BUDGET ISSUES

In budget and appropriations documents, the portions important to DOE’s cleanup program are labeled “Defense Environmental Cleanup,” “Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning Fund,” and “Non-Defense Environmental Cleanup.” Within those three categories, Congress allocates a certain amount for each cleanup site.

The appropriations for each site are listed here.

The federal budget process generally follows as such:

1. Guidance is issued to sites to engage the Site Specific Advisory Boards (SSABs), local governments, stakeholders, and regulators.

2. EM SSABs, local governments, stakeholders, and regulators submit advice to sites.

3. Sites submit a budget request to EM, along with recommendations from the site, stakeholders, local governments, and regulators.

4. EM deliberates among the sites.

5. EM submits a budget request to the Office of Management and Budget.

6. The Secretary deliberates within the Departments Program Secretarial Offices and submit a budget request to the Office of Management and Budget.

7. The Office of Management and Budget deliberates with the Administration and provides a “Passback” indicating the Administration’s policies and position for the final budget submission.

As explained in a 2009 DOE memorandum on engaging local stakeholders on budget development:

“Following issuance of the EM Budget Guidance (January/February), begin scheduling briefings for the EM SSAB and other stakeholders regarding planned accomplishments for the work scope, priorities, schedules/milestones, validated baselines and compliance projections for various prioritized activities. Establish an agreed-upon timeframe to allow the EM SSAB and other stakeholders to review and provide input in a timely manner to support the proposed budget submission.”

In 2022, in consultation with ECA, EM released an updated budget memo, including - for the first time - a section specifically on guidance for budget engagement with local governments. According to the memo:

Officials from the affected units of local government at each site should be engaged at the early stages of the budget development process to create a budget that meets cleanup needs.

Field sites should brief local governments during the following budget stages: (i) following the release of budget requests, (ii) following the receipt of an appropriation, and (iii) during the budget development process. Note that DOE budget presentations given to SSABs or local Citizen Advisory Boards do not substitute for direct engagement with local governments.

To strengthen local government engagement for the FY 2024 budget and beyond, the following activities are recommended:

• Field sites should meet annually in spring/early summer with local governments to discuss budget and priorities planning. This timeframe would allow DOE to (i) provide an update on how the current FY budget is being spent, (ii) discuss the outlook for the FY beginning in October, and (iii) gain local government insight that may potentially influence DOE’s request to OMB for the following FY.

• Field sites should provide read-ahead materials including priority projects that would be funded each FY. Materials could also include information on longer term projects that are still several years away, but that remain relevant for local governments.

• Field sites, where applicable, should include budget process discussion in monthly meetings between site managers and city managers. Alternatively, field sites could host a monthly meeting about budget and priorities planning with local governments.

Prior to engaging with EM, it is critical for local governments to understand the Department’s position on baselines and program priorities and incorporate them into stakeholder discussions. These include:

1. Well-defined work scope

2. Defensible near-term cost and reasonable out-year cost estimate

3. Scheduled milestones and critical path

4. Risks identified

Community input can make it easier for EM to justify budget requests to DOE and to congressional appropriators, increasing the likelihood of seeing cleanup activities fully funded.

Visiting and meeting with federal legislators—especially appropriators—is an essential part of gaining support for cleanup activities. In these meetings, communities can demonstrate to Members of Congress that federal support for cleanup activities can have significant impacts on the local economy and safety of their shared constituents.

In the late 1990s, each community around a site—the local government, businesses (primarily prime contractors and their subcontractors), citizen groups, and states—lobbied Congress to support the cleanup program and changes in the cleanup program laws. Similarly, national intergovernmental associations helped to raise awareness of the role of local governments and other impacted parties in the cleanup process. Regular meetings with congressional members, by all parties, ensured that the “politics” supported the cleanup program and EM budget.

Contractors, state regulators, federal regulators, local governments, community members and others should regularly brief congressional staff and members. The briefings can occur at all levels of a congressional office and include the staff and members of the congressional committees and subcommittees that impact the budget and policies of cleanup.

There are many steps in the budget process that may lead to lower-than-expected funding for cleanup. Federal budget caps may affect funding. Administration officials may request lower funding for cleanup in order to increase another portion of the budget. An appropriations committee may cut what they believe to be unjustified spending. In the past when Congress cut DOE’s budget overall, the cleanup funding cuts have occurred. Decreased funding can lead to job loss, missed mission milestones, and less cleanup work being accomplished. Cuts in budgets have also led to closing sites permanently.

Education and outreach to decision-makers is critical to help them understand the key issues impacting a community. DOE will meet with Congressional staff regularly throughout the year to identify the work that is being accomplished at DOE sites. Legislators need to have specific information about cleanup activities that cannot occur without sufficient funding, and, if possible, a specific amount of funding needed. The education of the delegation and their staff is an ongoing task that includes formal meetings in Washington and their home states/districts, and their visits to the site.

Just as DOE is educating Congressional staff, so too must the local governments, state governments, tribal governments and others. It is critical that Congressional members and staff also know the priorities and needs of the various parties impacted by DOE’s cleanup mission.