The Senate Appropriations Committee today approved a spending package in a voice vote that boosts funding for clean energy development and authorizes the Department of Energy to begin looking for sites to store nuclear waste.

Appropriators also unanimously signed off on a $20.1 billion spending bill for the country's agriculture programs and the Food and Drug Administration.

The energy and water subpanel's $33.4 billion proposal is $373 million below the current enacted levels for 2012 and $352 million below President Obama's budget request.

It includes $27.1 billion for the Department of Energy, more than $1 billion above current levels. The increases come in part from boosts to DOE's Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy program, which would get another $37 million to develop alternative energy sources.

Similarly, the Army Corps of Engineers would receive $5 billion, $276 million above the president's request and $5 million more than current levels.

"Clearly, we feel the corps projects are important," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), chairwoman of the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Subcommittee.

The Interior Department would be funded at $1 billion, which is $15 million more than the president's request but $27 million below current levels.

Feinstein emphasized the steps taken to address nuclear waste, noting that the bill's language is "limited" and any steps toward a permanent repository would have to be approved by Congress.

Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) suggested that the language should not hold up the bill, regardless of senators' feelings toward the controversial Yucca Mountain nuclear waste site in Nevada.

"Whether you are for Yucca Mountain or against Yucca Mountain, it is possible to be for the modest suggestion recommended here," he said.

Ohio Democrat Sherrod Brown successfully introduced an amendment that requires the Army Corps to complete a study by July 2014 on how Asian carp, an invasive species, is affecting the Great Lakes.

And Missouri Sen. Roy Blunt (R) offered an amendment that sought to shift $40 million in Army Corps funds to its flood control programs.

Democrats, however, opposed the measure, arguing that the transfer could open up the program to litigation because it would compromise the corps' compliance with environmental statutes.

"The best way to approach this is not to move the money through appropriations, but to go after the law," said Iowa Democrat Tom Harkin.

Blunt's amendment narrowly failed, 14-15.

The Senate appropriations action comes as senators' counterparts in the House yesterday approved a spending package that makes significant cuts to funds for clean energy and resurrects Yucca Mountain (E&ENews PM, April 25).

Agriculture, FDA

Senate appropriators also signed off on an agriculture, rural development and FDA package that is about $1 billion higher than enacted levels.

The bill would provide $2.5 billion for the Food and Drug Administration. The money would go largely to programs aimed at protecting the public health, including an additional $1 billion for food inspection.

"We believe this bill protects the need for public health and safety," said Sen. Herb Kohl (D-Wis.), the chairman of the Agriculture Appropriations subpanel. "It ensures American farmers continue to be the most productive in the world and have the tools they need to feed a growing population and new challenges."

There was little controversy surrounding the measure, except for one provision from Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) that gives FDA expanded authority to consider regulating flavored smoking products that Durbin said are aimed at children, such as chocolate-flavored cigars.

"I really believe that this crosses the line," Durbin said.

Louisiana Democrat Mary Landrieu and several Republicans raised objections, asking why they were mandating such action in a spending bill.

Durbin emphasized that the language "is not mandating any outcome," but noted that it is a "dramatic step forward" for the Appropriations Committee to include such a provision.

The Democrat revised the language to clarify it is directed at the marketing and sale of the products to children -- not adults -- and that appeared to appease Landrieu and others.