« PreviousContinue »
DOE AUTHORIZATION FOR F.Y. 1982
MARCH 3, 1981—NUCLEAR ENERGY
Serial No. 97-9
Printed for the use of the
C.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON : 1981
K Fan E5526
.)? 8 la COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE Pt. 2
JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan, Chairman JAMES H. SCHEUER, New York
JAMES T. BROYHILL, North Carolina RICHARD L. OTTINGER, New York
CLARENCE J. BROWN, Ohio HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
JAMES M. COLLINS, Texas TIMOTHY E. WIRTH, Colorado
NORMAN F. LENT, New York PHILIP R. SHARP, Indiana
EDWARD R. MADIGAN, Illinois JAMES J. FLORIO, New Jersey
CARLOS J. MOORHEAD, California ANTHONY TOBY MOFFETT, Connecticut MATTHEW J. RINALDO, New Jersey JIM SANTINI, Nevada
MARC L. MARKS, Pennsylvania EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts TOM CORCORAN, Illinois THOMAS A. LUKEN, Ohio
GARY A. LEE, New York DOUG WALGREN, Pennsylvania
WILLIAM E. DANNEMEYER, California ALBERT GORE, JR., Tennessee
BOB WHITTAKER, Kansas BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland
THOMAS J. TAUKE, Iowa RONALD M. MOTTL, Ohio
DON RITTER, Pennsylvania PHIL GRAMM, Texas
HAROLD ROGERS, Kentucky AL SWIFT, Washington
CLEVE BENEDICT, West Virginia MICKEY LELAND, Texas
DAN COATS, Indiana
THOMAS J. BLILEY, JR., Virginia
FRANK M. POTTER, Jr., Chief Counsel and Staff Director
DONALD A. WATT, Printing Editor
SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY CONSERVATION AND POWER
RICHARD L. OTTINGER Nev York. Chairman ANTHONY TOBY MOFFETT, Connecticut CARLOS J. MOORHEAD, California EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts MATTHEW J. RINALDO, New Jersey ALBERT GORE, JR., Tennessee
JAMES M. COLLINS, Texas PHIL GRAMM, Texas
TOM CORCORAN, Illinois AL SWIFT, Washington
BOB WHITTAKER, Kansas MICKEY LELAND, Texas
THOMAS J. TAUKE, Iowa RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama
DON RITTER, Pennsylvania MIKE SYNAR, Oklahoma
HAROLD ROGERS, Kentucky RON WYDEN, Oregon
CLEVE BENEDICT, West Virginia RALPH M. HALL, Texas
JAMES T. BROYHILL, North Carolina DOUG WALGREN, Pennsylvania
W. MICHAEL MCCABE, Staff Director
David SCHOOLER, Counsel
Wallace, Larry J., chairman, Indiana Public Service Commission ........... 956, 974
Memorandum and attachments from Harry A. Jones, Acting Assist-
ant Secretary, to Secretary Edwards re financing the strategic
Responses to subcommittee questions, submitted by Frank DeGeorge.. 1180
1378 Energy Conservation and Power Subcommittee, Committee on Energy
and Commerce: Staff memorandum re breakdown of DOE conservation
1344 McEwen, Hon. Bob, a Representative in Congress from the State of Ohio, statement.
DOE AUTHORIZATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 1982
TUESDAY, MARCH 3, 1981
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY CONSERVATION AND POWER, COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE,
Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2 p.m., in room 2123, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Richard L. Ottinger (chairman) presiding.
Mr. OTTINGER. The subcommittee will come to order.
This afternoon the Subcommittee on Energy Conservation and Power continues its hearings on the impact of proposed budget changes on various programs within the Department of Energy. Today the subcommittee meets to receive testimony from public witnesses on the Department's nuclear energy programs.
Last week the subcommittee received testimony concerning the new administration's proposal to eliminate or substantially reduce the budget of numerous programs, such as conservation and alcohol fuels, which offer near-term benefits.
The subject of today's hearing is in marked contrast with those prior hearings in that there is both some good news and some bad news. The good news is that we are finally reviewing an administration energy program which reportedly will not be seriously cut, and the bad news, at least from my standpoint, is the nuclear program.
It is completely beyond my comprehension why, with electricity consuming only 9.1 percent of our total oil consumption, we should be spending more than 50 percent of the revised civilian energy budget on nuclear energy for electricity production, to say nothing of the $4.5 billion spent on the military side of DOE's nuclear budget.
It also raises the question of whether there isn't some lack of confidence on behalf of the industry, and the ability of nuclear energy to survive in the marketplace if we are, indeed, going to deregulate and take away subsidies from all other forms of energy, and increase subsidies for nuclear energy.
I understand that some people feel, nevertheless, that in the past few years the nuclear program has operated under severe budget constraints and has not grown in proportion to other energy programs. As a result some nuclear programs, such as the new enrichment facility, are in serious jeopardy.
However, increases in the funding for nonnuclear alternatives represented a commitment on the part of the Congress to develop a balanced energy policy which provided both near-term and long