In this issue:
NRC OFFICIALS TESTIFY BEFORE HOUSE ENERGY AND COMMERCE COMMITTEE
The House Energy and Commerce Subcommittees on Environment and the Economy, and Energy and Power held a joint hearing last week to receive testimony from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC) new Chairman Allison Macfarlane. This was Chairman Macfarlane’s first appearance before the committees since her recent confirmation. Macfarlane was joined by NRC Commissioners Kristine Svinicki, William Magwood, and William Ostendorff in order to field questions on a wide-range of topics.
Subcommittee on Environment and Economy Chairman John Shimkus (R-IL) set the tone for the hearing in his opening statement, noting "With the new Chairman, today’s hearing provides an excellent opportunity to review policy and governance of the Commission. We can gather important perspective from the Commissioners, and importantly, Chairman Macfarlane about the future of the Commission and its work. This is an opportunity, not to dwell on the past, but to look to the future through some of the important lessons of recent Commission events and actions. It is critical for our oversight that we examine weaknesses in the NRC’s governance identified during the past Chairman’s tenure and to assess the many policy challenges facing the agency."
Describing her intended leadership style, Chairman Macfarlane expressed optimism that she would be able to establish an effective and collegial working environment at the NRC: "I will devote all my energies to serving on the NRC with the attributes that I consider important to good governance – openness, efficiency and transparency. I will make a strong commitment to collegiality at all levels. An agency endowed with the public trust such as the NRC requires a respectful working environment to assure its integrity."
Another major topic of discussion at the hearing included post-Fukushima follow-up actions at the NRC and the impact of potential new regulations on the nuclear power sector. Commissioner Ostendorff stressed the need for careful and thorough review of any regulatory changes, noting, "The Fukushima Task Force recommendations themselves were not accompanied by a regulatory technical analysis. Before we go out as a regulator and issue orders or require things to be changed, it is incumbent upon us to have a regulatory technical analysis."
Chairman Macfarlane fielded questions on a range of other topics, including her previous public comments and work on Yucca Mountain geologic issues. Macfarlane committed to keeping an “open mind” in her consideration of the waste repository and pledged to honor the forthcoming DC circuit court’s decision over whether the NRC is bound to finish its review of the Yucca Mountain license application.
Hearing materials and an archived webcast of the hearing are available at: http://energycommerce.house.gov/hearings/hearingdetail.aspx?NewsID=9707
Paul Fakes covers public policy-related research and development issues for ASME. He can be reached at fakesp@asme.org
SENATE ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES EXAMINES ENERGY-WATER NEXUS
Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), chair of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water and Power, and Subcommittee vice-chair, Senator Mike Lee (R-UT), convened a hearing last week to examine the role of water use efficiency as it relates to energy consumption. Witnesses testified on the economic benefits and energy saving potential of water efficiency technologies.
Senator Shaheen opened the hearing noting, "We live in a world of constrained water supplies. With over 60 percent of counties across the country facing drought, the topic of water efficiency is a timely and urgent issue, and one that requires immediate attention. Water and energy are interconnected in many ways: electricity generation requires substantial amounts of water and pumping and treating water requires electricity. Within the context of efficiency, this water and energy nexus is perhaps most easily understood by the principle that every drop of water saved in the U.S. conserves energy, and every unit of energy saved conserves water. Despite this clear link, efforts to improve efficient water and energy use have traditionally been handled separately. However, as we will hear today, there is substantial evidence that shows the need to unify these efforts into a more collaborative and comprehensive framework."
Henry Green, President of the National Institute of Building Sciences, discussed the challenges associated with public policies on water usage in buildings. Mr. Green noted that, "Data and research on water use in the building sector is lacking and requires a focus at several scales of magnitude. While we have a long history of energy use data for the building stock in general, from programs like the Energy Information Administration’s Commercial Building Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) and the Residential Energy Consumption Survey (RECS), no such resource exists for water use." Green went on to recommend new types of data collection on building water usage, as well as the creation of a national research program directed towards understanding the complex relationship between energy and water.
Harmonizing with Mr. Green’s recommendations, Mary Ann Dickinson, President and CEO of the Alliance for Water Efficiency also presented testimony on the benefits of water efficiency technologies, and underscored the need for additional resources for water efficiency research at the federal level.
Full witness testimony and an archived webcast is available at: http://www.energy.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/hearings-and-business-meetings?ID=8c3a493a-e8a8-4af6-9148-ce2aa875f46b
ASME’s Board of Government Relations (BGR) and Center for Research and Technology Development (CRTD) recently issued a position statement on energy-water nexus issues, which recommended the development of a national policy that addresses the interdependencies of reliable sources and efficient uses of energy and water. The full statement is available at: http://files.asme.org/asmeorg/NewsPublicPolicy/GovRelations/PositionStatements/32554.pdf
Paul Fakes covers public policy-related research and development issues for ASME. He can be reached at fakesp@asme.org
SCIENCE COMMITTEE EXAMINES THE ROLE OF FEDERAL RESEARCH TO ADVANCE SECURITY TECHNOLOGIES
On July 19th, the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology held a hearing to examine the federally-funded research and development (R&D) of threat detection technologies. Witnesses discussed the evolution of threat detection R&D, including how future threats are anticipated, as well as the ways in which stakeholders conduct and apply research to protect the public and to mitigate threats. Further, witnesses explored how relevant federal agencies and laboratories coordinate and work with the private sector to ensure that research supports marketable and economical products.
"We recognize that the terrorists only need to get it right once to succeed, whereas we need to get it right every time to ensure the protection of our citizens," noted Chairman Ralph Hall (R-TX). "The research and development activities occurring at our federal agencies have the potential to both transform and improve threat detection and to create products and technologies that could be beneficial for other purposes. While I recognize that threat detection is only one piece of a much larger system required to combat terrorism, better detection does enable better protection for our citizens. As the old saying goes, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure."
Prior to the September 11th terrorist attacks, the threat of terrorism from both the international and domestic environment was not as evident as it is today. To counter the growing list of threats and prevent a variety of attacks on the country, and to ensure quick response capabilities, the U.S. government and the private sector expanded R&D into technologies that could detect dangerous materials.
Dr. Huban Gowadia, Acting Director of DHS’s Domestic Nuclear Detection Office, discussed some of the great technological advancements that have been made. "Along with intelligence and law enforcement, technology is fundamental in our ability to detect nuclear threats," Dr. Gowadia said. "In recent years, there have been dramatic advancements in nuclear detection technology… As a result, frontline responders and law enforcement officials now regularly use detection equipment to search for, find, and identify nuclear materials in the field."
Representing the National Institute of Standards and Technology, Dr. Richard Cavanagh expanded on the importance of standards for detection technologies. "Standards play an important role in reliable threat detection, as they establish the reproducibility of the measurement, comparability of measurements made at different locations with different technologies, and the comparability of historical data to the data available today… Standards are important in quantifying the level of confidence that can be placed in the data."
Discussing the multi-discipline research conducted at the National Science Foundation that supports threat detection, Dr. Thomas Peterson testified that such fundamental research has significantly contributed to physical threat detection. "To truly understand threat detection technologies requires expertise not only in engineering and physical sciences, but in life sciences, social and behavioral sciences and education as well. NSF serves all those communities, and our support in this area taps on all those strengths," Peterson said.
The hearing charter, complete opening statement of Chairman Hall and the prepared statements of each of the witnesses may be viewed at: http://science.house.gov/hearing/full-committee-hearing-keeping-america-secure-science-supporting-development-threat
Paul Fakes covers public policy-related research and development issues for ASME. He can be reached at fakesp@asme.org
ENERGY DEPARTMENT ANNOUNCES NEW NUCLEAR ENERGY INNOVATION INVESTMENTS
Earlier this month, the Department of Energy (DOE) announced a $10.9 million investment across 13 projects to help solve common challenges across the nuclear industry and improve reactor safety, performance and cost competitiveness.
These projects fall under two categories:
- Advanced Methods for Manufacturing” (totaling $3 million over 4 projects) to improve the production and design efficiency of nuclear plant components including advanced concrete construction methods, near-net shape fabrication methods and joining processes that can be used in small modular reactor manufacturing; and,
- "Reactor Materials" (totaling $7.9 million over 9 projects) to conduct research into advanced reactor materials for piping, wiring cladding and other related structures in nuclear reactors and across the nuclear fuel cycle.
Additionally, DOE has announced a $1.6 million investment in three university-led projects through the Advanced Test Reactor National Scientific User Facility Program (ATR NSUF) and the Nuclear Energy University Programs (NEUP). Since 2007, the ATR NSUF Program has invested over $57 million in more than 40 experiments at the program’s research reactor facilities. Over the past four years, the Department’s Nuclear Energy University Programs have invested $219 million in 220 research projects at 79 U.S. universities and colleges.
Additional details and project descriptions for the “Advanced Methods for Manufacturing” and “Reactor Materials” grants may be found at: http://www.nuclear.energy.gov/nuenentech/pdfs/NEET%20Award%20Tables_Final.pdf
Additional information is on the ATR NSUF Program is available at: http://atrnsuf.inl.gov/About/tabid/37/Default.aspx
Paul Fakes covers public policy-related energy issues for ASME. He can be reached at fakesp@asme.org
EPA TO REVIEW TECHNICAL INFORMATION ON MERCURY AND AIR TOXICS STANDARDS FOR NEW POWER PLANTS
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is reviewing technical information that is focused on pollution limits for new power plants under the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards, based on new information provided by industry stakeholders after the rule was finalized. This review, which is not an uncommon step for major standards, will have no impact on the standards already set for existing power plants. By moving quickly to review the new information, this action will provide greater certainty for five planned future facilities in Georgia, Kansas, Texas, and Utah that would be covered by the standards. This review will not change the expected costs or public health benefits of the rule.
EPA will review monitoring issues related to the mercury standards for new power plants and will address other technical issues on the acid gas and particle pollution standards for these plants. The agency’s review will not change the types of state-of-the-art pollution controls new power plants are expected to use to reduce this harmful pollution.
This type of review, known as a "reconsideration," is a routine tool that EPA often uses to ensure that its standards incorporate all relevant information, particularly in cases where information only becomes available after a rule is promulgated. The agency will follow an expedited but open and transparent process that includes public comment on any proposed changes. The agency will complete the rulemaking by March 2013 and will also use its Clean Air Act authority to stay the final standards for new power plants for three months during this review.
EPA’s Mercury and Air Toxics Standards are the first national standards to regulate power plant emissions of mercury and toxic air pollution like arsenic, acid gas, nickel, selenium, and cyanide. By ensuring that existing power plants install widely available pollution control equipment, EPA estimates that the standards will prevent as many as 11,000 premature deaths and 4,700 heart attacks a year, as well as preventing 130,000 cases of childhood asthma symptoms and about 6,300 fewer cases of acute bronchitis among children each year.
For additional information, go to: http://epa.gov/mats/actions.html
Paul Fakes covers public policy-related environmental issues for ASME. He can be reached at fakesp@asme.org
UPDATED DATA NOW AVAILABLE ON THE EMPLOYMENT AND EDUCATION PATTERNS OF UNDERREPRESENTED GROUPS IN SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING
The National Science Foundation (NSF) recently released "Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering," a compilation of the latest data drawn from a wide variety of sources. The report provides statistical information about the participation of women, minorities and persons with disabilities in science and engineering education and employment. Tables continue to be updated as new data become available. A formal, interactive report, scheduled for release in January 2013, will highlight key information drawn from these data and will open the door to a rich set of associated resources.
This update contains a variety of information on the employment and education of scientists and engineers. Updated employment tables include information on scientists' and engineers' occupations, median annual salaries, federal employment and employment status according to disability status, race, ethnicity and sex.
Updated education tables display information on:
- Freshman intentions to major in science and engineering (S&E);
- Undergraduate enrollment in engineering;
- First university degrees awarded in selected countries;
- Doctoral degrees in S&E;
- Characteristics of S&E doctorate recipients' academic institution;
- Primary source of support for doctorate recipients who are U.S. citizens and permanent residents; and,
- Employment plans of S&E doctorate recipients.
The report is available at: http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/
Melissa Carl handles public policy-related science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education issues for ASME. She can be reached at: carlm@asme.org
THE ARTICLES CONTAINED IN CAPITOL UPDATE ARE NOT POSITIONS OF ASME OR ANY OF ITS SUB-ENTITIES, UNLESS SPECIFICALLY NOTED AS SUCH. THIS PUBLICATION IS DESIGNED TO INFORM ASME MEMBERS ABOUT ISSUES OF CONCERN BEING DEBATED AND DISCUSSED IN THE HALLS OF CONGRESS, IN THE STATES, AND IN THE FEDERAL AGENCIES.
EDITOR: ASME Government Relations, 1828 L Street, NW, Suite 810, Washington, DC 20036-5104.