H. Res. 645: H.R. ­3183 – Energy and Water Appropriations Act, FY 2010

COMMITTEE ACTION: REPORTED BY A RECORD VOTE of 7-4 on Tuesday,  July 14, 2009.
FLOOR ACTION: ADOPTED BY A RECORD VOTE OF 238 – 185 AFTER AGREEING TO THE PREVIOUS QUESTION BY A RECORD VOTE OF 237 – 177 on Wednesday, July 15, 2009.

MANAGERS: Matsui/Diaz-Balart

111th Congress 
1st Session

H.RES 645

[Report No. 111-209]

 

H.R. 3183 – Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010

  1. Structured rule.
  1. Provides one hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations.
  1. Waives all points of order against consideration of the bill except those arising under clauses 9 or 10 of rule XXI.
  1. Provides that the bill shall be considered as read through page 63, line 12.
  1. Waives points of order against provisions in the bill for failure to comply with clause 2 of rule XXI.
  1. Makes in order (1) the amendments printed in part A of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution; (2) not to exceed one of the amendments printed in part B of the report of the Committee on Rules if offered by Representative Campbell of California or his designee; (3) not to exceed six of the amendments printed in part C of the report of the Committee on Rules if offered by Representative Flake of Arizona or his designee; and (4) not to exceed three of the amendments printed in part D of the report of the Committee on Rules if offered by Representative Hensarling of Texas or his designee.
  1. Provides that each such amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for 10 minutes equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole.
  1. All points of order against such amendments are waived except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI. 
  1. Provides that for those amendments reported from the Committee of the Whole, the question of their adoption shall be put to the House en gros and without demand for division of the question. 
  1. Provides one motion to recommit with or without instructions.
  1. Provides that after disposition of the amendments specified in the first section of the resolution, the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations or their designees each may offer one pro forma amendment to the bill for the purpose of debate, which shall be controlled by the proponent. 
  1. Provides that the Chair may entertain a motion that the Committee rise only if offered by the chair of the Committee on Appropriations or his designee.
  1. Provides that the Chair may not entertain a motion to strike out the enacting words of the bill (as described in clause 9 of rule XVIII). 
  1. Provides that during consideration of the bill, the Chair may reduce to two minutes the minimum time for electronic voting.
  1. Lays House Resolution 618 on the table.

—————

RESOLUTION

            Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the bill (H.R. 3183) making appropriations for energy and water development and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010, and for other purposes.  The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI. General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations. After general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule.  The bill shall be considered as read through page 63, line 12.  Points of order against provisions in the bill for failure to comply with clause 2 of rule XXI are waived.  Notwithstanding clause 11 of rule XVIII, except as provided in section 2, no amendment shall be in order except: (1) the amendments printed in part A of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution; (2) not to exceed one of the amendments printed in part B of the report of the Committee on Rules if offered by Representative Campbell of California or his designee; (3) not to exceed six of the amendments printed in part C of the report of the Committee on Rules if offered by Representative Flake of Arizona or his designee; and (4) not to exceed three of the amendments printed in part D of the report of the Committee on Rules if offered by Representative Hensarling of Texas or his designee.  Each such amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for 10 minutes equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole.  All points of order against such amendments are waived except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI. At the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill to the House with such amendments as may have been adopted. In the case of sundry amendments reported from the Committee, the question of their adoption shall be put to the House en gros and without division of the question. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions.

 Sec. 2.  After disposition of the amendments specified in the first section of this resolution, the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations or their designees each may offer one pro forma amendment to the bill for the purpose of debate, which shall be controlled by the proponent.

 Sec. 3. The Chair may entertain a motion that the Committee rise only if offered by the chair of the Committee on Appropriations or his designee. The Chair may not entertain a motion to strike out the enacting words of the bill (as described in clause 9 of rule XVIII).

 Sec. 4. During consideration of H.R. 3183, the Chair may reduce to two minutes the minimum time for electronic voting under clause 6 of rule XVIII and clauses 8 and 9 of rule XX.

 Sec. 5. House Resolution 618 is laid on the table.

SUMMARY OF AMENDMENTS IN PART A PROPOSED TO BE MADE IN ORDER

(summaries derived from information provided by sponsors)

Sponsor

#

Description

1. Pastor (AZ)

#23

REVISED Would reduce the appropriation for the Corps of Engineers, Expenses by $9 million; would adds $1.8 million to the Regulatory account for the Army Corps of Engineers to help address the chronic backlog of project applications, offset by cutting the Corps of Engineers Expenses; would add $45 million for the Hydrogen, Fuel Cells, and Infrastructure Technologies program. The increase is offset by a $30 million reduction for Departmental Administration in the Department of Energy and a $15 million reduction for Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability. The amendment would increase funding for the Northern Border Regional Commission by $2.5 million, offset by a $2.5 million reduction to Other Defense Activities. The amendment would prohibits funds in the bill from being used to purchase light bulbs unless they have the "Energy Star" or "Federal Energy Management Program" designation. Finally, the amendment would prohibit any funds in the bill from being used to purchase passenger motor vehicles unless they are purchased from Ford, GM, or Chrysler.

2. Connolly (VA)

#20

REVISED Would provide $7 million for the Chesapeake Bay Oyster Restoration program run by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to enhance water quality and fisheries productivity in the bay, offset by a reduction in funding for Army Corps of Engineers Expenses.

3. Wamp (TN)/
Davis, Lincoln (TN)

#26

REVISED Would transfer $14 million from Corps of Engineers Expenses to Corps of Engineers Construction.

4. Hastings, Doc (WA)

#48

REVISED Would make available $5 million from the Bureau of Reclamation Water and Related Resources account to begin installing hydroelectric facilities identified in a report authorized under the Energy and Policy Act of 2005 at Bureau of Reclamation dams. The revision corrects a technical reference to "Power Program Services" within the Water and Related Resources account.

5. Costa (CA)/
Cardoza (CA)

#93

Would increase funding for the California Bay-Delta Restoration Program by $10 million and decreases funding for the Bureau of Reclamation Office of the Commissioner by $10 million.

6. Cardoza (CA)/
Costa (CA)

#92

REVISED Would facilitate water transfers within the Central Valley Project and also transfers from outside the Central Valley Project.

7. Boren (OK)

#39

REVISED Would increase by $5 million funding for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy account to be utilized in the EERE Vehicles Technologies, Fuels Technology program for Natural Gas Vehicle Research Development and Demonstration, offset by a reduction in funds for the Department of Energy Departmental Administration account for general expenses.

8. Miller, Candice (MI)

#68

Would increase the Water Power Program in Energy and Efficiency and Renewable Energy by $10 million, its FY2009 enacted level, offset by a reduction in funds to the D.O.E.'s departmental Administration by the same amount.

9. Heinrich (NM)

#31

REVISED Would allow national security laboratories to dedicate an additional 1% (total of 7%) of each labs' annual budget to Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD). LDRD allows laboratories to pursue high-risk, high-reward research and develop innovative technologies to support energy and homeland security priorities.

10. Cao (LA)

#14

Would reduce the time between preparation of reports and submissions to Congress from 90 days to 60 days.

11. Blackburn (TN)

#3

Would make an across-the-board cut of 5% to all funding accounts in the bill.

SUMMARY OF AMENDMENTS IN PART B, ONE OF WHICH IS PROPOSED TO BE MADE IN ORDER

Sponsor

#

Description

1. Campbell (CA)

#8

Would strike the $1,000,000 earmark for the Institute for Environmental Stewardship and reduce the overall cost of the bill by $1,000,000.

2. Campbell (CA)

#9

Would strike the $1,000,000 earmark for the Housatonic River Net-Zero Energy Building and reduce the overall cost of the bill by $1,000,000.

3. Campbell (CA)

#10

Would strike the $500,000 earmark for the South Jersey Wind Turbines project and reduce the overall cost of the bill by an equal amount.

SUMMARY OF AMENDMENTS IN PART C, SIX OF WHICH ARE PROPOSED TO BE MADE IN ORDER

Sponsor

#

Description

1. Flake, Jeff (AZ)

#75

Would strike $1.5 million in funding for the "Maret Center" and reduce the overall cost of the bill.

2. Flake, Jeff (AZ)

#76

Would strike $1 million in funding for the “Running Springs Retreat Center Solar Upgrade” and reduce the overall cost of the bill by a commensurate amount.

3. Flake, Jeff (AZ)

#77

Would strike $1 million in funding for the “Consortium for Plant Biotechnology Research” and reduce the overall cost of the bill by a commensurate amount.

4. Flake, Jeff (AZ)

#78

Would strike $500,000 in funding for “Ethanol from Agriculture” and reduce the overall cost of the bill by a commensurate amount.

5. Flake, Jeff (AZ)

#79

Would strike $2 million in funding for the “Fort Mason Center Pier 2 Project” and reduce the overall cost of the bill by a commensurate amount.

6. Flake, Jeff (AZ)

#80

Would strike $500,000 in funding for the "Prototyping and Development of Commercial Nano-crystalline Thin Film Silicon for Photovoltaic Manufacturing" and reduce the overall cost of the bill.

7. Flake, Jeff (AZ)

#81

Would strike $450,000 in funding for the “Institute for Energy and the Environment at Vermont Law School” and reduce the overall cost of the bill by a commensurate amount.

8. Flake, Jeff (AZ)

#82

Would strike $500,000 in funding for the “Henderson, Solar Energy Project” and reduce the overall cost of the bill by a commensurate amount.

9. Flake, Jeff (AZ)

#83

Would strike $600,000 in funding for the “Green Roof Demonstration Project” and reduce the overall cost of the bill by a commensurate amount.

10. Flake, Jeff (AZ)

#84

Would strike $300,000 in funding for “Whitworth University Stem Equipment” and reduce the overall cost of the bill by a commensurate amount.

11. Flake, Jeff (AZ)

#85

Would strike $1.6 million in funding for “The Boston Architectural College’s Urban Sustainable Initiative” and reduce the overall cost of the bill by a commensurate amount.

12. Flake, Jeff (AZ)

#86

Would strike $1.5 million in funding for the "Today's Leaders for a Sustainable Tomorrow: A Sustainable Energy Program" and reduce the overall cost of the bill.

SUMMARY OF AMENDMENTS IN PART D, THREE OF WHICH ARE PROPOSED TO BE MADE IN ORDER

Sponsor

#

Description

1. Hensarling (TX)

#58

Would strike $500,000 for the Energy Conservation and Efficiency Upgrade of HVAC project in New York and reduce the overall cost of the bill.

2. Hensarling (TX)

#59

Would strike $6.22 million for the Pier 36 removal project in California and reduce the overall cost of the bill by a commensurate amount.

3. Hensarling (TX)

#60

Would strike $2 million for the Ohio River Greenway Public Access in Indiana and reduce the overall cost of the bill.

4. Hensarling (TX)

#62

Would strike $500,000 for the Automated Remote Electric and Water Meters in South River project and reduce the overall cost of the bill by a commensurate amount.

5. Hensarling (TX)

#63

Would strike $500,000 for the Hospital Lighting Retrofit project in Illinois and reduce the overall cost of the bill by a commensurate amount.