In this issue:
DOT AND EPA UNVEIL NEW FUEL ECONOMY STANDARDS
As Congress fussed over the makings of a possible energy bill this week, the U.S. Department of Transportation and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency unveiled new fuel economy labels that the agencies say will help consumers receive more information on the efficiency of vehicles that are powered by electricity as well as gasoline. The new labels, which are the most dramatic overhaul to fuel economy labels since the program began more than 30 years ago, will provide more comprehensive fuel efficiency information, including estimated annual fuel costs, savings, as well as information on each vehicle’s environmental impact.
According to an EPA press release, the new labels will provide:
- New ways to compare energy use and cost between new-technology cars that use electricity and conventional cars that are gasoline-powered;
- Estimates on how much money consumers will save or spend on fuel over the next five years compared to the average new vehicle;
- Ratings of how a model compares to all others for smog emissions and emissions of pollution that contribute to climate change;
- An estimate of how much fuel or electricity it takes to drive 100 miles;
- Information on the driving range and charging time of an electric vehicle; and
- A QR Code®, a registered trademark of DENSO WAVE INCORPORATED, that will allow users of smartphones to access online information about how various models compare on fuel economy and other environmental and energy factors. This tool will also allow consumers to enter information about their typical commutes and driving behavior in order to get a more precise estimate of fuel costs and savings.
The new Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards for vehicles were approved as part of the “Energy Independence and Security Act” (EISA), which was passed in 2007 amid strong bipartisan support. The bill directed that CAFE standards for cars and light trucks – including SUVs, be gradually raised to an average of 35 miles per gallon by 2020. Labels were also required in the law. (For more information, please see the December 20th, 2007 Edition of Capitol Update).
Additional information regarding the new fuel economy labels can be found at: http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/d0cf6618525a9efb85257359003fb69d/9f473e018a34205e8525789a005d3518!OpenDocument
The new label can also be viewed at: http://fueleconomy.gov/label, while more information about this label can be found at: http://www.epa.gov/carlabel and http://www.nhtsa.gov/fuel-economy
Robert Rains handles public policy-related energy issues for ASME. He can be reached at rainsr@asme.org
HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE CONSIDERS DRAFT "NORTH AMERICAN-MADE ENERGY SECURITY ACT"
With oil back over $100 per barrel, lawmakers in the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Energy and Power, chaired by Rep. Ed Whitfield (R-KY), held their eighth hearing on the House Republicans’ “American Energy Initiative” last week, which focused on the discussion draft of the “North American-Made Energy Security Act,” a bill which is currently unnumbered. The bill would direct the President to expedite the consideration and approval of the construction and operation of the Keystone XL oil pipeline by no later than November 2, 2011.
Canada is the leading source of oil imports for the United States, sending over 2.5 million barrels per day to U.S. refineries in 2010. Over the past ten years, Canadian imports have increased by 725,000 barrels per day, in large part due to the development of the Athabasca oil sands in northern Alberta. While production from Alberta’s oil sands produces 1.7 million barrels per day, a recent report by the Canadian Energy Research Institute projects production will reach 2.1 million barrels per day by 2015 and 4.92 million barrels per day by 2035. Approximately 53 percent of Alberta’s oil sands production is currently exported to the United States.
To accommodate this rise in production, the Alberta, Canada-based TransCanada Corporation has proposed construction of a 1,661-mile extension (“Keystone XL”) of its Keystone pipeline system. TransCanada’s $13 billion project would link oil sands from Alberta to refineries in the Midwest and Texas. The expansion would more than double the Keystone system’s capacity, allowing 1.29 million barrels per day of Canadian crude to enter U.S. markets.
President Obama is considering issuing a Presidential Permit for Keystone XL under Executive Order 13337, which requires that a National Interest Determination (NID) be made on the pipeline. TransCanada has stated that it cannot continue its planned project if the Presidential Permit is not granted by the end of 2011.
Key issues discussed at the hearing included the following:
- The role Canadian crude oil plays in U.S. markets;
- The national security significance of Canadian crude imports;
- The economic impact of Keystone XL construction;
- The environmental concerns raised by the proposed pipeline;
- The process experienced by TransCanada in seeking a Presidential Permit; and,
- The discussion draft’s goal of providing certainty in agency decision-making.
To review the discussion draft of the “North American-Made Energy Security Act,” go to: http://republicans.energycommerce.house.gov/Media/file/Hearings/Energy/052311/NAMESA.pdf
Elsewhere last week on Capitol Hill, the House Natural Resources Committee took testimony regarding the economic viability of oil versus renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar. Although there has been a flurry of activity from Congress in introducing energy proposals, and holding hearings, few expect an energy bill to be advanced before the August recess, or this year at all.
For more information on the House Natural Resources Committee hearing, please visit: http://naturalresources.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=242965
Robert Rains handles public policy-related energy issues for ASME. He can be reached at
rainsr@asme.org
COMMITTEE MARKS UP H.R. 1891, THE "SETTING NEW PRIORITIES IN EDUCATION SPENDING ACT"
On Wednesday, May 25th, the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, chaired by Rep. John Kline (R-MN), held a markup of the “Setting New Priorities in Education Spending Act,” H.R. 1891. The measure, introduced by Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary and Secondary Education Chairman Duncan Hunter (R-CA), would repeal the authorizations of 43 various education programs, reducing the number of Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) programs by half.
Currently, the federal government operates more than 80 separate programs under the existing ESEA law. Some of these programs are said to overlap, so they have been targeted for elimination. Although the continuing resolution for fiscal year 2011 defunded several K-12 education programs, nothing prevents funding for these programs from being restored in a future appropriations bill. This authorizing legislation encourages a more streamlined federal role in the nation’s education system.
To date, this bill does not affect the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education programs contained within ESEA, with the exception of the Enhancing Education Through Technology (Ed-Tech) program. This program, which provides grants to State Educational Agencies (SEAs) to help elementary and secondary school students become “technologically literate,” would be defunded, as it was in the FY 2011 final continuing resolution. The program received $100 million in FY 2010, and $269.9 million in FY 2009.
To view a bill summary and list of programs targeted for elimination, please visit: http://edworkforce.house.gov/UploadedFiles/SUMMARY_-_Setting_New_Priorities_in_Education_Spending_Act.pdf
The text of H.R. 1891 may be reviewed at: http://edworkforce.house.gov/UploadedFiles/Substitue_HUNTER_038_xml.pdf
Melissa Carl handles public policy-related science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) issues for ASME. She can be reached at
carlm@asme.org
CONGRESS EXTENDS SBIR AND STTR PROGRAMS THOUGH SEPTEMBER 30th
The House and Senate each overwhelmingly supported legislation last week, S. 990, to temporarily extend authorizations for the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and the Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) programs through September 30, 2011.
While the Senate had initially approved a one-year extension for SBIR/STTR – through May 31, 2012 – House leaders insisted on a shorter-term measure, signaling resolve to pass a longer-term reauthorization measure later this year. Both the SBIR and STTR programs have been operating on relatively short-term extensions since 2006.
The short-term extension comes as other SBIR/STTR reauthorizing legislation (S. 493) has stalled in the Senate. On May 11th, the House Small Business Committee reported out its own legislation, H.R. 1425, “Creating Jobs through Small Business Innovation Act of 2011,” that would reauthorize the SBIR and STTR programs for three years. The May 16, 2011 edition of Capitol Update contains a summary of H.R. 1425. House leaders have not yet set a timetable for final consideration of their own reauthorization measure.
To learn more about the S.990, the “Small Business Additional Temporary Extension Act of 2011” go to: http://thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:S.+990:
Paul Fakes handles public policy-related research and development (R&D) issues for ASME. He can be reached at
fakesp@asme.org
NRC DELAYS APPROVAL OF AP1000 REACTOR DESIGN
Last week, proponents of nuclear energy were somewhat jolted to learn that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) had decided to delay the approval of the Toshiba-Westinghouse AP1000, the most popular reactor design pending before the agency. The design is included in six of 13 pending applications, and has even been cleared for limited construction in Georgia and in South Carolina. The NRC had previously said it expected to approve the AP1000 design by this summer, a dimming prospect given the latest news.
In a statement, NRC Chairman Gregory B. Jaczko said that NRC’s “efforts to confirm its review of Westinghouse’s amended AP1000 reactor design have resulted in the uncovering of additional technical issues. The NRC will always place its commitment to public safety and a transparent process before any other considerations; Westinghouse must resolve the issues before we can consider finalizing NRC certification of the design. The agency will determine what impact this effort may have on the schedule for the AP1000 design amendment and related license application reviews after the staff examines the company’s response on these matters.”
In a response to the NRC announcement, Westinghouse issued a statement that reads, in part, as follows: “Westinghouse is confident in the AP1000 design and its passive safety features, as it is one of the most studied, reviewed and analyzed nuclear power plant designs in the history of the commercial nuclear power industry. No other reactor design has received such scrutiny before or has gone through such thorough analytical review by the NRC and the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS), as well as highly respected independent experts and university scholars.”
The NRC has been under continuous pressure from all sides of the nuclear debate since the Japanese disaster on March 11. Some lawmakers have used the aftermath of the Japanese disaster to take both the NRC, and Chairman Jaczko, to task over decisions like the closing of the Yucca Mountain repository. A recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) report also concluded that Energy Secretary Steven Chu's decision to terminate the Yucca Mountain repository program was made for policy reasons, not technical or safety reasons. The Department of Energy (DOE) moved to pull its application to develop the site from the NRC in 2010, but the commission's Atomic Safety Licensing Board later ruled that the government could not pull the application unless Congress directed otherwise.
NRC Chairman Gregory B. Jaczko’s full statement may be read at: http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1114/ML111400301.pdf
The full Westinghouse statement is available at: http://westinghousenuclear.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=267
Robert Rains handles public policy-related energy issues for ASME. He can be reached at
rainsr@asme.org
HOUSE SCIENCE SUBCOMMITTEE EXAMINES NASA COMMERCIAL CARGO PROGRAM
On May 26, 2011, the House Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics held a hearing entitled, “NASA’s Commercial Cargo Providers: Are They Ready to Supply the Space Station in the Post-Shuttle Era?” The hearing featured testimony from William H. Gerstenmaier, NASA’s Associate Administrator for Space Operations, as well as representatives from the Government Accountability Office and U.S. commercial space firms, SpaceX and Orbital Sciences.
NASA’s commercial cargo program, known as Commercial Orbital Transportation Systems (COTS), was initiated in 2006 to stimulate activity in the commercial space industry. However, with the cancelation of the Constellation Systems program last year and the conclusion of the space shuttle program with the launch of STS-135 in July 2011, NASA will have no ‘government-operated’ cargo transportation system to support supply to the International Space Station (ISS). U.S. dependence on commercial entities for ISS cargo re-supply – combined with an extraordinarily tight budget environment for other NASA programs – has prompted Congress to exert especially tight oversight over NASA’s COTS program this year.
Subcommittee Chairman Steve Palazzo (R-MS) summarized Congress’s concerns with COTS, noting that, “Thus far, we have very little by which to make an informed judgment. Only one of the two cargo resupply contractors has actually orbited a prototype vehicle, and that was only an orbital demonstration that was not intended to reach the space station orbit.”
In his testimony, NASA’s William H. Gerstenmaier expressed confidence in the U.S. commercial space industry’s ability to meet the goal of transporting cargo to the ISS in 2012: “We anticipate that the final COTS demonstration flights will conclude by early 2012. The first CRS resupply flights are also planned take place in 2012, thereby providing a critical capability that will enable us to maintain the ISS following the retirement of the Space Shuttle.”
SpaceX and Orbital Science representatives went on to note in detail their successes to date in testing for commercial cargo delivery. To view an archived webcast of the subcommittee’s hearing and full witness testimony, please visit: http://science.house.gov/hearing/subcommittee-space-and-aeronautics-%E2%80%93-hearing
Paul Fakes handles public policy-related NASA issues for ASME. He can be reached at
fakesp@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.
ASME Government Relations
1828 L Street, NW, Suite 906
Washington, DC 20036