February 11, 2002

The Honorable Jeff Bingaman
Chairman, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
United States Senate
366 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

Dear Senator Bingaman:

The Energy Committee of the Council on Engineering, American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME International), is privileged to respond to your invitation to review and provide comments on S. 1766, the Energy Policy Act of 2002.

The Energy Committee, which comprises 30 members representing 17 divisions of the ASME, reviewed the summary of S. 1766, focusing primarily on Titles 12 and 13. On January 24th, the Committee conducted a teleconference with members of your staff, John Kotek, Jon Epstein, and Dan Alpert, during which they responded to questions about from the Committee. We would like to them for their cooperation in answering our questions in a direct and candid manner.

The Energy Committee strongly believes that the United States needs a well-defined, focused National Energy Policy. We commend you for introducing a comprehensive bill that continues the path toward a national energy strategy that began with the release of the President's National Energy Policy Plan and continued with the House passage of H.R. 4, the Secure America's Future Energy Act. While we are not prepared to offer a blanket endorsement of S. 1766, we do wish to provide comments on some of its more general directions and provisions.

In surveys of important issues facing our nation, the membership of ASME has consistently identifies energy policy and energy research and development (R&D) issues among their top concerns. Over the past 24 years, federal R&D budgets have steadily eroded to the point that they are now approximately half (in constant dollars) what they were in 1978. The Energy Committee considers energy R&D to be a critical factor in addressing future energy supplies, and we support the reversal of the historical funding trend for energy R&D represented in S. 1766. Within the bill, we support provisions that:

Increase government support of Energy R&D for long-term energy security of the United States;

encourage market-directed choices from multiple sources of energy. This approach has proved to be beneficial to the growth of the U. S. economy. However, we continue to be concerned about our increasing reliance on imported oil;

facilitate timely access to oil and gas reserves on public lands and which make federal land available for the development of renewable energy resources.

obtain information on, and a better understanding of, the status of global climate change and its linkage to the use of energy in our economy;

and provide bridging incentives and federal purchase requirements for the development of advanced and renewable energy technologies.

The Energy Committee applauds the bill's provisions related to nuclear power. However, we encourage you to expand provisions to include university initiatives to encourage faculty and student participation in nuclear engineering, as well as in other areas of advanced energy research and education.

Recognizing that natural gas is playing an increasing role in power generation, the Energy Committee and ASME encourage a serious examination of how the nation best utilizes this limited natural resource. Even though most power plants currently being designed and built utilize natural gas as the fuel source, it may be a more appropriate, longer-term approach to encourage conserving natural gas for home heating and other applications.

With regard to the provisions in the bill related to global climate change, the Energy Committee is generally supportive of efforts to consolidate climate change activities within the Department of Energy. However, the Committee believes that mandates and incentives designed to reduce emissions from power plants, automobiles, and other sources should be subjected to rigorous cost-benefit analyses prior to implementation. The same holds true for the seemingly arbitrary cumulative reductions in energy intensity called for in the bill.

We appreciate the opportunity to provide comments on S. 1766, and the Committee stands ready to provide additional information should the need arise. We have enclosed the ASME General Position Paper on Energy Policy published in March 2001 to give you a perspective on the Society's views on many aspects of energy policy.

Please do not hesitate to contact Francis Dietz, ASME Government Relations Representative, at 202-785-3756, or via e-mail at dietzf@asme.org, for additional information.

Sincerely,

Frank Adamek
Vice President
Energy Resources Board 

Richard Laudenat
Vice President
Energy Conversion Board
   
Thomas R. Mancini
Chairman, Energy Committee
Council on Engineering
  

Enclosure

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This letter represents the views of the Energy Committee of the ASME Council on Engineering, and is not necessarily a position of the Society as a whole.