Energy and Water Development:
December 8, 2020
FY2021 Appropriations
Mark Holt
The Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies appropriations bill provides funding
Specialist in Energy Policy
for civil works projects of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE); the Department of the

Interior’s Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) and Central Utah Project (CUP); the Department
Corrie E. Clark
of Energy (DOE); the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC); the Appalachian Regional
Analyst in Energy Policy
Commission (ARC); and several other independent agencies. DOE typically accounts for about

80% of the bill’s funding.
Overall Funding Totals

President Trump submitted his FY2021 budget proposal to Congress on February 10, 2020. The budget requests for agencies
included in the Energy and Water Development appropriations bill total $42.559 billion, including budget offsets. This was
$5.764 billion (12%) below the FY2020 enacted Energy and Water Development total of $48.324 billion, not including
supplemental appropriations. The House Appropriations Committee approved its FY2021 Energy and Water Development
appropriations bill July 13, 2020 (H.R. 7613, H.Rept. 116-449). The Energy and Water bill was included as Division C in the
second FY2021 consolidated appropriations bill (H.R. 7617), passed by the House July 31, 2020. The House-passed bill
would provide total non-emergency energy and water development funding of $49.601 billion, including offsets. This is
$1.278 billion (3%) above the FY2020 enacted level and $7.042 billion (17%) above the request. In addition, the bill includes
$44.050 billion in emergency FY2021 energy and water appropriations (described below), for a total of $93.651 billion. The
Chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee released a draft FY2021 Energy and Water bill and explanatory statement
on November 10, 2020 (https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/news/committee-releases-fy21-bills-in-effort-to-advance-
process-produce-bipartisan-results), without scheduled subcommittee or committee markups. The Senate draft includes
$51.864 billion for Energy and Water Development programs—$9.305 billion above the budget request and $3.540 billion
above the FY2020 enacted appropriation, excluding emergency appropriations.
DOE would receive $35.732 billion under the Administration’s FY2021 budget request (excluding offsets)—a decrease of
$2.925 billion (8%) from the FY2020 enacted level. The House-passed bill includes $40.864 billion for DOE, up 6% from
FY2020, excluding emergency funding. The draft Senate bill includes $42.041 billion for DOE, an increase of $6.309 billion
(18%) from the request, $1.178 billion (3%) over the House-passed bill, and $3.384 billion (9%) over the FY2020 enacted
level. The two water agencies in the bill would see funding cuts under the FY2021 budget request. USACE would decline
from $7.650 billion in FY2020 to $5.966 billion in FY2020 (down $1.684 billion, or 22%). Reclamation (separately from
CUP) would be reduced from $1.660 billion in FY2020 to $1.128 billion in FY2021 (down $532 million, or 32%). The
House-passed bill includes reductions of $21 million (0.3%) for USACE and $30 million (2%) for Reclamation from their
FY2020 enacted levels, excluding emergency supplementals. The draft Senate bill would provide $7.722 billion for USACE,
$93 million (1%) above the House level. For Reclamation, the draft Senate bill would provide $1.670 billion, $40 million
(2%) above the House level.
Emergency Funding
Title VI of the House-passed bill includes $44.05 billion in emergency FY2021 funding—nearly doubling the bill’s total
appropriations. These “additional infrastructure investments” are intended “to support the economic recovery from the
coronavirus pandemic,” according to the House Appropriations Committee report. USACE would receive $17.0 billion,
Reclamation would receive $3.0 billion, and DOE would receive $24.050 billion. The largest amounts of the DOE
emergency funding would go to EERE ($8.330 billion), Science (6.250 billion), Defense Environmental Cleanup ($2.685
billion), Electricity ($3.350 billion), Nuclear Energy ($1.250 billion), and Fossil Energy ($1.250 billion). The draft Senate
bill does not include emergency appropriations for Energy and Water Development programs.
Major Issues
Major FY2021 Energy and Water Development funding issues include Administration proposals to limit funding for water
projects, reduce energy R&D funding, eliminate weatherization grants for low-income households, establish a national
uranium reserve, and substantially increase DOE nuclear weapons activities; emergency supplemental funding included in the
House-passed bill; and a Senate majority draft proposal for renewable energy grid integration.
Congressional Research Service

link to page 5

Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

Introduction and Overview
The Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies appropriations bill includes funding
for civil works projects of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), in Title I; the Department
of the Interior’s Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) and Central Utah Project (CUP), in Title
II; the Department of Energy (DOE), in Title III; and a number of independent agencies,
including the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and the Appalachian Regional Commission
(ARC), in Title IV. Figure 1 compares the major components of the Energy and Water
Development appropriations bill from FY2019 through the FY2021 House-passed and Senate
Appropriations Committee draft levels.
Figure 1. Funding for Major Components of Energy and Water Development
Appropriations Bill, FY2019 through FY2021 Consideration
(excluding emergency supplementals)

Sources: Senate Appropriations Committee majority draft Explanatory Statement for Energy and Water
Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Bil , 2021; H.R. 7617; H.Rept. 116-449; Explanatory
Statement for Division C of H.R. 1865, 116th Congress; S.Rept. 116-102; S. 2470; H.R. 2740; FY2021 Budget
Appendix; and agency budget justifications. Includes some adjustments; see tables 4-7 for details.
Notes: FY2021 DOE request total does not include asset sales and certain other offsets. Enacted amounts do
not include subsequent emergency supplemental appropriations. CUP = Central Utah Project Completion
Account. FY2021 House levels exclude emergency appropriations and certain offsets.
President Trump submitted his FY2021 budget request to Congress on February 10, 2020. The
budget requests for agencies included in the Energy and Water Development appropriations bill
total $42.559 billion, including budget offsets. This was $5.764 billion (12%) below the FY2020
enacted Energy and Water Development total of $48.324 billion, not including supplemental
appropriations.1 The House Appropriations Committee approved its FY2021 Energy and Water

1 Most figures for the FY2020 enacted appropriations and FY2021 Administration Request are taken from the House
Appropriations Committee report on the Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill,
2021 (H.Rept. 116-449), July 15, 2020, and the Senate Appropriations Committee majority draft FY2021 explanatory
statement, https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/EWRept.pdf. House-passed figures are taken from
H.R. 7617 and the committee report. Figures for some subaccounts not shown in the House Appropriations Committee
Congressional Research Service

1

Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

Development appropriations bill July 13, 2020 (H.R. 7613, H.Rept. 116-449). The Energy and
Water bill was included as Division C in the second FY2021 consolidated appropriations bill
(H.R. 7617), passed by the House on July 31, 2020. The House-passed bill would provide total
non-emergency energy and water development funding of $49.601 billion, including offsets. This
is $1.278 billion (3%) above the FY2020 enacted level and $7.042 billion (17%) above the
request. In addition, the House bill includes $44.050 billion in emergency FY2021 energy and
water appropriations (described below), for a total of $93.651 billion.
Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Richard Shelby released draft bills and explanatory
statements for all 12 regular FY2021 appropriations bills on November 10, 2020, with no
scheduled subcommittee or committee markups. The release of the draft bills was intended to
further negotiations on annual appropriations between the House and the Senate.2 (Hereinafter,
the draft of the Energy and Water Development appropriations bill and explanatory statement are
referred to as “the Senate Appropriations Committee majority draft bill” and “Senate
Appropriations Committee majority draft explanatory statement.”) The committee majority’s
draft bill and explanatory statement for Energy and Water Development appropriations would
provide a total of $51.864 billion, including offsets, according to the comparative statement of
new budget authority that is in the explanatory statement. This is $3.540 billion (7%) above the
FY2020 enacted level, $9.305 billion (22%) above the request, and $2.262 billion (5%) above the
House-passed level, excluding emergency supplemental appropriations.
Administration Request
DOE would receive $35.732 billion under the Administration’s FY2021 budget request
(excluding offsets)—a decrease of $2.925 billion (8%) from the FY2020 enacted level. The
FY2021 request for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) is $720 million, which is
$2.070 billion (74%) below the FY2020 enacted level. This includes elimination of grants for
home weatherization assistance and state energy programs. Nuclear Energy Research and
Development (R&D) would drop from $1.493 billion in FY2020 to $1.180 billion in FY2021
(21%), and Fossil Energy R&D would be reduced from $750 million to $731 million (3%).
DOE’s Office of Science, which funds a wide range of research, would receive $5.838 billion,
down $1.162 billion (17%) from the FY2020 enacted level. Funding for the Advanced Research
Projects Agency—Energy (ARPA-E), which received $425 million in FY2020, would be
eliminated and $311 million in prior-year funding rescinded. Environmental Management (waste
management and cleanup) would decline from $7.455 billion in FY2020 to $6.066 billion in
FY2021 (down $1.390 billion, or 19%).
The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), the DOE agency responsible for defense-
related nuclear activities, would be increased from $16.705 billion in FY2020 to $19.771 billion
in FY2021 (up $3.066 billion, or 18%). Also proposed for increases are DOE’s Office of
Electricity (up $5 million, or 3%) and the Office of Cybersecurity, Energy Security, and
Emergency Response (up $29 million, or 18%).

report are taken from the DOE FY2021 Congressional Budget Justification, February 2020, https://www.energy.gov/
cfo/downloads/fy-2021-budget-justification.
2 Senate Appropriations Committee, “Committee Releases FY21 Bills in Effort to Advance Process, Produce Bipartisan
Results,” November 10, 2020, https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/news/committee-releases-fy21-bills-in-effort-to-
advance-process-produce-bipartisan-results. See also the statement from Senate Appropriations Committee Vice Chair
Patrick Leahy, at https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/news/minority/senate-approps-vice-chair-leahy-statement-on-
the-release-of-the-fy-2021-senate-appropriations-bills-.

Congressional Research Service

2

Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

The two major water agencies in the Energy and Water Development appropriations bill would
see funding reductions under the FY2021 budget request. USACE would decline from $7.650
billion in FY2020 to $5.966 billion in FY2021 (down $1.684 billion, or 22%). Reclamation
(separately from CUP) would be reduced from $1.660 billion in FY2020 to $1.128 billion in
FY2021 (down $532 million, or 32%).
Among the independent agencies funded by the bill, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
would receive an increase in total appropriations from $856 million in FY2020 to $863 million in
FY2021 (up $8 million, or 1%). NRC’s budget is mostly offset by nuclear industry fees, which
may vary from year to year; the agency’s net appropriation would decline from $128 million in
FY2020 to $123 million in FY2021 (down $5 million, or 4%). Funding for the Appalachian
Regional Commission would decrease from $175 million in FY2020 to $165 million in FY2021
(down $10 million, or 6%). Deeper percentage reductions in appropriations were proposed for
smaller regional authorities in the bill: Denali Commission (-51%), Delta Regional Authority (-
92%), Northern Border Regional Commission (-97%), and Southeast Crescent Regional
Commission (-100%).
House-Passed Bill
The House-passed bill would largely reverse the funding reductions proposed by the
Administration and reduce the Administration’s proposed increases for DOE defense programs.
DOE appropriations in the House bill total $40.864 billion (excluding emergency funding), up
$2.207 billion (6%) from FY2020. From the enacted FY2020 levels, funding for EERE would
increase by $60 million (2%), Science would rise $55 million (1%), ARPA-E would increase by
$10 million (2%), and loan programs would continue unchanged. Nuclear Energy R&D would be
reduced by $58 million (4%), less than the $313 million reduction sought by the Administration.
The bill would reduce Fossil R&D by $4 million less than the reduction proposed by the
Administration. The House bill would reduce the Administration’s proposed $3.066 billion (18%)
increase for NNSA to $1.333 billion (8%).
The Administration’s proposed FY2021 funding reductions for water development agencies
would be largely reversed under the House-passed bill: regular (non-emergency) appropriations
for Reclamation would decrease by $30 million (2%) and for USACE would decline by $21
million (a fraction of a percent) from their FY2020 enacted levels. For independent agencies
funded by the bill, the House bill would reverse the proposed reductions, mostly calling for level
funding or slight increases. The primary exception is the Delta Regional Authority, which would
be reduced by $15 million (50%) from its FY2020 funding level (compared with the 92%
reduction sought by the Administration). The House bill also includes first-time funding of
$250,000 for the Southwest Border Regional Commission.
Senate Committee Majority Draft
The Senate Appropriations Committee majority draft bill and explanatory statement would
provide $42.041 billion for DOE, $6.309 billion (18%) above the request and $1.178 billion (3%)
above the House-passed level, excluding emergency supplementals. Compared with the House-
passed levels, total funding for DOE energy programs would be $206 million (1%) higher under
the Senate draft, and defense programs would be $968 million (4%) higher.
For the water agencies, the Senate committee majority draft would provide $7.722 billion for
USACE, $1.756 (29%) above the request and $93 million (1%) above the House-passed level,
excluding emergency supplemental appropriations. Reclamation would receive $1.670 billion,
$542 million (48%) above the request and $40 million (2%) above the House-passed level.
Congressional Research Service

3

Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

Independent agencies would receive $413 million, $80 million (24%) above the request and $24
million (6%) above the total approved by the House. The Senate draft does not include startup
funding for the Southwest Border Regional Commission.
Emergency Funding
In addition to the regular appropriations described above, Title VI of the House-passed bill
includes $44.050 billion in emergency FY2021 funding—nearly doubling the bill’s total
appropriations. These “additional infrastructure investments” are intended “to support the
economic recovery from the coronavirus pandemic,” according to the House Appropriations
Committee report. USACE would receive $17.0 billion, Reclamation would receive $3.0 billion,
and DOE would receive $24.050 billion. The emergency spending in Title VI is outside the
annual budget caps described below. No emergency spending for energy and water development
programs is included in the Senate Appropriations Committee majority draft bill.3
The largest amounts of the DOE emergency funding would go to EERE ($8.330 billion), of which
$3.250 billion would be for weatherization (energy efficiency) improvements to low-income
housing, $2.250 billion would be for energy efficiency and conservation block grants, and $1.025
billion would be for electric vehicle infrastructure. Science would receive $6.250 billion in
emergency appropriations for upgrades to scientific research facilities. Other DOE programs
receiving the largest amount of emergency funding include Defense Environmental Cleanup
($2.685 billion), Electricity, for grid modernization ($3.350 billion), Nuclear Energy ($1.250
billion), and Fossil Energy ($1.250 billion).
USACE’s emergency appropriations include $10.0 billion for construction and $5.0 billion for
operation and maintenance. Limitations on USACE construction projects in various existing
statutes would be waived. Emergency funding for Reclamation includes $300 million for
WaterSMART grants for water efficiency and infrastructure improvements, $605 million for
Indian Water Rights Settlements, and at least $700 million for various efforts in California
associated with the California Bay-Delta Restoration Act, the Central Valley Project Improvement
Act, and the San Joaquin River Restoration Settlement.
The House bill specifies that funds “designated in this Act by the Congress as being for an
emergency requirement” will become available only if the President “subsequently so designates
all such amounts and transmits such designations to the Congress” (Section 4).
Earlier-Year Funding
FY2020 funding was enacted in the FY2020 Energy and Water Development and Related
Agencies Appropriations Act on December 19, 2019, as Division C of the Further Continuing
Appropriations Act, 2020, which was signed by the President on December 20, 2019 (P.L. 116-
94). The enacted measure provided $48.324 billion for Energy and Water programs (including
rescissions), $3.663 billion (8%) above the FY2019 funding level (excluding emergency
supplemental appropriations) and $10.368 billion (27%) above the Administration request.
Funding tables and other details are provided in the Explanatory Statement submitted with the
Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2020.4

3 Senate Appropriations Committee majority explanatory statement, p. 1, https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/
media/doc/EWRept.pdf.
4 Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020, Committee Print of the Committee on Appropriations, U.S. House of
Representatives, on H.R. 1865/P.L. 116-94, Legislative Text and Explanatory Statement, January 2020,
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CPRT-116HPRT38679/pdf/CPRT-116HPRT38679.pdf.
Congressional Research Service

4

Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

Figures for FY2019 exclude emergency supplemental appropriations totaling $17.419 billion
provided to USACE and DOE for natural disaster response by the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018
(P.L. 115-123), signed February 9, 2018. Similarly, the discussion and amounts in this report do
not reflect the emergency supplemental appropriations provided in the Additional Supplemental
Appropriations for Disaster Relief Act, 2019 (P.L. 116-20) for USACE ($3.258 billion) and
Reclamation ($16 million) or Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related supplemental
appropriations (e.g., P.L. 116-136). For more details, see CRS In Focus IF11435, Supplemental
Appropriations for Army Corps Flood Response and Recovery, by Nicole T. Carter and Anna E.
Normand, and CRS Report R45708, Energy and Water Development: FY2020 Appropriations, by
Mark Holt and Corrie E. Clark.
Budgetary Limits
Congressional consideration of the annual Energy and Water Development appropriations bill is
affected by certain procedural and statutory budget enforcement requirements. These consist
primarily of procedural limits on discretionary spending (spending provided in annual
appropriations acts) established in a budget resolution or through some other means, and
allocations of this amount that apply to spending under the jurisdiction of each appropriations
subcommittee.
Statutory budget enforcement is currently derived from the Budget Control Act of 2011 (BCA;
P.L. 112-25). The BCA established separate limits on defense and nondefense discretionary
spending. These limits are in effect from FY2012 through FY2021 and are primarily enforced by
an automatic spending reduction process called sequestration, in which a breach of a spending
limit would trigger across-the-board cuts, known as a sequester, within that spending category.
The BCA’s statutory discretionary spending limits were increased for FY2020 and FY2021 by
the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2019 (BBA 2019, P.L. 116-37, H.R. 3877), signed by the President
August 2, 2019. For FY2021, BBA 2019 sets discretionary spending limits of $671.5 billion for
defense funding and $626.5 billion for nondefense funding (the Energy and Water Development
Appropriations bill includes both). P.L. 116-136 (§14003) altered the accounting of certain harbor
maintenance spending toward the discretionary spending limits. From the FY2021 discretionary
spending limit, the House Appropriations Committee on July 13, 2020, allocated $49.607 billion
to the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Subcommittee (H.Rept. 116-443).5 That
limit does not apply to the emergency appropriations in the House-passed FY2021 consolidated
funding bills. The Senate Appropriations Committee majority posted draft FY2021 subcommittee
allocations on November 10, 2020, including $51.752 billion for energy and water development,
which is consistent with the text within the explanatory statement but different from the
comparative statement of new budget authority at the end of the explanatory statement.6 (For
more information, see CRS Insight IN11148, The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2019: Changes to the
BCA and Debt Limit, by Grant A. Driessen and Megan S. Lynch, and CRS Report R44874, The
Budget Control Act: Frequently Asked Questions, by Grant A. Driessen and Megan S. Lynch.)

5 The House and Senate Appropriations Committees make subcommittee allocations pursuant to Section 302(b) of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 ( P.L. 93-344).
6 Senate Appropriations Committee majority, 2021 Original Senate Allocation, https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/
imo/media/doc/FY21%20302(b)%20Subcommittee%20Allocations.pdf.
Congressional Research Service

5

Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

Funding Issues and Initiatives
Several issues have drawn particular attention during congressional consideration of Energy and
Water Development appropriations for FY2021. The issues described in this section—listed
approximately in the order the affected agencies appear in the Energy and Water Development
bill—were selected based on total funding involved, percentage of proposed increases or
decreases, amount of congressional debate engendered, and potential impact on broader public
policy considerations. Substantial controversy arose during House markups and floor debate
about the bill’s $44.050 billion in emergency spending under Title VI (Division C) in response to
the ongoing COVID-19 outbreak; discussion of specific programs targeted with emergency
funding is included in the issue areas below. (For information on COVID effects, see CRS Insight
IN11300, COVID-19: Potential Impacts on the Electric Power Sector, by Ashley J. Lawson.)
Army Corps of Engineers and Reclamation Budgets
For USACE, the Trump Administration requested $5.966 billion for FY2021, which is $1.684
billion (22%) below the FY2020 appropriation. The request includes no funding for initiating new
studies and construction projects (referred to as new starts). The FY2021 request would limit
funding for ongoing navigation and flood risk-reduction construction projects to those whose
benefits are at least 2.5 times their costs, or projects that address safety concerns. Many
congressionally authorized USACE projects do not meet that standard. The House-passed energy
and water funding measure for FY2021 provided $7.629 billion for USACE, plus $17.0 billion in
emergency appropriations, and includes funds for seven new starts for studies and seven new
starts for construction projects.7 The Senate Appropriations Committee majority draft bill for
FY2021 would provide $7.722 billion for USACE and includes funds for nine new starts for
studies and seven new starts for construction projects.
The Trump Administration also seeks to transfer the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action
Program (FUSRAP) from USACE to DOE, a proposal included in prior budget requests that
Congress has not approved. For Reclamation (not including CUP), the FY2021 request would
reduce funding by $532 million (32%) from the FY2020 level, to $1.128 billion. The House-
passed bill includes $1.630 billion for Reclamation, while the Senate Appropriations Committee
majority draft would provide $1.670 billion.
The Trump Administration did not request FY2021 funding for USACE’s Water Infrastructure
Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA) program. Congress authorized USACE’s WIFIA in 2014
(Title V, Subtitle C of P.L. 113-121).8 USACE through WIFIA is authorized to provide credit
assistance in the form of secured or direct loans for a range of water resource projects.9 H.Rept.
116-449 indicated support for USACE’s activities to develop its WIFIA, and in staying informed

7 House Committee on Appropriations, Report on Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies
Appropriations Bill, 2021, H.Rept. 116-449, p. 16.. For more on environmental infrastructure authorities, see CRS In
Focus IF11184, Army Corps of Engineers: Environmental Infrastructure Assistance, by Anna E. Normand.
8 USACE has elected to call its WIFIA program the Civil Works Infrastructure Financing Program (CWIFP); this
report refers to it as WIFIA, to remain consistent with legislative text.
9 USACE’s WIFIA is authorized to assist eligible projects that have the following purposes: reduction of riverine or
coastal storm flood damage; restoration of aquatic ecosystems; improvement of the inland and intracoastal waterways
navigation system; improvement of navigation of a coastal inland harbor of the United States, including channel
deepening and construction of associated general navigation features; or a combination of purposes that are supported
by the USACE’s and the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) WIFIA programs. (For more information, see 33
U.S.C. §3905.) USACE has clarified that dam and levee safety projects fall within WIFIA’s eligible project purposes.
Congressional Research Service

6

Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

about its development;10 no appropriations were provided specifically for USACE’s WIFIA in
H.R. 7617. The Senate Appropriations Committee majority draft would create a new USACE
account for the agency’s WIFIA and would appropriate $25 million to the new account.11 The
draft bill would provide $22.8 million of the funds to be used for WIFIA assistance to nonfederal
dam owners for dam safety projects,12 and $2.2 million for USACE administrative expenses to
carry out the program. For more details, see CRS In Focus IF11462, Army Corps of Engineers:
FY2021 Appropriations, by Anna E. Normand and Nicole T. Carter, CRS In Focus IF11465,
Bureau of Reclamation: FY2021 Appropriations, by Charles V. Stern, CRS Report R46320, U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers: Annual Appropriations Process and Issues for Congress, by Anna E.
Normand and Nicole T. Carter, and CRS In Focus IF11193, WIFIA Program: Background and
Recent Developments, by Elena H. Humphreys.
Power Marketing Administration Proposals
DOE’s FY2021 budget request includes three spending proposals related to the Power Marketing
Administrations (PMAs)—Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), Southeastern Power
Administration (SEPA), Southwestern Power Administration (SWPA), and Western Area Power
Administration (WAPA). PMAs sell the power generated by various federal dams. The
Administration proposed to divest the assets of the three PMAs that own transmission
infrastructure: BPA, SWPA, and WAPA.13 These assets consist of thousands of miles of high
voltage transmission lines and hundreds of power substations. The budget request projected that
mandatory spending savings from the sale of these assets would total approximately $4.1 billion
over a 10-year period.14 The budget request proposed to repeal the borrowing authority for
WAPA’s Transmission Infrastructure Program, which facilitates the delivery of renewable energy
resources.
The FY2021 budget also proposed eliminating the statutory requirement that PMAs limit rates to
amounts necessary to recover only construction, operations, and maintenance costs. The budget
proposed that the PMAs instead transition to a market-based approach to setting rates. The

10 House Committee on Appropriations, Report on Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies
Appropriations Bill, 2021, H.Rept. 116-449, p. 73. In the report, the committee included language that would direct the
USACE to brief the committee on the budget scoring challenges related to USACE’s WIFIA program. Some of the
scoring challenges relate to the scoring of federal projects and projects related to federal assets.
11 The authorization of appropriations for USACE’s WIFIA expired in FY2019 (see 33 U.S.C. §3912). In contrast to
the Environmental Protection Agency’s WIFIA program, which was also authorized in 2014 and provided its first
WIFIA assistance in 2018, USACE’s WIFIA program has been under development (using USACE General Expenses
appropriations), but was not operational as of the start of FY2021.
12 That is, although the WIFIA authority provides for USACE to assist a range of water resource projects, the draft bill
would limit the FY2021 WIFIA assistance to nonfederal dam safety. The draft explanatory statement accompanying the
bill provides additional direction to USACE on development of the program, including the types of eligible projects.
For more information, see Senate Committee on Appropriations majority draft explanatory statement, November 10,
2020, p. 59.
13 This proposal was also included in the Administration’s Delivering Government Solutions in the 21st Century:
Reform Plan and Reorganization Recommendations, June 21, 2018, pp. 66-67, https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-
content/uploads/2018/06/Government-Reform-and-Reorg-Plan.pdf. Total 10-year savings were estimated at $9.5
billion, possibly including the proposed cancellation of WAPA borrowing authority. Mandatory spending is provided
by permanent law outside the annual appropriations process; for details, see CBO, “What is the difference between
mandatory and discretionary spending?,” https://www.cbo.gov/content/what-difference-between-mandatory-and-
discretionary-spending.
14 Office of Management and Budget, A Budget for America’s Future: Major Savings and Reforms, Fiscal Year 2021,
p. 138, https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/msar_fy21.pdf.
Congressional Research Service

7

Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

Administration estimated that this proposal would yield $7.4 billion in new revenues over 10
years.15 The budget also called for repealing $3.25 billion in borrowing authority provided to
WAPA for transmission projects enacted under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of
2009 (P.L. 111-5). The proposal was estimated to save $500 million over 10 years.16
The Administration has made all of these proposals in previous years. To take effect, they would
need to be enacted in authorizing legislation, and no congressional action has been taken on them
to date. The proposals have been opposed by groups such as the American Public Power
Association and the National Rural Electrical Cooperative Association, and they have been the
subject of opposition letters to the Administration from several regionally based bipartisan groups
of Members of Congress. PMA reforms have been supported by some policy research institutes,
such as the Heritage Foundation.
For further information, see CRS Report R45548, The Power Marketing Administrations:
Background and Current Issues, by Richard J. Campbell.
Termination of Energy Efficiency Grants
The FY2021 budget request proposed to terminate both the DOE Weatherization Assistance
Program and the State Energy Program (SEP). The Weatherization Assistance Program provides
formula grants to states to fund energy efficiency improvements for low-income housing units to
reduce their energy costs and save energy. The SEP provides grants and technical assistance to
states for planning and implementation of their energy programs. Both the weatherization and
SEP programs are under DOE’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE). The
weatherization program received $305 million and SEP received $63 million for FY2020, after
also having been proposed for elimination in that year’s budget request, as well as in FY2019 and
FY2018. According to DOE, the proposed elimination of the grant programs is “due to a
departmental shift in focus away from deployment activities and towards early-stage R&D.”17
The House-passed bill includes funding for energy efficiency grants within Title III and Title VI.
Within Title III, the bill provides for small increases in weatherization and SEP grants over their
FY2020 enacted levels. Title VI of the bill would provide emergency supplemental funding:
$3.250 billion for weatherization grants, $730 million for SEP grants, and $2.250 billion for
Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grants (EECBGs). The EECBG program, which is
authorized by the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA, P.L. 110-140), was funded at
$3.2 billion under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA, P.L. 111-5). ARRA also
provided supplemental funding for the Weatherization Assistance Program ($5 billion) and SEP
($3.1 billion).
The Senate Appropriations Committee majority draft bill and explanatory statement include small
funding increases for energy efficiency grants: $305 million for weatherization grants and $62.5
million for SEP grants.

15 Ibid., p. 139.
16 Ibid., p. 140.
17 DOE, FY2021 Congressional Budget Request, Budget in Brief, p. 20, https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2020/
02/f72/doe-fy2021-budget-in-brief_0.pdf.
Congressional Research Service

8

Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

Proposed Reductions in Energy R&D
Appropriations for applied R&D on energy efficiency, renewable energy, nuclear energy (NE),
and fossil energy (FE) would be reduced from $5.021 billion in FY2020 to $2.670 billion (47%)
under the Administration’s FY2021 budget request.18 Major proposed reductions include
bioenergy technologies (-83%), vehicle technologies (-81%), natural gas technologies (-71%),
advanced manufacturing (-75%), building technologies (-79%), wind energy (-79%), solar energy
(-76%), geothermal technologies (-76%), and nuclear fuel cycle R&D (-39%), although some
programs would be increased, such as energy storage (+49%) and advanced coal energy systems
(+115%). The House voted to maintain nearly level funding for energy R&D, and, in addition, to
provide approximately $2.9 billion in emergency funding (Title VI) for energy research,
demonstration, and commercialization projects. The Senate Appropriations Committee majority
draft bill would maintain nearly level funding for energy R&D.
The Administration said its proposed reductions would primarily affect the later stages of energy
research, which tend to be the most costly. “The Budget focuses DOE resources toward early-
stage R&D, where the Federal role is strongest, and reflects an increased reliance on the private
sector to fund later-stage research, development, commercialization, and deployment of energy
technologies,” according to the FY2021 DOE request.19 However, the House Appropriations
Committee responded, “The Committee rejects this short-sighted and limited approach, which
will ensure that technology advancements will remain in early-stage form and are unlikely to
integrate the results of this early-stage research into the nation’s energy system.”20 The House
Appropriations Committee also stated that “the Department shall not fund projects within EERE,
OE, NE, and FE, that do not demonstrate potential for emissions reductions or improved
environmental performance.”21 The Senate Appropriations Committee majority draft explanatory
statement also responded, “The Committee directs the Department to support a comprehensive
strategy that includes early-, mid-, and later-stage research, development and market
transformation activities in each applied energy research and development program office.”22
The Administration has proposed similar reductions in previous years but they have not been
approved by Congress.
Renewable Energy Grid Integration and Storage Initiatives
The Senate Appropriations Committee majority draft bill and explanatory statement would
establish a new a funding line of $40 million for Renewable Energy Grid Integration, which
would “facilitate the oversight of grid integration activities among renewable energy
technologies,” including solar, wind, water power, and geothermal R&D programs. Within
available funds, the majority draft report recommends $10 million for “development and
demonstration of an ‘energyshed’ management system that addresses a discrete geographic area

18 Additional energy activities that are not included in this total include state energy efficiency and weatherization
grants, energy security programs, and electricity programs. The Office of Science and ARPA-E are not included.
19 DOE, FY2021 Congressional Budget Request, Budget in Brief, p. 17, https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2020/
02/f72/doe-fy2021-budget-in-brief_0.pdf.
20 House Committee on Appropriations, Report on Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies
Appropriations Bill, 2021, H.Rept. 116-449, July 15, 2020, p. 93.
21 The acronyms refer to the following offices: Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), Electricity (OE),
Nuclear Energy (NE), and Fossil Energy (FE). House Committee on Appropriations, Report on Energy and Water
Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill, 2021, H.Rept. 116-449, July 15, 2020, p. 97.
22 Senate Committee on Appropriations majority draft explanatory statement, November 10, 2020, p. 76.
Congressional Research Service

9

Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

in which renewable sources currently provide a large portion of electric energy needs, where grid
capacity constraints result in curtailment of renewable generation, and with very substantial
existing deployment of interactive smart meters.”23
Both the House committee report and Senate draft explanatory statement support crosscutting
energy storage activities. Among the efforts, the Senate draft explanatory statement also urged
DOE and the national laboratories to “to have a stronger collaboration with National Aeronautics
and Space Administration to develop an energy storage roadmap that address challenges for
mobility such as electric air flight.”24 The House committee report stated support for “continued
work on electric air flight through its national laboratories and with the National Aeronautical
Space Administration (NASA).”25
Nuclear Waste Management
The Administration’s FY2021 budget request does not include new funding for a proposed
underground nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain, NV, after the Administration’s funding
requests for the repository were not approved by Congress in the previous three fiscal years.
Those requests had included funding for DOE to pursue an NRC license for the repository and for
NRC to consider DOE’s license application. Although no FY2021 funding was requested for
licensing and developing Yucca Mountain, the Administration sought $27.5 million to develop
nuclear waste central interim storage capacity. “Funding is primarily dedicated to performing
activities that would lay the groundwork necessary to ensure near-term deployment of interim
storage to ensure safe and effective consolidation and temporary storage of nuclear waste,”
according to DOE’s budget justification. Funding for the program would come from the Nuclear
Waste Fund, which holds fees and interest paid by the nuclear power industry for waste
management.26 The House approved the Administration’s request but specified that only $7.5
million come from the Nuclear Waste Fund.
The Senate Appropriations Committee majority draft bill also includes $27.5 million (but within
Nuclear Energy rather than as a separate account) for the development of consolidated interim
nuclear spent fuel storage facilities. Up to $10 million of that amount could be used to contract
for spent fuel management, including storage by a private company. The Senate draft also
includes an authorization (Sec. 306) for DOE to conduct a pilot program for interim spent nuclear
fuel storage at a site selected with the consent of the host state, local governments, and Indian
tribes. Similar language has been included in previous Senate Appropriations Committee Energy
and Water Development appropriations bills but not enacted. For more background, see CRS
Report RL33461, Civilian Nuclear Waste Disposal, by Mark Holt.
Advanced Reactor Demonstrations
A new, $230 million sub-account for an Advanced Reactors Demonstration Program within the
DOE Nuclear Energy account was included in the Explanatory Statement for the FY2020 enacted
appropriations measure. Of that funding, $160 million was provided for DOE to begin two
advanced nuclear reactor demonstration projects, with a cost-share of at least 50% from

23 Senate Appropriations Committee majority draft explanatory statement, p. 92.
24 Senate Appropriations Committee majority draft explanatory statement, p. 78.
25 House report, p. 101.
26 DOE, Budget in Brief, February 2020, p. 38, https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2020/02/f72/doe-fy2021-
budget-in-brief_0.pdf.
Congressional Research Service

10

Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

nonfederal sources. Another $30 million was provided for grants to reduce the technical risk of
two-to-five additional reactor demonstration proposals, with a nonfederal cost-share of at least
20%. DOE announced awards totaling $160 million for two advanced reactor demonstrations on
October 13, 2020—a molten salt reactor and a high-temperature gas reactor.27 The FY2021 DOE
request includes no further funding for reactor demonstrations but would provide $20 million to
continue R&D related to the program. The budget request would formally establish the Versatile
Test Reactor (VTR) as a DOE construction project and more than quadruple its funding to $295
million. The VTR would be a new reactor to provide fast (high energy) neutrons for testing
advanced reactor fuels and materials. DOE estimates the project’s total construction cost at
between $3 billion and $6 billion, with completion ranging from 2026 to 2030.28
The House approved $240 million for Advanced Reactor Demonstrations in FY2021, $10 million
above the FY2020 enacted amount. However, the House-passed bill reduced VTR construction
funding from the requested amount to $65 million, the same as the FY2020 appropriation for
preconstruction activities.
The Senate Appropriations Committee majority draft report recommends $280 million for
Advance Reactor Demonstrations “to ensure that the program can continue in an accelerated
manner.” The Senate majority draft includes $45 million for the VTR, while noting, “The
Committee is concerned that the Department is proceeding with plans for the VTR without
having secured commitments from private companies or foreign governments for monetary and
in-kind contributions.”29
Proposed Uranium Reserve
The FY2021 budget request for the DOE Office of Nuclear Energy includes $150 million to
establish a Uranium Reserve. Under this initiative, DOE would purchase uranium from domestic
uranium producers and have it converted to uranium hexafluoride (a necessary step in making
nuclear reactor fuel) by a domestic conversion facility. According to DOE, this stockpile of
uranium would be available for nuclear power operators in the event of a civilian nuclear fuel
market disruption and provide a source of U.S.-origin uranium for defense purposes.
“Establishing a reserve is an urgent step needed in response to an overreliance on imported
uranium product that has undermined U.S. energy security and impacted U.S. fuel supply
capabilities,” according to the DOE budget justification. However, the justification notes that, for
the newly stockpiled uranium, “no immediate national security need has been identified.”30 The
proposed government purchases are also intended to address “near-term challenges to the
production and conversion of domestic uranium,” which are currently under economic stress,
according to the justification. “Subsequent support will be considered as deemed necessary across
a 10-year period as the government and private sector work to reestablish US technology and

27 DOE, Office of Nuclear Energy, “U.S. Department of Energy Announces $160 Million in First Awards under
Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program,” news release, October 13, 2020, https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/us-
department-energy-announces-160-million-first-awards-under-advanced-reactor.
28 Thomas J. O’Connor, VTR Program Director, DOE Office of Nuclear Energy, “Versatile Test Reactor Update,”
March 28, 2019, https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2019/04/f61/
VTR%20NEAC%20Rev%202%20%28003%29_1.pdf.
29 Senate Committee on Appropriations majority draft explanatory statement, November 10, 2020, p. 107.
30 DOE, Budget in Brief, February 2020, p. 39, https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2020/02/f72/doe-fy2021-
budget-in-brief_0.pdf.
Congressional Research Service

11

Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

market share,” according to a report released April 23, 2020, by the Administration’s Nuclear
Fuel Working Group (NFWG).31
The House provided no funding for the proposed Uranium Reserve. “The Department has been
unable to provide specific information about how it would implement the program, including in
congressional justifications, briefings, and in responses to questions from the Committee about
how the funds would be spent, including the process for the purchase, conversion, or sale of
uranium in a reserve,” according to the Appropriations Committee report. Instead, the committee
directed DOE within 180 days after enactment to provide a detailed plan for establishing the
Uranium Reserve.32
The Senate Appropriations Committee majority draft bill includes $120 million for the Uranium
Reserve, plus $30 million within DOE’s Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation accounts. The draft
report directs DOE to “provide a specific program plan for executing funds recommended for this
activity as well as plans to consolidate this program with other existing uranium management
activities within the Department.”33
U.S. uranium production in calendar year 2019 was the lowest since before 1949, according to the
Energy Information Administration (EIA). As of the fourth quarter of 2019, EIA reported that
three domestic in-situ uranium plants (solution mining operations in which a solvent is pumped
through underground ore bodies to recover uranium) were operating and that three domestic
conventional uranium mills were on standby. Two domestic uranium producers petitioned the
Department of Commerce (DOC) in 2018 to investigate foreign uranium imports under Section
232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (19 U.S.C. §1862). DOC subsequently recommended
presidential action to restrict imports, but President Trump did not concur.34 Nonetheless, the
Trump Administration expressed significant concerns regarding national security and responded
by establishing the NFWG. The DOE FY2021 budget justification called the Uranium Reserve
initiative “consistent with the priorities” of the NFWG and said it would “directly support the
operation of at least two U.S. uranium mines and the reestablishment of active domestic
conversion capabilities” and was “not designed to replace or disrupt market mechanisms.”35
For more information, see CRS In Focus IF11505, Uranium Reserve Program Proposal: Policy
Implications, by Lance N. Larson.
Strategic Petroleum Reserve Operations
The Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR)—administered, maintained, and operated by DOE—
includes both a crude oil reserve and a refined petroleum product reserve. These reserves provide
standby and emergency petroleum stocks that DOE can draw down and sell in the event of a
domestic or international oil supply disruption. Most SPR stocks are in the form of crude oil
contained in underground storage caverns—owned and operated by the federal government—
located in Texas and Louisiana. These crude oil stocks are near oil refining, pipeline, and port
infrastructure in the U.S. Gulf Coast region. As of November 2020, standby SPR crude oil stocks

31 DOE, “Strategy to Restore American Nuclear Energy Leadership,” news release, April 23, 2020,
https://www.energy.gov/strategy-restore-american-nuclear-energy-leadership.
32 House Committee on Appropriations, Report on Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies
Appropriations Bill, 2021, H.Rept. 116-449, July 15, 2020, p. 114.
33 Senate Appropriations Committee majority draft explanatory statement, p. 108.
34 White House, “Memorandum on the Effect of Uranium Imports on the National Security and Establishment of the
United States Nuclear Fuel Working Group,” July 12, 2019, https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/
memorandum-effect-uranium-imports-national-security-establishment-united-states-nuclear-fuel-working-group.
35 Ibid.
Congressional Research Service

12

link to page 17 link to page 17 Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

totaled approximately 635 million barrels. The SPR also includes a 1 million barrel northeast
gasoline supply reserve (NGSR) that contains refined petroleum products held in leased
commercial storage facilities located in the New York harbor area, the Boston area, and South
Portland, ME.
DOE’s FY2021 budget request includes appropriations for two SPR budget accounts: (1)
Strategic Petroleum Reserve ($187 million), which funds management, operations, and
maintenance activities, and (2) SPR Petroleum Account ($0), which funds the acquisition,
transportation, and injection of petroleum products (see Table 1). One notable change proposed in
DOE’s budget request is to disestablish the NGSR, sell all refined petroleum product, transfer $19
million to the SPR Petroleum Account, transfer additional proceeds to the general fund, and
eliminate annual NGSR leasing costs.
During FY2020, following oil market disruptions and price volatility related to the COVID-19
pandemic, DOE executed some unplanned efforts that required using available SPR Petroleum
Account funds. Some of these efforts included an exchange-for-storage solicitation and a $5
million crude oil purchase.36 In 2021, DOE is required to draw down and sell at least 10 million
barrels of crude oil as mandated by previously enacted legislation (P.L. 114-74 and P.L. 115-141)
and possibly more should a suspended FY2020 sale occur in FY2021.37 Expenses associated with
transporting and delivering mandated sales to buyers are paid for by SPR Petroleum Account
funds. DOE’s budget request estimates FY2021 drawdown costs of $7.5 million.
Neither the House-passed bill nor the Senate Appropriations Committee majority draft bill
approve DOE’s request to disestablish the NGSR. However, both bills do contain language that
would relax presidential finding criteria for selling, during FY2021, refined petroleum product
stored in the NGSR. Proceeds from such a sale would be deposited into the SPR Petroleum
Account. Whether such a sale might occur during FY2021 is uncertain and would depend on
regional petroleum-product market conditions and the Administration’s desire to draw down and
sell NGSR inventories.
For the Strategic Petroleum Reserve budget account, the House-passed bill and Senate draft bill
would appropriate $195 million and $187 million, respectively. For the SPR Petroleum Account,
the House bill and Senate draft would appropriate $7.5 million and $1 million, respectively (see
Table 1).
Table 1. SPR Budget Accounts: Comparison of FY2021 Budget Request, House Bill,
and Senate Appropriations Committee Majority Draft Bill
(dollars in thousands)

Senate
Committee
Majority

Budget Request
House Bill
Draft Bill
(A)
Strategic Petroleum Reserve
187,081
195,000
187,081

(B)
SPR Petroleum Account
0
7,500
1,000

36 For additional information, see CRS Insight IN11373, Strategic Petroleum Reserve: Recent Developments, by Phillip
Brown.
37 For additional information about congressionally required SPR oil sales, see Strategic Petroleum Reserve: Mandated
and Modernization Sales, by Phillip Brown, a congressional distribution memo available to congressional clients by
request from the author.
Congressional Research Service

13

Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

Senate
Committee
Majority

Budget Request
House Bill
Draft Bill

Budget Offset and Transfer: Refined Product Sales

(C)
Sell Northeast Gasoline Supply Reserve
-87,000
N/A
N/A
(D)
Transfer to SPR Petroleum Account
19,000
N/A
N/A
(E)
Net budget offset (C + D)
-68,000
N/A
N/A

(F)
Summation of Accounts and Offset (A + B + E)
119,081
202,500
188,081
Source: CRS analysis of DOE’s FY2021 budget request, House-passed bil , and Senate Appropriations
Committee majority draft bil and explanatory statement.
Notes: Net budget offset in DOE’s FY2021 budget request would be transferred to the general fund of the
Treasury. N/A = not applicable.
Elimination of Energy Loans and Loan Guarantees
The FY2021 budget request would halt further loans and loan guarantees under DOE’s Advanced
Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Loan Program and the Title 17 Innovative Technology Loan
Guarantee Program. Similar proposals to eliminate the programs in FY2018 through FY2020
were not enacted. The FY2021 budget request would also halt further loan guarantees under
DOE’s Tribal Energy Loan Guarantee Program, a proposal that also was not approved by
Congress in previous years. Under the FY2021 budget proposal, DOE would receive $3 million
(offset by fees) to administer its existing portfolio of loans and loan guarantees. Unused prior-
year authority, or ceiling levels, for loan guarantee commitments would be rescinded, as well as
$170 million in unspent appropriations to cover loan guarantee “subsidy costs” (which are
primarily intended to cover potential losses). The House bill and the Senate committee majority
draft would continue funding for the loan and loan guarantee programs.
Artificial Intelligence and Quantum Information Science
Initiatives
DOE’s FY2021 budget justification emphasizes the importance of the Office of Science’s
crosscutting research on quantum information science (QIS) and artificial intelligence (AI) in
supporting “U.S.-based leadership in microelectronics.”38 The FY2021 request includes $237
million for QIS and $125 million for AI, plus $12 million requested by NNSA in support of QIS
research. The DOE Office of Science’s funding for QIS has grown in the past five years, from $6
million in FY2017 to $195 million in FY2020—with a further 21% increase sought for FY2021.
The funding request is spread across six Office of Science program areas, mostly in Advanced
Scientific Computing Research ($86 million) and Basic Energy Sciences ($72 million).39

38 Secretary of Energy Dan Brouillette, Testimony Before the Senate Appropriations Committee, Subcommittee on
Energy and Water Development, March 4, 2020, https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/
03.04.20%20—%20Brouillette%20Testimony.pdf.
39 Email from Robert Tuttle, DOE Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs, April 16, 2020.
Congressional Research Service

14

Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

The House-passed bill provides for $235 million for quantum information science, about the same
as the request, “including not less than $120,000,000 for research and not less than $100,000,000
for up to five National Quantum Information Science Research Centers,” according to the House
Appropriations Committee report. The House bill includes funding of up to $125 million for AI
and machine learning, similar to the Administration request. In addition, Title VI includes
emergency supplemental funding of $75 million for equipment and infrastructure for the QIS
Research Centers.
The Senate Appropriations Committee majority draft report recommends $271 million from DOE
Science programs for QIS, including the five QIS research centers. The Senate draft also includes
at least $120 million from DOE Science programs for AI and machine learning, with “Advanced
Scientific Computing Research to take a lead role.”40
QIS, including quantum computing, builds on the principles governing the smallest particles of
matter and energy to obtain and process information in ways that cannot be achieved based on
classical physics principles. AI generally involves computerized systems that work and react in
ways commonly thought to require intelligence, such as solving complex problems in real-world
situations. AI is often considered to include machine learning as a subfield. DOE’s budget
documents describe the QIS and AI program areas as “fundamental for the Industries of the
Future Initiative” and the National Quantum Initiative, which are intended to advance U.S.
industrial and scientific leadership.41 DOE established the Artificial Intelligence and Technology
Office (AITO) in September 2019 to coordinate AI activities. The FY2021 DOE request includes
a new appropriations account for AITO, which would receive $5 million—nearly double the
FY2020 funding level for AI coordination, which had been included in the Departmental
Administration account. Additionally, the National Security Commission on AI recommended in
March 2020 that federal AI funding be doubled, including $300 million for DOE.42
For more information, see CRS Report R45409, Quantum Information Science: Applications,
Global Research and Development, and Policy Considerations, by Patricia Moloney Figliola,
CRS In Focus IF10608, Overview of Artificial Intelligence, by Laurie A. Harris, and CRS Video
WVB00311, Artificial Intelligence: An Overview of Technologies and Issues for Congress, by
Laurie A. Harris.
International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor and Fusion
Research Grants
The Administration’s FY2021 request for DOE’s Fusion Energy Sciences (FES) program under
the Office of Science includes $107 million for the U.S. contribution to the International
Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER), which is under construction in France by a
multinational consortium. “ITER will be the first fusion device to maintain fusion for long
periods of time” and is to lay the technical foundation “for the commercial production of fusion-
based electricity,” according to the consortium’s website.43 The FY2021 DOE appropriation
request, 56% below the FY2020 enacted level of $242 million (which had been an 83% increase

40 Senate Appropriations Committee majority draft explanatory statement, p. 116.
41 Ibid., and DOE, FY 2021 Congressional Budget Justification, vol. 4, February 2020, p. 150, https://www.energy.gov/
sites/prod/files/2020/03/f72/doe-fy2021-budget-volume-4_0.pdf.
42 National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence, First Quarter Recommendations, March 2020, p. 9,
https://sites.google.com/nscai.gov/home/reports.
43 ITER website, https://www.iter.org/.
Congressional Research Service

15

Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

from FY2019), includes funding to pay for components supplied by U.S. companies for the
project, such as central solenoid superconducting magnet modules.
The House-passed bill includes $260 million for the U.S. contribution to ITER, “of which not less
than $100,000,000 is for in-cash contributions,” according to the Appropriations Committee
report. An additional $65 million for ITER is provided by Title VI as an emergency supplemental.
The Senate committee majority draft recommends $211 million for the U.S. contribution to ITER,
including at least $54 million for in-cash contributions.
ITER has long attracted congressional concern about management, schedule, and cost. The
United States is to pay 9% of the project’s construction costs, including contributions of
components, cash, and personnel. Other collaborators in the project include the European Union,
Russia, Japan, India, South Korea, and China. The total U.S. share of the cost was estimated in
2015 to be between $4.0 billion and $6.5 billion, up from $1.45 billion to $2.2 billion in 2008.
Some private-sector fusion companies contend that the technologies they are pursuing could
produce practical fusion power sooner and less expensively than ITER.44 The FY2021 FES
budget request includes $4 million, the same as in FY2020, for the Innovation Network for
Fusion Energy (INFUSE) program, which provides private-sector fusion companies with access
to DOE national laboratory facilities and expertise.45 The House bill provides $5 million for
INFUSE, according to the committee report. In addition, ARPA-E is funding some alternative
fusion concepts.46 The Senate committee majority draft recommends $4 million for INFUSE.
Elimination of Advanced Research Projects Agency—Energy
The Trump Administration’s FY2021 budget would eliminate the Advanced Research Projects
Agency—Energy and rescind $332 million of the agency’s unobligated balances. ARPA-E funds
research on technologies that are determined to have potential to transform energy production,
storage, and use.47 According to the budget request, DOE would end ARPA-E “while
incorporating ARPA-E’s approach to technology development into the execution of applied
energy office Small Business Innovation Research/Small Business Technology.”48 The
Administration also proposed to terminate ARPA-E in its FY2018, FY2019, and FY2020 budget
requests, but Congress increased the program’s funding in all three years. The FY2020 enacted
appropriations measure provided $425 million for ARPA-E, $59 million (16%) above the FY2019
level. The Administration requested $21 million for ARPA-E close-out activities and oversight of
existing projects in FY2021.
The House voted to increase ARPA-E’s funding to $435 million in FY2021, $10 million (2%)
above the FY2020 enacted amount. In addition, Title VI of the House bill includes $250 million
for ARPA-E in emergency supplemental funding. The House Appropriations Committee report
said, “The Committee again strongly rejects the short-sighted proposal to terminate ARPA-E.
Instead, the Committee continues investment in this transformational program and directs the

44 Bourzac, Katherine, “Fusion Start-Ups Hope to Revolutionize Energy in the Coming Decades,” Chemical and
Engineering News, August 6, 2018, https://cen.acs.org/energy/nuclear-power/Fusion-start-ups-hope-revolutionize/96/
i32.
45 DOE, FY 2021 Congressional Budget Justification, vol. 4, February 2020, p. 188, https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/
files/2020/03/f72/doe-fy2021-budget-volume-4_0.pdf.
46 DOE, “Department of Energy Announces $32 Million for Lower-Cost Fusion Concepts,” April 7, 2020,
https://www.energy.gov/articles/department-energy-announces-32-million-lower-cost-fusion-concepts.
47 DOE, “About ARPA-E,” https://arpa-e.energy.gov/?q=arpa-e-site-page/about.
48 DOE, FY2021 Congressional Budget Request, Budget in Brief, p. 75, https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2020/
02/f72/doe-fy2021-budget-in-brief_0.pdf.
Congressional Research Service

16

Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

Department to continue to spend funds provided on research and development and program
direction.” The Senate Appropriations Committee majority draft bill includes $430 million for
ARPA-E.
Weapons Activities Funding Increases
The FY2021 budget request for DOE Weapons Activities is 25% greater than the FY2020 enacted
level ($15.602 billion vs. $12.457 billion). The FY2020 enacted appropriation for Weapons
Activities was 12% above the FY2019 level. Weapons Activities programs are carried out by the
National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), a semiautonomous agency within DOE.
Under Weapons Activities, the FY2021 budget request includes funding for several major nuclear
warhead life-extension programs (LEPs):
 NNSA requests $816 million for the B61-12 LEP in FY2021, an increase of $23
million over the $793 million enacted for FY2020. The B61-12 is to combine
four existing types of B61 warheads. The first production unit (FPU) had been
scheduled for FY2020 but was delayed due to an issue with capacitors used in six
major electrical components. According to NNSA, FPU is now scheduled for
FY2022, and the program is to be completed in FY2026.
 NNSA requests $257 million for the W88 Alteration in FY2021, a reduction of
$47 million from the $304 million enacted in FY2020. The program is to upgrade
the arming-fuzing-firing system on the warhead and refresh the warhead’s
conventional high explosives. This warhead is carried on a portion of the D-5
(Trident) submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs). NNSA expected to
provide the FPU of this warhead in 2020, but according to NNSA, the delivery
was delayed due to an issue with capacitors used in three major components.
According to its budget documents, NNSA now estimates that it will provide the
FPU in FY2021.
 NNSA is requesting $1.0 billion for the W80-4 in FY2021, an increase of 11%
over the $899 million enacted in FY2020. This is the warhead for the new long-
range cruise missile. The LEP would seek to use common components from other
LEPs and to improve warhead safety and security. The increase in the budget
request for FY2021 reflects an increase in the scope of work on the program. The
FPU is scheduled for FY2025.
 NNSA is requesting $541 million for the W87-1 warhead modification program
for FY2021, a nearly fivefold increase over the $112 million enacted for FY2020.
This increase reflects a “ramp-up” of activities across all program areas. The Air
Force plans to deploy the W87-1 on the new U.S. land-based intercontinental
ballistic missile (ICBM), the Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent (GBSD). NNSA
has indicated that the FPU for the W87-1 is currently planned for FY2030.
However, the FY2021 budget documents also note that the W87-0 warhead,
which is currently deployed on U.S. ICBMs, will also be “qualified and deployed
onto the GBSD.” This would provide the Air Force with an alternative warhead if
the W87-1 FPU is delayed.49
NNSA is requesting $2.458 billion for a new program area—Production Modernization. This new
program area funds many of the nuclear materials projects that were a part of Directed Stockpile

49 DOE, FY 2021 Congressional Budget Justification, vol. 1, February 2020, p. 118, https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/
files/2020/03/f72/doe-fy2021-budget-volume-1_2.pdf.
Congressional Research Service

17

Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

Work in the FY2020 budget. It has four subprograms: Primary Capability Modernization,
Secondary Capability Modernization, Non-nuclear Capability Modernization, and Tritium and
Domestic Uranium Enrichment. The budget request seeks increases in funding for each of the
subprograms, although nearly 70% of the added funding supports Primary Capability
Modernization.
According to NNSA’s budget documents, the Primary Capability Modernization program
“consolidates management of nuclear material processing capabilities … needed for the
production of primaries.”50 Primaries are the plutonium pits and high explosives that serve as the
core of nuclear weapons. In FY2020, Congress approved $797.8 million for the plutonium
modernization programs that are now a part of this program area; NNSA is requesting $1.369
million for FY2021. Congress approved $13.8 million for high explosives and energetics in
FY2020; NNSA is requesting $67.4 million in FY2021.
The Plutonium Sustainment subprogram plans to expand production of plutonium pits from
existing facilities at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico to a new facility
(repurposed from the canceled Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility) at the Savannah River Site
in South Carolina. The Plutonium Sustainment subprogram, which received $712 million for
FY2020, is to be divided into four subprograms for FY2021: Los Alamos Plutonium
Modernization ($593.5 million), Plutonium Pit Production Project at Los Alamos ($226 million),
Savannah River Plutonium Modernization ($200 million), and Savannah River Plutonium
Processing ($241.9 million). The two program areas at Los Alamos fund activities needed to
recapitalize buildings and capacity to meet pit production requirements at Los Alamos. The
programs at Savannah River support efforts to plan for operations at the new pit facility, to work
on its design and site and facility preparation, and to begin long-lead procurement.
The House approved $13.660 billion for Weapons Activities for FY2021. While this would be an
increase of $1.203 billion (10%) over the amount appropriated in FY2020, it is $1.942 billion
lower than the FY2021 budget request of $15.602 billion. The House also rejected some of
NNSA’s proposed changes in the structure of the Weapons Activities programs, noting in the
Appropriations Committee Report (H.Rept. 116-449) that, although NNSA had sought “to engage
in a constructive and transparent manner in communicating the proposed changes,” these efforts
were not sufficient and “the Committee believes additional oversight and monitoring is
necessary.”
The House-passed bill also contains a provision that would bar the use of funds “to conduct, or
make specific preparations for, any explosive nuclear weapons test that produces any yield” (Sec.
8133). Administration officials have indicated that they do not plan to conduct such a test at this
time, and would only consider doing so if there were concerns about the safety or reliability of
U.S. nuclear weapons. Recent reports indicate that the Administration has considered using such a
test to exhibit U.S. nuclear weapons capabilities.51
The Senate Appropriations Committee majority draft bill includes $15.602 billion for weapons
activities, the same as the request and $1.942 billion above the House-passed level. The Senate
committee draft explanatory statement “supports the initial studies to evaluate the W93 warhead”
(the House had eliminated the funding) and supports the funding for the pit production plan, using

50 Ibid., p. 92.
51 Hudson, John and Paul Sonne, “Trump Administration Discussed Conducting First U.S. Nuclear Test in Decades,”
Washington Post, May 22, 2020, https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/trump-administration-discussed-
conducting-first-us-nuclear-test-in-decades/2020/05/22/a805c904-9c5b-11ea-b60c-3be060a4f8e1_story.html.
Congressional Research Service

18

Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

both Los Alamos and the Savannah River site.52 For more information, see CRS Report R44442,
Energy and Water Development Appropriations: Nuclear Weapons Activities, by Amy F. Woolf.
Cleanup of Former Nuclear Sites: Reductions and Transfers
DOE’s Office of Environmental Management (EM) is responsible for environmental cleanup and
waste management at the department’s nuclear facilities. The $6.066 billion request for EM
activities for FY2021 would be a decrease of $1.390 billion (19%) from the FY2020 enacted level
of $7.455 billion. The budgetary components of the EM program are Defense Environmental
Cleanup (-20%) and Non-Defense Environmental Cleanup (-14%). The largest proposed
decreases are at the Hanford Site (WA), where projects managed by the Richland Operations
Office would be reduced by $347 million (-35%) and those by the Office of River Protection by
$358 million (-22%). Other relatively large EM reductions are proposed for the Oak Ridge Site
(TN), down by $251 million (-37%); Idaho National Laboratory, down by $175 million (-39%);
and Los Alamos National Laboratory, down by $100 million (-46%). The DOE budget
justification attributed many of the proposed funding decreases to completion of various cleanup
projects at the sites involved.53
The FY2021 request includes a proposal to transfer management of the Formerly Utilized Sites
Remedial Action Program from USACE to the Office of Legacy Management (LM), the DOE
office responsible for long-term stewardship of remediated sites. The transfer was also proposed
for FY2020 but not approved by Congress. The FY2021 LM budget request includes $150
million for FUSRAP, down from $200 million appropriated to USACE for the program in
FY2020. According to the DOE budget justification, “LM will be responsible for the
administration of FUSRAP, USACE will continue to conduct cleanup of FUSRAP sites, and LM
will continue to conduct LTS&M [long-term surveillance and maintenance] after cleanup
activities are completed.” Under the proposal, LM would reimburse USACE for the cost of the
cleanup activities.54
The House approved $7.458 billion for EM activities, an increase of $2 million from the FY2020
enacted level. In addition, the House bill includes $3.125 billion in EM emergency supplemental
funding, including $2.685 billion for defense cleanup, $200 million for non-defense cleanup, and
$240 million for the Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning Fund. The
House did not approve the proposed transfer of FUSRAP to DOE or proposed funding reduction,
recommending an FY2021 appropriation of $210 million, up $10 million (5%) from the FY2020
enacted amount. In addition, Title VI of Division C includes $500 million in emergency
supplemental appropriations for FUSRAP.
The Senate Appropriations Committee majority draft bill includes $7.534 billion for EM, $1.468
billion above the request and $76 million above the House-passed level, excluding emergency
supplementals.

52 Senate Appropriations Committee majority draft explanatory statement, p. 127.
53 DOE, FY2021 Congressional Budget Request, Budget in Brief, p. 53, https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2020/
02/f72/doe-fy2021-budget-in-brief_0.pdf.
54 DOE, FY2021 Budget in Brief, February 2020, p. 56, https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2020/02/f72/doe-
fy2021-budget-in-brief_0.pdf.
Congressional Research Service

19

link to page 24 link to page 25 Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

Southwest Border Regional Commission and Southeast Crescent
Regional Commission Funding
The House approved $250,000 in appropriations for the Southwest Border Regional Commission
(SBRC)—the first time appropriations have been recommended for the SBRC since it was
authorized in the 2008 farm bill (P.L. 110-234) along with the Southeast Crescent Regional
Commission (SCRC) and the Northern Border Regional Commission (NBRC). The SBRC is one
of seven authorized federal regional commissions and authorities, of which four are currently
active: the Appalachian Regional Commission, the NBRC, the Denali Commission, and the Delta
Regional Authority.55 If formed, the SBRC would be the fifth active federal regional commission.
However, even if the appropriation were to be enacted, the SBRC’s formation would additionally
depend on the appointment of a federal co-chair by the President with the advice and consent of
the Senate, as required by statute.
The House bill also includes $1 million for the SCRC, which is inactive as well. Since FY2010,
the SCRC has received annual appropriations of $250,000, but has yet to form, as no federal co-
chair has ever been appointed. Although the SCRC’s increased appropriation would provide it
with the ability to conduct some limited grantmaking upon formation, its development would still
require a presidentially appointed and Senate-confirmed federal co-chair. The Senate
Appropriations Committee majority draft bill would provide no funding for SBRC or SCRC.
Bill Status and Recent Funding History
Table 2 indicates the steps taken during consideration of FY2021 Energy and Water Development
appropriations. (For more details, see the CRS Appropriations Status Table at http://www.crs.gov/
AppropriationsStatusTable/Index.)
Table 2. Status of Energy and Water Development Appropriations, FY2021
Subcommittee
Markup

Final Approval

House
House
Senate
Senate
Conf.
Public
House
Senate Comm. Passed Comm. Passed
Report
House
Senate
Law
7/7/20

7/13/20
7/31/20

Source: CRS Appropriations Status Table.
Note: The Senate Appropriations Committee majority released a draft FY2021 Energy and Water Development
appropriations bil and explanatory statement November 10, 2020, at https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/
news/committee-releases-fy21-bil s-in-effort-to-advance-process-produce-bipartisan-results.

Table 3 includes budget totals for energy and water development appropriations enacted for
FY2014 through the FY2021 House passage.

55 For more information, see CRS Report R45997, Federal Regional Commissions and Authorities: Structural Features
and Function, by Michael H. Cecire.
Congressional Research Service

20

link to page 25 link to page 25 link to page 25 link to page 25 link to page 26 link to page 10 link to page 10 Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

Table 3. Energy and Water Development Appropriations,
FY2014-FY2021 Preliminary Action
(budget authority in billions of current dollars)
FY2021
Sen.
Comm.
FY2021 FY2021 Majority
FY2014 FY2015 FY2016 FY2017 FY2018 FY2019 FY2020 Request
House
Draft
34.1
34.8
37.3
37.4b
43.2b
44.7c
48.3de
42.6
49.6f
51.9
Source: Compiled by CRS from totals provided by congressional budget documents.
Notes: Figures exclude permanent budget authorities and reflect rescissions.
a. Amount does not include $5.4 bil ion in funding for USACE ($1.9 bil ion emergency and $3.5 bil ion
additional).
b. Amount does not includes $1.0 bil ion in emergency funding for the USACE.
c. Amount does not include $17.4 bil ion in emergency funding for USACE ($17.4 bil ion) and Department of
Energy programs ($22 mil ion).
d. Amount does not include supplemental funding provided by P.L. 116-20 ($3.258 bil ion for USACE and
$15.85 mil ion for Reclamation).
e. Amount does not include supplemental funding provided by P.L. 116-136.
f.
Amount does not include emergency funding.
Description of Major Energy and Water Programs
The annual Energy and Water Development appropriations bill includes four titles: Title I—Corps
of Engineers—Civil; Title II—Department of the Interior (Bureau of Reclamation and Central
Utah Project); Title III—Department of Energy; and Title IV—Independent Agencies, as shown
in Table 4. Major programs in the bill are described in this section in the approximate order they
appear in the bill. Previous appropriations and the amounts recommended and approved during
the major stages of the FY2021 appropriations process are shown in the accompanying tables,
and additional details about many of these programs are provided in separate CRS reports as
indicated. For a discussion of current funding issues related to these programs, see “Funding
Issues and Initiatives,” above. Congressional clients may obtain more detailed information by
contacting CRS analysts listed in CRS Report R42638, Appropriations: CRS Experts, by James
M. Specht and Justin Murray.
Congressional Research Service

21

link to page 26 Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

Table 4. Energy and Water Development Appropriations Summary
(budget authority in millions of current dollars)
FY2021
Sen.
Comm.
FY2017
FY2018
FY2019
FY2020
FY2021
FY2021
Majority
Title
Approp.
Approp.
Approp.
Approp.
Request
House
Draft
Title I: Corps of
6,038
6,827
6,999
7,650
5,966
7,629
7,722
Engineers
Title II: CUP and
1,317
1,480
1,565
1,680
1,138
1,655
1,690
Reclamation
Title III: Department
30,150
34,569
35,709
38,657
35,729
40,864
42,041
of Energy
Title IV: Independent
349
392
390
407
333
389
413
Agencies
General provisions
-62
—
21
—
—
—
—
Subtotal
37,791
43,268
44,684
48,395
43,169
50,536
51,866
Rescissions and
-436
-49
-24
-71
-610
-935
-2
Scorekeeping
Adjustmentsa
E&W Total
37,355
43,219
44,660
48,324
42,559
49,601
51,864
FY2021 Emergency

44,050

Supplemental
Total with

93,651

Supplemental
Sources: FY2021 Senate Appropriations Committee majority draft; H.R. 7617; H.Rept. 116-449; President’s
Budget FY2021; Explanatory Statement for Division C of H.R. 1865, 116th Congress; S.Rept. 116-102; S. 2470;
H.R. 2740; CBO Current Status Report; H.Rept. 116-83; H.Rept. 115-929; S.Rept. 115-258; and P.L. 115-31 and
explanatory statement. Subtotals may include other adjustments. Columns may not sum to totals because of
rounding and adjustments.
a. Budget “scorekeeping” refers to official determinations of spending amounts for congressional budget
enforcement purposes. These scorekeeping adjustments may include rescissions and offsetting revenues
from various sources.
Agency Budget Justifications
FY2021 budget justifications for the largest agencies funded by the annual Energy and Water
Development appropriations bill can be found through the links below. The justifications provide
detailed descriptions and funding breakouts for programs, projects, and activities under the
agencies’ jurisdiction.
 Title I, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Civil Works, http://www.usace.army.mil/
Missions/CivilWorks/Budget
 Title II
 Bureau of Reclamation, https://www.usbr.gov/budget/
 Central Utah Project, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/uploads/
fy2020_cupca_budget_justification.pdf
Congressional Research Service

22

Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

 Title III, Department of Energy, https://www.energy.gov/cfo/downloads/fy-2021-
budget-justification
 Title IV, Independent Agencies
 Appalachian Regional Commission, https://www.arc.gov/publications/
BudgetDocuments.asp
 Nuclear Regulatory Commission, https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-
collections/nuregs/staff/sr1100/
 Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, https://www.dnfsb.gov/about/
congressional-budget-requests
 Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board, http://www.nwtrb.gov/about-us/
plans
Army Corps of Engineers
USACE is an agency in the Department of Defense with both military and civilian
responsibilities. Under its civil works program, which is funded by the Energy and Water
Development appropriations bill, USACE plans, builds, operates, and in some cases maintains
water resource facilities for coastal and inland navigation, riverine and coastal flood risk
reduction, and aquatic ecosystem restoration.56
In recent decades, Congress has generally authorized USACE studies, construction projects, and
other activities in omnibus water authorization bills, typically titled as Water Resources
Development Acts (WRDA), prior to funding them through appropriations legislation. Recent
Congresses enacted the following omnibus water resources authorization acts: in June 2014, the
Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014 (WRRDA, P.L. 113-121); in December
2016, the Water Resources Development Act of 2016 (Title I of P.L. 114-322, the Water
Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation Act [WIIN Act]); and in October 2018, the Water
Resources Development Act of 2018 (Title I of P.L. 115-270, America’s Water Infrastructure Act
of 2018 [AWIA 2018]). These acts consisted largely of authorizations for new USACE projects,
and they altered numerous USACE policies and procedures.57
Unlike for highways and in municipal water infrastructure programs, federal funds for USACE
are not distributed to states or projects based on formulas or delivered via competitive grants.
Instead, USACE generally is directly involved in planning, designing, and managing the
construction of projects that are cost-shared with nonfederal project sponsors.
Since the 112th Congress, earmark moratorium policies have limited congressionally directed
funding of site-specific projects (i.e., earmarks). Prior to the 112th Congress, Congress would
direct funds to specific projects not in the budget request or increase funds for certain projects.
Each year since FY2011, Congress has appropriated additional funding for categories of USACE
work without identifying specific projects. For example, in FY2020, Congress provided $2.53
billion in additional funding for 26 categories of USACE activities (e.g., construction related to
flood and storm damage reduction). After congressional enactment of the appropriations
legislation and accompanying report language on priorities and other guidance for use of the

56 Military responsibilities are funded through the Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies
appropriations bill.
57 For more information on USACE authorization legislation, see CRS In Focus IF11322, Water Resources
Development Acts: Primer, by Nicole T. Carter and Anna E. Normand, and CRS Report R45185, Army Corps of
Engineers: Water Resource Authorization and Project Delivery Processes, by Nicole T. Carter and Anna E. Normand.
Congressional Research Service

23

link to page 28 link to page 29 link to page 29 link to page 29 link to page 29 Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

additional funding, the Administration develops a work plan that reports on (1) the studies and
construction projects selected to receive funding for the first time (new starts) and (2) the specific
projects receiving additional funds. For more information, see CRS In Focus IF11462, Army
Corps of Engineers: FY2021 Appropriations, by Anna E. Normand and Nicole T. Carter, and CRS
Report R46320, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: Annual Appropriations Process and Issues for
Congress, by Anna E. Normand and Nicole T. Carter. Previous appropriations, the FY2021
request, the FY2021 House-passed levels, and the FY2021 Senate Appropriations Committee
majority draft levels are shown in Table 5.
Table 5. Army Corps of Engineers
(budget authority in millions of current dollars)
FY2021
Sen.
Comm.
FY2017
FY2018
FY2019
FY2020
FY2021
FY2021
Majority
Program
Approp.
Approp.
Approp.
Approp.
Request
House
Draft
Investigations and
121.0
123.0
125.0
151.0
102.6
151.0
151.2
Planning
Construction
1,876.0
2,085.0
2,183.0
2,681.0
2,173.2a
2,619.9
2,661.0
Mississippi River
362.0
425.0
368.0
375.0
209.9a
365.0
395.0
and Tributaries
(MR&T)
Operation and
3,149.0
3,630.0
3,739.5
3,790.0
1,996.5a
3,838.0
3,781.0
Maintenance
(O&M)
Regulatory
200.0
200.0
200.0
210.0
200.0
210.0
210.0
General
181.0
185.0
193.0
203.0
187.0
195.0
211.0
Expenses
FUSRAPb
112.0
139.0
150.0
200.0
0
210.0
250.0
Flood Control
32.0
35.0
35.0
35.0
77.0
35.0
35.0
and Coastal
Emergencies
(FCCE)
Office of the
4.8
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
3.0
Asst. Secretary of
the Army
Water

25.0c
Infrastructure
Finance and
Innovation
(WIFIA) Program
Harbor

1,015.0

Maintenance
Trust Fund
Congressional Research Service

24

Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

FY2021
Sen.
Comm.
FY2017
FY2018
FY2019
FY2020
FY2021
FY2021
Majority
Program
Approp.
Approp.
Approp.
Approp.
Request
House
Draft
Inland

0

Waterways Trust
Fund
Total Title I
6,037.8
6,827.0
6,998.5
7,650.0
5,966.2
7,628.9
7,722.2
FY2021

17,000.0

Emergency
Supplemental
Total with

24,628.9

Supplemental
Sources: FY2021 Senate Appropriations Committee majority draft; H.R. 7617, H.Rept. 116-449; President’s
Budget, FY2021; Explanatory Statement for Division C of H.R. 1865, 116th Congress; S.Rept. 116-102; S. 2470;
H.R. 2740; CBO Current Status Report; H.Rept. 116-83; FY2020 Budget Justification; H.Rept. 115-929; S.Rept.
115-258; S.Rept. 115-132; H.Rept. 115-230; and P.L. 115-31 and explanatory statement. FY2020 and FY2021
request numbers can be found at https://www.usace.army.mil/Missions/Civil-Works/Budget/. Columns may not
sum to totals because of rounding.
a. In the Administration’s request, some activities that would have previously been funded in these accounts
were proposed to be funded directly from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund (HMTF) and Inland
Waterway Trust Fund (IWTF) accounts. That is, the Administration proposed funding eligible USACE
activities directly from the trust funds. This would replace the current practice of having USACE’s O&M,
Construction, and MR&T accounts incur expenses for HMTF-eligible and IWTF-eligible activities, and for
these expenses to be reimbursed from the HMTF and IWTF accounts. For example, HMTF-eligible
maintenance dredging would no longer be funded by the O&M account and reimbursed by the HMTF;
instead the dredging would be funded directly from the HMTF account. Similar proposals were not enacted
in FY2019 and FY2020.
b. Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program. The Administration’s FY2020 request proposed
transferring administration and funding of FUSRAP to the DOE Office of Legacy Management, but the
proposal was not enacted. The proposal is also included in the FY2021 budget request.
c. The FY2021 Senate Appropriations Committee majority draft would create a new USACE account to
support direct loans and for the cost of guaranteed loans, as authorized by the Water Infrastructure Finance
and Innovation Act of 2014 (Title V, Subtitle C of P.L. 113-121).
Bureau of Reclamation and Central Utah Project
Most of the large dams and water diversion structures in the West were built by, or with the
assistance of, the Bureau of Reclamation. While the Corps of Engineers built hundreds of flood
control and navigation projects, Reclamation’s original mission was to develop water supplies,
primarily for irrigation to reclaim arid lands in the West for farming and ranching. Reclamation
has evolved into an agency that assists in meeting the water demands in the West while working
to protect the environment and the public’s investment in Reclamation infrastructure. The
agency’s municipal and industrial water deliveries have more than doubled since 1970.
Today, Reclamation manages hundreds of dams and diversion projects, including more than 300
storage reservoirs, in 17 western states. These projects provide water to approximately 10 million
acres of farmland and 31 million people. Reclamation is the largest wholesale supplier of water in
the 17 western states and the second-largest hydroelectric power producer in the nation.
Reclamation facilities also provide substantial flood control, recreation, and other benefits.
Reclamation facility operations are often controversial, particularly for their effect on fish and
wildlife species and because of conflicts among competing water users during drought conditions.
Congressional Research Service

25

link to page 30 Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

As with the Corps of Engineers, the Reclamation budget is made up largely of individual project
funding lines, rather than general programs that would not be covered by congressional earmark
requirements. Therefore, as with USACE, these Reclamation projects have often been subject to
earmark disclosure rules. The current moratorium on earmarks restricts congressional steering of
money directly toward specific Reclamation projects.
Reclamation’s single largest account, Water and Related Resources, encompasses the agency’s
traditional programs and projects, including construction, operations and maintenance, dam
safety, and ecosystem restoration, among others.58 Reclamation also typically requests funds in a
number of smaller accounts, and has proposed additional accounts in recent years.
Implementation and oversight of the Central Utah Project, also funded by Title II, is conducted by
a separate office within the Department of the Interior.59
For more information, see CRS In Focus IF11465, Bureau of Reclamation: FY2021
Appropriations, by Charles V. Stern. Previous appropriations and the amounts recommended and
approved during the major stages of the FY2021 appropriations process are shown in Table 6.
Table 6. Bureau of Reclamation and CUP
(budget authority in millions of current dollars)
FY2021
Sen.
Comm.
FY2017
FY2018
FY2019
FY2020
FY2021
FY2021
Major.
Program
Approp
Approp
Approp Approp Request
House
Draft
Water and Related
1,155.9
1,332.1
1,392.0
1,512.2
979.0
1,487.0
1,521.1
Resources
Policy and Administration
59.0
59.0
61.0
60.0
60.0
54.0
60.0
CVP Restoration Fund
55.6
41.4
62.0
54.8
55.9
55.9
55.9
(CVPRF)
Calif. Bay-Delta (CALFED)
36.0
37.0
35.0
33.0
33.0
33.0
33.0
Gross Current
1,306.5
1,469.5
1,550.0
1,660.0
1,127.9
1,629.9
1,670.0
Reclamation Authority
Central Utah Project
10.5
10.5
15.0
20.0
10.0
25.0
20.0
(CUP) Completion

58 The Water and Related Resources Account is largely funded by the Reclamation Fund, which receives and
distributes receipts related to a number of federal activities (including royalties received from oil and gas leasing on
federal lands). For more on this fund and financing of selected Reclamation Projects, see CRS Report R41844, The
Reclamation Fund: A Primer, by Charles V. Stern.
59 The Central Utah Project moves water from the Colorado River basin in eastern Utah to the western slopes of the
Wasatch Mountain range. It was authorized in 1956 under the Colorado River Storage Project Act (P.L. 84-485). For
more information, see the CUP website at https://www.cupcao.gov/.
Congressional Research Service

26

link to page 31 link to page 33 link to page 33 link to page 33 Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

FY2021
Sen.
Comm.
FY2017
FY2018
FY2019
FY2020
FY2021
FY2021
Major.
Program
Approp
Approp
Approp Approp Request
House
Draft
Total, Title II Current
1,317.0
1,480.0
1,565.0
1,680.0
1,137.9
1,654.9
1,690.0
Authority (CUP and
Reclamation)
FY2021 Emergency

3,000.0

Supplemental
Total with

4,654.9

Supplemental
Sources: FY2021 Senate Appropriations Committee majority draft; H.R. 7617, H.Rept. 116-449; President’s
Budget, FY2021; Explanatory Statement for Division C of H.R. 1865, 116th Congress; S.Rept. 116-102; H.R. 2740;
CBO Current Status Report; H.Rept. 116-83; FY2020 Budget Justifications; H.Rept. 115-929; S.Rept. 115-258;
S.Rept. 115-132; H.Rept. 115-230; and P.L. 115-31 and explanatory statement. Excludes offsets and permanent
appropriations.
Notes: Columns may not sum to totals because of rounding. CVP = Central Valley Project.
Department of Energy
The Energy and Water Development appropriations bill has funded all DOE programs since
FY2005. Major DOE activities include (1) R&D on renewable energy, energy efficiency, nuclear
power, fossil energy, and electricity; (2) the Strategic Petroleum Reserve; (3) energy statistics; (4)
general science; (5) environmental cleanup; and (6) nuclear weapons and nonproliferation
programs. Table 7 provides the recent funding history for DOE programs, which are briefly
described further below.
Table 7. Department of Energy
(budget authority in millions of current dollars)
FY2021
Sen.
Comm.
FY2017
FY2018
FY2019
FY2020
FY2021
FY2021
Major.

Approp. Approp. Approp. Approp. Request
House
Draft
ENERGY PROGRAMS

Energy Efficiency and
2,034.6
2,321.8
2,379.0
2,799.0
719.6
2,850.2
2,848.0
Renewable Energy
Electricity Delivery and
229.6
248.3

Energy Reliabilitya
Electricity Delivery

156.0
190.0
195.0
195.0
223.0
Cybersecurity, Energy

120.0
156.0
184.6
165.0
156.0
Security, and Emerg. Resp.
Nuclear Energy
1,015.8
1,205.1
1,326.1
1,493.4b
1,179.9c
1,435.8
1,505.3
Fossil Energy R&D
421.2
726.8
740.0
750.0
730.6
735.0
750.0
Uranium Reserve

150.0
0
120.0
Naval Petroleum and Oil
12.0
4.9
10.0
14.0
13.0
13.0
13.0
Shale Reserves
Congressional Research Service

27

Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

FY2021
Sen.
Comm.
FY2017
FY2018
FY2019
FY2020
FY2021
FY2021
Major.

Approp. Approp. Approp. Approp. Request
House
Draft
Strategic Petroleum
222.6
260.4
245.0
205.0
119.1
202.5
188.1
Reserve
Northeast Home Heating
6.5
6.5
10.0
10.0
-84.0
10.0
10.0
Oil Reserve
Energy Information
122.0
125.0
125.0
126.8
128.7
126.8
126.8
Administration
Non-Defense
246.8
298.4
310.0
319.2
275.8
315.0
326.0
Environmental Cleanup
Uranium Enrichment
767.9
840.0
841.1
881.0
806.2
821.6
848.0
Decontamination and
Decommissioning Fund
Science
5,391.0
6,259.9
6,585.0
7,000.0
5,837.8
7,055.0
7,026.0
AI Technology Office

4.9
0
0
Advanced Research
305.3
353.3
366.0
425.0
-310.7
435.0
430.0
Projects Agency—Energy
(ARPA-E)
Nuclear Waste Disposal
0
0
0
0
27.5
27.5
0
Departmental Admin.
120.7
189.7
165.9
161.0
136.1
137.9
161.0
(net)
Office of Inspector
44.4
49.0
51.3
54.2
57.7
57.7
57.7
General
International Affairs

0
0
33.0
0
0
Office of Indian Energy
0
0
18.0
22.0
8.0
22.3
22.0
Advanced Technology
3.9
5.0
5.0
5.0
0
5.0
5.0
Vehicles Manufacturing
Loans
Title 17 Loan Guarantee
0.1
23.0
18.0
29.0
-384.7
29.0
29.0
Tribal Indian Energy Loan
9.0
1.0
1.0
2.0
-8.5
2.0
2.0
Guarantee
TOTAL, ENERGY
10,953.3 12,918.0 13,472.4 14,633.6
9,819.7 14,641.3 14,846.9
PROGRAMS
DEFENSE

ACTIVITIES
National Nuclear

Security
Administration
(NNSA)
Weapons Activities
9,240.7
10,642.1
11,100.0
12,457.1 15,602.0
13,659.6
15,602.0
Nuclear Nonproliferation
1,879.7
1,999.2
1,930.0
2,164.4
2,031.0
2,240.0
2,095.0
Naval Reactors
1,419.8
1,620.0
1,788.6
1,648.4
1,684.0
1,684.0
1,684.0
Congressional Research Service

28

link to page 33 Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

FY2021
Sen.
Comm.
FY2017
FY2018
FY2019
FY2020
FY2021
FY2021
Major.

Approp. Approp. Approp. Approp. Request
House
Draft
Office of Admin./Salaries
387.4
407.6
410.0
434.7
454.0
454.0
443.2
and Expenses
Total, NNSA
12,927.6 14,669.0 15,228.6 16,704.6 19,771.0 18,037.6 19,824.2
Defense Environmental
5,404.2
5,988.0
6,024.0
6,255.0
4,983.6
6,321.0
6,360.0
Cleanup
Defense Uranium

821.6

Enrichment D&D
Other Defense Activities
781.7
840.0
860.3
906.0
1,054.7b
942.3
906.0
Defense Nuclear Waste
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Disposal
TOTAL, DEFENSE
19,113.6 21,497.0 22,112.9 23,865.6 25,809.3 26,122.5 27,090.2
ACTIVITIES
POWER MARKETING

ADMINISTRATION
(PMAs)
Southwestern
11.1
11.4
10.4
10.4
10.4
10.4
10.4
Western
94.7
93.4
89.4
89.2
89.4
89.4
89.4
Falcon and Amistad O&M
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
Colorado River Basins
-23.0

-
Power Marketing Fund
TOTAL, PMAs
83.0
105.0
100.0
99.8
100.0
100.0
100.0
General provisions
-62.7

-12.7
-607.0

2.0
DOE total
30,149.9 34,569.1 35,708.9 38,657.2 35,732.2 40,863.8 42,041.4
appropriations
Offsets and adjustments
-62.7
-49.0
-23.6
-70.9
-610.2
—
-2.2
Total, DOE
30,087.2 34,520.1 35,685.3 38,586.3 35,122.1 40,863.8 42,039.1
FY2021 Emergency

24,050.0

Supplemental
Total with

64,913.8

Supplemental
Sources: FY2021 Senate Appropriations Committee majority draft; H.R. 7617; H.Rept. 116-449; President’s
Budget, FY2021; Explanatory Statement for Division C of H.R. 1865, 116th Congress; S.Rept. 116-102; H.R. 2740;
CBO Current Status Report; H.Rept. 116-83; H.Rept. 115-929; S.Rept. 115-258; S.Rept. 115-132; H.Rept. 115-
230; and P.L. 115-31 and explanatory statement.
Notes: Columns may not sum to totals because of rounding. AI = Artificial Intelligence.
a. The Office of Electric Delivery and Energy Reliability was split in FY2019 into the Office of Electricity
Delivery and the Office of Cybersecurity, Energy Security, and Emergency Response.
b. Includes defense budget function funding of $153.4 mil ion in FY2020 and $137.8 mil ion.
c. Includes $141 mil ion for the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program that is currently managed by
USACE.
Congressional Research Service

29

Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
DOE’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) conducts research and
development on transportation energy technology, energy efficiency in buildings and
manufacturing processes, and the production of solar, wind, geothermal, and other renewable
energy. EERE also administers formula grants to states for making energy efficiency
improvements to low-income housing units and for state energy planning.
The Sustainable Transportation program area includes electric vehicles, vehicle efficiency, and
alternative fuels. DOE’s electric vehicle program aims to “reduce the cost of electric vehicle
batteries by more than half, to less than $100/kWh [kilowatt-hour] (ultimate goal is $80/kWh),
increase range to 300 miles, and decrease charge time to 15 minutes or less.” DOE’s vehicle fuel
cell program is focusing on the costs of fuel cells and hydrogen to fuel them. According to the
FY2021 budget request, “Investments in fuel cell technologies will increase the emphasis on
heavy-duty vehicles and new applications (e.g., trucks, marine, rail, aviation, data centers).”
Regarding biofuels R&D, the DOE request says, “By 2030, the U.S. has the potential to produce
1 billion dry tons of non-food biomass resources without disrupting agricultural markets for food
and animal feed.”60
Renewable power programs focus on electricity generation from solar, wind, water, and
geothermal sources. The solar energy program has a goal of achieving, by 2030, costs of 3 cents
per kWh for unsubsidized, utility-scale photovoltaics (PV) and 5 cents/kWh for baseload
concentrating solar power (CSP) systems. This would require cost reductions of 40%-65% below
DOE’s 2018 benchmarks. Wind R&D is to focus on early-stage research and testing to reduce
costs and improve performance and reliability. For the geothermal program, DOE is requesting
funding in FY2021 to “support two new subsurface enhancement and sustainability efforts”: one
on well technology to isolate geothermal target zones, and the other on assessing reservoir
properties for enhanced geothermal systems.61
In the energy efficiency program area, the advanced manufacturing program focuses on
improving the energy efficiency of manufacturing processes and on the manufacturing of energy-
related products. The building technologies program includes R&D on lighting, space
conditioning, windows, and control technologies to reduce building energy-use intensity. The
energy efficiency program also provides weatherization grants to states for improving the energy
efficiency of low-income housing units and state energy planning grants.62
For more details, see CRS Report R44980, DOE’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy (EERE): Appropriations Status, by Corrie E. Clark.
Electricity Delivery, Cybersecurity, Energy Security, and Energy Reliability
The Office of Cybersecurity, Energy Security, and Emergency Response (CESER) was created
from programs that were previously part of the Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy
Reliability. The programs that were not moved into CESER became part of the DOE Office of
Electricity (OE).63

60 DOE, FY2021 Congressional Budget Justification, vol. 3, part 1, p. 12, https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2020/
04/f73/doe-fy2021-budget-volume-3-part-1.pdf.
61 Ibid., p. 13.
62 Ibid., p. 14.
63 DOE, “Secretary of Energy Rick Perry Forms New Office of Cybersecurity, Energy Security, and Emergency
Congressional Research Service

30

Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

OE’s mission is to lead DOE efforts “to strengthen, transform, and improve energy infrastructure
so that consumers have access to secure and resilient sources of energy.” Major priorities of OE
are developing a model of North American energy vulnerabilities, pursuing megawatt-scale
electricity storage, integrating electric power system sensing technology, and analyzing
electricity-related policy issues.64 The office also includes the DOE power marketing
administrations, which are funded from separate appropriations accounts.
CESER is the federal government’s lead entity for energy sector-specific responses to energy
security emergencies—whether caused by physical infrastructure problems or by cybersecurity
issues. The office conducts R&D on energy infrastructure security technology; provides energy
sector security guidelines, training, and technical assistance; and enhances energy sector
emergency preparedness and response.65
DOE’s Multiyear Plan for Energy Sector Cybersecurity describes the department’s strategy to
“strengthen today’s energy delivery systems by working with our partners to address growing
threats and promote continuous improvement, and develop game-changing solutions that will
create inherently secure, resilient, and self-defending energy systems for tomorrow.”66 The plan
includes three goals that DOE has established for energy sector cybersecurity:
 strengthen energy sector cybersecurity preparedness;
 coordinate cyber incident response and recovery; and
 accelerate research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) of resilient energy
delivery systems.
Nuclear Energy
DOE’s Office of Nuclear Energy (NE) “focuses on three major mission areas: the nation’s
existing nuclear fleet, the development of advanced nuclear reactor concepts, and fuel cycle
technologies,” according to DOE’s FY2021 budget justification. It calls nuclear energy “a key
element of United States energy independence, energy dominance, electricity grid resiliency,
national security, and clean baseload power.”67
The Reactor Concepts program area includes research on advanced reactors, including advanced
small modular reactors, and research to enhance the “sustainability” of existing commercial light
water reactors. Advanced reactor research focuses on “Generation IV” reactors, as opposed to the
existing fleet of commercial light water reactors, which are generally classified as generations II
and III. R&D under this program focuses on advanced coolants, fuels, materials, and other
technology areas that could apply to a variety of advanced reactors. To help develop those
technologies, the Reactor Concepts program is developing a Versatile Test Reactor that would
allow fuels and materials to be tested in a fast neutron environment (in which neutrons would not
be slowed by water, graphite, or other “moderators”). Research on extending the life of existing
commercial light water reactors (moderated and cooled by ordinary water) beyond 60 years, the

Response,” press release, February 14, 2018, https://www.energy.gov/articles/secretary-energy-rick-perry-forms-new-
office-cybersecurity-energy-security-and-emergency.
64 DOE, FY 2021 Congressional Budget Justification, vol. 3, part 1, February 2020, p. 262, https://www.energy.gov/
sites/prod/files/2020/04/f73/doe-fy2021-budget-volume-3-part-1.pdf.
65 Ibid., p. 317.
66 DOE, Multiyear Plan for Energy Sector Cybersecurity, March 2018, p. 5, https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/
2018/05/f51/DOE%20Multiyear%20Plan%20for%20Energy%20Sector%20Cybersecurity%20_0.pdf.
67 DOE, FY 2021 Congressional Budget Justification, vol. 3, part 2, February 2020, p. 9, https://www.energy.gov/sites/
prod/files/2020/04/f73/doe-fy2021-budget-volume-3-part-2.pdf.
Congressional Research Service

31

Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

maximum operating period currently licensed by NRC, is being conducted by this program with
industry cost-sharing.
The Fuel Cycle Research and Development program includes generic research on nuclear waste
management and disposal. One of the program’s primary activities is the development of
technologies to separate the radioactive constituents of spent fuel for reuse or solidifying into
stable waste forms. Other major research areas in the Fuel Cycle R&D program include the
development of accident-tolerant fuels for existing commercial reactors, evaluation of fuel cycle
options, and development of improved technologies to prevent diversion of nuclear materials for
weapons. The program is also developing sources of high-assay low enriched uranium (HALEU),
in which uranium is enriched to between 5% and 20% in the fissile isotope U-235, for potential
use in advanced reactors.
A new Advanced Reactors Demonstration Program was included in the Explanatory Statement for
the enacted FY2020 appropriations measure. The program is to provide up to 50% cost sharing
for two nuclear reactor demonstration projects, up to 20% cost sharing for development work for
two to five additional demonstrations, and funding for related advanced reactor
commercialization activities. For more information, see CRS Report R45706, Advanced Nuclear
Reactors: Technology Overview and Current Issues, by Danielle A. Arostegui and Mark Holt.
Fossil Energy Research and Development
Much of DOE’s Fossil Energy R&D Program focuses on technologies for use by coal-fired power
plants. Major activities include Advanced Coal Energy Systems and Carbon Capture, Utilization,
and Storage (CCUS); Natural Gas Technologies; and Unconventional Fossil Energy Technologies
from Petroleum—Oil Technologies.
Advanced Coal Energy Systems includes R&D on modular coal-gasification systems, advanced
turbines, solid oxide fuel cells, advanced sensors and controls, and power generation efficiency.
Elements of the CCUS program include the following:
 Carbon Capture subprogram for separating CO2 in both precombustion and
postcombustion systems;
 Carbon Utilization subprogram for R&D on technologies, including direct air
capture, to convert carbon to marketable products, such as chemicals and
polymers; and
 Carbon Storage subprogram on long-term geologic storage of CO2, focusing on
saline formations, oil and natural gas reservoirs, unmineable coal seams, basalts,
and organic shales.68
For more information, see CRS In Focus IF11501, Carbon Capture Versus Direct Air Capture, by
Ashley J. Lawson.
Strategic Petroleum Reserve
Authorized in 1975 by the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (P.L. 94-163, as amended; 42
U.S.C. §6201 et seq.), the SPR fulfills two statutory policy objectives: (1) reduce the economic
impact of oil supply disruptions, and (2) carry out U.S. obligations under the Agreement on an
International Energy Program (IEP)—a multilateral agreement subject to international law.

68 DOE, FY 2021 Congressional Budget Justification, vol. 3, part 2, February 2020, p. 195, https://www.energy.gov/
sites/prod/files/2020/04/f73/doe-fy2021-budget-volume-3-part-2.pdf.
Congressional Research Service

32

Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

Currently, the SPR consists of a crude oil reserve and a refined petroleum product reserve. Most
SPR stocks consist of crude oil—approximately 635 million barrels as of November 2020—held
in government-owned storage facilities located in Texas and Louisiana. The SPR also includes a 1
million barrel refined petroleum product reserve held in leased commercial facilities located in
the Northeast region.
Since establishment, SPR crude oil stocks have been used on three occasions in response to
emergency oil supply disruptions. More frequently, SPR authorities have been used to exchange
crude oil with refiners following natural disasters (i.e., hurricanes) and other regional supply
disruption events.69 The northeast gasoline supply reserve (NGSR)—established in 2014—has
never been utilized.
With limited utilization in response to emergency oil supply disruptions, growing U.S. crude oil
production, and rapidly declining net petroleum imports—one key metric used to determine IEP
emergency oil stock obligations—Congress began requiring DOE to draw down and sell SPR
crude oil in order to pay for other legislative priorities. Since 2015, Congress has enacted seven
laws mandating the sale of 271 million barrels of crude oil. Additionally, Congress has required
DOE to sell approximately $1.5 billion of SPR crude oil to pay for an SPR modernization
program.70
Science and ARPA-E
The DOE Office of Science conducts basic research in six program areas: advanced scientific
computing research, basic energy sciences, biological and environmental research, fusion energy
sciences, high-energy physics, and nuclear physics. According to DOE’s FY2021 budget
justification, the Office of Science “is the Nation’s largest Federal sponsor of basic research in the
physical sciences and the lead Federal agency supporting fundamental scientific research for our
Nation’s energy future.”71
DOE’s Advanced Scientific Computing Research (ASCR) program focuses on developing and
maintaining computing and networking capabilities for science and research in applied
mathematics, computer science, and advanced networking. The program plays a key role in the
DOE-wide effort to advance the development of exascale computing, which seeks to build a
computer that can solve scientific problems 1,000 times faster than today’s best machines. DOE
has asserted that the department is on a path to have a capable exascale machine by the early
2020s.
Basic Energy Sciences (BES), the largest program area in the Office of Science, focuses on
understanding, predicting, and ultimately controlling matter and energy at the electronic, atomic,
and molecular levels. The program supports research in disciplines such as condensed matter and
materials physics, chemistry, and geosciences. BES also provides funding for scientific user
facilities (e.g., the National Synchrotron Light Source II, and the Linac Coherent Light Source-
II), and certain DOE research centers and hubs (e.g., Energy Frontier Research Centers, as well as
the Batteries and Energy Storage and Fuels from Sunlight Energy Innovation Hubs).

69 For additional information about SPR releases, see U.S. Department of Energy, History of SPR Releases, at
https://www.energy.gov/fe/services/petroleum-reserves/strategic-petroleum-reserve/releasing-oil-spr, accessed
November 12, 2020.
70 For additional information about congressionally-required SPR oil sales, see Strategic Petroleum Reserve: Mandated
and Modernization Sales, by Phillip Brown, a congressional distribution memo available to congressional clients by
request from the author.
71 DOE, FY 2021 Congressional Budget Justification, vol. 4, February 2020, p, 7, https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/
files/2020/03/f72/doe-fy2021-budget-volume-4_0.pdf.
Congressional Research Service

33

Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

Biological and Environmental Research (BER) seeks a predictive understanding of complex
biological, climate, and environmental systems across a continuum from the small scale (e.g.,
genomic research) to the large (e.g., Earth systems and climate). Within BER, Biological Systems
Science focuses on plant and microbial systems, while Biological and Environmental Research
supports climate-relevant atmospheric and ecosystem modeling and research. BER facilities and
centers include four Bioenergy Research Centers and the Environmental Molecular Science
Laboratory at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory.
Fusion Energy Sciences (FES) seeks to increase understanding of the behavior of matter at very
high temperatures and to establish the science needed to develop a fusion energy source. FES
provides funding for the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) project, a
multinational effort to design and build an experimental fusion reactor.
The High Energy Physics (HEP) program conducts research on the fundamental constituents of
matter and energy, including studies of dark energy and the search for dark matter. Nuclear
Physics supports research on the nature of matter, including its basic constituents and their
interactions. A major project in the Nuclear Physics program is the construction of the Facility for
Rare Isotope Beams at Michigan State University.
Two significant research efforts in the Office of Science cut across multiple program areas:
quantum information science, which aims to use quantum physics to process information, and
artificial intelligence and machine learning, which use computerized systems that work and react
in ways commonly thought to require intelligence.
A separate DOE office, the Advanced Research Projects Agency—Energy, was authorized by the
America COMPETES Act (P.L. 110-69) to support transformational energy technology research
projects. DOE budget documents describe ARPA-E’s mission as overcoming long-term, high-risk
technological barriers to the development of energy technologies.
For more details, see CRS Report R46341, Federal Research and Development (R&D) Funding:
FY2021, coordinated by John F. Sargent Jr.
Loan Guarantees and Direct Loans
DOE’s Loan Programs Office provides loan guarantees for projects that deploy innovative energy
technologies, as authorized by Title 17 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPACT05, P.L. 109-
58), direct loans for advanced vehicle manufacturing technologies, and loan guarantees for tribal
energy projects. Section 1703 of the EPACT05 authorizes loan guarantees for advanced energy
technologies that reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and Section 1705 authorized a temporary
program through FY2011 for renewable energy and energy efficiency projects.
Title 17 allows DOE to provide loan guarantees for up to 80% of construction costs for eligible
energy projects. Successful applicants must pay an up-front fee, or “subsidy cost,” to cover
potential losses under the loan guarantee program. Under the loan guarantee agreements, the
federal government would repay all covered loans if the borrower defaulted. Such guarantees
would reduce the risk to lenders and allow them to provide financing at below-market interest
rates.
DOE currently has more than $40 billion in authority available to make direct loans and loan
guarantees in the following categories:72

72 DOE, “Products and Services,” as of April 23, 2020, https://www.energy.gov/lpo/title-xvii/products-
services#innovativeenergy.
Congressional Research Service

34

Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

 Advanced Fossil Energy Projects Loan Guarantees, $8.5 billion;
 Advanced Nuclear Energy Projects Loan Guarantees, $10.9 billion;
 Renewable Energy and Efficient Energy Projects Loan Guarantees, up to $4.5
billion;
 Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Loan Program, $17.7 billion in
direct loan authority; and
 Tribal Energy Loan Guarantee Program, up to $2 billion in partial loan guarantee
authority.
The only loan guarantees under Section 1703 have been $8.3 billion in guarantees provided to the
consortium building two new nuclear reactors at the Vogtle plant in Georgia. DOE committed an
additional $3.7 billion in loan guarantees for the Vogtle project on March 22, 2019.73 Another
nuclear loan guarantee is being sought by NuScale Power to build a small modular reactor in
Idaho.74
Nuclear Weapons Activities
In the absence of explosive testing of nuclear weapons, the United States has adopted a science-
based program to maintain and sustain confidence in the reliability of the U.S. nuclear stockpile.
Congress established the Stockpile Stewardship Program in the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 1994 (P.L. 103-160). The goal of the program, as amended by the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (P.L. 111-84, §3111), is to ensure “that the
nuclear weapons stockpile is safe, secure, and reliable without the use of underground nuclear
weapons testing.” The program is operated by NNSA, a semiautonomous agency within DOE
established by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (P.L. 106-65, Title
XXXII). NNSA implements the Stockpile Stewardship Program through the activities funded by
the Weapons Activities account in the NNSA budget.
Most of NNSA’s weapons activities take place at the nuclear weapons complex, which consists of
three laboratories (Los Alamos National Laboratory, NM; Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory, CA; and Sandia National Laboratories, NM and CA); four production sites (Kansas
City National Security Campus, MO; Pantex Plant, TX; Savannah River Site, SC; and Y-12
National Security Complex, TN); and the Nevada National Security Site (formerly the Nevada
Test Site). NNSA manages and sets policy for the weapons complex; contractors to NNSA
operate the eight sites. Radiological activities at these sites are subject to oversight and
recommendations by the independent Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, funded by Title IV
of the annual Energy and Water Development appropriations bill.
NNSA has reorganized and renamed its program areas in its FY2021 budget request. The four
main programs, each with a request of over $2 billion for FY2021, include the following:
 Stockpile Management, which contains many of the projects included in Directed
Stockpile Work from previous years, supports work directly on nuclear weapons.

73 DOE, “Secretary Perry Announces Financial Close on Additional Loan Guarantees During Trip to Vogtle Advanced
Nuclear Energy Project,” news release, March 22, 2019, https://www.energy.gov/articles/secretary-perry-announces-
financial-close-additional-loan-guarantees-during-trip-vogtle.
74 NuScale Power, “NuScale Power, LLC Submits Part II of DOE Loan Guarantee Application,” news release,
September 6, 2017, http://newsroom.nuscalepower.com/press-release/nuscale-power-llc-submits-part-ii-doe-loan-
guarantee-application. More information about DOE loans and loan guarantees is at the Loan Programs Office website,
https://www.energy.gov/lpo/loan-programs-office.
Congressional Research Service

35

Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

These include life extension programs, warhead surveillance, maintenance, and
other activities.
 Stockpile Production programs focus on maintaining and expanding the
production capabilities for the components of nuclear weapons that are critical to
weapons performance. According to NNSA, these include primaries, canned
subassemblies, radiation cases, and non-nuclear components.
 Stockpile Research, Technology, and Engineering replaces the Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation program area. These programs provide the
scientific foundation for science-based stockpile decisions.
 Infrastructure and Operations maintains, operates, and modernizes the NNSA
infrastructure. It supports construction of new facilities and funds deferred
maintenance in older facilities.
Nuclear Weapons Activities also has several smaller programs, including the following:
 Secure Transportation Asset, providing for safe and secure transport of nuclear
weapons, components, and materials;
 Defense Nuclear Security, providing operations, maintenance, and construction
funds for protective forces, physical security systems, personnel security, and
related activities; and
 Information Technology and Cybersecurity, whose elements include
cybersecurity, secure enterprise computing, and Federal Unclassified Information
Technology.
For more information, see CRS Report R44442, Energy and Water Development Appropriations:
Nuclear Weapons Activities, by Amy F. Woolf, and CRS Report R45306, The U.S. Nuclear
Weapons Complex: Overview of Department of Energy Sites, by Amy F. Woolf and James D.
Werner.
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation
DOE’s nonproliferation and national security programs provide technical capabilities to support
U.S. efforts to prevent, detect, and counter the spread of nuclear weapons worldwide. These
programs are administered by NNSA’s Office of Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation (DNN).
The Materials Management and Minimization program conducts activities to minimize and,
where possible, eliminate stockpiles of weapons-useable material around the world. Major
activities include conversion of reactors that use highly enriched uranium (useable for weapons)
to low-enriched uranium, removal and consolidation of nuclear material stockpiles, and
disposition of excess nuclear materials.
Global Materials Security has three major program elements. International Nuclear Security
focuses on increasing the security of vulnerable stockpiles of nuclear material in other countries.
Radiological Security promotes the worldwide reduction and security of radioactive sources
(typically used in medical and industrial devices), including the removal of surplus sources and
substitution of technologies that do not use radioactive materials. Nuclear Smuggling Detection
and Deterrence works to improve the capability of other countries to halt illicit trafficking of
nuclear materials.
Nonproliferation and Arms Control works to “to support U.S. nonproliferation and arms control
objectives to prevent proliferation, ensure peaceful nuclear uses, and enable verifiable nuclear
Congressional Research Service

36

Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

reductions,” according to the FY2021 DOE justification.75 This program conducts reviews of
nuclear export applications and technology transfer authorizations, implements treaty obligations,
and analyzes nonproliferation policies and proposals.
National Technical Nuclear Forensics Research and Development (NTNF R&D) is proposed as a
new NNSA program for FY2021, with the request moving $40 million for NTNF from the
Nuclear Detonation Detection subprogram under Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation R&D. The
NTNF operational readiness mission is currently located in the Department of Homeland
Security. The budget request says that the NTNF program would allow NNSA to “take on a more
active leadership role” in nuclear forensics. Another, existing DNN program, Nuclear
Counterterrorism and Incident Response, carries out activities to “protect our nation and its
citizens from nuclear terrorism and incidents or accidents involving the release of radiological
material,” according to the FY2021 budget justification.76 Other DNN programs include R&D
and Nonproliferation Construction.
For more information, see CRS Report R44413, Energy and Water Development Appropriations
for Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation: In Brief, by Mary Beth D. Nikitin.
Cleanup of Former Nuclear Weapons Production and Research Sites
The development and production of nuclear weapons since the beginning of the Manhattan
Project77 during World War II resulted in a waste and contamination legacy managed by DOE that
continues to present substantial challenges. DOE also manages legacy environmental
contamination at sites used for nondefense nuclear research. In 1989, DOE established the Office
of Environmental Management primarily to consolidate its responsibilities for the cleanup of
former nuclear weapons production sites that had been administered under multiple offices.78
DOE’s nuclear cleanup efforts are broad in scope and include the disposal of large quantities of
radioactive and other hazardous wastes generated over decades; management and disposal of
surplus nuclear materials; remediation of extensive contamination in soil and groundwater;
decontamination and decommissioning of excess buildings and facilities; and safeguarding,
securing, and maintaining facilities while cleanup is underway.79 DOE’s cleanup of nuclear
research sites adds a nondefense component to EM’s mission, albeit smaller in terms of the scope
of their cleanup and associated funding.80

75 DOE, FY 2021 Congressional Budget Justification, vol. 1, p. 613, https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2020/03/
f72/doe-fy2021-budget-volume-1_2.pdf.
76 Ibid., p. 665.
77 As described by the Manhattan Project National Historical Park, “The Manhattan Project was a massive, top secret
national mobilization of scientists, engineers, technicians, and military personnel charged with producing a deployable
atomic weapon during World War II. Coordinated by the US Army, Manhattan Project activities were located in
numerous locations across the United States.” The nuclear weapons activities begun by the Manhattan Project are now
the responsibility of DOE. See National Park Service, Manhattan Project National Historical Park website,
https://www.nps.gov/mapr/learn/historyculture/index.htm.
78 In 1989, DOE created the Office of Environmental Restoration and Waste Management, which later was renamed the
Office of Environmental Management.
79 The term “cleanup” often refers to the remediation of risks at a site. Cleanup may not necessarily entail the removal
of all hazards from a site, but in some instances may involve the permanent containment of wastes or contamination to
address exposure risks. If residual waste or contamination remains on-site after cleanup is complete, long-term
stewardship may continue to monitor the site and ensure that cleanup measures continue to operate effectively.
80 For additional information on the history, mission, and scope of the Office of Environmental Management, see
DOE’s website: http://energy.gov/em/office-environmental-management.
Congressional Research Service

37

Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

DOE has identified more than 100 separate sites in over 30 states that historically were involved
in the production of nuclear weapons and nuclear energy research for civilian purposes.81 The
geographic scope of these sites is substantial, collectively encompassing a land area of
approximately 2 million acres. Cleanup remedies are in place and operational at the majority of
these sites. Responsibility for the long-term stewardship of them has been transferred to the
Office of Legacy Management and other offices within DOE for the operation and maintenance
of cleanup remedies and monitoring.82 Some of the smaller sites for which DOE initially was
responsible were transferred to the Army Corps of Engineers in 1997 under the Formerly Utilized
Sites Remedial Action Program. Once USACE completes the cleanup of a FUSRAP site, it is
transferred back to DOE for long-term stewardship under the Office of Legacy Management,
which is separate from EM and has its own DOE funding subaccount within Other Defense
Activities.
Three appropriations accounts fund the Office of Environmental Management. The Defense
Environmental Cleanup account is the largest in terms of funding, and it finances the cleanup of
former nuclear weapons production sites. The Non-Defense Environmental Cleanup account
funds the cleanup of federal nuclear energy research sites. Title XI of the Energy Policy Act of
1992 (P.L. 102-486) established the Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and
Decommissioning Fund to pay for the cleanup of three federal facilities that enriched uranium for
national defense and civilian purposes.83 Those facilities are located near Paducah, KY; Piketon,
OH (Portsmouth plant); and Oak Ridge, TN. DOE declared the cleanup of the Oak Ridge
enrichment site complete on October 13, 2020.84 Title X of P.L. 102-486 authorized the
reimbursement of uranium and thorium producers for their costs of cleaning up contamination
attributable to uranium and thorium sold to the federal government.85
The adequacy of funding for the Office of Environmental Management to attain cleanup
milestones across the entire site inventory has been a recurring issue. Cleanup milestones are
enforceable measures incorporated into compliance agreements negotiated among DOE, the
Environmental Protection Agency, and the states. These milestones establish time frames for the
completion of specific actions to satisfy applicable requirements at individual sites.
Power Marketing Administrations
DOE’s four Power Marketing Administrations were established to sell the power generated by
various federal dams. Preference in the sale of power is given to publicly owned and
cooperatively owned utilities. The PMAs operate in 34 states; their assets consist primarily of
transmission infrastructure in the form of more than 33,000 miles of high voltage transmission
lines and 587 substations. PMA customers are responsible for repaying all power program
expenses, plus the interest on capital projects. Since FY2011, power revenues associated with the
PMAs have been classified as discretionary offsetting receipts (i.e., receipts that are available for
spending by the PMAs), thus the agencies are sometimes noted as having a “net-zero” spending

81 For a list of each active and completed site, see DOE’s Office of Environmental Management website,
http://energy.gov/em/cleanup-sites.
82 The Office of Legacy Management administers the long-term stewardship of DOE sites that do not have a continuing
mission once cleanup remedies are in place. Sites that have a continuing mission are transferred to the DOE offices that
administer those missions, which are responsible for their long-term stewardship.
83 42 U.S.C. §2297g.
84 DOE, Office of Environmental Management, “Workers Achieve Historic Cleanup of Uranium Enrichment
Complex,” news release, October 13, 2020, https://www.energy.gov/em/articles/workers-achieve-historic-cleanup-
uranium-enrichment-complex.
85 42 U.S.C. §2296a.
Congressional Research Service

38

link to page 43 Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

authority. Only the capital expenses of the Western Area Power Administration (WAPA) and
Southwestern Power Administration (SWPA) are supported by appropriations from Congress.
For more information, see CRS Report R45548, The Power Marketing Administrations:
Background and Current Issues, by Richard J. Campbell.
Independent Agencies
Independent agencies that receive funding in Title IV of the Energy and Water Development bill
include the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), the Appalachian Regional Commission
(ARC), and the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board. NRC is by far the largest of the
independent agencies, with a total budget of nearly $900 million. However, as noted in the
description of NRC below, about 90% of NRC’s budget is offset by fees, so that the agency’s net
appropriation is less than half of the total funding in Title IV. NRC and ARC are discussed in
more detail below. The recent appropriations history for all the Title IV agencies is shown in
Table 8.
Table 8. Independent Agencies Funded by Energy and Water Development
Appropriations
(budget authority in millions of current dollars)
FY2021
Sen.
Comm.
FY2018
FY2019
FY2020
FY2021
FY2021
Major.
Program
Approp.
Approp.
Approp.
Request
House
Draft
Appalachian Regional Commission
155.0
165.0
175.0
165.0
175.0
180.0
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
922.0
911.0
855.6
863.4
863.4
863.4
(Revenues)
-790.4
-780.8
-728.1
-740.4
-740.4
-740.4
Net NRC (including Inspector General)
131.6
130.1
127.5
123.0
123.0
123.0
Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board
31.0
31.0
31.0
28.8
31.0
31.0
Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.6
Denali Commission
30.0
15.0
15.0
7.3
15.0
15.0
Delta Regional Authority
25.0
25.0
30.0
2.5
15.0
30.0
Northern Border Regional Commission
15.0
20.0
25.0
0.9
25.0
30.0
Southeast Crescent Regional Commission
0.3
0.3
0.3
0
1.0
0
Southwest Border Regional Commission

0.3
0
Total
391.5
390.0
407.3
333.1
388.9
412.6
Sources: FY2021 Senate Appropriations Committee majority draft; H.R. 7617; H.Rept. 116-449; FY2021
President’s Request; Explanatory Statement for Division C of H.R. 1865, 116th Congress; S.Rept. 116-102; S.
2470; H.R. 2740; CBO Current Status Report; H.Rept. 116-83; H.Rept. 115-929; S.Rept. 115-258; S.Rept. 115-
132; H.Rept. 115-230; P.L. 115-31 and explanatory statement.
Note: Columns may not sum to totals because of rounding.
Congressional Research Service

39

link to page 45 Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

Appalachian Regional Commission
Established in 1965,86 the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) is a regional economic
development agency. It awards grants and contracts to state and local governments and nonprofit
organizations to foster economic opportunities, improve workforce skills, build critical
infrastructure, strengthen natural and cultural assets, and improve leadership skills and capacity in
the region. ARC’s authorizing statute defines the Appalachian Region as including all of West
Virginia and parts of Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, Maryland, Mississippi, New York, North
Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia. More than 25 million
people currently live in the region as defined.
ARC provides funding to several hundred projects each year, with particular focus on the region’s
most economically distressed counties. Major areas of infrastructure support include broadband
communication systems, transportation, and water and wastewater systems. ARC has supported
development of the Appalachian Development Highway System (ADHS), a planned 3,000-mile
system of highways that connect with the U.S. Interstate Highway System. According to ARC,
90.8% of ADHS is “complete, open to traffic, or under construction.”87
Since FY2016, Congress has appropriated approximately $50 million per year as a set-aside for
ARC’s POWER Initiative (Partnerships for Opportunity and Workforce and Economic
Revitalization), which assists communities impacted by the decline of the coal industry. The
POWER Initiative funds a variety of economic, workforce, and community development projects
to stabilize and stimulate economic activity in affected communities.
For more background on ARC and other regional commissions and authorities, see CRS Report
R45997, Federal Regional Commissions and Authorities: Structural Features and Function, by
Michael H. Cecire, and CRS In Focus IF11140, Federal Regional Commissions and Authorities:
Overview of Structure and Activities, by Michael H. Cecire.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
NRC is an independent agency that establishes and enforces safety and security standards for
nuclear power plants and users of nuclear materials. Major appropriations categories for NRC are
shown in Table 9. Nuclear Reactor Safety is NRC’s largest program and is responsible for
licensing and regulating the U.S. fleet of 95 power reactors, plus two under construction. NRC is
also responsible for licensing and regulating nuclear waste facilities, such as the proposed
underground nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain, NV (for which no funding is requested
for FY2021).
NRC is required by law to offset about 90% of its total budget, excluding specified items, through
fees charged to nuclear reactor owners and other holders of NRC licenses. As a result, NRC’s net
appropriation can be as low as 10% of its total funding level, depending on the activities that
Congress excludes from fee recovery. For example, excluded items in NRC’s FY2020 enacted
appropriation are prior-year balances, development of advanced reactor regulations, and
international activities.

86 Appalachian Regional Development Act of 1965, P.L. 89-4.
87 For more information, see ARC home page at https://www.arc.gov.
Congressional Research Service

40

Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

Table 9. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Funding Categories
(budget authority in millions of current dollars)
FY2021
Sen.
Comm.
FY2017
FY2018
FY2019
FY2020
FY2021
FY2021
Major.
Funding Category
Approp. Approp. Approp. Approp. Request
House
Draft
Nuclear Reactor Safety
460.2
462.6
469.8
447.6
452.9
452.9
452.8
Nuclear Materials and
114.3
113.0
108.6
103.2
102.9
102.9
102.9
Waste Safety
Decommissioning and
26.8
27.1
25.4
22.9
22.8
22.8
22.8
Low-Level Waste
Yucca Mountain
0
0.1
0
0
0
0
0
Licensing
Corporate Support
306.7
296.4
299.6
292.6
271.4
271.4
271.4
Integrated University
15.0
15.5
15.0
16.0
0
16.0
16.0
Program
Prior-Year Balances

-20
-40.0

-16.0
-16.0
Inspector General
12.2
13.3
12.6
13.3
13.5
13.5
13.5
Total
935.2
922.0
911.0
855.6
863.4
863.4
863.4
Source: FY2021 Senate Appropriations Committee majority draft; H.R. 7617; H.Rept. 116-449; NRC FY2021
Budget Justification; Explanatory Statement for Division C of H.R. 1865, 116th Congress; S.Rept. 116-102; H.R.
2740; H.Rept. 116-83; H.Rept. 115-929, NRC FY2020 Budget Justification; H.Rept. 115-697; S.Rept. 115-258.
Note: Fee offsets and some adjustments are excluded.
Congressional Hearings
The following hearings were held by the Energy and Water Development subcommittees of the
House and Senate Appropriations Committees on the FY2021 budget request. Testimony and
opening statements are posted on most of the web pages cited for each hearing, along with
webcasts in many cases.
House
 Department of Energy, February 27, 2020, https://appropriations.house.gov/
events/hearings/department-of-energy-budget-request-for-fy2021.
 DOE Applied Energy Programs, March 3, 2020,
https://appropriations.house.gov/events/hearings/department-of-energy-applied-
energy-programs-budget-requests-for-fy2021.
 DOE National Nuclear Security Administration, March 4, 2020,
https://appropriations.house.gov/events/hearings/department-of-energynational-
nuclear-security-administration.
 Corps of Engineers and Bureau of Reclamation, March 10, 2020,
https://appropriations.house.gov/events/hearings/us-army-corps-of-engineers-
and-bureau-of-reclamation-budget-requests-for-fy2021.
Congressional Research Service

41

Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

 DOE Advanced Research Projects Agency—Energy, Office of Science, and
Environmental Management, March 11, 2020, https://appropriations.house.gov/
events/hearings/department-of-energy-fy2021-budget-request-for-advanced-
research-projects-agency.
Senate
 Department of Energy, March 4, 2020, https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/
hearings/review-of-the-fy2021-budget-request-for-the-us-department-of-energy.
 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Bureau of Reclamation, March 11, 2020,
https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/hearings/review-of-the-fy2021-budget-
request-for-us-army-corps-of-engineers-and-bureau-of-reclamation-within-dept-
of-interior.

Author Information

Mark Holt
Corrie E. Clark
Specialist in Energy Policy
Analyst in Energy Policy

Acknowledgments
Former CRS Research Assistant Danielle A. Arostegui developed the spreadsheet used for appropriations
analysis in this report.
Key Policy Staff
Area of Expertise
Name
General (Coordinator)
Mark Holt
Corps of Engineers
Anna Normand
Nicole Carter
Bureau of Reclamation
Charles V. Stern
Renewable energy
Corrie E. Clark
Energy efficiency
Corrie E. Clark
Fossil energy research
Ashley Lawson
Strategic Petroleum Reserve
Phil ip Brown
Nuclear energy
Mark Holt
Science and ARPA-E
Daniel Morgan
Quantum Information Science
Patricia Moloney Figliola
Artificial intelligence
Laurie A. Harris
Nuclear weapons stewardship
Amy Woolf
Nonproliferation
Mary Beth Nikitin
Congressional Research Service

42

Energy and Water Development: FY2021 Appropriations

DOE Environmental Management
David Bearden
Lance Larson
Power Marketing Administrations
Charles V. Stern
Bonneville Power Administration
Charles V. Stern
Federal regional authorities and
Michael H. Cecire
commissions
Alyssa R. Casey
Appropriations legislative procedures
James V. Saturno
Bil Heniff
Megan Lynch

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan
shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and
under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other
than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in
connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not
subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or
material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to
copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

Congressional Research Service
R46384 · VERSION 8 · UPDATED
43