These provide unique testing capabilities, which are required for the development of nuclear energy that will be suitable for civilian power generation, for space, and for military applications. These facilities are also used in the development of fusion technology, cooperative technology programs with other countries, some nonnuclear energy programs, and for conducting tests for other Government and private sector organizations. The accomplishments and activities of these facilities and test programs are significant. Their continued operation in and of itself represents continuing contribution to advanced nuclear energy R&D for the advanced concepts. For example, the FFTF has achieved a world record of 101 days for continuous operation of a liquid-metal reactor at full power. Fuel performance in FFTF has gone well beyond the initial fuel burnup goal. We have recently successfully completed a test in EBR-II where we accommodated a loss of flow without reactor scram or other operator action, starting at 100-percent power, a good demonstration of passive safety. Testing at ETEC is continuing to make significant contributions to liquid-metal reactor designs resulting from their natural circulation tests, shutdown heat-removal tests, and performance testing of advanced steam generators. The facility cost line in our fiscal year 1987 budget reflects the current minimum doors-open cost for operating these facilities. The test programs at these facilities in fiscal year 1987 include reactor safety and fuel performance and component testing for advanced reactor concepts, irradiation of candidate core materials for space reactor use, the irradiation of SP-100 fuel and cladding, fuel behavior with breach and cladding, operational transient testing under a joint program between the United States and Japan, irradiation testing of materials specimens, infusion programs and tests supporting reactor plant simplification and cost-reduction features. So when we look at the budget, Madam Chairman, we should not completely separate the facility operating costs from continued progress in these advanced reactor programs. They are an integral part. The Department does plan to evaluate the current methods by which users share in our facility costs. We are evaluating alternative cost-sharing approaches. We may be able partially to implement those in fiscal year 1987, but with the more full implementation planned for fiscal year 1988, if practical. Finally, our water-cooled breeder reactor program will be concluded in fiscal year 1987, with activities focused on completing the evaluation to confirm breeding with the core removed in the Shippingport atomic power station. This completes my overview remarks, Madam Chairman; my colleagues and I would be pleased to respond to any questions you may have at this time. [The prepared statement of Mr. Vaughan follows:] STATEMENT OF JAMES W. VAUGHAN, JR. ACTING ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR NUCLEAR ENERGY SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY RESEARCH AND PRODUCTION FEBRUARY 27, 1986 Madam Chairman, I am pleased to have the opportunity to discuss the Department's Nuclear Energy research and development (R&D) programs. As you know, we are also scheduled to appear before this Subcommittee to separately discuss our Remedial Action and Waste Technology programs and Uranium Enrichment activities. To place our discussions in perspective, Table 1 summarizes our FY 1987 budget request and today I will provide a brief overview of all of our programs which we do not plan to repeat in our subsequent appearances. * Revenues in excess of outlays of approximately $110 million will accrue to the Treasury in FY 1986. 2 As noted in the above table, our funding request in FY 1987 for Nuclear Energy Supply R&D is $626.8 million in budget authority, as compared to $607.4 million estimated in FY 1986. The FY 1986 figures in this and subsequent tables reflect appropriated totals reduced by sequestrations responsive to Public Law 99-177 (the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Deficit Reduction Act), management initiatives, and other general reductions. The FY 1987 Uranium Enrichment request reflects both planned partial payback of prior Government investment and offsetting revenues, resulting in a net zero appropriation for that activity. OVERVIEW We place high priority on ensuring that nuclear energy continues to contribute to a strong, stable, and secure national energy base to meet both civilian and military requirements. Nuclear energy, along with fossil and renewable energy sources, are essential elements to achieving that goal at reasonable cost. The Department's commitment to nuclear energy remains strong. Our reactor development programs to help preserve the nuclear power option and our execution of a reliable, competitive, and businesslike uranium enrichment enterprise are an integral part of our commitment. The Department also remains strongly committed to protecting public health and safety and to assuring a safe and clean environment in connection with its activities. Our remedial action and waste technology efforts are an integral part of that commitment. In assessing our FY 1987 nuclear energy program priorities, we have faced hard choices for many of our program elements in a time of fiscal constraint. While the FY 1987 budget request for Nuclear Energy Supply Research and Development programs increases slightly from our FY 1986 estimate, there have been several shifts in relative funding levels for individual programs. Within that essentially level budget, our funding request for nuclear energy research and development (R&D) has decreased by about $46 million, while funding for Remedial Actions and Waste Technology has increased by some $64 million compared to FY 1986. Key factors that influenced the formulation of our programs and budget request include: First, the Department is fully committed to support the bipartisan effort to control and reduce the Federal deficit. In this necessary environment of fiscal constraint, we are constantly faced with difficult choices among deserving programs. Although it may appear to some that worthwhile R&D elements have been eliminated or significantly reduced, we believe that each of our programs is sharply focused to make optimum use of limited resources. 3 Second, space and defense nuclear energy needs are increasing, particularly those associated with the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI). Some of our activities in this area have progressed from the design and screening phase into the more funding-intensive hardware phase. These activities are an essential part of a top national priority. Accordingly, our funding request for these efforts in our nuclear energy R&D programs has increased in FY 1987 as previously planned. Certain benefits derived from the nuclear energy R&D work to support these national security requirements 4 will be applied to future civilian reactor development efforts and complementary base technology activities will continue. Third, our civilian reactor research and development program has been reduced, but more sharply focused on assuring that a path exists to maintain nuclear power as a robust option for the rest of this century and beyond. Last year, we testified that the institutional and technical impediments to the near-term deployment of light water reactors must be overcome before there would be any chance to realize the potential of advanced reactors. This is reflected in the priorities within the funds available for reactor research and development. Our Light Water Reactor (LWR) R&D program is more sharply focused on research and development which can help facilitate efforts by U.S. industry to usher in a new, advanced generation of nuclear powerplants. The Department's LWR R&D programs will continue to emphasize advanced in safety technology including continued evaluation of the Three Mile Island accident. It is our view that the time is ripe for the completion of development and certification of advanced, state-of-the-art LWR designs. Certainly the currently anticipated timing for the commercial introduction of innovative reactor technologies beyond light water reactors has been stretched out. We have made excellent progress in the past 2 to 3 years on design work for High Temperature Gas Reactors (HTGRs) and Liquid Metal Reactors (LMRs); our focus is now upon key features affecting the economic, passive safety, and technical issues of these concepts. Our funding request for civilian advanced reactor development activities has been reduced in FY 1987 consistent with this |