Bill Hits Snag Over Carbon Emissions Amendment Controversy, Full Committee Markup Postponed
Todd Jacobson
NS&D Monitor
6/20/2014
The Senate Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee cleared its version of the Fiscal Year 2015 Energy and Water Appropriations Act this week, zeroing out funding for work on a refurbished nuclear cruise missile warhead and drawing quick criticism from a Republican Senator on the panel. As the panel unveiled some details of its funding bill, matching the Obama Administration’s $8.3 billion request for the National Nuclear Security Administration’s weapons program, Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.) said he would fight a decision to cut a $9.4 million request for a study on the cruise missile warhead. By contrast, the House Appropriations Committee this week provided $17 million for the program in its version of the bill, which the panel reported this week. “It’s very important that funding continues,” Hoeven said, noting that the departments of Energy and Defense have laid out a plan to produce a First Production Unit on the warhead in 2027. “We have to be very careful about slowing down that funding and even the smaller amount of funding at this point will leverage that effort in a very, very important way.”
The entire Senate bill, however, hit a snag late this week due to a disagreement between Democrats and Republicans over a controversial amendment that would scuttle new carbon emissions regulations on power plants. Senate Appropriations Committee leaders cancelled a planned June 19 full committee markup of the bill over the issue, raising questions about the path ahead for the bill. The problem, according to Congressional aides, is that an amendment drafted by Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) that would aim to thwart new Environmental Protection Agency regulations aimed at reducing carbon emissions from coal plants had garnered some support from Democrats and had a chance of passing. It’s unclear when the markup will be rescheduled.
Feinstein to NNSA: Don’t Repeat Previous Mistake
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), the chair of the subcommittee, said it would not be prudent to fund the cruise missile warhead study until the Air Force commits to moving forward on the replacement and establishes requirements. She said the delay would not impact the performance or reliability of the current warhead, the W80. “The Air Force has no funding budgeted in the out-years to build a cruise missile warhead and before NNSA proceeds with the design of this weapon at a minimum there should be clear military requirements and the Air Force should identify needed resources,” she said.
She noted that between 2000 and 2005, NNSA spent approximately $300 million on a cruise missile warhead design before the project was shelved due to changing requirements. “So what we’re trying to do is simply say the committee should not repeat the same mistake and waste money before DoD establishes those clear requirements,” she said. “That as I understand it is the best practice recommended by [the Government Accountability Office]. So the hope is that DoD and NNSA will spend the next year developing clear requirements.”
Hoeven Planning Amendment to Restore Cruise Missile Warhead Funding
Hoeven, however, said he planned to address the issue with an amendment at the full committee, though it’s unclear now when that will take place. “We have to upgrade and you have to coordinate with the upgrade of the warhead and the missile,” he said. “They have to be synched up in order to meet a timeline which is ultimately 2030.”
In response to the actions taken by the subcommittee, Strategic Command chief Adm. Cecil Haney voiced his support for the mission need for the weapon. “That’s an important facet of our deterrent, to have that capability, to have that standoff capability now and well into the future,” Haney said during a speech at the Capitol Hill Club June 18, a day after the subcommittee markup.
Subcommittee Matches Funding for B61, W76, Uranium Processing Facility
While the subcommittee won’t release full details of the bill until the full Senate Appropriations Committee clears the legislation, several other highlights were revealed this week. Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.) said the bill matches the Administration’s request for work on the B61 refurbishment and provides $35.7 million to equip Los Alamos National Laboratory’s Radiological Laboratory Utility Office Building and $3.8 million to begin studying a new modular approach to help meet the lab’s plutonium capabilities. He also said the bill matches the Administration’s $259 million request for the ongoing W76 refurbishment and it $643 million request for the B61 refurbishment, which is Sandia National Laboratories’ biggest ongoing project. “This bill ensures the project will continue to be a priority,” Udall said, referring to the B61.
Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), the ranking member of the panel, said the bill matches the Administration’s $335 million request for work on the Uranium Processing Facility, which the NNSA recently decided to scale back as a result of recommendations made by a Red Team chaired by Oak Ridge National Laboratory Director Thom Mason. Alexander also said the bill would require the Red Team to review the project every six months. “In Tennessee we’re glad to have the thousands of jobs that will be there because of this construction project, which I suppose is the largest in the country, but Tennesseans are taxpayers too and we don’t want our money wasted,” he said. “I think we’re doing a better job of making sure that it’s not.”
Also included in the bill was a total of $151 million for the Exascale Computing initiative, split between the NNSA ($60 million) and the Office of Science ($91 million).
