperation

This section directs the Secretary of Energy and the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to enter into discussions with the goal of reaching an interagency working agreement to make NASA's energy expertise available to the Department.

TITLE II--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY MANAGEMENT

Sec. 201. Improved coordination and management of civilian science and technology programs

This section amends the Department of Energy Organization Act (`DOEOA') to require that the position of Director of the Office of Science established at section 209(a) of the DOEOA be elevated to an Assistant Secretary. The section also increases the overall number of Assistant Secretaries in the Department at section 203(a) of the DOEOA from six to seven, and expresses the Sense of Congress that leadership for departmental missions in nuclear energy should be at the Assistant Secretary level.

Sec. 202. Report on equal employment opportunity practices

This section requires the Secretary transmit to the Congress a biennial report on five aspects of the equal employment opportunity practices at the nonmilitary energy laboratories.

Sec. 203. External regulation of Department of Energy

This section terminates the Department's authority to self-regulate its nuclear and worker safety at non-military energy laboratories. It transfers regulatory and enforcement authority to the NRC and OSHA. It also prevents the delegation of that authority to the States. In addition, it shields contractor operators from bearing the costs of decommissioning a facility and directs the Department to establish decommissioning procedures for its nonmilitary energy laboratories.

TITLE III--CLEAN SCHOOL BUSES

Sec. 301. Establishment of pilot program

This section requires the Secretary to establish a program to demonstrate the use by local school districts of alternative fuel and ultra-low sulfur diesel school buses. Not less than 20 percent or more than 25 percent of funding under the section shall be for the demonstration of ultra-low sulfur diesel school buses.

Sec. 302. Fuel cell bus development and demonstration program

This section requires the Secretary to establish a program to enter into cooperative agreements for the development and demonstration of fuel cell-powered buses. Cost sharing under this provision is specified with regard to infrastructure and demonstration activities.

Sec. 303. Diesel retrofit program

This section requires the Secretary and the Administrator of the EPA to establish a pilot program for awarding grants to eligible recipients for the demonstration and commercial application of retrofit technologies for ultra-low sulfur diesel school buses.

Sec. 304. Authorization of appropriations

This section authorizes a total of $300 million for the title III program for fiscal years 2004-2006.

TITLE IV--ALTERNATIVE FUELED AND ADVANCED VEHICLES

Sec. 401. Definitions

This provision amends the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C. 14 13211) to provide definitions for alternative fueled vehicles, and fuel cell, hybrid, neighborhood electric, and ultra-low sulfur diesel vehicles. It also defines the pilot program.

Sec. 402. Pilot program

This section requires the Secretary to establish a competitive grant program to provide not more than 15 geographically dispersed demonstration projects for state and local governments or metropolitan transportation authorities. Grants can be utilized for the demonstration of alternative fueled vehicles, fuel cell vehicles, hybrid vehicles, ultra-low sulfur diesel vehicles and infrastructure associated with alternative fueled, fuel cell and hybrid vehicle projects. The section imposes several additional requirements on grants and imposes selection criteria that give priority consideration to projects which maximize protection of the environment, demonstrate that projects will be maintained or expanded after initial federal funding, and enable the transfer of goods or passengers to other transportation systems. Grants under the demonstration program are subject to 50 percent cost sharing requirements and a maximum period of five years. The Secretary is also required to seek broad geographic distribution of projects and to transfer information and knowledge gained through projects to other interested parties.

Sec. 403. Reports to Congress

This section requires the Secretary to issue a report to Congress on grants as well as evaluations of the effectiveness of the program.

Sec. 404. Fuel cell transit bus demonstration

This section requires the Secretary to establish a transit bus demonstration program to demonstrate not more than 12 fuel cell transit buses (and necessary infrastructure) in three geographically dispersed localities.

Sec. 405. Authorization of appropriations

This section authorizes $200 million to carry out title IV, to remain available until expended.

TITLE V--CLEAN COAL

Sec. 501. Authorization of appropriations

This section authorizes $1.8 billion for a Clean Coal Power Initiative at the Department for fiscal years 2003-2011. Section 501 also requires that the Secretary transmit a report, including a ten-year research plan, to Congress regarding certain implementation activities. Certain funding restrictions apply if the Secretary fails to transmit the report to Congress by September 30, 2005.

Sec. 502. Project criteria

This section establishes technical criteria that are to be required for projects funded under the Clean Coal Power Initiative. It also requires that the Secretary set technical milestones specifying the emissions levels that projects must be designed to and reasonably expected to achieve. The section requires that, through fiscal year 2009, no less than 80 percent of funding be provided only to projects involving coal-based gasification technologies. Beginning in 2009, the Secretary may, upon congressional notification, select projects that do not meet the 80 percent gasification requirement if they offer greater emissions reductions and permit carbon separation and capture. The section also specifies financial criteria for the program.

Sec. 503. Report

This section requires the Secretary, in consultation with other appropriate agencies, to transmit a report to Congress on the technical milestones and the status of projects funded under title V no later than one year after the date of the enactment of the title, and once every two years thereafter through 2011.

Sec. 504. Clean Coal Centers of Excellence

This section requires the Secretary to award competitive, merit-based grants to universities for the establishment of Centers of Excellence for Energy Systems of the Future. It also requires that the Secretary provide grants to universities that can show the greatest potential for advancing new clean coal technologies.

VIII. COMMITTEE VIEWS

Sec. 106A- Electric motor control technology. The Committee is aware of the potential of optical/graphical programming for driving, controlling, and improving virtually all types of electric motors. Successful development of a simple, low cost, and generic solution for the intelligent control of electric motors could significantly improve their energy efficiency. Such technology could have tremendous impact on the HVAC industry, among others.

DOE, through the Office of Industrial Technologies, has already invested in several promising energy efficient technologies, including the development of an optical programming system for intelligent control of electric air conditioning motors. From 1999-2002, the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) also invested significantly in an optical programming technology to improve the efficiency of HVAC motors. DOE program staff from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) have reviewed this electric motor control, optical programming technology and concluded that successful implementation of the technology could lead to significant improvements in HVAC efficiency.

Consequently, the Committee encourages DOE to fund larger demonstrations through its Building Technologies Program, Zero Energy Building Program or other programs to encourage the commercial application and wider acceptance of electric motor-control technology. As part of this effort, the Committee instructs DOE to work with NYSERDA to include this technology as part of a wider demonstration of energy efficient technology in institutional settings such as schools for grades K-12.

The Committee has also included language directing the Secretary to conduct additional research, development, demonstration, and commercial application of this technology. The Committee intends that the Secretary fund promising applications by small businesses that have special expertise in this area.

Sec. 110A- Advanced energy technology transfer centers. The Committee is aware that viable commercial technologies and best practices for utilizing energy efficiency in buildings and industrial processes have been developed in DOE laboratories and in the private sector. These technologies are currently available, but often lack sufficient market penetration and adoption to have substantial impacts on energy use. This is due not only to a lack of incentives for their use, but to the lack of exposure to building and energy professionals that would most benefit from these applications. Restructuring of power markets has left utilities that supported demand-side energy efficiency technologies with little financial incentive to continue programs that were designed to promote these technologies.

Subsection (a) of Section 110A authorizes the establishment of a national network of regional centers to provide training and demonstration of clean, energy efficient technologies and methods developed in both DOE laboratories and by private firms. The Committee intends that the centers be located to serve all regions of the country, while siting the centers based on greatest need.

Subsection (b) generally prescribes the primary functions and capabilities of the centers. Specifically, these centers should operate an extensive outreach program providing information, training and technical advice to a wide audience of building and industry professionals, technicians and organizations responsible for energy demand.

The Department will serve as a central coordinating body for the activities of the network of regional centers. In this capacity, the Department will be responsible for the dissemination and transfer of information among the regional centers, scheduling of televised classes and demonstrations, and will be the developer of curricula for the network and aggregator of findings, solutions and technologies developed through the regional centers, among other duties.

Sec. 111A- Demonstration and field test. The Committee is aware that the Energy Efficiency Subcommittee of the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) has endorsed a demonstration and field test of distributed generation systems to focus on the communications and control challenges that may result from the widespread adoption of these systems. To define technical needs, the field test should address interconnection reliability and safety issues for a range of generator sizes and types, applications, and locations on the system. The test should identify the full costs of distributed generation to the system. The Committee is particularly interested in the use of distributed generation systems in areas of low-density population. It is in areas such as these, with their special cost structures and widely distributed consumption bases, that experts believe distributed generation offers the greatest promise for providing efficient, reliable electricity. The Committee asks the Secretary to work with rural electric cooperatives--both national organizations such as the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association and state associations representing the rural electric cooperatives--in shaping this demonstration and field test to meet the special needs of the communities they serve.

Sec. 112- Strategy. The Committee draws on recommendations from the PCAST Report on Energy Efficiency (2002) to increase Federal research and development in communication and control technology for distributed generation systems. Through communications networks, these technologies allow distributed generation units to respond in real-time to fluctuations in market prices and grid demand by increasing production when grid demand and market prices are high and decreasing production when power from the grid is more economical.

Sec. 113- High power density industries. Section 113 requires the Secretary to develop and implement a comprehensive RD&D and commercial application program to improve energy efficiency, reliability, and environmental responsibility in high power density industries, such as data centers, server farms, and telecommunications facilities. In carrying out this section the Secretary shall consider technologies that provide significant improvements in thermal controls, metering, load management, peak load reduction or the efficient cooling of electronics.

Sec. 114- Micro-cogeneration energy technology. Section 114 is intended to help realize the potential of cogeneration technology as a clean source of energy for a variety of applications. Many believe the residential furnace industry is often overlooked in the development of such distributed cogeneration systems. The Committee believes that, with further research and development, cogeneration of electric power as a byproduct of residential building heating system operation could provide significant environmental benefits at low cost and high reliability and that the residential heating appliance industry is uniquely positioned to provide reliable electricity using environmentally friendly cogeneration power with practical technology.

The Committee believes the DOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy has adequate resources within its current budget to begin modest funding of micro-cogeneration energy technology research under this section. This is consistent with the spirit of a floor colloquy between the Chairman of the House Committee on Science and the Chairman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Interior and Related Agencies during the debate over the fiscal year 2003 Interior Appropriations legislation. The Committee expects DOE to release a micro-cogeneration R&D solicitation within a few months after enactment of this Act.

Sec. 117--Voluntary consensus standards. The Committee and the Congress, through the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (PL 104-113), have established the legal requirement that agencies must work with standards development organizations in the development of standards in technological areas of importance to each agency. Furthermore, the Act states that voluntary consensus standards, to the extent practicable, are to be used for procurement and regulatory purposes. The Committee feels that the development and widespread adoption of voluntary consensus standards for obtaining electricity from, or providing electricity to, distributed energy systems for use in manufacturing and for using equipment and systems for connection with electric distribution systems is a prime example of an area where the Act applies. The Committee commends the IEEE for its years of work, in conjunction with other standards development organizations, on distributed energy system standards and urges the Secretary, in consultation with the NIST, to take such steps as may be necessary to permit IEEE to complete the development, approval, and promulgation of these standards. The Secretary should also promote the widespread use of these standards with the goal of bringing predictability and standardization to the companies who choose to do business in this emerging energy area.

Sec. 121- Renewable energy. The Committee is supportive of DOE's research and development programs in wind energy generation located in Washington state. A continuing DOE commitment is important to bring about the commercialization of worthwhile projects through the regional field verification program. The Committee is supportive of establishing a wind energy demonstration site in the state of Washington, not only to accommodate the continued population and industrial growth of the Pacific Northwest, but also to gain knowledge to meet the incremental power needs in areas of the country where wind can be effectively utilized.

Sec. 122- Bioenergy Programs. The Committee is aware of research at a biofuels processing facility in New York to convert cellulose materials into levulinic acid for multiple applications. As part of this work, the State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry is developing a Bioenergy and Bioproducts Technology Center, focusing on biofuels from lignocellulosic biomaterial.

The Committee strongly encourages the Secretary to consider providing substantial financial assistance for this biofuels proposal. The Committee also intends that section 122 authorize the Secretary to provide assistance for an integrated rice straw project in Gridley, California, to convert rice straw into ethanol, electric power, and silica, and an ethanol production facility in Maryland to convert barley grain into ethanol for use in motor vehicles or other uses.

Sec. 127- Renewable energy in public buildings. This section establishes a DOE grant program for local and state governments that plan to deploy solar and other renewable energy source technologies in public buildings that they own or operate. The grants can provide up to 40 percent of the incremental cost of the renewable energy project. The Committee believes this program is a key way for DOE to be a financial partner with state and local municipalities that are committed to the long-term and expanding use of renewable energy technology as part of its energy infrastructure. For instance, Sebastopol, California, in conjunction with staff and students at Sonoma State University's Department of Environmental Studies and Planning, has developed a plan to use solar technology in Sebastopol's residential, commercial, and municipal buildings, with the eventual goal to completely transition the city to solar energy.

Sec. 134- University nuclear science and engineering support. This section authorizes new and existing programs to promote university research and education in nuclear engineering. The Committee is aware of concerns within the university nuclear research reactor community that DOE may be considering reducing its support for numerous university reactors. The Committee urges the Department to continue to maintain, and even expand, its support of the existing research reactor infrastructure. The Committee believes that a sustainable approach to nuclear power must include ongoing support for nuclear research reactors throughout the various regions of the United States.

Sec. 135- Geological isolation of spent fuel. The transportation of spent nuclear fuel faces increasing opposition from citizens who live on or near transportation routes that are expected to be used for transporting the fuel. An option for disposal of nuclear waste may be to bury it in deep holes bored into crystalline rocks. Surveys indicate that there are many appropriate sites located near existing reactors throughout the U.S. that could reduce the volumes of fuel needing to be hauled long distances. The Committee is supportive of examining the cost and technical feasibility of this deep borehole technology to determine its suitability as a means of disposal of spent fuel from the nation's nuclear power reactors.

Subtitle E--Fossil Energy: Part 3--Ultra-Deepwater and Unconventional Natural Gas and Other Petroleum Resources. Part 3 authorizes a new, seven-year program at the Department for research, development, demonstration, and commercial application of ultra-deepwater and unconventional natural gas and other petroleum exploration technologies. For purposes of this program, ultra-deepwater is defined to be in excess of 1,500 meters below the surface of the ocean. The Committee is hopeful that this technology will enable the U.S. to increase the supplies of oil and gas from the central and western Gulf of Mexico and other areas already open to drilling. The Department is to carry out the program through a non-profit research consortium, modeled on the highly successful example of SEMATECH, which guided jointly funded efforts of the Department of Defense and the semiconductor industry. The Committee intends that the Secretary exercise continuing oversight over the research consortium. It is the Secretary's responsibility to ensure that the public interest is being served by the consortium's projects, that the projects are making the desired technical progress, and that the public's money is being properly spent. Part 3 also requires annual audits by an independent, outside auditing firm. Such audits were also required of SEMATECH.

Section 145(a) requires that all the projects undertaken under this program have among their major goals the improvement of safety and the limiting of environmental impacts. The Committee expects the Secretary to carefully monitor the program to ensure that safety and environmental impacts are specifically addressed in the projects funded through the consortium.

The ultra deep program of RD&D would be applicable only in certain areas. Section 144(c) prohibits field activities under the program authorized by this Part in any offshore areas that are currently under federal moratoria, such as areas off the coasts of California or North Carolina.

Sec. 147- Additional requirements for awards. This section sets specific requirements for awards, including specification of commercial use of technologies, standards for intellectual property, the circumstances under which cost-sharing might be reduced, and the need for technology transfer activities as part of each award. The Committee expects the Department to make every effort to include companies and independent producers of oil and gas that have had less than $500 million in annual revenues over the last three years. The requirements in section 147(c) are not intended by the Committee to affect existing requirements of the Bayh-Dole Act in any way. Section 147(e) provides the Secretary with authority to reduce cost sharing to not less than 10 percent of project costs. The Committee expects that such reductions in cost sharing would be for a period not to exceed two years.

Sec. 150A- Transfer of advanced oil and gas exploration and production technologies. The Federal government, particularly the Navy, has spent decades developing technologies designed to operate in harsh marine environments. In some cases the government is ahead of the industry in developing these technologies that have yet to be fully utilized in the private sector. The Committee encourages the Department to review technologies within the government that may be suitable for use in the industry-led ultra-deep exploration, production, and development program. The section further requires the Secretary to seek out and select the most competent organization to manage technology transfer activities through a competitive solicitation.

Sec. 161- Science. The Committee is aware that, in an October 2002 report, PCAST's Subcommittee on Federal Investment in Science and Technology and its National Benefits observed:

All evidence points to a need to improve funding for physical sciences and engineering. Continuation of present patterns will lead to an inability to sustain our nation's technical and scientific leadership. * * * Lack of funding in these * * * disciplines is cause for concern for a number of reasons: [The number of b]oth full-time graduate and Ph.D. students in most physical sciences, math and engineering are decreasing. * * * Facilities and infrastructure in general for the physical sciences are becoming less than adequate for the needs of today's research problems. It is widely understood and acknowledged that the interdependence of the various disciplines requires that all advance together.

H.R. 238 therefore includes a significant budget increase for DOE's Office of Science, because of its primary importance to the physical sciences and to the science community in general. Unique among civilian science agencies, the Office of Science is responsible for operating specialized user facilities and supporting large teams of scientists capable of tackling large-scale, complex, multi-disciplinary problems that are national priorities in scientific research, such as nanotechnology. For more than a decade, however, Office of Science budgets have stagnated or declined. The increase recommended in this bill would reinvigorate these programs and assure America's continued scientific leadership.

The decline in the number of physical science and engineering degrees awarded to U.S. citizens is well documented and a cause for concern, even alarm, given the requirements of our economy and the shortage of technical personnel to fulfill them. The Committee notes, further, that the growth in expert personnel abroad, combined with the diminishing numbers of Americans entering the physical sciences, mathematics and engineering--an unhealthy trend--is leading corporations to locate more of their R&D activities outside the United States.

The Committee also recognizes that research conducted by universities is vital to the success of the Office of Science program and that the training of a national workforce skilled in a wide variety of physical science disciplines, including computing and engineering is essential. Approximately one quarter of the Office of Science budget supports competitive, merit-reviewed grants to about 2,000 individual investigators at more than 250 universities and institutions nationwide. Although it is the prime supporter of the physical sciences and is responsible for a major share of university research in these fields, DOE is able to fund only 10 percent of the grant applications it receives. Even in a priority area such as nanotechnology, DOE is able to fund only 13.5 percent of submitted applications. By comparison, the National Science Foundation (NSF) was able to fund 31 percent of grants submitted in 2001. As a result, a far greater proportion of good ideas in the physical sciences are unlikely to be pursued.

Sec. 161A- ITER. Although the challenges and uncertainties associated with the development of practical fusion energy are significant, the Committee recognizes the reward for success is great: a safe, environmentally attractive and virtually unlimited base-load power source.

The Committee also recognizes that U.S. magnetic fusion research has reached a major milestone. As the result of substantial progress in fusion research over the past several years, the U.S. fusion research community has developed a strong consensus that magnetic fusion is ready to take the next step toward fusion energy: a burning plasma experiment. Several outside reviewers including the National Research Council have echoed this conclusion. Further, the consensus within the fusion community is that as a first choice, the U.S. should satisfactorily conclude negotiations leading toward the construction of an international burning plasma research project--the ITER project. The preponderance of the international fusion community, including the European Union, Japan, Russia, Canada, China and most recently South Korea, is moving forward with negotiations over the financing and the location of the ITER project. The second choice would be a domestic burning plasma device.

H.R. 238 authorizes U.S. participation in the ITER project if certain prescribed conditions are met. The bill's conditions for ITER participation are meant to reflect lessons learned from U.S. participation in other major domestic and international science projects: there must be cost protections; the U.S. role must be clearly defined; the U.S. must share equitably in experimental design, operations and collective decision making; the collaboration must maximize benefit to the U.S. domestic fusion program; and there must be a reasonable exit strategy for U.S. participation. The authorization also calls for the Secretary to submit to Congress its plan for U.S. participation in ITER prior to any U.S. contribution being made toward ITER construction. The Committee wants to ensure that Congress will have ample time to review the final decision to join the ITER project after the negotiations are complete and DOE has submitted its reports.

Regardless of whether ITER goes forward, the U.S. fusion energy sciences program must be strengthened. This strengthening is necessary to revitalize a program that faces increased demands to utilize existing experiments more fully, increase its scientific and computational base, diversify its lines of enquiry in terms of innovative approaches to fusion, and maintain its place as a world leader in the face of European and Japanese programs of much greater size. Hence, the Committee authorizes increased funding for domestic fusion energy sciences program for the next four fiscal years.

Finally, it is the Committee's view that a strengthened domestic fusion research program is critical for participation in ITER. Therefore, the Committee has included separate authorizing levels for the initial four years of ITER participation in order to emphasize that funding for U.S. participation in ITER should complement, not compete with the U.S. domestic fusion program. An attempt to partially or wholly fund ITER at the expense of the U.S. domestic fusion program could result in a weakened domestic fusion program that would be unable to fully utilize or leverage the value of participation in ITER.

Sec. 167- Facility and infrastructure support for nonmilitary energy laboratories. The DOE supports the operation of major scientific user facilities such as synchrotron light sources for the national scientific and technological community. Of the increased funding authorized for the Office of Science, the Committee recommends that the DOE increase the budgets for operations and maintenance of the Office's user facilities to maximize their operation and run times. These budgets have not increased substantially since 1980 even as key infrastructure has aged and now requires additional maintenance. In many cases the scientific output and accessibility of these facilities is impaired by inadequate operations budgets and lack of funds for appropriate upgrades.

Sec. 169- Nanotechnology research and development. The Committee supports a comprehensive DOE program of research, development, demonstration and commercial application in nanotechnology including support for new DOE nanotechnology facilities. The Committee anticipates that many benefits will be realized as new materials and products emerge through the pursuit of nanotechnology research. However, the Committee notes that new technologies also can produce unintended negative consequences. Therefore, as part of this program, the Committee intends the research funded under Section 169(b)(5) to explore the societal and ethical implications of the technologies that may be developed through research on nanotechnology.

The commitment of resources to study the broad range of societal and ethical issues will provide opportunities to ensure that the technological developments in this field are examined in terms of their implications for the betterment of individuals and of all of society. Public support for nanotechnology research and development and public acceptance of the products derived from it will be enhanced through proactive, reasoned consideration of the potential impacts of the new materials and technologies.

The program is intended to provide opportunities for interdisciplinary work between scientists developing these technologies and social scientists and ethicists. Through the work undertaken in this program, enhanced communication can occur between social scientists and technology developers at an early stage in the research and development process. The Committee notes that this program is analogous to the Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications (ELSI) Research Program that has been a part of the Human Genome Project since 1990. Studies of environmental and societal consequences should include research on the potential environmental consequences of nanotechnology and the potential toxic effects of nanotechnology materials, and the ability for nanotechnology materials to persist and be transformed after they are introduced into the environment. This type of information may make it possible to improve the lifecycle design of existing and new products.

The projects funded through this program should address the potential implications of using nanotechnology for `non-biological intelligence.' Examples of non-biological intelligence might include applications to enhance human performance, both physically and intellectually, beyond what is generally considered to be the normal range, or aiding artificial intelligence by using nanotechnology to scan the human brain from the inside, and guide computer engineers in the development of computational devices modeled after the human brain. Some experts warn, however, that nanotechnology could lead to the creation of ultra-fast, efficient computers with computational and self-analytical, problem-solving abilities that may surpass the ability of humans to monitor or control them. The projects funded through this program should address these and other social, environmental and ethical issues associated with nanotechnology applications. The Committee wants DOE to ensure, however, that this research does not duplicate NSF- or EPA-funded efforts in these areas.

Sec 170A- Nitrogen fixation. Research activities leading to the development of crops with enhanced biological nitrogen fixation capability have the potential to dramatically reduce natural gas demand. The primary input required for nitrogen fertilizer production is natural gas; in fact, fertilizer manufacturing consumes about 6 percent of all U.S. natural gas production. Research advances in nitrogen fixation will lead to reduced energy demand and agricultural input costs for farmers while also providing environmental benefits through reduced reliance on chemical fertilizers.

Sec. 170C- Department of Energy Science and Technology Scholarship Program. The Committee is greatly concerned about the ability of DOE to attract and retain the scientific and technical personnel it needs to effectively administer its programs. H.R. 238 contains a provision that the Committee intends and expects to result in the award of scholarships for talented young scientists pursuing graduate degrees in scientific and technical disciplines of importance to DOE. Students participating in this program will receive scholarships in exchange for a commitment to work at DOE upon completion of their degrees. The Committee believes that this program will provide an important tool for recruiting talented young scientists to government service.

Sec. 178- Fuel cell test center. The Committee is supportive of the establishment of a fuel cell test facility for the next-generation of fuel cells. These fuel cells are expected to need a large and continuous source of hydrogen to operate effectively. The Department should examine possible sites where hydrogen is available by pipeline, rather than delivered to the site by truck, and where access to electric transmission systems is available, especially for the testing of stationary fuel cells for electric power generation. Some universities such as Lamar University are especially qualified to operate these facilities and the Department is encouraged to look for suitable university partners through the course of the study.

Subtitle H--Hydrogen. The Committee has long been involved in hydrogen research, development, demonstration and the commercial application of hydrogen-related technologies. The Committee authorized hydrogen science and technology programs in the original Spark M. Matsunaga Act of 1990 and Hydrogen Future Act of 1996. During the conference on comprehensive energy legislation in the 107th Congress (H.R. 4), the Committee negotiated language with the Senate conferees on amending the Matsunaga and Hydrogen Future Acts, which is reflected in H.R. 238 as introduced. At markup, the Committee revised the Hydrogen Subtitle to reflect two Presidential policy initiatives--the FreedomCAR program, announced in 2001, which redirected Federal automotive R&D to place greater emphasis on advanced vehicle technologies using hydrogen and fuel cells, and the new Hydrogen Fuel Initiative, which the President announced in his State of the Union address in January.

The Committee strongly supports the President's commitment to hydrogen, but is particularly intent that the President's FreedomCAR and Hydrogen Initiatives address the following areas:

1. Stationary Power Generation- The President's Hydrogen Initiative has a clear focus on hydrogen fuel cell vehicles and the infrastructure to support them. Such vehicles hold potentially enormous benefits for the Nation, in terms of improved energy efficiency, near zero emissions, and reduced dependence on foreign oil. However, stationary applications face fewer technical barriers before becoming commercially viable, especially in niche market applications. The Committee strongly encourages the Department to support stationary fuel cell research, which will lead to technology advances applicable to fuel cell vehicles.

2. Meaningful Demonstrations- Past efforts by the Department to demonstrate technologies have not always been successful in providing reproducible models for commercial applications. As the Department demonstrates hydrogen and fuel cell technology, the Committee urges the Department to choose applications that have value in the commercial market, and can be easily reproduced, rather than one-of-a-kind examples that do not advance the technology's acceptance. The bill requires meaningful demonstrations, such as placing the technology into an existing facility, for example placing a stationary fuel cell into critical telecommunications switching stations, which require uninterruptible power.

3. Integration of Policy into the Research Plan- The Committee expects the research plan to explicitly state the specific policy assumptions that are guiding the development of the R&D agenda. While the Committee understands that the Department cannot yet be sure exactly what policies will be put in place to facilitate the transition to a hydrogen economy, DOE cannot put together an R&D agenda without making some assumptions about the future policy environment. For example, the mix of sources we choose to tap for hydrogen (coal, natural gas, renewables, etc.) will be greatly affected by government policy (air regulations, tax incentives, and so forth). The way those sources are used will also be affected by government policy. (For example, will carbon sequestration be required in the production of hydrogen?) Since DOE's R&D agenda must facilitate the development of technologies that can be put to work in a relatively short time in `the real world,' DOE's decisions about R&D investments must take into account how that world will be shaped by government policy.

4. Report and Review- The Committee commends the Department on the National Hydrogen Vision and Roadmap, especially the involvement of stakeholders and the long-term planning those documents embody. The Committee directs the Department to continue developing a research plan, and gives specific details the Department must consider in section 105. The Committee looks forward to working with the Department as it develops the research plan. Section 109 also requires the Department to engage a non-federal entity, such as the National Academy of Sciences, to review the plan after it is developed, and review the program and its progress biennially thereafter.

5. Coordination- Although the majority of the President's initiative will be located in the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, it is the intention of the Committee that the Department conduct all hydrogen and fuel cell work in a coordinated manner to prevent duplication and provide maximum benefit. The Committee strongly encourages the Department to involve the Office of Science in areas of basic research relevant to the program. Additionally, the Committee notes that four separate sections of the bill authorize fuel cell RD&D and commercial application: section 142 (c) in fossil energy, section 182 amending the Matsunaga Act, section 302 pertaining to fuel cell school buses, and section 404 pertaining to fuel cell bus demonstration programs. The Committee intends that the Secretary coordinate implementations of these provisions to maximize their integration and effectiveness.

The Committee intends that the term `overall' in section 103 (a)(3) indicate that the complete life-cycle, or `well-to-wheels', efficiency and environmental costs be considered as the Department is considering various technology options for the production, delivery, and use of hydrogen.

Sec. 196- University collaboration. The Department has a large number of grants, contracts and cooperative agreements with universities. Many of them are with some of the largest universities in the country. The Committee is interested in encouraging greater participation in DOE programs by smaller colleges and universities, especially minority-serving institutions. The Committee also believes that the considerable talents and expertise that reside in these smaller institutions can be more effectively utilized through collaborations or other teaming arrangements with large universities. The Department is encouraged to examine appropriate ways to promote these types of arrangements for the benefit of the Department and the university community.

Sec. 197- Federal laboratory educational partners. Section 197 amends the Stevenson-Wydler Act to add support of science education activities to the list of permissible uses for the revenues Federal laboratories receive from their inventions. The Committee feels that Federal laboratories, especially DOE's National Laboratories, with their high concentrations of scientists and engineers, are uniquely positioned to aid surrounding communities in improving the learning experience of their students. For instance, DOE's National Renewable Energy Laboratory initiated the Coalition for Learning Opportunities and United Tutors (CLOUT) program in 1998 activities, using funds provided by private sources, including funds from companies that operate the lab to match volunteers with students in 17 Denver public schools. It is the hope of the Committee that a portion of this royalty stream can be used to expand laboratory educational outreach and to provide scientists and engineers as role models to students who might not otherwise cross paths with adults with these backgrounds.

Sec. 198- Interagency cooperation. Several Federal agencies, including NIST, DOE, and NASA, have recently formed the Government Agencies Technology Exchange in Manufacturing (GATE--M) program to improve the exchange of information concerning technical programs and to collaborate for enhanced payoffs from federal investments. These agencies have recognized the need for improved flow of information and technology among agencies and out to the private sector. The Committee expects that DOE and NASA will use GATE--M as a model for interagency collaboration, utilizing NASA technical expertise and research to enhance commercial development and technology transfer programs and to improve U.S. industry competitiveness in producing solar, wind, fuel cell, and hydrogen energy products.

Sec. 202- Report on equal employment opportunity practices. This section directs the Secretary to transmit a biennial report on equal employment practices at non-military energy laboratories. The Committee expects the Secretary to deliver the first of these reports within 12 months of the date of enactment of this Act.

Sec. 203- External regulation of Department of Energy. The Committee has monitored the debate on external regulation since the late 1980s. In 1999, the Energy Subcommittee of the Committee on Science held a hearing on the Department's original set of pilot projects at which DOE, NRC, OSHA and the General Accounting Office (GAO) testified. The witnesses testified that those pilot projects demonstrated the feasibility of ending the Department's self-regulation of nuclear safety and worker safety and health. The Committee is convinced that this reform, if properly implemented, would keep the labs safe and save the taxpayers money.

This provision would require the Department to end its self-regulation of nuclear and worker safety and health within 24 months of the enactment of this Act. The responsibility for regulating nuclear safety will be assumed by the NRC; the responsibility for regulating worker safety and health will be taken up by OSHA.

Currently, DOE is unique among Federal agencies in that it self-regulates nuclear and worker safety and health at its facilities. Work by the GAO strongly suggests that the Department is an inefficient regulator at best. The GAO also reported that Lab directors representing the five multi-program science labs indicated that they could reduce or redirect their safety and health (S&H) staff by up to 30 percent with external regulation. GAO also found that Battelle, which manages three of the Department's labs, spends one-half to one-third less on S&H at its externally regulated private-sector labs. According to DOE's 2002 Best Practices Pilot Study, in comparison with similar NASA and NSF-funded facilities, the Department appears to use notably more resources in S&H with no demonstrable gain in safety.

One negative consequence of self-regulation is that workers who may face unsafe conditions may be cowed into not reporting those conditions due to fear of retaliation. The Department and its contractors are put in the unenviable position of being seen to have a conflict-of-interest between carrying out their missions and correcting working conditions that may be unsafe. Removing the Department from the business of regulating itself would improve this situation, creating a safer environment in the labs. Further, it will improve the credibility of the labs with the communities that house those labs. It is the Committee's view that such apparent conflicts of interest would be less likely to develop if credible outside regulatory agencies--OSHA and NRC--were involved in regulating the labs.

There will be costs involved in a transition to external regulation; however, Departmental estimates on the costs have been unreliable. An estimate by the labs suggested compliance costs (that is, bringing the complex up to the regulatory standards of OSHA and the NRC) would be on the order of $75 million. In addition, the labs anticipate some $200 million will be required for decontamination and decommissioning of old, unused science facilities to comply with NRC guidelines. GAO estimates that, if the Department dramatically changes its approach to safety and health oversight, relying instead on industry norms for risk management as is done by NASA, an agency with a comparable science laboratory, safety and health costs could be reduced by up to $41 million each year. We anticipate that some proportion of the savings will actually go to more scientific study in the labs while some proportion will be reflected in smaller appropriations for the Department. Uncertainties regarding cost led the House Appropriations Energy and Water Subcommittee to direct the Department to work with the NRC and OSHA on a compliance audit of the ten labs. The audit is to be completed by April 30, 2004. We encourage our colleagues on the Appropriations Committee to provide funds sufficient to complete the work necessary to bring the complex up to code.

Both NRC and OSHA will require additional funding for annual training and will have annual personnel costs, estimated to be $6.9 million a year. The Committee encourages these agencies to budget for these tasks beginning with their fiscal year 2005 submission. The Committee looks forward to closely monitoring and reviewing all transition plans prepared by the DOE, OSHA or the NRC. In addition, the Committee strongly recommends both the NRC and OSHA show maximum flexibility in applying their regulatory standards to the Department's lab complex. In exercising this flexibility, NRC and OSHA should recognize DOE's expertise in the operation and maintenance of unique facilities and equipment and avoid undue interference with their scientific missions. In all cases, we ask NRC and OSHA to provide adequate time for the laboratories to comply with its regulations.

In carrying out the provisions of this title, the Secretary is directed to follow the guidance provided by GAO regarding management reform in external regulation. It is not the Committee's intent to see dual regulation continue--that is, the Department maintaining its current level of effort overseeing the labs' nuclear and worker safety and health programs--nor does the Committee intend that S&H standards be weakened in any way. Rather, the Committee expects the Department to adopt bold, new, efficient management techniques to save taxpayer money and allow the labs to do the work the Congress funds them to do: world-class science.

The 1997-1999 pilot program demonstrated that the contractors must hold licenses if significant cost savings are to be realized. It is for this reason the Committee requires this licensing in Section 202(b)(2). The DOE report to Congress should clearly indicate the roles of OSHA and NRC, and demonstrate DOE's close cooperation with the agencies as they develop a plan for transition to external regulation. The Committee also directs GAO to track the Department's progress and ensure cost saving reforms are made so that S&H standards can be carried out in the most intelligent and efficient manner possible.

Sec. 303- Diesel Retrofit Program. The Committee recognizes the clear benefits to the health of children who ride school buses of retrofitting those buses made in 1991 and later model years with emissions control technology, particularly newer diesel emissions control technology, if it can be demonstrated to be reliable. The Committee recognizes the effort of EPA, and directs the Secretary to work closely with the Administrator of that agency.

Sec. 402- Pilot program. In selecting applicants and project sites, the Secretary should, consistent with subsection 103(d)(1), give special consideration to proposals that address environmental needs in Clean Air Act nonattainment areas like the Washington, DC metropolitan region and in communities seeking to meet zero air emission goals, like Santa Clara County, California.

Sec. 404- Fuel cell transit bus demonstration. This section directs the Secretary to establish a comprehensive public private partnership program to demonstrate hydrogen fuel cell transit bus technology. The Committee recognizes that fuel cell technology could significantly contribute to improving the cost effectiveness and environmental impact of mass transit options. However, more research and development work needs to be done to address a number of issues related to this technology. This demonstration program should specifically address numerous aspects of the introduction of this new technology, including consideration of the following components:

The Committee is aware that the Department of Transportation is currently developing and funding a number of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) demonstration programs around the country. The Committee believes that the BRT program is structured in a way that would facilitate the execution of this fuel cell bus demonstration program, as well as reducing redundancy in interagency research, and recommends the Secretary consider coordinating this fuel cell demonstration with existing BRT initiatives where there is local support to do so. The Committee also recognizes that local organizations, such as the Houston-Galveston Area Council, are well equipped to assist the Federal government in demonstrating the benefits from research on fuel cell technologies used for low-emission mass transit vehicles.

Title V--Clean Coal. Like the Administration, the Committee believes that coal is likely to continue to be a significant source of electric power in the U.S. for years to come, given its domestic abundance. However, if that is to be the case, coal must become a far more efficient and cleaner fuel. Section 501 authorizes appropriations of $200 million per year for fiscal years 2003 through 2011, for the Clean Coal Power Initiative (CCPI). Section 502 sets out project criteria, including technical milestones for reduced emissions and for improved thermal efficiency. The Committee notes that improvements in efficiency in existing plants will be necessary to keep them competitive. As such, the efficiency targets set out in Section 502(b)(4) for efficiency refer to changes in the total plant efficiency. For example, for coal of 7000 British thermal units per pound (btu/lb.), these targets require that plants would be expected to improve from 29 percent total plant efficiency to 33 percent total plant efficiency. Such improvements will require, among other actions, government investment in research, development, demonstration and commercial application of truly advanced coal technologies. Neither the taxpayers nor the coal industry will be well served in the long run if government investments are made in technologies that do not `push the edge of the envelope.' Moreover, a concerted effort will be needed to strengthen the management of clean coal programs.

With those concerns in mind, Title V places a number of requirements and restrictions on coal programs, particularly on the CCPI. First, the Committee requires a detailed report on how CCPI will be organized and implemented. The Committee is troubled that at Committee hearings in the last Congress, the Administration witness could explain neither how the $2 billion figure was arrived at nor how the money would be spent. Given the priority the Administration has placed on the CCPI, the Committee will allow the Initiative to begin. However, no new projects will be allowed to be started as of October 1, 2005, unless the Administration has submitted the detailed report required by this Act.

The report must be specific in explaining how the $2 billion figure was developed, the scope of the program, how the program will operate, what technical milestones will be established and how they will be achieved, and how the program can be guided or informed by the successes and failures of past clean coal efforts. Section 501 requires that the report contain a number of specific components. First, the report must contain a detailed assessment of whether the aggregate funding levels provided under subsection (a) are the appropriate funding levels for that program. The Committee expects that this section will include an estimate of total number of demonstrations of a given class of technology that are necessary to prove acceptance of the technology by industry, the approximate risk and cost reductions likely from second and successive demonstrations, and how these changes in cost and risk should affect the program's industrial participants' willingness to cost-share.

Second, the legislation requires a detailed description of how proposals will be solicited and evaluated, including a list of all activities expected to be undertaken. The Committee expects that this section will include the relative weights of technical merit, of cost sharing, of the financial ability of the participant to complete the project, of the anticipated size of the target market, and other considerations factored into project evaluations. The Committee expects that this section will also include an evaluation of the market segments that each technology demonstrated in the program is intended for, the share of the overall coal power market of each technology and the share of the overall electricity market of each technology.

Third, the report must contain a detailed list of technical milestones for each coal and related technology that will be pursued. The Committee expects that this section will define the performance levels (especially emissions and efficiency criteria outlined in Section 502) that successive projects are anticipated to meet, and the timeline for project awards to meet each performance level.

Finally, the report must include a detailed description of how the program will avoid problems enumerated in GAO reports on the Clean Coal Technology Program, including problems that have resulted in unspent funds and projects that failed either financially or scientifically. The Committee expects that this section will include a detailed plan on contract mechanisms and enforcement to ensure that project partners with successful projects meet their obligations.

Subsection 501(b) provides that no new projects can be started after September 30, 2005, unless the Secretary has transmitted the report outlined in section 502 to Congress and Congress has had at least 30 days to review the report.

The biennial report mentioned in Section 503 can be submitted as a part of the annual report required by Public Law 99-190 in the Clean Coal Technology Program, provided that it includes all the information required by that law. The Committee expects that cost-sharing will continue to be an important tool for leveraging scarce Federal resources, and therefore expects that the Department will continue to use cost-sharing as a major factor in project selection, especially in regard to demonstration projects. As milestones are met in the program and technologies approach commercialization, the Committee expects an increase in the private contribution to the program. The Act also establishes strict environmental standards that projects must be designed to meet and reasonably be expected to achieve in order to receive funding. Moreover, at least 80 percent of the funding must be devoted to projects related to gasification (which may include sequestration), because these are technologies that are furthest from development and promise the greatest environmental benefit among economically viable technologies, and, therefore, are the ones most deserving of government support.

The Committee intends that the Secretary set strict, achievable, specific environmental milestones to ensure that the projects comply with section 502. The environmental criteria in this Act, which are taken from industry's own technology roadmap, are not mere advisory guidelines. They are precise requirements that the program must be designed to meet.

The Committee intends that the efficiency requirements refer to generation efficiency and that the efficiency numbers apply to plants that are exclusively generating power. The Secretary should issue equivalent efficiency numbers for plants involved in the production of industrial chemicals or other activities.

The Act also sets strict financial criteria for participants in CCPI. These criteria are absolutely essential to the success of the program. The Committee intends that the Secretary require specific, written documentation and audits from the participants to meet the requirements of subsection 503(c). For example, a market should exist for the technology being demonstrated or applied, as evidenced by statements of interest in writing from potential purchasers of technology.

The Committee recommends that the Secretary consult with objective, outside experts in developing the report, including those from the National Academy of Sciences (who will eventually be reviewing the program, pursuant to section 187(e)) and GAO. The Committee also recommends that, in writing the report and carrying out the program, the Secretary consult with environmental groups and other environmental experts, the coal industry, the utility industry, and the coal equipment manufacturing industry.

Sec. 504--Clean Coal Centers of Excellence. This section directs the Secretary to provide grants to universities for the establishment of clean coal centers of excellence. Based on the Subcommittee on Energy's June 12, 2001 hearing on Clean Coal Technology and subsequent discussions and materials, the Committee strongly encourages the Secretary to consider as potential recipients Southern Illinois University, the University of Pittsburgh, Carnegie-Mellon University, and the Center for Electric Power at Tennessee Technological University.

IX. COST ESTIMATE

Rule XIII, clause 3(c)(2) of the Rules of the House of Representatives requires each Committee Report on a measure approved by the Committee to include: (1) an estimate by the Committee of the costs that would be incurred in carrying out the bill or joint resolution in the fiscal year in which it is reported and in each of the five fiscal years following that fiscal year (or for the authorized duration of any program authorized by the bill or joint resolution if less than five years); (2) a comparison of the estimate of costs described in subparagraph (1) of this paragraph made by the Committee with any estimate of such costs made by a government agency and submitted to such Committee; and (3) when practicable, a comparison of the total estimated funding level for the relevant programs with the appropriate levels under current law. However, House Rule XIII, clause 3(d)(3)(B) provides that this requirement does not apply when a cost estimate and comparison prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 has been submitted prior to the filing of the report and included in the report pursuant to House Rule XIII, clause 3(c)(3). A cost estimate and comparison prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 has been submitted to the Committee on Science prior to the filing of this report and is included in Section X of this report pursuant to House Rule XIII, clause 3(c)(3).

Rule XIII, clause 3(c)(2) of the House of Representatives requires each Committee Report that accompanies a measure providing new budget authority (other than continuing appropriations), new spending authority, or new credit authority, or changes in revenues or tax expenditures to contain a cost estimate, as required by section 308(a)(1) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and, when practicable, with respect to estimates of new budget authority, a comparison of the total estimated funding level for the relevant program (or programs) to the appropriate levels under current law. H.R. 238 does not contain any new budget authority, credit authority, or changes in revenues or tax expenditures. Assuming that the sums authorized under the bill are appropriated, H.R. 238 does authorize additional discretionary spending, as described in the Congressional Budget Office report on the bill, which is contained in section X of this report.

X. CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE

U.S. Congress,

Congressional Budget Office,

Washington, DC, April 15, 2003.

Hon. SHERWOOD L. BOEHLERT,
Chairman, Committee on Science,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 238, the Energy Research, Development, Demonstration, and Commercial Application Act of 2003.

If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Julie Middleton.

Sincerely,

Barry B. Anderson

(For Douglas Holtz-Eakin, Director).

Enclosure.

H.R. 238--Energy Research, Development, Demonstration, and Commercial Application Act of 2003

Summary: H.R. 238 would authorize funding for various research activities at the Department of Energy (DOE) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and would change the way some of DOE's laboratories are regulated. The bill also would authorize loan guarantees for new technologies. Assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts, CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 238 would cost a total of $32.7 billion over the next five years and a total of $36.7 billion over the 2004-2013 period. CBO estimates that enacting the bill would not affect direct spending or revenues.

H.R. 238 contains both an intergovernmental and a private-sector mandate as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) by effectively increasing the annual fees collected from Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) licensees. However, CBO estimates that the fee increase would fall well below the annual thresholds established by that act over the next five years ($59 million for intergovernmental mandates and $117 million for private-sector mandates in 2003, adjusted annually for inflation). The remaining provisions of the bill contain no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates, and any costs borne by states would be voluntary or would result from conditions of federal aid.

Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated budgetary impact of H.R. 238 is shown in the following table. The costs of this legislation fall within budget functions 250 (general science, space, and technology) 270 (energy), and 300 (natural resources and the environment).


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--                               
                                                                                       2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION                                                                                         
Spending for Certain Energy R&D Under Current Law:                                                                        
Budget Authority 1                                                                    5,251     0     0     0     0     0 
Estimated Outlays                                                                     5,044 2,722   571   146    47     0 
Proposed Changes:                                                                                                         
Specified Authorizations:                                                                                                 
Authorization Level                                                                       0 6,784 7,071 7,789 8,605   700 
Estimated Outlays                                                                         0 3,241 6,286 7,344 8,142 4,616 
Estimated Authorizations:                                                                                                 
0                                                                                        21   258   444   539   512   553 
0                                                                                        10    80   160   190   120     0 
0                                                                                        52   122   137   118    73     8 
0                                                                                        29    65    83    57    23    11 
0                                                                                       113   525   824   904   727   572 
Total Proposed Changes:                                                                                                   
Estimated Authorization Level                                                             0 7,630 7,940 8,660 9,249 1,272 
Estimated Outlays                                                                         0 3,353 6,811 8,168 9,046 5,344 
Spending Under H.R. 238:                                                                                                  
Estimated Authorization Level 1                                                       5,251 7,630 7,940 8,660 9,249 1,272 
Estimated Outlays                                                                     5,044 6,075 7,382 8,314 9,093 5,344 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that the amounts authorized by H.R. 238 will be appropriated near the beginning of each fiscal year and that spending will follow historical patterns for ongoing or similar activities.

Authorization of specified amounts

H.R. 238 would specifically authorize the appropriation of $31.8 billion over the 2004-2012 period for certain research and development (R&D), grant, and loan programs. Over half of this funding (or $17.9 billion) would be allocated to DOE's science programs, with most of the balance going to R&D related to energy efficiency and various fuel sources. Other provisions specifically authorize $500 million for grants to states and localities for acquiring vehicles and school buses that use alternative fuels and ultra-low-sulfur diesel fuel; $125 million for a direct loan for a specific coal project in Alaska; $23 million for cooperative research between the United States and Mexico; and $1 million for feasibility studies on using post-consumer carpet in cement kilns and on establishing a center for testing next-generation fuel cells. Estimated outlays for the specified authorizations would total $29.6 billion over the next five years and $31.8 billion over the next 10 years.

Estimated authorizations

In addition to these specified amounts, H.R. 238 would authorize appropriations for other research programs, credit assistance, grants, studies, and regulatory reforms. CBO estimates that implementing these provisions would cost a total of $3.1 billion over the 2004-2008 period and a total of $4.9 billion over the 10-year period.

Oil and Gas Research. H.R. 238 would allow DOE to spend 7.5 percent of the government's collections from oil and gas royalties for certain oil and gas research, subject to future appropriation action. This authorization for oil and gas research and development programs would extend through fiscal year 2010. Based on CBO's projection of royalties from oil and gas production, we estimate that this provision would cost between $400 million to $500 million annually.

Loan Guarantees. The bill also would authorize DOE to guarantee loans for certain gasification projects that use coal or other natural resources as input. Section 174 would allow DOE to provide a loan guarantee for a 400 megawatt project that uses integrated gasification combined-cycle technology and sells power in deregulated energy markets at competitive rates without subsidies from ratepayers.

The bill also would authorize the department to guarantee loans for at least one polygeneration plant that uses petroleum coke gasification technology. (Polygeneration plants typically produce multiple products, such as electricity, chemicals, and steam.)

Under credit reform procedures, funds must be appropriated in advance to cover the subsidy cost of such loan guarantees, measured on a present-value basis. CBO expects that gasification and polygeneration projects would be riskier than conventional power plants. Both the coal and coke projects would require large capital investments, ranging from over $500 million for a 400 megawatt gasification plant to $1 billion or more for some of the polygeneration plants being proposed in the United States. In contracts, a conventional natural gas power plant could be built for half the cost. As a result, the gasification and coke projects are financially viable only when operating costs are well below those using alternative fuels. In addition, the new technologies may pose special technical risks. The credit risk posed by such projects also would depend on the terms of purchase agreements and other contracts.

H.R. 238 does not impose any limits on the amount or terms of those loan guarantees. For this estimate, CBO assumes that DOE would guarantee investments totaling about $2 billion over the next five years. The subsidy cost of such loan guarantees could vary widely--at worst, the government could absorb all of the risk, effectively converting the loan guarantees into a grant (as occurred in the 1980s for a coal gasification project in North Dakota). For this estimate, CBO assumes that DOE would only guarantee projects if the terms are at least equivalent to those of bonds rated CCC by companies like Standard and Poor and Moodys. Projects with this rating typically have a cumulative default risk of more than 50 percent. At the same time, CBO assumes that coal or coke projects are unlikely to be more creditworthy than conventional power plants (many of which have a BB rating, which suggests a cumulative default risk of about 24 percent). Given this range of possible outcomes, CBO estimates that these provisions would result in loans being guaranteed with a 30 percent subsidy, resulting in a cost of about $600 million over the 2004-2008 period.

External Regulation. Title II would authorize the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to regulate 10 of DOE's national energy laboratories. Under current law, DOE is responsible for regulating those labs. Based on information from DOE, OSHA, and NRC, CBO estimates that transferring the regulation of those labs to NRC and OSHA would have a gross cost of about $525 million over the 2004-2008 period, assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts. The NRC, however, has the authority to offset a substantial portion of its appropriation with fees charged to facilities it regulates. After accounting for such collections, we estimate that the net cost of implementing H.R. 238 would be about $500 million over the same period.

The cost of transferring the regulatory authority to NRC and OSHA would include modifying DOE facilities to meet current NRC and OSHA standards, updating OSHA and NRC rules and regulations to accommodate unique DOE facilities, and decommissioning facilities no longer in use. Based on information from these agencies, CBO estimates that the cost of administrative changes and upgrading DOE facilities would be about $500 million over the 2004-2008 period. This figure could be lower or higher depending upon how stringently NRC and OSHA regulate the labs. In addition, it is likely that a portion of the cost to upgrade and decommission facilities could be incurred under current law. Finally, CBO estimates that NRC and OSHA would spend about $7 million annually to inspect and regulate the labs.

External regulation could result in some cost savings to DOE when NRC and OSHA undertake some of DOE's current responsibilities. Under current law, DOE spends about $145 million a year to regulate these labs. Based on information from DOE and the General Accounting Office, we expect any such savings would eventually be $5 million to $10 million a year, but would not be realized for several years.

Other Activities. H.R. 238 would authorize appropriation of the amounts necessary for several other initiatives. It would authorize EPA to issue grants over the 2004-2006 period to demonstrate technologies for retrofitting diesel school buses so they can use cleaner fuels. Based on information from EPA, CBO estimates that the agency would spend a total of $210 million over the 2004-2008 period for such projects. Another provision would authorize DOE to support the development of biopower and biofuels projects that use certain rice, barley, sugarcane, and forest products. CBO estimates that such activities would cost around $10 million annually, based on information from DOE. Finally, the bill would authorize a study by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) on issues related to the commercialization and transfer of technologies developed by DOE. According to the NAS, this study would cost about $600,000.

Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: Under current law, the NRC collects annual fees from its licensees, both public and private, to offset a major portion of its general fund appropriation. Because H.R. 238 would shift the regulatory responsibility for certain nonmilitary energy laboratories from the Department of Energy to NRC, CBO expects that additional fees would be collected from the licensees to cover the cost of the external regulation. The duty to pay those fee increases would be considered both an intergovernmental and a private-sector mandate under UMRA as it results in an increase in the cost of an existing mandate. Assuming amounts necessary to cover the costs of NRC's additional regulatory responsibilities are appropriated, CBO estimates the additional fees would total $24 million over the next five years. Those additional costs to NRC licensees would fall well below the annual thresholds established by UMRA ($59 million for intergovernmental mandates and $117 million for private-sector mandates in 2003, adjusted annually for inflation).

The remaining provisions of H.R. 238 contain no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in UMRA. States would benefit from the research and development initiatives that seek greater energy efficiency in all major energy sectors. States that participate in the proposed grant programs for secondary battery use, advanced technology transfer centers, renewable energy in government buildings, clean school and transit buses, and other initiatives may face match requirements and other costs, but any such costs result from conditions of federal aid, and thus, would be voluntary.

Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Julie Middleton, Kathleen Gramp, Lisa Cash Driskill, and Susanne Mehlman. Impact on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Greg Waring. Impact on the Private Sector: Paige Piper/Bach.

Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.

XI. COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 104-4

H.R. 238 contains no unfunded mandates.

XII. COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Rule XIII, clause 3(c)(1) of the Rules of the House of Representatives requires each Committee Report on a measure approved by the Committee to include oversight findings and recommendations required pursuant to clause 2(b)(1) of rule X. The Committee on Science's oversight findings and recommendations are reflected in the body of this report.

XIII. CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

Rule XIII, clause 3(d)(1) of the Rules of the House of Representatives requires that each report of a Committee on a public bill or public joint resolution shall contain a statement citing the specific powers granted to Congress in the Constitution to enact the law proposed by the bill or joint resolution. Article I, section 8 of the Constitution of the United States grants Congress the authority to enact H.R. 238.

XIV. FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT

H.R. 238 creates six advisory committee(s) within the meaning of section 5(b) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act whose functions are not currently being performed, nor could they be performed by one or more agencies, by an advisory committee already in existence, or by enlarging the mandate of an existing advisory committee:

1. Section 106(e) requires the Director of OSTP to establish an advisory committee to the interagency group responsible for the development and implementation of a National Building Performance Initiative to address energy conservation, RD&D and commercial application, and related issues.

2. Section 110A(f) requires the Secretary to establish an Advisory Committee for Advanced Energy Technology Transfer Centers composed of members from State or local energy offices, energy professionals, trade or professional associations, architects, engineers, construction professionals, manufacturers, the research community, and nonprofit energy or environmental organizations to advise the Secretary on the establishment of the Centers under this section.

3. Section 148(a) requires the Secretary to establish the Ultra-Deepwater Advisory Committee. The purpose of this advisory committee is to advise the Secretary on the development and implementation of programs related to ultra-deepwater natural gas and other petroleum resources.

4. Section 148(b) requires the Secretary to establish the Unconventional Resources Technology Advisory Committee. The purpose of this advisory committee is to advise the Secretary on the development and implementation of programs under this part related to unconventional natural gas and other petroleum resources.

5. Section 187(b)(2) requires the Secretary to establish the Science Advisory Committee within the Office of Science to include of the chairs of the existing scientific program advisory committees.

6. Section 188 requires the Secretary to establish the Technology Transfer Working Group, which shall consist of representatives of the National Laboratories and single-purpose research facilities.

In addition, H.R. 238, section 182 amends section 108 of the Spark M. Matsunaga Hydrogen Research, Development, and Demonstration Act of 1990 by replacing the existing Hydrogen Technical Advisory Panel with the Hydrogen Technical and Fuel Cell Advisory Committee consisting of experts drawn from domestic industry, academia, professional societies, governmental laboratories, and financial, environmental, and other organizations, as appropriate, to review and advise on the progress made through the programs and activities authorized under the Act.

Section 187(a) authorizes the creation of at least four advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act whose functions are not currently being performed, but whose functions could potentially be assumed by expanding the mandate of existing committees. In these cases, however, the decision to establish new committees or expand existing ones is left to the discretion of the Secretary.

XV. CONGRESSIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY ACT

The Committee finds that H.R. 238 does not relate to the terms and conditions of employment or access to public services or accommodations within the meaning of section 102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act (Public Law 104-1).

XVI. STATEMENT ON PREEMPTION OF STATE, LOCAL, OR TRIBAL LAW

H.R. 238 is not intended to preempt any State, local, or Tribal law.

XVII. CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

HIGH-PERFORMANCE COMPUTING ACT OF 1991

* * * * * * *

SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS.

* * * * * * *

* * * * * * *

TITLE II--AGENCY ACTIVITIES

* * * * * * *

SEC. 203. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ACTIVITIES.

* * * * * * *

* * * * * * *

-

SPARK M. MATSUNAGA HYDROGEN RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, AND DEMONSTRATION ACT OF 1990

* * * * * * *

[Struck out->][ SEC. 102. FINDING, PURPOSES, AND DEFINITION. ][<-Struck out]

[Struck out->][ Sec. 103. Report to Congress ][<-Struck out]

[Struck out->][ Sec. 104. Hydrogen research and development ][<-Struck out]

[Struck out->][ SEC. 105. DEMONSTRATIONS. ][<-Struck out]

[Struck out->][ SEC. 106. TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER PROGRAM. ][<-Struck out]

[Struck out->][ SEC. 107. COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION. ][<-Struck out]

[Struck out->][ SEC. 108. TECHNICAL PANEL. ][<-Struck out]

[Struck out->][ SEC. 109. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. ][<-Struck out]

SEC. 102. FINDINGS AND DEFINITIONS.

SEC. 103. PROGRAM.

SEC. 104. FREEDOM CAR.

SEC. 105. PLAN.

SEC. 106. EDUCATION, OUTREACH, AND TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER.

SEC. 107. INTERAGENCY TASK FORCE.

SEC. 108. ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

SEC. 109. EXTERNAL REVIEW.

SEC. 110. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.

SEC. 111. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

-

HYDROGEN FUTURE ACT OF 1996

[Struck out->][ SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. ][<-Struck out]

[Struck out->][ SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. ][<-Struck out]

[Struck out->][ TITLE I--HYDROGEN ][<-Struck out]

[Struck out->][ SEC. 101. PURPOSES AND DEFINITIONS. ][<-Struck out]

[Struck out->][ SEC. 102. REPORTS TO CONGRESS. ][<-Struck out]

[Struck out->][ `Sec. 103. Report to Congress ][<-Struck out]

[Struck out->][ SEC. 103. HYDROGEN RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT. ][<-Struck out]

[Struck out->][ `Sec. 104. Hydrogen research and development ][<-Struck out]

[Struck out->][ SEC. 104. DEMONSTRATIONS. ][<-Struck out]

[Struck out->][ SEC. 105. TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER. ][<-Struck out]

[Struck out->][ SEC. 106. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. ][<-Struck out]

[Struck out->][ TITLE II--FUEL CELLS ][<-Struck out]

[Struck out->][ SEC. 201. INTEGRATION OF FUEL CELLS WITH HYDROGEN PRODUCTION SYSTEMS. ][<-Struck out]

[Struck out->][ SEC. 202. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. ][<-Struck out]

[Struck out->][ TITLE III--DOE SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL PROGRAM QUALITY ][<-Struck out]

[Struck out->][ SEC. 301. TEMPORARY APPOINTMENTS FOR SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL EXPERTS IN DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS. ][<-Struck out]

-

STEVENSON-WYDLER TECHNOLOGY INNOVATION ACT OF 1980

* * * * * * *

SEC. 12. COOPERATIVE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS.

* * * * * * *

* * * * * * *

* * * * * * *

SEC. 14. DISTRIBUTION OF ROYALTIES RECEIVED BY FEDERAL AGENCIES.

* * * * * * *

* * * * * * *

-

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ORGANIZATION ACT

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Sec. 2. Definitions.
* * * * * * *
TITLE II--ESTABLISHMENT OF THE DEPARTMENT
Sec. 201. Establishment.
* * * * * * *
[Struck out->][ Section 209. ][<-Struck out] Sec. 209. Office of Science.
* * * * * * *
[Struck out->][ 213. ][<-Struck out] Sec. 213. Establishment of policy for National Nuclear Security Administration.
[Struck out->][ 214. ][<-Struck out] Sec. 214. Establishment of security, counterintelligence, and intelligence policies.
[Struck out->][ 215. ][<-Struck out] Sec. 215. Office of Counterintelligence.
[Struck out->][ 216. ][<-Struck out] Sec. 216. Office of Intelligence.
* * * * * * *

TITLE II--ESTABLISHMENT OF THE DEPARTMENT

* * * * * * *

ASSISTANT SECRETARIES

* * * * * * *

[Struck out->][ OFFICE OF SCIENCE ][<-Struck out]

OFFICE OF SCIENCE

* * * * * * *

-

SECTION 5315 OF TITLE 5, UNITED STATES CODE

Sec. 5315. Positions at level IV

* * * * * * *

* * * * * * *

* * * * * * *

-

SECTION 189 OF THE ATOMIC ENERGY ACT OF 1954

b. The following Commission actions shall be subject to judicial review in the manner prescribed in chapter 158 of title 28, United States Code, and chapter 7 of title 5, United States Code:

* * * * * * *

XVIII. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

On April 2, 2003, a quorum being present, the Committee favorably reported H.R. 238, the Energy Research, Development, Demonstration, and Commercial Application Act of 2003, as amended, by a voice vote, and recommended its enactment.

XIX. STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

Pursuant to clause 3(c) of House rule XIII, the outcome-related goals of H.R. 238, as enumerated in Section 3, are to be used to guide the conduct of a balanced energy research, development, demonstration, and commercial application portfolio of programs in order to meet the purposes of H.R. 238 under Section 2. Additional goals can be found throughout H.R. 238 including: Section 163 relating to the Plan for Fusion Energy Sciences Program; Section 170B relating to Genomes to Life; Section 170C relating to the Department of Energy Science and Technology Scholarship Program; Section 182 relating to the Matsunaga Act Amendments; Section 198 relating to Interagency Cooperation; and Section 301 relating to the Establishment of a Pilot Program in the Clean School Bus Title.

XX. EXCHANGE OF COMMITTEE CORRESPONDENCE

House of Representatives,

Committee on Science,

Washington, DC, April 7, 2003.

Hon. WILLIAM J. TAUZIN,
Committee on Energy and Commerce,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This letter is intended to put in writing the understandings about jurisdiction that informed our negotiations over the structure and content of H.R. 6, the Energy Policy Act of 2003.

It was agreed that the structure of H.R. 6 has no bearing on future decisions on jurisdiction and that neither our Committee nor yours waived any jurisdictional claim as part of the drafting of H.R. 6. No agreements concerning either the language of H.R. 6 or the placement of any language should be construed as a waiver of either Committee's jurisdictional claims under Rule X or the precedents of the House.

Moreover, our two Committees agreed that both Committees have jurisdiction over the Division of H.R. 6 pertaining to the Hydrogen Initiative and FreedomCAR.

I look forward to continuing to work with you as H.R. 6 moves through the legislative process.

Sincerely,

Sherwood L. Boehlert,

Chairman.

-

House of Representatives,

Committee on Energy and Commerce,

Washington, DC, April 9, 2003.

Hon. SHERWOOD L. BOEHLERT,
Chairman, Committee on Science, House of Representatives, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC.

DEAR CHAIRMAN BOEHLERT: Thank you for your letter regarding the discussions our Committees held to draft H.R. 6.

I agree that no agreements concerning either the language of H.R. 6 or the placement of any language should be construed as a waiver of either Committee's jurisdictional claims under Rule X or the precedents of the House.

Moreover, our two Committees agreed that both Committees have jurisdiction over the Division of H.R. 6 pertaining to the Hydrogen Initiative and FreedomCAR.

Sincerely,

W.J. `Billy' Tauzin,

Chairman.

-

House of Representatives,

Committee on Science,

Washington, DC, April 9, 2003.

Hon. W.J. `BILLY' TAUZIN,
Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

DEAR CHAIRMAN TAUZIN: On April 8, 2003, you introduced H.R. 1644, a bill to enhance energy conservation and research and development, to provide for security and diversity in the energy supply for the American people. The bill was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Science (among others). The bill contains provisions that fall within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Science.

In deference to your desire to bring this legislation before the House in an expeditious manner as part of H.R. 6, the `the Energy Policy Act of 2003,' I will not exercise this Committee's right to consider H.R. 1644. Despite waiving its consideration of H.R. 1644, the Science Committee does not waive its jurisdiction over H.R. 1644. Additionally, the Science Committee expressly reserves its authority to seek conferees on any provisions that are within its jurisdiction during any House-Senate conference that may be convened on this legislation or like provisions in H.R. 6 or similar legislation which falls within the Science Committee's jurisdiction. I ask for your commitment to support any request by the Science Committee for conferees on H.R. 1644 as well as any similar or related legislation including, but not limited to H.R. 6.

I request that you include this letter as part of the Record during consideration of the legislation on the House floor.

Thank you for your consideration and attention regarding these matters.

Sincerely,

Sherwood L. Boehlert,

Chairman.

XXI. ADDITIONAL VIEW

The Statement of Administration Policy (SAP) of May 8, 2003 for the Senate version of this legislation contains the following two unfortunate sentences that cannot be ignored. `Several provisions including sections 931, 987, and 1005, provide certain preferences based on the recipient's race. These provisions should be revised to apply only to the extent consistent with affording equal protection of the laws, as required by the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution.' The White House could not be more inaccurate.

The provisions in question are mainstream. One refers to the Section 8A loan program of the Small Business Administration. The other two help reverse under-representation of some groups in our society in the fields of science and technology. I myself authored one similar amendment during our Committee's consideration of HR 4 that was so non-controversial that it was accepted by voice vote. Similar language was approved by the House and the Senate last year. The Congress has consistently gone on record preserving this type of outreach--in landmark legislation such as TEA-21, and more recently in the Nanotechnology Research and Development Act of 2003. Such provisions ensure that under-represented groups and institutions are included in federal programs, instead of excluded, which has too often been the case.

Whoever wrote the SAP words for the Administration either does not understand the last 50 years of judicial interpretation of equal protection or else wants to turn back the clock. I, therefore, feel compelled to take this opportunity now to answer this vaguely articulated constitutional challenge.

These provisions state the obvious; there are populations and classifications of academic institutions that have historically been under-represented in the field of energy-related scientific research. We know that our academic and research institutions were not insulated from the past record of racial and gender discrimination that was once pervasive and widely accepted throughout this country. We can all be gratified by the fact that much progress has been achieved in the area of equal opportunity. However, we must also acknowledge that past discrimination has resulted in a clear and undeniable under-representation of minority students (including women) both within the science-related professions and within the academic institutions and facilities where our cutting edge research occurs, and where students receive professional training in the Science.

If we do not correct the mistakes of the past, they will continue. Therefore, I commend my colleagues for looking beyond simplistic interpretations of equal protection and equal opportunity and casting their votes in a forward-thinking manner.

SHEILA JACKSON-LEE.

XXII. PROCEEDINGS OF THE FULL COMMITTEE MARKUP ON H.R. 238, ENERGY RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, DEMONSTRATION, AND COMMERCIAL APPLICATION ACT OF 2003

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 2, 2003

House of Representatives,

Committee on Science,

--Washington, DC.

The Committee met, pursuant to call, at 3:00 p.m., in Room 2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Sherwood L. Boehlert [Chairman of the Committee] presiding.

238a.eps

238b.eps

Chairman BOEHLERT. The Committee on Science is meeting today to consider the following measure, H.R. 238, Energy Research, Development, Demonstration, and Commercial Application Act of 2003. I ask unanimous consent for the authority to recess the Committee at any point, and without objection, it is so ordered. I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Energy be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 238 and ask for its immediate consideration at full committee, and without objection, it is so ordered.

We will now consider the bill H.R. 238. It is a pleasure to welcome everyone here for today's markup on this vitally important bill.

As was the case with the Energy Bill in the last Congress, the Science Committee has put together a package that is bipartisan, comprehensive, forward thinking, and balanced. What else would you expect from this great Committee? It should be a model for the larger energy package into which it will be incorporated this weekend. This--that package will be brought to the Floor, hopefully, next week.

Our starting point today is H.R. 238, which I introduced along with Mr. Hall, during the first week of this Congress. The language in the bill is the text of the tentative bipartisan agreement that was reached last year between the House and Senate conferees on the research and development title of H.R. 4.

A lot of work went into that agreement, and it was fair and balanced, promoting R&D in energy efficiency, and renewables, and nuclear and fossil fuels, as well as basic research in the Office of Science. It included major initiatives, such as the new ultra-deep drilling program, a favorite of our Distinguished Ranking Member, and landmark compromise on the Clean Coal Program to ensure that it actually leads to true emissions reduction. And in that regard, I wish to especially note the cooperative attitude of Mr. Costello as we worked together to fashion something that will do this committee proud. So I am pleased that last year's agreement is the foundation of what we'll be reporting out today.

But there have been important developments since the energy conference folded last November. So we have spent the last few weeks arduously--and this is a staff operation, and the staff I can't compliment highly enough, both the majority and the minority staff. They worked while oftentimes--we worked, too, but were doing other things. We have spent the last few weeks negotiating changes to H.R. 238 and those changes are encompassed in the en bloc amendment that I will bringing--be bringing forward with Mr. Hall today. Our partnership continues.

There is a lot in the en bloc amendment, as we will hear later. It contains proposals that were put forward by numerous Members on both sides of the aisle, but let me focus now on the two primary elements of the amendment.

First, it authorizes U.S. participation in the ITER, the international fusion experiment, with strict limitations to ensure that the U.S. financial exposure will be limited and to allow Congress to revisit the issue again before we move forward in earnest. This is especially vital, because the U.S. fusion community does not want to participate in ITER if doing so will reduce funding for domestic fusion programs. And that principle is embodied in this bill and will also be included in the report that accompanies the bill.

Personally, I doubt that we will be able to fund ITER without cutting into our existing fusion programs, so we are going to have to examine our choices carefully when we have complete information on what ITER participation would mean. This bill will ensure that we get that information in a timely manner that enables us to make thoughtful decisions.

I want to thank Ms. Lofgren and Mr. Nethercutt, two tireless advocates for fusion, for working with us on this language.

The en bloc amendment also authorizes the President's Hydrogen Initiative and the related FreedomCAR program at the funding levels requested by the President. Our language fleshes out the areas of R&D the Initiative must cover; requires more extensive planning; and will ensure that demonstration projects actually help move us toward a transition to a hydrogen economy. This language will be one of the things that this bill is remembered for.

The en bloc also increases funding for the Office of Science, something Mrs. Biggert has strongly advocated, and a step that is essential if we are to adequately fund the physical sciences.

Members will offer a number of other amendments today, most of which have been negotiated between the majority and the minority; a few of them I may feel constrained to oppose, depending on how they are explained. But I know that we will end on a note of unity, as this committee always has.

We will bring to the Floor a bill that looks across the forms of energy to ensure that the U.S. has a secure energy future in the decades to come. We are determined to contribute to the development of a responsible energy policy for the Nation, something that has been sorely lacking for far too long.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Boehlert follows:]

Prepared Statement of Chairman Sherwood Boehlert

It's a pleasure to welcome everyone here for today's markup on this vitally important bill.

As was the case with the Energy Bill in the last Congress, the Science Committee has put together a package that is bipartisan, comprehensive, forward-thinking and balanced. It should be a model for the larger energy package into which it will be incorporated this weekend. That package will be brought to the floor next week.

Our starting point today is H.R. 238, which I introduced, along with Mr. Hall, during the first week of this Congress. The language in the bill is the text of the tentative, bipartisan agreement that was reached last year between the House and Senate conferees on the research and development title of H.R. 4.

A lot of work went into that agreement, and it was fair and balanced, promoting R&D in energy efficiency and renewables, and nuclear and fossil fuels, as well as basic research in the Office of Science. It included major initiatives, such as the new ultra-deep drilling program and landmark compromise on the Clean Coal Program to ensure that it actually leads to true emissions reductions. So I'm pleased that last year's agreement is the foundation of what we'll be reporting out today.

But there have been important developments since the energy conference folded last November. So we've spent the last few weeks arduously negotiating changes to H.R. 238 to update the bill, and those changes are encompassed in the en bloc amendment that I will be bringing forward with Mr. Hall today. Our partnership continues.

There's a lot in the en bloc amendment, as we'll hear later. It contains proposals that were put forward by numerous Members on both sides of the aisle. But let me focus now on the two primary elements of the amendment.

First, it authorizes U.S. participation in the ITER, the international fusion experiment, with strict limitations to ensure that the U.S. financial exposure will be limited and to allow Congress to revisit the issue again before we move forward in earnest. This is especially vital because the U.S. fusion community does not want to participate in ITER if doing so will reduce funding for domestic fusion programs--and that principle is embodied in this bill, and will also be included in the report that accompanies the bill.

Personally, I doubt that we will be able to fund ITER without cutting into our existing fusion programs, so we're going to have to examine our choices carefully when we have complete information on what ITER participation would mean. This bill will ensure that we get that information in a timely manner that enables us to make thoughtful decisions.

I want to thank Ms. Lofgren and Mr. Nethercutt, two tireless advocates for fusion, for working with us on this language.

The en bloc amendment also authorizes the President's Hydrogen Initiative and the related FreedomCAR program at the funding levels requested by the President. Our language fleshes out the areas of R&D the Initiative must cover; requires more extensive planning; and will ensure that demonstration projects actually help move us toward a transition to a hydrogen economy. This language will be one of the things this bill is remembered for.

The en bloc also increases funding for the Office of Science, something Mrs. Biggert has strongly advocated, and a step that is essential if we are to adequately fund the physical sciences.

Members will offer a number of other amendments today--most of which have been negotiated between the majority and minority; a few others I will oppose. But I know that we will end on a note of unity, as this committee always has.

We will bring to the floor a bill that looks across all the forms of energy to ensure that the U.S. has a secure energy future in the decades to come.

Mr. Hall.

Chairman BOEHLERT. Now with Mr. Hall absent, is there someone who wishes to claim--we will come back to him. All right. We will come back to him. No. All right.

Now without objection, all Members may place opening statements in the record at this point. I ask unanimous consent that the bill will--well, wait a minute. The bill is--where are we? Ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered as read and open to amendment at any point.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Costello follows:]

Prepared Statement of Representative Jerry F. Costello

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the Chairman for working with me on the clean coal provisions included in the bill. A reliable and affordable energy supply is crucial to America's economic vitality, security, and quality of life. Congress can help achieve this goal by passing balanced, comprehensive energy legislation that promotes energy conservation and efficiency; increases the use of all domestic energy resources, including coal; improves energy infrastructure; and promotes the development of advanced energy technologies. New and improved technologies hold the promise of far greater emissions reductions and increased efficiency.

The clean coal agreement included in the manager's en bloc amendment will assist in burning coal more efficiently and cleanly. The clean coal technology initiative encourages development of new technologies for cleaner, higher efficiency coal combustion in new and established plants with the hope of achieving a healthier environment while maintaining jobs.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Lofgren follows:]

Prepared Statement of Representative Zoe Lofgren

I am pleased that the Committee's en bloc amendment contains the spirit and most of the letter of the FUTURE Act, which was introduced by myself, Congressman Nethercutt, and over 30 bipartisan Members of the House.

I introduced this legislation because I believe it is essential for this nation and the international community to pursue fusion as aggressively. Fusion research has shown dramatic progress over the past decade, and we are now ready to take the next major step toward a demonstration. The bill recognizes this and as I will explain, positions the U.S. to take advantage of this fact.

Fusion powers the sun and if our scientists can engineers can harness it here on earth, we will have an environmentally friendly, safe and virtually unlimited source of energy which no nation will monopolize.

Yet, practical fusion energy is not guaranteed: it is probably the most difficult scientific and technological challenge ever undertaken. So obviously, there are some uncertainties. However, when you contemplate just how few and uncertain our future energy options are, aggressively pursuing fusion is utterly compelling.

Further, when you think about what we are paying today in terms of human lives and dollars for an energy policy that is so heavily reliant on imported oil, it seems self-evident that we must pursue this aggressively almost no matter what the cost or risk.

Let me cite just one statistic: we spend more money importing oil into this country every day than we do every year on fusion research, well over $250 million per day!

So, what will the Committee's bill accomplish? First, the bill authorizes the Department of Energy to fully participate in the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) project. ITER is a next step fusion project that will effectively cap off the science and much of the technology necessary to move ahead and build a demonstration of a first generation fusion energy project. Negotiations to determine the financing and site selection of ITER are now moving forward between Europe, Japan, Russia, Canada, China and now South Korea. Earlier this year, the President announced that the U.S. should join these negotiations.

While the bill authorizes the U.S. to join the project should these negotiations be successful, it contains provisions and protections to help ensure that U.S. negotiators will strike a `good deal' for the U.S. A `good deal' for the U.S. must position the U.S. to provide maximum benefit for our domestic fusion energy research program.

To this end, the bill authorizes increases in our fusion energy science budget. Over the next four years, the bill provides about 40 percent increase in funding for the Department of Energy's fusion science budget. The Fiscal Year (FY) 2003 budget was about $250 million. FY 2004 starts at $276 million and ends at $350 million in FY 2007. Specifically, the increases break down the following way: FY 2004, $276 million; FY 2005, $300 million; FY 2006, $340 million and in FY 2007, $350 million.

The Committee also authorized is separate funding for ITER. ITER is funded in FY 2004 at $12 million, FY 2005 at $20 million, FY 2006 at $50 million and FY 2007 at $75 million dollars. In addition, the bill requires the Department of Energy to deliver a plan to Congress to ensure that the U.S. research and industrial communities are competitive with those of other nations when it comes to providing fusion energy for our own needs and those of other nations.

The bill directs the Department of Energy to plan how to address issues of fusion materials and fusion technologies that are key to practical fusion energy.

Finally, I want to emphasize that by authorizing separate funding for the ITER project, the bill sends the unmistakable signal that ITER funding is not to come from the already underfunded domestic research effort.

I want to thank Chairman Boehlert, Congressman Hall, Congressman Nethercutt and several other Members of the Committee who are cosponsors of Hr 1282 and the staffs on both sides of the aisle for their support and hard work on this issue.

[H.R. 238 follows:]

1ST SESSION

H. R. 238

To provide for Federal energy research, development, demonstration, and commercial application activities, and for other purposes.

-

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

January 8, 2003

Mr. BOEHLERT (for himself and Mr. HALL) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Science, and in addition to the Committee on Resources, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

-

A BILL

To provide for Federal energy research, development, demonstration, and commercial application activities, and for other purposes.

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

TITLE I--RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

SEC. 101. PURPOSES.

SEC. 102. GOALS.

SEC. 103. DEFINITIONS.

Subtitle A--Energy Efficiency

PART 1--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS

SEC. 104. ENERGY EFFICIENCY.

PART 2--LIGHTING SYSTEMS

SEC. 105. NEXT GENERATION LIGHTING INITIATIVE.

PART 3--BUILDINGS

SEC. 106. NATIONAL BUILDING PERFORMANCE INITIATIVE.

PART 4--VEHICLES

SEC. 107. DEFINITIONS.

SEC. 108. ESTABLISHMENT OF SECONDARY ELECTRIC VEHICLE BATTERY USE PROGRAM.

SEC. 109. ADVANCED VEHICLE TECHNOLOGY.

PART 5--ENERGY EFFICIENCY SCIENCE INITIATIVE

SEC. 110. ENERGY EFFICIENCY SCIENCE INITIATIVE.

Subtitle B--Distributed Energy and Electric Energy Systems

PART 1--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS

SEC. 111. DISTRIBUTED ENERGY AND ELECTRIC ENERGY SYSTEMS.

PART 2--DISTRIBUTED POWER

SEC. 112. STRATEGY.

SEC. 113. HIGH POWER DENSITY INDUSTRY PROGRAM.

SEC. 114. MICRO-COGENERATION ENERGY TECHNOLOGY.

PART 3--TRANSMISSION SYSTEMS

SEC. 115. TRANSMISSION INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEMS RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, DEMONSTRATION, AND COMMERCIAL APPLICATION.

Subtitle C--Renewable Energy

PART 1--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS

SEC. 121. RENEWABLE ENERGY.

PART 2--BIOENERGY

SEC. 122. BIOENERGY PROGRAMS.

PART 3--HYDROGEN

SEC. 123. SHORT TITLE.

SEC. 124. MATSUNAGA ACT AMENDMENT.

`SEC. 102. FINDING, PURPOSES, AND DEFINITIONS.

`SEC. 103. PLAN; REPORT.

`SEC. 104. HYDROGEN RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT.

`SEC. 105. DEMONSTRATIONS.

`SEC. 106. TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT AND TRANSFER.

`SEC. 107. COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION.

`SEC. 108. ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

`SEC. 109. NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES REVIEW.

`SEC. 110. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

SEC. 125. HYDROGEN FUTURE ACT AMENDMENT.

`TITLE II--FUEL CELLS

`SEC. 201. INTEGRATION OF FUEL CELLS WITH HYDROGEN SYSTEMS.

`SEC. 202. INTERAGENCY TASK FORCE.

`SEC. 203. COOPERATIVE AND COST-SHARING AGREEMENTS.

`SEC. 204. INTEGRATION AND DISSEMINATION OF TECHNICAL INFORMATION.

`SEC. 205. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

PART 4--MISCELLANEOUS PROJECTS

SEC. 126. MISCELLANEOUS PROJECTS.

Subtitle D--Nuclear Energy

PART 1--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS

SEC. 131. NUCLEAR ENERGY.

PART 2--NUCLEAR ENERGY RESEARCH PROGRAMS

SEC. 132. NUCLEAR ENERGY RESEARCH PROGRAMS.

PART 3--ADVANCED FUEL RECYCLING

SEC. 133. ADVANCED FUEL RECYCLING PROGRAM.

PART 4--UNIVERSITY PROGRAMS

SEC. 134. UNIVERSITY NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING SUPPORT.

Subtitle E--Fossil Energy

PART 1--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS

SEC. 141. FOSSIL ENERGY.

PART 2--RESEARCH PROGRAMS

SEC. 142. FOSSIL ENERGY RESEARCH PROGRAMS.

SEC. 143. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT FOR COAL MINING TECHNOLOGIES.

PART 3--ULTRA-DEEPWATER AND UNCONVENTIONAL NATURAL GAS AND OTHER PETROLEUM RESOURCES

SEC. 144. PROGRAM AUTHORITY.

SEC. 145. ULTRA-DEEPWATER PROGRAM.

SEC. 146. UNCONVENTIONAL NATURAL GAS AND OTHER PETROLEUM RESOURCES PROGRAM.

SEC. 147. ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR AWARDS.

SEC. 148. ADVISORY COMMITTEES.

SEC. 149. LIMITS ON PARTICIPATION.

SEC. 150. FUND.

SEC. 151. SUNSET.

SEC. 152. DEFINITIONS.

Subtitle F--Science

PART 1--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS

SEC. 161. SCIENCE.

PART 2--FUSION ENERGY SCIENCES

SEC. 162. PLAN FOR FUSION EXPERIMENT.

SEC. 163. PLAN FOR FUSION ENERGY SCIENCES PROGRAM.

PART 3--SPALLATION NEUTRON SOURCE

SEC. 164. DEFINITION.

SEC. 165. REPORT.

SEC. 166. LIMITATIONS.

PART 4--MISCELLANEOUS

SEC. 167. FACILITY AND INFRASTRUCTURE SUPPORT FOR NONMILITARY ENERGY LABORATORIES.

SEC. 168. RESEARCH REGARDING PRECIOUS METAL CATALYSIS.

SEC. 169. NANOSCALE SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING RESEARCH.

SEC. 170. ADVANCED SCIENTIFIC COMPUTING FOR ENERGY MISSIONS.

Subtitle G--Energy and Environment

SEC. 171. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

SEC. 172. UNITED STATES-MEXICO ENERGY TECHNOLOGY COOPERATION.

SEC. 173. WASTE REDUCTION AND USE OF ALTERNATIVES.

SEC. 174. COAL GASIFICATION.

SEC. 175. PETROLEUM COKE GASIFICATION.

SEC. 176. OTHER BIOPOWER AND BIOENERGY.

SEC. 177. TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER.

SEC. 178. COAL TECHNOLOGY LOAN.

Subtitle H--Management

SEC. 181. AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS.

SEC. 182. COST SHARING.

SEC. 183. MERIT REVIEW OF PROPOSALS.

SEC. 184. EXTERNAL TECHNICAL REVIEW OF DEPARTMENTAL PROGRAMS.

SEC. 185. IMPROVED COORDINATION OF TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER ACTIVITIES.

SEC. 186. TECHNOLOGY INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM.

SEC. 187. SMALL BUSINESS ADVOCACY AND ASSISTANCE.

SEC. 188. MOBILITY OF SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL PERSONNEL.

SEC. 189. NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES REPORT.

SEC. 190. OUTREACH.

SEC. 191. LIMITS ON USE OF FUNDS.

SEC. 192. REPROGRAMMING.

SEC. 193. CONSTRUCTION WITH OTHER LAWS.

TITLE II--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY MANAGEMENT

SEC. 201. IMPROVED COORDINATION AND MANAGEMENT OF CIVILIAN SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY PROGRAMS.

`OFFICE OF SCIENCE

TITLE III--CLEAN SCHOOL BUSES

SEC. 301. ESTABLISHMENT OF PILOT PROGRAM.

SEC. 302. FUEL CELL BUS DEVELOPMENT AND DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM.

SEC. 303. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

TITLE IV--ALTERNATIVE FUELED AND ADVANCED VEHICLES

SEC. 401. DEFINITIONS.

SEC. 402. PILOT PROGRAM.

SEC. 403. REPORTS TO CONGRESS.

SEC. 404. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

TITLE V--CLEAN COAL

SEC. 501. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

SEC. 502. PROJECT CRITERIA.

SEC. 503. REPORT.

SEC. 504. CLEAN COAL CENTERS OF EXCELLENCE.



This Report:     Printer Friendly: HTML  |  PDF
1 of 1