A Senate Appropriations subcommittee this week will vote on its fiscal 2013 energy and water spending bill, while appropriators in the House are scheduled to mark up their own competing legislation.

The Senate Energy and Water Development Subcommittee tomorrow will mark up its spending bill, which would fund the Energy Department, Army Corps of Engineers and Bureau of Reclamation.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), chairwoman of the subpanel, has said the measure won't include funding for the controversial nuclear waste dump under Yucca Mountain in Nevada, which the Obama administration has abandoned. A separate measure moving through the House would set aside $25 million to license the project. Feinstein is preparing legislation to revamp the nation's nuclear waste policies and move past Yucca Mountain, but Republicans have argued that the repository is required to be built under federal law (E&E Daily, Feb. 1).

Senators on the subcommittee will also delve into funding for small modular reactors, energy efficiency and renewable programs and protection of the nation's nuclear weapons stockpile.

The full House Appropriations Committee on Wednesday will mark up a competing fiscal 2013 energy and water spending measure that would cut funding for President Obama's energy efficiency and renewables program, resurrect the controversial Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump and set aside research money to investigate high gas prices. DOE would also receive $114 million to research mini nuclear reactors.

The House Energy and Water Development subpanel unanimously voted to approve the the $32.1 billion proposal last week (Greenwire, April 18). House Republicans have said the spending request represents a $965 million dip from President Obama's budget proposal.

Subcommittee Chairman Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-N.J.) said last week that while the bill's total is an increase of $88 million from 2012 levels, taking into account rescissions made in 2012 that won't be made this year, it actually is $623 million below 2012 levels. He said "hard choices" had to be made to reach that level (Greenwire, April 18).

Democrats on the House Appropriations subcommittee last week generally warmed to the legislation but warned that the measure's hefty price tag could complicate the appropriations process for other agencies and leave House lawmakers with less funds to work with. Democrats also expressed concern that the measure would cut funding for water and clean energy programs, as well as DOE's Office of Science.

Army Corps and Reclamation

Obama requested $4.7 billion for the Army Corps of Engineers in fiscal 2013, down $271 million, or 5.4 percent, from what the agency received in 2012. The bill approved by the House subpanel last week would provide the agency $4.8 billion. Reclamation would receive $1 billion under the president's request, which is largely in keeping with recent funding levels.

Democrats in charge of the Senate Energy and Water Development Subcommittee are expected to put forward a bill that would devote more money for ports and waterways, while preserving funding for environmental priorities that have come under fire from House Republicans, such as Everglades restoration.

Democrats are expected to likewise strive to protect funding for WaterSMART, the administration's signature reuse and conservation program, and environmental restoration in drought-prone Western areas such as California's Central Valley -- a priority for Feinstein -- and the lower Colorado River. In a hearing last month, subcommittee members on both sides of the aisle complained that the administration's budget request did not devote enough cash to inland waterway and port maintenance (E&E Daily, March 29).

Senators also worried that the Army Corps was unprepared to make the strategic investments in ports and dredging needed to accept the projected increase in freighter traffic through the Panama Canal, where enlargements are set to be completed by December 2014.

Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), the subpanel's ranking Republican, urged corps leaders to plan first for the next-generation Panama Canal and worry about money later. "Think first about what do we need to do -- what's our vision for the future -- then see if we can match money and procedures to the vision we have," he said.

What Senate appropriators choose to do about the one lock and dam project in particular will be telling. The Ohio River Olmstead Locks and Dam project has been eating most of the annual waterway budget in recent years. Originally estimated to cost $775 million in 1988, Olmstead will now run $3.1 billion and take another decade or longer to complete, the Army Corps recently announced.

House appropriators dealt with the Olmstead problem by building language into their energy and water bill to put a hold on 50 percent of the money and require new plans be drawn up for how to complete the project more quickly and efficiently (Greenwire, April 17).

Alexander suggested last month that the project be funded separately.

Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) was critical of the proposed cuts to the corps' budget and what she characterized as inadequate investments in waterway transportation and shipping.

"We're going to need a bigger budget -- there's absolutely no way around it," Landrieu said. "It simply does not have enough money to maintain or invest or build the structures that we have to build for an economy that will last. And that's just the simple truth."

Schedule: The Senate markup is tomorrow at 10:30 a.m. in 192 Dirksen.

Schedule: The House markup is Wednesday, April 25, at 1:00 p.m. in 2359 Rayburn.