QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR HATFIELD Inflation and Taxes Question: What rate of inflation was assumed in this appropriation at the beginning of FY 1984 and what is the expected inflation rate for FY 1984 now? Answer: We assumed a 7 percent inflation rate for FY 1984. We continue to believe that that rate is appropriate based on our experience to date. Question: What amount is included to cover inflation or escalation for operating expenses in the FY 1985 request? percent of the request? What Answer: The amount included in the FY 1985 request for operating expenses to cover inflation is $257,233,000. This represents 4.6 percent of the FY 1985 request for operating expenses which is $5,480,754,000. Question: How much is included in FY 1985 budget for State taxes? Please provide this by site and State. Answer: The amount included in the FY 1985 budget for State taxes is $48.8 million. The following table gives a breakdown by site and State. State, Site Taxes California, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. $ 0.1 1.4 Question: Please describe the reorganization of the Albuquerque Operations Office and the redistribution of staffing among the programs. Answer: The realignment of the Albuquerque Operations Office, which was effective June 12, 1983, involved the consolidation of the Resources Management Division and the Program, Plans, and Budget Division into a new Budget and Resources Management Division. The reorganization further involved creation of a new Management Support Division by abolishing the Sandia Area Office and combining functions of that office with the functions of the Headquarters Services Division. This realignment provided a more efficient structure for the performance of all budget and support service functions and provided the organization and personnel necessary to recognize the importance of real estate and traffic management. Additionally, the realignment provided for the consolidation of all construction and contract administration activities related to the Albuquerque-based projects and contracts. This reorganization resulted in a redistribution of 13 Federal full-time equivalents from the Weapons Research, Development, and Testing Program and 24 Federal full-time equivalents from the Weapons Production and Surveillance Program into Weapons Program Direction. TRANSFER OF MARSHALL ISLANDS PROGRAM Question: What was the rationale for the transfer of the Marshall Islands and Nevada Dose Assessment Program to Defense Programs? Answer: All of the Department of Energy programs in the Marshall Islands are a legacy of the atmospheric nuclear testing conducted from 1946 to 1958. The Department's responsibility described in Public Law 95-134 is threefold: (a) to determine and evaluate radiological conditions at the atolls of Enewetak and Bikini that were affected by testing; (b) to provide technical advice and assistance to Government agencies, notably the Department of the Interior and the Department of Defense, for the resettlement of those atolls; and (c) to maintain a medical program for those portions of the populations of Rongelap and Utirik who received acute exposures from radioactive fallout in 1954. While it may appear that health surveillance activities, such as our Marshall Islands effort, are not defense related, there is merit to the argument that the weapons program caused the problems in the Marshalls and we should assume responsibility. We in Defense Programs, and in our predecessor agencies, have been responsive to the needs of the Marshallese for 30 years now. MARSHALL ISLANDS FUNDING Question: Provide a distribution of funding between the Marshall Islands and Nevada Dose Assessment in FY 1984 and FY 1985. Why has the program been reduced from $9.6 million to $6 million in FY 1985? Answer: The Marshall Islands effort will receive $8.5 million in FY 1984 and $5.4 million in FY 1985. The Nevada Dose Assessment effort will be funded at $1.1 million in FY 1984 and $0.6 million in FY 1985. This effort is scheduled to be completed in FY 1986. The FY 1984 funding of $9,600,000 includes $4,000,000 in supplemental funding provided under Public Law 96-205 for implementation of a comprehensive health care plan. This supplemental funding will be used to develop health care arrangements described in the Public Law and consistent with Section 177 of the Compact for Free Association. The provisions of these funds does not assume any future commitment for additional funding for this effort. Responsibility for development of this plan rests with the Department of Interior. INTERACTIVE GRAPHICS SYSTEMS Question: Provide a listing of all funding for interactive graphics systems funded throughout the Defense Programs budget for FY 1983, FY 1984, and FY 1985. Show source of funds by location. Answer: This information is provided for the record. CAPITAL EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENTS Question: Provide a table showing the capital equipment requirements in the various Weapons Activities for FY 1983, FY 1984, and FY 1985. Justify the increase in FY 1985 considering the significant increases in FY 1983 and FY 1984. Answer: A table outlining capital equipment requirements for Weapons Activities is provided for the record. There are many reasons for increased capital equipment funding. The fundamental need is to slow the physical and technological deterioration of the capital asset base. Additional equipment is also needed to prepare for the increasing workload in FY 1986 and FY 1987, as well as improved safeguards, security, and environmental measures. AIRCRAFT ACQUISITION Question: Please provide a description of and the need for the aircraft included in this appropriation. Answer: The FY 1985 appropriation includes a request for the Department of Energy to acquire title to one fixed-wing twin engine propeller aircraft, which is a Beechcraft Super King Air, Model 200-C. This aircraft has been leased under a lease-toownership contractual agreement. The Department of Energy will acquire title to this aircraft when the final lease payment is made in February 1985. It is a secondary aircraft operated by Ross Airlines to transport cargo, DELETED the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, and other Department of Energy missions assigned to the Albuquerque Operations Office. STRATEGIC DEFENSE INITIATIVE Question: Your budget states the feasibility of the Department of Energy directed energy program would not be established until the early-to-mid-1990's, and weaponization would require an additional 5 to 10 years. In terms of billions of dollars, what would you expect such a program to cost? We Answer: The research needed to determine the technical feasibility of nuclear-directed energy weapons concepts for strategic defense will require a substantial effort over a period of years. expect to spend about $2 billion in 1985 dollars on this work by FY 1989. We have not estimated costs beyond that date. TOTAL STRATEGIC DEFENSE BUDGET Question: What range would you expect the total Department of Defense and Department of Energy Strategic Defense Initiative to cost? Answer: For FY 1985, the Departments of Defense and Energy are requesting a total of approximately $2 billion for the Strategic Defense Initiative. For FY 1986-1989, the two Departments expect that a total of $24 billion will be required. DELETED Question: Strategic Defense Initiative What information do we have with regard to the Russian progress in the field of Strategic Defense? Answer: In open literature articles, the Soviets have indicated an interest in nuclear explosive driven directed energy weapons and they certainly have the demonstrated knowledge and technical capability to do so. DELETED |