House Energy Bill: DOE Office of Science Provisions

The House passed its version of a National Energy Policy (H.R. 4) on August 1, just before Congress left on its month-long summer recess. The bill is a wide-ranging piece of authorizing legislation, incorporating the work of several different House committees. The Science Committee crafted a portion of the bill which, among other things, sets authorization levels for the Department of Energy’s Office of Science and some of its programs. FYI #104 provides some general information on the energy bill; below are more details on the House’s authorization levels for DOE civilian science programs. It is notable, however, that the House and Senate have already passed their versions of Energy and Water Development funding bills; while the bills must be reconciled in conference, authorization levels set it this late date may have little impact on the appropriations process.

The House-passed energy bill would authorize $3,299.6 million for DOE’s Office of Science for FY 2002. Current-year funding is
$3,155.5 million; the Administration’s FY 2002 request is $3,159.9 million. This authorization level is greater than what congressional appropriators would provide: the House Energy and Water Development appropriations bill would give $3,166 million, while the Senate appropriations bill would provide $3,268 million.

Within the Office of Science, the House bill sets specific authorization levels for fusion energy sciences and for construction of the Spallation Neutron Source. Fusion Energy Sciences would be authorized at $320 million for FY 2002 and $335 million for FY 2003 under the House energy bill. This authorization level, as well as findings that the current fusion budget is inadequate and a requirement for the Energy Secretary to develop a plan for a Burning Plasma Experiment, were taken from provisions of H.R. 1781, “The Fusion Energy Sciences Act of 2001,” sponsored by Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) (see FYI #65 ). The Administration requested, and the House and Senate appropriations bills both would provide, $248.5 million for DOE’s fusion program in FY 2002, the same as current-year funding.

H.R. 4 would authorize $276.3 million in FY 2002, the amount requested, for continued construction of the Spallation Neutron Source. The bill sets authorization levels through completion of construction in 2006, as follows: FY 2003: $210.6 million; FY 2004: 124.6 million; FY 2005: $79.8 million; and FY 2006: $41.1 million. Specific authorizations levels are not given for High Energy Physics, Nuclear Physics, or other Office of Science programs.

The House’s energy package calls on the Director of OSTP, in consultation with the Secretary of Energy, to establish an Advisory Panel on DOE’s Office of Science to "(1) address concerns about the current status and the future of scientific research supported by the Office; (2) examine alternatives to the current organizational structure of the Office within the Department, taking into consideration existing structures for the support of scientific research in other Federal agencies and the private sector; and (3) suggest actions to strengthen the scientific research supported by the Office that might be taken jointly by the Department and Congress.”

On the Senate side, Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) is also expected to address the organization of DOE’s Office of Science in his energy bill. Bingaman is reportedly considering recommendations made in a December discussion paper by several prominent physicists (see FYI #5 ), and may suggest creating the position of Under Secretary for Science, or raising the status of the Director of the Office of Science to the level of Assistant Secretary for Science.

It is worth remembering that the energy bill is an authorization, not appropriations, bill. The Senate version will certainly be very different, and reconciling the competing versions is likely to be contentious and may drag on long after the appropriations bills for FY 2002 are completed. Authorizers may recommend funding levels they think are appropriate, but the actual funding decisions are made by appropriators who are constrained by the budget resolution, their subcommittee allocations, and the trade-offs they must make to fund other programs under their jurisdictions.