The House Appropriations Committee on Monday passed a potentially massive budget plus-up for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP), while again dismissing the White House proposal to transfer it to the Department of Energy.
The panel voted 31-20 in favor of its $49.6 billion energy and water appropriations bill for fiscal 2021, sending it to the full House for further consideration.
The House bill would provide $7.6 billion in full for the Army Corps, $1.7 billion more than the Trump administration in February requested for the budget year beginning Oct. 1. That would include a base level of $210 million for FUSRAP, $10 million above its current funding and $60 million more than sought by the administration.
However, the energy legislation would add another $500 million “to remain available until expended: Provided, That such amount is designated by the Congress as being for an emergency requirement pursuant to” the 1985 Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act. The bill, and its accompanying legislative report, do not specify how that money should be used.
Asked about the reason for the proposed extra money, a House Democratic aide said Wednesday by email only that House Appropriations energy and water subcommittee Chairwoman Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio) “and the Committee have strongly supported the FUSRAP program for several years. This funding would support the Corps’ work to clean up a number of sites across the country that were used for Manhattan Project and subsequent activities.”
This would be just part of hundreds of billions of dollars in emergency funds that majority Democrats have spread through various appropriations bills in the House, aimed to offset the economic harm from the COVID-19 pandemic. Republican appropriators have decried the additional spending, which they say was included in the bills without their input and has led to party-line splits on the measures.
The full House is expected to take up the energy and water bill during the week of July 27. The Senate has not yet released any of its 2021 appropriations legislation.
There appears to be bipartisan support, though, for keeping FUSRAP within the Army Corps of Engineers.
In the report for the energy and water bill, House appropriators noted that Congress “intentionally” transferred FUSRAP from the Energy Department to the Army Corps in October 1997.
“The Committee remains pleased with the current cooperation between the Corps and the Department in carrying out the program and expects the Department to continue to provide its institutional knowledge and expertise to ensure the success of this program and to serve the nation and the affected communities,” according to the bill report, posted Sunday to the committee website. “The Corps is directed to submit its fiscal year 2022 budget request using this budget structure.”
The Trump administration first proposed relocating the 46-year-old cleanup program in its budget request for the current fiscal year. Congress rejected that plan, but that did not prevent the White House from re-upping for 2021.
The Army Corps would continue to manage site remediation projects, with DOE’s Office of Legacy Management handling the program’s budget and administration.
Within FUSRAP, the Army Corps remediates properties contaminated from the 1940s to 1960s by nuclear-weapon and power operations under the Manhattan Engineer District and Atomic Energy Commission. There were 23 active locations as of 2019, with 12 undergoing cleanup.
The Office of Legacy Management already has a central role in FUSRAP – assessing properties for inclusion in the program and conducting long-term monitoring once remediation of a site has been completed. Under the White House plan, the Army Corps would continue to manage the actual site operations, with DOE handling program budget and administration.
“This proposal would enable DOE to consider a broader range of federal cleanup efforts in prioritizing work each year, thereby increasing the effectiveness and efficiency of Federal cleanup efforts,” the Army Corps said in announcing its fiscal 2021 budget plan in February.
The issue was not discussed during Monday’s committee markup. The Army Corps said this week it could not comment on proposed legislation.
In the legislative report, the committee expressed support for “prioritization of sites, especially those that are nearing completion.” It mandated a remedial investigation and feasibility study of the onetime Sylvania nuclear fuel facility in Hicksville, N.Y., and potentially to advance to a record of decision that would formalize the cleanup approach for the property.
The Sylvania facility is not among the active FUSRAP sites.
Other Agencies
Appropriators also did not express any objections to the bill’s funding for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission — $863.4 million, the amount requested for the year and up from $855.6 million this year.
Within the total, $452.9 million would be directed toward nuclear reactor safety operations, $102.9 million for nuclear materials and waste safety, and $22.8 million for decommissioning and low-level waste. The recommended levels match the amounts sought by the federal regulator.
However, the House committee recommended just $3.6 million for the independent Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board. That is the amount it has received each year since fiscal 2016, but $2 million less than it wanted in 2021.
The bill report says only that the “Committee does not include any funds for the legislative proposal in the budget request.”
The Trump administration “was unwilling to explain the purpose of and need for this proposal,” the House Democratic aide said.
The Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board declined to discuss the matter. The small agency provides expert technical and scientific peer review on management and disposal operations at the Department of Energy for high-level radioactive waste and used nuclear fuel. Much of the additional funding requested was to hire four new full-time employees to support the board’s planned expanded mission “to leverage its expertise in the geosciences, material sciences, and engineering fields to conduct independent analyses and other activities as appropriate.”
