Report text available as:

(PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.) Tip?



                                                        Calendar No. 96
114th Congress      }                        {        Report
                              SENATE
 1st Session        }                        {        114-54
===================================================================
 
     ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2016

                                _______
                                

                  May 21, 2015.--Ordered to be printed

  Mr. Alexander, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted the 
                               following

                                 REPORT

                        [To accompany H.R. 2028]

    The Committee on Appropriations, to which was referred the 
bill (H.R. 2028) making appropriations for energy and water 
development and related agencies for the fiscal year ending 
September 30, 2016, and for other purposes, reports the same 
with an amendment in the nature of a substitute, and recommends 
that the bill as amended do pass.



New obligational authority

Total of bill as reported to the Senate................. $36,118,168,000
Amount of 2015 appropriations...........................  34,780,277,000
Amount of 2016 budget estimate..........................  36,646,014,000
Amount of House allowance...............................  36,010,658,000
Bill as recommended to Senate compared to--
    2015 appropriations.................................  +1,337,891,000
    2016 budget estimate................................    -527,846,000
    House allowance.....................................    +107,510,000

                                CONTENTS

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

Purpose..........................................................     4
Summary of Estimates and Recommendations.........................     4
Introduction.....................................................     4
Title I:
    Department of Defense--Civil: Department of the Army:
        Corps of Engineers--Civil:
            Investigations.......................................     9
            Construction.........................................    19
            Mississippi River and Tributaries....................    25
            Operations and Maintenance...........................    28
            Regulatory Program...................................    47
            Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program......    47
            Flood Control and Coastal Emergencies................    47
            Expenses.............................................    48
            Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil 
              Works).............................................    48
            General Provisions--Corps of Engineers--Civil........    48
Title II:
    Department of the Interior:
        Central Utah Project Completion Account..................    49
        Bureau of Reclamation:
            Water and Related Resources..........................    51
            Central Valley Project Restoration Fund..............    62
            California Bay-Delta Restoration.....................    62
            Policy and Administration............................    63
            Indian Water Rights Settlements......................    63
            San Joaquin Restoration Fund.........................    63
        General Provisions--Department of the Interior...........    63
Title III:
    Department of Energy:
        Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy...................    69
        Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability..............    75
        Nuclear Energy...........................................    79
        Fossil Energy Research and Development...................    81
        Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves...................    85
        Strategic Petroleum Reserve..............................    85
        Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve.......................    85
        Energy Information Administration........................    86
        Non-Defense Environmental Cleanup........................    86
        Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning 
          Fund...................................................    87
        Science..................................................    88
        Advanced Research Projects Agency--Energy................    93
        Office of Indian Energy Policy and Programs..............    93
        Innovative Technology Loan Guarantee Program.............    93
        Tribal Indian Energy Loan Guarantee Program..............    94
        Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Loan Program..    94
        Departmental Administration..............................    94
        Office of the Inspector General..........................    96
        Weapons Activities.......................................    97
        Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation.........................   101
        Naval Reactors...........................................   102
        Federal Salaries and Expenses............................   103
        Defense Environmental Cleanup............................   104
        Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning 
          Federal Contribution...................................   106
        Other Defense Activities.................................   106
        Power Marketing Administrations:
            Bonneville Power Administration Fund.................   106
            Operations and Maintenance, Southeastern Power 
              Administration.....................................   106
            Operations and Maintenance, Southwestern Power 
              Administration.....................................   106
            Construction, Rehabilitation, Operations and 
              Maintenance, Western Area Power Administration.....   107
            Falcon and Amistad Operating and Maintenance Fund....   107
        Federal Energy Regulatory Commission: Salaries and 
          Expenses...............................................   107
        General Provisions--Department of Energy.................   132
Title IV:
    Independent Agencies:
        Appalachian Regional Commission..........................   133
        Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board..................   133
        Delta Regional Authority.................................   134
        Denali Commission........................................   134
        Northern Border Regional Commission......................   134
        Southeast Crescent Regional Commission...................   134
        Nuclear Regulatory Commission............................   135
            Office of Inspector General..........................   137
        Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board.....................   138
        Office of the Federal Coordinator for Alaska Natural Gas 
          Transportation Projects................................   138
Title IV: General Provisions.....................................   138
Title V: General Provisions......................................   139
Compliance With Paragraph 7, Rule XVI, of the Standing Rules of 
  the 
  Senate.........................................................   139
Compliance With Paragraph 7(c), Rule XXVI, of the Standing Rules 
  of the 
  Senate.........................................................   140
Compliance With Paragraph 12, Rule XXVI, of the Standing Rules of 
  the 
  Senate.........................................................   141
Budgetary Impact of Bill.........................................   145
Comparative Statement of Budget Authority........................   146

                                PURPOSE

    The purpose of this bill is to provide appropriations for 
fiscal year 2016, beginning October 1, 2015, and ending 
September 30, 2016, for energy and water development, and for 
other related purposes. It supplies funds for water resources 
development programs and related activities of the Corps of 
Engineers' civil works program in title I; for the Department 
of the Interior's Bureau of Reclamation in title II; for the 
Department of Energy's energy research activities, including 
environmental restoration and waste management, and atomic 
energy defense activities of the National Nuclear Security 
Administration in title III; and for independent agencies and 
commissions, including the Appalachian Regional Commission, 
Delta Regional Authority, Denali Commission, and the Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission in title IV.

                SUMMARY OF ESTIMATES AND RECOMMENDATIONS

    The fiscal year 2016 budget estimates for the bill total 
$36,646,014,000 in new budget (obligational) authority. The 
recommendation of the Committee totals $36,118,168,000. This is 
$527,846,000 below the budget estimates and $1,337,891,000 
above the enacted appropriation for the current fiscal year.

                         Subcommittee Hearings

    The Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water 
Development held four sessions in connection with the fiscal 
year 2016 appropriations bill. Witnesses included officials and 
representatives of the Federal agencies under the 
subcommittee's jurisdiction.
    The recommendations for fiscal year 2016, therefore, have 
been developed after careful consideration of available data.

                         Votes in the Committee

    By a vote of ---- to ---- the Committee on ----------, 
recommended that the bill, as amended, be reported to the 
Senate.

                          INTRODUCTION

    The Committee recommends $35,368,000,000 for the Energy and 
Water Development appropriations bill for fiscal year 2016, 
including adjustments, an increase of $1,165,723,000 over 
fiscal year 2015. Within the amount recommended, 
$19,002,000,000 is classified as defense and $16,366,000,000 is 
classified as non-defense spending. The Committee 
recommendation complies with the Budget Control Act of 2011, as 
amended.
    The Committee's constitutional responsibility to oversee 
the Federal Government's expenditure of taxpayer dollars 
requires setting priorities and ensuring these funds are 
executed as Congress has directed. To develop this 
recommendation, the Committee held four budget hearings in 
March and April 2015 to examine the budget requests for the 
Corps of Engineers, Bureau of Reclamation, Department of 
Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration, and the 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The hearings provided officials 
from the agencies an opportunity to present their most pressing 
priorities to the Committee. The Committee also invited and 
received recommendations from Senators.
    The Committee's recommendation reflects that process, and 
includes funding for the highest priority activities across 
several Federal agencies. The recommendation includes funds for 
critical water infrastructure, including our Nation's inland 
waterways, ports, and harbors; agricultural water supply and 
drought relief in the West; groundbreaking scientific research 
and development, including world-class supercomputing; support 
for the Nation's nuclear weapons, non-proliferation, and 
nuclear Navy programs; and critical economic development. The 
Committee did not recommend funding for low-priority programs, 
and rescinded unused funds from prior years.

                               Oversight

    To ensure appropriate oversight of taxpayer dollars, the 
Committee's recommendation includes financial reporting 
requirements in each title of the bill, and provides additional 
Congressional control points in the recommendation for the 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The Committee describes these 
new requirements in detail in the relevant sections.

                                TITLE I

                      DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE--CIVIL

                         DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

                       Corps of Engineers--Civil

                       OVERVIEW OF RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $5,499,500,000 for the Corps of 
Engineers, an increase of $767,500,000 from the budget request. 
The Committee also recommends rescinding $128,000,000 of 
unobligated prior year balances, for a net appropriation of 
$5,371,500,000.
    The Committee recommendation sets priorities by supporting 
our Nation's infrastructure. Specifically, the Committee 
recommendation provides adequate appropriations to utilize all 
of the estimated fiscal year 2016 revenues from the Inland 
Waterways Trust Fund and meets the target prescribed in the 
Water Resources Reform and Development Act [WRRDA] of 2014 for 
projects eligible for Harbor Maintenance Trust Funds. This 
level of funding will help modernize our Nation's ports and 
waterways as we prepare for completion of the Panama Canal 
expansion.

                              INTRODUCTION

    The Corps of Engineers' civil works mission is to provide 
quality, responsive engineering services to the Nation in peace 
and war. Approximately 23,000 civilians and about 290 military 
officers are responsible for executing the civil works mission. 
This bill only funds the civil works functions of the Corps of 
Engineers.
    The Corps of Engineers maintains our inland waterways, 
keeps our ports open, manages a portion of our drinking water 
supply, provides emission free electricity from dams, looks 
after many of our recreational waters, helps manage the river 
levels during flooding, provides environmental stewardship, and 
emergency response to natural disasters. The annual net 
economic benefit generated by the Corps of Engineers' civil 
works mission is estimated to be $87,000,000,000, which equates 
to a return of about $16 for every $1 expended.
    The Corps of Engineers' responsibilities include:
  --navigation systems, including 13,000 miles of deep draft 
        channels, 12,000 miles of inland waterways, 236 lock 
        chambers, and 926 harbors which handle over 2.3 billion 
        tons of cargo annually;
  --flood risk management infrastructure, including 707 dams, 
        14,700 miles of levees, and multiple hurricane and 
        storm damage risk reduction projects along the coast;
  --municipal and industrial water supply storage at 136 
        projects spread across 25 States;
  --environmental stewardship, infrastructure, and ecosystem 
        restoration;
  --recreation for approximately 370 million recreation visits 
        per year to Corps of Engineers' projects;
  --regulation of waters under Federal statutes; and
  --maintaining hydropower capacity of nearly 24,000 megawatts 
        at 75 projects.

                   PROGRAM COORDINATION AND EXECUTION

    The Committee expects the Corps of Engineers to execute the 
civil works program in accordance with congressional direction 
included in this report and the accompanying act. This includes 
moving individual projects forward in accordance with the funds 
annually appropriated. However, the Committee realizes that 
many factors outside the Corps of Engineers' control may 
dictate the progress of any given project or study. The 
Committee directs the Corps of Engineers to notify the 
Committee of any major deviations as soon as practicable, 
including a detailed justification and updates of cost, 
schedule, or scope for the project or study. A major deviation 
is defined as any reprogramming action that requires Committee 
notification as identified in the Energy and Water Development 
and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2015, or a schedule 
change that causes completions, as identified in the fiscal 
year 2015 or fiscal year 2016 budget requests to be delayed 
beyond the fiscal year stated.

                       FISCAL YEAR 2016 WORK PLAN

    The Committee has recommended funding above the budget 
request for Investigations, Construction, Operations and 
Maintenance, and Mississippi River and Tributaries. The Corps 
of Engineers is directed to submit a work plan, not later than 
45 days after the date of enactment of this act, to the 
Committee proposing its allocation of these additional funds. 
The Corps of Engineers is directed not to obligate any funding 
above the budget request for studies or projects until the 
Committee has approved the work plan for fiscal year 2016. The 
work plan shall be consistent with the following general 
guidance, as well as the specific direction the Committee 
provides within each account.
  --None of the funds may be used for any item for which the 
        Committee has specifically denied funding.
  --Except for funds proposed for new starts, the additional 
        funds are provided for ongoing studies or projects that 
        were either not included in the budget request or for 
        which the budget request was inadequate.
  --The work plan shall include a single group of new starts 
        for Investigations and Construction.
  --Funding associated with a category may be allocated to 
        eligible studies or projects within that category.
  --Funding associated with a subcategory may be allocated only 
        to eligible studies or projects within that 
        subcategory.
  --The Corps of Engineers may not withhold funding from a 
        study or project because it is inconsistent with the 
        administration's policy.
  --The Committee notes that these funds are in excess of the 
        administration's budget request, and that 
        administration budget metrics should not disqualify a 
        study or project from being funded.

                              PROCUREMENT

    The Committee remains concerned about the high unemployment 
rate of the Nation's construction industry. Despite the efforts 
of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy to increase 
communication between procurement officers and industry, the 
Committee believes that local contractors very often do not 
know about nor have the opportunity to compete for local 
construction projects funded in this act. Therefore, the 
Committee directs the Secretary to ensure that regional/
district offices responsible for construction projects inform 
and engage local construction industry contractors, especially 
small businesses, minority-owned businesses, and women-owned 
businesses, about Federal procurement opportunities and the 
bidding process. The Committee requests a clear outreach plan 
from the Secretary no later than 90 days after enactment of 
this act. This plan should modernize traditional outreach 
methods to reach a broader group of local contractors.

                             REPROGRAMMING

    The Committee is retaining the reprogramming legislation 
provided in the Energy and Water Development and Related 
Agencies Appropriations Act, 2015.

                    NEW STARTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016

    The Committee recommends new starts in both the 
Investigations and Construction accounts for fiscal year 2016. 
The Committee decision is based, in part, on the budget request 
providing funding to complete 11 feasibility studies, 2 
preconstruction engineering design [PED] studies, and 9 
construction projects.
    Investments in our infrastructure are investments in our 
economy. These investments should be continued even during 
constrained budgets, as the benefits continue to accrue for 
decades. The Committee recommends up to 10 new feasibility 
study starts, and 6 new construction starts, including the 
following 4 proposed in the administration's budget request for 
fiscal year 2016: Port Lions Harbor, Alaska; Coyote & Berryessa 
Creeks, California; Ohio River Shoreline, Paducah, Kentucky; 
and, Marsh Lake, Minnesota.
    The Corps of Engineers is directed to propose, not later 
than 45 days after the date of enactment of this act, a single 
group of new starts to the Committee as a part of the work 
plan, under the direction included above under the heading 
``Fiscal Year 2016 Work Plan''.

                          SAVINGS AND SLIPPAGE

    Savings and slippage [S&S;] is a budgetary term that 
recognizes that nothing ever goes completely as planned. The 
Committee recognizes that many changes may occur between the 
Corps of Engineers' budget formulation--beginning 22 months 
before it is submitted to the Committee--and when funds are 
actually appropriated. Although the Committee has attempted to 
identify and address changes through coordination with the 
Corps of Engineers, the Committee realizes that actual 
appropriations may not be enacted until later in the year. 
Accordingly, the Committee has included, as in prior years, a 
reasonable percentage of S&S; within Investigations, 
Construction, and Operations and Maintenance as a way to 
accommodate additional project needs, even if funding is 
insufficient. Upon applying the S&S; amounts, normal 
reprogramming procedures should be undertaken to account for 
schedule slippages, accelerations, or other unforeseen 
conditions.

                   CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING

    The Committee did not accept or include Congressionally 
Directed Spending, as defined in section 5(a) of rule XLIV of 
the Standing Rules of the Senate. However, the Committee has 
recommended additional programmatic funds for Investigations, 
Construction, Operations and Maintenance, and Mississippi River 
and Tributaries to address deficiencies in the budget request. 
In some cases, these additional funds have been included within 
defined categories, as in prior years, and are described in 
more detail in their respective sections, below.

                         ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY

    The Comptroller General of the Government Accountability 
Office is directed to study the cumulative economic impact of 
all the shallow draft ports on the Mississippi River between 
St. Louis, Missouri, and Baton Rouge, Louisiana. The study 
should include the revenue and jobs created locally and 
nationally, the importance of these ports to inland waterways 
shippers, the economic effects that would result from any 
single port closing down, the economic effects that would 
result from all ports closing down, the increase in barge 
traffic that these ports may see with the expansion of the 
Panama Canal, and the ability or inability of these ports to 
meet that expansion under the current funding environment. 
Finally, the study shall make a recommendation regarding the 
establishment of one funding stream for dredging these small 
inland ports as compared to historical funding mechanisms.

                             INVESTIGATIONS

Appropriations, 2015..................................   $122,000,000
Budget estimate, 2016................................      97,000,000
House allowance.......................................    113,000,000
Committee recommendation..............................    109,000,000

    The Committee recommends $109,000,000 for Investigations, 
an increase of $12,000,000 from the budget request. The 
Committee's recommendation allows the Corps of Engineers to 
begin up to 10 new feasibility study starts.

                              INTRODUCTION

    Funding in this account is used to develop feasibility and 
PED studies to address the Nation's water infrastructure needs, 
in support of project authorization. The Committee is very 
concerned that only one-third of the budget request for 
Investigations is directed to specifically authorized studies, 
with the remainder directed to nationwide programs that will 
not result in construction recommendations. Further, the budget 
request proposes funding for only 51 specifically authorized 
feasibility studies, as compared to over 100 studies receiving 
appropriations in fiscal year 2015. Additional funding 
recommended for Investigations will allow a more balanced 
planning program.
    The Committee is also concerned about the administration's 
failure to efficiently fund ongoing studies to completion, with 
completion being defined as the end of the PED phase. The 
budget request does not include funding to move any of the 34 
feasibility studies that were completed in the prior fiscal 
year into the PED study phase. If the Committee were to adopt 
the budget request without modification, a backlog of at least 
40 studies would be created from just the past 2 fiscal years. 
The Committee recognizes that the administration's budget does 
not provide adequate Investigations, and specifically PED 
funding to allow many of America's most important waterways to 
move efficiently from planning to construction. The Committee 
therefore recommends additional funding to be used to 
seamlessly continue feasibility studies into the PED study 
phase.

                               NEW STARTS

    The Committee's recommendation includes funding for up to 
10 new feasibility study starts. Each new feasibility study 
shall be selected based on the Corps of Engineers' 
prioritization process and included as a part of the 
Investigations work plan. Not less than 50 percent of the 
additional funds recommended for Investigations shall be used 
to seamlessly continue studies into the PED phase, which have a 
Chief's Report dated prior to October 1, 2015.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The table below displays the budget request and the 
Committee's recommendation for Investigations. Funding is 
classified as either for feasibility or PED studies, as 
indicated in the columns, to provide greater transparency in 
the study phases.

                                       CORPS OF ENGINEERS--INVESTIGATIONS
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Budget  estimate      House  allowance          Committee
                                               --------------------------------------------    recommendation
                 Project title                                                             ---------------------
                                                   FEAS       PED        FEAS       PED        FEAS       PED
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    ALABAMA
 
MOBILE HARBOR DEEPENING AND WIDENING, AL......        400  .........        400  .........        400  .........
 
                    ALASKA
 
CRAIG HARBOR, AK..............................        535  .........        535  .........        535  .........
KOTZEBUE SMALL BOAT HARBOR, AK................        700  .........        700  .........        700  .........
PERRYVILLE HARBOR, AK.........................        700  .........        700  .........        700  .........
SAINT GEORGE HARBOR IMPROVEMENT, AK...........        700  .........        700  .........        700  .........
 
                    ARIZONA
 
LITTLE COLORADO RIVER (WINSLOW), AZ...........        100  .........        100  .........        100  .........
LOWER SANTA CRUZ RIVER, AZ....................        700  .........        700  .........        700  .........
 
                   ARKANSAS
 
THREE RIVERS, AR..............................        700  .........        700  .........        700  .........
 
                  CALIFORNIA
 
AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES,       .........      3,500  .........      3,500  .........      3,500
 NATOMAS BASIN, CA............................
DRY CREEK (WARM SPRINGS) RESTORATION, CA......        700  .........        700  .........        700  .........
LOWER CACHE CRK, YOLO CNTY, WOODLAND & VIC, CA        570  .........        570  .........        570  .........
PORT OF LONG BEACH NAV IMP, CA................        700  .........        700  .........        700  .........
SACRAMENTO RIVER BANK PROTECTION (PHASE 3)            500  .........        500  .........        500  .........
 (GENERAL REEVALUATION REPORT), CA............
SAN FRANCISQUITO CREEK, CA....................        331  .........        331  .........        331  .........
YUBA RIVER ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, CA..........        700  .........        700  .........        700  .........
 
                   COLORADO
 
ADAMS AND DENVER COUNTIES, CO.................        700  .........        700  .........        700  .........
 
        COMMONWEALTH NORTHERN MARIANAS
 
ROTA HARBOR MODIFICATIONS, CNMI...............        700  .........        700  .........        700  .........
TINIAN HARBOR MODIFICATIONS, CNMI.............        700  .........        700  .........        700  .........
 
                  CONNECTICUT
 
FAIRFIELD AND NEW HAVEN COUNTIES (FLOODING),          700  .........        700  .........        700  .........
 CT...........................................
NEW HAVEN HARBOR DEEPENING, CT................        700  .........        700  .........        700  .........
 
                    FLORIDA
 
MANATEE HARBOR, FL............................        700  .........        700  .........        700  .........
 
                    GEORGIA
 
PROCTOR CREEK, GA.............................        700  .........        700  .........        700  .........
SATILLA RIVER BASIN WATERSHED, GA.............        700  .........        700  .........        700  .........
 
                     IDAHO
 
BOISE RIVER, BOISE, ID........................        275  .........        275  .........        275  .........
 
                   ILLINOIS
 
DU PAGE RIVER, IL.............................        700  .........        700  .........        700  .........
ILLINOIS RIVER BASIN RESTORATION, IL..........        400  .........        400  .........        400  .........
INTERBASIN CONTROL OF GREAT LAKES-MISSISSIPPI         500  .........        500  .........        500  .........
 RIVER AQUATIC NUISANCE SPECIES, IL, IN, OH &
 WI...........................................
 
KASKASKIA RIVER BASIN, IL.....................        500  .........        500  .........        500  .........
 
                     IOWA
 
DES MOINES LEVEE SYSTEM, DES MOINES AND               700  .........        700  .........        700  .........
 RACCOON RIVERS, IA...........................
 
                   LOUISIANA
 
INNER HARBOR NAVIGATION CANAL LOCK, LA              1,400  .........      1,400  .........      1,400  .........
 (GENERAL REEVALUATION REPORT)................
LOUISIANA COASTAL AREA ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION,          50  .........         50  .........         50  .........
 LA...........................................
MISSISSIPPI RIVER SHIP CHANNEL, GULF TO BATON         550  .........        550  .........        550  .........
 ROUGE, LA....................................
 
                   MARYLAND
 
CHESAPEAKE BAY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, MD, PA & VA        250  .........        250  .........        250  .........
 
                 MASSACHUSETTS
 
BOSTON HARBOR DEEP DRAFT INVESTIGATION, MA....  .........      1,835  .........      1,835  .........      1,835
 
                   MICHIGAN
 
SAGINAW RIVER DEEPENING, SAGINAW, MI (GENERAL         100  .........        100  .........        100  .........
 REEVALUATION REPORT).........................
 
                   MINNESOTA
 
MINNESOTA RIVER WATERSHED STUDY, MN & SD              600  .........        600  .........        600  .........
 (MINNESOTA RIVER AUTHORITY)..................
 
                   MISSOURI
 
ST LOUIS RIVERFRONT, MO & IL..................        700  .........        700  .........        700  .........
 
                  NEW JERSEY
 
NEW JERSEY BACKBAY, NJ........................  .........  .........        300  .........  .........  .........
PASSAIC RIVER MAINSTEM, NJ (GENERAL                   982  .........        982  .........        982  .........
 REEVALUATION REPORT).........................
RAHWAY RIVR BASIN (UPPER BASIN), NJ...........        500  .........        500  .........        500  .........
 
                   NEW YORK
 
NEW YORK--NEW JERSEY HARBOR & TRIBUTARIES, NY   .........  .........        400  .........  .........  .........
 & NJ.........................................
UPPER SUSQUEHANNA COMPREHENSIVE FLOOD DAMAGE          600  .........        600  .........        600  .........
 REDUCTION, NY................................
WESTCHESTER COUNTY STREAMS, BYRAM RIVER BASIN,        703  .........        703  .........        703  .........
 NY & CT......................................
 
                 NORTH DAKOTA
 
RED RIVER OF THE NORTH BASIN, ND, MN, SD &            786  .........        786  .........        786  .........
 MANITOBA, CANADA.............................
 
                   OKLAHOMA
 
ARKANSAS RIVER CORRIDOR, OK...................        815  .........        815  .........        815  .........
 
                 PENNSYLVANIA
 
DELAWARE RIVER DREDGE MATERIAL UTILIZATION, PA        700  .........        700  .........        700  .........
 
                  PUERTO RICO
 
SAN JUAN HARBOR CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT STUDY, PR.        700  .........        700  .........        700  .........
 
                     TEXAS
 
COASTAL TEXAS PROTECTION AND RESTORATION              700  .........        700  .........        700  .........
 STUDY, TX....................................
HOUSTON SHIP CHANNEL, TX......................        700  .........        700  .........        700  .........
SABINE PASS TO GALVESTON BAY, TX..............        600  .........        600  .........        600  .........
SPARKS ARROYO COLONIA, EL PASO COUNTY, TX.....        200  .........        200  .........        200  .........
SULPHUR RIVER BASIN, TX.......................        500  .........        500  .........        500  .........
 
                   VIRGINIA
 
CITY OF NORFOLK, VA...........................  .........  .........        300  .........  .........  .........
NORFOLK HARBOR AND CHANNELS (55-FOOT), VA             800  .........        800  .........        800  .........
 (GENERAL REEVALUATION REPORT)................
 
                  WASHINGTON
 
DUNGENESS RIVER ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION STUDY,          700  .........        700  .........        700  .........
 WA...........................................
SEATTLE HARBOR, WA............................        500  .........        500  .........        500  .........
                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------
      SUBTOTAL, ITEMS UNDER STATES............     30,847      5,335     31,847      5,335     30,847      5,335
 
                REMAINING ITEMS
 
ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR ONGOING WORK:
    FLOOD AND STORM DAMAGE REDUCTION..........  .........  .........      6,500  .........      1,000      1,000
        FLOOD CONTROL.........................  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........      1,000
        SHORE PROTECTION......................  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........
    NAVIGATION................................  .........  .........      4,000  .........  .........      1,000
        COASTAL AND DEEP-DRAFT................  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........      5,031
        INLAND................................  .........  .........  .........  .........        500        500
        SMALL, REMOTE, OR SUBSISTENCE.........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........      1,158
    OTHER AUTHORIZED PROJECT PURPOSES.........  .........  .........      2,000  .........      1,000  .........
    ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION OR COMPLIANCE...  .........  .........  .........  .........        500  .........
    REMOTE, COASTAL, OR SMALL WATERSHED.......  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........  .........
COORDINATION STUDIES WITH OTHER AGENCIES:
    ACCESS TO WATER DATA......................        750  .........        750  .........        750  .........
    COMMITTEE ON MARINE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS        100  .........        100  .........        100  .........
    OTHER COORDINATION PROGRAMS:
        CALFED................................        100  .........        100  .........        100  .........
        CHESAPEAKE BAY PROGRAM................         75  .........         75  .........         75  .........
        COORDINATION WITH OTHER WATER RESOURCE        398  .........        398  .........        398  .........
         AGENCIES.............................
        GULF OF MEXICO........................        100  .........        100  .........        100  .........
        INTERAGENCY AND INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT.        400  .........        400  .........        400  .........
        INTERAGENCY WATER RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT        721  .........        721  .........        721  .........
        INVENTORY OF DAMS.....................        400  .........        400  .........        400  .........
        LAKE TAHOE............................         50  .........         50  .........         50  .........
        PACIFIC NW FOREST CASE................         10  .........         10  .........         10  .........
        SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS................      1,350  .........      1,350  .........      1,350  .........
        FERC LICENSING........................        200  .........        200  .........        200  .........
    PLANNING ASSISTANCE TO STATES.............      5,500  .........      6,000  .........      6,000  .........
 
COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA:
    AUTOMATED INFORMATION SYSTEMS SUPPORT TRI-        251  .........        251  .........        251  .........
     CADD.....................................
    COASTAL FIELD DATA COLLECTION.............      1,000  .........      1,000  .........      1,000  .........
    ENVIRONMENTAL DATA STUDIES................         75  .........         75  .........         75  .........
    FLOOD DAMAGE DATA.........................        220  .........        220  .........        220  .........
    FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT SERVICES...........     15,000  .........     15,000  .........     15,000  .........
    HYDROLOGIC STUDIES........................      1,743  .........      1,743  .........      1,743  .........
    INTERNATIONAL WATER STUDIES...............        150  .........        150  .........        150  .........
    PRECIPITATION STUDIES.....................        225  .........        225  .........        225  .........
    REMOTE SENSING/GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION              75  .........         75  .........         75  .........
     SYSTEM SUPPORT...........................
    SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL INFORMATION               47  .........         47  .........         47  .........
     CENTERS..................................
    STREAM GAGING.............................        550  .........        550  .........        550  .........
    TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS....................        385  .........        385  .........        385  .........
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT......................     18,143  .........     18,143  .........     22,000  .........
OTHER--MISC:
    DISPOSITION OF COMPLETED PROJECTS.........        800  .........        800  .........        800  .........
    NORTH ATLANTIC COAST COMPREHENSIVE STUDY        1,000  .........  .........  .........      1,800  .........
     FOCUS AREA...............................
    NATIONAL FLOOD RISK MANAGEMENT PROGRAM....      6,000  .........      6,000  .........      6,000  .........
    NATIONAL SHORELINE........................        400  .........        400  .........        400  .........
    PLANNING SUPPORT PROGRAM..................      3,100  .........      3,100  .........      3,100  .........
    TRIBAL PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM................      1,500  .........      1,500  .........      1,500  .........
HOUSE FLOOR AMENDMENTS........................  .........  .........      3,500  .........  .........  .........
                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------
      SUBTOTAL................................     60,818  .........     76,318  .........     68,975      9,689
 
SAVINGS AND SLIPPAGE..........................  .........  .........  .........  .........     -5,081       -765
                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL...................................     91,665      5,335    108,165      5,335     94,741     14,259
                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------
      GRAND TOTAL.............................  .........     97,000  .........    113,500  .........    109,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Upper Mississippi River Comprehensive Plan.--The Committee 
understands that during the 2011 flooding on the Mississippi 
River, much of the damage was concentrated on the Upper 
Mississippi River Basin, where there is no final flood risk 
management plan. An appropriate Upper Mississippi River 
Comprehensive Plan would help work toward flood risk management 
goals. The Committee directs the Corps of Engineers to provide, 
not later than 60 days after the enactment of this act, a 
comprehensive survey of the authorization and funding 
requirements necessary for the Corps of Engineers to continue 
work on the Upper Mississippi River Comprehensive Plan, 
including work on alternative scenarios for the 500 year flood 
(included in the current plan, Plan H). The report shall also 
outline the perceived challenges to, and recommendations for, 
working toward the creation of an overall flood risk management 
plan for the entire main stem of the Mississippi River.
    Mobile Harbor, Alabama Limited Reevaluation Report.--The 
Committee directs the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil 
Works [Secretary] to budget for this project at the rate 
indicated in Section 110 of the Energy and Water Development 
and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2015. In future budget 
submissions, the Secretary shall adhere to Congressional 
direction included in statute regarding this project. The 
Committee expects the Secretary to allocate funds provided in 
this act in a manner that is consistent with statutory cost 
sharing requirements.
    Upper Mississippi River-Illinois Waterway System.--The 
Committee recognizes that the bipartisan support for the 
Navigation and Ecosystem Sustainability Program [NESP], 
spanning almost a decade, has not resulted in NESP's 
implementation. The Committee recognizes that NESP is now so 
delayed that new economic and cost-benefit analyses must be 
performed before it can move forward. The Committee also 
recognizes that although the Corps of Engineers has 
reprogrammed funding into NESP, this funding has not been used 
to deliver updated analysis.
    Consequently, the Committee directs the Corps of Engineers, 
not later than 30 days after the enactment of this act, to 
provide a report detailing the scope, schedule, and budget for 
delivering the updated economic analysis and cost 
recertification so the Corps of Engineers can begin 
implementing NESP.
    Mud Mountain Dam.--The Committee commends the Corps of 
Engineers and the National Marine Fisheries Service for 
reaching agreement on a biological opinion [BiOp] to mitigate 
the impact of the ongoing operation of Mud Mountain Dam on 
species listed under the Endangered Species Act [ESA] by 
replacing the barrier structure and building a new fish trap 
facility. The Committee is aware that the Corps of Engineers is 
scheduled to complete the decision document in May 2015, which 
will inform design and construction work. The Committee 
encourages the Corps of Engineers to uphold its ESA and Tribal 
treaty responsibilities by requesting sufficient funding in 
future budgets to implement the BiOp requirements and complete 
construction by 2020.
    Puget Sound Nearshore Study.--The Committee is aware that 
the Corps of Engineers completed public review on the draft 
Puget Sound Nearshore Feasibility Report and Environmental 
Impact Statement [Report] in December 2014. If the final Report 
does not identify an implementable Federal project, the 
Committee encourages the Corps of Engineers to identify other 
existing authorities and resources that could assist with 
timely construction of alternatives included in the Report. The 
Committee further encourages the Corps of Engineers to 
acknowledge early action restoration efforts by the State of 
Washington as part of the overall plan, including cost share 
obligations when a project cost share agreement is executed.
    Tribal Communities Located in Remote Areas.--The Committee 
recognizes that Tribal communities located in remote areas that 
experience severe, weather-related conditions that jeopardize 
public health and safety, face a significant disadvantage in 
the Corps of Engineers' utilization of benefit-cost ratios in 
the budgeting process. The Committee urges the Corps of 
Engineers to consider Federal trust and treaty obligations and 
the need to protect public health and safety in severe weather 
situations in determining future budget priorities.
    National Mall and Federal Triangle Flood Protection.--The 
Committee expects the Corps of Engineers to provide information 
and cooperate with other Federal agencies, the District of 
Columbia government, and nonprofit interests, including the 
National Coalition to Save Our Mall and Federal City Council, 
to address ongoing flood risks facing the Federal Triangle/
National Mall area. The Committee directs the Corps of 
Engineers to provide unclassified information to the 
aforementioned interests for the purposes of developing a 
report on a proposed cost-neutral, public-private partnership 
approach to combine flood protection with underground visitor 
amenities and parking in order to address flood risks to the 
Federal Triangle/National Mall area, as well as the need to 
improve visitor access to National Mall museums, monuments, and 
activities.
    Aquatic Nuisance Species.--The Committee is aware that the 
Corps of Engineers is capable of utilizing funding beyond what 
was in the administration's fiscal year 2016 budget request to 
further ongoing studies, including ongoing projects to address 
the threat of aquatic nuisance species in the Great Lakes 
Basin. The Committee encourages the Corps of Engineers to 
consider funding the program to address the threat of aquatic 
nuisance species in the Great Lakes Basin to its full 
capability in the fiscal year 2016 work plan.
    The Committee further understands that under the Great 
Lakes and Mississippi River Interbasin Study, the Corps of 
Engineers has initiated a feasibility study to investigate 
near-term options and technologies to prevent the one-way 
transfer of aquatic nuisance species from the Mississippi River 
Basin into the Great Lakes Basin. Considering the pressing and 
potentially devastating harm aquatic nuisance species pose to 
the Great Lakes fishery and economy, the Committee is concerned 
that the Corps issued a waiver from the 3x3x3 rule to allow the 
feasibility study to take more than 3 years. The Committee 
believes that the Brandon Road Lock and Dam offers great 
promise as a single point to control the upstream transfer of 
aquatic nuisance species and that delays would be a major 
setback. Therefore, the Committee urges the Corps of Engineers 
to consider alternative ways to accelerate the feasibility 
study and to complete it within 3 years.
    Research and Development, Additional Topic--Urban Flood 
Damage Reduction and Stream Restoration in Arid Regions.--The 
Committee encourages the Corps of Engineers' research and 
development [R&D;] program to focus on the management of water 
resources projects that promote public safety; reduce risk; 
improve operational efficiencies; reduce flood damage in arid 
and semi-arid regions; sustain the environment; and position 
our water resource systems to be managed as systems and 
adaptable due to the implications of a changing climate. The 
R&D; program should also continue its focus on science and 
technology efforts to address needs for resilient water 
resources infrastructure.
    Export Terminals.--The Committee strongly encourages the 
Corps of Engineers to complete environmental review for export 
terminal projects as expeditiously as possible, in a 
transparent manner, and in a reasonable timeframe. In addition, 
the Committee directs the Corps of Engineers to thoroughly 
consult with the Secretary of the Interior, and all affected 
Tribal nations regarding the environmental and economic impacts 
as well as treaty rights of all Tribes affected by export 
terminal projects undergoing environmental review.
    Additional Funding for Ongoing Work.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $12,000,000 in additional funds for 
Investigations. From these additional funds, the Corps of 
Engineers is authorized to begin up to 10 new feasibility 
studies. The Corps of Engineers is directed to allocate these 
additional funds in accordance with the direction in the front 
matter under the heading ``Fiscal Year 2016 Work Plan''. 
Additionally, the Corps of Engineers shall comply with the 
following direction in allocating funds made available for 
Investigations:
  --Allocating funds for PED and new feasibility studies shall 
        take priority over allocating funds for ongoing 
        feasibility studies.
  --The Corps of Engineers shall not apply new start criteria 
        to studies moving from the feasibility phase to the PED 
        phase.
  --The Corps of Engineers shall consider PED phase work as a 
        continuation of the investigations and by definition, a 
        study is not completed until PED is completed.
  --When evaluating proposals for new feasibility studies, the 
        Corps of Engineers should give higher priority to those 
        studies that have an identifiable sponsor with the 
        ability to provide any necessary cost share for the 
        study phase, and are regional in scope, have the 
        potential to provide greater national benefits; address 
        endangered species concerns; or provide protection to 
        large numbers of our citizens.
  --When evaluating ongoing studies to propose for funding, the 
        Corps of Engineers shall consider completing or 
        accelerating ongoing studies which will enhance the 
        Nation's economic development, job growth, and 
        international competitiveness; studies located in areas 
        that have suffered recent natural disasters; or studies 
        for areas where revisions to flood frequency flow lines 
        may result in existing infrastructure failing to meet 
        the requirements under the National Flood Insurance 
        Program.
  --The Corps of Engineers shall include appropriate requests 
        for funding in future budget submissions for PED and 
        new feasibility studies initiated in fiscal year 2016.
  --Funding shall be available for existing studies, including 
        studies in the PED phase, that were either not included 
        in the budget request or for which the recommendation 
        in the budget request was inadequate. Ongoing studies 
        that are actively progressing and can utilize the 
        funding in a timely manner are eligible for these 
        additional funds.
  --The Corps of Engineers, in future fiscal years, shall 
        prepare the budget to reflect study completions, 
        defined as completion of PED.

                              CONSTRUCTION

Appropriations, 2015....................................  $1,639,489,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................   1,172,000,000
House allowance.........................................   1,635,000,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,641,000,000

    The Committee recommends $1,641,000,000 for Construction, 
an increase of $469,000,000 from the budget request. The 
Committee's recommendation allows the Corps of Engineers to 
select up to 6 new construction starts to begin in fiscal year 
2016.

                              INTRODUCTION

    Funding in this account is used for construction, major 
rehabilitation, and related activities for water resources 
development projects having navigation, flood and storm damage 
reduction, water supply, hydroelectric, environmental 
restoration, and other attendant benefits to the Nation. Funds 
to be derived from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund will be 
applied to cover the Federal share of the Dredged Material 
Disposal Facilities Program.
    The Committee is concerned that the budget request is 
inadequate to meet the needs of projects that depend on funding 
from this account. Consequently, the recommendation includes 
$469,000,000 in additional funding for ongoing work.

                               NEW STARTS

    The Committee recommends up to 6 new construction starts, 
including the 4 proposed in the budget request.

                      INLAND WATERWAYS TRUST FUND

    The Committee recognizes the administration has not had 
adequate time to react to the Inland Waterways Trust Fund 
[IWTF] revenues that were expanded by the passage of the Able 
Act and expanded authority received in the Water Resources 
Reform and Development Act of 2014 [WRRDA]. Therefore, the 
Committee recommends an additional $108,600,000 for inland 
waterway projects to continue with construction on the priority 
projects as designated in the Inland Marine Transportation 
Systems [IMTS] Capital Projects Business Model Final Report, 
dated April 13, 2010. The Committee is aware that the Corps of 
Engineers is developing a new report describing a 20-year 
program for making capital investments on the inland and 
intracoastal waterways, pursuant to WRRDA section 2002(d). This 
report is due to be submitted to Congress in June 2015. The 
Committee requires an opportunity to review any new report 
prior to the Corps of Engineers incorporating any part of the 
report into funding decisions. Therefore, when allocating the 
fiscal year 2016 additional funding provided in the Remaining 
Items--Inland Waterways Trust Fund Projects account, the Corps 
of Engineers shall not use the report being developed pursuant 
to WRRDA. The Corps of Engineers shall continue to use, as 
appropriate, the IMTS report as the applicable 20-year plan.
    With the exception of the Olmsted Locks and Dam project on 
the Ohio River between Kentucky and Illinois [Olmsted project], 
the construction and major rehabilitation of designated 
projects for inland and coastal waterways derives one-half of 
the funding from the IWTF and one-half of the funding from the 
General Treasury. All funds are appropriated in the 
Construction account. The cost sharing for the Olmsted project 
has been modified from the traditional 50/50 cost share to 85 
percent from the General Treasury and 15 percent from the IWTF. 
The net effect of this change allows additional investments on 
other inland waterways projects that are cost shared with the 
IWTF. The Committee expects the administration to address these 
increased investment opportunities for the inland waterways 
system in future budget submissions.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The table below displays the budget request and Committee's 
recommendation for Construction:

                                        CORPS OF ENGINEERS--CONSTRUCTION
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Budget           House         Committee
                              Item                                   estimate        allowance    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             ALASKA
 
PORT LIONS HARBOR, AK (DEEPENING AND BREAKWATER)................           7,928  ..............           7,928
 
                           CALIFORNIA
 
AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED (FOLSOM DAM MODIFICATIONS), CA.........          56,024          56,024          56,024
AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED (FOLSOM DAM RAISE), CA.................          18,641          18,641          18,641
COYOTE & BERRYESSA CREEK, CA....................................          12,739  ..............          12,739
HAMILTON CITY, CA...............................................          15,000          15,000          15,000
ISABELLA LAKE, CA (DAM SAFETY)..................................          49,900          49,900          49,900
OAKLAND HARBOR (50 FOOT PROJECT), CA............................           1,200           1,200           1,200
SACRAMENTO RIVER BANK PROTECTION PROJECT, CA....................           6,000           6,000           6,000
SANTA ANA RIVER MAINSTEM, CA....................................          21,500          21,500          21,500
YUBA RIVER BASIN, CA............................................           7,361           7,361           7,361
 
                             FLORIDA
 
HERBERT HOOVER DIKE, FL (SEEPAGE CONTROL).......................          64,141          64,141          64,141
SOUTH FLORIDA ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, FL.........................         123,742         123,742         123,742
 
                             GEORGIA
 
RICHARD B RUSSELL DAM AND LAKE, GA & SC.........................             770             770             770
SAVANNAH HARBOR DISPOSAL AREAS, DREDGED MATERIAL CONTAINMENT               8,663           8,663           8,663
 AREA 13A, GA & SC (DMDF).......................................
SAVANNAH HARBOR EXPANSION, GA...................................          21,050          21,050          21,050
 
                            ILLINOIS
 
CALUMET HARBOR AND RIVER, IL & IN...............................           1,100           1,100           1,100
CHICAGO SANITARY AND SHIP CANAL DISPERSAL BARRIER, IL...........          28,000          28,000          28,000
EAST ST LOUIS, IL...............................................              50              50              50
MCCOOK AND THORNTON RESERVOIRS, IL..............................           9,000           9,000           9,000
MELVIN PRICE LOCK AND DAM, IL & MO..............................           2,000           2,000           2,000
OLMSTED LOCKS AND DAM, OHIO RIVER, IL & KY......................         180,000         180,000         180,000
UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER RESTORATION, IL, IA, MN, MO & WI........          19,787          19,787          19,787
WOOD RIVER LEVEE, DEFICIENCY CORRECTION, IL.....................              50              50              50
 
                              IOWA
 
MISSOURI RIVER FISH AND WILDLIFE RECOVERY, IA, KS, MO, MT, NE,            47,127          47,127          47,127
 ND & SD........................................................
 
                             KANSAS
 
TOPEKA, KS......................................................           7,000           7,000           7,000
 
                            KENTUCKY
 
OHIO RIVER SHORELINE, PADUCAH, KY...............................           5,500  ..............           5,500
 
                            LOUISIANA
 
LOUISIANA COASTAL AREA ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, LA................          10,000          10,000          10,000
 
                            MARYLAND
 
ASSATEAGUE ISLAND, MD...........................................             600             600             600
CHESAPEAKE BAY OYSTER RECOVERY, MD & VA.........................           1,970           1,970           1,970
POPLAR ISLAND, MD...............................................          26,500          26,500          26,500
 
                            MINNESOTA
 
MARSH LAKE, MN (MINNESOTA RIVER AUTHORITY)......................           2,700  ..............           2,700
 
                            MISSOURI
 
KANSAS CITYS, MO & KS...........................................           1,815           1,815           1,815
MISSISSIPPI RIVER BETWEEN THE OHIO AND MISSOURI RIVERS (REG                   50              50              50
 WORKS), MO & IL................................................
MONARCH--CHESTERFIELD, MO.......................................           1,275           1,275           1,275
 
                           NEW JERSEY
 
RARITAN RIVER BASIN, GREEN BROOK SUB-BASIN, NJ..................           7,500           7,500           7,500
 
                              OHIO
 
BOLIVAR DAM, OH (DAM SAFETY)....................................           3,500           3,500           3,500
 
                            OKLAHOMA
 
CANTON LAKE, OK.................................................           3,632           3,632           3,632
PINE CREEK LAKE, OK.............................................           1,957           1,957           1,957
 
                             OREGON
 
COLUMBIA RIVER AT THE MOUTH, OR & WA............................          11,000          11,000          11,000
LOWER COLUMBIA RIVER ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, OR & WA.............          13,300          13,300          13,300
 
                          PENNSYLVANIA
 
EAST BRANCH CLARION RIVER LAKE, PA..............................          59,000          59,000          59,000
LOCKS AND DAMS 2, 3 AND 4, MONONGAHELA RIVER, PA................          52,000          52,000          52,000
WYOMING VALLEY, PA (LEVEE RAISING)..............................           1,000           1,000           1,000
 
                           PUERTO RICO
 
RIO PUERTO NUEVO, PR............................................           1,700           1,700           1,700
 
                         SOUTH CAROLINA
 
CHARLESTON HARBOR, SC...........................................           2,893           2,893           2,893
 
                            TENNESSEE
 
CENTER HILL LAKE, TN............................................          30,000          30,000          30,000
 
                              TEXAS
 
BUFFALO BAYOU AND TRIBUTARIES, TX...............................          36,410          36,410          36,410
GIWW, CHOCOLATE BAYOU, TX.......................................          13,913          13,913          13,913
GREENS BAYOU, HOUSTON, TX.......................................          16,287          16,287          16,287
LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN (WHARTON/ONION), TX..................          10,000          10,000          10,000
 
                           WASHINGTON
 
COLUMBIA RIVER FISH MITIGATION, WA, OR & ID.....................          85,300          85,300          85,300
GRAYS HARBOR (38-FOOT DEEPENING), WA............................           7,000           7,000           7,000
 
                          WEST VIRGINIA
 
BLUESTONE LAKE, WV..............................................           9,400           9,400           9,400
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      SUBTOTAL, ITEMS UNDER STATES..............................       1,124,975       1,096,108       1,124,975
 
                         REMAINING ITEMS
 
ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR ONGOING WORK FLOOD AND STORM DAMAGE        ..............         136,117          60,000
 REDUCTION......................................................
    FLOOD CONTROL...............................................  ..............         105,000          50,000
    SHORE PROTECTION............................................  ..............          45,000  ..............
    NAVIGATION..................................................  ..............          49,500         112,305
    INLAND WATERWAYS TRUST FUND PROJECTS........................  ..............         108,000         108,600
    OTHER AUTHORIZED PROJECT PURPOSES...........................  ..............          10,000          25,000
    ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION OR COMPLIANCE.....................  ..............  ..............          40,000
    ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCURE PROJECTS........................  ..............          10,000          60,000
    HYDROPOWER PROJECTS.........................................  ..............  ..............  ..............
AQUATIC PLANT CONTROL PROGRAM...................................  ..............           4,000           4,000
 
     CONTINUING AUTHORITIES PROJECTS NOT REQUIRING SPECIFIC
 
LEGISLATION:
    EMERGENCY STREAMBANK AND SHORELINE PROTECTION (SECTION 14)..  ..............           3,000           1,000
    SHORE PROTECTION (SECTION 103)..............................  ..............           1,250  ..............
    NAVIGATION PROGRAM (SECTION 107)............................  ..............           2,500           5,000
    NAVIGATION MITIGATION PROJECT (SECTION 111).................  ..............             750             500
    BENEFICIAL USES OF DREDGED MATERIAL (SECTION 204, 207, 933).           2,000           2,750             500
    FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS (SECTION 205)........................             500           8,000             500
    AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION (SECTION 206).................             500           2,500          10,000
    PROJECT MODIFICATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT                 500           3,000           3,000
     (SECTION 1135).............................................
DAM SAFETY AND SEEPAGE/STABILITY CORRECTION PROGRAM.............          24,200          24,200          24,200
EMPLOYEES' COMPENSATION.........................................          19,000          19,000          19,000
INLAND WATERWAYS USERS BOARD--BOARD EXPENSE.....................              50              50              50
INLAND WATERWAYS USERS BOARD--CORPS EXPENSE.....................             275             275             275
RESTORATION OF ABANDONED MINES..................................  ..............  ..............           2,000
HOUSE FLOOR AMENDMENTS..........................................  ..............           4,000  ..............
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      SUBTOTAL, REMAINING ITEMS.................................          47,025         538,892         525,930
 
SAVINGS AND SLIPPAGE............................................  ..............  ..............          -9,905
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      TOTAL.....................................................       1,172,000       1,635,000       1,641,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal Dispersal Barrier, 
Illinois.--The issue of hydrologic separation should be fully 
studied by the Corps of Engineers and vetted by the appropriate 
congressional authorizing committees and specifically enacted 
into law. No funds provided in this act may be used for 
construction of hydrologic separation measures.
    Aquatic Plant Control Program.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $4,000,000 for this program, which is 
the only nationwide R&D; program to address invasive aquatic 
plants. The Committee urges the Corps of Engineers to continue 
to support cost shared aquatic plant management programs.
    Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge.--The Corps of 
Engineers has completed the final cabin sale at the Charles M. 
Russell National Wildlife Refuge. The Committee instructs the 
Secretary to reconcile all remaining funds in accordance with 
the Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge Enhancement Act 
of 2000. The Committee requests final accounting of the 
proceeds and administrative costs reimbursed to the Corps of 
Engineers under 808(b) within 1 year of enactment of this act.
    Continuing Authorities Program.--The Committee recommends 
$20,500,000 for the Continuing Authorities Program [CAP], an 
increase of $17,000,000 from the budget request. CAP is a 
useful tool for the Corps of Engineers to undertake small 
localized projects without being encumbered by the lengthy 
study and authorization phases typical of most Corps of 
Engineers projects. The standing CAP authorities are: flood 
control (section 205), emergency streambank and shoreline 
protection (section 14), beach erosion control (section 103), 
mitigation of shore damages (section 111), navigation projects 
(section 107), snagging and clearing (section 208), aquatic 
ecosystem restoration (section 206), beneficial uses of dredged 
material (section 204), and project modifications for 
improvement of the environment (section 1135). The Committee 
has chosen to fund seven of the nine sections rather than only 
the four sections proposed in the budget request. The Committee 
has not recommended funding for section 208, as these projects 
can be accommodated under the authority of section 205. The 
Committee has not recommended funding for section 103 because 
the Corps of Engineers is projecting an $8,000,000 carryover of 
unobligated balances from prior appropriations.
    The Committee urges the administration to execute the CAP 
program laid out by the Committee and include sufficient 
funding for this program in future budget requests. The Corps 
of Engineers shall continue the ongoing processes for 
initiating, suspending, and terminating projects. Suspended 
projects shall not be reactivated or funded unless the sponsor 
reaffirms in writing its support for the project and 
establishes its willingness and capability to execute its 
project responsibilities. The Chief of Engineers shall provide 
an annual report within 60 days of the end of each fiscal year 
detailing the progress made on the backlog of projects. The 
report shall include the completions and terminations as well 
as progress of ongoing work.
    Restoration of Abandoned Mines.--The Corps of Engineers is 
directed to continue working closely with Federal land 
management agencies, western States, and Tribes with abandoned 
non-coal mine sites to cost-effectively address the greatest 
number of those sites presenting threats to public health and 
safety.
    Public-Private Partnerships.--The Committee notes that the 
Secretary and the Chief of Engineers expressed strong support 
for a public-private partnerships [Partnership] as a method to 
reduce the Federal cost of future construction projects. The 
acronyms P3, P4, etcetera are interchangeable and represent the 
number of public and/or private entities that comprise the 
Partnership. The Committee believes the Corps of Engineers 
should demonstrate the value of projects that use a Partnership 
model and directs that, of the six new construction starts, at 
least one shall be either a navigation or flood risk management 
project that utilizes such a Partnership. The Committee further 
directs that the selected Partnership project should have a 
Chief's Report showing a benefit-cost ratio greater than one 
for the Federal investment only, but shall not be subject to 
any other restrictions applicable to traditional construction 
new starts to ensure that multiple projects qualify for 
selection as a Partnership project.
    Reimbursements.--The Committee directs the Secretary to 
prioritize the Corps of Engineers' reimbursement obligations 
based on projects with signed project cooperation agreements. 
The Secretary shall demonstrate plans for the additional 
funding provided by Congress to meet the project cooperation 
agreement and Federal Government's fiscal responsibilities.
    Metro East Saint Louis, Illinois.--This levee 
rehabilitation project will help protect communities in the 
Metro East region from rising waters on the Mississippi River. 
The non-Federal sponsors remain very interested in continuing 
implementation of the project, have raised sufficient cost 
share, and should be given heightened cooperation by the Corps 
of Engineers. The Committee urges the Corps of Engineers to 
enter a cost share agreement with the non-Federal sponsors.
    Melvin Price Lock and Dam, Illinois and Missouri.--The 
length of time it is taking the Corps of Engineers to rectify 
the seepage problems that the impoundment of the navigation 
pool is causing to the Wood River Levee, as well as escalating 
cost estimates, continues to be troublesome. The Corps of 
Engineers is encouraged to ensure that the Independent External 
Peer Review and oversight of this project continues and is 
conducted in a manner that will not lengthen an already long 
schedule.
    Additional Funding for Ongoing Work.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $469,000,000 in additional funds for 
Construction. The Corps of Engineers is directed to allocate 
these additional funds in accordance with the direction in the 
front matter under the heading ``Fiscal Year 2016 Work Plan''. 
Additionally, the Corps of Engineers shall comply with the 
following direction in allocating funds made available for 
Construction:
  --Additional considerations include whether the project is 
        positioned to permit award of significant items of 
        construction, achieve necessary milestones, or 
        otherwise realize notable construction progress in 
        fiscal year 2016; and the project sponsor expended 
        funds under an existing Project Partnership Agreement 
        for creditable work, including acquisition of rights-
        of-way.
  --None of these funds shall be used for projects in the 
        Continuing Authorities Program.
  --Funding may be for all categories including periodic beach 
        renourishments and reimbursements.
  --Funding may be made available to projects for which the 
        sponsor is awaiting reimbursement from the Federal 
        Government to continue with construction of remaining 
        authorized project features.
    In prioritizing projects for environmental infrastructure 
assistance, the Committee recognizes that these authorities 
were originally created to assist communities that were unable 
to compete well in the Statewide revolving fund authorities 
under the jurisdiction of the Environmental Protection Agency. 
While the Committee believes it is appropriate to prioritize 
those projects with the greater economic impact, it recognizes 
that such rigid criteria may exclude rural underserved 
communities with greater needs and projects located in towns, 
cities, and municipalities experiencing compliance difficulties 
with Federal environmental regulations. When allocating these 
funds, the Committee encourages the Corps of Engineers to 
consider counties or parishes where the average family income 
is below the national poverty level.

                   MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES

Appropriations, 2015....................................    $302,000,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................     225,000,000
House allowance.........................................     275,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     330,000,000

    The Committee recommends $330,000,000 for Mississippi River 
and Tributaries, an increase of $105,000,000 over the budget 
request. Funds recommended in this account are for planning, 
construction, and operations and maintenance activities 
associated with water resource projects located in the lower 
Mississippi River Valley from Cape Girardeau, Missouri to the 
Gulf of Mexico.
    The table below displays the budget request and Committee's 
recommendation:

                                        MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                         Senate Committee
                                                                                   recommendation  compared with
                                      Budget           House         Committee               (+ or -)
              Item                   estimate        allowance    recommendation -------------------------------
                                                                                      Budget           House
                                                                                     estimate        allowance
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          CONSTRUCTION
 
CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT, AR, IL, KY,          43,231          43,231          43,231  ..............  ..............
 LA, MS, MO & TN................
MISSISSIPPI RIVER LEVEES, AR,             15,909          15,909          15,909  ..............  ..............
 IL, KY, LA, MS, MO & TN........
ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, LA...........           2,709           2,709           2,709  ..............  ..............
ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, FLOODWAY                  758             758             758  ..............  ..............
 SYSTEM, LA.....................
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      SUBTOTAL, CONSTRUCTION....          62,607          62,607          62,607  ..............  ..............
 
    OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
 
CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT, AR, IL, KY,          65,124          65,124          65,124  ..............  ..............
 LA, MS, MO & TN................
HELENA HARBOR, PHILLIPS COUNTY,               15              15              15  ..............  ..............
 AR.............................
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS,               250             250             250  ..............  ..............
 AR.............................
LOWER ARKANSAS RIVER, NORTH                  294             294             294  ..............  ..............
 BANK, AR.......................
LOWER ARKANSAS RIVER, SOUTH                  198             198             198  ..............  ..............
 BANK, AR.......................
MISSISSIPPI RIVER LEVEES, AR,              9,175           9,175           9,175  ..............  ..............
 IL, KY, LA, MS, MO & TN........
ST FRANCIS BASIN, AR & MO.......           5,900           5,900           5,900  ..............  ..............
TENSAS BASIN, BOEUF AND TENSAS             2,589           2,589           2,589  ..............  ..............
 RIVERS, AR & LA................
WHITE RIVER BACKWATER, AR.......           1,000           1,000           1,000  ..............  ..............
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS,               170             170             170  ..............  ..............
 IL.............................
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS,               100             100             100  ..............  ..............
 KY.............................
ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, LA...........          12,085          12,085          12,085  ..............  ..............
ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, FLOODWAY                1,889           1,889           1,889  ..............  ..............
 SYSTEM, LA.....................
BATON ROUGE HARBOR, DEVIL SWAMP,              53              53              53  ..............  ..............
 LA.............................
BAYOU COCODRIE AND TRIBUTARIES,               48              48              48  ..............  ..............
 LA.............................
BONNET CARRE, LA................           2,909           2,909           2,909  ..............  ..............
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS,             1,399           1,399           1,399  ..............  ..............
 LA.............................
LOWER RED RIVER, SOUTH BANK                  498             498             498  ..............  ..............
 LEVEES, LA.....................
MISSISSIPPI DELTA REGION, LA....             567             567             567  ..............  ..............
OLD RIVER, LA...................           9,246           9,246           9,246  ..............  ..............
TENSAS BASIN, RED RIVER                    3,345           3,345           3,345  ..............  ..............
 BACKWATER, LA..................
GREENVILLE HARBOR, MS...........              24              24              24  ..............  ..............
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS,               130             130             130  ..............  ..............
 MS.............................
VICKSBURG HARBOR, MS............              42              42              42  ..............  ..............
YAZOO BASIN, ARKABUTLA LAKE, MS.           5,483           5,483           5,483  ..............  ..............
YAZOO BASIN, BIG SUNFLOWER                   185             185             185  ..............  ..............
 RIVER, MS......................
YAZOO BASIN, ENID LAKE, MS......           4,924           4,924           4,924  ..............  ..............
YAZOO BASIN, GREENWOOD, MS......             807             807             807  ..............  ..............
YAZOO BASIN, GRENADA LAKE, MS...           5,487           5,487           5,487  ..............  ..............
YAZOO BASIN, MAIN STEM, MS......           1,344           1,344           1,344  ..............  ..............
YAZOO BASIN, SARDIS LAKE, MS....           6,640           6,640           6,640  ..............  ..............
YAZOO BASIN, TRIBUTARIES, MS....             967             967             967  ..............  ..............
YAZOO BASIN, WILL M WHITTINGTON              384             384             384  ..............  ..............
 AUX CHAN, MS...................
YAZOO BASIN, YAZOO BACKWATER                 544             544             544  ..............  ..............
 AREA, MS.......................
YAZOO BASIN, YAZOO CITY, MS.....             731             731             731  ..............  ..............
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS,               220             220             220  ..............  ..............
 MO.............................
WAPPAPELLO LAKE, MO.............           4,512           4,512           4,512  ..............  ..............
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS,                80              80              80  ..............  ..............
 TN.............................
MEMPHIS HARBOR, MCKELLAR LAKE,             2,107           2,107           2,107  ..............  ..............
 TN.............................
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      SUBTOTAL, OPERATION AND            151,465         151,465         151,465  ..............  ..............
       MAINTENANCE..............
 
         REMAINING ITEMS
 
ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR ONGOING
 WORK:
    DREDGING....................  ..............           6,000          10,090         +10,090          +4,090
    FLOOD CONTROL...............  ..............          39,090          60,000         +60,000         +20,910
    WATER SUPPLY AND RELATED      ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
     AUTHORIZED PURPOSES........
    OTHER AUTHORIZED PURPOSES...  ..............           5,000          35,000         +35,000         +30,000
COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC              9,700           9,700           9,700  ..............  ..............
 DATA...........................
MAPPING.........................           1,138           1,138           1,138  ..............  ..............
MISSISSIPPI RIVER COMMISSION....              90  ..............  ..............             -90  ..............
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      SUBTOTAL, REMAINING ITEMS.          10,928          60,928         115,928        +105,000         +55,000
 
REDUCTION FOR SAVINGS AND         ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
 SLIPPAGE.......................
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, MISSISSIPPI RIVER           225,000         275,000         330,000        +105,000         +55,000
       AND TRIBUTARIES..........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee's recommendation includes not less than 
$1,000,000 for the competitive procurement of modern land 
surveying equipment for Corps of Engineers districts.
    Additional Funding for Ongoing Work--Flood Control.--Within 
the amounts available for flood control, the Committee 
recommendation provides not less than $25,000,000 for ongoing 
construction projects outside of the Lower Mississippi River 
main stem that were not included in the administration's 
request, and which provide benefits and value to the Nation.
    Additional Funding for Ongoing Work--Other Authorized 
Purposes.--Within the amounts available for other authorized 
purposes, the Committee recommendation provides not less than 
$3,000,000 for maintenance projects with recreational or 
environmental stewardship components. Funding associated with 
this category should be used to perform routine and non-routine 
operations and maintenance of facilities that are both 
recreational and educational, or to continue management of 
mitigation features in order to meet requirements set forth 
under the Corps of Engineers' plans.
    Additional Funding for Ongoing Work--Dredging.--In 
considering dredging projects for funding, the Corps of 
Engineers shall give priority to annual tonnage and the total 
work capability that can be completed in fiscal year 2016.

                       OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE

Appropriations, 2015....................................  $2,908,511,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................   2,710,000,000
House allowance.........................................   3,094,306,000
Committee recommendation................................   2,909,000,000

    The Committee recommends $2,909,000,000 for Operations and 
Maintenance, an increase of $199,000,000 over the budget 
request.

                              INTRODUCTION

    Funding in this account is used to fund operations, 
maintenance, and related activities at water resource projects 
that the Corps of Engineers operates and maintains. These 
activities include dredging, repair, and operation of 
structures and other facilities, as authorized in the various 
river and harbor, flood control, and water resources 
development acts. Related activities include aquatic plant 
control, monitoring of completed projects where appropriate, 
removal of sunken vessels, and the collection of domestic 
waterborne commerce statistics.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The table below displays the budget request and Committee's 
recommendation for Operations and Maintenance.

                                  CORPS OF ENGINEERS--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Budget           House         Committee
                              Item                                   estimate        allowance    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             ALABAMA
 
ALABAMA--COOSA COMPREHENSIVE WATER STUDY, AL....................             158             158             158
ALABAMA RIVER LAKES, AL.........................................          21,238          21,238          21,238
BLACK WARRIOR AND TOMBIGBEE RIVERS, AL..........................          43,295          43,295          43,295
GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, AL..................................           5,869           5,869           5,869
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AL...............................              65              65              65
MOBILE HARBOR, AL...............................................          23,230          23,230          23,230
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, AL...................................             148             148             148
TENNESSEE--TOMBIGBEE WATERWAY WILDLIFE MITIGATION, AL & MS......           1,700           1,700           1,700
TENNESSEE--TOMBIGBEE WATERWAY, AL & MS..........................          24,725          24,725          24,725
WALTER F GEORGE LOCK AND DAM, AL & GA...........................          10,644          10,644          10,644
WATER/ENVIRONMENTAL CERTIFICATION, AL...........................              25              25              25
 
                             ALASKA
 
ANCHORAGE HARBOR, AK............................................          11,904          11,904          11,904
CHENA RIVER LAKES, AK...........................................           3,615           3,615           3,615
CHIGNIK HARBOR, AK..............................................             400             400             400
DILLINGHAM HARBOR, AK...........................................           1,231           1,231           1,231
HOMER HARBOR, AK................................................             462             462             462
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AK...............................             180             180             180
KETCHIKAN, THOMAS BASIN, AK.....................................             334             334             334
LOWELL CREEK TUNNELL (SEWARD) AK................................           2,286           2,286           2,286
NINILCHIK HARBOR, AK............................................             345             345             345
NOME HARBOR, AK.................................................           1,550           1,550           1,550
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, AK...................................             700             700             700
ST. PAUL HARBOR, AK.............................................           4,000           4,000           4,000
 
                             ARIZONA
 
ALAMO LAKE, AZ..................................................           1,472           1,472           1,472
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AZ...............................              71              71              71
PAINTED ROCK DAM, AZ............................................           1,024           1,024           1,024
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, AZ.............................             133             133             133
WHITLOW RANCH DAM, AZ...........................................             367             367             367
 
                            ARKANSAS
 
BEAVER LAKE, AR.................................................           7,632           7,632           7,632
BLAKELY MT DAM, LAKE OUACHITA, AR...............................           7,513           7,513           7,513
BLUE MOUNTAIN LAKE, AR..........................................           2,496           2,496           2,496
BULL SHOALS LAKE, AR............................................           9,646           9,646           9,646
DARDANELLE LOCK AND DAM, AR.....................................           8,183           8,183           8,183
DEGRAY LAKE, AR.................................................           6,121           6,121           6,121
DEQUEEN LAKE, AR................................................           1,754           1,754           1,754
DIERKS LAKE, AR.................................................           1,702           1,702           1,702
GILLHAM LAKE, AR................................................           1,519           1,519           1,519
GREERS FERRY LAKE, AR...........................................           9,474           9,474           9,474
HELENA HARBOR, PHILLIPS COUNTY, AR..............................              15              15              15
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AR...............................             538             538             538
MCCLELLAN-KERR ARKANSAS RIVER NAVIGATION SYSTEM, AR.............          30,554          30,554          30,554
MILLWOOD LAKE, AR...............................................           2,946           2,946           2,946
NARROWS DAM, LAKE GREESON, AR...................................           8,975           8,975           8,975
NIMROD LAKE, AR.................................................           2,520           2,520           2,520
NORFORK LAKE, AR................................................           5,172           5,172           5,172
OSCEOLA HARBOR, AR..............................................              15              15              15
OUACHITA AND BLACK RIVERS, AR & LA..............................           8,076           8,076           8,076
OZARK--JETA TAYLOR LOCK AND DAM, AR.............................           6,611           6,611           6,611
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, AR...................................               2               2               2
WHITE RIVER, AR.................................................              25              25              25
YELLOW BEND PORT, AR............................................               3               3               3
 
                           CALIFORNIA
 
BLACK BUTTE LAKE, CA............................................           2,777           2,777           2,777
BUCHANAN DAM, HV EASTMAN LAKE, CA...............................           2,001           2,001           2,001
COYOTE VALLEY DAM, LAKE MENDOCINO, CA...........................           4,001           4,001           4,001
DRY CREEK (WARM SPRINGS) LAKE AND CHANNEL, CA...................           6,411           6,411           6,411
FARMINGTON DAM, CA..............................................             431             431             431
HIDDEN DAM, HENSLEY LAKE, CA....................................           2,180           2,180           2,180
HUMBOLDT HARBOR AND BAY, CA.....................................           3,106           3,106           3,106
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, CA...............................           4,198           4,198           4,198
ISABELLA LAKE, CA...............................................           1,550           1,550           1,550
LOS ANGELES COUNTY DRAINAGE AREA, CA............................           7,327           7,327           7,327
MARINA DEL REY, CA..............................................           3,846           3,846           3,846
MERCED COUNTY STREAMS, CA.......................................             387             387             387
MOJAVE RIVER DAM, CA............................................             389             389             389
MORRO BAY HARBOR, CA............................................           3,070           3,070           3,070
NEW HOGAN LAKE, CA..............................................           2,993           2,993           2,993
NEW MELONES LAKE, DOWNSTREAM CHANNEL, CA........................           1,998           1,998           1,998
NOYO RIVER AND HARBOR, CA.......................................           2,365           2,365           2,365
OAKLAND HARBOR, CA..............................................          15,000          15,000          15,000
OCEANSIDE HARBOR, CA............................................           2,285           2,285           2,285
PINE FLAT LAKE, CA..............................................           3,409           3,409           3,409
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, CA...................................           1,794           1,794           1,794
REDWOOD CITY HARBOR, CA.........................................           4,500           4,500           4,500
RICHMOND HARBOR, CA.............................................          12,243          12,243          12,243
SACRAMENTO RIVER (30 FOOT PROJECT), CA..........................           1,100           1,100           1,100
SACRAMENTO RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES (DEBRIS CONTROL), CA...........           2,042           2,042           2,042
SACRAMENTO RIVER SHALLOW DRAFT CHANNEL, CA......................             160             160             160
SAN FRANCISCO BAY DELTA MODEL STRUCTURE, CA.....................           1,001           1,001           1,001
SAN FRANCISCO BAY LONG TERM MANAGEMENT STRATEGY, CA.............             500             500             500
SAN FRANCISCO HARBOR AND BAY, CA (DRIFT REMOVAL)................           4,240           4,240           4,240
SAN FRANCISCO HARBOR, CA........................................           3,220           3,220           3,220
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER, PORT OF STOCKTON, CA.........................           4,442           4,442           4,442
SAN PABLO BAY AND MARE ISLAND STRAIT, CA........................           1,180           1,180           1,180
SANTA ANA RIVER BASIN, CA.......................................           4,521           4,521           4,521
SANTA BARBARA HARBOR, CA........................................           2,760           2,760           2,760
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, CA.............................           1,310           1,310           1,310
SUCCESS LAKE, CA................................................           2,423           2,423           2,423
SUISUN BAY CHANNEL, CA..........................................           3,250           3,250           3,250
TERMINUS DAM, LAKE KAWEAH, CA (DAM SAFETY)......................           2,212           2,212           2,212
VENTURA HARBOR, CA..............................................           4,830           4,830           4,830
YUBA RIVER, CA..................................................           1,450           1,450           1,450
 
                            COLORADO
 
BEAR CREEK LAKE, CO.............................................             883             883             883
CHATFIELD LAKE, CO..............................................           1,919           1,919           1,919
CHERRY CREEK LAKE, CO...........................................           1,677           1,677           1,677
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, CO...............................             364             364             364
JOHN MARTIN RESERVOIR, CO.......................................           2,865           2,865           2,865
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, CO.............................             529             529             529
TRINIDAD LAKE, CO...............................................           1,449           1,449           1,449
 
                           CONNECTICUT
 
BLACK ROCK LAKE, CT.............................................             603             603             603
COLEBROOK RIVER LAKE, CT........................................             708             708             708
HANCOCK BROOK LAKE, CT..........................................             686             686             686
HOP BROOK LAKE, CT..............................................           1,113           1,113           1,113
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, CT..............              10              10              10
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, CT...............................             260             260             260
MANSFIELD HOLLOW LAKE, CT.......................................             647             647             647
NORTHFIELD BROOK LAKE, CT.......................................             743             743             743
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, CT...................................             850             850             850
STAMFORD HURRICANE BARRIER, CT..................................             566             566             566
THOMASTON DAM, CT...............................................           1,026           1,026           1,026
WEST THOMPSON LAKE, CT..........................................           1,753           1,753           1,753
 
                            DELAWARE
 
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, DE...............................              40              40              40
INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, DELAWARE RIVER TO CHESAPEAKE BAY, DE & MD          13,429          13,429          13,429
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, DE...................................             200             200             200
WILMINGTON HARBOR, DE...........................................           3,845           3,845           3,845
 
                      DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
 
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, DC...............................             142             142             142
POTOMAC AND ANACOSTIA RIVERS, DC (DRIFT REMOVAL)................             875             875             875
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, DC...................................              25              25              25
WASHINGTON HARBOR, DC...........................................              25              25              25
 
                             FLORIDA
 
CANAVERAL HARBOR, FL............................................           4,430           4,430           4,430
CENTRAL AND SOUTHERN FLORIDA, FL................................          14,683          14,683          14,683
ESCAMBIA AND CONECUH RIVERS, FL & AL............................           1,123           1,123           1,123
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, FL...............................           1,450           1,450           1,450
INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, JACKSONVILLE TO MIAMI, FL................             700             700             700
JACKSONVILLE HARBOR, FL.........................................           6,100           6,100           6,100
JIM WOODRUFF LOCK AND DAM, LAKE SEMINOLE, FL, AL & GA...........           7,269           7,269           7,269
MANATEE HARBOR, FL..............................................             400             400             400
MIAMI HARBOR, FL................................................             250             250             250
OKEECHOBEE WATERWAY, FL.........................................           2,750           2,750           2,750
PALM BEACH HARBOR, FL...........................................           3,200           3,200           3,200
PENSACOLA HARBOR, FL............................................           1,840           1,840           1,840
PORT EVERGLADES HARBOR, FL......................................             300             300             300
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, FL...................................           1,425           1,425           1,425
REMOVAL OF AQUATIC GROWTH, FL...................................           3,200           3,200           3,200
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, FL.............................              33              33              33
SOUTH FLORIDA ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, FL.........................           7,181           7,181           7,181
TAMPA HARBOR, FL................................................           9,500           9,500           9,500
WATER / ENVIRONMENTAL CERTIFICATION, FL.........................              40              40              40
 
                             GEORGIA
 
ALLATOONA LAKE, GA..............................................           7,406           7,406           7,406
APALACHICOLA, CHATTAHOOCHEE AND FLINT RIVERS, GA, AL & FL.......           1,525           1,525           1,525
ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, GA..............................             176             176             176
BRUNSWICK HARBOR, GA............................................           5,808           5,808           5,808
BUFORD DAM AND LAKE SIDNEY LANIER, GA...........................          12,141          12,141          12,141
CARTERS DAM AND LAKE, GA........................................           7,584           7,584           7,584
HARTWELL LAKE, GA & SC..........................................          11,175          11,175          11,175
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, GA..............              12              12              12
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, GA...............................             190             190             190
J STROM THURMOND LAKE, GA & SC..................................           9,887           9,887           9,887
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, GA...................................             125             125             125
RICHARD B RUSSELL DAM AND LAKE, GA & SC.........................           8,065           8,065           8,065
SAVANNAH HARBOR, GA.............................................          17,321          17,321          17,321
SAVANNAH RIVER BELOW AUGUSTA, GA................................             105             105             105
WEST POINT DAM AND LAKE, GA & AL................................           7,000           7,000           7,000
 
                             HAWAII
 
BARBERS POINT HARBOR, HI........................................             317             317             317
HONOLULU HARBOR, HI.............................................           5,600           5,600           5,600
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, HI...............................             725             725             725
KIKIAOLA SMALL BOAT HARBOR, KAUAI, HI...........................           5,000           5,000           5,000
PORT ALLEN HARBOR, KAUAI, HI....................................             773             773             773
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, HI...................................             798             798             798
 
                              IDAHO
 
ALBENI FALLS DAM, ID............................................           1,337           1,337           1,337
DWORSHAK DAM AND RESERVOIR, ID..................................           2,983           2,983           2,983
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, ID...............................             377             377             377
LUCKY PEAK LAKE, ID.............................................           2,806           2,806           2,806
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, ID.............................             623             623             623
 
                            ILLINOIS
 
CALUMET HARBOR AND RIVER, IL & IN...............................           4,506           4,506           4,506
CARLYLE LAKE, IL................................................           5,837           5,837           5,837
CHICAGO HARBOR, IL..............................................           3,735           3,735           3,735
CHICAGO RIVER, IL...............................................             560             560             560
FARM CREEK RESERVOIRS, IL.......................................             296             296             296
ILLINOIS WATERWAY (MVR PORTION), IL & IN........................          48,709          48,709          48,709
ILLINOIS WATERWAY (MVS PORTION), IL & IN........................           1,826           1,826           1,826
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, IL..............              50              50              50
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IL...............................           2,393           2,393           2,393
KASKASKIA RIVER NAVIGATION, IL..................................           3,648           3,648           3,648
LAKE MICHIGAN DIVERSION, IL.....................................             784             784             784
LAKE SHELBYVILLE, IL............................................           6,208           6,208           6,208
MISSISSIPPI RIVER BETWEEN MISSOURI RIVER AND MINNEAPOLIS (MVR             82,208          82,208          82,208
 PORTION), IL...................................................
MISSISSIPPI RIVER BETWEEN MISSOURI RIVER AND MINNEAPOLIS (MVS             22,226          22,226          22,226
 PORTION), IL...................................................
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, IL...................................             104             104             104
REND LAKE, IL...................................................           5,606           5,606           5,606
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, IL....................             741             741             741
WAUKEGAN HARBOR, IL.............................................           1,439           1,439           1,439
 
                             INDIANA
 
BROOKVILLE LAKE, IN.............................................           1,128           1,128           1,128
BURNS WATERWAY HARBOR, IN.......................................           1,852           1,852           1,852
CAGLES MILL LAKE, IN............................................           1,628           1,628           1,628
CECIL M HARDEN LAKE, IN.........................................           1,656           1,656           1,656
INDIANA HARBOR, IN..............................................          11,339          11,339          11,339
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IN...............................           1,124           1,124           1,124
J EDWARD ROUSH LAKE, IN.........................................           1,950           1,950           1,950
MISSISSINEWA LAKE, IN...........................................           1,235           1,235           1,235
MONROE LAKE, IN.................................................           1,226           1,226           1,226
PATOKA LAKE, IN.................................................           1,222           1,222           1,222
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, IN...................................             185             185             185
SALAMONIE LAKE, IN..............................................           1,154           1,154           1,154
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, IN....................             141             141             141
 
                              IOWA
 
CORALVILLE LAKE, IA.............................................           4,204           4,204           4,204
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IA...............................             762             762             762
MISSOURI RIVER--SIOUX CITY TO THE MOUTH, IA, KS, MO & NE........           9,143           9,143           9,143
MISSOURI RIVER FISH AND WILDLIFE RECOVERY, IA, KS, MO, MT, NE,             5,436           5,436           5,436
 ND & SD........................................................
RATHBUN LAKE, IA................................................           2,913           2,913           2,913
RED ROCK DAM AND LAKE RED ROCK, IA..............................           4,725           4,725           4,725
SAYLORVILLE LAKE, IA............................................           5,266           5,266           5,266
 
                             KANSAS
 
CLINTON LAKE, KS................................................           2,441           2,441           2,441
COUNCIL GROVE LAKE, KS..........................................           1,502           1,502           1,502
EL DORADO LAKE, KS..............................................           2,701           2,701           2,701
ELK CITY LAKE, KS...............................................             951             951             951
FALL RIVER LAKE, KS.............................................           1,136           1,136           1,136
HILLSDALE LAKE, KS..............................................             976             976             976
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, KS...............................             944             944             944
JOHN REDMOND DAM AND RESERVOIR, KS..............................           1,549           1,549           1,549
KANOPOLIS LAKE, KS..............................................           2,915           2,915           2,915
MARION LAKE, KS.................................................           3,207           3,207           3,207
MELVERN LAKE, KS................................................           2,444           2,444           2,444
MILFORD LAKE, KS................................................           2,376           2,376           2,376
PEARSON--SKUBITZ BIG HILL LAKE, KS..............................           1,552           1,552           1,552
PERRY LAKE, KS..................................................           2,485           2,485           2,485
POMONA LAKE, KS.................................................           2,259           2,259           2,259
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, KS.............................             290             290             290
TORONTO LAKE, KS................................................             724             724             724
TUTTLE CREEK LAKE, KS...........................................           3,142           3,142           3,142
WILSON LAKE, KS.................................................           1,911           1,911           1,911
 
                            KENTUCKY
 
BARKLEY DAM AND LAKE BARKLEY, KY & TN...........................          11,554          11,554          11,554
BARREN RIVER LAKE, KY...........................................           2,993           2,993           2,993
BIG SANDY HARBOR, KY............................................           1,904           1,904           1,904
BUCKHORN LAKE, KY...............................................           1,725           1,725           1,725
CARR CREEK LAKE, KY.............................................           1,969           1,969           1,969
CAVE RUN LAKE, KY...............................................           1,038           1,038           1,038
DEWEY LAKE, KY..................................................           1,853           1,853           1,853
ELVIS STAHR (HICKMAN) HARBOR, KY................................              15              15              15
FALLS OF THE OHIO NATIONAL WILDLIFE, KY & IN....................              19              19              19
FISHTRAP LAKE, KY...............................................           2,075           2,075           2,075
GRAYSON LAKE, KY................................................           1,526           1,526           1,526
GREEN AND BARREN RIVERS, KY.....................................           2,139           2,139           2,139
GREEN RIVER LAKE, KY............................................           2,709           2,709           2,709
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, KY...............................             975             975             975
KENTUCKY RIVER, KY..............................................              10              10              10
LAUREL RIVER LAKE, KY...........................................           2,042           2,042           2,042
MARTINS FORK LAKE, KY...........................................           1,091           1,091           1,091
MIDDLESBORO CUMBERLAND RIVER BASIN, KY..........................             264             264             264
NOLIN LAKE, KY..................................................           2,743           2,743           2,743
OHIO RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS, KY, IL, IN & OH......................          31,219          31,219          31,219
OHIO RIVER OPEN CHANNEL WORK, KY, IL, IN, OH, PA & WV...........           5,600           5,600           5,600
PAINTSVILLE LAKE, KY............................................           1,430           1,430           1,430
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, KY...................................               2               2               2
ROUGH RIVER LAKE, KY............................................           2,826           2,826           2,826
TAYLORSVILLE LAKE, KY...........................................           1,444           1,444           1,444
WOLF CREEK DAM, LAKE CUMBERLAND, KY.............................           9,189           9,189           9,189
YATESVILLE LAKE, KY.............................................           1,215           1,215           1,215
 
                            LOUISIANA
 
ATCHAFALAYA RIVER AND BAYOUS CHENE, BOEUF & BLACK, LA...........           7,051           7,051           7,051
BARATARIA BAY WATERWAY, LA......................................             108             108             108
BAYOU BODCAU RESERVOIR, LA......................................           1,221           1,221           1,221
BAYOU LAFOURCHE AND LAFOURCHE JUMP WATERWAY, LA.................             956             956             956
BAYOU PIERRE, LA................................................              23              23              23
BAYOU SEGNETTE WATERWAY, LA.....................................              15              15              15
BAYOU TECHE AND VERMILION RIVER, LA.............................               5               5               5
BAYOU TECHE, LA.................................................              72              72              72
CADDO LAKE, LA..................................................             209             209             209
CALCASIEU RIVER AND PASS, LA....................................          20,386          20,386          20,386
FRESHWATER BAYOU, LA............................................           1,547           1,547           1,547
GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, LA..................................          19,681          19,681          19,681
HOUMA NAVIGATION CANAL, LA......................................           1,276           1,276           1,276
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, LA...............................             961             961             961
J BENNETT JOHNSTON WATERWAY, LA.................................           8,782           8,782           8,782
LAKE PROVIDENCE HARBOR, LA......................................              14              14              14
MADISON PARISH PORT, LA.........................................               4               4               4
MERMENTAU RIVER, LA.............................................           1,374           1,374           1,374
MISSISSIPPI RIVER OUTLETS AT VENICE, LA.........................           1,575           1,575           1,575
MISSISSIPPI RIVER, BATON ROUGE TO THE GULF OF MEXICO, LA........          85,866          85,866          85,866
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, LA...................................              49              49              49
REMOVAL OF AQUATIC GROWTH, LA...................................             384             384             384
WALLACE LAKE, LA................................................             226             226             226
WATERWAY FROM EMPIRE TO THE GULF, LA............................               6               6               6
WATERWAY FROM INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY TO BAYOU DULAC, LA..........              15              15              15
 
                              MAINE
 
DISPOSAL AREA MONITORING, ME....................................           1,050           1,050           1,050
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, ME..............               5               5               5
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, ME...............................             111             111             111
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, ME...................................           1,100           1,100           1,100
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, ME....................              25              25              25
 
                            MARYLAND
 
BALTIMORE HARBOR AND CHANNELS (50 FOOT), MD.....................          18,925          18,925          18,925
BALTIMORE HARBOR, MD (DRIFT REMOVAL)............................             325             325             325
CUMBERLAND, MD AND RIDGELEY, WV.................................             150             150             150
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MD...............................             162             162             162
JENNINGS RANDOLPH LAKE, MD & WV.................................           1,905           1,905           1,905
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MD...................................             450             450             450
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, MD.............................              61              61              61
WICOMICO RIVER, MD..............................................           1,500           1,500           1,500
 
                          MASSACHUSETTS
 
BARRE FALLS DAM, MA.............................................             718             718             718
BIRCH HILL DAM, MA..............................................             933             933             933
BUFFUMVILLE LAKE, MA............................................             609             609             609
CAPE COD CANAL, MA..............................................           9,665           9,665           9,665
CHARLES RIVER NATURAL VALLEY STORAGE AREA, MA...................             388             388             388
CONANT BROOK LAKE, MA...........................................             609             609             609
EAST BRIMFIELD LAKE, MA.........................................             772             772             772
HODGES VILLAGE DAM, MA..........................................             620             620             620
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, MA..............              20              20              20
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MA...............................             331             331             331
KNIGHTVILLE DAM, MA.............................................             841             841             841
LITTLEVILLE LAKE, MA............................................             790             790             790
NEW BEDFORD FAIRHAVEN AND ACUSHNET HURRICANE BARRIER, MA........             806             806             806
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MA...................................             900             900             900
TULLY LAKE, MA..................................................             721             721             721
WEST HILL DAM, MA...............................................             831             831             831
WESTVILLE LAKE, MA..............................................             603             603             603
WEYMOUTH-FORE RIVER, MA.........................................             500             500             500
 
                            MICHIGAN
 
CHANNELS IN LAKE ST CLAIR, MI...................................             180             180             180
DETROIT RIVER, MI...............................................           5,475           5,475           5,475
GRAND HAVEN HARBOR, MI..........................................           1,015           1,015           1,015
HOLLAND HARBOR, MI..............................................             750             750             750
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MI...............................             210             210             210
KEWEENAW WATERWAY, MI...........................................              28              28              28
LUDINGTON HARBOR, MI............................................             590             590             590
MANISTEE HARBOR, MI.............................................             650             650             650
MUSKEGON HARBOR, MI.............................................           1,400           1,400           1,400
ONTONAGON HARBOR, MI............................................             850             850             850
PRESQUE ISLE HARBOR, MI.........................................             596             596             596
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MI...................................             710             710             710
ROUGE RIVER, MI.................................................             900             900             900
SAGINAW RIVER, MI...............................................           2,775           2,775           2,775
SEBEWAING RIVER, MI.............................................              40              40              40
ST CLAIR RIVER, MI..............................................             665             665             665
ST JOSEPH HARBOR, MI............................................           1,590           1,590           1,590
ST MARYS RIVER, MI..............................................          31,160          31,160          31,160
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, MI....................           2,788           2,788           2,788
 
                            MINNESOTA
 
BIGSTONE LAKE--WHETSTONE RIVER, MN & SD.........................             257             257             257
DULUTH--SUPERIOR HARBOR, MN & WI................................           6,641           6,641           6,641
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MN...............................             332             332             332
LAC QUI PARLE LAKES, MINNESOTA RIVER, MN........................           1,805           1,805           1,805
MINNESOTA RIVER, MN.............................................             262             262             262
MISSISSIPPI RIVER BETWEEN MISSOURI RIVER AND MINNEAPOLIS (MVP             58,644          58,644          58,644
 PORTION), MN...................................................
ORWELL LAKE, MN.................................................             468             468             468
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MN...................................              88              88              88
RED LAKE RESERVOIR, MN..........................................             184             184             184
RESERVOIRS AT HEADWATERS OF MISSISSIPPI RIVER, MN...............           4,240           4,240           4,240
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, MN....................             490             490             490
TWO HARBORS, MN.................................................           1,000           1,000           1,000
 
                           MISSISSIPPI
 
CLAIBORNE COUNTY PORT, MS.......................................               1               1               1
EAST FORK, TOMBIGBEE RIVER, MS..................................             285             285             285
GULFPORT HARBOR, MS.............................................           4,492           4,492           4,492
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MS...............................              92              92              92
MOUTH OF YAZOO RIVER, MS........................................              34              34              34
OKATIBBEE LAKE, MS..............................................           1,569           1,569           1,569
PASCAGOULA HARBOR, MS...........................................           7,055           7,055           7,055
PEARL RIVER, MS & LA............................................             150             150             150
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MS...................................             150             150             150
ROSEDALE HARBOR, MS.............................................               9               9               9
WATER/ENVIRONMENTAL CERTIFICATION, MS...........................              15              15              15
YAZOO RIVER, MS.................................................              21              21              21
 
                            MISSOURI
 
CARUTHERSVILLE HARBOR, MO.......................................              15              15              15
CLARENCE CANNON DAM AND MARK TWAIN LAKE, MO.....................           8,813           8,813           8,813
CLEARWATER LAKE, MO.............................................           3,353           3,353           3,353
HARRY S TRUMAN DAM AND RESERVOIR, MO............................           9,698           9,698           9,698
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MO...............................           1,401           1,401           1,401
LITTLE BLUE RIVER LAKES, MO.....................................             950             950             950
LONG BRANCH LAKE, MO............................................             882             882             882
MISSISSIPPI RIVER BETWEEN THE OHIO AND MISSOURI RIVERS (REG               24,487          24,487          24,487
 WORKS), MO & IL................................................
NEW MADRID COUNTY HARBOR, MO....................................              10              10              10
NEW MADRID HARBOR, MO (MILE 889)................................              15              15              15
POMME DE TERRE LAKE, MO.........................................           2,739           2,739           2,739
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MO...................................               2               2               2
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, MO.............................              90              90              90
SMITHVILLE LAKE, MO.............................................           1,620           1,620           1,620
SOUTHEAST MISSOURI PORT, MISSISSIPPI RIVER, MO..................               1               1               1
STOCKTON LAKE, MO...............................................           4,960           4,960           4,960
TABLE ROCK LAKE, MO & AR........................................           9,352           9,352           9,352
 
                             MONTANA
 
FT PECK DAM AND LAKE, MT........................................           5,271           5,271           5,271
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MT...............................             206             206             206
LIBBY DAM, MT...................................................           2,088           2,088           2,088
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, MT.............................             125             125             125
 
                            NEBRASKA
 
GAVINS POINT DAM, LEWIS AND CLARK LAKE, NE & SD.................           9,726           9,726           9,726
HARLAN COUNTY LAKE, NE..........................................           3,742           3,742           3,742
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NE...............................             505             505             505
MISSOURI RIVER--KENSLERS BEND, NE TO SIOUX CITY, IA.............              90              90              90
PAPILLION CREEK, NE.............................................             989             989             989
SALT CREEKS AND TRIBUTARIES, NE.................................           1,089           1,089           1,089
 
                             NEVADA
 
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NV...............................              75              75              75
MARTIS CREEK LAKE, NV & CA......................................           1,163           1,163           1,163
PINE AND MATHEWS CANYONS LAKES, NV..............................             353             353             353
 
                          NEW HAMPSHIRE
 
BLACKWATER DAM, NH..............................................             674             674             674
EDWARD MACDOWELL LAKE, NH.......................................             863             863             863
FRANKLIN FALLS DAM, NH..........................................           1,007           1,007           1,007
HOPKINTON--EVERETT LAKES, NH....................................           1,348           1,348           1,348
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NH...............................              76              76              76
OTTER BROOK LAKE, NH............................................             740             740             740
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NH...................................             250             250             250
SURRY MOUNTAIN LAKE, NH.........................................           1,139           1,139           1,139
 
                           NEW JERSEY
 
BARNEGAT INLET, NJ..............................................             425             425             425
COLD SPRING INLET, NJ...........................................             375             375             375
DELAWARE RIVER AT CAMDEN, NJ....................................              15              15              15
DELAWARE RIVER, PHILADELPHIA TO THE SEA, NJ, PA & DE............          23,305          23,305          23,305
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NJ...............................             285             285             285
MANASQUAN RIVER, NJ.............................................             420             420             420
NEW JERSEY INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, NJ............................             260             260             260
NEWARK BAY, HACKENSACK AND PASSAIC RIVERS, NJ...................             300             300             300
PASSAIC RIVER FLOOD WARNING SYSTEMS, NJ.........................             605             605             605
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NJ...................................           1,893           1,893           1,893
RARITAN RIVER TO ARTHUR KILL CUT-OFF, NJ........................             150             150             150
RARITAN RIVER, NJ...............................................             150             150             150
SHARK RIVER, NJ.................................................             460             460             460
 
                           NEW MEXICO
 
ABIQUIU DAM, NM.................................................           3,357           3,357           3,357
COCHITI LAKE, NM................................................           3,172           3,172           3,172
CONCHAS LAKE, NM................................................           2,616           2,616           2,616
GALISTEO DAM, NM................................................             762             762             762
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, NM..............              20              20              20
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NM...............................             650             650             650
JEMEZ CANYON DAM, NM............................................           1,047           1,047           1,047
MIDDLE RIO GRANDE ENDANGERED SPECIES COLLABORATIVE PROGRAM, NM..           2,500           2,500           2,500
SANTA ROSA DAM AND LAKE, NM.....................................           1,894           1,894           1,894
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, NM.............................             330             330             330
TWO RIVERS DAM, NM..............................................           1,028           1,028           1,028
UPPER RIO GRANDE WATER OPERATIONS MODEL STUDY, NM...............           1,300           1,300           1,300
 
                            NEW YORK
 
ALMOND LAKE, NY.................................................             439             439             439
ARKPORT DAM, NY.................................................             307             307             307
BLACK ROCK CHANNEL AND TONAWANDA HARBOR, NY.....................           1,735           1,735           1,735
BUFFALO HARBOR, NY..............................................             320             320             320
BUTTERMILK CHANNEL, NY..........................................             100             100             100
EAST ROCKAWAY INLET, NY.........................................             220             220             220
EAST SIDNEY LAKE, NY............................................             906             906             906
FIRE ISLAND INLET TO JONES INLET, NY............................              50              50              50
FLUSHING BAY AND CREEK, NY......................................              50              50              50
HUDSON RIVER, NY (MAINT)........................................           3,640           3,640           3,640
HUDSON RIVER, NY (O & C)........................................           4,250           4,250           4,250
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NY...............................           1,220           1,220           1,220
JAMAICA BAY, NY.................................................             251             251             251
LONG ISLAND INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, NY...........................             100             100             100
MOUNT MORRIS DAM, NY............................................           3,595           3,595           3,595
NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY CHANNELS, NY............................             400             400             400
NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY HARBOR, NY & NJ.........................           5,480           5,480           5,480
NEW YORK HARBOR, NY.............................................           3,650           3,650           3,650
NEW YORK HARBOR, NY & NJ (DRIFT REMOVAL)........................           9,300           9,300           9,300
NEW YORK HARBOR, NY (PREVENTION OF OBSTRUCTIVE DEPOSITS)........           1,045           1,045           1,045
OSWEGO HARBOR, NY...............................................           1,285           1,285           1,285
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NY...................................           2,193           2,193           2,193
ROCHESTER HARBOR, NY............................................           2,320           2,320           2,320
RONDOUT HARBOR, NY..............................................             250             250             250
SOUTHERN NEW YORK FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS, NY....................             587             587             587
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, NY....................             616             616             616
WHITNEY POINT LAKE, NY..........................................           1,120           1,120           1,120
 
                         NORTH CAROLINA
 
ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, NC..............................           2,600           2,600           2,600
B EVERETT JORDAN DAM AND LAKE, NC...............................           2,049           2,049           2,049
CAPE FEAR RIVER ABOVE WILMINGTON, NC............................             772             772             772
FALLS LAKE, NC..................................................           1,776           1,776           1,776
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NC...............................             270             270             270
MANTEO (SHALLOWBAG) BAY, NC.....................................           2,000           2,000           2,000
MASONBORO INLET AND CONNECTING CHANNELS, NC.....................              50              50              50
MOREHEAD CITY HARBOR, NC........................................           8,796           8,796           8,796
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NC...................................             700             700             700
ROLLINSON CHANNEL, NC...........................................             300             300             300
SILVER LAKE HARBOR, NC..........................................             300             300             300
W KERR SCOTT DAM AND RESERVOIR, NC..............................           3,363           3,363           3,363
WILMINGTON HARBOR, NC...........................................          15,019          15,019          15,019
 
                          NORTH DAKOTA
 
BOWMAN HALEY, ND................................................             186             186             186
GARRISON DAM, LAKE SAKAKAWEA, ND................................          13,290          13,290          13,290
HOMME LAKE, ND..................................................             284             284             284
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, ND...............................             332             332             332
LAKE ASHTABULA AND BALDHILL DAM, ND.............................           1,533           1,533           1,533
PIPESTEM LAKE, ND...............................................             518             518             518
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, ND.............................             127             127             127
SOURIS RIVER, ND................................................             382             382             382
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, ND....................              32              32              32
 
                              OHIO
 
ALUM CREEK LAKE, OH.............................................           1,715           1,715           1,715
BERLIN LAKE, OH.................................................           2,360           2,360           2,360
CAESAR CREEK LAKE, OH...........................................           2,035           2,035           2,035
CLARENCE J BROWN DAM, OH........................................           1,251           1,251           1,251
CLEVELAND HARBOR, OH............................................           9,540           9,540           9,540
CONNEAUT HARBOR, OH.............................................           2,665           2,665           2,665
DEER CREEK LAKE, OH.............................................           1,398           1,398           1,398
DELAWARE LAKE, OH...............................................           1,773           1,773           1,773
DILLON LAKE, OH.................................................           1,333           1,333           1,333
FAIRPORT HARBOR, OH.............................................             190             190             190
HURON HARBOR, OH................................................           3,200           3,200           3,200
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, OH...............................             697             697             697
MASSILLON LOCAL PROTECTION PROJECT, OH..........................              66              66              66
MICHAEL J KIRWAN DAM AND RESERVOIR, OH..........................           1,201           1,201           1,201
MOSQUITO CREEK LAKE, OH.........................................           1,429           1,429           1,429
MUSKINGUM RIVER LAKES, OH.......................................          10,584          10,584          10,584
NORTH BRANCH KOKOSING RIVER LAKE, OH............................             400             400             400
OHIO-MISSISSIPPI FLOOD CONTROL, OH..............................           1,792           1,792           1,792
PAINT CREEK LAKE, OH............................................           1,396           1,396           1,396
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, OH...................................             305             305             305
ROSEVILLE LOCAL PROTECTION PROJECT, OH..........................              36              36              36
SANDUSKY HARBOR, OH.............................................           1,700           1,700           1,700
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, OH....................             258             258             258
TOLEDO HARBOR, OH...............................................           7,165           7,165           7,165
TOM JENKINS DAM, OH.............................................             780             780             780
WEST FORK OF MILL CREEK LAKE, OH................................             959             959             959
WILLIAM H HARSHA LAKE, OH.......................................           1,595           1,595           1,595
 
                            OKLAHOMA
 
ARCADIA LAKE, OK................................................             472             472             472
BIRCH LAKE, OK..................................................             673             673             673
BROKEN BOW LAKE, OK.............................................           2,213           2,213           2,213
CANTON LAKE, OK.................................................           4,350           4,350           4,350
COPAN LAKE, OK..................................................           1,666           1,666           1,666
EUFAULA LAKE, OK................................................           5,748           5,748           5,748
FORT GIBSON LAKE, OK............................................           5,593           5,593           5,593
FORT SUPPLY LAKE, OK............................................           1,173           1,173           1,173
GREAT SALT PLAINS LAKE, OK......................................             432             432             432
HEYBURN LAKE, OK................................................             820             820             820
HUGO LAKE, OK...................................................           1,996           1,996           1,996
HULAH LAKE, OK..................................................           3,792           3,792           3,792
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, OK...............................             141             141             141
KAW LAKE, OK....................................................           1,967           1,967           1,967
KEYSTONE LAKE, OK...............................................           3,891           3,891           3,891
MCCLELLAN-KERR ARKANSAS RIVER NAVIGATION SYSTEM, OK.............           5,662           5,662           5,662
OOLOGAH LAKE, OK................................................           2,573           2,573           2,573
OPTIMA LAKE, OK.................................................              36              36              36
PENSACOLA RESERVOIR, LAKE OF THE CHEROKEES, OK..................             148             148             148
PINE CREEK LAKE, OK.............................................           1,366           1,366           1,366
ROBERT S. KERR LOCK AND DAM AND RESERVOIR, OK...................           6,360           6,360           6,360
SARDIS LAKE, OK.................................................             991             991             991
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, OK.............................           1,200           1,200           1,200
SKIATOOK LAKE, OK...............................................           1,676           1,676           1,676
TENKILLER FERRY LAKE, OK........................................           4,697           4,697           4,697
WAURIKA LAKE, OK................................................           1,622           1,622           1,622
WEBBERS FALLS LOCK AND DAM, OK..................................           6,354           6,354           6,354
WISTER LAKE, OK.................................................             829             829             829
 
                             OREGON
 
APPLEGATE LAKE, OR..............................................           1,018           1,018           1,018
BLUE RIVER LAKE, OR.............................................           1,128           1,128           1,128
BONNEVILLE LOCK AND DAM, OR & WA................................           7,570           7,570           7,570
COLUMBIA RIVER AT THE MOUTH, OR & WA............................          19,825          19,825          19,825
COOS BAY, OR....................................................           6,239           6,239           6,239
COTTAGE GROVE LAKE, OR..........................................           1,349           1,349           1,349
COUGAR LAKE, OR.................................................           5,466           5,466           5,466
DETROIT LAKE, OR................................................           1,131           1,131           1,131
DORENA LAKE, OR.................................................           1,168           1,168           1,168
ELK CREEK LAKE, OR..............................................             386             386             386
FALL CREEK LAKE, OR.............................................           5,224           5,224           5,224
FERN RIDGE LAKE, OR.............................................           1,727           1,727           1,727
GREEN PETER--FOSTER LAKES, OR...................................           2,161           2,161           2,161
HILLS CREEK LAKE, OR............................................           1,381           1,381           1,381
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, OR..............              20              20              20
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, OR...............................           1,040           1,040           1,040
JOHN DAY LOCK AND DAM, OR & WA..................................           4,865           4,865           4,865
LOOKOUT POINT LAKE, OR..........................................           2,371           2,371           2,371
LOST CREEK LAKE, OR.............................................           4,004           4,004           4,004
MCNARY LOCK AND DAM, OR & WA....................................           7,011           7,011           7,011
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, OR...................................             400             400             400
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, OR.............................              86              86              86
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, OR....................           2,598           2,598           2,598
WILLAMETTE RIVER AT WILLAMETTE FALLS, OR........................             128             128             128
WILLAMETTE RIVER BANK PROTECTION, OR............................             200             200             200
WILLOW CREEK LAKE, OR...........................................             909             909             909
YAQUINA BAY AND HARBOR, OR......................................           3,002           3,002           3,002
 
                          PENNSYLVANIA
 
ALLEGHENY RIVER, PA.............................................           5,317           5,317           5,317
ALVIN R BUSH DAM, PA............................................             740             740             740
AYLESWORTH CREEK LAKE, PA.......................................             345             345             345
BELTZVILLE LAKE, PA.............................................           1,290           1,290           1,290
BLUE MARSH LAKE, PA.............................................           2,774           2,774           2,774
CONEMAUGH RIVER LAKE, PA........................................           1,347           1,347           1,347
COWANESQUE LAKE, PA.............................................           1,896           1,896           1,896
CROOKED CREEK LAKE, PA..........................................           1,731           1,731           1,731
CURWENSVILLE LAKE, PA...........................................             851             851             851
DELAWARE RIVER, PHILADELPHIA, PA TO TRENTON, NJ.................           5,460           5,460           5,460
EAST BRANCH CLARION RIVER LAKE, PA..............................           1,205           1,205           1,205
ERIE HARBOR, PA.................................................           1,500           1,500           1,500
FOSTER JOSEPH SAYERS DAM, PA....................................           1,178           1,178           1,178
FRANCIS E WALTER DAM, PA........................................             905             905             905
GENERAL EDGAR JADWIN DAM AND RESERVOIR, PA......................             385             385             385
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, PA...............................           1,179           1,179           1,179
JOHNSTOWN, PA...................................................              62              62              62
KINZUA DAM AND ALLEGHENY RESERVOIR, PA..........................           1,191           1,191           1,191
LOYALHANNA LAKE, PA.............................................           1,682           1,682           1,682
MAHONING CREEK LAKE, PA.........................................           1,308           1,308           1,308
MONONGAHELA RIVER, PA...........................................          15,986          15,986          15,986
OHIO RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS, PA, OH & WV..........................          47,965          47,965          47,965
OHIO RIVER OPEN CHANNEL WORK, PA, OH & WV.......................             800             800             800
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, PA...................................             170             170             170
PROMPTON LAKE, PA...............................................             585             585             585
PUNXSUTAWNEY, PA................................................              27              27              27
RAYSTOWN LAKE, PA...............................................           5,357           5,357           5,357
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, PA.............................              45              45              45
SHENANGO RIVER LAKE, PA.........................................           2,031           2,031           2,031
STILLWATER LAKE, PA.............................................             570             570             570
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, PA....................             106             106             106
TIOGA--HAMMOND LAKES, PA........................................           2,611           2,611           2,611
TIONESTA LAKE, PA...............................................           2,032           2,032           2,032
UNION CITY LAKE, PA.............................................             414             414             414
WOODCOCK CREEK LAKE, PA.........................................             944             944             944
YORK INDIAN ROCK DAM, PA........................................           1,463           1,463           1,463
YOUGHIOGHENY RIVER LAKE, PA & MD................................           3,274           3,274           3,274
 
                           PUERTO RICO
 
SAN JUAN HARBOR, PR.............................................           5,700           5,700           5,700
 
                          RHODE ISLAND
 
BLOCK ISLAND HARBOR OF REFUGE, RI...............................             350             350             350
FOX POINT BARRIER, NARRANGANSETT BAY, RI........................           2,636           2,636           2,636
GREAT SALT POND, BLOCK ISLAND, RI...............................             350             350             350
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, RI..............              25              25              25
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, RI...............................              48              48              48
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, RI...................................             350             350             350
WOONSOCKET, RI..................................................             499             499             499
 
                         SOUTH CAROLINA
 
ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, SC..............................             100             100             100
CHARLESTON HARBOR, SC...........................................          17,059          17,059          17,059
COOPER RIVER, CHARLESTON HARBOR, SC.............................           6,930           6,930           6,930
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, SC...............................              65              65              65
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, SC...................................             875             875             875
TOWN CREEK, SC..................................................             530             530             530
 
                          SOUTH DAKOTA
 
BIG BEND DAM, LAKE SHARPE, SD...................................          10,363          10,363          10,363
COLD BROOK LAKE, SD.............................................             355             355             355
COTTONWOOD SPRINGS LAKE, SD.....................................             313             313             313
FORT RANDALL DAM, LAKE FRANCIS CASE, SD.........................          11,253          11,253          11,253
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, SD...............................             169             169             169
LAKE TRAVERSE, SD & MN..........................................             594             594             594
OAHE DAM, LAKE OAHE, SD & ND....................................          12,222          12,222          12,222
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, SD.............................             143             143             143
 
                            TENNESSEE
 
CENTER HILL LAKE, TN............................................           5,893           5,893           5,893
CHEATHAM LOCK AND DAM, TN.......................................           9,429           9,429           9,429
CHICKAMAUGA LOCK, TENNESSEE RIVER, TN...........................           1,630           1,630           1,630
CORDELL HULL DAM AND RESERVOIR, TN..............................           7,210           7,210           7,210
DALE HOLLOW LAKE, TN............................................           6,824           6,824           6,824
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, TN...............................             182             182             182
J PERCY PRIEST DAM AND RESERVOIR, TN............................           5,060           5,060           5,060
NORTHWEST TENNESSEE REGIONAL HARBOR, LAKE COUNTY, TN............              10              10              10
OLD HICKORY LOCK AND DAM, TN....................................          10,416          10,416          10,416
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, TN...................................               2               2               2
TENNESSEE RIVER, TN.............................................          23,759          23,759          23,759
WOLF RIVER HARBOR, TN...........................................             250             250             250
 
                              TEXAS
 
AQUILLA LAKE, TX................................................           1,727           1,727           1,727
ARKANSAS--RED RIVER BASINS CHLORIDE CONTROL--AREA VIII, TX......           1,660           1,660           1,660
BARDWELL LAKE, TX...............................................           2,621           2,621           2,621
BELTON LAKE, TX.................................................           4,654           4,654           4,654
BENBROOK LAKE, TX...............................................           2,612           2,612           2,612
BRAZOS ISLAND HARBOR, TX........................................           2,700           2,700           2,700
BUFFALO BAYOU AND TRIBUTARIES, TX...............................           2,612           2,612           2,612
CANYON LAKE, TX.................................................           3,897           3,897           3,897
CHANNEL TO HARLINGEN, TX........................................           1,478           1,478           1,478
CHANNEL TO PORT BOLIVAR, TX.....................................             168             168             168
CORPUS CHRISTI SHIP CHANNEL, TX.................................           8,750           8,750           8,750
DENISON DAM, LAKE TEXOMA, TX....................................           9,656           9,656           9,656
ESTELLINE SPRINGS EXPERIMENTAL PROJECT, TX......................              33              33              33
FERRELLS BRIDGE DAM, LAKE O' THE PINES, TX......................           3,408           3,408           3,408
FREEPORT HARBOR, TX.............................................           5,800           5,800           5,800
GALVESTON HARBOR AND CHANNEL, TX................................          10,900          10,900          10,900
GIWW, CHANNEL TO VICTORIA, TX...................................           2,700           2,700           2,700
GRANGER DAM AND LAKE, TX........................................           2,624           2,624           2,624
GRAPEVINE LAKE, TX..............................................           3,191           3,191           3,191
GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, TX..................................          23,785          23,785          23,785
HORDS CREEK LAKE, TX............................................           1,555           1,555           1,555
HOUSTON SHIP CHANNEL, TX........................................          32,633          32,633          32,633
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, TX...............................           1,937           1,937           1,937
JIM CHAPMAN LAKE, TX............................................           1,466           1,466           1,466
JOE POOL LAKE, TX...............................................           1,130           1,130           1,130
LAKE KEMP, TX...................................................             302             302             302
LAVON LAKE, TX..................................................           4,267           4,267           4,267
LEWISVILLE DAM, TX..............................................           4,035           4,035           4,035
MATAGORDA SHIP CHANNEL, TX......................................           6,100           6,100           6,100
NAVARRO MILLS LAKE, TX..........................................           3,839           3,839           3,839
NORTH SAN GABRIEL DAM AND LAKE GEORGETOWN, TX...................           2,226           2,226           2,226
O C FISHER DAM AND LAKE, TX.....................................             860             860             860
PAT MAYSE LAKE, TX..............................................           1,065           1,065           1,065
PROCTOR LAKE, TX................................................           2,644           2,644           2,644
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, TX...................................             300             300             300
RAY ROBERTS LAKE, TX............................................           2,217           2,217           2,217
SABINE--NECHES WATERWAY, TX.....................................          14,100          14,100          14,100
SAM RAYBURN DAM AND RESERVOIR, TX...............................           7,613           7,613           7,613
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, TX.............................             271             271             271
SOMERVILLE LAKE, TX.............................................           3,075           3,075           3,075
STILLHOUSE HOLLOW DAM, TX.......................................           2,413           2,413           2,413
TEXAS CITY SHIP CHANNEL, TX.....................................           1,000           1,000           1,000
TOWN BLUFF DAM, B A STEINHAGEN LAKE, TX.........................           3,894           3,894           3,894
WACO LAKE, TX...................................................           6,614           6,614           6,614
WALLISVILLE LAKE, TX............................................           1,999           1,999           1,999
WHITNEY LAKE, TX................................................           7,007           7,007           7,007
WRIGHT PATMAN DAM AND LAKE, TX..................................           4,270           4,270           4,270
 
                              UTAH
 
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, UT...............................              40              40              40
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, UT.............................             655             655             655
 
                             VERMONT
 
BALL MOUNTAIN, VT...............................................             930             930             930
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, VT...............................              46              46              46
NARROWS OF LAKE CHAMPLAIN, VT & NY..............................              40              40              40
NORTH HARTLAND LAKE, VT.........................................           1,067           1,067           1,067
NORTH SPRINGFIELD LAKE, VT......................................           1,038           1,038           1,038
TOWNSHEND LAKE, VT..............................................           1,026           1,026           1,026
UNION VILLAGE DAM, VT...........................................             811             811             811
 
                            VIRGINIA
 
ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY--ACC, VA.........................           2,525           2,525           2,525
ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY--DSC, VA.........................           1,130           1,130           1,130
CHINCOTEAGUE INLET, VA..........................................             600             600             600
GATHRIGHT DAM AND LAKE MOOMAW, VA...............................           2,070           2,070           2,070
HAMPTON ROADS, NORFOLK & NEWPORT NEWS HARBOR, VA (DRIFT REMOVAL)           1,500           1,500           1,500
HAMPTON ROADS, VA (PREVENTION OF OBSTRUCTIVE DEPOSITS)..........             114             114             114
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, VA...............................             297             297             297
JAMES RIVER CHANNEL, VA.........................................           4,006           4,006           4,006
JOHN H KERR LAKE, VA & NC.......................................          10,976          10,976          10,976
JOHN W FLANNAGAN DAM AND RESERVOIR, VA..........................           2,347           2,347           2,347
LYNNHAVEN INLET, VA.............................................             500             500             500
NORFOLK HARBOR, VA..............................................          12,543          12,543          12,543
NORTH FORK OF POUND RIVER LAKE, VA..............................             685             685             685
PHILPOTT LAKE, VA...............................................           5,023           5,023           5,023
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, VA...................................           1,298           1,298           1,298
RUDEE INLET, VA.................................................             400             400             400
WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL CERTIFICATIONS, VA......................             135             135             135
WATERWAY ON THE COAST OF VIRGINIA, VA...........................              50              50              50
 
                           WASHINGTON
 
CHIEF JOSEPH DAM, WA............................................             672             672             672
COLUMBIA AND LOWER WILLAMETTE RIVERS BELOW VANCOUVER, WA &                38,132          38,132          38,132
 PORTLAND, OR...................................................
COLUMBIA RIVER BETWEEN VANCOUVER, WA AND THE DALLES, OR.........           1,001           1,001           1,001
COLUMBIA RIVER FISH MITIGATION, WA, OR & ID.....................           3,498           3,498           3,498
EVERETT HARBOR AND SNOHOMISH RIVER, WA..........................           1,358           1,358           1,358
GRAYS HARBOR(38-F00T DEEPENING), WA.............................          12,018          12,018          12,018
HOWARD HANSON DAM, WA...........................................           3,347           3,347           3,347
ICE HARBOR LOCK AND DAM, WA.....................................           9,172           9,172           9,172
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, WA..............              70              70              70
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WA...............................           1,087           1,087           1,087
LAKE WASHINGTON SHIP CANAL, WA..................................           8,872           8,872           8,872
LITTLE GOOSE LOCK AND DAM, WA...................................           7,267           7,267           7,267
LOWER GRANITE LOCK AND DAM, WA..................................           3,222           3,222           3,222
LOWER MONUMENTAL LOCK AND DAM, WA...............................           6,695           6,695           6,695
MILL CREEK LAKE, WA.............................................           2,255           2,255           2,255
MOUNT SAINT HELENS SEDIMENT CONTROL, WA.........................             268             268             268
MUD MOUNTAIN DAM, WA............................................           9,548           9,548           9,548
NEAH BAY, WA....................................................             275             275             275
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, WA...................................             580             580             580
PUGET SOUND AND TRIBUTARY WATERS, WA............................           1,200           1,200           1,200
QUILLAYUTE RIVER, WA............................................             100             100             100
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, WA.............................             423             423             423
SEATTLE HARBOR, WA..............................................             565             565             565
STILLAGUAMISH RIVER, WA.........................................             290             290             290
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, WA....................              64              64              64
TACOMA, PUYALLUP RIVER, WA......................................             155             155             155
THE DALLES LOCK AND DAM, WA & OR................................          10,931          10,931          10,931
 
                          WEST VIRGINIA
 
BEECH FORK LAKE, WV.............................................           1,330           1,330           1,330
BLUESTONE LAKE, WV..............................................           2,043           2,043           2,043
BURNSVILLE LAKE, WV.............................................           2,458           2,458           2,458
EAST LYNN LAKE, WV..............................................           2,497           2,497           2,497
ELKINS, WV......................................................              55              55              55
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WV...............................             424             424             424
KANAWHA RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS, WV................................           8,258           8,258           8,258
OHIO RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS, WV, KY & OH..........................          38,310          38,310          38,310
OHIO RIVER OPEN CHANNEL WORK, WV, KY & OH.......................           2,977           2,977           2,977
R D BAILEY LAKE, WV.............................................           2,266           2,266           2,266
STONEWALL JACKSON LAKE, WV......................................           1,160           1,160           1,160
SUMMERSVILLE LAKE, WV...........................................           2,432           2,432           2,432
SUTTON LAKE, WV.................................................           2,412           2,412           2,412
TYGART LAKE, WV.................................................           2,397           2,397           2,397
 
                            WISCONSIN
 
EAU GALLE RIVER LAKE, WI........................................             808             808             808
FOX RIVER, WI...................................................           2,489           2,489           2,489
GREEN BAY HARBOR, WI............................................           2,885           2,885           2,885
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WI...............................              52              52              52
KEWAUNEE HARBOR, WI.............................................              15              15              15
MANITOWOC HARBOR, WI............................................             845             845             845
MILWAUKEE HARBOR, WI............................................           1,600           1,600           1,600
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, WI...................................             304             304             304
STURGEON BAY HARBOR AND LAKE MICHIGAN SHIP CANAL, WI............              19              19              19
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, WI....................             567             567             567
 
                             WYOMING
 
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, WY..............              12              12              12
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WY...............................              74              74              74
JACKSON HOLE LEVEES, WY.........................................           2,104           2,104           2,104
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, WY.............................             234             234             234
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      SUBTOTAL, PROJECTS LISTED UNDER STATES....................       2,523,734       2,523,734       2,523,734
 
                         REMAINING ITEMS
 
               ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR ONGOING WORK
 
DONOR AND ENERGY PORTS..........................................  ..............  ..............          50,000
NAVIGATION MAINTENANCE..........................................  ..............  ..............          33,346
    DEEP-DRAFT HARBOR AND CHANNEL...............................  ..............         234,000         135,000
    INLAND WATERWAYS............................................  ..............          42,000          45,000
    SMALL, REMOTE, OR SUBSISTENCE HARBORS AND CHANNELS..........  ..............          42,500          50,000
OTHER AUTHORIZED PURPOSES.......................................  ..............          35,100          20,000
AQUATIC NUISANCE CONTROL RESEARCH...............................             675             675             675
ASSET MANAGEMENT/FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT MANAGEMENT (FEM)......           3,250           3,250           3,250
CIVIL WORKS WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (CWWMS).....................          15,000           5,000          15,000
 
       BUDGET/MANAGEMENT SUPPORT FOR O&M; BUSINESS PROGRAMS
 
STEWARDSHIP SUPPORT PROGRAM.....................................           1,000           1,000           1,000
PERFORMANCE-BASED BUDGETING SUPPORT PROGRAM.....................           3,939           3,939           3,939
RECREATION MANAGEMENT SUPPORT PROGRAM...........................           1,650           1,650           1,650
OPTIMIZATION TOOLS FOR NAVIGATION...............................             322             322             322
COASTAL DATA INFORMATION PROGRAM (CDIP).........................           3,000           5,400           5,400
COASTAL INLET RESEARCH PROGRAM..................................           2,700           2,700           2,700
RESPONSE TO CLIMATE CHANGE AT CORPS PROJECTS....................           6,000           6,000           6,000
CULTURAL RESOURCES (NAGPRA/CURATION)............................           6,000           6,000           6,000
DREDGE MCFARLAND READY RESERVE..................................          11,690          11,690          11,690
DREDGE WHEELER READY RESERVE....................................          15,000          15,000          15,000
DREDGING DATA AND LOCK PERFORMANCE MONITORING SYSTEM............           1,119           1,119           1,119
DREDGING OPERATIONS AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH (DOER)...........           6,450           6,450           6,450
DREDGING OPERATIONS TECHNICAL SUPPORT PROGRAM (DOTS)............           2,820           2,820           2,820
EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS REDUCTION PROGRAM............................             270             270             270
FACILITY PROTECTION.............................................           4,000           4,000           4,000
FISH & WILDLIFE OPERATING FISH HATCHERY REIMBURSEMENT...........           4,700           4,700           5,400
GREAT LAKES TRIBUTARY MODEL.....................................             600             600             600
INLAND WATERWAY NAVIGATION CHARTS...............................           4,500           4,500           4,500
INTERAGENCY PERFORMANCE EVALUATION TASK FORCE/HURRICANE                    2,800           2,800           2,800
 PROTECTION DECISION CHRONOLOGY (IPET/HPDC) LESSONS LEARNED
 IMPLEMENTATION.................................................
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED FEDERAL FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS..........          28,000          28,000          28,000
MONITORING OF COMPLETED NAVIGATION PROJECTS.....................           3,300           3,300           4,000
NATIONAL (LEVEE) FLOOD INVENTORY................................          16,000          16,000          16,000
NATIONAL (MULTIPLE PROJECT) NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT                   6,000           6,000           6,000
 ACTIVITIES.....................................................
NATIONAL COASTAL MAPPING PROGRAM................................           6,300           6,300           6,300
NATIONAL DAM SAFETY PROGRAM (PORTFOLIO RISK ASSESSMENT).........          10,000          10,000          10,000
NATIONAL EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS PROGRAM (NEPP)..................           4,500           4,500           4,500
NATIONAL PORTFOLIO ASSESSMENT FOR REALLOCATIONS.................           1,071           1,071           1,071
PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT TECHNICAL SUPPORT...........................           1,481           1,481           1,481
WATERBORNE COMMERCE STATISTICS..................................           4,669           4,669           4,669
HARBOR MAINTENANCE FEE DATA COLLECTION..........................             795             795             795
RECREATIONONESTOP (R1S) NATIONAL RECREATION RESERVATION SERVICE.              65              65              65
REGIONAL SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM............................           1,800           1,800           1,800
REVIEW OF NON-FEDERAL ALTERATIONS OF CIVIL WORKS PROJECTS                  4,000           4,000           4,000
 (SECTION 408)..................................................
RELIABILITY MODELS PROGRAM FOR MAJOR REHAB......................             300             300             300
WATER OPERATIONS TECHNICAL SUPPORT (WOTS).......................             500           2,500           5,500
HOUSE FLOOR AMENDMENTS..........................................  ..............          36,306  ..............
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      SUBTOTAL, REMAINING ITEMS.................................         186,266         570,572         528,412
 
REDUCTION FOR SAVINGS AND SLIPPAGE..............................  ..............  ..............        -143,146
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE..........................       2,710,000       3,094,306       2,909,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Lowell Creek Tunnel, Alaska.--The Committee recognizes the 
current problems with the existing Lowell Creek Tunnel and 
encourages the Corps of Engineers to undertake a study for an 
alternative method of flood diversion for Lowell Canyon. The 
Water Resources Development Act of 2007 transferred operations 
and maintenance to the Corps of Engineers until a new 
alternative was built, or for 15 years, whichever was earlier. 
This bill includes a general provision to extend the Corps of 
Engineers' operation and maintenance responsibility for this 
project for another 5 years. The Corps of Engineers has not 
progressed towards developing an alternative, and the City of 
Seward cannot afford the estimated $1,500,000 per year in 
operations and maintenance costs of the tunnel.
    Missouri River Fish and Wildlife Recovery.--It has come to 
the Committee's attention that the Corps of Engineers has 
listed the Missouri River Fish and Wildlife Recovery program 
under the navigation business line. The Missouri River Fish and 
Wildlife Recovery program is associated with flood plain 
mitigation and compliance with endangered species protection 
requirements. The Committee seeks to understand how these 
activities relate to the promotion of navigation. The Corps of 
Engineers has recently classified the program under the 
navigation business line. The Committee directs that, within 60 
days of the date of enactment of this act, the Corps of 
Engineers shall submit to the Committee the reasons for this 
classification. The Corps of Engineers shall describe its plans 
to ensure that it does not impact anticipated or needed work 
under the Bank Stabilization and Navigation Program.
    WRRDA Section 1039--Invasive Species.--Funding is provided 
for watercraft inspection stations, as authorized by WRRDA 
section 1039. The Secretary, in consultation with the States of 
Idaho, Montana, Oregon, and Washington, is required to 
establish watercraft inspection stations in the vicinity of 
reservoirs operated by the Corps of Engineers, including for 
boat inspection stations in the Columbia River Basin States. 
These inspection stations are the principal line of defense 
against the spread of aquatic species at reservoirs operated 
and maintained by the Secretary, such as entry of zebra and 
quagga mussels into the Flathead Basin in Montana.
    Monitoring of Completed Navigation Projects.--The Committee 
recommends additional funding for the Corps of Engineers to 
monitor aging navigation infrastructure to ensure that it 
continues operating as planned.
    Operations and Maintenance--Fisheries.--The Committee is 
concerned that a reduction in or elimination of navigational 
lock operations is having a negative impact on the ability of a 
number of endangered, threatened, and game fish species to 
migrate through waterways, particularly during critical 
spawning periods. The Committee is aware of preliminary 
research that indicates reduced lock operations on certain 
Corps of Engineers' designated low-use waterways is directly 
impacting migration and that there are effective means to 
mitigate the impacts. The Committee believes maximizing the 
ability of fish to use these locks to move past the dams has 
the potential to restore natural and historic long-distance 
river migrations that may well be critical to species survival. 
The Committee provides $2,000,000 to continue external fish 
behavior research to determine the appropriate time, frequency, 
and number of mitigation lockages; how to increase the numbers 
of fish entering locks during navigational and mitigation 
operations; and how to get fish to stay in locks for the 
optimal period of time. This research should be conducted in 
coordination with both the Corps of Engineers and the Fish and 
Wildlife Service.
    Levels of Service.--The Committee is aware of recent 
decisions to reduce service levels at locks across the country. 
The Committee notes that the Corps of Engineers is authorized 
to open locks independently of the established levels of 
service [LoS] for specific and unique activities where such 
opening and closing will be advantageous to fostering economic 
and community development. The Committee remains concerned 
about limited budgetary resources for infrastructure 
improvements on the Nation's locks and dams, and encourages the 
Corps of Engineers to consider all options within its statutory 
authority to collect additional funds. Such efforts should 
include acceptance of contributed funds under existing 
authorities, to maintain robust lock operations. Such efforts 
should also include public-private partnerships, which include 
State agencies, to ensure locks are safe and operational for 
economic growth and community development. Local economies 
benefit from using locks and dams for commercial and 
recreational uses that are unrelated to commercial barge 
traffic. The Committee acknowledges that the Corps of Engineers 
has given local communities assurances that, within its current 
statutory authority, the Corps of Engineers will be sensitive 
to economic impacts on local economies.
    Dam Optimization.--The Corps of Engineers is urged not to 
carry out any reservoir reoperation or reallocation for 
authorized purposes at Corps of Engineers' facilities with 
funds from any non-Federal entity other than the non-Federal 
sponsor until the Corps of Engineers has completed all public 
outreach and coordination, and submitted to the relevant 
authorizing and appropriations Committees, and the 
Congressional delegation representing such facility, a detailed 
analysis of the change in operations of the reservoir, and 
specific information on whether the activities would alter 
availability of water for existing authorized purposes at such 
facility, as well as compensation for lost water that would be 
necessary to make users whole if such activities were carried 
out.
    Western Drought Contingency Plans.--The Committee notes 
that the Corps of Engineers carries out water control 
management activities for Corps of Engineers and non-Corps of 
Engineers projects as required by Federal laws and directives, 
and that these activities are governed by the establishment of 
water control plans. The Committee understands that many of 
these plans and manuals were developed decades ago and are 
required to be revised as necessary to conform to changing 
requirements. Continuous examination should be made of 
regulation schedules and possible need for storage reallocation 
within existing authority and constraints. Emphasis should be 
placed on evaluating current or anticipated conditions that 
could require deviation from normal release schedules as part 
of drought contingency plans.
    Not later than 90 days after enactment of this act, the 
Secretary shall provide to the Committee a report including the 
following information for any western State under a 
gubernatorial drought declaration during water year 2015: (1) a 
list of Corps of Engineers and non-Corps of Engineers (section 
7 of the 1944 Flood Control Act) projects that have a Corps of 
Engineers developed water control plan; (2) the year the 
original water control manual was approved; (3) the year for 
any subsequent revisions to the project's water control plan 
and manual; (4) a list of projects where operational deviations 
for drought contingency have been requested and the status of 
the request; (5) how water conservation and water quality 
improvements were addressed; (6) a list of projects where 
permanent changes to storage allocations have been requested 
and the status of the request.
    Disposal of Dredged Sediment.--No funds recommended in this 
act may be used for open lake disposal of dredged sediment 
unless such disposal meets water and environmental standards 
agreed to by the administrator of a State's water permitting 
agency and is consistent with a State's Coastal Zone Management 
Plan. If this standard is not met, the Corps of Engineers will 
maintain its long-standing funding obligations for dredged 
material management.
    Bayport Flare--Houston Ship Channel, Texas.--The Committee 
encourages the Corps of Engineers to utilize previously 
appropriated funds to expeditiously complete necessary studies 
to address safety and efficiency issues in a timely manner to 
avoid property damage, injury, loss of life and economic 
impacts on nationally significant deep draft, high commercial 
use channels.
    WRRDA Section 6002.--The Committee supports the Corps of 
Engineers performing a review of its inventory, in accordance 
with WRRDA section 6002.
    WRRDA Section 4001.--The Committee urges the Secretary to 
follow through on the direction provided by Congress in WRRDA 
section 4001 to find and implement the means necessary to 
financially support the Susquehanna, Delaware, and Potomac 
River Basin Commissions. Congress has made clear its intent 
that the 3 River Basin Commissions be supported and expects the 
Corps of Engineers to act appropriately.
    Donor Ports and Energy Transfer Ports.--The Committee 
provides $50,000,000 for eligible donor ports and energy 
transfer ports in accordance with WRRDA section 2106. The 
Committee directs the Corps of Engineers to issue 
implementation guidance for section 2106 within 30 days of 
enactment of this act. With respect to eligible donor ports, 
the Committee directs 50 percent of such funds be equally 
divided between the eligible donor ports; and the remaining 50 
percent of such funds be divided between the eligible donor 
ports based on each eligible donor port's percentage of the 
total Harbor Maintenance Tax revenues generated at such ports, 
in accordance with WRRDA section 2101. Funds recommended for 
section 2106 shall be used at the discretion of each eligible 
donor port and energy transfer port in accordance with section 
2106.
    Monitoring Requirement.--The Committee directs the Corps of 
Engineers to monitor the withdrawals for its existing water 
contracts in the Alabama-Coosa-Tallapoosa [ACT] river basin. 
Upon determination of an exceedance of the contracted amounts, 
the Corps of Engineers shall make notifications as required in 
the contract and notify the Committee within 30 days of such 
determination.
    Additional Funding for Ongoing Work.--The fiscal year 2016 
budget request does not fund operations, maintenance, and 
rehabilitation of our Nation's aging infrastructure 
sufficiently to ensure continued competitiveness in a global 
marketplace. Federal navigation channels maintained at only a 
fraction of authorized dimensions, and navigation locks and 
hydropower facilities, well beyond their design life, result in 
economic inefficiencies. The Committee believes that investing 
in operations, maintenance, and rehabilitation of 
infrastructure today will save taxpayers money in the future.
    The Committee recommendation includes additional funds to 
continue ongoing projects and activities, including periodic 
dredging of ports and harbors.
    The Committee directs that priority in allocating these 
funds be given to completing ongoing work to maintain 
authorized depths and widths of harbors and shipping channels, 
including where contaminated sediments are present, and for 
addressing critical maintenance backlog.
    Particular emphasis should be placed on projects where 
there is a Coast Guard or other water safety or police force 
presence; that will enhance national, regional, or local 
economic development; or that will promote job growth or 
international competitiveness.
    The Committee is concerned that the administration's 
criteria for navigation maintenance does not allow small, 
remote, or subsistence harbors and waterways to properly 
compete for scarce navigation maintenance funds. The Committee 
urges the Corps of Engineers to revise the criteria used for 
determining which navigation maintenance projects are funded in 
order to develop a reasonable and equitable allocation under 
this account. The criteria should include the economic impact 
that these projects provide to local and regional economies, in 
particular, those with national defense or public health and 
safety importance.

                           REGULATORY PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2015....................................    $200,000,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................     205,000,000
House allowance.........................................     199,576,000
Committee recommendation................................     200,000,000

    The Committee recommends $200,000,000 for the Regulatory 
Program of the Corps of Engineers, a decrease of $5,000,000 
from the budget request. The Committee urges the Corps of 
Engineers to continue to coordinate with the Department of the 
Interior to analyze the environmental impacts of the proposed 
marina development project in Coral Bay, St. John and provide 
input into the permitting process.

            FORMERLY UTILIZED SITES REMEDIAL ACTION PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2015....................................    $101,500,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................     104,000,000
House allowance.........................................     104,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     101,500,000

    The Committee recommends $101,500,000 for the Formerly 
Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program, a decrease of 
$2,500,000 from the budget request.

                 FLOOD CONTROL AND COASTAL EMERGENCIES

Appropriations, 2015....................................     $28,000,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................      34,000,000
House allowance.........................................      34,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      28,000,000

    The Committee recommends $28,000,000 for Flood Control and 
Coastal Emergencies, a decrease of $6,000,000 from the budget 
request.

                                EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2015....................................    $178,000,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................     180,000,000
House allowance.........................................     179,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     178,000,000

    The Committee recommends $178,000,000 for Expenses, a 
decrease of $2,000,000 from the budget request. This 
appropriation finances the expenses for the Office of the Chief 
of Engineers, the Division Offices, and certain research and 
statistical functions of the Corps of Engineers. No funding is 
recommended for creation of an Office of Congressional Affairs.

      OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE ARMY (CIVIL WORKS)

Appropriations, 2015....................................      $3,000,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................       5,000,000
House allowance.........................................       4,750,000
Committee recommendation................................       3,000,000

    The Committee recommends $3,000,000 for the Office of the 
Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works), a decrease of 
$2,000,000 from the budget request.

             GENERAL PROVISIONS--CORPS OF ENGINEERS--CIVIL

    Section 101. The bill includes language concerning 
reprogramming guidelines.
    Section 102. The bill includes language rescinding prior 
year unobligated funding.
    Section 103. The bill includes language concerning funding 
transfers requested by the administration related to fish 
hatcheries.
    Section 104. The bill includes language concerning the 
definitions of ``fill material'' or ``discharge of fill 
material'' for purposes of the Federal Water Pollution Control 
Act.
    Section 105. The bill contains language deauthorizing a 
project.
    Section 106. The bill includes language regarding the 
Lowell Creek Tunnel project.
    Section 107. The bill includes language regarding water 
allocations.

                                TITLE II

                       DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

                CENTRAL UTAH PROJECT COMPLETION ACCOUNT

Appropriations, 2015....................................      $9,874,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................       7,300,000
House allowance.........................................       9,874,000
Committee recommendation................................       9,874,000

    The Committee recommends $9,874,000 for the Central Utah 
Project Completion account which includes $6,024,000 for 
Central Utah Project construction, $1,000,000 for transfer to 
the Utah Reclamation Mitigation and Conservation Account for 
use by the Utah Reclamation Mitigation and Conservation 
Commission, $1,350,000 for necessary expenses of the Secretary 
of the Interior, and up to $1,500,000 for the Commission's 
administrative expenses. This allows Reclamation to develop 
water supply facilities that will continue to sustain economic 
growth and an enhanced quality of life in the western States, 
the fastest growing region in the United States.

                         Bureau of Reclamation


                       Overview of Recommendation

    The Committee recommends $1,133,159,000 for the Bureau of 
Reclamation [Reclamation], an increase of $34,491,000 from the 
budget request. The Committee recommendation sets priorities by 
supporting our Nation's infrastructure.

                              INTRODUCTION

    In addition to the traditional missions of bringing water 
and power to the West, Reclamation continues to develop 
programs, initiatives, and activities that will help meet new 
water needs and balance the multitude of competing uses of 
water in the West. Reclamation is the largest wholesaler of 
water in the country, operating 348 reservoirs with a total 
storage capacity of 245 million acre-feet. Reclamation projects 
deliver 10 trillion gallons of water to more than 31 million 
people each year, and provide 1 out of 5 western farmers with 
irrigation water for 10 million acres of farmland that produce 
60 percent of the Nation's vegetables and 25 percent of its 
fruits and nuts. Reclamation manages, with partners, 289 
recreation sites that have 90 million visits annually.

                   PROGRAM COORDINATION AND EXECUTION

    The Committee expects Reclamation to execute its program in 
accordance with congressional direction included in this report 
and the accompanying act. This includes moving individual 
projects forward in accordance with the funds annually 
appropriated. However, the Committee realizes that many factors 
outside Reclamation's control may dictate the progress of any 
given project or study. The Committee directs Reclamation to 
notify the Committee of any major deviations as soon as 
practicable, including a detailed justification and updates of 
cost, schedule, or scope for the project or study. A major 
deviation is defined as any reprogramming action that requires 
Committee notification as identified in the Energy and Water 
Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2015, or, 
a schedule change that causes completions, as identified in the 
fiscal year 2015 or fiscal year 2016 budget requests, to be 
delayed beyond the fiscal year stated.
    The Committee has divided underfinancing between the 
Resources Management subaccount and the Facilities Operation 
and Maintenance subaccount. Upon applying the underfinanced 
amounts, normal reprogramming procedures should be undertaken 
to account for schedule slippages, accelerations, or other 
unforeseen conditions.

                       FISCAL YEAR 2016 WORK PLAN

    The Committee has recommended funding above the budget 
request for Water and Related Resources. Reclamation is 
directed to submit a work plan, not later than 45 days after 
the date of enactment of this act, to the Committee proposing 
its allocation of these additional funds. Reclamation is 
directed not to obligate any funding above the budget request 
for studies or projects until the Committee has approved the 
work plan for fiscal year 2016. The work plan shall be 
consistent with the following general guidance.
  --None of the funds may be used for any item for which the 
        Committee has specifically denied funding.
  --The additional funds are provided for ongoing studies or 
        projects that were either not included in the budget 
        request or for which the budget request was inadequate.
  --Funding associated with a category may be allocated to 
        eligible studies or projects within that category.
  --Reclamation may not withhold funding from a study or 
        project because it is inconsistent with administration 
        policy. The Committee notes that these funds are in 
        excess of the administration's budget request, and that 
        administration budget metrics should not disqualify a 
        study or project from being funded.

                             REPROGRAMMING

    The Committee is retaining the reprogramming legislation 
provided in the Energy and Water Development and Related 
Agencies Appropriations Act, 2015.

                                DROUGHT

    The Committee is particularly concerned about the continued 
drought in the West. The U.S. Drought Monitor for May 12, 2015, 
shows that all Reclamation States are currently suffering from 
drought conditions. Ten of the Reclamation States are suffering 
from severe to exceptional drought over large portions of the 
individual States. Nearly all of California, one-half of 
Nevada, one-half of Oregon, and some areas of the southern 
Great Plains are suffering from extreme to exceptional drought.
    The Committee recognizes that drought is a difficult 
condition to address while it is occurring. However, there are 
many things that can be done to stretch available water 
supplies. Reclamation and the Department of the Interior are 
encouraged to use all of the flexibility and tools at their 
disposal to mitigate the impacts of this drought. The Committee 
is pleased to see that Reclamation has increased the funding 
for WaterSmart grants that increase efficiencies in current 
water uses. The Committee also appreciates Reclamation 
including a line in the budget request under WaterSmart to 
provide Drought Response and Comprehensive Drought Plans.
    However, these efforts are insufficient to address the 
current scope of this drought and do nothing to address future 
droughts. The Committee believes that the only answer to these 
chronic droughts is a combination of additional storage, 
improved conveyance, and increased efficiencies in the uses of 
water both for agriculture and potable purposes. As the West 
has consistently been the fastest growing part of the country, 
it is incumbent on Reclamation to lead the way in increasing 
the water that is available from year to year and to 
incentivize more efficient use of the water that is available.

                   CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING

    The Committee did not accept or include Congressionally 
Directed Spending, as defined in section 5(a) of rule XLIV of 
the Standing Rules of the Senate. However, the Committee has 
recommended additional programmatic funds for the Water and 
Related Resources account. In some cases, these additional 
funds have been included within defined categories, as in prior 
years, and are described in more detail in their respective 
sections, below.

                      WATER AND RELATED RESOURCES

Appropriations, 2015....................................    $978,131,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................     805,157,000
House allowance.........................................     950,640,000
Committee recommendation................................     988,131,000

    The Committee recommends $988,131,000 for Water and Related 
Resources, an increase of $182,974,000 from the budget request. 
Within this amount, the Committee recommendation includes 
funding for Indian Water Rights Settlements and the San Joaquin 
River Restoration Fund as in prior years.

                              INTRODUCTION

    The Water and Related Resources account supports the 
development, management, and restoration of water and related 
natural resources in the 17 western States. The account 
includes funds for operating and maintaining existing 
facilities to obtain the greatest overall level of benefits, to 
protect public safety, and to conduct studies on ways to 
improve the use of water and related natural resources. Work 
will be done in partnership and cooperation with non-Federal 
entities and other Federal agencies.
    The Committee has increased funding in the Water and 
Related Resources account on a number of line items to better 
allow Reclamation to address the immediate impacts of the 
drought. These funds may be used for environmental restoration 
and compliance activities; water conservation and delivery; 
increased operations and maintenance funding; drought emergency 
assistance planning; WaterSmart grants; and drought response 
and comprehensive drought assistance. The Committee notes that 
Reclamation included more funds in its fiscal year 2016 budget 
to address the continuing impacts from this drought. The 
Committee encourages Reclamation to maintain or increase these 
levels in the development of its fiscal year 2017 budget 
request.

                                                   BUREAU OF RECLAMATION--WATER AND RELATED RESOURCES
                                                                [In thousands of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Budget estimate                 House allowance            Committee recommendation
                                                         -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Project title                          Resources      Facilities       Resources      Facilities       Resources      Facilities
                                                            management         OM&R;         management         OM&R;         management         OM&R;
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                         ARIZONA
 
AK CHIN INDIAN WATER RIGHTS SETTLEMENT ACT PROJECT......  ..............          15,341  ..............          15,341  ..............          15,341
COLORADO RIVER BASIN--CENTRAL ARIZONA PROJECT...........           6,620             458           6,620             458           6,620             458
COLORADO RIVER FRONT WORK AND LEVEE SYSTEM..............           2,303  ..............           2,303  ..............           2,303  ..............
SALT RIVER PROJECT......................................             649             250             649             250             649             250
SAN CARLOS APACHE TRIBE WATER SETTLEMENT ACT PROJECT....             150  ..............             150  ..............             150  ..............
SIERRA VISTA SUBWATERSHED FEASIBILITY STUDY.............               2  ..............               2  ..............               2  ..............
YUMA AREA PROJECTS......................................           1,324          24,640           1,324          24,640           1,324          24,640
 
                       CALIFORNIA
 
CACHUMA PROJECT.........................................             647             674             647             674             647             674
 
CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECTS:
    AMERICAN RIVER DIVISION, FOLSOM DAM UNIT/MORMON                1,577           9,138           1,577           9,138           1,577           9,138
     ISLAND.............................................
    AUBURN-FOLSOM SOUTH UNIT............................              35           2,184              35           2,184              35           2,184
    DELTA DIVISION......................................           5,718           5,511           5,718           5,511           5,718           5,511
    EAST SIDE DIVISION..................................           1,290           2,772           1,290           2,772           1,290           2,772
    FRIANT DIVISION.....................................           2,192           3,401           2,192           3,401           2,192           3,401
        SAN JOAQUIN RIVER RESTORATION SETTLEMENT........  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............          35,000  ..............
    MISCELLANEOUS PROJECT PROGRAMS......................           7,596             454           7,596             454           7,596             454
    REPLACEMENTS, ADDITIONS, AND EXTRAORDINARY MAINT.     ..............          20,262  ..............          20,262  ..............          20,262
     PROGRAM............................................
    SACRAMENTO RIVER DIVISION...........................           1,307             944           1,307             944           1,307             944
    SAN FELIPE DIVISION.................................             372              75             372              75             372              75
    SAN JOAQUIN DIVISION................................              52  ..............              52  ..............              52  ..............
    SHASTA DIVISION.....................................             720           8,658             720           8,658             720           8,658
    TRINITY RIVER DIVISION..............................          12,309           5,177          12,309           5,177          12,309           5,177
    WATER AND POWER OPERATIONS..........................           4,389          10,393           4,389          10,393           4,389          10,393
    WEST SAN JOAQUIN DIVISION, SAN LUIS UNIT............          10,457           6,043          10,457           6,043          10,457           6,043
ORLAND PROJECT..........................................  ..............             930  ..............             930  ..............             930
SALTON SEA RESEARCH PROJECT.............................             300  ..............             300  ..............             300  ..............
SOLANO PROJECT..........................................           1,329           2,367           1,329           2,367           1,329           2,367
VENTURA RIVER PROJECT...................................             313              33             313              33             313              33
 
                        COLORADO
 
ANIMAS-LA PLATA PROJECT.................................             949           1,943             949           1,943             949           1,943
ARMEL UNIT, P-SMBP......................................               5             377               5             377               5             377
COLLBRAN PROJECT........................................             237           1,684             237           1,684             237           1,684
COLORADO-BIG THOMPSON PROJECT...........................             707          13,230             707          13,230             707          13,230
FRUITGROWERS DAM PROJECT................................             103             136             103             136             103             136
FRYINGPAN-ARKANSAS PROJECT..............................             295          11,729             295          11,729             295          11,729
FRYINGPAN-ARKANSAS PROJECT--ARKANSAS VALLEY CONDUIT.....             500  ..............             500  ..............             500  ..............
GRAND VALLEY UNIT, CRBSCP, TITLE II.....................             603           2,606             603           2,606             603           2,606
LEADVILLE/ARKANSAS RIVER RECOVERY PROJECT...............  ..............           1,958  ..............           1,958  ..............           1,958
MANCOS PROJECT..........................................              95             188              95             188              95             188
NARROWS UNIT, P-SMBP....................................  ..............              36  ..............              36  ..............              36
PARADOX VALLEY UNIT, CRBSCP, TITLE II...................           1,293           2,679           1,293           2,679           1,293           2,679
PINE RIVER PROJECT......................................             194             299             194             299             194             299
SAN LUIS VALLEY PROJECT, CLOSED BASIN...................             307           3,637             307           3,637             307           3,637
SAN LUIS VALLEY PROJECT, CONEJOS DIVISION...............              16              40              16              40              16              40
UNCOMPAHGRE PROJECT.....................................             849             193             849             193             849             193
UPPER COLORADO RIVER OPERATIONS PROGRAM.................             270  ..............             270  ..............             270  ..............
 
                          IDAHO
 
BOISE AREA PROJECTS.....................................           2,880           2,029           2,880           2,029           2,880           2,029
COLUMBIA AND SNAKE RIVER SALMON RECOVERY PROJECT........          18,000  ..............          18,000  ..............          18,000  ..............
LEWISTON ORCHARDS PROJECTS..............................             617              25             617              25             617              25
MINIDOKA AREA PROJECTS..................................           2,435           2,183           2,435           2,183           2,435           2,183
PRESTON BENCH PROJECT...................................               4               8               4               8               4               8
 
                         KANSAS
 
ALMENA UNIT, P-SMBP.....................................              40             496              40             496              40             496
BOSTWICK UNIT, P-SMBP...................................             372             882             372             882             372             882
CEDAR BLUFF UNIT, P-SMBP................................              35             547              35             547              35             547
GLEN ELDER UNIT, P-SMBP.................................              66           1,158              66           1,158              66           1,158
KANSAS RIVER UNIT, P-SMBP...............................  ..............             100  ..............             100  ..............             100
KIRWIN UNIT, P-SMBP.....................................              36             408              36             408              36             408
WEBSTER UNIT, P-SMBP....................................              12           1,629              12           1,629              12           1,629
WICHITA PROJECT--CHENEY DIVISION........................              88             426              88             426              88             426
 
                         MONTANA
 
CANYON FERRY UNIT, P-SMBP...............................             246           6,268             246           6,268             246           6,268
EAST BENCH UNIT, P-SMBP.................................             202             661             202             661             202             661
FORT PECK RESERVATION / DRY PRAIRIE RURAL WATER SYSTEM..           3,700  ..............           3,700  ..............           3,700  ..............
HELENA VALLEY UNIT, P-SMBP..............................              19             164              19             164              19             164
HUNGRY HORSE PROJECT....................................  ..............             422  ..............             422  ..............             422
HUNTLEY PROJECT.........................................              12              45              12              45              12              45
LOWER MARIAS UNIT, P-SMBP...............................             102           1,613             102           1,613             102           1,613
LOWER YELLOWSTONE PROJECT...............................             364              16             364              16             364              16
MILK RIVER PROJECT......................................             548           1,487             548           1,487             548           1,487
MISSOURI BASIN O&M;, P-SMBP..............................           1,028             269           1,028             269           1,028             269
ROCKY BOYS/NORTH CENTRAL MT RURAL WATER SYSTEM..........           4,625  ..............           4,625  ..............           4,625  ..............
SUN RIVER PROJECT.......................................             153             253             153             253             153             253
YELLOWTAIL UNIT, P-SMBP.................................              22           7,067              22           7,067              22           7,067
 
                        NEBRASKA
 
AINSWORTH UNIT, P-SMBP..................................              64             115              64             115              64             115
FRENCHMAN-CAMBRIDGE UNIT, P-SMBP........................             335           2,065             335           2,065             335           2,065
MIRAGE FLATS PROJECT....................................              13             110              13             110              13             110
NORTH LOUP UNIT, P-SMBP.................................              89             142              89             142              89             142
 
                         NEVADA
 
LAHONTAN BASIN PROJECT..................................           6,325           3,476           6,325           3,476           6,325           3,476
LAKE TAHOE REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.................             115  ..............             115  ..............             115  ..............
LAKE MEAD /LAS VEGAS WASH PROGRAM.......................             700  ..............             700  ..............             700  ..............
 
                       NEW MEXICO
 
CARLSBAD PROJECT........................................           2,812           1,327           2,812           1,327           2,812           1,327
EASTERN NEW MEXICO RURAL WATER SUPPLY...................              47  ..............              47  ..............              47  ..............
MIDDLE RIO GRANDE PROJECT...............................          12,878          11,113          12,878          11,113          12,878          11,113
RIO GRANDE PROJECT......................................           1,374           6,032           1,374           6,032           1,374           6,032
RIO GRANDE PEUBLOS PROJECT..............................             300  ..............             300  ..............             300  ..............
TUCUMCARI PROJECT.......................................              17               9              17               9              17               9
 
                      NORTH DAKOTA
 
DICKINSON UNIT, P-SMBP..................................             212             393             212             393             212             393
GARRISON DIVERSION UNIT, P-SMBP.........................          16,406           6,743          16,406           6,743          16,406           6,743
HEART BUTTE UNIT, P-SMBP................................              82           1,196              82           1,196              82           1,196
 
                        OKLAHOMA
 
ARBUCKLE PROJECT........................................              67             207              67             207              67             207
MCGEE CREEK PROJECT.....................................              91             851              91             851              91             851
MOUNTAIN PARK PROJECT...................................              25             587              25             587              25             587
NORMAN PROJECT..........................................              48             303              48             303              48             303
WASHITA BASIN PROJECT...................................             160           1,083             160           1,083             160           1,083
W.C. AUSTIN PROJECT.....................................              59             629              59             629              59             629
 
                         OREGON
 
CROOKED RIVER PROJECT...................................             286             506             286             506             286             506
DESCHUTES PROJECT.......................................             372             211             372             211             372             211
EASTERN OREGON PROJECTS.................................             511             220             511             220             511             220
KLAMATH PROJECT.........................................          13,379           4,621          13,379           4,621          13,379           4,621
ROGUE RIVER BASIN PROJECT, TALENT DIVISION..............           2,645             426           2,645             426           2,645             426
TUALATIN PROJECT........................................             172             252             172             252             172             252
UMATILLA PROJECT........................................             528           2,462             528           2,462             528           2,462
 
                      SOUTH DAKOTA
 
ANGOSTURA UNIT, P-SMBP..................................             249             750             249             750             249             750
BELLEFOURCHE UNIT, P-SMBP...............................             270           1,006             270           1,006             270           1,006
KEYHOLE UNIT, P-SMBP....................................             198             569             198             569             198             569
LEWIS AND CLARK RURAL WATER SYSTEM......................           2,774  ..............           2,774  ..............           2,774  ..............
MID-DAKOTA RURAL WATER PROJECT..........................  ..............              15  ..............              15  ..............              15
MNI WICONI PROJECT......................................  ..............          12,000  ..............          12,000  ..............          12,000
OAHE UNIT, P-SMBP.......................................              36              58              36              58              36              58
RAPID VALLEY PROJECT....................................  ..............              69  ..............              69  ..............              69
RAPID VALLEY UNIT, P-SMBP...............................  ..............             195  ..............             195  ..............             195
SHADEHILL UNIT, P-SMBP..................................              75             469              75             469              75             469
 
                          TEXAS
 
BALMORHEA PROJECT.......................................              26              14              26              14              26              14
CANADIAN RIVER PROJECT..................................              84              87              84              87              84              87
LOWER RIO GRANDE WATER RESOURCES CONSERVATION PROGRAM...              50  ..............              50  ..............              50  ..............
NUECES RIVER PROJECT....................................              88             824              88             824              88             824
SAN ANGELO PROJECT......................................              38             552              38             552              38             552
 
                          UTAH
 
HYRUM PROJECT...........................................             178             177             178             177             178             177
MOON LAKE PROJECT.......................................               9              86               9              86               9              86
NEWTON PROJECT..........................................              50              75              50              75              50              75
OGDEN RIVER PROJECT.....................................             218             266             218             266             218             266
PROVO RIVER PROJECT.....................................           1,285             453           1,285             453           1,285             453
SANPETE PROJECT.........................................              60              10              60              10              60              10
SCOFIELD PROJECT........................................             609              84             609              84             609              84
STRAWBERRY VALLEY PROJECT...............................             830             100             830             100             830             100
WEBER BASIN PROJECT.....................................             972           1,150             972           1,150             972           1,150
WEBER RIVER PROJECT.....................................              60              88              60              88              60              88
 
                       WASHINGTON
 
COLUMBIA BASIN PROJECT..................................           4,200          10,610           4,200          10,610           4,200          10,610
WASHINGTON AREA PROJECTS................................             415              60             415              60             415              60
YAKIMA PROJECT..........................................             787           6,784             787           6,784             787           6,784
YAKIMA RIVER BASIN WATER ENHANCEMENT PROJECT............          12,811  ..............          12,811  ..............          12,811  ..............
 
                         WYOMING
 
BOYSEN UNIT, P-SMBP.....................................             231           1,828             231           1,828             231           1,828
BUFFALO BILL DAM, DAM MODIFICATION, P-SMBP..............              32           2,669              32           2,669              32           2,669
KENDRICK PROJECT........................................             107           4,547             107           4,547             107           4,547
NORTH PLATTE PROJECT....................................             205           1,190             205           1,190             205           1,190
NORTH PLATTE AREA, P-SMBP...............................             111           5,012             111           5,012             111           5,012
OWL CREEK UNIT, P-SMBP..................................               6              96               6              96               6              96
RIVERTON UNIT, P-SMBP...................................              12             651              12             651              12             651
SHOSHONE PROJECT........................................              72             729              72             729              72             729
                                                         -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      SUBTOTAL, ITEMS UNDER STATES......................         190,940         286,948         190,940         286,948         225,940         286,948
 
                     REMAINING ITEMS
 
ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR ONGOING WORK:
    RURAL WATER.........................................  ..............  ..............          28,750  ..............          29,705  ..............
    FISH PASSAGE AND FISH SCREENS.......................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............           4,000  ..............
    WATER CONSERVATION AND DELIVERY.....................  ..............  ..............           2,250  ..............           8,000  ..............
    ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION AND COMPLIANCE............  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............           1,000  ..............
    FACILITIES OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, AND                ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
     REHABILITATION.....................................
COLORADO RIVER BASIN SALINITY CONTROL PROJECT, TITLE I..  ..............          14,170  ..............          14,170  ..............          14,170
COLORADO RIVER BASIN SALINITY CONTROL PROJECT, TITLE II.           8,423  ..............           8,423  ..............           8,423  ..............
COLORADO RIVER STORAGE PROJECT (CRSP), SECTION 5........           3,936           5,735           3,936           5,735           3,936           5,735
COLORADO RIVER STORAGE PROJECT (CRSP), SECTION 8........           2,250  ..............           2,250  ..............           2,250  ..............
COLORADO RIVER WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT........             620  ..............             620  ..............             620  ..............
DAM SAFETY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR DAM SAFETY  ..............           1,300  ..............           1,300  ..............           1,300
 PROGRAM................................................
    INITIATE SAFETY OF DAMS CORRECTIVE ACTION...........  ..............          66,500  ..............          66,500  ..............          66,500
    SAFETY EVALUATION OF EXISTING DAMS..................  ..............          20,284  ..............          20,284  ..............          20,284
DROUGHT EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM....................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............          50,000  ..............
EMERGENCY PLANNING & DISASTER RESPONSE PROGRAM..........  ..............           1,250  ..............           1,250  ..............           1,250
ENDANGERED SPECIES RECOVERY IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM......          24,351  ..............          24,351  ..............          24,351  ..............
ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION....................           1,720  ..............           1,720  ..............           1,720  ..............
EXAMINATION OF EXISTING STRUCTURES......................  ..............           8,809  ..............           8,809  ..............           8,809
GENERAL PLANNING ACTIVITIES.............................           2,000  ..............           2,000  ..............           2,000  ..............
INDIAN WATER RIGHTS SETTLEMENTS AAMODT LITIGATION         ..............  ..............           6,000  ..............           3,000  ..............
 SETTLEMENT ACT.........................................
    CROW TRIBE WATER RIGHTS SETTLEMENT ACT OF 2010......  ..............  ..............          12,772  ..............           2,000  ..............
    NAVAJO-GALLUP WATER SUPPLY PROJECT..................  ..............  ..............          89,663  ..............          81,000  ..............
    TAOS PUEBLO INDIAN WATER RIGHTS SETTLEMENT ACT......  ..............  ..............           4,048  ..............           4,048  ..............
LAND RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PROGRAM.......................           9,188  ..............           9,188  ..............           9,188  ..............
LOWER COLORADO RIVER OPERATIONS PROGRAM.................          28,345  ..............          28,345  ..............          28,345  ..............
MISCELLANEOUS FLOOD CONTROL OPERATIONS..................  ..............             817  ..............             817  ..............             817
NATIVE AMERICAN AFFAIRS PROGRAM.........................          10,925  ..............          10,925  ..............          10,925  ..............
NEGOTIATION & ADMINISTRATION OF WATER MARKETING.........           1,728  ..............           1,728  ..............           1,728  ..............
OPERATION & PROGRAM MANAGEMENT..........................             962           1,547             962           1,547             962           1,547
POWER PROGRAM SERVICES..................................           2,391             307           2,391             307           2,391             307
PUBLIC ACCESS AND SAFETY PROGRAM........................             596             206             596             206             596             206
RECLAMATION LAW ADMINISTRATION..........................           2,323  ..............           2,323  ..............           2,323  ..............
RECREATION & FISH & WILDLIFE PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION.....           2,202  ..............           2,202  ..............           2,202  ..............
 
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT:
    DESALINATION AND WATER PURIFICATION PROGRAM.........           2,305           1,150           2,305           1,150           2,305           1,150
    SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM......................          16,565  ..............          16,565  ..............          16,565  ..............
SITE SECURITY ACTIVITIES................................  ..............          26,220  ..............          26,220  ..............          26,220
UNITED STATES/MEXICO BORDER ISSUES--TECHNICAL SUPPORT...              90  ..............              90  ..............              90  ..............
WATERSMART PROGRAM WATERSMART GRANTS....................          23,365  ..............          20,000  ..............          23,365  ..............
    WATER CONSERVATION FIELD SERVICES PROGRAM...........           4,239  ..............           4,239  ..............           4,239  ..............
    COOPERATIVE WATERSHED MANAGEMENT....................             250  ..............             250  ..............             250  ..............
    BASIN STUDIES.......................................           5,200  ..............           5,200  ..............           5,200  ..............
    DROUGHT RESPONSE & COMPREHENSIVE DROUGHT PLANS......           2,500  ..............           2,500  ..............           2,500  ..............
    RESILIENT INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENTS................  ..............           2,500  ..............           2,500  ..............           2,500
    TITLE XVI WATER RECLAMATION & REUSE PROGRAM.........          20,000  ..............          23,365  ..............          20,000  ..............
HOUSE FLOOR AMENDMENTS..................................  ..............  ..............           2,000  ..............  ..............  ..............
                                                         -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      SUBTOTAL, REMAINING ITEMS.........................         176,474         150,795         321,957         150,795         359,227         150,795
 
UNDERFINANCING..........................................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............         -19,896         -14,883
                                                         -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL.............................................         367,414         437,743         512,897         437,743         565,271         422,860
      GRAND TOTAL, WATER AND RELATED RESOURCES..........  ..............         805,157  ..............         950,640  ..............         988,131
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CALFED Water Storage Feasibility Studies.--The Committee 
notes that with the passage of California Proposition 1 in 
2014, the California Water Commission is expected to begin 
allocating $2,700,000,000 for the public benefits of water 
storage projects in early 2017. To ensure that the CALFED water 
supply projects are able to compete for the available State 
funding, the Committee directs Reclamation to take such steps 
as are necessary to ensure that each of the authorized CALFED 
water storage feasibility studies, and associated environmental 
impact statements, are completed as soon as practicable, and 
that, at a minimum, publicly available drafts of such studies 
and environmental reviews are completed no later than November 
30, 2016.
    Safety of Dams Act of 1978, as amended.--The Committee 
reiterates that Sisk Dam in California and its related 
facilities are owned by the United States. If determined that 
corrective actions are needed to reduce risk from seismic 
activity, then, under the Safety of Dams Act of 1978, as 
amended, 85 percent of all costs of those corrective actions 
should be a nonreimbursable cost of the United States. The 
other 15 percent of costs should be allocated to authorized 
State and Federal purposes of the project pursuant to 43 U.S.C. 
Sec. 508(c).
    Scoggins Dam, Tualatin Project, Oregon.--As part of its Dam 
Safety Program, Reclamation is working on a Corrective Action 
Alternatives Study [CAS] for Scoggins Dam, the main feature of 
the Tualatin Project. Working with local stakeholders, 
Reclamation is evaluating how water supply objectives, such as 
increased storage, may be coordinated with CAS implementation. 
Phase 2 of the CAS, which is scheduled for completion in fiscal 
year 2016, should evaluate alternatives including replacement 
structures near the current dam to address Safety of Dams Act 
of 1978 modifications and additional storage benefits. These 
alternatives may reduce the obligation for both the Federal 
Government and stakeholders. As requested in fiscal year 2015, 
the Committee has included authorizing language to increase the 
cost ceiling for the Safety of Dams program and allow for 
concurrent safety modifications and additional storage capacity 
if determined by the Secretary of the Interior to be feasible 
and in the national interest.
    Water Hyacinth.--The Committee notes that the aquatic 
invasive water hyacinth has had harmful effects on navigation, 
trade and commerce, the environment, wildlife, and water 
supplies in the western United States. The Committee directs 
Reclamation to coordinate with the United States Department of 
Agriculture, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, National 
Marine Fisheries Service, the Corps of Engineers, State and 
local authorities, water districts, water contractors, and not-
for-profit organizations to establish best practices and 
cooperative arrangements that could be implemented annually to 
help mitigate and eliminate the spread of water hyacinth in 
waterways in Reclamation States.
    Non-native Predators.--The Committee is encouraged by the 
steps that Reclamation has taken, in consultation with the 
United States Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Marine 
Fisheries Service, States, and other stakeholders, to evaluate 
and implement projects that could improve protection and 
recovery of endangered salmon and smelt. The Committee directs 
Reclamation to continue consultations with Federal, State, and 
local agencies to develop additional activities that could aid 
in mitigating or removing non-native predators that prey on 
endangered salmon and smelt.
    Mni Wiconi Project, South Dakota.--Within the funds 
provided for the operations and maintenance of the project, 
Reclamation may use funds for upgrading existing community 
systems that have always been intended to be part of the 
project. Additionally, within 60 days of enactment of this act, 
Reclamation shall provide a report on a plan to identify 
existing resources and complete the needed community system 
upgrades. This plan shall be coordinated with the United States 
Departments of Agriculture, Health and Human Services, Housing 
and Urban Development, Bureau of Indian Affairs, and 
Environmental Protection Agency.
    Rural Water Projects.--When allocating resources for rural 
water projects, the Committee prohibits Reclamation from using 
the ability of a non-Federal sponsor to contribute funds in 
excess of the authorized non-Federal cost share as a criterion 
for prioritizing these funds.
    The Committee also directs Reclamation to work with the 
United States Department of the Interior, the Senate Energy and 
Natural Resources Committee, and House Natural Resources 
Committee on legislative solutions to funding authorized 
Reclamation Rural Water Projects.
    WaterSMART Program.--The Committee recommends that grants 
funded under the WaterSMART Program have a near-term impact on 
water and energy conservation and improved water management. 
Reclamation is urged to prioritize funding for projects in 
regions most stricken by drought.
    Additional Funding for Water and Related Resources Work.--
The Committee recommendation includes an additional 
$182,974,000 above the budget request for Water and Related 
Resources studies, projects, and activities. Priority in 
allocating these funds should be given to advance and complete 
ongoing work; improve water supply reliability; improve water 
deliveries; enhance national, regional, or local economic 
development; promote job growth; advance Tribal and non-Tribal 
water settlement studies and activities; or address critical 
backlog maintenance and rehabilitation activities. Funding 
provided under the heading Additional Funding for Ongoing Work 
may be utilized for ongoing work, including pre-construction 
activities, on projects which provide new or existing water 
supplies through additional infrastructure; provided, however, 
that priority should be given in allocating funds to ongoing 
work on authorized projects for which environmental compliance 
has been completed. Funding provided under the heading Drought 
Emergency Assistance Program may be allocated to any authorized 
purposes, but shall be allocated to those activities that will 
have the most direct, most immediate, and largest impact on 
extending limited water supplies during current drought 
conditions. Reclamation is encouraged to use all available 
authorities to provide for additional water supplies through 
conservation, minor changes to the operations of existing 
projects, drilling emergency wells, or other means authorized 
under current law. This additional funding may be used alone or 
in combination with any other funding provided in a program, 
project, or activity.
    Buried Metallic Water Pipe.--Last year, the Committee 
directed Reclamation to, among other things, conduct an 
objective, independently peer-reviewed analysis of pipeline 
reliability standards. Reclamation has yet to complete this 
study, which is of particular concern to the Committee because 
Reclamation's use of Technical Memorandum 8140-CC-2004-1 
(``Corrosion Considerations for Buried Metallic Water Pipe'') 
continues to hold different materials to different standards of 
reliability and increases project costs. The Committee directs 
that until this study is completed, Reclamation shall not use 
the memorandum as the sole basis to deny funding or approval of 
a project or to disqualify any material from use in highly 
corrosive soils. The pipeline reliability study must provide an 
objective, independently peer-reviewed analysis of pipeline 
reliability standards and be completed as quickly as possible. 
Reclamation is reminded that this study, including all data 
assembly and analysis must be conducted by an appropriate, 
independent third-party. Reclamation and its contractors 
involved in these efforts are expected to protect business-
sensitive data that is collected during this process.

                CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT RESTORATION FUND

Appropriations, 2015....................................     $56,995,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................      49,528,000
House allowance.........................................      49,528,000
Committee recommendation................................      49,528,000

    The Committee recommends $49,528,000 for the Central Valley 
Project Restoration Fund, the same as the budget request. This 
appropriation is fully offset by a scorekeeping adjustment from 
revenues.
    The Central Valley Project Restoration Fund was authorized 
in the Central Valley Project Improvement Act, title 34 of 
Public Law 102-575. This fund uses revenues from payments by 
project beneficiaries and donations for habitat restoration, 
improvement and acquisition, and other fish and wildlife 
restoration activities in the Central Valley project area of 
California. Payments from project beneficiaries include several 
required by the act (Friant Division surcharges, higher charges 
on water transferred to non-Central Valley Project users, and 
tiered water prices) and, to the extent required in 
appropriations acts, additional annual mitigation and 
restoration payments.

                    CALIFORNIA BAY-DELTA RESTORATION

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2015....................................     $37,000,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................      37,000,000
House allowance.........................................      37,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      37,000,000

    The Committee recommends $37,000,000 for California Bay-
Delta Restoration, the same as the budget request.
    This account funds activities that are consistent with the 
CALFED Bay-Delta Program, a collaborative effort involving 18 
State and Federal agencies and representatives of California's 
urban, agricultural, and environmental communities. The goals 
of the program are to improve fish and wildlife habitat, water 
supply reliability, and water quality in the San Francisco Bay-
San Joaquin River Delta, the principle hub of California's 
water distribution system.

                       POLICY AND ADMINISTRATION

Appropriations, 2015....................................     $58,500,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................      59,500,000
House allowance.........................................      59,500,000
Committee recommendation................................      58,500,000

    The Committee recommends $58,500,000 for Policy and 
Administration, a decrease of $1,000,000 from the budget 
request.
    This account funds the executive direction and management 
of all Reclamation activities, as performed by the 
Commissioner's offices in Washington, DC; Denver, Colorado; and 
five regional offices. The Denver office and regional offices 
charge individual projects or activities for direct beneficial 
services and related administrative and technical costs. These 
charges are covered under other appropriations.

                    INDIAN WATER RIGHTS SETTLEMENTS

Appropriations, 2015....................................................
Budget estimate, 2016...................................    $112,483,000
House allowance.........................................................
Committee recommendation................................................

    The Committee recommends no funds for Indian Water Rights 
Settlements in this account.
    This account was proposed as a part of the administration 
request to cover expenses associated with four Indian water 
rights settlements contained in the Claims Resolution Act of 
2010 (Public Law 111-291), title X of the Omnibus Public Lands 
Management Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-11), and the White 
Mountain Apache Tribe Rural Water System Loan Authorization Act 
(Public Law 110-390). Rather than create a new account as 
proposed, the Committee has recommended funding under the Water 
and Related Resources account as similar work and funding has 
been previously provided in that account.

                      SAN JOAQUIN RESTORATION FUND

Appropriations, 2015....................................................
Budget estimate, 2016...................................     $35,000,000
House allowance.........................................................
Committee recommendation................................................

    The Committee recommends no funds for the San Joaquin 
Restoration Fund in this account.
    The Committee has provided this funding request under the 
Central Valley Project, Friant Division of the Water and 
Related Resources account as similar work and funding has been 
provided in that account in prior years.

             GENERAL PROVISIONS--DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

    Section 201. The bill includes a provision regarding 
reprogramming and transfer of funds.
    Section 202. The bill includes a provision regarding the 
San Luis Unit.
    Section 203. The bill includes a provision regarding the 
Secure Water Act.
    Section 204. The bill includes a provision regarding Calfed 
Bay Delta.
    Section 205. The bill includes a provision regarding the 
Reclamation Safety of Dams Act of 1978.
    Section 206. The bill includes a provision regarding the 
Reclamation Safety of Dams Act of 1978.
    Section 207. The bill includes a provision regarding 
feasibility studies.
    Section 208. The bill includes a provision regarding 
California Bay-Delta.
    Section 209. The bill includes a provision regarding the 
Central Valley Project Restoration Fund.

                               TITLE III

                          DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

                       Overview of Recommendation

    The Committee recommends $29,429,115,000 for the Department 
of Energy, a decrease of $1,098,021,000 from the budget 
request. Within the funding recommendation, $18,956,437,000 is 
classified as defense and $10,472,678,000 is classified as non-
defense.
    The Committee recommendation sets priorities by supporting 
basic energy research; reducing spending of mature 
technologies; leading the world in scientific computing; 
addressing the Federal Government's responsibility for 
environmental cleanup and disposal of used nuclear fuel; 
keeping large construction projects on time and on budget; 
effectively maintaining our nuclear weapons stockpile; and 
supporting our nuclear Navy.

                              Introduction

    The mission of the Department of Energy [Department] is to 
ensure America's security and prosperity by addressing its 
energy, environmental, and nuclear challenges through 
transformative science and technology solutions. To accomplish 
this mission, the Secretary of Energy [Secretary] relies on a 
world-class network of national laboratories, private industry, 
universities, States, and Federal agencies, which allows our 
brightest minds to solve our Nation's most important 
challenges.
    The Committee's recommendation for the Department includes 
funding in both defense and non-defense budget categories. 
Defense funding is recommended for atomic energy defense 
activities, including the National Nuclear Security 
Administration, which manages our Nation's stockpile of nuclear 
weapons, and prevents proliferation of dangerous nuclear 
materials, and supports the Navy's nuclear fleet; defense 
environmental cleanup to remediate the former nuclear weapons 
complex; and safeguards and security for Idaho National 
Laboratory. Non-defense funding is recommended for the 
Department's energy research and development programs 
(including nuclear, fossil, and renewable energy, energy 
efficiency, grid modernization and resiliency, and the Office 
of Science), power marketing administrations, the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission, and administrative expenses.

                        Reprogramming Guidelines

    The Committee's recommendation includes control points to 
ensure that the Secretary spends taxpayer funds in accordance 
with congressional direction. The Committee's recommendation 
also includes reprogramming guidelines to allow the Secretary 
to request permission from the Committee for certain 
expenditures, as defined below, which would not otherwise be 
permissible. The Secretary's execution of appropriated funds 
should be fully consistent with the direction provided under 
this heading and in section 301 of the bill, unless the 
Committee includes separate guidelines for specific actions in 
this report.
    Prior to obligating any funds for an action defined below 
as a reprogramming, the Secretary shall notify and obtain 
approval of the Committee. The Secretary should submit a 
detailed reprogramming request in accordance with section 301 
of the bill, which should, at a minimum, justify the deviation 
from prior congressional direction and describe the proposed 
funding adjustments with specificity. The Secretary shall not, 
pending approval from the Committee, obligate any funds for the 
action described in the reprogramming proposal.
    The Secretary is also directed to inform the Committee 
promptly and fully when a change in program execution and 
funding is required during the fiscal year.
    Definition.--A reprogramming includes:
  --the reallocation of funds from one activity to another 
        within an appropriation;
  --any significant departure from a program, project, 
        activity, or organization described in the agency's 
        budget justification as presented to and approved by 
        Congress;
  --for construction projects, the reallocation of funds from 
        one construction project identified in the agency's 
        budget justification to another project or a 
        significant change in the scope of an approved project;
  --adoption of any reorganization proposal which includes 
        moving prior appropriations between appropriations 
        accounts; and
  --any reallocation of new or prior year budget authority, or 
        prior year deobligations.

                        Crosscutting Initiatives

    The budget request proposes several crosscutting 
initiatives that span several program offices. The Committee 
supports the Secretary's efforts to reach outside of individual 
program offices to draw on the diverse disciplines within the 
agency as a whole. These initiatives, which address grid 
modernization, supercritical CO2, subsurface 
engineering, energy-water nexus, and cybersecurity would allow 
a more comprehensive review of complex issues. Budgetary 
constraints do not allow the Committee to recommend full 
funding for these initiatives at this time, but the Committee 
directs the Secretary to prioritize funds that are provided 
within this recommendation to support these crosscutting 
initiatives to the maximum extent possible. The Secretary is 
further directed to provide the Committee, not later than 180 
days after the enactment of this act, a comprehensive program 
plan for crosscutting initiatives covering the next five fiscal 
years, including proposed funding requirements and goals of 
each new initiative.
    Grid Modernization.--The Committee supports the Secretary's 
decision to further coordinate what has been fragmented 
research and development efforts on grid modernization into a 
crosscutting initiative, as well as the effort to establish a 
laboratory consortium to assist in this coordination. 
University research teams and small-to-medium sized companies, 
which are at the core of future power delivery systems 
innovation, generally lack the research and development budgets 
and advanced test capabilities for developing new high-power 
prototypes and devices needed to integrate increasingly large 
loads of renewable-sourced energy onto the grid. The Committee 
encourages the Secretary to leverage existing national assets 
for technical assistance and testing centers for grid and power 
technologies.
    The Committee is encouraged by the Secretary's efforts 
toward grid modernization research and development planning 
that will ensure a path toward an integrated, secure, clean, 
and reliable electricity infrastructure while remaining 
affordable to consumers. The Committee recognizes the valuable 
role the national laboratories can play for advancements in 
electric infrastructure to meet our Nation's energy needs and 
is supportive of the grid modernization crosscut and the work 
of the National Laboratory Grid Modernization Consortium. The 
Committee also encourages the Department's continued 
coordination to ensure grid-related research across the 
Department complex is not duplicative. In addition, the 
Committee directs the Secretary to provide within 180 days of 
enactment of this act, a detailed implementation plan on the 
grid crosscut, detailing funding requirements, specific 
objectives, and delineation of responsibilities among the 
program offices within the Department.
    Energy-Water Nexus.--The Committee recognizes there is a 
clear need to obtain reliable, current, and comprehensive data 
on energy-for-water and water-for-energy use. Examples include 
data on water use by power plants, water for fuel extraction 
and liquid fuel production, energy use by water utilities, and 
water reuse and replacement. More accurate data and analysis 
can improve informed decision making; help prioritize 
investments in energy-water infrastructure; contribute to the 
research and development of related technologies; and lead to 
more efficient and sustainable water and energy practices. 
Transitioning to a more efficient water and energy 
infrastructure will strengthen the manufacturing and production 
sectors. In order to better understand water use for power 
generation and fuel processing, the Committee recommends that 
the Energy Information Administration [EIA] account for water 
use in the energy policy analysis it undertakes.

                       Quadrennial Energy Review

    The first installment of the Quadrennial Energy Review 
[QER], as directed by the president in January 2014, was 
released in April 2015. The QER makes recommendations to 
modernize and improve our energy architecture and 
infrastructure, specifically in the areas of transmission, 
storage, and distribution [TS&D;]. Modernizing our nation's 
aging, extensive, vulnerable, and high-demand infrastructure is 
made even more challenging due to our increasingly diverse 
energy supply and competing uses of ports and railways for 
energy transportation. Successfully addressing these critical 
issues will require coordination among many levels of 
government and private industry, and the Committee believes the 
Secretary must solicit and rely on well-informed input from a 
variety of stakeholders to support recommendations that will 
lead to a more resilient, reliable and robust TS&D; 
infrastructure to meet the demands of our 21st century economy. 
The Committee urges the Secretary to continue engagement with 
State, local, tribal, and international jurisdictions to inform 
future action on this modernization roadmap. The Committee 
encourages and strongly supports the well-designed, purpose-
driven, public-private partnerships that have coordinated to 
create this report.
    The Committee directs the Secretary, within 180 days after 
the enactment of this act, to provide the Committee with a 
status of implementing the recommendations in the QER, 
including what has been achieved through the shared interest of 
involved parties, Federal Government actions cited in the 
report, and an analysis of recommendations that have not been 
adopted. The Edison Electric Institute estimated in 2008 that 
by 2030, the U.S. electric utility industry would need to make 
a total infrastructure investment of between $1,500,000,000,000 
and $2,000,000,000,000, of which transmission and distribution 
are expected to account for about $900,000,000,000. The 
Committee looks forward to working with the Secretary to use 
the QER as a roadmap to support Federal funding of potential 
solutions, but recognizes that the vast majority of our 
Nation's infrastructure is privately owned and sustained by the 
private sector. Supporting the advancement of our energy 
architecture and infrastructure will not be addressed solely by 
Federal funding and private investment, but also through 
changes in the regulatory environment, such as the Federal 
process for permitting and siting of electrical transmission 
facilities, to enable and support these critical investments.

                        COMMONLY RECYCLED PAPER

    The Secretary shall not expend funds for projects that 
knowingly use as a feedstock commonly recycled paper that is 
segregated from municipal solid waste or collected as part of a 
collection system that commingles commonly recycled paper with 
other solid waste at any point from the time of collection 
through materials recovery.

                         SOCIAL COST OF CARBON

    The Secretary should not promulgate any regulations in 
fiscal year 2016 using the May 2013 estimates for the social 
cost of carbon until a new working group is convened. The 
working group should include the relevant agencies and affected 
stakeholders, re-examine the social cost of carbon using the 
best available science, and revise the estimate using an 
accurate discount rate and domestic estimate in accordance with 
Executive Order 12866 and OMB Circular A-4. To increase 
transparency, the working group should solicit public comments 
prior to finalizing any updates.

                              5 YEAR PLAN

    The Secretary is required by section 7279-a of title 42 
U.S.C., enacted by the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012, 
to include in the Department's annual budget request proposed 
funding levels for the request year and 4 subsequent years, at 
a level of detail commensurate with the current budget 
justification documents. This requirement is to ensure that the 
Secretary is proposing a current budget that takes into account 
realistic budget constraints in future years, and that Congress 
has full visibility into the future implications of current 
budget decisions across the Department's energy programs.
    Unfortunately, the Secretary has chosen not to comply by 
omitting any meaningful 5-year budgeting from its four budget 
requests since enactment of this legal requirement. The 
Committee directs the Secretary to submit a report, not later 
than September 30, 2015, to the Committees on Appropriations of 
both the House of Representatives and Senate, on the plan to 
comply with section 7279a of title 42 in its fiscal year 2017 
budget request. Failure to provide this report may result in 
more directive measures to ensure the Secretary complies with 
the law and engages in practices that safeguard taxpayer 
dollars.

                            ENERGY PROGRAMS

                 Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

Appropriations, 2015....................................  $1,923,935,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................   2,722,987,000
House allowance.........................................   1,668,774,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,950,000,000

    The Committee recommends $1,950,000,000 for Energy 
Efficiency and Renewable Energy [EERE], a decrease of 
$772,987,000 from the budget request. Within available funds, 
the Committee recommends $160,000,000 for program direction.

                          VEHICLE TECHNOLOGIES

    The Committee recommends $292,000,000 for Vehicle 
Technologies.
    The Committee recommends not less than $20,000,000 for 
applied research to overcome the barriers to widespread 
adoption of lightweight material designs that include magnesium 
alloys, aluminum alloys, high-strength steels, and fiber-
reinforced polymer composites. Further applied research is 
needed to develop coatings, adhesives, high-strength 
fiberglass, and other advanced materials to effectively join 
mixed materials, prevent corrosion, reduce costs, and address 
consumer requirements such as noise mitigation and appearance.
    The Committee urges the Secretary to work with the natural 
gas vehicle industry to identify needs and develop solutions 
for additional engines and emissions control technologies in 
order to obtain the emission advantages when using natural gas 
in high efficiency engines.
    The Committee directs the Secretary to work with heavy-duty 
vehicle and engine manufacturers to develop an emissions 
profile for heavy-duty, dual-fueled natural gas and diesel 
automobiles to help determine what, if any, emissions control 
technologies need to be installed on such vehicles to meet 
environmental regulations. The Committee expects the Secretary 
to seek the most cost-competitive options as it evaluates the 
control technology options available to these equipment 
manufacturers.
    The Committee recommends $20,000,000 for Fuel and Lubricant 
Technologies. Within available funds, the Committee recommends 
up to $5,000,000 for research, development, and demonstration 
supporting direct injection engines using propane or liquefied 
petroleum gas.
    The Committee acknowledges the success of the SuperTruck I 
program in improving freight efficiency and heavy-duty vehicle 
efficiency. The Committee recommends $20,000,000 for the 
SuperTruck II program to further improve the efficiency of 
heavy-duty class 8 long- and regional-haul vehicles. The 
Secretary is directed to make up to 4 awards using the multi-
year allocation process that was used successfully by the 
SuperTruck I program.
    Within available funds, the Committee recommends 
$10,000,000 for continued funding of section 131 of the 2007 
Energy Independence and Security Act for transportation 
electrification.
    Within available funds, the Committee recommends not less 
than $5,000,000 to support competitive demonstrations of energy 
storage using electric vehicle batteries to evaluate residual 
value. The Committee further encourages the Secretary to 
develop opportunities to partner with nonprofit organizations 
in deploying workplace electric vehicle charging 
infrastructure.
    The Committee recognizes local initiatives to deploy 
alternative fuel vehicles and infrastructure are critical to 
wider adoption of these technologies to diversify our fuel 
supply and save consumers money. The Committee recommends 
$49,000,000 for deployment of vehicles through the Clean Cities 
Program. The Committee further recommends, within available 
funds, not less than $20,000,000 to support the ``Alternative 
Fuel Vehicle Community Partner Projects'' for competitive 
demonstration of electric and advanced fuel deployment 
programs, with a focus on larger scale deployment proposals.
    The Committee supports the EcoCAR 3 competition, which 
provides hands-on, real-world experience to demonstrate a 
variety of advanced technologies and designs, and supports 
development of a workforce trained in advanced vehicles. The 
Committee recommends $2,500,000 for Advanced Vehicle 
Competitions to develop and execute the second of the 4-year 
collegiate engineering competition, EcoCAR 3.

                         BIOENERGY TECHNOLOGIES

    The Committee recommends $225,000,000 for Bioenergy 
Technologies.
    Within available funds, the Committee directs the Secretary 
to provide a total of $30,000,000 for algae biofuels. Within 
available funds, the Committee recommends $45,000,000 for the 
Department's final contribution to the Defense Production Act 
collaboration with the Navy and Department of Agriculture.
    The Committee recognizes research and development focused 
on higher value co-products is an effective strategy for 
lowering the cost of converting biomass to advanced biofuels. 
However, the Committee also believes there is an opportunity 
for the Secretary to invest in the development of broader 
platforms and capabilities that may drive down conversion costs 
more generally, and thereby provide additional returns on 
Federal investment. The Committee encourages the Secretary to 
explore these opportunities.
    The Committee remains concerned the Secretary is 
interpreting bioenergy too narrowly and failing to consider 
biopower as a viable output of energy technology projects. When 
issuing funding opportunities, the Secretary is directed to 
include biopower projects as eligible recipients for technology 
development support.
    The Committee supports the Secretary's participation in the 
Farm to Fly 2 Initiative with the Federal Aviation 
Administration's Center of Excellence for Alternative Jet Fuels 
and the Environment. The initiative is intended to be a cost-
sharing partnership between academia, industry, and the Federal 
Government, and the Committee urges the Secretary, within 90 
days after the enactment of this act, to provide to the 
Committee the initiative's cost sharing plans, including 
projected outyear budgetary requirements.
    The Committee supports the Bioenergy Technologies mission 
to develop and deploy commercially viable biofuels and 
bioproducts from renewable biomass resources, and encourages 
the Secretary to further the mission by testing and scaling up 
new bio-based technologies by conducting a competitive 
solicitation to establish demonstration-scale multi-user 
facilities for the production of bio-based products and 
chemicals.

                  HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL TECHNOLOGIES

    The Committee recommends $97,000,000 for Hydrogen and Fuel 
Cell Technologies. The Committee continues to support fuel cell 
and hydrogen energy systems for stationary, vehicle, motive, 
and portable power applications. Within available funds, the 
Committee recommends not less than $35,200,000 for hydrogen 
research and development, including research both into direct 
solar water splitting and near-term cost improvements for 
hydrogen dispensed at refueling stations.

                              SOLAR ENERGY

    The Committee recommends $241,600,000 for solar energy.
    The Committee supports the Secretary's emphasis on 
advancing integration of distributed solar generation with the 
existing power grid and on lowering the soft costs of solar 
installations for residential and small-scale commercial 
customers. The financing, contracting, permitting, inspection, 
and installation costs can add significantly to the overall 
cost of solar system acquisition. The Secretary's efforts to 
develop the workforce, regulatory and legal expertise, and 
information technology tools are needed to drive down costs for 
solar technology for every day consumers.
    The Committee recognizes that solar energy is one of the 
fastest growing industries in the United States, and employs 
174,000 workers today. Within available funds, the Committee 
recommends $1,000,000 for the Secretary's contribution to the 
joint Solar Ready Vets program with the Department of Defense 
as a way to train America's veterans to fill this growing skill 
need.
    Within available funds, the Committee recommends 
$48,400,000 for concentrating solar power projects that lower 
the cost of the technology, address electric grid reliability 
integration of variable renewable power into the electric grid, 
and support the Supercritical Transformational Electric Power 
Generation Initiative. Areas of research and development should 
include improved design of solar collection, higher cooperating 
receivers, and the integration of higher temperature power 
cycles.

                              WIND ENERGY

    The Committee recommends $46,000,000 for Wind Energy. 
Within these funds, the Committee recommends $40,000,000 for 
offshore wind demonstration projects, and $6,000,000 to further 
substantiate the design and economic value proposition of 
alternative project designs for offshore wind power. No 
additional funding is recommended for Wind Energy.

                              WATER POWER

    The Committee recommends $65,000,000 for Water Power. 
Within available funds, the Committee recommends $23,000,000 
for conventional hydropower, including up to $3,900,000 for the 
purposes of section 242 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, and 
not less than $5,000,000 shall support competitive 
demonstrations of pumped hydroelectric storage projects.
    Marine and Hydrokinetic Technology Research, Development, 
and Deployment.--Within available funds, the Committee 
recommends $42,000,000 for marine and hydrokinetic [MHK] 
technology research, development, and deployment. Within this 
amount, the Committee recommends $20,000,000 for a balanced 
portfolio of competitive private sector-led research, 
development and demonstrations of MHK technologies, including 
wave and current (tidal, river, ocean) energy conversion 
technologies. No funding is recommended for advanced design 
tools, the incubator program, or for the clean energy 
manufacturing initiative. Within available funds, the Committee 
recommends $5,000,000 to continue its development and 
construction for an open water, fully energetic, grid-connected 
wave energy test facility. The Committee also directs the 
Secretary to share with Congress the outcome of the ongoing 
consultation with the MHK energy industry on the program's 
research, development and deployment priorities, and to ensure 
related activities by the national laboratories support 
industry-driven technology advancement projects, with a 
priority on the development of domestic technologies. The 
Secretary is also encouraged to review and share the findings 
with Congress on how the Small Business Innovation Research 
program may be more effectively utilized to support the goals 
of the Water Power Program.
    The Committee encourages the Secretary to support 
activities to develop advanced MHK systems and component 
technologies to increase energy capture, reliability, and 
survivability for lower costs and to assess and monitor 
environmental effects.

                        GEOTHERMAL TECHNOLOGIES

    The Committee recommends $71,000,000 for Geothermal 
Technologies. Funds made available by this section shall be 
disbursed to the full spectrum of geothermal technologies, as 
authorized by the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 
(Public Law 110-140). The Secretary is encouraged to continue 
to support comprehensive programs that foster academic and 
professional development initiatives.
    To facilitate necessary technology development and expand 
understanding of subsurface dynamics, the Committee recommends 
$35,000,000 for the Frontier Observatory for Research in 
Geothermal Energy [FORGE], which will use a competitive process 
to site and construct a facility for the design, development, 
and testing of innovative methods of generating electricity for 
geothermal resources.

                         ADVANCED MANUFACTURING

    The Committee recommends $214,000,000 for Advanced 
Manufacturing. The Committee recognizes the importance of the 
manufacturing sector to the U.S. economy, which directly 
generates 12 percent of the gross domestic product and employs 
nearly 12 million people.
    Within available funds, the Committee recommends 
$84,000,000 to support the existing 3 Clean Energy 
Manufacturing Institutes [CEMI], including $14,000,000 each for 
the wide bandgap semiconductor institute, the advanced 
composites institute, and the smart manufacturing institute, a 
fourth institute to be awarded in fiscal year 2015. The 
Committee recommendation includes funding to establish an 
additional CEMI. The Committee is pleased that several diverse 
consortia were formed to respond to these innovation 
opportunities, but is concerned there are limited resources 
available to support both the focus areas and additional teams 
that were not selected for prior awards. The Committee urges 
the Secretary to find mechanisms to support the ideas that were 
not funded in previous awards, but have technical merit for 
advanced manufacturing developments. For the fourth and each 
subsequent institute, the Secretary shall conduct an open 
solicitation and competitive, merit-based review process. 
Should future requests propose funding for new institutes, the 
Secretary shall continue to include in each budget 
justification the potential specific research topics associated 
with the proposed institutes. This will provide the Committee 
with the necessary transparency to evaluate and prioritize 
funding to ensure that only highly effective centers closely 
aligned with the Advanced Manufacturing program missions are 
funded.
    The Committee recognizes that stranded, flared, and vented 
natural gas is the result of low natural gas prices that make 
transporting it uneconomic. As topics for additional Clean 
Energy Manufacturing Institutes are evaluated, the Secretary is 
encouraged to consider modular chemical processing as a way to 
address the issue of natural gas flaring and enable advanced 
manufacturing applications in the oil and gas industry.
    The Committee recommends $25,000,000 for the Critical 
Materials Hub aimed at improving critical material supply 
chains that are prone to disruption. The Committee notes that 
the Hub has focused on high-priority problems and has developed 
strong milestones. The Committee supports the Hub's goal of 
developing at least one technology adopted by U.S. companies 
within each of its three focus areas: diversifying and 
expanding production; reducing wastes; and developing 
substitutes.
    Related to critical materials and advanced fabrication 
techniques, the Committee further recognizes the promise of new 
nanostructured metals that can be used in structural 
applications, extreme environments, and chemical synthesis with 
direct relevance to advanced energy technologies. Within 
available funds, the Committee recommends $3,000,000 for 
university and industry support to help bridge the gap between 
laboratory research and marketplace deployment of these new 
materials.
    The Committee recommends $20,000,000 for development of 
additive manufacturing processes, low-cost carbon fiber, and 
other manufacturing technologies at the existing Manufacturing 
Demonstration Facility [MDF]. The Committee notes the ongoing 
emphasis on assisting small- and medium-sized businesses 
overcome the risks and challenges of investing in specialized, 
high-technology equipment at the MDF. The Secretary is 
encouraged to continue this emphasis in the coming year.
    The Committee supports continued research and development 
of technologies to produce low-cost carbon fiber. The Committee 
encourages the Secretary to create a pilot program to make a 
competitive award to produce at least 2 million pounds of 
carbon fiber per year at a target price of less than $5 per 
pound. The pilot program should require recipients to directly 
synthesize carbon filament, eliminating dependence of filament 
precursors and the requisite carbonization process, while 
minimizing all post-processing while demonstrating 
significantly less total energy consumption.
    The Committee recommends $1,500,000 for the joint additive 
manufacturing pilot institute with the Department of Defense.

                         BUILDING TECHNOLOGIES

    The Committee recommends $178,000,000 for Building 
Technologies. The Committee supports the focus on advanced 
technologies for heating, ventilation, and air conditioning 
systems, recognizing that such technologies have the potential 
to reduce the national cost of energy by 20 to 50 percent. The 
Committee recognizes that most building standard codes are 
developed and implemented by State and local governments. 
Therefore, the Committee also supports ongoing efforts to work 
with State and local agencies to incorporate the latest 
technical knowledge and best practices into construction 
requirements.
    Within available funds, the Committee recommends 
$26,000,000 for the Residential Building Integration Program. 
Within this amount, funding should be concentrated on industry 
teams to facilitate research; demonstrate and test new systems; 
and encourage widespread deployment. These activities should be 
coordinated through direct engagement with builders, the 
construction trades, equipment manufacturers, smart grid 
technology and systems suppliers, integrators, and State and 
local governments.
    The Committee recommends $60,000,000 for the Emerging 
Technologies subprogram. Within available funds, the Committee 
recommends $14,000,000 for transactive controls research and 
development. Within available funds, the Committee recommends 
$24,000,000 for solid-state lighting technology development to 
focus on reducing the cost of organic light-emitting diodes and 
other technologies. If the Secretary finds solid-state lighting 
technology eligible for the Bright Tomorrow Lighting Prize, 
specified under section 655 of the Energy Independence and 
Security Act of 2007, $5,000,000 is included in addition to 
funds for solid-state lighting research and development.
    The Committee is concerned the Department's final rule 
setting energy efficiency standards for commercial 
refrigerators [Energy Conservation Standards for Commercial 
Refrigeration Equipment; 79 FR 17725 (March 28, 2014)] 
established its required energy efficiency targets based on the 
performance of equipment using hydrofluorocarbons [HFCs], 
refrigerants that have been in the marketplace for over 20 
years. HFCs will be phased out of production by Environmental 
Protection Agency [EPA] regulatory action before the 
Department's standard takes effect. The Committee encourages 
the Department to reassess its standards in light of the EPA 
action and take necessary action to resolve any conflicts 
between the two agencies' standards.

              WEATHERIZATION AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL PROGRAM

    The Committee recommends $197,000,000 for the 
Weatherization Assistance Program, $3,000,000 for Training and 
Technical Assistance, $400,000 for NREL Sitewide Facility 
Support, and $50,000,000 for State Energy Program Grants. No 
funding is recommended for the Local Technical Assistance 
Program proposed in the budget request.

                           CORPORATE SUPPORT

    The Committee recommends $243,000,000 for Corporate 
Support, including $2,000,000 for the United States-Israel 
energy cooperative agreement within Strategic Programs. The 
Committee understands that the EERE has previously executed the 
United States-Israel Binational Industrial R&D; [BIRD] program 
to include authorized energy efficiency and renewable energy 
technologies. The Committee directs the Secretary, within 180 
days of enactment of this act, to report on implementation and 
coordination plans between EERE and the Office of Fossil Energy 
to support research and development of natural gas energy 
technologies, as section 12 in Public Law 113-296, the United 
States-Israel Strategic Partnership Act of 2014, expanded the 
scope of collaborative research and development to include 
water technologies and natural gas energy, including 
conventional, unconventional, and other associated natural gas 
technologies.

              Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability

Appropriations, 2015....................................    $147,306,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................     270,100,000
House allowance.........................................     187,500,000
Committee recommendation................................     152,306,000

    The Committee recommends $152,306,000 for Electricity 
Delivery and Energy Reliability, a decrease of $117,794,000 
from the budget request. Within available funds, the Committee 
recommends $27,000,000 for program direction. The Committee 
directs the Secretary to provide regular updates of reported 
data on the status of energy infrastructure and concerns 
impacting the energy sector as they become available.
    The modernization of the electrical grid is critical to 
ensuring national security, sustaining our Nation's economic 
growth, and maintaining our way of life. The electrical grid is 
a complex system, owned and operated by numerous regulated and 
non-regulated private and public entities. Implementation and 
execution of these new technologies must be driven by private 
market acceptance, and not forced on industry. Many 
organizations throughout the United States, including national 
laboratories, academia, and industry are leading the grid 
modernization effort. To maximize the value of taxpayer 
investment in the grid modernization strategy, the Committee 
suggests that the Secretary's initiatives be fairly and 
equitably competed to ensure the best ideas, technologies, and 
teams are brought together to develop the best solutions for 
the electric grid of the future.
    To ensure our energy systems are safe, secure, reliable, 
sustainable, and cost-effective, the Committee supports a 
strategy that involves extensive partnerships between 
government, academia, and industry to undertake the transition 
and modernization of the electrical grid to address our major 
energy issues. The Committee directs the Secretary to complete 
an independent, third-party assessment of the United States' 
capabilities to perform multi-megawatt testing that meets the 
goals supporting the Grid Modernization Multi-Year Program 
Plan. Following the completion of the assessment and if the 
Secretary deems appropriate, the Committee urges the Secretary 
to establish through a competitive bid process, a national user 
center capable of operating in the multi-megawatt range, above 
2 MW, to support the Nation's grid modernization efforts to 
advance utility scale technologies like energy storage. World-
class testing facilities that can replicate real world 
conditions, without risks to the existing grid, are needed at 
the residential, commercial, and distribution level to test and 
validate these innovations. The Committee is aware the 
Secretary has invested in testing facilities of 2 MW and below, 
and facilities are needed at the multi-megawatt level above 2 
MW for technologies at the distribution level.
    The Committee continues to support the Secretary's research 
activities to ensure transmission reliability. Recent weather-
related events, however, have reinforced the need for 
integration of local, regional, and national weather into 
transmission reliability and resiliency modeling and simulation 
activities to support the utility industry and emergency 
response. The Committee encourages the Secretary to partner 
with universities, national laboratories, and industry when 
issuing competitively awarded research and development 
activities to ensure regional weather and related environmental 
variables are accounted for in advanced grid modeling research.

               CLEAN ENERGY TRANSMISSION AND RELIABILITY

    The Committee recommends $31,000,000 for Clean Energy 
Transmission and Reliability. The Committee believes that the 
integration of distributed and intermittent renewable sources 
of generation into existing infrastructure and transmission and 
distribution networks is critical to the effective deployment 
of clean energy sources. Developing the analytical and modeling 
tools in collaboration with utilities, grid operators, and 
universities will lay the foundation for risk assessment.
    The Committee supports the Secretary's proposed research on 
advanced modeling capabilities to improve electric planning and 
operations. Advances in big data analytic capabilities and 
modeling and visualization technologies offer potential for 
improving efficient operations of the electric grid 
particularly when incorporating power from variable renewable 
energy sources. Within Energy Systems Risk and Predictive 
Capability and Advanced Modeling Grid Research, the Secretary 
is directed to consider an expanded scope of projects, in 
addition to response to energy supply disruption, and to 
include university and industry teams for research and 
workforce development. The Committee notes that workforce 
education will be critical to the successful and rapid 
transition of advanced modeling and simulation solutions 
developed under this program. The Committee recognizes that 
further investment is needed to maintain and expand power and 
energy education programs, and secure industry partnerships to 
facilitate the development of a highly skilled next-generation 
technical and engineering workforce for the electric power 
sector. Therefore, the Committee encourages the Secretary to 
prioritize research and development investments to engage and 
further develop the capabilities of university undergraduate 
and graduate programs in power and energy.
    The Committee also encourages the Secretary to consider 
expanding research and development partnerships, including 
those related to the development and deployment of microgrids. 
Partnerships should engage stakeholders in diverse geographic 
regions with unique market dynamics and policy challenges. 
These partnerships should inform nationwide efforts to improve 
grid resiliency, reliability, security, and integration of a 
broad range of generation sources, and consumer empowerment.

                  SMART GRID RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

    The Committee recommends $15,307,000 for Smart Grid 
Research and Development. Within available funding, $5,000,000 
is for development of advanced, secure, low-cost sensors that 
measure, analyze, predict, and control the future grid during 
steady state and under extreme conditions.
    The Committee recognizes the opportunities presented by the 
application, integration, and investment in grid technologies 
across all sectors of the economy. The Secretary should ensure 
that efforts in these areas are coordinated and focused on the 
evolution to the grid of the future.

               CYBER SECURITY FOR ENERGY DELIVERY SYSTEMS

    The Committee recommends $45,999,000 for Cyber Security for 
Energy Delivery Systems. Within available funds, the Committee 
recommends not less than $5,000,000 to develop cyber and cyber-
physical solutions for advanced control concepts for 
distribution and municipal utility companies. The potential 
threat posed by cyber security attacks on our critical energy 
infrastructure cannot be underemphasized and must be 
appropriately guarded against.

                             ENERGY STORAGE

    The Committee recommends $16,000,000 for Energy Storage. 
Within available funds, the Committee supports a utility-
sponsored and operated energy storage test facility capable of 
performance-driven data in a utility environment.

             TRANSFORMER RESILIENCE AND ADVANCED COMPONENTS

    The Committee recommends $5,000,000 for Transformer 
Resilience and Advanced Components. The Committee directs the 
Secretary to support research and development on low-cost, 
power flow control devices, including both solid state and 
hybrid concepts that use power electronics to control 
electromagnetic devices and enable improved controllability, 
flexibility, and resiliency.

                     NATIONAL ELECTRICITY DELIVERY

    The Committee recommends $6,000,000 for National 
Electricity Delivery. The Committee encourages the Secretary to 
allocate a portion of this funding for a competitive grant 
program to help States, regional, and tribal entities to 
develop, refine, and improve their programs, policies, and laws 
related to electricity in order to facilitate the development 
and deployment of reliable and affordable energy 
infrastructure, whether generation, transmission, distribution, 
or demand side electricity resources.

             INFRASTRUCTURE SECURITY AND ENERGY RESTORATION

    The Committee recommends $6,000,000 for Infrastructure 
Security and Energy Restoration.
    Energy Resilience and Operations Center.--No funding is 
provided for the Energy Resilience and Operations Center 
[Operations Center]. The Energy and Water Development and 
Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2015, provided up to 
$8,000,000 to support construction of the Operations Center 
within the Department's headquarters in Washington, DC. The 
Committee understands that this office is now engaged in a 
joint effort with the National Nuclear Security Administration, 
and that construction of the Operations Center has been 
delayed.
    Although Congress included clear direction and funding in 
fiscal year 2015 for this project, the Secretary chose to take 
a different course without notifying the Committee. The 
Committee understands that the Secretary may propose to use 
less than the $8,000,000 made available for fiscal year 2015, 
while asking for additional funds for fiscal year 2016. If, by 
the date of enactment of this act, the Secretary has used, or 
has proposed to use, less than the $8,000,000 that Congress 
made available in fiscal year 2015 for the Operations Center, 
the Secretary, within 30 days after the date of enactment of 
this act, shall submit a report to the Committee describing the 
amount of fiscal year 2015 funds proposed to be used to 
construct the Operations Center; an explanation of why the 
Secretary did not use or propose to use all funding that was 
made available for the Operations Center; and which programs, 
projects, or activities were a higher priority for funding.
    The Committee further directs the Secretary to execute this 
project in accordance with congressional direction, and to 
provide the Committee with a monthly status report, until 
construction has been completed, on changes to schedule, cost, 
and scope. Because construction may not begin in fiscal year 
2015, the Committee recommends no new funding for the 
Operations Center for fiscal year 2016. If the Secretary 
completes construction in fiscal year 2016, the Secretary may 
reprogram up to $3,000,000 for the facility from funds made 
available for Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, 
subject to the Committee's approval. If the Operations Center 
becomes operational in fiscal year 2016, the Committee directs 
the Secretary to notify the Committee each time the Operations 
Center is activated.

                 STATE ENERGY RELIABILITY AND ASSURANCE

    The Committee recommends no funds for State Energy 
Reliability and Assurance.

                             Nuclear Energy

Appropriations, 2015....................................    $833,500,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................     907,574,000
House allowance.........................................     936,161,000
Committee recommendation................................     950,161,000

    The Committee recommends $950,161,000 for Nuclear Energy, 
an increase of $42,587,000 from the budget request. The 
Committee's recommendation for nuclear power prioritizes 
funding for programs, projects and activities that will ensure 
a strong future for nuclear power in the United States.
    Nuclear power provides more than 20 percent of our Nation's 
electricity and more than 60 percent of our emissions-free 
electricity. Electricity generation from our Nation's 99 
operating nuclear power plants is critical to our national 
security, economy, and way of life. Programs, projects, and 
activities that are funded within the Nuclear Energy account.
    The Committee supports the Secretary reconvening the 
working group among the national laboratories with nuclear 
capabilities, and directs the Secretary to continue those 
efforts.

                        Research and Development


           SMALL MODULAR REACTOR LICENSING TECHNICAL SUPPORT

    The Committee recommends $62,500,000 for Small Modular 
Reactor Licensing Technical Support, the same as the request. 
The Committee notes that Small Modular Reactors may provide a 
cost-effective method of generating electricity.

   SUPERCRITICAL TRANSFORMATION ELECTRIC POWER GENERATION INITIATIVE

    The Committee recommends $5,000,000 for the Supercritical 
Transformational Electric Power Generation Initiative for an 
industry cost-shared demonstration project.

       REACTOR CONCEPTS RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, AND DEMONSTRATION

    The Committee recommends $117,874,000 for Reactor Concepts 
Research, Development, and Demonstration. The Committee directs 
the Nuclear Energy Program to focus funding for Reactor 
Concepts Research, Development and Demonstration, which 
includes funding for Advanced SMRs and Advanced Reactor 
Concepts, on technologies that show clear potential to be 
safer, less waste producing, more cost competitive, and more 
proliferation-resistant than existing nuclear power 
technologies. Within available amounts, the Committee 
recommends up to $12,000,000 for industry-only competition to 
further the development of deployable advanced reactor 
components.
    Light Water Reactor Sustainability.--Within available 
funds, the Committee recommends $43,275,000. The most cost 
effective way for the United States to maintain low-cost, 
carbon-free electricity is to safely extend the lives of our 
Nation's existing nuclear reactors from 60 to 80 years. 
Therefore, the Committee recommends additional funding for this 
activity as a priority. The Committee directs the Secretary to 
use funding in this activity to continue research and 
development work on the technical basis for subsequent license 
renewal. The Secretary should focus funding in this program on 
materials aging and degradation, advanced instrumentation and 
control technologies, and component aging modeling and 
simulation. The Secretary shall also coordinate with industry 
to determine other areas of high-priority research and 
development in this area.

                  FUEL CYCLE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

    The Committee recommends $217,000,000 for Fuel Cycle 
Research and Development within which, $97,000,000 is for the 
Used Nuclear Fuel Disposition program.
    The Committee continues to strongly support the 
recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's 
Nuclear Future and believes that near-term action is needed to 
address this important national issue. Therefore, the Committee 
again includes a general provision in section 306 of this bill 
authorizing the Department of Energy to develop a pilot program 
for a consolidated storage facility, pending enactment of more 
comprehensive legislation. Furthermore, the Committee provides 
a technical correction in section 311 that broadens the 
contractual arrangements by which the government can acquire 
spent fuel storage capabilities. The Committee recommends 
$30,000,000 for used nuclear fuel disposition to implement 
sections 306 and 311. Within this amount, funds are provided 
for financial and technical assistance associated with a 
consent-based siting process, including education, technical 
analyses, and other support to entities considering hosting an 
interim storage facility; and for incentive payments to 
entities with signed agreements with eligible jurisdictions.
    Transportation of spent nuclear fuel will require detailed 
planning within the Department, coordination with state and 
local governments, and the acquisition of specialized equipment 
and capabilities. The Secretary should engage in these 
activities so that it ready to transport spent nuclear fuel 
when storage capabilities, however acquired, become available. 
Within the funds provided, the Committee again recommends 
$3,000,000 to design, procure, and test industry-standard 
compliant rail rolling stock in a timeframe that supports the 
transportation of spent fuel to the interim storage facility.
    Within the amount recommended for used nuclear fuel 
activities, $3,000,000 is provided for the Secretary to 
continue to develop disposal pathways for defense high-level 
radioactive waste.
    Research and development activities on behavior of spent 
fuel in long-term storage, under transportation conditions, and 
in various geologic media will continue to be important to 
developing a new solution to the waste problem. Within the 
amounts recommended for used nuclear fuel disposition, 
$64,000,000 shall be for continuance of these activities. 
Priority should be placed on the ongoing study of the 
performance of high-burnup fuel in dry storage and on the 
potential for direct disposal of existing spent fuel dry 
storage canister technologies.
    The Committee recommends $60,100,000 for the Advanced Fuels 
program. The Department is directed to continue implementation 
of the accident tolerant fuels development program, the new 
goal of which is development of accident tolerant nuclear fuels 
leading to commercial reactor fuel assembly testing by 2022. 
The Committee directs the Secretary to consult with industry, 
universities and other interested organizations on a 
commercialization roadmap for these technologies, including new 
Silicon carbide based ceramic material. The Secretary is 
directed to share the outcome of this consultation with the 
Committee. While the benefit of incremental improvements to 
existing commercially available fuels is acknowledged, there is 
concern that the Department's ongoing activities on accident 
tolerant fuels will not ultimately lead to meaningful 
reductions in the consequences of unexpected severe accidents 
in nuclear power plants. Therefore, $12,000,000 is provided for 
the continued industry led cost-shared program on Accident 
Tolerant Fuels, and $3,000,000 is provided for continuation of 
the previously competitively awarded Small Business projects to 
develop ceramic cladding for Accident Tolerant Fuels. Further, 
the Committee continues to be concerned that the Secretary has 
not yet provided to the Committee the plan for development of 
accident tolerant fuels leading to in-reactor testing and 
utilization as required by the Fiscal Year 2012 Consolidated 
Appropriations Act (Report 112-75). The Committee directs the 
Department to provide this report to the Committee no later 
than 30 days after enactment of this act.

                  NUCLEAR ENERGY ENABLING TECHNOLOGIES

    The Committee recommends $101,000,000 for Nuclear Energy 
Enabling Technologies. The Committee recommends $24,300,000 for 
the Energy Innovation Hub for Modeling and Simulation.

                             Infrastructure


                   RADIOLOGICAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT

    The Committee recommends $20,800,000 for Radiological 
Facilities Management, including $14,000,000 for continued safe 
operation of Oak Ridge National Laboratory hot cells. The 
Committee commends that Secretary for including additional 
funding for this activity in the Office of Science.

                 Fossil Energy Research and Development

Appropriations, 2015....................................    $571,000,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................     560,000,000
House allowance.........................................     605,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     610,000,000

    The Committee recommends $610,000,000 for Fossil Energy 
Research and Development, an increase of $50,000,000 from the 
budget request. Within available funds, the Committee 
recommends $115,000,000 for program direction. The Committee 
recognizes that this program supports vital research on clean 
coal technologies, and has accordingly provided significant 
funds above the budget request to accelerate these activities. 
The Committee notes that clean coal technology affords our 
Nation the ability to respond to environmental challenges by 
improving the performance of our coal-based electricity fleet, 
while also allowing for continued utilization of abundant and 
affordable U.S. coal.
    According to the Energy Information Administration, fossil 
energy resources meet approximately 82 percent of the United 
States demand. Fossil fuels support the activities of a modern 
economy, and will continue to supply our Nation's energy needs 
for the foreseeable future. Approximately 67 percent of the 
electricity generated in the United States is from coal, 
natural gas, and petroleum, and fossil fuel generation is and 
will continue expanding across the world. The Committee notes 
that the Department should allocate sufficient resources to 
support fossil energy research, development, and demonstrations 
to improve both existing technologies and develop the next 
generation of clean, affordable, and safe systems.
    The Committee notes the improved coordination among the 
Office of Fossil Energy and other program office on work 
examining the feasibility of recovering rare earth materials 
from coal and coal-byproduct streams.

                      COAL, CCS AND POWER SYSTEMS

    The Committee recommends $402,000,000 for CCS and Power 
Systems. The Committee encourages the Secretary to establish 
university partnerships to support ongoing fossil energy 
programs, to promote broader research into CCS technologies, 
and to expand its technology transfer efforts. The Secretary 
has previously funded several university-based CCS projects, 
and should build on an established research base to support 
ongoing research, as well as address the wider implementation 
of CCS technologies.
    The Committee supports the Secretary's cooperative 
agreements to develop cost sharing partnerships to conduct 
basic, fundamental, and applied research that assist industry 
in developing, deploying, and commercializing efficient, low-
carbon, non-polluting energy technologies that could compete 
effectively in meeting requirements for clean fuels, chemical 
feedstocks, electricity, and water resources.
    The Secretary is further directed to report to the 
Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives 
and the Senate not later than June 30, 2015, on the 
reallocation of base funding to other ongoing large-scale Clean 
Coal Power Initiative demonstration projects.
    Carbon Capture.--Within the recommendation, $88,000,000 is 
for Carbon Capture to support the R&D; and scale-up of 2nd 
generation and transformational technologies for capturing 
CO2 from new and existing industrial and power-
producing plants. The Committee recommendation includes 
$30,000,000 for the Department's National Carbon Capture 
Center. The Committee recommends $250,000 for an assessment of 
research and development needs to aid in the development and 
commercialization of direct air capture technologies that 
capture carbon dioxide from dilute sources, such as the 
atmosphere, on a significant scale.
    Carbon Storage.--Within the recommendation, $99,000,000 is 
for Carbon Storage. Within funds available for Carbon Storage, 
the Committee recommends $63,084,000 for Regional Carbon 
Sequestration Partnerships, the same as the request, and 
$10,000,000 for Carbon Use and Reuse for research and 
development activities to support valuable and innovative uses 
for carbon. The Committee recognizes that finding new 
commercial uses for captured carbon could significantly offset 
the costs of capturing and sequestering carbon from our 
Nation's coal-fired power plants. The Committee encourages the 
Secretary to use its existing authorities to fund activities 
that promote the reuse of captured carbon from coal and other 
sources in the production of fuels and other products. The 
Committee also urges the Secretary to support other carbon 
dioxide utilization technologies in addition to Enhanced Oil 
Recovery [EOR], including using carbon dioxide to produce 
algae. The Committee encourages the Office of Fossil Energy to 
collaborate with the Bioenergy Technologies program within the 
Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy to support 
projects that utilize carbon dioxide in the production of 
algae.
    Advanced Energy Systems.--Within the recommendation, 
$103,000,000 is for Advanced Energy Systems, which supports 
improving the efficiency of coal-based power systems, enabling 
affordable CO2 capture, increasing plant 
availability, and maintaining the highest environmental 
standards. The Committee supports and encourages the Secretary 
to fund research and development of Gasification Systems, which 
focuses on technology developments to reduce the cost of coal 
gasification and facilitates co-feeding of coal with biomass or 
waste; Advanced Combustion Systems, which focuses on the 
development of oxy-combustion and chemical looping processes 
that are applicable to new and existing power plants; Coal and 
Coal-Biomass to Liquids, which the Secretary did not include in 
its budget request, and Solid Oxide Fuel Cells, which focuses 
on research and development to enable efficient, cost-effective 
electricity generation from coal and natural gas with near-zero 
atmospheric emissions of CO2 and pollutants, as well 
as minimal water use in central power generation applications 
that can be integrated with carbon capture and storage. Within 
available funding, the Committee urges the Secretary to fund 
research and development activities to improve the efficiency 
of gas turbines used in power generation systems, working 
cooperatively with industry, small businesses, universities, 
and other appropriate parties.
    NETL Coal Research and Development.--Within the 
recommendation, the Committee provides $53,000,000 for NETL 
Coal Research and Development. The Committee is supportive of 
the mission of conducting in-house research activities, such as 
activities in Carbon Capture, Carbon Storage, Advanced Energy 
Systems, and Cross-cutting research for the Coal R&D; programs.

                        NATURAL GAS TECHNOLOGIES

    The Committee recommends $43,000,000 for Natural Gas 
Technologies. The recommendation does not include additional 
funding for the joint research effort with the Environmental 
Protection Agency and the U.S. Geological Survey into hydraulic 
fracturing technologies. The Committee notes that it has 
provided funding for this joint research effort over the prior 
4 years, and that the Secretary is scheduled to submit a final 
report to Congress during the summer of 2015. If the Department 
chooses to pursue additional joint research after submission of 
the final report, the Secretary may propose specified topics, 
along with the total cost and expected duration of the 
research, in the fiscal year 2017 budget request.
    Risk-Based Data Management System.--Within available funds, 
the Committee recommends $5,200,000 to continue the Risk-Based 
Data Management System [RBDMS], and support the addition of 
including water tracking in pre- and post-drilling applications 
where States require them. Funds are also recommended to 
integrate FracFocus and RBDMS for improved public access to 
State oil and gas related data, as well as for State regulatory 
agencies to support electronic permitting for operators, eForms 
for improved processing time for new permits, operator training 
for the improved FracFocus 3.0, and additional reports. The 
Committee supports this initiative's continued efforts to 
provide public transparency, while protecting proprietary 
information.
    Methane Hydrate Activities.--The Committee notes that the 
request does not include funding for methane hydrate 
activities. The Committee understands that instead of 
requesting additional funds in fiscal year 2016 to continue 
methane hydrates research, the Secretary instead elected to 
spend the $15,000,000 provided in fiscal year 2015 more slowly, 
contrary to the intent of Congress, and potentially delaying 
important research activities for a year. The Committee 
recommendation rejects the Secretary's approach, and provides, 
within available funds, $19,800,000 for methane hydrates. The 
Committee also encourages the Secretary to perform a long-term 
methane hydrate production test in the Arctic, as proposed in 
the Methane Hydrate Advisory Committee's May 21, 2014, 
recommendations to the Secretary.
    Environmentally Prudent Development.--The Committee 
recommends $6,000,000 for Environmentally Prudent Development 
subprogram.
    Emissions Mitigations from Midstream Infrastructure.--The 
Committee recommends $7,000,000 for Emissions Mitigation from 
Midstream Infrastructure subprogram.
    Emissions Quantification from Natural Gas Infrastructure.--
The Committee recommends $5,000,000 for Emissions 
Quantification from Natural Gas Infrastructure research 
subprogram.

               UNCONVENTIONAL FOSSIL ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES

    The Committee recommends $25,321,000 for Unconventional 
Fossil Energy Technologies. The Secretary did not include any 
funding in the fiscal year 2016 budget request, and the 
Committee notes the importance of providing research support 
that will assure sustainable, reliable, affordable, and 
environmentally sound supplies of domestic unconventional 
fossil energy resources.
    In September 2011, the Secretary submitted its ``Domestic 
Unconventional Fossil Energy Resource Opportunities and 
Technology Applications'' report to Congress, as directed in 
the fiscal year 2010 Energy and Water Development 
Appropriations bill. The report outlines the domestic 
unconventional resource opportunities and technology 
applications of a comprehensive research, development, and 
deployment [RD&D;] strategy for unconventional oil, gas, and 
coal resources. The Secretary is encouraged to fund high-
priority RD&D; activities identified in the report, including 
oil shale.
    The Committee supports the Secretary's efforts to conduct 
research on crude by rail safety. The Secretary is uniquely 
suited to understand the characteristics of crude, including 
volatility and other properties, which bear on safe methods of 
transportation. Given the public safety concerns, the Committee 
supports the joint effort with the Department of Transportation 
to conduct and conclude the second phase of this study at the 
soonest available time. Within funds available under this 
heading, the Committee recommends up to $1,000,000 to provide 
for the study. The Committee also encourages the Secretary to 
examine the impacts of State and Federal regulations on 
transportation and delivery of oil, including potential safety 
and health risks.
    Within available funds, the Committee encourages the 
Secretary to support efforts to increase production of 
unconventional fossil fuels through advanced technology and 
modeling, including optimizing high resolution and time-lapse 
geophysical methods for improved resource detection and better 
rock characterization at the micro- and nano-scale. The 
Committee also encourages the Secretary to examine the 
feasibility of utilizing geothermal energy from produced fluids 
for in-field energy requirements.

                 Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves

Appropriations, 2015....................................     $19,950,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................      17,500,000
House Allowance.........................................      17,500,000
Committee recommendation................................      17,500,000

    The Committee recommends $17,500,000 for Naval Petroleum 
and Oil Shale Reserves, the same as the budget request.

                      Strategic Petroleum Reserve

Appropriations, 2015....................................    $200,000,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................     257,000,000
House Allowance.........................................     212,030,000
Committee recommendation................................     200,000,000

    The Committee recommends $200,000,000 for the Strategic 
Petroleum Reserve, a decrease of $57,000,000 from the budget 
request.
    The Committee recognizes the work the Secretary is 
undertaking to conduct a long-term strategic review of the 
Strategic Petroleum Reserve. The Committee looks forward to the 
results of the review, and the Secretary's recommendations on 
future investments in infrastructure and associated 
maintenance.

                   Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve

Appropriations, 2015....................................      $1,600,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................       7,600,000
House allowance.........................................       7,600,000
Committee recommendation................................       7,600,000

    The Committee recommends $7,600,000 for the Northeast Home 
Heating Oil Reserve, the same as the request.

                   Energy Information Administration

Appropriations, 2015....................................    $117,000,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................     131,000,000
House allowance.........................................     117,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     122,000,000

    The Committee recommends $122,000,000 for the Energy 
Information Administration, a decrease of $9,000,000 from the 
budget request.

                   Non-Defense Environmental Cleanup

Appropriations, 2015....................................    $246,000,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................     220,185,000
House allowance.........................................     229,193,000
Committee recommendation................................     244,000,000

    The Committee recommends $244,000,000 for Non-Defense 
Environmental Cleanup, an increase of $23,815,000 from the 
budget request.
    Small Sites.--The Committee recommends $77,822,000 for 
Small Sites. Within the available funds, the Committee 
recommends $6,000,000 to complete the design and initiate 
construction of facilities pursuant to the agreement reached in 
2012 between the Department of Energy, the Advisory Council on 
Historic Preservation, and State and local governments to 
complete the demolition of K-25 in exchange for preserving the 
historic contributions made by the K-25 site to the Manhattan 
Project. The Secretary should consider this regulatory 
requirement as no different than any other regulatory 
requirement, and is directed to request appropriate funding to 
satisfy the requirements of the National Historic Preservation 
Act in future budget requests.
    Within available funds, the Committee recommends 
$17,000,000 to continue to deactivate, decommission, and 
demolish facilities at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. 
Further, the Committee commends the Secretary for work to 
preserve cultural and sacred sites at the Energy Technology 
Engineering Center, and encourages the Secretary to continue 
working with Native American tribes, the community, and other 
Federal, State, and local agencies to ensure that this portion 
of the property is preserved for future generations.
    The Committee remains concerned that the Secretary is not 
requesting adequate funding within the Non-Defense 
Environmental Cleanup account. Further, the budget request 
stated that the Department has no liability for the 
decommissioning and decontamination of the Southwest 
Experimental Fast Oxide Reactor, despite that facility being 
constructed for, and used by, the Atomic Energy Commission. 
Funding has been provided by Congress to complete the planning 
work for cleanup. The Committee encourages the Secretary to 
request sufficient funding to execute the work in future budget 
requests, and execute the work via an innovative firm-fixed 
price remediation contract.

      Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning Fund

Appropriations, 2015....................................    $625,000,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................     542,289,000
House allowance.........................................     625,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     614,000,000

    The Committee recommends $614,000,000 for Uranium 
Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning [UED&D;] 
activities, an increase of $71,711,000 from the budget request.
    The Committee recommendation includes $194,673,000 for East 
Tennessee Technology Park [ETTP], $199,925,000 for Paducah, and 
$165,417,000 for Portsmouth. Within available funds for ETTP, 
the Committee recommendation includes up to $3,000,000 for 
demolition of the Building K-1200 Complex if the Secretary 
makes a determination under 42 U.S.C. 2296a-3(1)(b).
    The Committee recommends $32,959,000 for the Title X 
Uranium and Thorium Reimbursement Program. Title X of the 
Energy Policy Act of 1992 authorizes the Secretary to reimburse 
eligible licensees for the Federal Government's share of the 
cost associated with cleaning up former uranium and thorium 
processing sites across the country. The Committee continues to 
be concerned about the accumulating balances and liabilities 
owed to private licensees for the Department's failure to 
address the Federal Government's cost share. The Committee 
notes the administration requested funding for title X for the 
first time since fiscal year 2008. Fulfilling the obligation to 
fully reimburse licensees is important to the health and safety 
of the impacted communities. Moving forward, the Committee 
expects the Secretary to request sufficient resources within 
its annual budget request to reimburse licensees for approved 
claim balances.
    The Committee directs the Secretary to provide a report 
consistent with section 1805 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, 
as amended by the Energy Policy Act of 1992, that requires the 
Secretary to submit a report every 3 years to Congress on the 
progress and success of the UED&D; program. The report should 
include an assessment of remaining facilities that require 
UED&D; cleanup along with any recommended changes to facilities 
designated for cleanup funding. The last report was submitted 
to Congress in December 2010.
    Transparency on Uranium Transfers.--Congress included 
permanent notification authority for the Secretary regarding 
uranium transfers in the Energy and Water Development 
Appropriations Act, 2015. The Committee supports increased 
transparency in these transfers, and accordingly directs the 
Secretary to make available to the public all secretarial 
determinations under section 3112(d)(2)(B) of the USEC 
Privatization Act, including all related reports, analyses, 
data, and methodologies within 30 days after the notification 
has been submitted or the determination has been made. The 
Secretary is encouraged to develop and report recommendations 
to the Committee, within 90 days after the enactment of this 
act, to minimize the impact of uranium transfers on the 
domestic uranium mining, conversion, and enrichment industries, 
including any actions that would require new authority for the 
Secretary to implement. The Secretary should also consider 
measures that would allow the Department to contract directly 
with domestic uranium industries to introduce uranium into the 
market.


                                Science

Appropriations, 2015....................................  $5,071,000,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................   5,339,794,000
House allowance.........................................   5,100,000,000
Committee recommendation................................   5,143,877,000

    The Committee recommends $5,143,877,000 for Science, a 
decrease of $195,917,000 from the budget request.
    Distinguished Scientist Program.--The Committee recommends 
directing up to $2,000,000 to support the Department's 
Distinguished Scientist Program, as authorized in section 5011 
of 42 U.S.C. 16537 to promote scientific and academic 
excellence through collaborations between institutions of 
higher education and National laboratories.
    Brain Research through Advancing Innovative 
Neurotechnologies [BRAIN] Initiative.--The Committee supports 
the involvement of the Office of Science and both the 
Interagency Working Group on Neuroscience and the National 
Brain Observation Group, and encourages the Department to 
collaborate with other agencies on the BRAIN Initiative. The 
national laboratory system possesses skills, tools, and 
methodologies to support the initiative, specifically through 
the user facilities in high performance computing and 
nanoscience supported by the Office of Science. Computational 
resources at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory are already 
being used to model and assess data to better understand brain 
processes. Additionally, extensive biomedical imaging resources 
and sensor technologies could be used to support this important 
effort. This complementary, multi-agency initiative is 
encouraged to take advantage of existing investments and 
infrastructure while engaging closely with the neuroscience 
community to accelerate our understanding of the brain.


                 ADVANCED SCIENTIFIC COMPUTING RESEARCH

    The Committee recommends $620,994,000 for Advanced 
Scientific Computing Research. The Committee believes its 
recommendation would allow the Department to develop and 
maintain world-class computing and network facilities for 
science and deliver the necessary research in applied 
mathematics, computer science, and advanced networking to 
support the Department's missions.
    The Committee strongly supports the exascale initiative, 
which is critical to maintaining our Nation's global 
competitiveness and supporting our national security. Exascale 
computers will be capable of a thousand-fold increase in 
sustained performance over today's petascale computers, which 
have been in operation since 2008. The Committee understands 
the goal of the Department's Exascale Computing Initiative is 
to integrate efforts across industry, academia, and government 
to address the technical challenges of exascale computing, and 
to deploy by 2023, capable exascale computing systems. 
Additional research is needed to achieve practical exascale 
computing goals, and the Committee recommends including 
$157,894,000 for exascale activities within the Office of 
Science.
    The Committee directs, within funds available, the 
Secretary to broaden the Research Evaluation Prototype program 
to support the design and development of node, system and 
application prototypes. These efforts will support the 
development of four exascale nodes, three system architecture 
teams, and teams to develop initial plans for programming 
exascale applications. Multiple teams are necessary to 
adequately explore design options and to mitigate overall 
project risk. Overall industry investment in this area is 
significant, with billions of dollars in development costs for 
next generation high performance computing systems. To 
influence the trajectory of technology, the Department must 
partner early with domestic vendors, and support a significant 
share of these early design and development efforts.
    The Committee also recommends $104,317,000 for the Oak 
Ridge Leadership Computing Facility and $86,000,000 for the 
National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center [NERSC] 
facility at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. Funding is 
recommended to upgrade the NERSC infrastructure with power and 
cooling within the new Computational Research and Theory [CRT] 
building.
    Within available funds, the Committee recommends 
$38,000,000 for ESnet, the same as the budget request.

                         BASIC ENERGY SCIENCES

    The Committee recommends $1,844,300,000 for Basic Energy 
Sciences [BES]. Of these funds, $1,644,000,000 is for research. 
Within available funds for operations and maintenance of 
scientific user facilities, the Committee recommends 
$254,990,000 for high-flux neutron sources, which will allow 
for both Spallation Neutron Source [SNS] and High Flux Isotope 
Reactor [HFIR] to proceed with the most critical deferred 
repairs, replace outdated instruments, and make essential 
machine improvements. Within available funds, $477,079,000 is 
provided to support near-optimal operations for the five BES 
light sources, including $125,500,000 the first full year of 
operations for the newly constructed NSLS-II. The Committee 
recognizes the critical role that light sources play in the 
Nation's innovation ecosystem, and the growing reliance on them 
by U.S. researchers and industry. In light of increased 
international investment in these unique scientific resources 
and the consequences for U.S. innovation leadership, the 
Committee supports the Secretary's efforts to upgrade and renew 
these facilities across the full spectrum of x-ray 
capabilities. In addition to the operating budget request, 
which is fully funded, an additional $10,000,000 is provided to 
accelerate completion of the Conceptual Design Report for the 
Second Target Station at the Spallation Neutron Source. 
Further, $5,000,000 is provided for research and development 
for the Advanced Light Source Upgrade. The Committee strongly 
supports the continued upgrades to Generation IV facilities, 
such as the Advanced Photon Source Upgrade project at Argonne 
National Laboratory. Therefore, within available funds, 
$20,000,000 is provided for the Advanced Photon Source Upgrade 
project, the same as the budget request. To better plan for 
costs of these upgrades and major construction projects, the 
Committee requests the Basic Energy Sciences Advisory Committee 
to provide a list prioritizing the order of the next five 
projects not later than 90 days after enactment of this act.
    The Committee also recommends $12,000,000 for exascale 
systems, the same as the crosscut request for fiscal year 2016. 
In future budget requests, the Committee directs the Office of 
Science to work with the Office of Nuclear Energy to 
demonstrate a commitment to operations and maintenance of 
nuclear facilities at Oak Ridge National Laboratory that 
supports multiple critical missions. As the Office of Science 
considers what user facilities are needed for future scientific 
research, the Secretary should have a balanced portfolio of 
user facilities that gives researchers a breadth of ability to 
make scientific discoveries.
    Innovative new materials are needed that catalyze the 
synthesis of ammonia without requiring an input of natural gas, 
in order to reduce the overall energy budget of fertilizer 
manufacturing, as well as ameliorate environmental concerns. 
Given the production cost and century-old processes, the 
Committee recommends within the funds provided $3,000,000 for a 
competitive solicitation for universities to perform 
fundamental research toward the development of a new generation 
of nanostructured catalysts that can be used to synthesize 
fertilizer and ammonia without any secondary greenhouse gases.
    The Committee recommends $24,137,000 for the Batteries and 
Energy Storage Hub, the Joint Center for Energy Storage 
Research [JCESR]. The Committee is encouraged by the work of 
JCESR which was initiated in fiscal year 2013 and focuses on 
understanding the fundamental performance limitations for 
electrochemical energy storage to launch the next generation, 
beyond lithium-ion energy storage technologies relevant to both 
the electrical grid and transportation. The Committee supports 
the continued research and development for JCESR, to ensure the 
outcome of basic research leads to practical solutions that are 
competitive in the marketplace. The Committee commends JCESR 
for expanding it partnership of national laboratories, 
academia, and industry to additional members outside their 
region.
    The Committee recommends $15,000,000 for the Fuels from 
Sunlight Hub, the Joint Center for Artificial Photosynthesis 
[JCAP] which was established in fiscal year 2010, and extended 
for a second 5-year term at a reduced scope. During the renewal 
award period, JCAP will develop the knowledge, materials, and 
components needed for generation of transportation fuel from 
sunlight and carbon dioxide, with major emphasis on fundamental 
discovery science of carbon dioxide reduction. The Committee is 
aware of the positive changes evident in JCAP and the 
milestone-driven research plan, and looks forward to the 
capitalization on its scientific achievements, technology 
development, and leveraging of public investment to advance 
research efforts addressing critical needs in solar fuels 
development.
    The Committee also recommends $20,000,000 for the 
Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research 
[EPSCoR]. The Committee recognizes the importance of supporting 
basic research, spanning the broad range of the Department's 
science and technology programs in States that have 
historically received disproportionate Federal research funding 
grants. The Committee encourages the Secretary to undertake 
additional efforts to include EPSCoR States in energy research 
activities related to the energy production and output 
contribution of their State.
    The Committee encourages the Secretary to continue funding 
to support research and development needs of graduate and post-
graduate science programs at Historically Black Colleges and 
Universities.

                 BIOLOGICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH

    The Committee recommends $610,000,000 for Biological and 
Environmental Research. Within these funds, the Committee 
recommends $294,271,000 for biological systems science and 
$315,729,000 for climate and environmental sciences. Within 
available funds, the Committee recommends $18,730,000 for 
exascale computing, the same as the request for fiscal year 
2016 crosscut.
    Within available funds, the Committee recommends 
$75,000,000 for three Bioenegy Research Centers. The Committee 
recognizes the unique and beneficial role that the Department 
plays for the Nation in the advancement of biosciences to 
address core departmental missions in energy and the 
environment. Therefore, the Committee strongly supports the 
requested increases in funding for biosystems design to develop 
new and transformative metabolic engineering capabilities for 
bioenergy production and environmental solutions, and urges the 
Secretary to consider opportunities to further support use-
inspired research in these areas with the increased funding.
    The Committee encourages the Secretary to increase funding 
for academia to perform climate model studies that include the 
collection and evaluation of atmospheric data sets from 
satellite observations obtained in cooperation with NASA. 
Satellite observations of the atmosphere, within the context of 
the Earth as a global system, provide information that is 
critical in the interpretation of Earth-based observations. In 
addition, the Committee encourages the Secretary to allocate 5 
percent of the Department's funds spent on climate change 
models, studies, or evaluations to create a Red Team, so as to 
ensure science-based findings.

                         FUSION ENERGY SCIENCES

    The Committee recommends $270,168,000 for Fusion Energy 
Sciences.
    U.S. Contribution to ITER.--The Committee recommends no 
funding for the U.S. contribution to ITER.
    The Committee has previously expressed and continues to 
remain concerned about the rising cost of the United States' 
participation in the International Thermonuclear Experimental 
Reactor [ITER] under construction in Cadarache, France, as well 
as management problems and continued delays. The United States 
is to pay 9.09 percent of the projects' construction costs. In 
2008, the total cost share for the United States was estimated 
to be between $1,450,000,000 and $2,200,000,000, and is now 
estimated to be somewhere between $4,000,000,000 and 
$6,500,000,000. With declining budgets, the Committee believes 
funding for the contribution to ITER is crowding out other 
Federal science investments, including domestic fusion 
research, as well as high performance computing and materials 
science, where the United States has maintained leadership. In 
addition, there is no approved cost or schedule baseline for 
the project, and the Committee recommends not supporting a 
project with no specified price tag or date of completion.
    For these reasons, the Committee directs the Secretary to 
work with the Department of State to withdraw from the ITER 
project.
    Within the funds for Fusion Energy Sciences, the Committee 
recommends $2,750,000 to continue heavy ion fusion science 
research at the Neutralized Drift Compression Experiment-II at 
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.

                          HIGH ENERGY PHYSICS

    The Committee recommends $788,100,000, for High Energy 
Physics.
    The Committee strongly supports the Secretary's efforts to 
advance the recommendations of the Particle Physics Project 
Prioritization Panel [P5] Report, which established clear 
priorities for the domestic particle physics program over the 
next 10 years under realistic budget scenarios. Within 
available funds, the Committee recommends $19,000,000 for the 
Long Baseline Neutrino Facility. The Committee supports ongoing 
activities to advance project engineering and design, and site 
preparation work at the Homestake Mine in South Dakota. The 
Committee urges the Secretary to maintain a careful balance 
among the competing priorities and among small, medium, and 
large-scale projects. Therefore, to assist in implementation of 
the P5 recommendations, the Committee recommendation provides 
Cosmic Frontier Experimental Physics an additional $6,500,000 
to fund the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument [DESI] at 
$10,300,000 and the G2 Dark Matter Experiment LUX ZEPLIN at 
$10,500,000, an increase of $6,500,000 above the request. The 
Committee recommends $40,800,000 for the Large Synoptic Survey 
Telescope Camera [LSSTcam], the same as the request.

                            NUCLEAR PHYSICS

    The Committee recommends $591,500,000 for Nuclear Physics. 
Within these funds, the Committee recommends $95,000,000 for 
the Facility for Rare Isotope Beams and operations and research 
for the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider [RHIC] for 
$174,935,000.

           WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT FOR TEACHERS AND SCIENTISTS

    The Committee recommends $19,500,000, for Workforce 
Development for Teachers and Scientists. The Committee 
recommends $1,000,000 to continue the Computational Sciences 
Graduate Fellowship program.

                  SCIENCE LABORATORIES INFRASTRUCTURE

    The Committee recommends $113,600,000 for Science 
Laboratories Infrastructure. Within these funds, the Committee 
recommends $12,000,000 for nuclear operations at Oak Ridge 
National Laboratory and commends the Secretary for the cross-
cutting infrastructure initiative, which deals with long-
standing needs that underpin mission execution.

               Advanced Research Projects Agency--Energy

Appropriations, 2015....................................    $280,000,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................     325,000,000
House allowance.........................................     280,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     291,000,000

    The Committee recommends $291,000,000 for the Advanced 
Research Projects Agency--Energy [ARPA-E], a decrease of 
$34,000,000 from the request. Within available funds, the 
Committee recommends $28,000,000 for program direction. Since 
receiving its first funding in fiscal year 2009, ARPA-E 
continues to catalyze and support the development of 
transformational, high-impact energy technologies to ensure the 
Nation's economic and energy security and technological lead. 
Project sponsors continue to form strategic partnerships and 
new companies, as well as securing private sector funding to 
help move ARPA-E technologies closer to the market. ARPA-E has, 
in total, invested in more than 400 projects in 25 focused 
program areas. The Committee supports the program's focus for 
fiscal year 2016 on transportation fuels and feedstocks; energy 
materials and processes; dispatchable energy; and sensors, 
information and integration.

              Office of Indian Energy Policy and Programs

Appropriations, 2015....................................................
Budget estimate, 2016...................................     $20,000,000
House allowance.........................................................
Committee recommendation................................................

    The Committee does not recommend funding for the Office of 
Indian Energy Policy and Programs. The Committee recommendation 
for the Department of Energy, however, includes funding for 
activities proposed under this new account within the 
Departmental Administration program, consistent with fiscal 
year 2015.

              Innovative Technology Loan Guarantee Program


                        ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

                          GROSS APPROPRIATION

Appropriations, 2015....................................     $42,000,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................      42,000,000
House allowance.........................................      42,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      42,000,000

                          OFFSETTING RECEIPTS

Appropriations, 2015....................................    -$25,000,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................     -25,000,000
House allowance.........................................     -25,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     -25,000,000

                           NET APPROPRIATION

Appropriations, 2015....................................     $17,000,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................      17,000,000
House allowance.........................................      17,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      17,000,000

    The Committee recommends $42,000,000 in funding for the 
Loan Guarantee Program, the same as the request. This funding 
is offset by $25,000,000 in receipts from loan guarantee 
applicants, for a net appropriation of $17,000,000. An 
additional $68,000,000 in prior receipts from loan guarantee 
applicants is credited to the bill as a scorekeeping 
adjustment.

              Tribal Indian Energy Loan Guarantee Program

Appropriations, 2015....................................................
Budget estimate, 2016...................................     $11,000,000
House allowance.........................................................
Committee recommendation................................................

    The Committee recommends no funding for the Tribal Indian 
Energy Loan Guarantee Program.

        Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Loan Program

Appropriations, 2015....................................      $4,000,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................       6,000,000
House allowance.........................................       6,000,000
Committee recommendation................................       6,000,000

    The Committee recommends $6,000,000 for the Advanced 
Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Loan Program, the same as the 
request.

                      Departmental Administration


                                (GROSS)

Appropriations, 2015....................................    $245,142,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................     270,682,000
House allowance.........................................     191,200,000
Committee recommendation................................     248,142,000

                        (MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES)

Appropriations, 2015....................................   -$119,171,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................    -117,171,000
House allowance.........................................    -117,171,000
Committee recommendation................................    -117,171,000

                           NET APPROPRIATION

Appropriations, 2015....................................    $125,971,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................     153,511,000
House allowance.........................................      74,029,000
Committee recommendation................................     130,971,000

    The Committee recommends $248,142,000 in funding for 
Departmental Administration, a decrease of $22,540,000 from the 
request. This funding is offset by $117,171,000 in revenue for 
a net appropriation of $130,971,000.
    Nonprofit Cost Share.--The Committee notes that the 
Secretary may reduce or eliminate the research and development 
match requirement established in section 988 of the Energy 
Policy Act of 2005, where necessary and appropriate. The 
Committee encourages the Secretary to consider the use of this 
discretion if the research goals of the Department of Energy 
would be advanced by reducing or eliminating the match 
requirement for nonprofit organizations and institutions.
    Small Refinery Exemption.--Under section 211(o)(9)(B) of 
the Clean Air Act, a small refinery may petition the EPA 
Administrator for an exemption from the Renewable Fuel Standard 
[RFS] on the basis that the refinery experiences a 
disproportionate economic hardship under the RFS. When 
evaluating a petition, the Administrator consults with the 
Secretary of Energy to determine whether disproportionate 
economic hardship exists. According to the Department's March 
2011 Small Refinery Exemption Study, disproportionate economic 
hardship must encompass two broad components: a high cost of 
compliance relative to the industry average disproportionate 
impacts, and an effect sufficient to cause a significant 
impairment of the refinery operations viability.
    If the Secretary finds that either of these two components 
exists, the Committee directs the Secretary to recommend to the 
EPA Administrator a 50 percent waiver of RFS requirements for 
the petitioner. The Committee also directs the Secretary to 
seek small refinery comment before making changes to its 
scoring metrics for small refinery petitions for RFS waivers, 
and to notify the Committee prior to making any final changes 
to scoring metrics.
    The Committee notes that the conference report accompanying 
the Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies 
Appropriations Act, 2010, addressed similar issues and directed 
the Secretary to redo an earlier study done to evaluate whether 
the RFS program imposes a disproportionate economic hardship on 
small refineries. In calling for the Secretary to redo the 
study, the conference report cited the lack of small refinery 
input into the earlier study, concerns about regional RFS 
compliance cost disparities, small refinery dependence on the 
purchase of renewable fuel credits [RINs], and increasing RIN 
costs. Since then, the dramatic rise in RIN prices has 
amplified RFS compliance and competitive disparities, 
especially where unique regional factors exist, including high 
diesel demand, no export access, and limited biodiesel 
infrastructure and production. In response to recent petitions, 
the Secretary determined that the RFS program would impose a 
disproportionate economic and structural impact on several 
small refineries. Despite this determination, the Secretary did 
not recommend, and EPA did not provide, any RFS relief because 
it determined the refineries were profitable enough to afford 
the cost of RFS compliance without substantially impacting 
their viability. The Committee reminds the Secretary that the 
RFS program may impose a disproportionate economic hardship on 
a small refinery even if the refinery makes enough profit to 
cover the cost of complying with the program. Small refinery 
profitability does not justify a disproportionate regulatory 
burden where Congress has explicitly given EPA authority, in 
consultation with the Secretary, to reduce or eliminate this 
burden.

                    Office of the Inspector General

Appropriations, 2015....................................     $40,500,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................      46,424,000
House allowance.........................................      46,424,000
Committee recommendation................................      46,424,000

    The Committee recommends $46,424,000 for the Office of the 
Inspector General, the same as the request.

                    ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES


                NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

    The Committee recommends $12,263,276,000 for the National 
Nuclear Security Administration [NNSA]. The Committee continues 
funding for recapitalization of our nuclear weapons 
infrastructure, while modernizing and maintaining a safe, 
secure, and credible nuclear deterrent without testing. This is 
among our most important national security priorities.
    At the same time, the Committee supports continuing 
important efforts to secure and permanently eliminate remaining 
stockpiles of nuclear and radiological materials overseas and 
in the United States that can be used for nuclear or 
radiological weapons. In addition, the Committee supports Naval 
Reactors and the important role they play in enabling the 
Navy's nuclear fleet.
    The Committee remains concerned about NNSA's ability to 
concurrently execute multiple, highly complex life extension 
programs and construction projects, but is encouraged by the 
improved level of cooperation between NNSA and its primary 
customer, the Department of Defense.
    Use of Low-Enriched Uranium in Naval Reactors.--The 
Committee notes that a window of opportunity exists to explore 
and pursue the use of low-enriched uranium reactor fuel in the 
Nation's submarine fleet as another round of replacements 
approaches after the Ohio-class replacement. In addition to the 
direction provided in the Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation 
account, the NNSA Administrator is directed to develop a cost 
estimate, budget profile, and schedule for undertaking this 
effort; and determine the lead and participating organizations 
in which such an effort should be executed. This assessment 
shall be delivered to the Committee no later than 120 days 
after enactment of this act.
    Joint Effort on Energy Resilience and Operations Center.--
No NNSA fund in this act, or any other act, is available to 
fund any effort in support of the Energy Resilience and 
Operations Center, regardless of amount, unless it is submitted 
to Congress as a reprogramming request in accordance with the 
reprogramming requirements in this act.

                     INTEGRATED UNIVERSITY PROGRAM

    The Committee directs the Secretary to carry out the 
requirements of 42 U.S.C. 16274a in support of university 
research and development in areas relevant to the NNSA's 
mission. Within available funds, the Committee recommends not 
less than $15,000,000 for the Integrated University Program to 
cultivate the next generation of leaders in nonproliferation, 
nuclear security, and international security. Together with 
funds from the Office of Nuclear Energy and the Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission, this program ensures highly qualified 
nuclear specialists will be available to meet national needs. 
The Committee directs the Secretary to request funding for this 
program in future budget years, and specifically highlight the 
source of funds within the budget request. Further, funding for 
this program shall not come from prior year funds.

                            COST ESTIMATING

    The Committee is concerned with the continued poor cost 
estimating by the Department, particularly within the NNSA. 
Despite this problem having been the subject of many reviews 
and studies over the past decade, the lack of progress shows 
that the Department does not understand the root causes, and 
has not implemented appropriate corrective actions. In November 
2014, the Government Accountability Office [GAO] reported that 
the Department's cost estimating requirements and guidance for 
projects and programs generally do not reflect best practices 
for developing cost estimates. GAO made a series of 
recommendations to incorporate best practices into the 
Department's requirements and guidance. While the Department 
generally agreed with these recommendations, they have not 
shown any urgency in implementing them. Similarly, in December 
2014, GAO reported that several major construction projects had 
incurred significant cost increases and schedule delays, and 
that the Department was reassessing the originally selected 
project alternative for these projects. When GAO assessed the 
Department's process for selecting project alternatives, it 
again found an overall lack of best practices. The Department 
again agreed with the GAO recommendations, but was noncommittal 
in providing dates for incorporating changes. The Secretary is 
directed to provide a report to this Committee no later than 90 
days after enactment of this act, that outlines the 
Department's plan for improving cost estimating for major 
projects and programs, including a line-by-line plan of action 
for each open recommendation from the two GAO reports discussed 
above.

                           Weapons Activities

Appropriations, 2015....................................  $8,186,657,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................   8,846,948,000
House allowance.........................................   8,713,000,000
Committee recommendation................................   8,882,364,000

    The Committee recommends $8,882,364,000 for Weapons 
Activities, an increase of $35,416,000 from the budget request 
to ensure the safety, security, reliability, and effectiveness 
of the Nation's nuclear weapons stockpile without the need for 
nuclear testing.

                        Directed Stockpile Work

    The Committee recommends $3,039,474,000 for Directed 
Stockpile Work.
    Life Extension Programs.--The Committee recommends 
$1,302,532,000 for Life Extension Programs and Major 
Alterations, which fully funds all life extension programs and 
major alterations in the budget request, consistent with the 
plan of record approved by the Nuclear Weapons Council. NNSA 
needs to ensure that Life Extension Programs are completed on 
time and on budget to prevent impact on other high priorities, 
such as modernizing aging infrastructure, critical 
nonproliferation activities to combat nuclear terrorism, and 
naval nuclear propulsion. As such, NNSA should consider 
implementing a process for Life Extension Programs that is 
similar to the process specified in DOE Order 413.3B for 
capital projects.
    W76 Life Extension Program.--The Committee recommends 
$244,019,000 for the W76 Life Extension Program. Completing the 
W76 Life Extension Program, which makes up the largest share of 
the country's nuclear weapon deterrent on the most survivable 
leg of the Triad, is this Committee's highest priority for life 
extension programs.
    B61 Life Extension Program.--The Committee recommends 
$643,300,000 as requested for the B61 Life Extension Program. 
The Committee supports the Nuclear Weapons Council plan to 
retire the B83, the last megaton class weapon in the stockpile, 
by 2025.
    W88 Alt 370.--The Committee recommends $220,176,000 for the 
W88 Alt 370. The Committee recognizes different categories of 
nuclear weapon modernization programs. Life Extension Programs 
include a comprehensive analysis of the weapon's components and 
systems, followed by reuse, refurbishment or replacement of 
those components and systems, to purposefully extend the life 
of the weapon. Alterations are component changes, much less 
intensive, and do not change the weapon's operational 
capability. The distinction between a life extension program 
and an alteration is important, and should be maintained.
    Stockpile Services.--The Committee recommends $858,000,000 
for stockpile services. Subcritical experiments at the Nevada 
National Security Site provide the validation data for weapons 
simulation codes and enhance the ability to predict the 
behavior of aging weapons. NNSA is currently conducting one of 
these experiments every 18 months, which limits participation 
to one national laboratory. However, stockpile life extension 
efforts may require greater participation by the national labs 
and therefore, likely increased frequency of experiments. 
Within funds provided in this account, NNSA is directed to plan 
for two subcritical experiments per year to ensure that the 
laboratories actively participating in life extension efforts 
are involved in critical peer review and to realize shorter 
cycle times in providing nuclear weapon designers needed 
experimental data. This increased frequency could address key 
certification issues associated with weapon systems scheduled 
for Life Extension Program modernization.
    Nuclear Material Commodities.--The Committee recommends 
$344,516,000 for Nuclear Material Commodities.
    Domestic Uranium Enrichment.--The Committee recommends 
$50,000,000 for a domestic uranium enrichment capability. The 
bill contains a provision that provides special reprogramming 
authority of an additional $50,000,000 subject to the 
Committee's normal notification guidelines. The Committee 
directs that the Department of Energy shall use these funds 
only to maintain existing centrifuges and facilities associated 
with domestic enrichment capabilities and safeguard 
intellectual property rights.

           RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TECHNOLOGY, AND ENGINEERING

    The Committee recommends $1,766,295,000 for Research, 
Development, Technology, and Engineering.
    Inertial Confinement Fusion Ignition and High-Yield 
Campaign.--The Committee recommends $511,050,000 for the 
inertial confinement fusion ignition and high-yield campaign. 
Within these funds, $329,000,000 shall be used for inertial 
confinement fusion activities at the National Ignition Facility 
[NIF], $44,500,000 shall be used for Sandia National 
Laboratory's Z facility, and not less than $68,000,000 shall be 
used for the University of Rochester's Omega facility. The 
Committee supports ongoing efforts at NIF to operate more 
efficiently and expand the base of academic users in order to 
help attract top talent to stockpile stewardship. The Committee 
supports NNSA efforts to better coordinate diagnostic 
development efforts across national labs and universities for 
use at the major inertial confinement fusion facilities to make 
sure that critical diagnostics are available when needed.
    Advanced Simulation and Computing.--The Committee 
recommends $623,006,000 for advanced simulation and computing. 
Within these funds, the Committee recommends no less than 
$64,000,000 for activities associated with the exascale 
initiative, such as advanced system architecture design 
contracts with vendors and advanced weapons code development to 
effectively use new high performance computing platforms.

               READINESS IN TECHNICAL BASE AND FACILITIES

    The Committee recommends $1,021,110,000 for Readiness in 
Technical Base and Facilities.
    Operations.--The Committee recommends $360,920,000 for 
Operations. NNSA procedures require that the contracting 
officer review each M&O; contract at appropriate intervals, and 
at least once every 5 years, and he or she should determine 
whether meaningful improvement in performance or cost might 
reasonably be achieved when making a final decision to compete 
the existing contract. Within 120 days of enactment, NNSA 
should provide a report to the House and Senate Appropriations 
Committees that details the results of these reviews over the 
last 5 years, and the schedule for reviews in the coming year.
    Bannister Road Complex.--The Committee is concerned that 
NNSA will not follow through on completion of all activities 
needed to effectively turn over the Bannister Road Complex to a 
private entity, consistent with section 3143 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act, 2014. The Committee supports the 
budget request for the Bannister Road Complex, and recommends, 
within available funds, $7,800,000 for Site Surveillance, 
$3,000,000 for long-term stewardship activities, and 
$28,000,000 for Bannister Road Disposition. Further, the 
Committee is concerned that while the budget request states 
$200,000,000 will be required in fiscal year 2017 to complete 
the transfer, funding has not been included in the current 
outyear funding profile provided to the Committee with the 
budget request. The Secretary is directed to provide a report 
to the Committee no later than December 31, 2015 describing the 
proposed schedule and funding plan for completing the transfer.
    Construction.--The Committee recommends $660,190,000 for 
major capital construction projects.
    Project 06-D-141, Uranium Processing Facility, Y-12, Oak 
Ridge, Tennessee.--The Committee recommends $430,000,000 to 
continue design and engineering work as well as site readiness 
and site preparation projects for the Uranium Processing 
Facility.
    The Committee supports efforts to replace existing enriched 
uranium capabilities currently residing in Building 9212 by 
2025 for not more than $6,500,000,000. The Committee believes 
the recommendations from the Red Team are practical and lower 
cost compared to the previous big box, single structure uranium 
building design. The Committee believes NNSA should continue to 
ensure full implementation of the Red Team recommendations to 
maximize the use of existing facilities at Y-12 and build 
smaller, more affordable facilities at the appropriate hazard 
and security category, where needed. To accomplish this, NNSA 
is breaking the project into more manageable sub-projects. This 
practice is specifically permitted by DOE Order 413.3B, and is 
a practical approach for this project. The Committee expects 
the Secretary to ensure full compliance with the Department's 
requirement to have a design that is at least 90 percent 
complete before approving the start of construction for the 
nuclear facilities. As such, the Committee specifically 
authorizes site preparation and other construction activities 
prior to completion of any required independent cost estimate 
for the project.
    Project 04-D-125, Chemistry and Metallurgy Research 
Building Replacement Project, Los Alamos, New Mexico.--The 
Committee recommends $155,610,000 to maximize the use of the 
newly constructed Radiological Laboratory Utility Office 
Building [RLUOB] and reuse laboratory space in PF-4 to 
transition plutonium capabilities out of the aging Chemistry 
and Metallurgy Research [CMR] building by 2019. Within these 
funds, the Committee recommends organizing this work as sub-
projects under the existing CMRR line item project. The 
Committee recommends $117,000,000 for the RLUOB Equipment 
Installation Phase 2 sub-project, which transfers most 
analytical chemistry capabilities from CMR to RLUOB, and 
$38,610,000 for the PF-4 Equipment Installation sub-project 
which transfers material characterization and remaining 
analytical chemistry capabilities out of CMR to PF-4.
    Secure Transportation Asset.--The Committee recommends 
$219,000,000 for Secure Transportation Asset [STA]. The budget 
request proposes a nearly 15 percent increase in funding for 
STA, but does not provide adequate justification for the 
increase. In addition, the recapitalization of STA equipment is 
projected to cost more than originally thought. The Secretary 
should ensure cost estimating and analysis of alternatives best 
practices are incorporated into STA program planning before the 
procurement plan is finalized.

                        DEFENSE NUCLEAR SECURITY

    The Committee recommends $657,891,000 for Defense Nuclear 
Security.
    The recommendation provides additional funding above the 
budget request to meet shortfalls anticipated for the 
protective forces at Y-12 and other NNSA sites, and the need to 
replace vital security infrastructure. The Committee is 
concerned that NNSA has been overly aggressive in forecasting 
savings from the new contract structure at Y-12 and Pantex, and 
has not budgeted for a sufficient protective force to support 
production work required in the life extension programs. The 
Committee directs the Secretary to submit a report on the 
processes NNSA follows to coordinate across the various NNSA 
departments to ensure assumptions used in budget estimating for 
support functions, such as security, are synchronized with the 
primary missions of the site.
    The Committee is concerned that the NNSA terminated the Y-
12 Security Improvements Project without completing the full 
scope of work planned. The budget request also defers 
improvements that are needed at the Pantex Plant. The Secretary 
is encouraged to ensure that these investments are prioritized 
and appropriately funded in future budget requests.

                    Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation

Appropriations, 2015....................................  $1,616,638,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................   1,940,302,000
House allowance.........................................   1,907,606,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,705,912,000

    The Committee recommends $1,705,912,000 for Defense Nuclear 
Nonproliferation, a decrease of $234,390,000 from the budget 
request.

                    DEFENSE NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION

    Global Material Security.--The Committee recommends 
$426,751,000 for Global Material Security to increase the 
security of vulnerable stockpiles of nuclear weapons, weapons-
usable nuclear materials, and radiological materials and to 
improve partner countries' abilities to deter, detect, and 
interdict illicit trafficking. To ensure vital core 
capabilities in this area are maintained, it is imperative that 
the U.S. Government retain requisite expertise in uranium 
science and engineering, with appropriate infrastructure 
(laboratories, small-scale processing capability, and 
equipment), and resources to support nonproliferation and 
counter-proliferation efforts.
    Of the amount provided, not less than $30,000,000 is for a 
Uranium Science Institute for capacity building to both 
preserve and advance uranium science and engineering expertise 
and technology for national security and nonproliferation 
initiatives. These efforts will include research and 
development activities that improve and enhance knowledge of 
uranium enrichment and processing, while establishing and 
maintaining a core of personnel, laboratories, and equipment 
that can address current and future U.S. Government needs.
    Material Management and Minimization.--The Committee 
recommends $311,584,000 for Material Management and 
Minimization. Within these funds, the Committee recommends 
$109,000,000 for Nuclear Material Removal. The removal of U.S. 
and Russian origin HEU and LEU is an important mission, but 
budget request proposes a greater than 65 percent increase 
without sufficient justification. Also within these funds, the 
Committee recommends $120,000,000 for HEU Reactor Conversion. 
The Committee believes permanently eliminating supplies of HEU 
around the world significantly reduces the threat of nuclear 
terrorism. The Navy is the largest consumer of HEU for power 
generation. Within the funds provided for HEU Reactor 
Conversion, not less than $5,000,000 shall be used to start a 
technical program managed by Naval Reactors to develop and 
qualify an LEU fuel system for naval cores.
    Moly-99.--The Committee remains concerned about the 
development of domestic supplies of the medical isotope Moly-99 
on a schedule necessary to assure the public health and meet 
the expectations set forth in the Committee's fiscal year 2015 
report. Further, NNSA's efforts to develop a domestic source of 
Moly-99 from other than high-enriched uranium should include, 
but not be limited to, low-enriched uranium and natural 
molybdenum. The Committee directs NNSA to submit a report to 
the Appropriations Committees by January 31, 2016 on ways it 
plans to assure the deployment of two or more domestic sources 
of Moly-99 into commercial distribution by January 1, 2019 or 
sooner.
    Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Research and 
Development.--The Committee recommends $419,333,000 for Defense 
Nuclear Nonproliferation Research and Development, an increase 
of $25,932,000 from the fiscal year 2015 enacted level. The 
Committee supports a robust research and development capability 
to support nonproliferation initiatives.
    Nonproliferation Construction.--The Committee recommends 
$345,000,000 and adopts the budget request for the Mixed Oxide 
Fuel Fabrication Facility [MFFF]. The Committee directs the 
Secretary to form a Red Team, similar to the UPF Red Team, to 
review the project and make recommendations. The Red Team 
review should be completed in sufficient time to inform the 
fiscal year 2017 budget request.
    Nuclear Counterterrorism and Incident Response.--The 
Committee funds Nuclear Counterterrorism and Incident Response 
within the Weapons Activities account, and accordingly 
recommends no appropriation under Defense Nuclear 
Nonproliferation.
    Legacy Contractor Pensions.--The Committee recommends 
$94,617,000 for legacy contractor defined benefit pension 
plans.

                             Naval Reactors

Appropriations, 2015....................................  $1,234,000,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................   1,375,496,000
House allowance.........................................   1,322,820,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,300,000,000

    The Committee recommends $1,300,000,000 for Naval Reactors, 
a decrease of $75,496,000 from the budget request. The 
Committee's recommendation fully funds important national 
priorities, including the Ohio-class replacement submarine 
design and the prototype refueling. The Committee also 
recommends full funding for Naval Reactors Operations and 
Infrastructure, recognizing the importance of safe operations 
of the prototype reactors in New York and the spent fuel 
facility in Idaho, while properly maintaining overall 
infrastructure and facilities at four sites.

           OHIO-CLASS REPLACEMENT REACTOR SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT

    The Committee recommends $186,800,000 for Ohio-Class 
Replacement Reactor Systems Development.

                       NAVAL REACTORS DEVELOPMENT

    The Committee recommends $430,400,000 for Naval Reactors 
Development.
    Advanced Test Reactor.--The Committee encourages Naval 
Reactors and the Office of Nuclear Energy to continue working 
with the Idaho National Laboratory to establish and request 
adequate funding in future budget requests to ensure the 
continued reliable, safe operation of the Advanced Test 
Reactor, a vital and unique research facility. The Committee 
recommends $67,200,000 for ATR operation.

                              CONSTRUCTION

    The Committee recommends $62,100,000 for Construction. 
Within available funds, the Committee recommends $48,000,000 
for the Spent Fuel Handling Facility in Idaho and $3,100,000 
for the Engine Room Team Trainer. The requirements set forth in 
50 U.S.C. 2406 make the Deputy Administrator for Naval 
Reactors, within the Department of Energy, responsible for 
training conducted at the prototype reactors, including 
training and qualification of personnel who supervise, operate, 
or maintain naval nuclear propulsion plants. For this reason, 
and because this is a capital project required for that mission 
at a NNSA site, this project should continue to be funded 
through the Naval Reactors account within the NNSA.

                           PROGRAM DIRECTION

    The Committee recommends $42,504,000 for Program Direction. 
The Committee recommendation does not approve the requested 
increase in FTEs, and restricts manning to 238 FTEs.

                     Federal Salaries and Expenses

Appropriations, 2015....................................    $370,000,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................     402,654,000
House allowance.........................................     388,500,000
Committee recommendation................................     375,000,000

    The Committee recommends $375,000,000, a decrease of 
$27,654,000 from the budget request. Within these funds, the 
Committee recommends $2,000,000 for the Office of Cost 
Estimating and Program Evaluation and $972,000 for improved 
financial systems integration within the Department in 
accordance with the 2014 National Defense Authorization Act, 
section 3112. The Committee supports efforts to gain 
consistency in accounting across the Nuclear Security 
Enterprise so meaningful comparisons and analysis can be 
conducted, and management can focus its effort on the 
appropriate areas. The Committee urges the Secretary to 
complete the report required in section 3112, which was due in 
December 2014.

                     Defense Environmental Cleanup

Appropriations, 2015....................................  $5,000,000,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................   5,055,550,000
House allowance.........................................   5,055,550,000
Committee recommendation................................   5,180,000,000

    The Committee recommendation for Defense Environmental 
Cleanup is $5,180,000,000, an increase of $124,450,000 from the 
budget request. Within available funds, the Department is 
directed to fund the Hazardous Waste Worker Training Program.

                          DEFERRED MAINTENANCE

    The Committee is concerned that the Department is not 
addressing the backlog of deferred maintenance across the 
complex. Despite the stated goal of improving the facility 
maintenance activities and reinvestment projects to arrest 
growth in deferred maintenance, it is unclear how the 
Department intends to accomplish this goal, or measure its 
progress. The Secretary is directed to submit, as part of its 
annual budget request starting with the fiscal year 2017 
request, a prioritized list of the deferred maintenance it 
intends to accomplish in each of the next 5 years, including 
the rationale for the prioritization and the planned cost for 
each item. Further, the Committee expects the Secretary to 
request adequate funding to complete the maintenance consistent 
with its plan.
    Closure Sites.--The Committee recommends $4,889,000 for 
Closure Sites activities.
    Richland.--As a signatory to the Tri-Party Agreement, the 
Department of Energy is required to meet specific compliance 
milestones toward the cleanup of the Hanford site. Among other 
things, the Department committed to provide the funding 
necessary to enable full compliance with its cleanup 
milestones. Unfortunately, if the Department's fiscal year 2016 
budget request were enacted, several future fiscal year Tri-
Party Agreement milestones could be at risk, threatening high 
risk cleanup projects near the city of Richland, Washington and 
the economically and environmentally important Columbia River. 
The Committee recognizes that significant progress has been 
made at the Hanford Site. However, because the Department's 
budget request could slow or halt critical cleanup work and 
threaten the Department's compliance with its legal obligations 
under the Tri-Party Agreement, the Committee recommends 
$922,590,000 for Richland Operations. Additional funding is 
provided for cleanup of the 300-296 waste site, continued 
remediation of the 618-10 burial ground, and community and 
regulatory support. Within available funds in the River 
Corridor control point, the Department is directed to carry out 
maintenance and public safety efforts at the B Reactor, the 
Manhattan Project National Historical Park, and the Hazardous 
Materials Management and Emergency Response facilities.
    NNSA Sites.--The Committee recommends $254,876,000 for NNSA 
sites.
    Oak Ridge Reservation.--The Committee recommends 
$223,050,000 for Oak Ridge Reservation. Within the funds 
available for Nuclear Facility D&D;, the Committee recommends an 
additional $5,000,000 to support compliance and design life 
extension of Waste Treatment Facilities at Oak Ridge National 
Laboratory and $7,000,000 to support planning and preparation 
for a new landfill for the Oak Ridge Reservation. The existing 
on-site disposal facility is expected to reach capacity before 
all cleanup activities are completed. Planning for a new 
landfill is necessary to ensure that there is no interruption 
of cleanup activities.
    U-233 Disposition Program.--The Committee recommends 
$35,895,000 for the cleanup of Building 3019. Removal of legacy 
material from this building, an aging facility in the heart of 
the Oak Ridge National Laboratory central campus, must remain a 
high priority for the Department. Timely completion of this 
effort will enable the overall security posture at the 
laboratory to be relaxed, which will reduce costs and eliminate 
nuclear safety issues, and make campus more conducive to 
collaborative science.
    Mercury Treatment Facility.--The Committee recommends 
$9,400,000 for the Outfall 200 Mercury Treatment Facility, an 
increase of $2,600,000 from the budget request. Remediation of 
mercury contamination at the Oak Ridge Reservation is an 
important precursor to full site remediation. Reducing the 
mercury being released into the East Fork of Poplar Creek is a 
high priority for the Environmental Management program. Given 
the significant risk to public health, the Committee urges the 
Department to continue to pursue efforts to prevent mercury 
from escaping into the environment.
    Office of River Protection.--The Committee recommends 
$1,414,000,000 for the Office of River Protection.
    The Committee is supportive of the Department's efforts at 
technology development efforts to reduce the overall volume of 
radioactive wastes needing treatment and disposal. Preliminary 
work on technologies capable of removing the salts from the 
low-activity tank waste streams has been undertaken. Within 
available funds, the Department is directed to complete this 
effort by conducting system conceptual design and cost estimate 
activities in order to gain a deeper understanding of its 
potential within recent waste treatment system changes.
    Savannah River Site.--The Committee recommends 
$1,208,421,000 for the Savannah River site. Within the funds 
provided, $3,000,000 is provided for disposition of spent fuel 
from the High Flux Isotope Reactor.
    Waste Isolation Pilot Plant.--The Committee recommends 
$243,318,000 for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant.
    The Committee encourages the Secretary to take all 
appropriate actions to reopen the facility on schedule and 
demonstrate the ability operate in a safe manner. Worker safety 
must continue to be a priority for the Department and its 
contractors. The Committee is disappointed with the lack of a 
detailed budget to adequately explain and justify the recovery 
work and ensure that the recovery is not delayed by funding 
issues. The Committee requests that the Department develop and 
maintain a detailed budget of the WIPP recovery plan and 
provide it to the Committee on a semi-annual basis to account 
for work and needed projects.

    Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning Federal 
                              Contribution

Appropriations, 2015....................................    $463,000,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................     471,797,000
House allowance.........................................     471,797,000
Committee recommendation................................     614,000,000

    The Committee recommends $614,000,000 to fully offset the 
fiscal year 2016 appropriation for the Uranium Enrichment 
Decontamination and Decommissioning account. The Committee 
recommendation does not include authorization of a legislative 
proposal to reinstate a tax on nuclear utilities.

                        Other Defense Activities

Appropriations, 2015....................................    $754,000,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................     774,425,000
House allowance.........................................     767,570,000
Committee recommendation................................     764,000,000

    The Committee recommends $764,000,000 for Other Defense 
Activities, a decrease of $10,425,000 from the budget request. 
Within the funds provided, the Committee recommends 
$215,000,000 for Specialized Security Activities.

                    POWER MARKETING ADMINISTRATIONS


                  Bonneville Power Administration Fund

Appropriations, 2015....................................................
Budget estimate, 2016...................................................
House allowance.........................................................
Committee recommendation................................................

    The bill approves expenditures from the Bonneville Power 
Administration Fund for the Shoshone Paiute Trout Hatchery, the 
Spokane Tribal Hatchery, the Snake River Sockeye Weirs.

     Operations and Maintenance, Southeastern Power Administration

Appropriations, 2015....................................................
Budget estimate, 2016...................................................
House allowance.........................................................
Committee recommendation................................................

    The Committee recommends a net appropriation of $0 for the 
Southeastern Power Administration. Appropriations of $6,900,000 
are fully offset by collections.

     Operations and Maintenance, Southwestern Power Administration

Appropriations, 2015....................................     $11,400,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................      11,400,000
House allowance.........................................      11,400,000
Committee recommendation................................      11,400,000

    The Committee recommends a net appropriation of $11,400,000 
for the Southwestern Power Administration.

Construction, Rehabilitation, Operations and Maintenance, Western Area 
                          Power Administration

Appropriations, 2015....................................     $93,372,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................      93,372,000
House allowance.........................................      93,372,000
Committee recommendation................................      93,372,000

    The Committee recommends a net appropriation of $93,372,000 
for the Western Area Power Administration.

           Falcon and Amistad Operating and Maintenance Fund

Appropriations, 2015....................................        $228,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................         228,000
House allowance.........................................         228,000
Committee recommendation................................         228,000

    The Committee recommends a net appropriation of $228,000 
for the Falcon and Amistad Operating and Maintenance Fund.

                  Federal Energy Regulatory Commission


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2015....................................    $304,389,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................     319,800,000
House allowance.........................................     319,800,000
Committee recommendation................................     319,800,000

                            REVENUES APPLIED

Appropriations, 2015....................................   -$304,389,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................    -319,800,000
House allowance.........................................    -319,800,000
Committee recommendation................................    -319,800,000

    The Committee recommends a net appropriation of $0 for the 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

                                                                  DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
                                                                [In thousands of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                             Committee recommendation compared to--
                                       Enacted      Budget estimate  House allowance     Committee    --------------------------------------------------
                                                                                       recommendation      Enacted      Budget estimate  House allowance
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         ENERGY PROGRAMS
 
 ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE
              ENERGY
 
Sustainable Transportation:
    Vehicle technologies.........         280,000          444,000          255,400          292,000          +12,000         -152,000          +36,600
    Bioenergy technologies.......         225,000          246,000          165,300          225,000   ...............         -21,000          +59,700
    Hydrogen and fuel cell                 97,000          103,000           94,083           97,000   ...............          -6,000           +2,917
     technologies................
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Sustainable               602,000          793,000          514,783          614,000          +12,000         -179,000          +99,217
       Transportation............
 
Renewable Energy:
    Solar energy.................         233,000          336,700          151,600          241,600           +8,600          -95,100          +90,000
    Wind energy..................         107,000          145,500           90,450           46,000          -61,000          -99,500          -44,450
    Water power..................          61,000           67,000           38,700           65,000           +4,000           -2,000          +26,300
    Geothermal technologies......          55,000           96,000           46,000           71,000          +16,000          -25,000          +25,000
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Renewable Energy.         456,000          645,200          326,750          423,600          -32,400         -221,600          +96,850
 
Energy Efficiency:
    Advanced manufacturing.......         200,000          404,000          205,000          214,000          +14,000         -190,000           +9,000
    Building technologies........         172,000          264,000          150,362          178,000           +6,000          -86,000          +27,638
    Federal energy management              27,000           43,088           18,800           27,000   ...............         -16,088           +8,200
     program.....................
    Weatherization and
     intergovernmental:
        Weatherization:
            Weatherization                190,000          223,999          190,000          197,000           +7,000          -26,999           +7,000
             assistance program..
            Training and                    3,000            4,000            3,000            3,000   ...............          -1,000   ...............
             technical assistance
            NREL Site-Wide         ...............             400              400              400             +400   ...............  ...............
             Facility Support....
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal,                   193,000          228,399          193,400          200,400           +7,400          -27,999           +7,000
               Weatherization....
 
    State energy program grants..          50,000           70,100           50,000           50,000   ...............         -20,100   ...............
    Local technical assistance     ...............          20,000   ...............  ...............  ...............         -20,000   ...............
     program.....................
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Weatherization            243,000          318,499          243,400          250,400           +7,400          -68,099           +7,000
       and intergovernmental
       program...................
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Energy Efficiency         642,000        1,029,587          617,562          669,400          +27,400         -360,187          +51,838
 
Corporate Support:
    Facilities and
     infrastructure:
        National Renewable Energy          56,000           62,000           56,000           62,000           +6,000   ...............          +6,000
         Laboratory [NREL].......
    Program direction............         160,000          165,330          150,000          160,000   ...............          -5,330          +10,000
    Strategic programs...........          21,000           27,870           12,000           21,000   ...............          -6,870           +9,000
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Corporate Support         237,000          255,200          218,000          243,000           +6,000          -12,200          +25,000
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Energy efficiency       1,937,000        2,722,987        1,677,095        1,950,000          +13,000         -772,987         +272,905
       and renewable energy......
 
Use of Prior Year Balances.......  ...............  ...............         -19,321   ...............  ...............  ...............         +19,321
Rescissions......................         -13,065   ...............  ...............  ...............         +13,065   ...............  ...............
Floor amendments.................  ...............  ...............          11,000   ...............  ...............  ...............         -11,000
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, ENERGY EFFICENCY AND       1,923,935        2,722,987        1,668,774        1,950,000          +26,065         -772,987         +281,226
       RENEWABLE ENERGY..........
                                  ======================================================================================================================
 ELECTRICITY DELIVERY AND ENERGY
           RELIABILITY
 
Research and development:
    Clean energy transmission and          34,262           40,000           31,000           31,000           -3,262           -9,000   ...............
     reliability.................
    Smart grid research and                15,439           30,000           30,000           15,307             -132          -14,693          -14,693
     development.................
    Cyber security for energy              45,999           52,000           54,500           45,999   ...............          -6,001           -8,501
     delivery systems............
    Energy storage...............          12,000           21,000           15,000           16,000           +4,000           -5,000           +1,000
    Transformer resilience and     ...............          10,000           10,000            5,000           +5,000           -5,000           -5,000
     advanced components.........
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal...................         107,700          153,000          140,500          113,306           +5,606          -39,694          -27,194
 
National electricity delivery....           6,000            7,500            6,000            6,000   ...............          -1,500   ...............
Infrastructure security and                 6,000           14,000           14,000            6,000   ...............          -8,000           -8,000
 energy restoration..............
State energy reliability and       ...............          63,000   ...............  ...............  ...............         -63,000   ...............
 assurance.......................
Program direction................          27,606           32,600           27,000           27,000             -606           -5,600   ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Electricity               147,306          270,100          187,500          152,306           +5,000         -117,794          -35,194
       Delivery and Energy
       Reliability...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, ELECTRICITY DELIVERY         147,306          270,100          187,500          152,306           +5,000         -117,794          -35,194
       AND ENERGY RELIABILITY....
                                  ======================================================================================================================
          NUCLEAR ENERGY
 
Research and development:
    Integrated university program           5,000   ...............           5,000            5,000   ...............          +5,000   ...............
    STEP R&D.....................;           5,000            5,000            5,000            5,000   ...............  ...............  ...............
    Small modular reactor                  54,500           62,500           62,500           62,500           +8,000   ...............  ...............
     licensing technical support.
    Nuclear energy enabling               101,000           86,387          111,600          101,000   ...............         +14,613          -10,600
     technologies................
    Reactor concepts RD&D........;         133,000          108,140          141,718          117,874          -15,126           +9,734          -23,844
    Fuel cycle research and               197,000          217,760          175,800          217,000          +20,000             -760          +41,200
     development.................
    International nuclear energy            3,000            3,000            3,000            3,000   ...............  ...............  ...............
     cooperation.................
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal...................         498,500          482,787          504,618          511,374          +12,874          +28,587           +6,756
 
Infrastructure:
    Radiological facilities
     management:
        Space and defense                  20,000   ...............  ...............          14,000           -6,000          +14,000          +14,000
         infrastructure..........
        Research reactor                    5,000            6,800            6,800            6,800           +1,800   ...............  ...............
         infrastructure..........
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal...............          25,000            6,800            6,800           20,800           -4,200          +14,000          +14,000
 
    INL facilities management:
        INL operations and                200,631          209,826          216,582          209,826           +9,195   ...............          -6,756
         infrastructure..........
        Construction:
            16-E-200 Sample        ...............           2,000            2,000            2,000           +2,000   ...............  ...............
             preparation
             laboratory..........
            13-D-905 Remote-                5,369   ...............  ...............  ...............          -5,369   ...............  ...............
             handled low level
             waste disposal
             project, INL........
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal,                     5,369            2,000            2,000            2,000           -3,369   ...............  ...............
               Construction......
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal, INL               206,000          211,826          218,582          211,826           +5,826   ...............          -6,756
               facilities
               management........
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal,                   231,000          218,626          225,382          232,626           +1,626          +14,000           +7,244
               Infrastructure....
 
Idaho sitewide safeguards and             104,000          126,161          126,161          126,161          +22,161   ...............  ...............
 security........................
Program direction................          80,000           80,000           80,000           80,000   ...............  ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Nuclear Energy...         913,500          907,574          936,161          950,161          +36,661          +42,587          +14,000
 
Rescission.......................         -80,000   ...............  ...............  ...............         +80,000   ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, NUCLEAR ENERGY......         833,500          907,574          936,161          950,161         +116,661          +42,587          +14,000
                                  ======================================================================================================================
    FOSSIL ENERGY RESEARCH AND
           DEVELOPMENT
 
Coal CCS and power systems:
    Carbon capture...............          88,000          116,631           97,800           88,000   ...............         -28,631           -9,800
    Carbon storage...............         100,000          108,768          104,000           99,000           -1,000           -9,768           -5,000
    Advanced energy systems......         103,000           39,385          105,000          103,000   ...............         +63,615           -2,000
    Cross cutting research.......          49,000           51,242           52,100           49,000   ...............          -2,242           -3,100
    NETL coal research and                 50,000           34,031           50,000           53,000           +3,000          +18,969           +3,000
     development.................
    STEP (Supercritical CO2).....          10,000           19,300           15,000           10,000   ...............          -9,300           -5,000
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, CCS and power             400,000          369,357          423,900          402,000           +2,000          +32,643          -21,900
       systems...................
 
Natural Gas Technologies:
    CCS demonstrations:
        Natural gas carbon         ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............
         capture and storage.....
        Research.................          25,121           44,000           21,200           43,000          +17,879           -1,000          +21,800
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Natural Gas            25,121           44,000           21,200           43,000          +17,879           -1,000          +21,800
           Technologies..........
 
Unconventional fossil energy                4,500   ...............          13,000           25,321          +20,821          +25,321          +12,321
 technologies from petroleum--oil
 technologies....................
Program direction................         119,000          114,202          120,000          115,000           -4,000             +798           -5,000
Plant and capital equipment......          15,782           18,044           18,003           15,782   ...............          -2,262           -2,221
Fossil energy environmental                 5,897            8,197            8,197            8,197           +2,300   ...............  ...............
 restoration.....................
Super computer...................  ...............           5,500   ...............  ...............  ...............          -5,500   ...............
Special recruitment programs.....             700              700              700              700   ...............  ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, FOSSIL ENERGY                571,000          560,000          605,000          610,000          +39,000          +50,000           +5,000
       RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT..
                                  ======================================================================================================================
NAVAL PETROLEUM AND OIL SHALE              19,950           17,500           17,500           17,500           -2,450   ...............  ...............
 RESERVES........................
ELK HILLS SCHOOL LANDS FUND......          15,580   ...............  ...............  ...............         -15,580   ...............  ...............
STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE......         200,000          257,000          212,030          200,000   ...............         -57,000          -12,030
 
    NORTHEAST HOME HEATING OIL
             RESERVE
 
NORTHEAST HOME HEATING OIL                  7,600            7,600            7,600            7,600   ...............  ...............  ...............
 RESERVE.........................
Rescission.......................          -6,000   ...............  ...............  ...............          +6,000   ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, NORTHEAST HOME                 1,600            7,600            7,600            7,600           +6,000   ...............  ...............
       HEATING OIL RESERVE.......
                                  ======================================================================================================================
ENERGY INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION         117,000          131,000          117,000          122,000           +5,000           -9,000           +5,000
 
NON-DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP
 
Fast Flux Test Reactor Facility             2,562            2,562            2,562            2,562   ...............  ...............  ...............
 (WA)............................
Gaseous Diffusion Plants.........         104,403          104,403          104,403          104,403   ...............  ...............  ...............
Small sites......................          80,049           54,007           61,715           77,822           -2,227          +23,815          +16,107
West Valley Demonstration Project          58,986           59,213           59,213           59,213             +227   ...............  ...............
 
Construction:
    Mercury storage facility.....  ...............  ...............           1,300   ...............  ...............  ...............          -1,300
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, NON-DEFENSE                  246,000          220,185          229,193          244,000           -2,000          +23,815          +14,807
       ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP.....
                                  ======================================================================================================================
        URANIUM ENRICHMENT
         DECONTAMINATION
 
     AND DECOMMISSIONING FUND
 
Oak Ridge........................         167,898          154,235          163,946          194,673          +26,775          +40,438          +30,727
 
Paducah:
    Nuclear facility D&D;, Paducah         198,729          167,456          192,456          198,729   ...............         +31,273           +6,273
    Construction:
        15-U-407 On-site waste              8,486   ...............  ...............  ...............          -8,486   ...............  ...............
         disposal facility,
         Paducah.................
        16-U-401 Solid waste       ...............           1,196            1,196            1,196           +1,196   ...............  ...............
         management units 5&6....
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Paducah.........         207,215          168,652          193,652          199,925           -7,290          +31,273           +6,273
 
Portsmouth:
    Nuclear facility D&D;,                 209,524          131,117          156,117          131,117          -78,407   ...............         -25,000
     Portsmouth..................
    Construction:
        15-U-408 On-site waste              4,500           34,300           57,300           34,300          +29,800   ...............         -23,000
         disposal facility,
         Portsmouth..............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Portsmouth......         214,024          165,417          213,417          165,417          -48,607   ...............         -48,000
 
Pension and community and                  25,863           21,026           21,026           21,026           -4,837   ...............  ...............
 regulatory support..............
Title X uranium/thorium                    10,000           32,959           32,959           32,959          +22,959   ...............  ...............
 reimbursement program...........
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, UED&D; FUND..........         625,000          542,289          625,000          614,000          -11,000          +71,711          -11,000
                                  ======================================================================================================================
             SCIENCE
 
Advanced scientific computing             541,000          620,994          537,539          620,994          +79,994   ...............         +83,455
 research........................
 
Basic energy sciences:
    Research.....................       1,594,500        1,649,000        1,578,440        1,644,000          +49,500           -5,000          +65,560
    Construction:
        13-SC-10 LINAC coherent           138,700          200,300          191,866          200,300          +61,600   ...............          +8,434
         light source II, SLAC...
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Construction.         138,700          200,300          191,866          200,300          +61,600   ...............          +8,434
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Basic energy        1,733,200        1,849,300        1,770,306        1,844,300         +111,100           -5,000          +73,994
           sciences..............
 
Biological and environmental              592,000          612,400          538,000          610,000          +18,000           -2,400          +72,000
 research........................
 
Fusion energy sciences:
    Research.....................         317,500          270,000          317,600          270,168          -47,332             +168          -47,432
    Construction:
        14-SC-60 ITER............         150,000          150,000          150,000   ...............        -150,000         -150,000         -150,000
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Fusion energy         467,500          420,000          467,600          270,168         -197,332         -149,832         -197,432
           sciences..............
 
High energy physics:
    Research.....................         729,000          731,900          717,900          722,000           -7,000           -9,900           +4,100
    Construction:
        11-SC-40 Project                   12,000           16,000           18,000           26,000          +14,000          +10,000           +8,000
         engineering and design
         [PED] long baseline
         neutrino experiment,
         FNAL....................
        11-SC-41 Muon to electron          25,000           40,100           40,100           40,100          +15,100   ...............  ...............
         conversion experiment,
         FNAL....................
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Construction.          37,000           56,100           58,100           66,100          +29,100          +10,000           +8,000
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, High energy           766,000          788,000          776,000          788,100          +22,100             +100          +12,100
           physics...............
 
Nuclear physics:
    Operations and maintenance...         489,000          517,100          510,665          489,000   ...............         -28,100          -21,665
    Construction:
        14-SC-50 Facility for              90,000          100,000           98,000           95,000           +5,000           -5,000           -3,000
         rare isotope beams,
         Michigan State
         University..............
        06-SC-01 12 GeV                    16,500            7,500            7,500            7,500           -9,000   ...............  ...............
         continuous electron beam
         facility upgrade, TJNAF.
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Construction.         106,500          107,500          105,500          102,500           -4,000           -5,000           -3,000
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Nuclear               595,500          624,600          616,165          591,500           -4,000          -33,100          -24,665
           physics...............
 
Workforce development for                  19,500           20,500           20,500           19,500   ...............          -1,000           -1,000
 teachers and scientists.........
 
Science laboratories
 infrastructure:
    Infrastructure support:
        Payment in lieu of taxes.           1,713            1,713            1,713            1,713   ...............  ...............  ...............
        Oak Ridge landlord.......           5,777   ...............           6,177            6,177             +400           +6,177   ...............
        Facilities and                      6,100           30,977           10,000           24,800          +18,700           -6,177          +14,800
         infrastructure..........
        Oak Ridge nuclear          ...............          12,000           12,000           12,000          +12,000   ...............  ...............
         operations..............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal...............          13,590           44,690           29,890           44,690          +31,100   ...............         +14,800
 
    Construction:
        15-SC-78 Integrative               12,090           20,000           16,000           20,000           +7,910   ...............          +4,000
         genomics building, LBNL.
        15-SC-77 Photon science            10,000           25,000           25,000           25,000          +15,000   ...............  ...............
         laboratory building,
         SLAC....................
        15-SC-76 Materials design           7,000           23,910           19,000           23,910          +16,910   ...............          +4,910
         laboratory, ANL.........
        15-SC-75 Infrastructure            25,000   ...............  ...............  ...............         -25,000   ...............  ...............
         and operational
         improvements, PPPL......
        12-SC-70 Science and user          11,920   ...............  ...............  ...............         -11,920   ...............  ...............
         support building, SLAC..
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal...............          66,010           68,910           60,000           68,910           +2,900   ...............          +8,910
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Science                79,600          113,600           89,890          113,600          +34,000   ...............         +23,710
           laboratories
           infrastructure........
 
Safeguards and security..........          93,000          103,000          103,000          100,715           +7,715           -2,285           -2,285
Science program direction........         183,700          187,400          181,000          185,000           +1,300           -2,400           +4,000
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Science..........       5,071,000        5,339,794        5,100,000        5,143,877          +72,877         -195,917          +43,877
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, SCIENCE.............       5,071,000        5,339,794        5,100,000        5,143,877          +72,877         -195,917          +43,877
                                  ======================================================================================================================
NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL...........  ...............  ...............         150,000   ...............  ...............  ...............        -150,000
 
ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY-
              ENERGY
 
ARPA-E projects..................         252,000          295,750          252,000          263,000          +11,000          -32,750          +11,000
Program direction................          28,000           29,250           28,000           28,000   ...............          -1,250   ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, ARPA-E..............         280,000          325,000          280,000          291,000          +11,000          -34,000          +11,000
 
      INDIAN ENERGY PROGRAMS
 
    Program direction............  ...............           3,510   ...............  ...............  ...............          -3,510   ...............
    Tribal energy program........  ...............          16,490   ...............  ...............  ...............         -16,490   ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, INDIAN ENERGY         ...............          20,000   ...............  ...............  ...............         -20,000   ...............
       PROGRAMS..................
 
 TITLE 17--INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY
        LOAN GUARANTEE PGM
 
Administrative expenses..........          42,000           42,000           42,000           42,000   ...............  ...............  ...............
Offsetting collection............         -25,000          -25,000          -25,000          -25,000   ...............  ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, TITLE 17--INNOVATIVE          17,000           17,000           17,000           17,000   ...............  ...............  ...............
       TECHNOLOGY LOAN GUARANTEE
       PROGRAM...................
                                  ======================================================================================================================
    TRIBAL INDIAN ENERGY LOAN
        GUARANTEE PROGRAM
 
    Loan guarantee credit subsidy  ...............           9,000   ...............  ...............  ...............          -9,000   ...............
     costs.......................
    Administrative operations....  ...............           2,000   ...............  ...............  ...............          -2,000   ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, TRIBAL INDIAN ENERGY  ...............          11,000   ...............  ...............  ...............         -11,000   ...............
       LOAN GUARANTEE PROGRAM....
                                  ======================================================================================================================
   ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY VEHICLES
      MANUFACTURING LOAN PGM
 
Administrative expenses..........           4,000            6,000            6,000            6,000           +2,000   ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY            4,000            6,000            6,000            6,000           +2,000   ...............  ...............
       VEHICLESMANUFACTURING LOAN
       PROGRAM...................
                                  ======================================================================================================================
CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY                      -6,600   ...............  ...............  ...............          +6,600   ...............  ...............
 (RESCISSION)....................
 
   DEPARTMENTAL ADMINISTRATION
 
Administrative operations:
    Salaries and expenses:
        Office of the Secretary:
            Program direction....           5,008            5,300            5,008            5,008   ...............            -292   ...............
            Chief Financial                47,000           50,182           47,000           47,000   ...............          -3,182   ...............
             Officer.............
            Management...........          62,946           76,227           64,598           62,946   ...............         -13,281           -1,652
            Chief human capital            24,500           25,400           24,500           24,500   ...............            -900   ...............
             officer.............
            Chief Information              33,188           30,988           30,988           30,988           -2,200   ...............  ...............
             Officer.............
            Office of Indian               16,000   ...............          16,000           16,000   ...............         +16,000   ...............
             energy policy and
             programs............
            Congressional and               6,300            6,300            6,300            6,300   ...............  ...............  ...............
             intergovernmental
             affairs.............
            Office Of Small and             2,253            3,000            3,000            3,000             +747   ...............  ...............
             disadvantaged
             business utilization
            Economic impact and             6,200           10,000           10,000           10,000           +3,800   ...............  ...............
             diversity...........
            General Counsel......          33,000           33,000           33,000           33,000   ...............  ...............  ...............
            Energy policy and              31,181           35,000           31,297           31,297             +116           -3,703   ...............
             systems analysis....
            International Affairs          13,000           23,600           13,000           18,000           +5,000           -5,600           +5,000
            Public affairs.......           3,431            3,431            3,431            3,431   ...............  ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Salaries and          284,007          302,428          288,122          291,470           +7,463          -10,958           +3,348
           expenses..............
 
    Program support:
        Economic impact and                 2,800   ...............  ...............  ...............          -2,800   ...............  ...............
         diversity...............
        Policy analysis and        ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............
         system studies..........
        Environmental policy       ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............
         studies.................
        Climate change technology  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............
         program (prog. supp)....
        Cybersecurity and secure           21,364           21,006           21,006           21,006             -358   ...............  ...............
         communications..........
        Corporate IT program               19,612           27,806           20,850           20,224             +612           -7,582             -626
         support (CIO)...........
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Program                43,776           48,812           41,856           41,230           -2,546           -7,582             -626
           support...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal,                       327,783          351,240          329,978          332,700           +4,917          -18,540           +2,722
           Administrative
           operations............
 
    Strategic partnership                  42,000           40,000           40,000           40,000           -2,000   ...............  ...............
     projects (SPP)..............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Departmental              369,783          391,240          369,978          372,700           +2,917          -18,540           +2,722
       administration............
 
Use of prior-year balances.......          -5,805           -2,000   ...............          -2,000           +3,805   ...............          -2,000
Digital service team--CIO........  ...............           4,000   ...............  ...............  ...............          -4,000   ...............
Funding from other defense               -118,836         -122,558         -122,558         -122,558           -3,722   ...............  ...............
 activities......................
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Departmental                 245,142          270,682          247,420          248,142           +3,000          -22,540             +722
       administration (gross)....
                                  ======================================================================================================================
Miscellaneous revenues...........        -119,171         -117,171         -117,171         -117,171           +2,000   ...............  ...............
Floor amendments.................  ...............  ...............         -56,220   ...............  ...............  ...............         +56,220
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, DEPARTMENTAL                 125,971          153,511           74,029          130,971           +5,000          -22,540          +56,942
       ADMINISTRATION (net)......
                                  ======================================================================================================================
 OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
 
Office of the inspector general..          40,500           46,424           46,000           46,424           +5,924   ...............            +424
Floor amendments.................  ...............  ...............             424   ...............  ...............  ...............            -424
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, OFFICE OF THE                 40,500           46,424           46,424           46,424           +5,924   ...............  ...............
       INSPECTOR GENERAL.........
                                  ======================================================================================================================
      TOTAL, ENERGY PROGRAMS.....      10,232,742       11,554,964       10,279,211       10,502,839         +270,097       -1,052,125         +223,628
                                  ======================================================================================================================
 ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES
 
    NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY
          ADMINISTRATION
 
        WEAPONS ACTIVITIES
 
Directed stockpile work:
    B61 Life extension program...         643,000          643,300          643,300          643,300             +300   ...............  ...............
    W76 Life extension program...         259,168          244,019          244,019          244,019          -15,149   ...............  ...............
    W88 Life extension program...         165,400          220,176          220,176          220,176          +54,776   ...............  ...............
    Cruise missile warhead life             9,418   ...............  ...............  ...............          -9,418   ...............  ...............
     extension study.............
    W80-4 Life extension program.  ...............         195,037          195,037          195,037         +195,037   ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal...................       1,076,986        1,302,532        1,302,532        1,302,532         +225,546   ...............  ...............
 
    Stockpile systems:
        B61 Stockpile systems....         109,615           52,247           52,247           52,247          -57,368   ...............  ...............
        W76 Stockpile systems....          45,728           50,921           50,921           50,921           +5,193   ...............  ...............
        W78 Stockpile systems....          62,703           64,092           64,092           64,092           +1,389   ...............  ...............
        W80 Stockpile systems....          70,610           68,005           68,005           68,005           -2,605   ...............  ...............
        B83 Stockpile systems....          63,136           42,177           42,177           42,177          -20,959   ...............  ...............
        W87 Stockpile systems....          91,255           89,299           89,299           89,299           -1,956   ...............  ...............
        W88 Stockpile systems....          88,060          115,685          115,685          115,685          +27,625   ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal...............         531,107          482,426          482,426          482,426          -48,681   ...............  ...............
 
    Weapons dismantlement and              50,000           48,049           48,049           52,000           +2,000           +3,951           +3,951
     disposition.................
    Stockpile services:
        Production support.......         350,942          447,527          447,527          430,000          +79,058          -17,527          -17,527
        Research and Development           25,500           34,159           41,059           32,000           +6,500           -2,159           -9,059
         support.................
        R and D certification and         160,000          192,613          185,000          170,000          +10,000          -22,613          -15,000
         safety..................
        Management, technology,           226,000          264,994          258,527          226,000   ...............         -38,994          -32,527
         and production..........
        Plutonium sustainment....         132,000   ...............  ...............  ...............        -132,000   ...............  ...............
        Tritium readiness........         140,053   ...............  ...............  ...............        -140,053   ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal...............       1,034,495          939,293          932,113          858,000         -176,495          -81,293          -74,113
 
    Strategic materials:
        Uranium sustainment......  ...............          32,916           32,916           32,916          +32,916   ...............  ...............
        Plutonium sustainment....  ...............         174,698          174,698          157,000         +157,000          -17,698          -17,698
        Tritium sustainment......  ...............         107,345          107,345          104,600         +104,600           -2,745           -2,745
        Domestic uranium           ...............         100,000           50,000           50,000          +50,000          -50,000   ...............
         enrichment..............
        Strategic materials        ...............  ...............         224,217   ...............  ...............  ...............        -224,217
         sustainment.............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal...............  ...............         414,959          589,176          344,516         +344,516          -70,443         -244,660
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Directed            2,692,588        3,187,259        3,354,296        3,039,474         +346,886         -147,785         -314,822
           stockpile work........
 
Research, Development, Test and
 Evaluation (RDT&E;):
    Science:
        Advanced certification...          58,747           50,714           58,747           50,714           -8,033   ...............          -8,033
        Primary assessment                109,000           98,500          104,100           98,500          -10,500   ...............          -5,600
         technologies............
        Dynamic materials                 109,000          109,000          100,400          109,000   ...............  ...............          +8,600
         properties..............
        Advanced radiography.....          47,000           47,000           27,000           47,000   ...............  ...............         +20,000
        Secondary assessment               88,344           84,400           72,900           84,400           -3,944   ...............         +11,500
         technologies............
        Academic alliances and     ...............  ...............          49,800   ...............  ...............  ...............         -49,800
         partnerships............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal...............         412,091          389,614          412,947          389,614          -22,477   ...............         -23,333
 
    Engineering:
        Enhanced surety..........          52,003           50,821           50,821           50,821           -1,182   ...............  ...............
        Weapons system                     20,832           17,371           17,371           17,371           -3,461   ...............  ...............
         engineering assessment
         technology..............
        Nuclear survivability....          25,371           24,461           24,461           24,461             -910   ...............  ...............
        Enhanced surveillance....          37,799           38,724           38,724           38,724             +925   ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal...............         136,005          131,377          131,377          131,377           -4,628   ...............  ...............
 
    Inertial confinement fusion
     ignition and high yield:
        Ignition.................          77,994           73,334           76,334           76,334           -1,660           +3,000   ...............
        Support of other                   23,598           22,843           22,843           22,843             -755   ...............  ...............
         stockpile programs......
        Diagnostics, cryogenics            61,297           58,587           58,587           58,587           -2,710   ...............  ...............
         and experimental support
        Pulsed power inertial               5,024            4,963            4,963            4,963              -61   ...............  ...............
         confinement fusion......
        Joint program in high               9,100            8,900            8,900            8,900             -200   ...............  ...............
         energy density
         laboratory plasmas......
        Facility operations and           335,882          333,823          339,423          339,423           +3,541           +5,600   ...............
         target production.......
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal...............         512,895          502,450          511,050          511,050           -1,845           +8,600   ...............
 
    Advanced simulation and               598,000          623,006          605,000          623,006          +25,006   ...............         +18,006
     computing...................
 
Advanced manufacturing
 development:
    Additive manfacturing........          12,600   ...............          16,000   ...............         -12,600   ...............         -16,000
    Component manufacturing                75,000          112,256           80,000           93,448          +18,448          -18,808          +13,448
     development.................
    Process technology                     19,600           17,800           17,800           17,800           -1,800   ...............  ...............
     development.................
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal...................         107,200          130,056          113,800          111,248           +4,048          -18,808           -2,552
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, RDT&E............;       1,766,191        1,776,503        1,774,174        1,766,295             +104          -10,208           -7,879
 
Infrastructure and Operations
 (formerly RTBF):
    Operations of facilities:
        Kansas City Plant........         125,000   ...............         100,250   ...............        -125,000   ...............        -100,250
        Lawrence Livermore                 71,000   ...............          70,671   ...............         -71,000   ...............         -70,671
         National Laboratory.....
        Los Alamos National               198,000   ...............         196,460   ...............        -198,000   ...............        -196,460
         Laboratory..............
        Nevada Test Site.........          89,000   ...............          89,000   ...............         -89,000   ...............         -89,000
        Pantex...................          75,000   ...............          58,021   ...............         -75,000   ...............         -58,021
        Sandia National                   106,000   ...............         115,300   ...............        -106,000   ...............        -115,300
         Laboratory..............
        Savannah River Site......          81,000   ...............          80,463   ...............         -81,000   ...............         -80,463
        Y-12 National Security            151,000   ...............         120,625   ...............        -151,000   ...............        -120,625
         Complex.................
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal...............         896,000   ...............         830,790   ...............        -896,000   ...............        -830,790
 
    Program readiness............          68,000           75,185   ...............          60,000           -8,000          -15,185          +60,000
    Material recycle and recovery         126,000          173,859   ...............         160,000          +34,000          -13,859         +160,000
    Containers...................          26,000   ...............  ...............  ...............         -26,000   ...............  ...............
    Storage......................          40,800           40,920   ...............          40,920             +120   ...............         +40,920
    Safety and environmental       ...............  ...............         107,701   ...............  ...............  ...............        -107,701
     operations..................
 
Maintenance and repair of
 facilities:
    Maintenance and repair of             227,000   ...............  ...............  ...............        -227,000   ...............  ...............
     facilities..................
    Site maintenance.............  ...............  ...............         252,000   ...............  ...............  ...............        -252,000
    High-risk excess facilities..  ...............  ...............          25,000   ...............  ...............  ...............         -25,000
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Maintenance and           227,000   ...............         277,000   ...............        -227,000   ...............        -277,000
       repair of facilities......
 
Recapitalization:
    Recapitalization.............         224,600          104,327   ...............         100,000         -124,600           -4,327         +100,000
    Infrastructure and safety....  ...............  ...............         253,724   ...............  ...............  ...............        -253,724
    Capability based investments.  ...............  ...............          98,800   ...............  ...............  ...............         -98,800
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Recapitalization.         224,600          104,327          352,524          100,000         -124,600           -4,327         -252,524
 
    Construction:
        16-D-140 Project           ...............  ...............          34,103   ...............  ...............  ...............         -34,103
         engineering and design,
         various locations.......
        16-D-621 TA-3 Substation   ...............  ...............          25,000   ...............  ...............  ...............         -25,000
         replacement, LANL.......
        15-D-613 Emergency                  2,000   ...............  ...............  ...............          -2,000   ...............  ...............
         Operations Center, Y-12.
        15-D-301 HE Science &              11,800   ...............  ...............  ...............         -11,800   ...............  ...............
         Engineering Facility, PX
        15-D-302 TA-55                     16,062           18,195   ...............          18,195           +2,133   ...............         +18,195
         Reinvestment project
         III, LANL...............
        12-D-301 TRU waste                  6,938   ...............  ...............  ...............          -6,938   ...............  ...............
         facility project, LANL..
        11-D-801 TA-55                     10,000            3,903            3,903            3,903           -6,097   ...............  ...............
         Reinvestment project II,
         LANL....................
        07-D-220 Radioactive       ...............          11,533           11,533           11,533          +11,533   ...............  ...............
         liquid waste treatment
         facility, LANL..........
        07-O-220-04 Transuranic             7,500           40,949   ...............          40,949          +33,449   ...............         +40,949
         liquid waste facility,
         LANL....................
    Uranium processing facility
     (UPF):
        06-D-141 Uranium                  335,000          430,000   ...............         430,000          +95,000   ...............        +430,000
         Processing Facility, Y-
         12......................
        Project engineering and    ...............  ...............         289,128   ...............  ...............  ...............        -289,128
         design, UPF.............
        06-D-141-02 Site           ...............  ...............         140,872   ...............  ...............  ...............        -140,872
         preparation, UPF........
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, UPF..........         335,000          430,000          430,000          430,000          +95,000   ...............  ...............
 
    Chemistry and metallurgy
     replacement (CMRR):
        04-D-125 Chemistry and             35,700          155,610   ...............         155,610         +119,910   ...............        +155,610
         metallurgy replacement
         project, LANL...........
        04-D-125-04 RLUOB          ...............  ...............         117,000   ...............  ...............  ...............        -117,000
         equipment installation,
         phase 2.................
        04-D-125-05 PF-4           ...............  ...............          38,610   ...............  ...............  ...............         -38,610
         equipment installation..
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, CMRR.........          35,700          155,610          155,610          155,610         +119,910   ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Construction.         425,000          660,190          660,149          660,190         +235,190   ...............             +41
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal,                     2,033,400        1,054,481        2,228,164        1,021,110       -1,012,290          -33,371       -1,207,054
           Infrastructure and
           Operations............
 
Secure transportation asset:
    Operations and equipment.....         121,882          146,272          140,000          121,882   ...............         -24,390          -18,118
    Program direction............          97,118          105,338           92,000           97,118   ...............          -8,220           +5,118
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Secure                    219,000          251,610          232,000          219,000   ...............         -32,610          -13,000
       transportation asset......
 
Nuclear counterterrorism incident         177,940   ...............  ...............         234,390          +56,450         +234,390         +234,390
 response........................
Counterterrorism and                       46,093   ...............  ...............  ...............         -46,093   ...............  ...............
 counterproliferation programs...
 
    Infrastructure and safety
 
    Operations of facilities       ...............         100,250   ...............         100,250         +100,250   ...............        +100,250
     Kansas City Plant...........
    Lawrence Livermore National    ...............          70,671   ...............          70,671          +70,671   ...............         +70,671
     Laboratory..................
    Los Alamos National            ...............         196,460   ...............         196,460         +196,460   ...............        +196,460
     Laboratory..................
    Nevada National Security Site  ...............          89,000   ...............          89,000          +89,000   ...............         +89,000
    Pantex.......................  ...............          58,021   ...............          58,021          +58,021   ...............         +58,021
    Sandia National Laboratory...  ...............         115,300   ...............         115,300         +115,300   ...............        +115,300
    Savannah River Site..........  ...............          80,463   ...............          80,463          +80,463   ...............         +80,463
    Y-12 National security         ...............         120,625   ...............         120,625         +120,625   ...............        +120,625
     complex.....................
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Operations of         ...............         830,790   ...............         830,790         +830,790   ...............        +830,790
       facilities................
 
    Safety operations............  ...............         107,701   ...............         107,701         +107,701   ...............        +107,701
    Maintenance..................  ...............         227,000   ...............         227,000         +227,000   ...............        +227,000
    Recapitalization.............  ...............         257,724   ...............         257,724         +257,724   ...............        +257,724
    Construction:
        16-D-621 Substation        ...............          25,000   ...............          25,000          +25,000   ...............         +25,000
         replacement at TA-3,
         LANL....................
        15-D-613 Emergency         ...............          17,919   ...............          17,919          +17,919   ...............         +17,919
         Operations Center, Y-12.
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Construction....  ...............          42,919   ...............          42,919          +42,919   ...............         +42,919
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Infrastructure    ...............       1,466,134   ...............       1,466,134       +1,466,134   ...............      +1,466,134
           and safety............
 
Site stewardship.................          76,531           36,595   ...............          36,595          -39,936   ...............         +36,595
 
Defense nuclear security:
    Defense nuclear security.....         636,123          619,891          634,891          644,891           +8,768          +25,000          +10,000
    Security improvements program  ...............  ...............          35,000   ...............  ...............  ...............         -35,000
    Construction:
        14-D-710 Device assembly   ...............          13,000           13,000           13,000          +13,000   ...............  ...............
         facility argus
         installation project, NV
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Defense               636,123          632,891          682,891          657,891          +21,768          +25,000          -25,000
           nuclear security......
 
Information technology and cyber          179,646          157,588          157,588          157,588          -22,058   ...............  ...............
 security........................
Legacy contractor pensions.......         307,058          283,887          283,887          283,887          -23,171   ...............  ...............
Domestic uranium enrichment......          97,200   ...............  ...............  ...............         -97,200   ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Weapons                 8,231,770        8,846,948        8,713,000        8,882,364         +650,594          +35,416         +169,364
       Activities................
 
Rescission.......................         -45,113   ...............  ...............  ...............         +45,113   ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, WEAPONS ACTIVITIES..       8,186,657        8,846,948        8,713,000        8,882,364         +695,707          +35,416         +169,364
                                  ======================================================================================================================
 DEFENSE NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION
 
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation
 Programs:
 
Global material security:
    International nuclear          ...............         130,527          130,527          130,527         +130,527   ...............  ...............
     security....................
    Radiological security........  ...............         153,749          153,749          153,749         +153,749   ...............  ...............
    Nuclear smuggling detection..  ...............         142,475          138,673          142,475         +142,475   ...............          +3,802
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Global material    ...............         426,751          422,949          426,751         +426,751   ...............          +3,802
       security..................
 
Material management and
 minimization:
    HEU reactor conversion.......  ...............         115,000          115,000          120,000         +120,000           +5,000           +5,000
    Nuclear material removal.....  ...............         114,000          114,000          109,000         +109,000           -5,000           -5,000
    Material disposition.........  ...............          82,584           81,584           82,584          +82,584   ...............          +1,000
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Material           ...............         311,584          310,584          311,584         +311,584   ...............          +1,000
       management and
       minimization..............
 
Nonproliferation and arms control  ...............         126,703          130,203          126,703         +126,703   ...............          -3,500
Defense nuclear nonproliferation          393,401          419,333          419,333          419,333          +25,932   ...............  ...............
 R&D.............................;
 
Nonproliferation construction:
    99-D-143 Mixed Oxide (MOX)     ...............         345,000          345,000          345,000         +345,000   ...............  ...............
     Fuel Fabrication Facility,
     SRS.........................
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Nonproliferation   ...............         345,000          345,000          345,000         +345,000   ...............  ...............
       construction..............
 
Global threat reduction
 initiative:
    HEU reactor conversion.......         119,383   ...............  ...............  ...............        -119,383   ...............  ...............
    International nuclear and             117,737   ...............  ...............  ...............        -117,737   ...............  ...............
     radiological material
     removal and protection......
    Domestic radiological                  88,632   ...............  ...............  ...............         -88,632   ...............  ...............
     material removal and
     protection..................
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Global threat             325,752   ...............  ...............  ...............        -325,752   ...............  ...............
       reduction initiative......
 
Nonproliferation and                      141,359   ...............  ...............  ...............        -141,359   ...............  ...............
 international security..........
International materials                   270,911   ...............  ...............  ...............        -270,911   ...............  ...............
 protection and cooperation......
 
Fissile materials disposition:
    U.S. plutonium disposition...          60,000   ...............  ...............  ...............         -60,000   ...............  ...............
    U.S. uranium disposition.....          25,000   ...............  ...............  ...............         -25,000   ...............  ...............
    Construction:
    99-D-143 Mixed oxide fuel             345,000   ...............  ...............  ...............        -345,000   ...............  ...............
     fabrication facility,
     Savannah River, SC..........
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Construction.....         345,000   ...............  ...............  ...............        -345,000   ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Fissile materials            430,000   ...............  ...............  ...............        -430,000   ...............  ...............
       disposition...............
 
Legacy contractor pensions.......         102,909           94,617           94,617           94,617           -8,292   ...............  ...............
Nuclear counterterrorism and       ...............         234,390          234,390   ...............  ...............        -234,390         -234,390
 incident response program.......
Use of prior-year balances.......         -22,963          -18,076          -39,076          -18,076           +4,887   ...............         +21,000
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Defense Nuclear         1,641,369        1,940,302        1,918,000        1,705,912          +64,543         -234,390         -212,088
       Nonproliferation..........
 
Rescission.......................         -24,731   ...............         -10,394   ...............         +24,731   ...............         +10,394
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, DEFENSE NUCLEAR            1,616,638        1,940,302        1,907,606        1,705,912          +89,274         -234,390         -201,694
       NONPROLIFERATION..........
                                  ======================================================================================================================
          NAVAL REACTORS
 
Naval reactors development.......         411,180          444,400          414,642          430,400          +19,220          -14,000          +15,758
OHIO replacement reactor systems          156,100          186,800          186,800          186,800          +30,700   ...............  ...............
 development.....................
S8G Prototype refueling..........         126,400          133,000          133,000          133,000           +6,600   ...............  ...............
Naval reactors operations and             390,000          445,196          424,452          445,196          +55,196   ...............         +20,744
 infrastructure..................
 
Construction:
    15-D-904 NRF Overpack Storage             400              900              900              900             +500   ...............  ...............
     Expansion 3.................
    15-D-903 KL Fire System                   600              600              600              600   ...............  ...............  ...............
     Upgrade.....................
    15-D-902 KS Engineroom team    ...............           3,100   ...............           3,100           +3,100   ...............          +3,100
     trainer facility............
    14-D-902 KL Materials          ...............          30,000           30,000            9,000           +9,000          -21,000          -21,000
     characterization laboratory
     expansion, KAPL.............
    14-D-901 Spent fuel handling           70,000           86,000           86,000           48,000          -22,000          -38,000          -38,000
     recapitalization project,
     NRF.........................
    13-D-905 Remote-handled low-           14,420   ...............  ...............  ...............         -14,420   ...............  ...............
     level waste disposal
     project, INL................
    13-D-904 KS Radiological work          20,100   ...............  ...............  ...............         -20,100   ...............  ...............
     and storage building, KSO...
    10-D-903, Security upgrades,            7,400              500              500              500           -6,900   ...............  ...............
     KAPL........................
    08-D-190 Expended Core                    400   ...............  ...............  ...............            -400   ...............  ...............
     Facility M-290 recovering
     discharge station, NRF, ID..
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Construction.....         113,320          121,100          118,000           62,100          -51,220          -59,000          -55,900
 
Program direction................          41,500           45,000           43,500           42,504           +1,004           -2,496             -996
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Naval Reactors...       1,238,500        1,375,496        1,320,394        1,300,000          +61,500          -75,496          -20,394
 
Rescission.......................          -4,500   ...............  ...............  ...............          +4,500   ...............  ...............
Floor amendments.................  ...............  ...............           2,500   ...............  ...............  ...............          -2,500
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, NAVAL REACTORS......       1,234,000        1,375,496        1,322,894        1,300,000          +66,000          -75,496          -22,894
                                  ======================================================================================================================
FEDERAL SALARIES AND EXPENSES....         370,000          402,654          388,000          375,000           +5,000          -27,654          -13,000
Floor amendments.................  ...............  ...............          -2,426   ...............  ...............  ...............          +2,426
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, FEDERAL SALARIES AND         370,000          402,654          385,574          375,000           +5,000          -27,654          -10,574
       EXPENSES..................
                                  ======================================================================================================================
      TOTAL, NATIONAL NUCLEAR          11,407,295       12,565,400       12,329,074       12,263,276         +855,981         -302,124          -65,798
       SECURITY ADMINISTRATION...
                                  ======================================================================================================================
  DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP
 
Closure sites....................           4,889            4,889            4,889            4,889   ...............  ...............  ...............
 
Richland:
    River corridor and other              377,788          196,957          275,831          270,710         -107,078          +73,753           -5,121
     cleanup operations..........
    Central plateau remediation..         497,456          555,163          555,163          555,163          +57,707   ...............  ...............
    RL community and regulatory            19,701           14,701           14,701           19,701   ...............          +5,000           +5,000
     support.....................
    Construction:
        15-D-401 Containerized             46,055           77,016           77,016           77,016          +30,961   ...............  ...............
         sludge removal annex, RL
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Richland.....         941,000          843,837          922,711          922,590          -18,410          +78,753             -121
 
Idaho National Laboratory:
    Idaho cleanup and waste               377,293          357,783          387,783          357,783          -19,510   ...............         -30,000
     disposition.................
    Idaho community and                     2,910            3,000            3,000            3,000              +90   ...............  ...............
     regulatory support..........
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Idaho National               380,203          360,783          390,783          360,783          -19,420   ...............         -30,000
       Laboratory................
 
NNSA sites and Nevada offsites:
    Lawrence Livermore National             1,366            1,366            1,366            1,366   ...............  ...............  ...............
     Laboratory..................
    Nevada.......................          64,851           62,385           62,385           62,385           -2,466   ...............  ...............
    Sandia National Laboratory...           2,801            2,500            2,500            2,500             -301   ...............  ...............
    Los Alamos National                   185,000          188,625          180,000          188,625           +3,625   ...............          +8,625
     Laboratory..................
    Construction:
        15-D-406 Hexavalent                 4,600   ...............  ...............  ...............          -4,600   ...............  ...............
         chromium Pump and
         Treatment facility, LANL
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, NNSA sites and           258,618          254,876          246,251          254,876           -3,742   ...............          +8,625
           Nevada off-sites......
 
Oak Ridge Reservation:
    OR Nuclear facility D&D......;          73,155           75,958           84,958           95,958          +22,803          +20,000          +11,000
    U233 disposition program.....  ...............          26,895           35,895           35,895          +35,895           +9,000   ...............
    OR cleanup and waste                  131,930           60,500           60,500           68,597          -63,333           +8,097           +8,097
     disposition.................
    Construction:
        15-D-405 Sludge                     4,200   ...............  ...............  ...............          -4,200   ...............  ...............
         processing facility
         buildouts...............
        14-D-403 Outfall 200                9,400            6,800            9,400            9,400   ...............          +2,600   ...............
         mercury treatment
         facility................
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Construction.          13,600            6,800            9,400            9,400           -4,200           +2,600   ...............
 
    OR community & regulatory               4,365            4,400            4,400           10,400           +6,035           +6,000           +6,000
     support.....................
    OR Technology development and  ...............           2,800            2,800            2,800           +2,800   ...............  ...............
     deployment..................
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Oak Ridge                    223,050          177,353          197,953          223,050   ...............         +45,697          +25,097
       Reservation...............
 
Office of River Protection:
    Construction:
        15-D-409 Low activity              23,000           75,000           75,000           56,000          +33,000          -19,000          -19,000
         waste pretreatment
         sysem, ORP..............
        01-D-16 A-D, Waste                563,000          595,000          545,000          595,000          +32,000   ...............         +50,000
         treatment and
         immobilization plant,
         ORP.....................
        01-D-16 E, Waste                  104,000           95,000           70,000           95,000           -9,000   ...............         +25,000
         treatment and
         immobilization plant,
         Pretreatment facility,
         ORP.....................
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Construction....         690,000          765,000          690,000          746,000          +56,000          -19,000          +56,000
 
    Tank farm activities:
        Rad liquid tank waste             522,000          649,000          578,000          668,000         +146,000          +19,000          +90,000
         stabilization and
         disposition.............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Office of           1,212,000        1,414,000        1,268,000        1,414,000         +202,000   ...............        +146,000
           river protection......
 
Savannah River Site:
    SR site risk management               397,976          386,652          389,652          386,652          -11,324   ...............          -3,000
     operations..................
    SR community and regulatory            11,013           11,249           11,249           11,249             +236   ...............  ...............
     support.....................
    SR radioactive liquid tank            547,318          581,878          562,000          581,878          +34,560   ...............         +19,878
     waste stabilization and
     disposition.................
    Construction:
        15-D-402 Saltstone                 30,000           34,642           34,642           34,642           +4,642   ...............  ...............
         disposal Unit #6, SRS...
        05-D-405 Salt waste               135,000          194,000          194,000          194,000          +59,000   ...............  ...............
         processing facility, SRS
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Savannah River         1,121,307        1,208,421        1,191,543        1,208,421          +87,114   ...............         +16,878
           Site..................
 
Waste Isolation Pilot Plant:
    Waste Isolation Pilot Plant..         304,000          212,600   ...............         212,600          -91,400   ...............        +212,600
    Operations and maintenance...  ...............  ...............         116,800   ...............  ...............  ...............        -116,800
    Recovery activities..........  ...............  ...............          87,000   ...............  ...............  ...............         -87,000
    Central characterization       ...............  ...............          35,000   ...............  ...............  ...............         -35,000
     project.....................
    Transportation...............  ...............  ...............          16,339   ...............  ...............  ...............         -16,339
    Construction:
        15-D-411 Safety                    12,000           23,218           23,218           23,218          +11,218   ...............  ...............
         significant confinement
         ventilation system, WIPP
        15-D-412 Exhaust shaft,             4,000            7,500            7,500            7,500           +3,500   ...............  ...............
         WIPP....................
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Waste isolation          320,000          243,318          285,857          243,318          -76,682   ...............         -42,539
           pilot plant...........
 
Program direction................         280,784          281,951          281,951          281,951           +1,167   ...............  ...............
Program support..................          14,979           14,979           14,979           14,979   ...............  ...............  ...............
Safeguards and Security..........         240,000          236,633          236,633          236,633           -3,367   ...............  ...............
Technology development...........          14,000           14,510           14,000           14,510             +510   ...............            +510
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Defense                 5,010,830        5,055,550        5,055,550        5,180,000         +169,170         +124,450         +124,450
       Environmental Cleanup.....
 
Rescission.......................         -10,830   ...............  ...............  ...............         +10,830   ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, DEFENSE                    5,000,000        5,055,550        5,055,550        5,180,000         +180,000         +124,450         +124,450
       ENVIRONMENTAL CLEAN UP....
                                  ======================================================================================================================
Defense Environmental Cleanup      ...............         471,797   ...............  ...............  ...............        -471,797   ...............
 (Legislative proposal)..........
DEFENSE URANIUM ENRICHMENT                463,000   ...............         471,797          614,000         +151,000         +614,000         +142,203
 DECONTAMINATION AND
 DECOMMISSIONING.................
 
     OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES
 
Environment, health, safety and
 security:
    Environment, health, safety           118,763          120,693          120,693          118,763   ...............          -1,930           -1,930
     and security................
    Program direction............          62,235           63,105           63,105           62,235   ...............            -870             -870
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Environment,              180,998          183,798          183,798          180,998   ...............          -2,800           -2,800
       Health, safety and
       security..................
 
Independent enterprise
 assessments:
    Independent enterprise                 24,068           24,068           24,068           24,068   ...............  ...............  ...............
     assessments.................
    Program direction............          49,466           49,466           49,466           49,466   ...............  ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Independent                73,534           73,534           73,534           73,534   ...............  ...............  ...............
       enterprise assessments....
 
Specialized security activities..         203,152          221,855          215,000          217,952          +14,800           -3,903           +2,952
 
Office of Legacy Management:
    Legacy management............         158,639          154,080          154,080          154,080           -4,559   ...............  ...............
    Program direction............          13,341           13,100           13,100           13,100             -241   ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Office of Legacy          171,980          167,180          167,180          167,180           -4,800   ...............  ...............
       Management................
 
Defense related administrative            118,836          122,558          122,558          118,836   ...............          -3,722           -3,722
 support.........................
Office of hearings and appeals...           5,500            5,500            5,500            5,500   ...............  ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, OTHER DEFENSE                754,000          774,425          767,570          764,000          +10,000          -10,425           -3,570
       ACTIVITIES................
                                  ======================================================================================================================
      TOTAL, ATOMIC ENERGY             17,624,295       18,867,172       18,623,991       18,821,276       +1,196,981          -45,896         +197,285
       DEFENSE ACTIVITIES........
                                  ======================================================================================================================
 POWER MARKETING ADMINISTRATIONS
               (1)
 
SOUTHEASTERN POWER ADMINISTRATION
 
    Operation and maintenance:
        Purchase power and                 89,710           83,600           83,600           83,600           -6,110   ...............  ...............
         wheeling................
        Program direction........           7,220            6,900            6,900            6,900             -320   ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Operation and          96,930           90,500           90,500           90,500           -6,430   ...............  ...............
           maintenance...........
 
    Less alternative financing            -16,131          -17,100          -17,100          -17,100             -969   ...............  ...............
     [PPW].......................
    Offsetting collections (for           -73,579          -66,500          -66,500          -66,500           +7,079   ...............  ...............
     PPW)........................
    Offsetting collections (PD)..          -2,220           -6,900           -6,900           -6,900           -4,680   ...............  ...............
    Use of prior-year balances...          -5,000   ...............  ...............  ...............          +5,000   ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, SOUTHEASTERN POWER    ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............
       ADMINISTRATION............
                                  ======================================================================================================================
SOUTHWESTERN POWER ADMINISTRATION
 
    Operation and maintenance:
        Operating expenses.......          15,174           19,279           19,279           19,279           +4,105   ...............  ...............
        Purchase power and                 63,000           73,000           73,000           73,000          +10,000   ...............  ...............
         wheeling................
        Program direction........          31,089           31,932           31,932           31,932             +843   ...............  ...............
        Construction.............          13,403           12,012           12,012           12,012           -1,391   ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Operation and         122,666          136,223          136,223          136,223          +13,557   ...............  ...............
           maintenance...........
 
    Less alternative financing             -5,934           -8,288           -8,288           -8,288           -2,354   ...............  ...............
     (for O&M;)...................
    Less alternative financing            -10,000          -10,000          -10,000          -10,000   ...............  ...............  ...............
     (for PPW)...................
    Less alternative financing             -7,492           -7,574           -7,574           -7,574              -82   ...............  ...............
     (Const).....................
    Offsetting collections (PD)..         -29,402          -29,938          -29,938          -29,938             -536   ...............  ...............
    Offsetting collections (for            -5,438           -6,023           -6,023           -6,023             -585   ...............  ...............
     O&M;)........................
    Offsetting collections (for           -53,000          -63,000          -63,000          -63,000          -10,000   ...............  ...............
     PPW)........................
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, SOUTHWESTERN POWER            11,400           11,400           11,400           11,400   ...............  ...............  ...............
       ADMINISTRATION............
                                  ======================================================================================================================
WESTERN AREA POWER ADMINISTRATION
 
    Operation and maintenance:
        Construction and                   86,645           58,374           58,374           58,374          -28,271   ...............  ...............
         rehabilitation..........
        Operation and maintenance          81,958           80,901           80,901           80,901           -1,057   ...............  ...............
        Purchase power and                441,223          565,927          565,927          565,927         +124,704   ...............  ...............
         wheeling................
        Program direction........         227,905          236,398          236,398          236,398           +8,493   ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Operation and         837,731          941,600          941,600          941,600         +103,869   ...............  ...............
           maintenance...........
 
    Less alternative financing             -5,197           -1,757           -1,757           -1,757           +3,440   ...............  ...............
     (for O&M;)...................
    Less alternative financing            -74,448          -53,585          -53,585          -53,585          +20,863   ...............  ...............
     (for Construction)..........
    Less alternative financing             -5,300           -5,273           -5,273           -5,273              +27   ...............  ...............
     (for Program Dir.)..........
    Less alternative financing           -180,713         -213,114         -213,114         -213,114          -32,401   ...............  ...............
     (for PPW)...................
    Offsetting collections (for          -174,285         -177,697         -177,697         -177,697           -3,412   ...............  ...............
     program direction)..........
    Offsetting collections (for           -36,745          -36,645          -36,645          -36,645             +100   ...............  ...............
     O&M;)........................
    Offsetting collections               -260,510         -352,813         -352,813         -352,813          -92,303   ...............  ...............
     (Public Law 108-477, Public
     Law 109-103)................
    Offsetting collections                 -7,161           -7,344           -7,344           -7,344             -183   ...............  ...............
     (Public Law 98-381).........
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, WESTERN AREA POWER            93,372           93,372           93,372           93,372   ...............  ...............  ...............
       ADMINISTRATION............
                                  ======================================================================================================================
 FALCON AND AMISTAD OPERATING AND
         MAINTENANCE FUND
 
    Operation and maintenance....           5,529            4,950            4,950            4,950             -579   ...............  ...............
    Offsetting collections.......          -4,499           -4,262           -4,262           -4,262             +237   ...............  ...............
    Less alternative financing...            -802             -460             -460             -460             +342   ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, FALCON AND AMISTAD               228              228              228              228   ...............  ...............  ...............
       O&M; FUND..................
                                  ======================================================================================================================
      TOTAL, POWER MARKETING              105,000          105,000          105,000          105,000   ...............  ...............  ...............
       ADMINISTRATIONS...........
                                  ======================================================================================================================
    FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY
            COMMISSION
 
    Federal Energy Regulatory             304,389          319,800          319,800          319,800          +15,411   ...............  ...............
     Commission..................
    FERC revenues................        -304,389         -319,800         -319,800         -319,800          -15,411   ...............  ...............
 
        General Provisions
 
Title III Rescissions:
    Department of Energy:
        Energy Efficiency and              -9,740   ...............         -16,677          -16,677           -6,937          -16,677   ...............
         Energy Reliability......
        Science..................          -3,262   ...............          -4,717           -4,717           -1,455           -4,717   ...............
        Nuclear Energy...........            -121   ...............          -1,665           -1,665           -1,544           -1,665   ...............
        Fossil Energy Research            -10,413   ...............         -12,064          -12,064           -1,651          -12,064   ...............
         and Development.........
        Office of Electricity                -331   ...............            -900             -900             -569             -900   ...............
         Delivery and Energy
         Reliability.............
        Advanced Research                     -18   ...............  ...............  ...............             +18   ...............  ...............
         Projects Agency--Energy.
        Construction,                      -1,632   ...............          -4,832           -4,832           -3,200           -4,832   ...............
         Rehabilitation,
         Operation and
         Maintenance, Western
         Area Power
         Administration..........
        Weapons activities (050)           -6,298   ...............  ...............         -65,135          -58,837          -65,135          -65,135
         (rescission)............
        Office of the                        -413   ...............  ...............  ...............            +413   ...............  ...............
         Administrator (050)
         (rescission)............
        Departmental                         -928   ...............  ...............  ...............            +928   ...............  ...............
         Administration..........
        Defense Environmental              -9,983   ...............  ...............  ...............          +9,983   ...............  ...............
         Cleanup (050)...........
        Defense Nuclear                    -1,390   ...............  ...............         -19,324          -17,934          -19,324          -19,324
         Nonproliferation (050)..
        Naval Reactors (050).....            -160   ...............  ...............            -628             -468             -628             -628
        Other Defense Activities             -551   ...............  ...............  ...............            +551   ...............  ...............
         (050)...................
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, General                  -45,240   ...............         -40,855         -125,942          -80,702         -125,942          -85,087
           Provisions............
                                  ======================================================================================================================
          GRAND TOTAL, DEPARTMENT      27,916,797       30,527,136       28,967,347       29,303,173       +1,386,376       -1,223,963         +335,826
           OF ENERGY.............
      (Total amount appropriated)     (28,152,876)     (30,527,136)     (29,018,596)     (29,429,115)     (+1,276,239)     (-1,098,021)       (+410,519)
          (Rescissions)..........       (-236,079)  ...............        (-51,249)       (-125,942)       (+110,137)       (-125,942)        (-74,693)
                                  ======================================================================================================================
       SUMMARY OF ACCOUNTS
 
Energy efficiency and renewable         1,923,935        2,722,987        1,668,774        1,950,000          +26,065         -772,987         +281,226
 energy..........................
Electricity delivery and energy           147,306          270,100          187,500          152,306           +5,000         -117,794          -35,194
 reliability.....................
Nuclear energy...................         833,500          907,574          936,161          950,161         +116,661          +42,587          +14,000
Fossil Energy Research and                571,000          560,000          605,000          610,000          +39,000          +50,000           +5,000
 Development.....................
Naval Petroleum & Oil Shale                19,950           17,500           17,500           17,500           -2,450   ...............  ...............
 Reserves........................
Elk Hills School Lands Fund......          15,580   ...............  ...............  ...............         -15,580   ...............  ...............
Strategic petroleum reserves.....         200,000          257,000          212,030          200,000   ...............         -57,000          -12,030
Northeast home heating oil                  1,600            7,600            7,600            7,600           +6,000   ...............  ...............
 reserve.........................
Energy Information Administration         117,000          131,000          117,000          122,000           +5,000           -9,000           +5,000
Non-Defense Environmental Cleanup         246,000          220,185          229,193          244,000           -2,000          +23,815          +14,807
Uranium enrichment D&D; fund......         625,000          542,289          625,000          614,000          -11,000          +71,711          -11,000
Nuclear Waste Disposal...........  ...............  ...............         150,000   ...............  ...............  ...............        -150,000
Science..........................       5,071,000        5,339,794        5,100,000        5,143,877          +72,877         -195,917          +43,877
Advanced Research Projects Agency-        280,000          325,000          280,000          291,000          +11,000          -34,000          +11,000
 Energy..........................
Departmental administration......         125,971          153,511           74,029          130,971           +5,000          -22,540          +56,942
Indian energy program............  ...............          20,000   ...............  ...............  ...............         -20,000   ...............
Office of the Inspector General..          40,500           46,424           46,424           46,424           +5,924   ...............  ...............
Tribal Indian Energy Loan          ...............          11,000   ...............  ...............  ...............         -11,000   ...............
 Guarantee Program...............
Title 17 Innovative technology             17,000           17,000           17,000           17,000   ...............  ...............  ...............
 loan guarantee program..........
Advanced technology vehicles                4,000            6,000            6,000            6,000           +2,000   ...............  ...............
 manufacturing loan pgm..........
Clean coal technology............          -6,600   ...............  ...............  ...............          +6,600   ...............  ...............
 
Atomic energy defense activities:
    National Nuclear Security
     Administration:
          Weapons activities.....       8,186,657        8,846,948        8,713,000        8,882,364         +695,707          +35,416         +169,364
          Defense nuclear               1,616,638        1,940,302        1,907,606        1,705,912          +89,274         -234,390         -201,694
           nonproliferation......
          Naval reactors.........       1,234,000        1,375,496        1,322,894        1,300,000          +66,000          -75,496          -22,894
          Federal Salaries and            370,000          402,654          385,574          375,000           +5,000          -27,654          -10,574
           Expenses..............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Subtotal, National         11,407,295       12,565,400       12,329,074       12,263,276         +855,981         -302,124          -65,798
             Nuclear Security
             Admin...............
 
    Defense environmental cleanup       5,000,000        5,055,550        5,055,550        5,180,000         +180,000         +124,450         +124,450
    Defense environmental cleanup  ...............         471,797   ...............  ...............  ...............        -471,797   ...............
     (legislative proposal)......
    Defense uranium enrichment            463,000   ...............         471,797          614,000         +151,000         +614,000         +142,203
     decontamination and
     decommissioning.............
    Other defense activities.....         754,000          774,425          767,570          764,000          +10,000          -10,425           -3,570
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Atomic Energy             17,624,295       18,867,172       18,623,991       18,821,276       +1,196,981          -45,896         +197,285
       Defense Activities........
 
Power marketing administrations
 (1):
    Southeastern Power             ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............
     Administration..............
    Southwestern Power                     11,400           11,400           11,400           11,400   ...............  ...............  ...............
     Administration..............
    Western Area Power                     93,372           93,372           93,372           93,372   ...............  ...............  ...............
     Administration..............
    Falcon and Amistad operating              228              228              228              228   ...............  ...............  ...............
     and maintenance fund........
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Power Marketing              105,000          105,000          105,000          105,000   ...............  ...............  ...............
       Administrations...........
 
Federal Energy Regulatory
 Commission:
    Salaries and expenses........         304,389          319,800          319,800          319,800          +15,411   ...............  ...............
    Revenues.....................        -304,389         -319,800         -319,800         -319,800          -15,411   ...............  ...............
General Provisions...............         -45,240   ...............         -40,855         -125,942          -80,702         -125,942          -85,087
                                  ======================================================================================================================
      Total Summary of Accounts,       27,916,797       30,527,136       28,967,347       29,303,173       +1,386,376       -1,223,963         +335,826
       Department of Energy......
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Totals include alternative financing costs, reimbursable agreement funding, and power purchase and wheeling expenditures. Offsetting collection
  totals reflect funds collected for annual expenses, including power purchase and wheeling.

                GENERAL PROVISIONS--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

    The following list of general provisions is recommended by 
the Committee. The recommendation includes several provisions 
which have been included in previous Energy and Water 
Appropriations Acts and new provisions as follows:
    Section 301. Language is included on the execution of 
appropriations, including reprogramming, and Congressional 
notification.
    Section 302. Language is included on merging the unexpended 
balances of prior appropriations.
    Section 303. Language is included specifically authorizing 
intelligence activities pending enactment of the fiscal year 
2016 Intelligence Authorization Act.
    Section 304. The Committee has included a provision related 
to nuclear safety requirements.
    Section 305. The Committee has included language related to 
independent cost estimates.
    Section 306. The Committee has included a provision on a 
pilot program related to consolidated storage of spent nuclear 
fuel.
    Section 307. Language is included regarding the Strategic 
Petroleum Reserve.
    Section 308. Language is included rescinding unobligated 
balances.
    Section 309. Language is included rescinding unobligated 
balances.
    Section 310. Language is included regarding domestic 
uranium enrichment.
    Section 311. Language is included as a technical correction 
to the Secretary of Energy's authority.
    Section 312. Language is included regarding the application 
of funds for the Department of Energy.

                                TITLE IV

                          INDEPENDENT AGENCIES

                    Appalachian Regional Commission

Appropriations, 2015....................................     $90,000,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................      95,000,000
House allowance.........................................      95,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     105,000,000

    The Committee recommends $105,000,000 for the Appalachian 
Regional Commission [ARC], an increase of $10,000,000 from the 
budget request. Established in 1965, the Appalachian Regional 
Commission is an economic development agency composed of 13 
Appalachian States and a Federal co-chair appointed by the 
President. Within available funding, $10,000,000 is recommended 
to foster and continue the workforce training program in 
Southern Appalachia, primarily focused on the automotive 
supplier industry and the aviation sector in South Central 
Appalachia. The program will benefit economically distressed 
counties in Southern and South Central Appalachia. This funding 
shall be in addition to any funds otherwise directed to 
distressed counties. The funds shall be distributed according 
to ARC's Distressed Counties Formula, which includes land area, 
population estimates, and the number of distressed counties.
    Within available funds, the Committee recommends 
$25,000,000, the same as the budget request, for the POWER Plus 
Plan. This new activity is designed to support communities, 
primarily in Appalachia, that have been adversely impacted by 
the closure of coal-powered generating plants and a declining 
coal industry by providing resources for economic 
diversification, job creation, job training, and other 
employment services.

                Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2015....................................     $28,500,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................      29,150,000
House allowance.........................................      29,900,000
Committee recommendation................................      29,150,000

    The Committee recommends $29,150,000 for the Defense 
Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, the same as the budget 
request. The Committee notes that Congress permanently 
authorized the Inspector General for the Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission to serve as the Inspector General for the Defense 
Nuclear Facilities Safety Board. The Committee recommendation 
includes $958,000 in funding within the Office of Inspector 
General of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to perform these 
services.

                        Delta Regional Authority

Appropriations, 2015....................................     $12,000,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................      14,936,000
House allowance.........................................      12,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      25,000,000

    The Committee recommends $25,000,000 for the Delta Regional 
Authority, an increase of $10,064,000 from the request. The 
Delta Regional Authority is a Federal-State partnership that is 
designed to assist the eight-State Mississippi Delta Region in 
developing basic infrastructure, transportation, skills 
training, and opportunities for economic development for 
distressed counties and parishes. Within available funds, not 
less than $10,000,000 shall be used for flood control, basic 
infrastructure development and transportation improvements, 
which shall be in addition to the State formula funding 
allocations. The Federal co-chairman, in consultation with 
State Governors, shall distribute funding to States and public 
and nonprofit entities for projects that will benefit rural 
communities with the greatest infrastructure needs.

                           Denali Commission

Appropriations, 2015....................................     $10,000,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................      10,000,000
House allowance.........................................      10,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      11,000,000

    The Committee recommends $11,000,000 for the Denali 
Commission, an increase of $1,000,000 from the budget request. 
The Denali Commission is a Federal-State partnership 
responsible for promoting infrastructure development, job 
training, and other economic support services in rural areas 
throughout Alaska.

                  Northern Border Regional Commission

Appropriations, 2015....................................      $5,000,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................       5,000,000
House allowance.........................................       3,000,000
Committee recommendation................................       7,500,000

    The Committee recommends $7,500,000 for the Northern Border 
Regional Commission, an increase of $2,500,000 from the budget 
request. The Northern Border Regional Commission is a Federal-
State partnership intended to promote transportation, basic 
public infrastructure, job skills training and business 
development in areas of persistent economic distress in the 
northern border region, which covers portions of Maine, New 
Hampshire, New York, and Vermont. The Committee notes that 
section 404 of the Energy and Water Appropriations Act, 2015, 
required each independent agency funded in title IV of the bill 
to submit a budget justification and a detailed annual report. 
The Committee directs the Northern Border Regional Commission 
to comply with this direction.

                Southeast Crescent Regional Commission

Appropriations, 2015....................................        $250,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................................
House allowance.........................................         250,000
Committee recommendation................................................

    The Committee recommends no funds for the Southeast 
Crescent Regional Commission.

                     Nuclear Regulatory Commission


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2015....................................  $1,003,233,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................   1,020,119,000
House allowance.........................................   1,003,233,000
Committee recommendation................................     990,000,000

                                REVENUES

Appropriations, 2015....................................   -$885,375,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................    -899,971,000
House allowance.........................................    -862,274,000
Committee recommendation................................    -872,864,000

                           NET APPROPRIATION

Appropriations, 2015....................................    $117,858,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................     120,148,000
House allowance.........................................     140,959,000
Committee recommendation................................     117,136,000

    The Committee recommends $990,000,000 for the Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission [Commission], a decrease of $30,119,000 
from the budget request. This amount is offset by estimated 
revenues of $872,864,000, resulting in a net appropriation of 
$117,136,000. In developing this recommendation, the Committee 
has consulted with the Commission to ensure it maintains its 
gold-standard health and safety mission while reducing low-
priority work.
    The recommendation includes three new control points to 
provide additional transparency to the Commission's budget 
execution process: Nuclear Reactor Safety; Nuclear Materials 
and Waste Safety; and Decommissioning and Low-Level Waste, as 
described below. Section 401 provides new reprogramming 
authority to the Commission between the accounts, subject to 
prior congressional approval, with a provision made for 
emergency circumstances. This reprogramming authority 
supersedes the Commission's existing guidance on internal 
reprogrammings.
    Nuclear Reactor Safety.--The Committee recommends 
$771,852,000 for Nuclear Reactor Safety, including $270,150,000 
for corporate support activities. This new control point 
includes the Commission's Operating Reactors and New Reactors 
business lines. The recommendation includes funding to continue 
licensing activities associated with awards made under the 
Department of Energy's Small Modular Reactor Licensing 
Technical Support program. The Commission is directed to report 
any transfer of more than $500,000 across business lines, as 
identified in the budget request, to the Committee as soon as 
practicable.
    Nuclear Materials and Waste Safety.--The Committee 
recommends $174,691,000 for Nuclear Materials and Waste Safety, 
including $61,033,000 for corporate support activities. This 
new control point includes the Commission's Fuel Facilities, 
Nuclear Material Users, and Spent Fuel Storage and 
Transportation business lines. The Committee notes that section 
3 of title III includes a general provision for a pilot program 
for the consolidated storage of used nuclear fuel. The 
Committee urges the Commission to be prepared to act promptly 
if this provision is enacted into law.
    Decommissioning and Low-Level Waste.--The Committee 
recommends $43,628,000 for Decommissioning and Low-Level Waste, 
including $15,224,000 for corporate support.
    Excess Unobligated Carryover.--The Committee recommendation 
authorizes the Commission to reallocate up to $20,000,00 in 
unobligated carryover balances to supplement its fiscal year 
2016 appropriation. The Committee notes that between fiscal 
year 2015 and fiscal year 2016 projections, the Commission will 
have carried over more than $50,000,000 in unobligated 
balances. The Committee directs the Commission to discontinue 
its practice of carrying over such significant sums from prior 
fiscal years, which is largely derived from revenues. The 
Commission is directed to carry over only the minimum amount 
necessary for efficient execution of its mission, and to ensure 
that any rule or other requirement for collection of revenue or 
fees is calculated accordingly.
    Integrated University Program.--Within available funds, the 
Committee recommends not less than $15,000,000 for the 
Integrated University Program [IUP] to maintain specialists in 
radiation safety needed in healthcare, energy, defense, 
homeland security, environmental protection, agriculture, 
science, space exploration, construction, and industrial 
applications. Together with IUP funds from the Department of 
Energy's Office of Nuclear Energy and the National Nuclear 
Security Administration, this program ensures a highly 
qualified next generation of nuclear specialists. Funding for 
this program shall not be from prior year balances.
    Agency Efficiency.--The Committee recognizes that the 
Commission is taking important steps to make the agency run 
more effectively. In February 2015, the Commission publicly 
released its report on the Project Aim 2020 initiative which 
forecasts the agency's workload over the next 5 years and 
recommends 12 adjustments to staffing, planning, and processes 
to make the Commission more effective in carrying out its 
mission. Specifically, this report envisions a reduction of 10 
percent to both staffing and budget authority by 2020 from 
fiscal year 2015 levels due to a projected reduction in 
workload. The Commission, however, has not yet formally adopted 
the recommendations in the report, and consequently, the budget 
request for fiscal year 2016 was not fully informed by these 
recommendations. If the Committee were simply to adopt the 
Commission's fiscal year 2016 budget as proposed, significant 
time would be lost in implementing the recommendations, 
resulting in a need for a steep decline in resources over the 
next 3 fiscal years. Further, fully funding the Commission's 
budget request with the understanding that such funds would 
exceed the Commission's actual requirements would not be 
consistent with the Committee's responsibility to ensure 
taxpayer dollars are spent wisely.
    The Committee recommendation, therefore, includes a 
reduction of $30,119,000 from the Commission's request, with 
the majority directed at low-priority work and corporate 
support activities. This recommendation provides the Commission 
with the opportunity to find savings and begin to implement the 
Project Aim recommendations in earnest prior to fiscal year 
2017. In choosing where to apply these reductions, the 
Commission should consider eliminating low-value activities and 
expenses, and consolidating programs or offices for efficiency. 
The Commission is directed to not make reductions that would 
impact safety. Further, the Commission should not make 
reductions that would negatively impact the critical skill sets 
and highly technical staff that are needed to fulfil the 
agency's mission. Allowing the Commission to begin making 
reductions this fiscal year will result in less drastic 
reductions over the next three fiscal years. The Commission is 
directed to report to the Committees on Appropriations of both 
Houses of Congress within 30 days after the date of enactment 
of this act on how it has applied the reductions to individual 
business lines.
    Rulemaking Process.--The Committee is concerned that the 
staff-directed rulemaking process is inefficient and permits 
expenditure of significant agency resources in developing the 
technical basis and regulatory analysis for potential rules 
without prior Commission approval. The Committee believes that, 
in keeping with NRC's Principles of Good Regulation, the 
Commission should return to the Commission-directed process 
outlined in the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission 
Regulations Handbook (NUREG/BR-0053, Revision 6) [Handbook]. 
The Committee therefore directs the Commission to make 
conforming changes to NRC Management Directive 6.3, ``The 
Rulemaking Process'' to be consistent with the Handbook's 
Commission-directed process. The Commission is directed to 
provide the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of 
Congress with an updated directive not later than 90 days after 
the enactment of this act. The Commission is further directed 
to provide to the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses 
of Congress, not later than 30 days after the enactment of this 
act, a report that includes a general description and status of 
each proposed rule that is currently pending before the 
Commission, including the date on which the proposed rule was 
docketed.
    Subsequent License Renewal.--The Committee continues to 
encourage the Commission to act expeditiously to ensure that a 
fair, effective, predictable, and efficient process for 
subsequent licensing is available for licensees actively 
planning to pursue second license renewal, including timely 
issuance of updated regulatory guidance to support receipt of 
the lead application in the 2018 timeframe.

                      OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL


                          GROSS APPROPRIATION

Appropriations, 2015....................................     $12,071,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................      12,136,000
House allowance.........................................      12,136,000
Committee recommendation................................      12,136,000

                                REVENUES

Appropriations, 2015....................................    -$10,099,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................     -10,060,000
House allowance.........................................     -10,060,000
Committee recommendation................................     -10,060,000

                           NET APPROPRIATION

Appropriations, 2015....................................      $1,972,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................       2,076,000
House allowance.........................................       2,076,000
Committee recommendation................................       2,076,000

    The Committee recommends $12,136,000 for the Office of 
Inspector General, the same as the budget request, which is 
offset by revenues estimated at $10,060,000, for a net 
appropriation of $2,076,000. The Office of Inspector General 
serves both the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Defense 
Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, and the recommendation 
includes $958,000 for that purpose that is not available from 
fee revenues.
    The Committee encourages the Office of Inspector General to 
examine, through its audit program, additional savings and 
efficiencies at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that could be 
realized through consolidations or other streamlining.

                  Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board

Appropriations, 2015....................................      $3,400,000
Budget estimate, 2016...................................       3,600,000
House allowance.........................................       3,600,000
Committee recommendation................................       3,600,000

    The Committee recommends $3,600,000 for the Nuclear Waste 
Technical Review Board, the same as the budget request.

       Office of the Federal Coordination for Alaska Natural Gas 
                        Transportation Projects

Appropriations, 2015....................................................
Budget estimate, 2016...................................      $1,000,000
House allowance.........................................       1,000,000
Committee recommendation................................................

    The Committee does not recommend funding for the Office of 
the Federal Coordinator for Alaska Natural Gas Transportation 
Projects.

                           GENERAL PROVISIONS

    Section 401. The Committee includes reprogramming language 
for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
    Section 402. The Committee includes language on providing 
information to Congress.
    Section 403. The Committee includes a technical correction.

                                TITLE V

    The Committee is concerned about the millions of taxpayer 
dollars spent on wasteful printing practices each year and the 
lack of clear printing policies within each of the agencies. 
While progress has been made to better utilize the cloud and 
digitalize records, little progress has been made to reform in-
house printing practices. The Committee directs each agency to 
work with Office of Management and Budget to reduce printing 
and reproduction by 34 percent and report to the Committee 
within 60 days after enactment of this Act on what steps have 
been taken to reduce printing volume and costs. The report 
should specifically identify how much money each agency will be 
saving.
    The Committee directs the Comptroller General of the United 
States to study the effects of forward capacity auctions and 
other capacity mechanisms that have been established by 
Independent System Operators or Regional Transmission 
Organizations on (1) consumer prices for electricity; (2) the 
installation of new electrical generation systems; (3) the 
preservation of existing electrical generation systems; and (4) 
competition in energy markets, including the potential for the 
use of undue market power or manipulation in the auctions.

                           GENERAL PROVISIONS

    The following list of general provisions are recommended by 
the Committee:
    Section 501. The provision prohibits the use of any funds 
provided in this bill from being used to influence 
congressional action.
    Section 502. The provision addresses transfer authority 
under this act.
    Section 503. The provision relates to Executive Order No. 
13690.

                     Program, Project, and Activity

    In fiscal year 2016, for purposes of the Balanced Budget 
and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Public Law 99-177), 
as amended, the following information provides the definition 
of the term ``program, project or activity'' for departments 
and agencies under the jurisdiction of the Energy and Water 
Development Appropriation bill. The term ``program, project or 
activity'' shall include the most specific level of budget 
items identified in the Energy and Water Development 
Appropriations Bill, 2016 and the report accompanying the bill.
    If a sequestration order is necessary, in implementing the 
Presidential order, departments and agencies shall apply any 
percentage reduction required for fiscal year 2016 pursuant to 
the provisions of Public Law 99-177 to all items specified in 
the report accompanying the bill by the Senate Committee on 
Appropriations in support of the fiscal year 2016 budget 
estimates as modified by congressional action.

  COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7, RULE XVI, OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

    Paragraph 7 of rule XVI requires that Committee reports on 
general appropriations bills identify each Committee amendment 
to the House bill ``which proposes an item of appropriation 
which is not made to carry out the provisions of an existing 
law, a treaty stipulation, or an act or resolution previously 
passed by the Senate during that session.''
    The Committee is filing an original bill, which is not 
covered under this rule, but reports this information in the 
spirit of full disclosure.
    The Committee recommends funding for the following programs 
or activities which currently lack authorization for fiscal 
year 2016:
    Corps of Engineers.--Individual studies and projects 
proposed for appropriations within this bill are specifically 
authorized by law. The appropriation accounts where the funding 
for the studies and projects are recommended are not considered 
to be authorized as there is no originating act providing for 
these appropriation accounts.
    Department of Energy: Energy Conservation and Supply 
Activities:
    Office of Fossil Energy: Fossil Energy R&D;, Clean Coal, 
Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Research;
    Health, Safety and Security;
    Non-Defense Environmental Management;
    Office of Science;
    Department of Administration;
    National Nuclear Security Administration: Weapons 
Activities; Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation; Naval Reactors; 
Office of the Administrator;
    Defense Environmental Management, Defense Site Acceleration 
Completion;
    Other Defense Activities;
    Defense Nuclear Waste Fund;
    Office of Security and Performance Assurance;
    Federal Energy Regulatory Commission;
    Power Marketing Administrations: Southeastern, 
Southwestern, Western Area; and
    Energy Information Administration.

COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7(c), RULE XXVI, OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

    Pursuant to paragraph 7(c) of rule XXVI, on May 21, 2015, 
the Committee ordered favorably reported a bill (H.R. 2028) 
making appropriations for energy and water development and 
related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2016, 
and for other purposes, provided, that the bill be subject to 
further amendment and that the bill be consistent with its 
budget allocation, by a recorded vote of 26-4, a quorum being 
present. The vote was as follows:
        Yeas                          Nays
Chairman Cochran                    Mrs. Murray
Mr. McConnell                       Mr. Reed
Mr. Shelby                          Mr. Tester
Mr. Alexander                       Mr. Murphy
Ms. Collins
Ms. Murkowski
Mr. Graham
Mr. Kirk
Mr. Blunt
Mr. Moran
Mr. Hoeven
Mr. Boozman
Mrs. Capito
Mr. Cassidy
Mr. Lankford
Mr. Daines
Ms. Mikulski
Mr. Leahy
Mrs. Feinstein
Mr. Durbin
Mr. Udall
Mrs. Shaheen
Mr. Merkley
Mr. Coons
Mr. Schatz
Ms. Baldwin

 COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 12, RULE XXVI, OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

    Paragraph 12 of rule XXVI requires that Committee reports 
on a bill or joint resolution repealing or amending any statute 
or part of any statute include ``(a) the text of the statute or 
part thereof which is proposed to be repealed; and (b) a 
comparative print of that part of the bill or joint resolution 
making the amendment and of the statute or part thereof 
proposed to be amended, showing by stricken-through type and 
italics, parallel columns, or other appropriate typographical 
devices the omissions and insertions which would be made by the 
bill or joint resolution if enacted in the form recommended by 
the Committee.''
    In compliance with this rule, changes in existing law 
proposed to be made by the bill are shown as follows: existing 
law to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets; new matter is 
printed in italic; and existing law in which no change is 
proposed is shown in roman.

                TITLE 42--THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELFARE


                       CHAPTER 109B--SECURE WATER


Sec. 10364. Water management improvement

(a) Authorization of grants and cooperative agreements

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

(e) Authorization of appropriations

    There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this 
section [$300,000,000] $500,000,000, to remain available until 
expended.
                                ------                                


       RECLAMATION SAFETY OF DAMS ACT OF 1978, PUBLIC LAW 95-578

    Sec. 2 * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    Sec. 3 [Construction] Except as provided in section 5B, 
construction authorized by this subchapter shall be for the 
purposes of dam safety and not for the specific purposes of 
providing additional conservation storage capacity or of 
developing benefits over and above those provided by the 
original dams and reservoirs. Nothing in this subchapter shall 
be construed to reduce the amount of project costs allocated to 
reimbursable purposes heretofore authorized.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    Sec. 5 There are hereby authorized to be appropriated for 
fiscal year 1979 and ensuing fiscal years such sums as may be 
necessary, but not to exceed $100,000,000 and, effective 
October 1, 1983, not to exceed an additional $650,000,000 
(October 1, 1983, price levels), and, effective October 1, 
2000, not to exceed an additional $95,000,000 (October 1, 2000, 
price levels), and, effective October 1, 2001, not to exceed an 
additional $32,000,000 (October 1, 2001, price levels), and, 
effective October 1, 2003, not to exceed an additional 
$540,000,000 (October 1, 2003, price levels), and effective 
October 1, 2015, not to exceed an additional $1,100,000,000 
(October 1, 2003, price levels), plus or minus such amounts, if 
any, as may be justified by reason of ordinary fluctuations in 
construction costs as indicated by engineering cost indexes 
applicable to the types of construction involved herein, to 
carry out the provisions of this Act to remain available until 
expended if so provided by the appropriations Act: Provided, 
That no funds exceeding [$1,250,000] $20,000,000 (October 1, 
2003, price levels), as adjusted to reflect any ordinary 
fluctuations in construction costs indicated by applicable 
engineering cost indexes, shall be obligated for carrying out 
actual construction to modify an existing dam under authority 
of this Act prior to 30 calendar days from that date that the 
Secretary has transmitted a report on such existing dam to the 
[Congress] Committee on Natural Resources of the House of 
Representatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural 
Resources of the Senate. The report required to be submitted by 
this section will consist of a finding by the Secretary of the 
Interior to the effect that modifications are required to be 
made to insure the safety of an existing dam. Such finding 
shall be accompanied by a technical report containing 
information on the need for structural modification, the 
corrective action deemed to be required, alternative solutions 
to structural modification that were considered, the estimated 
cost of needed modifications, and environmental impacts if any 
resulting from the implementation of the recommended plan of 
modification. For modification expenditures between $1,800,000 
and $20,000,000 (October 1, 2013, price levels), the Secretary 
of the Interior shall, at least 30 days before the date on 
which the funds are expended, submit written notice of the 
expenditures to the Committee on Natural Resources of the House 
of Representatives and Committee on Energy and Natural 
Resources of the Senate that provides a summary of the project, 
the cost of the project, and any alternatives that were 
considered.

    Sec. 5A. (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (d) The Secretary may waive 1 or more of the requirements 
of subsections (a), (b), and (c), if the Secretary determines 
that implementation of the requirement could have an adverse 
impact on dam safety or security.

    Sec. 5B. Notwithstanding section 3, if the Secretary, in 
her judgment, determines that additional project benefits, 
including but not limited to additional conservation storage 
capacity, are necessary and in the interests of the United 
States and the project and are feasible and not inconsistent 
with the purposes of this Act, the Secretary is authorized to 
develop additional project benefits through the construction of 
new or supplementary works on a project in conjunction with the 
Secretary's activities under section 2 of this Act and subject 
to the conditions described in the feasibility study, provided 
the costs associated with developing the additional project 
benefits are allocated to the authorized purposes of the 
structure and repaid consistent with all provisions of Federal 
Reclamation law (the Act of June 17, 1902, 43 U.S.C. 371 et 
seq.) and acts supplemental to and amendatory of that Act.
                                ------                                


  OMNIBUS CONSOLIDATED AND EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 
                        1999, PUBLIC LAW 105-277


DIVISION A--OMNIBUS CONSOLIDATED APPROPRIATIONS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



                               TITLE III


GENERAL PROVISIONS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



                         Bulk Fuel Storage Tank

    Sec. 329. (a) Transfer of Funds.--* * *

    (b) Use of Interest Only.--The interest produced from the 
investment of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline Liability Fund balance 
that is transferred and deposited into the Oil Spill Liability 
Trust Fund under section 8102(a)(2)(B)(ii) of the Oil Pollution 
Act of 1990 (43 U.S.C. 1653 note) after June 16, 1998 shall be 
transferred annually by the National Pollution Funds Center to 
the Denali Commission for a program, to be developed in 
consultation with the Coast Guard, to repair or replace bulk 
fuel storage tanks in Alaska which are not in compliance with 
federal law, including the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, or State 
law or for the construction and repair of barge mooring points 
and barge landing sites to facilitate pumping fuel from fuel 
transport barges into bulk fuel storage tanks.
                                ------                                


  WATER SUPPLY, RELIABILITY, AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPROVEMENT ACT, 2005, 
                           PUBLIC LAW 108-361


    TITLE I--CALIFORNIA WATER SECURITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENHANCEMENT

SEC. 101. SHORT TITLE.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 103. BAY DELTA PROGRAM.

    (a) In General.--

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (e) New and Expanded Authorizations for Federal Agencies.--

            (1) In general.--The heads of the Federal agencies 
        described in this subsection are authorized to carry 
        out the activities described in subsection (f) during 
        each of fiscal years 2005 through [2016] 2020, in 
        coordination with the Governor.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (f) Description of Activities Under New and Expanded 
Authorizations.--

            (1) Conveyance.-- * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

            (3) Levee stability.--

                    (A) In general.-- * * *

                    (B) Report.--Not later than 180 days after 
                the date of enactment of this Act, the 
                Secretary of the Army shall submit to the 
                appropriate authorizing and appropriating 
                committees of the Senate and the House of 
                Representatives a report that describes the 
                levee stability reconstruction projects and 
                priorities that will be carried out under this 
                title during each of fiscal years 2005 through 
                [2016] 2020.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 107. FEDERAL SHARE OF COSTS.

    (a) In General.--The Federal share of the cost of 
implementing the Calfed Bay-Delta Program for fiscal years 2005 
through [2016] 2020 in the aggregate, as set forth in the 
Record of Decision, shall not exceed 33.3 percent.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 109. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATION.

    There are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary 
and the heads of the Federal agencies to pay the Federal share 
of the cost of carrying out the new and expanded authorities 
described in subsections (e) and (f) of section 103 
$389,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 2005 through [2016] 
2020, to remain available until expended.
                                ------                                


      WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 2007, PUBLIC LAW 110-114


                         TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS

SEC. 5032. LOWELL CREEK TUNNEL, SEWARD, ALASKA.

    (a) Long-Term Maintenance and Repair.--

            (1) Maintenance and repair.--* * *

            (2) Duration of responsibilities.--The 
        responsibility of the Secretary for long-term 
        maintenance and repair of the tunnel shall continue 
        until an alternative method of flood diversion is 
        constructed and operational under this section, or [15] 
        20 years after the date of enactment of this Act, 
        whichever is earlier.
                                ------                                


                        BUDGETARY IMPACT OF BILL


  PREPARED IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE PURSUANT TO SEC. 308(A), PUBLIC LAW 93-344, AS
                                                     AMENDED
                                            [In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Budget authority                         Outlays
                                         -----------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Committee                           Committee
                                             allocation      Amount in bill      allocation      Amount in bill
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comparison of amounts in the bill with
 the subcommittee allocation for 2016:
 Subcommittee on Energy and Water
 Development:
    Mandatory...........................  ................  ................  ................  ................
    Discretionary.......................            35,368            35,368            36,326         \1\36,316
        Security........................            19,002            19,002                NA                NA
        Nonsecurity.....................            16,366            16,366                NA                NA
Projections of outlays associated with
 the recommendation:
    2016................................  ................  ................  ................         \2\20,739
    2017................................  ................  ................  ................            10,070
    2018................................  ................  ................  ................             3,452
    2019................................  ................  ................  ................               759
    2020 and future years...............  ................  ................  ................               429
Financial assistance to State and local                 NA               131                NA                24
 governments for 2016...................
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority.
\2\Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority.
 
NA: Not applicable.


  COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL
                                                                        YEAR 2016
                                                                [In thousands of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                       Senate Committee recommendation compared  with (+
                                                                                                                             or -)
               Item                      2015       Budget estimate  House allowance     Committee    --------------------------------------------------
                                    appropriation                                      recommendation        2015
                                                                                                        appropriation   Budget estimate  House allowance
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE--
              CIVIL
 
      DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
 
    Corps of Engineers--Civil
 
Investigations...................         122,000           97,000          113,500          109,000          -13,000          +12,000           -4,500
Construction.....................       1,639,489        1,172,000        1,635,000        1,641,000           +1,511         +469,000           +6,000
Mississippi River and Tributaries         302,000          225,000          275,000          330,000          +28,000         +105,000          +55,000
Operations and Maintenance.......       2,908,511        2,710,000        3,094,306        2,909,000             +489         +199,000         -185,306
Regulatory Program...............         200,000          205,000          199,576          200,000   ...............          -5,000             +424
Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial          101,500          104,000          104,000          101,500   ...............          -2,500           -2,500
 Action Program (FUSRAP).........
Flood Control and Coastal                  28,000           34,000           34,000           28,000   ...............          -6,000           -6,000
 Emergencies.....................
Expenses.........................         178,000          180,000          179,000          178,000   ...............          -2,000           -1,000
Office of Assistant Secretary of            3,000            5,000            4,750            3,000   ...............          -2,000           -1,750
 the Army (Civil Works)..........
 
        General Provisions
 
Title I (rescission).............         -28,000   ...............  ...............        -128,000         -100,000         -128,000         -128,000
                                  ======================================================================================================================
      Total, title I, Department        5,454,500        4,732,000        5,639,132        5,371,500          -83,000         +639,500         -267,632
       of Defense--Civil.........
          Appropriations.........      (5,482,500)      (4,732,000)      (5,639,132)      (5,499,500)        (+17,000)       (+767,500)       (-139,632)
          Rescissions............        (-28,000)  ...............  ...............       (-128,000)       (-100,000)       (-128,000)       (-128,000)
                                  ======================================================================================================================
   TITLE II--DEPARTMENT OF THE
             INTERIOR
 
 Central Utah Project Completion
             Account
 
Central Utah Project Completion             9,874            7,300            9,874            9,874   ...............          +2,574   ...............
 Account.........................
 
      Bureau of Reclamation
 
Water and Related Resources......         978,131          805,157          950,640          988,131          +10,000         +182,974          +37,491
Central Valley Project                     56,995           49,528           49,528           49,528           -7,467   ...............  ...............
 Restoration Fund................
California Bay-Delta Restoration.          37,000           37,000           37,000           37,000   ...............  ...............  ...............
Policy and Administration........          58,500           59,500           59,500           58,500   ...............          -1,000           -1,000
Indian Water Rights Settlements..  ...............         112,483   ...............  ...............  ...............        -112,483   ...............
San Joaquin River Restoration      ...............          35,000   ...............  ...............  ...............         -35,000   ...............
 Fund............................
Bureau of Reclamation Loan                   -500   ...............  ...............  ...............            +500   ...............  ...............
 Program Account (Rescission)....
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Bureau of                  1,130,126        1,098,668        1,096,668        1,133,159           +3,033          +34,491          +36,491
       Reclamation...............
                                  ======================================================================================================================
      Total, title II, Department       1,140,000        1,105,968        1,106,542        1,143,033           +3,033          +37,065          +36,491
       of the Interior...........
          Appropriations.........      (1,140,500)      (1,105,968)      (1,106,542)      (1,143,033)         (+2,533)        (+37,065)        (+36,491)
          Rescissions............           (-500)  ...............  ...............  ...............           (+500)  ...............  ...............
                                  ======================================================================================================================
 TITLE III--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
 
         Energy Programs
 
Energy efficiency and renewable         1,937,000        2,722,987        1,668,774        1,950,000          +13,000         -772,987         +281,226
 energy..........................
    Rescissions..................         -13,065   ...............  ...............  ...............         +13,065   ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Energy efficiency       1,923,935        2,722,987        1,668,774        1,950,000          +26,065         -772,987         +281,226
 
Electricity delivery and energy           147,306          270,100          187,500          152,306           +5,000         -117,794          -35,194
 reliability.....................
Nuclear energy...................         805,000          772,413          810,000          815,000          +10,000          +42,587           +5,000
    Defense function.............         108,500          135,161          126,161          135,161          +26,661   ...............          +9,000
    Rescission...................         -80,000   ...............  ...............  ...............         +80,000   ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal...................         833,500          907,574          936,161          950,161         +116,661          +42,587          +14,000
 
Fossil Energy Research and                571,000          560,000          605,000          610,000          +39,000          +50,000           +5,000
 Development.....................
Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale              19,950           17,500           17,500           17,500           -2,450   ...............  ...............
 Reserves........................
Elk Hills School Lands Fund......          15,580   ...............  ...............  ...............         -15,580   ...............  ...............
Strategic Petroleum Reserve......         200,000          257,000          212,030          200,000   ...............         -57,000          -12,030
Northeast Home Heating Oil                  7,600            7,600            7,600            7,600   ...............  ...............  ...............
 Reserve.........................
    Rescission...................          -6,000   ...............  ...............  ...............          +6,000   ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal...................           1,600            7,600            7,600            7,600           +6,000   ...............  ...............
 
Energy Information Administration         117,000          131,000          117,000          122,000           +5,000           -9,000           +5,000
Non-defense environmental cleanup         246,000          220,185          229,193          244,000           -2,000          +23,815          +14,807
Uranium Enrichment                        625,000          542,289          625,000          614,000          -11,000          +71,711          -11,000
 Decontamination and
 Decommissioning Fund............
Science..........................       5,071,000        5,339,794        5,100,000        5,143,877          +72,877         -195,917          +43,877
Nuclear waste disposal...........  ...............  ...............         150,000   ...............  ...............  ...............        -150,000
Advanced Research Projects Agency-        280,000          325,000          280,000          291,000          +11,000          -34,000          +11,000
 Energy..........................
Office of Indian Energy Policy     ...............          20,000   ...............  ...............  ...............         -20,000   ...............
 and Programs....................
 
Title 17 Innovative Technology             42,000           42,000           42,000           42,000   ...............  ...............  ...............
 Loan Guarantee Program..........
    Offsetting collection........         -25,000          -25,000          -25,000          -25,000   ...............  ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal...................          17,000           17,000           17,000           17,000   ...............  ...............  ...............
 
Tribal Indian Energy Loan          ...............          11,000   ...............  ...............  ...............         -11,000   ...............
 Guarantee Program...............
Advanced Technology Vehicles                4,000            6,000            6,000            6,000           +2,000   ...............  ...............
 Manufacturing Loans program.....
Clean coal technology                      -6,600   ...............  ...............  ...............          +6,600   ...............  ...............
 (rescission)....................
Departmental administration......         245,142          270,682          191,200          248,142           +3,000          -22,540          +56,942
    Miscellaneous revenues.......        -119,171         -117,171         -117,171         -117,171           +2,000   ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Net appropriation........         125,971          153,511           74,029          130,971           +5,000          -22,540          +56,942
 
Office of the Inspector General..          40,500           46,424           46,424           46,424           +5,924   ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Energy programs.....      10,232,742       11,554,964       10,279,211       10,502,839         +270,097       -1,052,125         +223,628
                                  ======================================================================================================================
 Atomic Energy Defense Activities
 
    National Nuclear Security
          Administration
 
Weapons activities...............       8,231,770        8,846,948        8,713,000        8,882,364         +650,594          +35,416         +169,364
    Rescission...................         -45,113   ...............  ...............  ...............         +45,113   ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal...................       8,186,657        8,846,948        8,713,000        8,882,364         +695,707          +35,416         +169,364
 
Defense nuclear nonproliferation.       1,641,369        1,940,302        1,918,000        1,705,912          +64,543         -234,390         -212,088
    Rescission...................         -24,731   ...............         -10,394   ...............         +24,731   ...............         +10,394
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal...................       1,616,638        1,940,302        1,907,606        1,705,912          +89,274         -234,390         -201,694
 
Naval reactors...................       1,238,500        1,375,496        1,322,820        1,300,000          +61,500          -75,496          -22,820
    Rescission...................          -4,500   ...............  ...............  ...............          +4,500   ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal...................       1,234,000        1,375,496        1,322,820        1,300,000          +66,000          -75,496          -22,820
 
Federal salaries and expenses....         370,000          402,654          385,500          375,000           +5,000          -27,654          -10,500
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, National Nuclear          11,407,295       12,565,400       12,328,926       12,263,276         +855,981         -302,124          -65,650
       Security Administration...
                                  ======================================================================================================================
 Environmental and Other Defense
            Activities
 
Defense environmental cleanup....       5,010,830        5,055,550        5,055,550        5,180,000         +169,170         +124,450         +124,450
    Rescission...................         -10,830   ...............  ...............  ...............         +10,830   ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal...................       5,000,000        5,055,550        5,055,550        5,180,000         +180,000         +124,450         +124,450
 
Defense environmental cleanup      ...............         471,797   ...............  ...............  ...............        -471,797   ...............
 (legislative proposal)..........
Defense Uranium Enrichment                463,000   ...............         471,797          614,000         +151,000         +614,000         +142,203
 Decontamination and
 Decommissioning.................
Other Defense activities.........         754,000          774,425          767,570          764,000          +10,000          -10,425           -3,570
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Environmental and          6,217,000        6,301,772        6,294,917        6,558,000         +341,000         +256,228         +263,083
       Other Defense Activities..
                                  ======================================================================================================================
      Total, Atomic Energy             17,624,295       18,867,172       18,623,843       18,821,276       +1,196,981          -45,896         +197,433
       Defense Activities........
                                  ======================================================================================================================
         Power Marketing
        Administrations\1\
 
Operation and maintenance,                  7,220            6,900            6,900            6,900             -320   ...............  ...............
 Southeastern Power
 Administration..................
    Offsetting collections.......          -7,220           -6,900           -6,900           -6,900             +320   ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal...................  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............
 
Operation and maintenance,                 46,240           47,361           47,361           47,361           +1,121   ...............  ...............
 Southwestern Power
 Administration..................
    Offsetting collections.......         -34,840          -35,961          -35,961          -35,961           -1,121   ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal...................          11,400           11,400           11,400           11,400   ...............  ...............  ...............
 
Construction, rehabilitation,             304,402          307,714          307,714          307,714           +3,312   ...............  ...............
 operation and maintenance,
 Western Area Power
 Administration..................
    Offsetting collections.......        -211,030         -214,342         -214,342         -214,342           -3,312   ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal...................          93,372           93,372           93,372           93,372   ...............  ...............  ...............
 
Falcon and Amistad Operating and            4,727            4,490            4,490            4,490             -237   ...............  ...............
 Maintenance Fund................
    Offsetting collections.......          -4,499           -4,262           -4,262           -4,262             +237   ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal...................             228              228              228              228   ...............  ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Power Marketing              105,000          105,000          105,000          105,000   ...............  ...............  ...............
       Administrations...........
                                  ======================================================================================================================
    Federal Energy Regulatory
            Commission
 
Salaries and expenses............         304,389          319,800          319,800          319,800          +15,411   ...............  ...............
Revenues applied.................        -304,389         -319,800         -319,800         -319,800          -15,411   ...............  ...............
 
        General Provisions
 
Title III Rescissions:
    Department of Energy:
    Energy efficiency and energy           -9,740   ...............         -16,677          -16,677           -6,937          -16,677   ...............
     reliability.................
    Science......................          -3,262   ...............          -4,717           -4,717           -1,455           -4,717   ...............
    Nuclear energy...............            -121   ...............          -1,665           -1,665           -1,544           -1,665   ...............
    Fossil Energy Research and            -10,413   ...............         -12,064          -12,064           -1,651          -12,064   ...............
     Development.................
    Office of Electricity                    -331   ...............            -900             -900             -569             -900   ...............
     Delivery and Energy
     Reliability.................
    Advanced Research Projects                -18   ...............  ...............  ...............             +18   ...............  ...............
     Agency--Energy..............
    Construction, rehabilitation,          -1,632   ...............          -4,832           -4,832           -3,200           -4,832   ...............
     operation and maintenance,
     Western Area Power
     Administration..............
    Weapons activities...........          -6,298   ...............  ...............         -65,135          -58,837          -65,135          -65,135
    Office of the Administrator..            -413   ...............  ...............  ...............            +413   ...............  ...............
    Departmental administration..            -928   ...............  ...............  ...............            +928   ...............  ...............
    Defense environmental cleanup          -9,983   ...............  ...............  ...............          +9,983   ...............  ...............
    Defense nuclear                        -1,390   ...............  ...............         -19,324          -17,934          -19,324          -19,324
     nonproliferation............
    Naval reactors...............            -160   ...............  ...............            -628             -468             -628             -628
    Other Defense activities.....            -551   ...............  ...............  ...............            +551   ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal...................         -45,240   ...............         -40,855         -125,942          -80,702         -125,942          -85,087
                                  ======================================================================================================================
      Total, title III,                27,916,797       30,527,136       28,967,199       29,303,173       +1,386,376       -1,223,963         +335,974
       Department of Energy......
          Appropriations.........     (28,152,876)     (30,527,136)     (29,018,448)     (29,429,115)     (+1,276,239)     (-1,098,021)       (+410,667)
          Rescissions............       (-236,079)  ...............        (-51,249)       (-125,942)       (+110,137)       (-125,942)        (-74,693)
                                  ======================================================================================================================
  TITLE IV--INDEPENDENT AGENCIES
 
Appalachian Regional Commission..          90,000           95,000           95,000          105,000          +15,000          +10,000          +10,000
Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety          28,500           29,150           29,900           29,150             +650   ...............            -750
 Board...........................
Delta Regional Authority.........          12,000           14,936           12,000           25,000          +13,000          +10,064          +13,000
Denali Commission................          10,000           10,000           10,000           11,000           +1,000           +1,000           +1,000
Northern Border Regional                    5,000            5,000            3,000            7,500           +2,500           +2,500           +4,500
 Commission......................
Southeast Crescent Regional                   250   ...............             250   ...............            -250   ...............            -250
 Commission......................
 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission:
    Salaries and expenses........       1,003,233        1,020,119        1,003,233          990,000          -13,233          -30,119          -13,233
    Revenues.....................        -885,375         -899,971         -862,274         -872,864          +12,511          +27,107          -10,590
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal...................         117,858          120,148          140,959          117,136             -722           -3,012          -23,823
 
    Office of Inspector General..          12,071           12,136           12,136           12,136              +65   ...............  ...............
    Revenues.....................         -10,099          -10,060          -10,060          -10,060              +39   ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal...................           1,972            2,076            2,076            2,076             +104   ...............  ...............
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Nuclear Regulatory           119,830          122,224          143,035          119,212             -618           -3,012          -23,823
       Commission................
                                  ======================================================================================================================
Nuclear Waste Technical Review              3,400            3,600            3,600            3,600             +200   ...............  ...............
 Board...........................
Office of the Federal Coordinator  ...............           1,000            1,000   ...............  ...............          -1,000           -1,000
 for Alaska Natural Gas
 Transportation Projects.........
                                  ======================================================================================================================
      Total, title IV,                    268,980          280,910          297,785          300,462          +31,482          +19,552           +2,677
       Independent agencies......
                                  ======================================================================================================================
      Grand total................      34,780,277       36,646,014       36,010,658       36,118,168       +1,337,891         -527,846         +107,510
          Appropriations.........     (35,044,856)     (36,646,014)     (36,061,907)     (36,372,110)     (+1,327,254)       (-273,904)       (+310,203)
          Rescissions............       (-264,579)  ...............        (-51,249)       (-253,942)        (+10,637)       (-253,942)       (-202,693)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Totals adjusted to net out alternative financing costs, reimbursable agreement funding, and power purchase and wheeling expenditures. Offsetting
  collection totals only reflect funds collected for annual expenses, excluding power purchase wheeling.

                                             [all]