Page Four Low-level waste 3. Managing an escrow account, comprised of 25% of the surcharges that will be rebated to the states and compacts upon achieving specific milestones; and 4. Producing an annual report of the progress of states and regions in meeting the deadlines in the Act and on industry's procedures for handling low-level waste. Each of these new responsibilities must be funded out of DOE's low-level waste budget which means that the limited resources available to states from DOE will be reduced even further. While we recognize that the responsibility for implementing a low-level waste management and disposal system now rests with the states, such a system cannot be implemented without full cooperation and assistance from the Federal government. We are convinced that if the Federal government's level of conmmitment is reduced at this critical juncture, successful implementation of the system will be placed in serious jeopardy. The cost of failure will be high since if the States are not successful; responsibility for low-level waste may shift to the Federal government. I think you would agree that this outcome would be an unfortunate and costly result. For these reasons, we urge the Congress to increase the amount available for the DOE's Low-level waste program in FY87. 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 thein 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 0 - 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) |