As a result of our discussion last week, I would like to reemphasize my support for several nuclear energy programs that are important to the overall success of the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI). These programs include the SP-100 and Multimegawatt (MMW) space reactors, the Dynamic Isotope Power System (DIPS), and the Secure Military Powerplant Project (SMPP). Space reactor systems will be required in the SP-100 power range in order to satisfy the space platform operational power requirements of a space based SDI system. Higher power MMW space reactors are also candidates to meet the pulse power needs of several of the Directed Energy Weapons (DEW) and Kinetic Energy Weapons (KEW) currently being investigated. Key technology and development issues should be addressed in both programs and the ongoing SP-100 Ground Subsystem Test Program and nuclear MMW development programs need to be continued to address these issues. The DIPS and SMPP Programs are primarily U.S. Air Force initiatives, but because of their potential application to SDI, I endorse them and urge your continued support as part of your cooperative efforts with the Air Force. The DIPS concept is the preferred power source for an operational Boost Surveillance and Tracking System (BSTS) and development should proceed on a time scale that is compatible with overall BSTS development. As part of my overall funding support for BSTS, some SDI funding will be directed toward DIPS development. As I indicated to you in an earlier letter, the SMPP may be important to ground based SDI assets. The ground based systems are receiving increased emphasis and I encourage you to continue this cooperative effort with the Air Force. Because it is more of a new application of existing technology rather than a new technology or feasibility issue, Air Force funding is more appropriate than direct SDI funding, and I am relying on Air Force funding to help carry this project forward. As you consider the various program alternatives that the rigid budget constraints force you to consider, I urge you to give a high priority to these programs that are important to the Strategic Defense Initiative. Sincerely, James A. Abrahann James A. Abrahamson Lieutenant General, USAF 64-415 O 86 - 25 DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS-FISCAL YEAR 1987 (Nuclear Research and Development Programs) MONDAY, MAY 5, 1986 U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES, Washington, DC. The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:05 p.m. in room SD-366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Pete V. Domenici, presiding. Present: Senator Domenici. Also present: Marilyn Meigs, professional staff member; Benjamin S. Cooper, professional staff member for the minority; and James T. Bruce, counsel for the minority. OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. PETE V. DOMENICI, A U.S. Senator DOMENICI. Could we have order, please. We have three different panels today, two with four witnesses and one with two. We are going to try our best to get to all of you, if you will help us here. We have about an hour and a half. That ought to be enough time, I think. I am not sure we are going to have any other Senators able to attend, so we will do our best to accommodate the witnesses, and you will have to keep the testimony as brief as possible. Once again, good afternoon to you all. Today we will continue with the second part of the hearing on the Department of Energy's Nuclear Energy Program. During the first hearing on Tuesday, April 29, we received testimony from several administration witnesses representing the DOE, the NRT, the SDIO, and the Air Force. Today we will receive testimony from public witnesses concerning the DOE's nuclear energy programs. Since April 29, the Russian nuclear accident has caught the attention of the world. The speculations have been rampant. Undoubtedly, the safety of nuclear power will be under scrutiny more now than ever. In order for the United States to maintain the nuclear option for energy independence, we obviously must take a look, and a careful look, at the funding level of nuclear research and development programs, especially on the advanced reactor pro (767) gram, to ensure a safe, secure, and economic supply option if and when it is needed. The budget resolution adopted by the Senate last week recognizes the importance of maintaining Federal funding for the energy R&D programs. It provides, not cuts as recommended by the administration, but a freeze on the energy functions at the fiscal year 1986 level, with an increase of $94 million in the R&D portion of the budget, subject to appropriations action, actual allocation and funding, to bring this back to the same level after inflation. We are pleased now to have the three panels of public witnesses, and I assume that you are prepared to proceed in the order that was scheduled by the staff. So if the first panel will please come to the witness table: Ms. Edwyna Anderson, chairperson of the NARUC Subcommittee on Nuclear Waste Disposal, Commissioner from the Michigan Public Service Commission. Thank you very much for coming and we will be right with you. And Mr. Fred Davis, senior legislative affairs representative for Edison Electric Institute. You may proceed. STATEMENT OF EDWYNA G. ANDERSON, CHAIRPERSON, SUBCOMMITTEE ON NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REGULATORY UTILITY COMMISSIONERS, AND COMMISSIONER, MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION MS. ANDERSON. I am Edwyna Anderson. I am testifying today on behalf of the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, better known as NARUC, a 96-year-old quasi-governmental association of commissions engaged, among other things, in the economic regulation of investor-owned utilities within all 50 States and territories. One of our responsibilities is to assure the Nation's ratepayers that all possible efforts are being made to make the nuclear waste disposal program safe, well managed, and cost-effective. We are continuing to advise the Department of Energy and the Congress on the conduct of this necessary but very expensive program. All ratepayers of utilities operating nuclear electric plants are now being assessed through their monthly electric bills for this decades-long program costing billions of dollars. We emphasize that ratepayers, not utilities, are the source of these revenues. Our overall findings, including-and I want to emphasize-several successes of the program appear in the full written text, which I request be bound into the record. Senator DOMENICI. Without objection, it will be so filed. Ms. ANDERSON. In this limited time, I will highlight five recommendations. The first, in the matter of cost control, we believe the Congress should launch an audit of the enormous program costs. We note the assertions of many that the waste disposal issue is not a technical problem. Focus should be on big ticket items and on those items escalating at an unusually high rate. Also on program audit and cost control, the General Accounting Office recommended last year that the DOE substantially upgrade, intensify, and make uniform its audit of contractors. Recognizing |