tv Politics and Public Policy Today CSPAN April 29, 2016 9:30am-11:31am EDT
>> andre cody is the executive chef here at the washington hilton. it's known as one of washington's premier events bringing together hollywood stars. c span has live coverage of the 2016 white house correspondent's dinner starting at 6:00 p.m. eastern. the live coverage includes red carpet arrivals, background on the dinner and award presentations. 2,700 people are expected to attend this year's sold out dinner. larry will headline and this year president obama will give his final speech as commander in chief. join us to watch the 2016 white house koir respondents' -- correspondents' dinner live on c span. and we're live on capitol hill for a committee on nuclear regulation. we will hear testimony from former commissioner of the nuclear regulatory commission.
before your five-minute opening statement, but we want to thank marvin fratel for the great job he did at the nuclear energy institute and i think it's plan to go on and look at other challenges at the end of this year, so we're delighted he's here. he served as nei's president chief executive order since 2009 and has long and distinguished year advocating for the nuclear industry. nuclear energy is an integral part of our industry policy. the current fleet roughly 100 operating nuclear power plants safely and reliably generates about 20% of our nation's electricity. however, many of these power plants are approaching the end of their current license and unnecessary regulatory cost are adding to challenging economic conditions. this provides the time, the opportunity to examine proposals to approve the framework for
nuclear power plants and options to develop a regulatory framework for advanced nuclear technologies. new nuclear technologies hold great promise to operate in a cost-competitive environment with greater safety margins than existing reactors, while generating less wage and reducing proliferating concerns. however, regulatory uncertainty is repeatedly cited as top barrier to developing these technologies. the department of energy, which supports nuclear research and development activities should collaborate where applicable with uncertainty. today we're going to hear from stake holders on how to more effectively manage the process, including options to increase the efficiency and certainty of the nrc's existing licensing process. a representative kissinger's
draft forces rate payers to pay more for safe, clean, nuclear power. and i want to thank him for his legislation and we look forward to your comments about that. also, certainly appreciate congressman ladis leadership in addressing regulatory barriers hindering the advance nuclear technologies, his legislation, the advanced nuclear technology act will ensure that doe's technical expertise, research and facilities are utilized when appropriate to assist the nrc. and at this time, i would like to yield in a minute or so to mr. lad and then i'll yield to mr. kissinger. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. i would like to, again, thank you for holding this hearing today on the nuclear power, which is highlighting the bill
that i introduced last week, hr 4979 the act of 2016. i'd like to ask unanimous consent mr. chairman to enter several letters into the record. these letters are from the nuclear institute, the american nuclear society. >> without objection. >> thank you very much. it needs to start now with the nuclear regulatory commission is able to provide innovative technologies, 20% of the national energy portfolio must remain energy next. as the united states looks to the future more energy will be needed and nuclear power provides a reliable, clean based load power option. investment in new technologies is happening with approximately 50 companies in this country working to develop the next generation of nuclear power. again, that is why we have introduced hr 49/79 it's time for congress to ensure that nrc provides the framework so
innovators are preparing to apply for licensing technologies. hr 4979 requires that nrc establish regulatory framework for issuing licenses for reactor technology but also requires the nrc submit a schedule to implementation of the framework by 2019. safety and nuclear is the number one goal in the regulatory frame ensures the nrc has the opportunity that enables them to regulate the future technology of the nuclear industry. hr 4979 requires the department of energy and nrc collaborate in advancing new nuclear technology and natural labs and doe provide opportunities for testing for new nuclear technology in the option to look at private -- public private partnerships between the doe and the private sector companies, interested in investing a future of nuclear. there's also a role for nrc in this space because these testing opportunities allow for demonstration for technologies
that nrc has not been licensing for over the past four years and mr. chairman, i greatly appreciate holding this hearing. i yield back to you, thank you very much. you know, mr. upton is not going to be here. i want to give you his time. >> thank you. >> all right. >> if there l ladder wants to talk some more, he can talk some more too. >> i recognize mr. rush for his five-minute statement. >> i want to thank you, mr. chairman, for holding this important hearing today on hr 4979 advanced nuclear technology development act of 2016. and the nuclear utilization of keynote energy policies act. mr. chairman, as we move towards a reduced carbon sustainable energy economy, there's no doubt that nuclear energy will need to play an instrumental role in
order to reach those object jiv. while today's fleet reactor technology, more intention is now being paid to the use of nonlwr reactor designs that have been demonstrated by the department of energy, but are currently not licensed for commercial use in the united states. and thank mr. chairman emerging innovative designs of advanced nonlike water reactors and like waters, small modular reactors have the potential to produce nuclear power more efficiently and with less waist than the current technologies. and we're to truly develop a scale up these technological advances. it is important that policy
makers and nuclear regulatory commission, provide regulatory certainty for the the nuclear industry in order to encourage investment in these next generation nuclear designs. so i applaud my colleagues, mr. ladder and mr. mcnerney for introducing hr 4979. this legislation seeks to provide guidance and direction to the nrc and the doe to ensure that these two agencies have sufficient expertise and -- in order to support and regulate advanced reactor technology. it also requires nrc to form formulate a plan that will help the civilian research and development of advanced nuclear energy, technologies and enhanced the licenses --
licensing and commercial development of such technologies. mr. chairman, i fully support the intent of this legislation, i look forward to hearing feedback from our panel of experts but this type of legislation and implications one it is inactive. in regards to the nuclear utilization of keynote energy policies that also look forward to engaging the witnesses on this legislation. mr. chairman, finally, if nuclear energy is going to continue to play a constructive role in a reduced common energy portfolio, we must ensure that we have policies in place that appropriately reflect the contributions of the industry and current reality that it faces, so i commend my
colleagues from illinois, mr. kissinger for introducing a real draft that has conversation towards reaching this goal. of course, mr. chairman, today's bill is simply a discussion draft and we will need to hear from the nrc commissioners themselves before moving into it into legislative process. but i look forward to today's hearing and i look forward testimony from today's experts of mostly need for the changes outlined in the bill as well as the practical implications if these changes were indeed enacted. thank you, mr. chairman, i yield back the balance of time. >> gentleman yields back, i recognize mr. kiss sin ger for five minutes and some others want some of your time, you might consider yielding it. >> i want to thank you for holding the hearing and i want to thank each of the witnesses
for being here today. it's an important topic. as we've heard, nuclear power generates about 20% of electricity in the united states and in illinois it's over 50%, including 60% of the nation's carbon free electricity. they're having the capacity factors by far in the electricity industry and setting the gold standard for commercial nuclear safety worldwide. we have to recognize, however, that while our nuclear fleet is strong today, the demand for clean, reliable and affordable energies only is increasing. we have an obligation to safely maintain our existing fleet of 99 units and to ensure the nrc continues to regulate efficie efficiently and effectively so investment plants can continue. the regulatory inefficiency we often see today does nothing to help our existing fleet. does nothing to foster investment in new plants, or most importantly to ensure safety and protect public health. i want to thank nrc for
providing me with technical feedback which we're currently reviewing. i look forward to continue to work with them throughout this process. i appreciate the interest in my colleagues in this issue, addressed in my discussion draft, including establishing fair and more equitable in our fees streamlining the licensing process and improving the current regulatory framework for decommissioning plants. these are all important conversations staffs so that nuclear power can continue to provide clean, reliable and affordable for rate payers in the united states. again, i welcome this opportunity to discuss how we can maintain our position as the global leader in civilian nuclear power and nrcs position to to safety. think all of us in this room recognize that if we see the position, it will have serious consequences, not only for our economy, but also for our national security. with that, mr. chairman, i'm happy to yield to anybody who wants my time. >> anybody on our side seek additional time? >> i yield back. >> yields back. this time i recognize the
gentleman of california and thank him for cosponsoring this legislation, as well for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chair. our nation will buy necessities deminnish in order to fight climate change, as we do so, we will need to turn more and more to nuclear power. hr 4979 the bill that my colleague mr. lada and i introduced allows the nrc to develop the needed technical expertise for emerging technologi technologies. this legislation provides a pathway for the nrc and the doe to continue collaborating and establishes a regulatory framework for consideration of licensing advanced reactors. this will help ensure that as newer, safer technologies are developed that the nrc has the framework in place to review new applications. mr. chairman, with unanimous concept i would like to submit three letters, one from the lurkly's engineering department
and one from third way and one from clean air task force into the record. >> without objection. >> and i'll yield the balance of my time to my colleague from pennsylvania. >> and i thank my colleague, i want to thank the chairman in the ranking member for holding this important hearing today. to me, nuclear is a critical component of our energy future. we need to work here at this committee to ensure that it remains feasible and safe for our constituents back home by investing in this incredible energy source and its technology and making sure its value as carbon free reliable base load power is properly appreciated. i believe advanced nuclear is key component for maintaining nuclear power in the future and will be entry cal part of our portfolio here in the united states. my colleague's congressman and mcnerney's bill takes important steps in that direction. i also want to applaud our colleague, mr. kinsing ger for his discussion draft.
i think we share many similar concerns regarding the nuclear industry and i'm optimistic that we'll be able to find some common ground on solutions, though, i couldn't help but notice the acronym for your bill is nuke pa, which i find someone distre distressing but i'm encouraged by bringing attention to these issues the nuclear industry is facing and i do hope we can work together on solutions and by coming up with a different acronym than the one you've chosen. thank you, i yield back. >> gentleman yield backs that concludes the opening statements. and i'm going to introduce the witnesses individually before they speak, so first of all we have mr. marvin fratel who i mentioned in my opening statement, executive officer for the nuclear energy institute. thanks for being with us and we look forward to your testimony and you're recognized for five minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman and
ranking member rush and members of the subcommittee on behalf of the commercial nuclear energy industry. i want to thank the committee for considering the advanced nuclear technology development act, hr 4979 and discussion draft of the nuclear utilization of keynote energy policies act. i am pleased to represent the broad nuclear industry, including the owners and operators of nuclear power plants and the supplier community today. as congressmen said, the nuclear energy is the largest and most efficient source of carbon free electricity in the united states. our 99 reactors produced nearly 20% of our nation's electricity and approximately 63% of our carbon free electricity. nuclear energy facilities demonstrate unmatched reliability by operating with an average capacity factor of 92%. higher than all other positions. and importantly, they're essential to the country's economy and the communities in which they operate. despite the significant environmental economic and
national security benefits that nuclear energy provides, the current regulatory requirements and licensing processes challenge the industry's ability to build new technologically advanced reactors. the the prospect has become attra attractive and necessary in the u.s. and abrord. in this country, 126,000 megawatts of generation will be retired over the next 15 years. u.s. energy information administration forecasts a need for 287,000 megawatts of new electric capacity by 2014. in addition to the lech tris capacity needed to replace the retired power plants. many other countries are looking to rapid expansion of nuclear energy to address breauxing electricity and environmental needs. advance the nuclear reactor designs or technological advances for the u.s. and are well suited to developing economies. however, without strong federal leadership and direction, u.s.
industry runs risk of falling behind international competitors. hr 4979 affirms congress' commitment to u.s. leadership in u.s. technology and safety. the industry supports provisions in the bill to think differently about licensing reactors. the bill calls for efficient, risk-informed next logical network and a phase review process that could facilitate private financing for advanced reactors. developers will be able to demonstrate progress to investors and participants in the first of a kind projects and obtain necessary capital investments as they achieve milestones. as we look to the details of how innovative advanced reactor technologies can meet requirements, it is important for the nrc's framework to
acknowledge there will be a variety of effective ways to meet safety requirements. hr 4979 also recognizes that as a government function to develop the regulatory infrastructure, license advanced reactor technologies and, therefore, authorize as federal funding to support those activity. congress should reform nrc's fee recovery structure to make fees more equitable and transparent. despite efforts to reduce the budget and rightsize the agency, fees continue to be excessive and limitations of the fee rule create fundamental structural problems. the budget is $1 billion a year despite significant declines in the workload. in particular, according to ernst and young study performed for nrc, nrc spends 37% its budget on mission support act cost more than 10% higher than pier agencies. because the nrc must collect 90%
of budget from licensees and the budget has not declined, remaining licensees are responsible for paying higher annual fees. with recent premature shutdown and decommissioning, the current fee structure guarantees remaining licensees will continue to bear higher annual fees. the draft nuclear utilization of keynote energy policy acts adopts straightforward approach of adopting fees more equitable. it will continue to require the licensee to pay for agency but disallow collection of fees associated with the agency's corporate support. there are federal budget questions that arise with this approach, it would require the nrc to justify corporate support costs to congress in order to receive appropriations and it turn prompt the nrc to control the budget and reduce wasteful
spending. the draft bill recognizes value of international investments in u.s. nuclear plants removing outdated restrictions on foreign ownership that ignore protections to the nation's security and reality to the global nuclear energy markets. the draft bill eliminates uncontested nrc hearing on construction permits and combined license applications. this would not limit public participation since the public does not part naicipate in a puc hearding. the draft bill would require the nrc include the framework for deigs xhid decommissioning power reactors. the existing framework does not appropriately account for significant reduction and risk that result when a power reactor ceases operations, defuels and decommissions.
in closing, on behalf of nei and its members, i'd like to thank the congressmen for introducing the legislation. we support passage of this bill. we pressuappreciate congressman kendsinger. we look forward to working with members of the committee and staff to advance these reforms. thank now for the opportunity to testify today. >> next witness, mr. jeffrey merrifield, chairman of the advanced reactors task force, nuclear infrastructure council, welcome. you're recognized for five minutes. >> thank you mrvery much. the commissioner of the u.s. regulatory commission -- >> would you move your microphone closer? >> sorry.
i got it. again, thank you very much. thank you ranking member rush. as former commission or the nuclear regulatory commission i frequently testified before this committee and it's an honor to be here this morning. today, i'm appearing in my role as chair of the u.s. nuclear infrastructure council advanced reactors task force, i'm in partner in the pillsbury law firm. my testimony will discuss provisions in hr 4979 on advanced reactors as well as proposed changes to the procedures subject of the discussion draft offer the by congressman kenzinger. salute the focus and support for advanced reactors as well as the budget reform provisions that provide funding for nrc to develop a modernized framework for advanced nuclear technologies. nik issued a framework for advance the reactor licensing modernization white paper february 22, 2016, which
embraces many elements contained in legislation. when i first became a commissioner in 1998, the nrc, with the support of congress, worked to right size the agency consistent with a level of licensing and inspection activities. at that time the agency has approximately 3400 employees, and in the exfour years we were able to reduce that down to 2800 through attrition, yet without sacrifice to its mission of protecting people and the environment. today, the agency faces the same challenges to reduce its staff and become more efficient and timely in licensing activities. the nrc has made great strides in right sizing the agency, we believe further efficiencies can be realized maintaining safety inspects and improving timeliness of licensing. the u.s. maintained its technology leadership building new passive generation iii
reactors in georgia and south carolina, as well as small modular light water nuclear reactors headed toward deployment. nic has seen significant growth and support for generation iv reactors that will provide expanded options for economical, carbon-free electricity. if the united states is to be successful in maintaining its lead in developing and deploying reactors in the 2020s, 2030s, congress must consider significant policy changes. we believe the language in section 6 of hr 4979 will allow the agency to create a modern, risk-informed, technology neutral framework enable development of advance the regulations without passing costs on to the developers or the utilities. section 6a6 calls for nrc to evaluate options to allow
applicants to review fees processes we believe the language should be strengthened to require the nrc to establish specific stages in the advanced nuclear process including prelicensing vendor preliline r recommended by the nic white paper. such a process would allow advanced reactor developers and investors to have a clearer picture of where they stand in the nrc process, meeting nrc safety requirements, and allow them to achieve further investment in their technologies. we emphasize a need to establish risk informed performance criteria applicable for advanced reactor its. licensing process reforms are needed for nonlight water reactors the nrc must move forward to finalize generic design criteria, source term, and emergency requirements among
others. we strongly support section 2 of the discussion draft which places fair and equitable provisions on the agency's fee-based programs. by eliminating current fee base to nonfee base ratio and articulating specific areas borne by general revenues the draft provides appropriate balance between fees borne by individual companies those over head activities by the federal government. nic believes the discussion draft should be conducted at no or limited cost with appropriate cost share, perhaps 50/50 for later stages of the license process. this could be funded through general revenues or a grant reprogram, either way avoid the doe and nrc picking advanced reactor winners and losers. we believe the private sector is better placed to identify and promote innovation and the nrc licensee fees should not have a chilling effect on
entrepreneurial efforts. finally i strongly support elimination of the foreign ownership requirements of section 3 and the mandatory hearing requirements contained in second 4 and, pleased to discuss my views with the subcommittee. i ask additional letters of support including that of x-energy included in the hearing record. thank you for allowing me to testify today. >> thank you. next witness, mr. todd alp, senior fellow of the clean energy program for the third way. dr. allen, thanks for being with us. you're recognized for five minutes. please, get the microphone up close. >> absolutely. good morning. chairman witfield, ranking member rush, other distinguished member of the committee, i appreciate the opportunity to provide testimony. the importance of nuclear energy innovation. my perspective on nuclear energy comes from a diverse career. my first rob aftjob i lived on
floating reactor. i spent ten years teaching at university of wisconsin nuclear engineering. i've seen a generation that believes in nuclear technology as a critical component providing clean energy. i've worked in the national laboratory system. as deputy for science and technology at idaho national laboratory, working to open up the facilities to university and industry users across the country. now, i'm at a think tank where i think. creates and brings to market advanced nuclear technologies. currently, nuclear energy provided as a single product offering, specifically large giga watts scale, electricity production machines but the national energy system is changing rapidly, opening up the possibility of nuclear energy supporting a wider range of functions, if new ideas can get from conception to commercialization. a 2015 third way report identified 50 companies backed by $1.3 billion in private.
capital, developing plans for new nuclear plans in the u.s. and canada. these companies are creating a brea growing number of product options intending to build upon the continued success of our current light water reactor fleet which provides over 60% of the carbon-free electricity in the united states. private/public partnerships will be key to the story. similar to the way hydraulic fracking and internet were developed and space-x teaming with nasa to send unmanned vehicles to mars. i'll use as an example a hypothetical graduate nuclear engineering student named carla who wants to provide clean energy to the world and make money at the same time. what's her path to success in transitioning a good idea on paper to a marketable product and thriving government and partnership with the february to be useful? benefit from early interactions.
we suggest carla could be help through the creation of private/public partnerships, innovation centers. innovation centers would benefit the department of energy. it could inform now d.o.e. informs research dollars to support multiple companies. at innovation center, carla has opportunities to trouble shoot and mature her concept and introduced to financial firms which helps her secure a small investment to fund her company. carla could leverage private investment allowing her to move quickly and signal that her design is especially promising. the department of energy engages in cost share programs like the ones supporting project agreements with tera power. further use is encouraged. third step specialized testing. here's where the federal
programs become uniquely valuable. some development requires access to specialized capabilities. for instance, test reactors, facilities to test radioactive materials or high performance computing. a number of department energy laboratories have these facilities and expertise that carla needs. the department of energy created gateway for accelerated innovation in nuclear or gain program to facilitate private/public interactions. step four, beginning regulatory process, as she develops her technology, carla would like to get valls fr signals from the regulator her solutions are reasonable. she needs a regulator who is staffed and funded in a manner that allows it to be ready to respond to emerging light water reactor technologies, ideally the pace of regulatory review would support new products for energy system that is changing
rapidly, all while maintaining traditional exemplary safety record. step five, demonstration reactor. as typical with many new and capital intensive technologies carla may need to build a demonstration of reactor before moving on to full-scale reactor. the department of energy should allow innovators to build dem administrations at one of their laboratories that have experience running nuclear facilities, allowing carla to bill her reactor at idaho or oak ridge could help her more affordably test her design and make final changes to commercialize her product. final step, nrcness willing of demonstration reactor. because carla's hoping her design will become commercialized which would require her to go through nrc licensing process, it would benefit her if the nrc were involved in the licensing and construction of the reactor. when the reactor works, she's ready to work with the investors are and the nuclear regulatory commission to get final
approval. where can congress help? early innovation, support the creation of multiple private public centers that facilitate creation of entrepreneurs done through report languages in the appropriation process. test beds, support the game program as national nuclear innovation center, ensuring modern infrastructure with world-leading staff that serve as nation's test bed, ensure programs are structured to maximize value through well-structured private/public partnership. finally regulation, ensure the commission is staffed, structured and funded to support pace of regulatory review that would support new products for an energy system that is changing rapidly. house resolution 4979 asks nrc and d.o.e. to look broadly at th functions. we're supportive of this national approach and suggested some specific ideas. we hope d.o.e. and nrc have additional useful ideas.
we appreciate the discussion draft and ready and willing to enact to optimize our ability to move nuclear energy forward. thank you for let me testify. >> next witness, mr. jeff frire fetus. thanks for being with us. you're recognized for five minutes. >> thank you. >> pull it up close. pull it closer to you. >> is it working? terrific. thank you, chairman whitfield and inc. raing rush and distinguished members of the committee. i'll highlight a few points here. first, twropt hr 4979 which requires d.o.e. and nrc to work together to work to develop plan with public input for advanced reactor licensing systems, such a charge has merit in that it asks two of the relevant federal agencies to work together. 270 days is far too short a time
to gather and analyze the regulatory information and provide for public comment with respect to such a complicated set of economic, security, environmental challenges, as those faced by the licensing of advanced reactors. further, both epa and the president's council on environmental quality should be part of any such enterprise. epa for its standard setting authority. even though many advanced reactor concepts have been around for decades, none of the current spate demonstrated security, environmental and safety improvements necessary to make them viable in the near term and more pertinent to the reality of the carbon future. the licensing process effectively dined by industry and streamlined by nrc multiple times over the last two decades has little to do with that. thus, our concern is real, the practical nuclear engineering
and economic hurdles inherit to the technologies may serve as distraction to the scale of up of solutions to the threat of climate change from wind, solar, energy efficiencies. i'll highlight a few of the seconds. section 2, on substantial costs to the taxpayers rather than collecting them as done historically via licensing fee. section 3 requires a study on implications of repealing foreign ownership restrictions. it wise to study a matter and collect information before legislating we urge requirement for public input on a matter this complicated especially on sku security terms. which would do much harm to public confidence that all issued considered by the nrc. the mantder to hearing plays a crucial role in supplementing
the contested hearing process in which few issues, sometimes no issues, survive the gauntlet of nrc's arduous procedural requirement to the hearing. the process has a proven track record of highlighting weaknesses in the nrc's staff review. for example, in the case of the clinton esp, the board found the staff's review, i quote, did not supply adequate technical information or flow of logic to permit a judgment as to whether the staff had a reasonable basis for its conclusions. 64 nrc at 460. section 5 is equally trouble systemsome as it is a codify indication of agency drift to informal less rigorous hearing process that has already been under way for a long time. rather than ensuring the hearing process continues to become yet more expedient process and restricted venue for states and public, congress should be directing nrc to submit substantially redesigned hearing
process that will provide regulatory certainty but simplify the hearing requirements to allow substantive technical issues of environmental concern come to the fore rather than entertain joint industry staff efforts to have dismissed literally every contention ever filed before at tomich safety board. section 6, it weakens the opportunity for hearings on inspections, tests, analyses and test criteria prior to information. the perception of the hearings caused delays in licensing has no basis in fact. the industry's long structured the hearing process and nrc staff requiests for additional information is at the heart of the requirement. docketing the application before complete, when it contains substantial areas that are promised to be addressed later
or leaves out significant details creates false impression that the time between when the application is docketed and when the final decision is rendered is attributable to the hearing process and public participation. this delay should not be used to justify further restrictions. section 7 would do grave harm to nepa and likely bar meaningful review by staff. the current process as practiced is already problematic. i detail that in my testimony. finally, with respect to section 8 we recommend striking text in section b, factors from the draft legislation, as this language can prejudice and distort the final decommissioning rule making that's just commenced at the commission. thank you again for this opportunity. >> thank you. thank all of you for your testimony. at this time, we'll recognize members for questions. mr. lada, recognized for five minutes. >> thanks, mr. chairman.
thanks for holding today's hearing. gentlemen, thanks for your testimony today. mr. merrifield, start with first question to you, my legislation requires that development of phased licensing process provides insure rances to licensing applicants. what are primary advantages of structuring the licensing process and how would you recommend nrc develop such a process. >> i think right now one of the disadvantages of the current system is sort of all or nothing. you have to put in your license application and wait a very long period of time to determine whether the nrc will find that to be acceptable. for the advanced reactor community. having a stepwise process envisioned by the bill would allow early interaction with nrc and early indication of whether that design may be licensable. if indeed the nrc finds that's
the case, that developer can identify additional areas of funding to continue to process that application and that design. if for some reason, we hope it not the case, nrc were to find that would be something difficult or not able to be licensed, then that applicant could make a logical business decision whether they want to continue to move fortunate or not. that's a real benefit to innovation. >> your testimony also suggests the model used by the canadian nuclear regulators should be pursued. what makes their structure more unique and constructive? >> it has very specific steps to it. it does have preapplication vendor design review. it got specific deliverables that are expected by the canadian regulator, spelled out, a specific timing for when the review should occur and they have limitations in what the costs will be for the applicants. it makes a very clear program
for everyone involved to understand what is expected in the first step and allows technology both to be evaluated as well as move forward. >> thank you. doctor, following up on that, any additional thoughts regarding benefit of the phased licensing process. >> one small thing. i agree with the commissioner it's an important, early signal of someone trying to take early idea to commercialization to get the feedback from the regulator. the other thing, by getting those, parallel to this, we've got the department of energy doing research programs in similar technical areas. the more we can get early signals we can use to feedback and guide how we spend federal dollars on research in way that helps companies is also very useful. >> mr. fretel a question of you and your testimony, you talk about the country's going to lose in the next 15 years 126 giga watts of generation and we
need 287 giga watts by 2040, i represent a district with 60,000 manufacturing jobs, we have to have a base load capacity out there, maybe give me an overview of what -- how many power plans talking about, talking about 126 giga watts, what we need when you look at 287? >> yeah. i think -- i think congressman, in general, you could think about them whether gas plants, which is what we're building now, they're probably on the order of 400 to 500 federal government megawatts. we're building 2500 megawatt -- sorry, 1,000 -- yeah, to get to 240 plus -- it's about 500, almost 500,000 megawatts. so you'd be building 1,000 plants at 500 megawatts each. >> thank you. mr. merrifield, advanced nuclear technology development act requires nrc to develop a risked
informed framework. provide your interpretation of what a risk informed framework means and what the primary inputs are in such a framework? >> a risk informed performance-based approach uses combination of risk analysis and performance history to identify what are the most significant areas to focus your inspection and your regulatory activities. it recognizes that in any system, whether nuclear power plant, petrochemical refinery or inner planetary space vehicle, every system is not equally important to safety. using risk informed performance based approach allows you to prioritize one of the most critical components and focus your regulatory process towards those. >> thank you. i see my time's about ready to expire. i yield back. >> recognize the gentleman from illinois, mr. rush, for five
minutes. >> [ inaudible ]. >> subcommittee examined the agencies request of almost $20 million less this year than what was enacted last year's budget. these cuts were said to be in line with the agency's project aim initiative designed to streamline operations and better reflect the commission's decreased workload. however, in your statement, you said that those reductions are not sufficient and then that industry continues to see regulatory inefficiencies. can you discuss why the new fee structure as outlined in the discussion draft is necessary?
however, the changes outlined in the bill impact safety standards and protocols at these nuclear facilities? and if there's any other witnesses who would like to addressful any of thquestions i asked, please chime in. >> thank you. first, we never want to see nrc's effectiveness as regulate or credibility under mined. we think they are the best regulator in the world. and it's very important for us from a commercial industry standpoint for them to be very effective and credible in what they do. they have project aim going we think project aim is a very significant and sincere effort on their part to look at rebaselining what they're doing. their scope as responsibilities has dramatically decreased. they staffed up for 20-plus new plants. they were operating as though
they had 107 existing reactors. we're moving forward with four new reactors, currently 99. a number of those are shutting down soon. material licensees significantly decreased in how many they are regulating. so, they have and recognize this a significant opportunity to read baseline what they're trying to do with the basically scope of safety that they have to look at. they also, as commissioner mentioned, before are looking at getting much more safety were greater of 60 new rule makings which the commission is not doing all of them for an industry performing exceptionally well and an industry they've been regulating for 50-plus years. we see a significant opportunity for them to continue do what they're doing and we think, as they do what the industry is doing, deal with turnover due to
retirements you deal with a lot of this through attrition. basic basically, you have an opportunity to hire critical resources but not replace all resources. that's what we're doing on our side really religiously right now, unfortunately, because of challenges that our plants face. on the corporate overhead, and the approach in the bill that congressman kinzinger proposed what we see is tremendous benefit of having congress provide accountable and oversight to the corporate overhead. their corporate overhead, based upon the commission with ernst and young is higher than peer agencies they looked at. i don't think they're evil for doing that but there's not a lot of accountability for them to do less because we pay for it. it's not appropriated money. there's not a lot of oversight put to it and little transparency from our side to seeing what we're paying for and
why. so, we see significant tune opportunity but to your point we do not want to hurt the credibility or effectiveness but think they can continue going down their path. we may push harder because we know they won't go as fast, but we think that helps them go in the right direction. >> congressman, to that point, i was proud to serve as commissioner of the nrc. i agree with the characterization. it contains extraordinary group of hard, dedicated individuals. having said that, as i related in my testimony, we wren through a similar process when i was a commissioner to the process that they're undergoing today. there was a decreasing workload and a need to appropriately align the size of the workforce and task and make it more risk informed. we were able to do that. i think it resulted from a couple of things. one a significant amount of oversight from congress. we had to provide monthly reports to congress on the progress of the licensing activities that we had under
way. and that drove the commission in its budget process, in what it presented to congress to conduct a line by line review of how it was spending money, what the priorities were, make sure it was doing the most important stuff in recognizing that some things simply didn't need to be done. i think the commission certainly needs to have that level of engagement. i trust they should right now. the one thing i would mention on corporate overhead support, we didn't have this term as a commissioner. i think there's been a lot of growth in things like i.t. and other things which may drive some of this. there is one program, i think, this committee needs to be aware is important that is an overhead and that's international programs. countries around the world that look to the nrc to help them craft their regulatory programs. it very important as congress looks to oversee programs that that one in particular is not hurt. those are important investments and should come from general revenues but it's assistance that that agency provides around
the world is critical. >> the industry would support commissioner merrifields recommends on them helping internationally for a safety standpoint. >> recognize the gentleman from west virginia for five minutes, mr. mckinley. >> i'll try to keep this short. i'll limit to one or two questions. mr. fertel, with you, with nei, we understand with the new nuclear technologies that will come as a result of legislation like this, we know there are developments that will probably reduce the amount of weight product that comes from the spent fuel rods. but nevertheless the whole process of making nuclear energy is going to develop a waste product, maybe left than we're currently doing but nevertheless a waste product. does nei have a position, do you support the mountain as a perm
side site for the disposal fuel as required by law? >> we supported going forward, finishing licensing on yucca mountain for its license, and to move forward with yucca mountain. we support in parallel the necessity of having centralized interim storage. we done think y't think you can yucca and do everything fast enough for the plants that are shutting down. there's over $30 billion in. don't have access. >> 99, i guess, reactors, we have functioning. i'm curious about what's being done currently to safeguard those spent fuel rods in those water baths. we know the potential with all of the fear of terrorism and other activity for national
security, is there something being done on this nuclear waste management that can give us a greater comfort than the way we're doing now, instead if we're not using yucca mountain yet, how safe should we feel? >> i'm sure commissioner -- >> i'll add to this. >> i will. the nrc heaviirily regulates wh woo do with used nuclear fuel, both in the used fuel fool and dry cast storage on site. we have stringent security plans to make sure that not just used fuel is protected but active fuel and other things that our plants and based upon the fukushima lessons learned, there's enhancements to what we do at used fuel because of what we learned because of what went on in japan. i think, to some degree, the problem with used fuel is that it's managed well on sites which doesn't create the crisis to cause our country to try and implement the nuclear waste policy act or any other law
related to it. so the good news, we manage it very well and it's regulated well. the bad news, it doesn't move it quickly to where you want it to go. >> congressman, on the issue of security, i was a commissioner during 9/11, in front of the committee talking about things that needed to be accomplished to protect the u.s. fleet of nuclear units. i can say, without reservation, and i have been on nuclear sites within the last week, looking at security issues and i can assure you, these are the safest industrial facilities in the united states, the level of security that we have at the nuclear power plans in the united states is well beyond what is even needed to protect that fuel from the adversaries we face today. >> thank you. chairman i yield back balance of my time. >> we have two votes of the floor. we've got 10 or 11 minutes left. if you all would be in agreement, we'll recognize you for three minutes and we'll get as far as we can, and if
somebody wants to come back, we can talk about that. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. fertel, do you believe we need to include fusion specifically in the hr 4979 framework? >> question about fusion? >> yes. >> to be honest i hadn't thought about that but my reaction is, i think it's a whole different regulatory regime that we'd have to look at for fusion and the availability of fusion is still far enough off that i wouldn't rush it in and distract the nrc from paying attention to be able to put a regulatory process in place for the other technologies that are deployable sooner than that. i wouldn't eliminate it as something you should look at for the longer term. >> mr. allen, the third way report that identified 50 companies developing plans for new nuclear plans in the u.s. can canada, how soon are some technologies going to be
available? is the nrc ready for that. >> i think they're on a big spectrum, depending how much technology development has been done in the past. i said quickest, assuming we do types of things we need in regulatory space, 10, 15 years, some much further out than that. and i think that nrc has a strong regulatory function but as we've talked about could do some things to be better receptive to companies and to build staff depth in areas that they're not used to regulating. >> do you think there's a risk of agency. >> bucking heads with each other with respect to the nuclear technology? >> i think there was a lot of discussions of the d.o.e. and nrc on early advanced reactor-like programs. that did not get as far as we hoped it would have gotten. i think with the focus that this
committee and your counterparts in the senate have on advanced reactor technologies, legislation that you have before you will give the framework and the encouragement for the nrc to move forward. they are an agency, when focused on a mission, do a great job of accomplishing. i sometimes to refer to boy scouts of federal agencies. they need focus, encouragement of the committee but i think they can accomplish the mission to appropriately and safely license and regulate advanced reactors in a timely and effective way. >> mou would be sufficient? >> i believe so, yes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. the nrc has previously informed congress that it believes amending the atomic energy act to eliminate mandatory uncontested hearing on combined license and early site permit politics could enhance efficiency of nrc operations.
second 4 in my draft allows the commission if a hearing isn't requested by affected person to issue a permit or operating license or amendment to such permits andness abo licenses wi holding a hearing. how would this provision improve regulatory efficiency at nrc? >> what it would do is allow both licensee and the nrc staff to move forward on issues while a hearing is being done, which is, to be honest, similar to situation for the operating plants. it would not delay the start-up of a facility critical to electricity but not making revenue by what's sitting there. if there was a true safety issue it shouldn't start up they're not going to allow it to do that. it doesn't allow you to do something that's going provide unsafe condition. >> what regulatory and economic burdens associated with the mandatory hearing requirement. how much can unnen come tested mandatory hearing delay the
process? >> there's not great data. we have looked at that based upon the vogel experience and some of the other projects, and it's hard to decipher exactly because there was the design going through at same time. our estimate it could have been 80-to 120-day delay as a result. not significant value added by that because of all of the other reviews. >> if i can jump in for a skd on that unand. i think there are two issues associated with mandatory hearings. one is an issue of extra time it takes. the other portion is the amount of staff activity that um ma ultimately has to be borne by the applicant to getting to the ultimate decision. the staff in preparing for hearings wants to make sure everything they send up to the commission is in a certain way, that eats up a huge amount of
time. as a commissioner, i recognized that there was extraordinary opportunities for the public to comment on the process that even led to the ultimate licensing and the planneder to hemandator antiquated to 1950s and was not need. >> recognize the gentleman from texas, mr. green, for three minutes. >> i'm a supporter of fub pnucl power. i believe increased cooperation between d.o.e. and nrc would create efficiencies and approving new reactors combined with the president's gain initiative, i think we can revitalize our nuclear sector and secure additional base load power i have concerns about the nuclear utilization of keynote energy -- keystone on my mind -- energy policies act.
you made reference to 2016 white paper released by your organization that discussed framework for licensing modernization. the white paper listed five recommendations forren come. proactive oversight of nrc's design and licensing process, providing sufficient resources and i'm guessing that means money, encouraging nrc to meet 36-month deadline for review and directing nrc to identify roadblocks to expedite approvals and submitting annual updates. does the legislation for the subcommittee today adequately address these recommendations? >> in the meeting i think it does. we focused on a couple of things we would ask for improvement in the two bills that you're looking at today. one is to be specific in requiring a preapplication vendor design review process. the or one was to providi greater opportunity for
engagement between the developers of advanced reactor technologies and the nrc at no cost early stages in the process to enhance level of understanding on the part of the agency and developer. >> during your service as commissioner, do you recall how many license reviews the nrc completed? >> i'd have to go back and do research. >> if you know, i'd appreciate it. with respect to reviews you have a sense of how many hearings did the commission grant upon request under section 189 of the atomic energy act? >> i would have to go back and review that one. >> under section 189, former ajude kaer to procedures required commission to do or have discretionary authority. are they required to have those procedures? is did discretionary with the commission. >> i didn't hear that. >> second 189, the formal
adjudication procedures required of the commission or do they have discretionary authority? >> congressman -- >> i can answer that. >> i would like to have the opportunity to review those procedures and provide an appropriate response to the committee. >> i'll be glad to submit the questions. if you could get back to us. if we can move the process along coordination between agencies is never bad. >> thank you. we appreciate you all being with us. i'm going to ask a couple of questions. we have three minutes before we have to vote. >> no rush. new scale power stated their plans to submit its design certification application to nrc by the end of 2016 for so-called small modular reactor. mr. merrifield, what is your
outlook for nrc's readiness to accept a high quality application and review it in a timely manner? >> congressman, i think nrc has been preparing, as far as i can, i believe the n. a nrc has been preparing itself to receive that. i think they will do their level best to accept it and review it in due course. >> do you agree with that, mr. fertel? >> i think the way jeff merrifield answered is probably accurate. i think the division director there is competent, young woman who i think is making sure that the they're as prepared as they can be. we expect they'll do as good a job as they can. >> i agree with that. mr. fer ittel references a talented, young woman.
>> we hear discussion about small nuclear modular reactors and great hope for them. so are sodium cool, some are lead cool, light water. how many small modular reactors are operating today around the world? anybody have any idea? >> i don't think that, from a commercial standpoint, there's hardly any. but all of the submarines are using small modular reactors and aircraft carriers. there's experience with them. now, they're different but there's a lot of experience. in our country now, mr. chairman, electricity growth, thanks to really good efficiency and things like that, also probably being hurt by our economy a bit. but our electricity growth is very small. small modular reactors are becoming more important domestically. we always thought they were important internationally. domestically they're becoming very important, particularly as
you replace older, smaller coal plants and eventually even gas plants. >> one thing that is important to remember about advanced reactor technologies we talk about traditional utility uses for electricity. they provide high sources of heat. new users of the technologies may not be traditional utilities. it may be for other industrial processes to utilize the heat and power. >> anybody else have any comment? okay. >> i would agree they're looking at a large number of different commercial products than giga watts. >> are we talking about below 300 megawatts or so? >> yeah some of them conceptualized could be as small as 3 to 10 megawatts some in the range of 80 to 100. others sort of verge of 300. there's a range of potential reactors. >> chairman, there's one
caution. the only ones we've seen that have had any indication of any economic viability have been coupled together and the 700 megawatt range to allow for some economy of scale to be able to compete in a market. none of these are built around the world. numbers's zero. the question is whether or not they'll have any chance in a competitive marketplace in 10, 12, 15 years, no one has a crystal ball here. >> no one has a crystal ball. but the end of the market's going to resolve that. that's what we're asking for predictable regulatory regime that reactors can be licensed through. if they can't come up with the economics, the market will bear reactors will not go forward. >> thank you all very much. we look forward to working with you as we consider these two pieces of legislation and other issues as well. we'll keep the record open for ten days. once again, thank you. that concludes today's hearing.
c-span3. >> therefore, this committee as undertaken such an investigation. its purpose not to impair the fbi's legitimate law enforcement and counterespionage functions, but to evaluate domestic intelligence, according to standards of the constitution and the statutes of our land. >> over 40 years ago, a senate select committee chaired by senator frank church, democrat from idaho, was convened to investigate the intelligence activities of the cia, fbi, irs, nsa. this weekend marks 40th anniversary of the xhur committee's final report. we will look at portions of the televised hearings saturday night, 10:00 eastern. >> i cannot explain why that quantity was developed except that this was a collaboration that we were engaged in with the united states arm and we did develop this particular weapon,
you might say, as a possible -- for possible use. >> on the civil war at 6:00 -- >> in 1860 the united states was 70 years old, it was not old enough to have wisdom. the leaf family at that time had been living in virginia 225 years. i do not think lee anguished at all over the decision that they made that april evening. and i think that devotion to duty came forth in 1861. his primary duty was to his family. his family had been virginians over two centuries. the old dominion was lee's birth right. >> historian james bud robertson talks about general robert e. lee, ties to virginia and military campaigns throughout the state. sunday morning at 10:00, road to the white house rewind, "a private decision" chronicles 1968 presidential race from primaries in new hampshire and president johnson's surprise
withdrawal through the assassination of kennedy. at 8:00, on the presidency -- >> he was one as a result of that because of one's ability in foreign policy as head of state of the united states as the head of the chief of the armed forces of the leading power in the world and the leading power in the free world to think responsibly about what one can achieve and to try and define one's policies and to try and understand geopolitics in that light. >> military historian jeremy black looks at origins of the cold war and focuses on eisenhower as military man and president. go to c-span.org. >> the president of somalia recently washington, d.c. one of his stops at u.s. institute of peace where he talked about some mallian politics and security in the region. this is 40 minutes.
>> good afternoon. my name is george moose, i have the honor of serving as vice chair of the board of directors of the united states institute of peace. and it's my pleasure to welcome all of you to this important discussion of current political and security developments in somalia, a topic which, judging by the size of this audience, is clearly of great interest. we are honored to have, as our guest today, is excellency, president of the federal republic of somalia. i would also like to welcome senior representatives across the u.s. government, from the state department, the national security council, the congress,
as well as ambassadors and other members of the diplomatic corps and other organizations. we are happy to be joined today, as el and, by ambassador johnny carson, former assistant secretary of state for african affairs, now senior adviser here at the institute. ambassador carson will moderate today's discussion with president mahmoud. for those new to usip, we are an independent national institute founded by congress over 30 years ago and dedicated to the proposition that peace is possible, that peace is practical, and peace is essential for u.s. and for international security interests. we pursue this vision of a world without violent conflict by working directly with partners in conflict zones, quipping them with peace building knowledge, training and tools, developed and tested in the course of our
years of experience. somalia is alas a country that knows all too well the devastating consequences of sustained violentconflict. i know that to -- from personal experience, somalia was one of the countries i visited on my very first official trip as assistant secretary of state for africa. almost exactly 23 years ago. at a time when the seeds of the current conflict were being sown, this weekend the world witnessed in horror one of the most tragic consequences of the continuing conflict when 200 or more somalis were drowned in the mediterranean ocean as they were attempting to reach europe. there are enormous challenges that continue to face the country. but it's also clear that we are
seeing signs that peace is indeed possible. and we look forward to this opportunity to hear more about these developments. the united states has been an important partner and supporter in the evolution, the obama administration's decision to nominate an ambassador to somalia is another important state in building a strong u.s. somali relationship. for its part, usip has been working for more than 20 years across the horn of africa. to build peace and inclusive processes through the partnerships with the u.s. state department, non-governmental organizations and regional stakeholders. in that context, usip has provided education grants, training and resources to help somalis strengthen the institutions and skills needed to build more stable resilient societies and states.
with our associates and non-profit peace tech lab the institute for example has helped to facilitate the important review of the 2012 provisional constitution working with constitution drafting bodies with civil society organizations and government representatives. we have helped to train members of the somali police force. through courses on community policing methods that have proven effective in countering violent extremism. through our generation change program we're helping to build the capacity of civically engaged youth ages 18-35 as they emerge as leaders in their communities. president mahmoud has been a critical partner in support of these efforts. it's fair to say he was a peace builder before he was a president. before deciding to enter politics he studies mediation at the eastern mennen nite peace
building institute based in virginia. when the current round of conflict in somalia erupted he remained in somali and served as an advisor and consultant to a number of international organizations and ngo's. these efforts led to his decision to establish the independent peace and development party. and to his election to parliament in 2012. this background is clearly reflected in the approach that he has taken to somalia's challenges. since becoming president. your excellency it is our pleasure to welcome you and invite you to address this audience. [ applause ]
[ speaking in a foreign language ]. >> i'm honored to share with you some reflections and insights into somalia. to discuss and talk about somalia in these days, months and years, but i will try to be very brief and summarize the most important elements that i would like to share with you as my experience. ladies and gentlemen, almost four years ago, upon my appointment as the president, i made a pledge on behalf of somalia to spursue three items. pursue somalia and a progressive
somalia. they agreed to political administration by adopting a federal grvean-- we laid out th ambitious agenda knowing that we faced the challenge of trying to transform somalia which is not an easy matter. but we have specifically focused on a specific agenda that we prioritize it as the most important element of a state building in a post conflict environment. somalia has been without a functioning state for some time. so in early 2013, we established the ambitious agenda over vision called the vision 2016. that was outlining how we are going to move out of the current status of that day to a new
status in 2016. we developed that vision with three tracks federating the country which was an option that has already been agreed by the somalis, establishing a federal somalia. the second track was reviewing the constitution that was existing by the time and the third was the democratation process. which was making somalia a democratic state or country. this is the new somalia as we envision it in 2015. that was going to be done in a difficult environment where the spaces for doing this exercise was very narrow, very limited where the people were having much more priority which was the
security at the time. we move it forward and today we have federated somalia. which i can claim that the federal somalia's structure has been put in place. those federal units that have been established recently, they lack capacity, they lack enough resources to implement the real federation. but they are there. somalia has been a territory that is ungoverned for a long time. today, we have someone who is responsible in a particular area of somalia. someone who is in charge and have full responsibility of that territory. i cannot implement the problem
enough. institutions are in place. they need help capacitating in somalia. today, we have our constitution under review. recently, we have reviewed the constitution by a technical team. the constitution consists of chapters that are much more universal. some chapters you'll see in almost all constitutions. and there are specific for the country in question which needs specific attention. in somalia there are chapters of the constitution that needs a lot of consensus building around them. those chapters have been drafted and last time our last meeting of the national leaders forum we discussed it. we shared the draft with the leaders of the regional states. we asked them to go back home,
discuss with their people and then next time when we get together we will discuss about the points we need to worry. in may 25th to june 5th a national conference has been agreed to take place. where all somalis of different corners of somalia will get together and discuss about the important chapters of the constitution. the national leaders forum will agree in three days' session. and seven days session it's the public that will discuss at the national level. it will be taken back to the parliament of the federal government and the process will wait until referend ref rnerend
takes place. it was not possible to make achieve the goal which was one person, one vote for somalia in 2016. the circumstances on the ground does not permit that to happen. the challenge we had was shall we wait and stay where we are until the next term or we do what key can do which was to do an election model that we agreed and that election model is for 2016 only. we agreed also a road map to 2016 to 2020. on which we have clearly explained it on how to get out
of the formula 4.5 and go to universal sufferage of one person, one vote. the journey started in djibouti in 2010. national government has been established at t&g which was mandated two years. after two years when we went back outside somalia in kenya where a process that was going on for two years was there. ended up in 2014 with transitional federal government with transitional charter agreed on somalia as a federal country. from there, the governments are located back to somalia, then moke mogadis
mogadishu. the parliament has been established by 135 members of the somali clans, different clans of somalis. this was nomination, selection and nomination by one of the 135 members. now what we said is that two important things, one is that journey has to go further and take somewhere outside somalia. if it happened in 2012 in mogadishu in 2016 we want it to happen in different parts of somalia, six different corners of somalia. if 2016 the parliament was selected and nominated by 135 elders, more larger number of citizens to participate the election of the next parliament. not a selection. for ease, we maintain it some of what was there already. the parliament we keep the 275 seats of the parliament which too big for somalia right now.
but trying to reduce that number will mean a lot of time and energy which was available right now. keeping the fphorial formula 4. it because there was no other tool or instrument readily available right now since constitution and others are in the making. so then what is different? the difference is taking the elections to different places of somalia, involving or giving more citizens to participate in bringing the next parliament. that's what's new to this process now. almost a 14,000 citizens will participate in the election. although we're still using the clan system, but this time the clan itself will need to be very
fair within the clan and give a number of different people to compete for the seat that presents the clan itself. so we have 14,000 citizens electing 275 in six different locations in somalia. the journey that started in kenya, mogadishu now into the headquarters of the federal member states in 2002 and 2020's plan to go down into the district which is the lowest level in somalia which we're planning and will put in place a road map that indicates what will happen when. in the next four years of the new term where the government is compelled to implement that road map, including local elections, state elections and national elections at the end.
that will be the end of the journey when we reach one person one vote in all districts of somalia. the elections are more demographic in that collegiate electorates in 2020 we expect it will be an election with one person, one vote. this is the new somalia that we are working on. it's why i have started my presentation with politics is we believe that so many good things the world can do for somalia. there is only one and one thing that the world cannot do for somalia, but can do with somalia. when we were having famine and the world brought us food, when we have insecurity, the world brought us force to fight with us against the terrorism or other evil forces. but in 25 years the world has been trying to fix the political
problem of somalia and it didn't happen. we realized it's only the somalis who can fix the political problems of somalia. the politics of somalia, the world still can play an important role in fixing the politics. the world cannot do that for us. that's what we have tried. in the past, the fixing political problems of somalia, the world has been sitting in the driving seat and somalis were sitting in the back seat. now, is a time we decided to take the driving seat and we request our international partners to sit on the back seat to help us do that. we're doing that. the agenda for the state building of somalia is too many, too big and too diverse. i have taken only the political one. but one which is very important and priority number one was in
security. the security somalia as many of us know it started in 2010 and 2011 where by 17 districts in mogadishu the government was controlling six districts out of that 17. the remaining 11 districts in the south central regions of somalia were controlled by al shabaab. that is where the war against al shabaab started. today al shabaab they do not control any significant town or location that's known. but the challenge is is it's still there. the insurgents war is still there. the terrorists are still there,
but al shabaab is a known force that has control of a geographic location. one of the reasons why that has happened in the past was somalia was a territory that is governed by no one. the intervention in 2007 and establishment of somali national army has created enough space today we're talking about elections. we are expecting that space will be further expanded to have been one person, one vote in 2017 -- in 2020. on the other front, the war against extremism is not military only, it has other facets, economic, social. the war in the military front has reached an advanced stage but the war in front of the economy and social services are still lacking behind.
somalia is a very rich country in terms of resources in terms of its strategic location, but because of bad politics, we've never benefitted those richness and wealthy. it's time now for the federal government of somalia is diverting its direction towards the stimulating and recovering the economic aspects of somalia. we have made good starting on that. today, it's coming back to somalia and investing back to the country at different levels. the somali government is struggling with reforming substantially the public finance management institutions of the country so we're going to have institutions that can deal with international partners. after 22 years, the imf has
produced -- after 27 years, sorry. it was 1988. in 2013 we have the next report that indicated 3.7% of economic growth in somalia that has shown prospects. we are entered last week the staff monitoring program that will go on for another one year to make sure that somalia has access to the international financing institutions and will go into the program. so somalia can benefit from the international tools of development and construction. on conclusion, i would like to say a little bit about the future of somalia. somalia has a very prosperous
future. because of its wealthiness, because it is clear direction of fixing and transforming the country in terms of politics . d it was not an easy task, a task that can be done over night because this is a young nation that's going to rebirth again. we're changing almost every system that was existing in the country. highly centralized government system is highly decentralized government system. we were having systems that have been put in place during the cold war now, we're changing all those systems. we're getting -- because of the federal system, almost every load that was existing in somalia has to be reviewed with minor changes, major changes taking place, including and starting from the constitution. with this we hope that somalia will soon be a better place that
attracts international investment. this is a country that has the longest coast line in the african country. unfortunately we do not benefit from that. serious challenges we're having, illegal fishing. destroying the ecology of the oceans. we have a lot of containers that have been thrown out by the sea. those containers we don't know what's inside it. but this is a good indicator that toxic waste has been dumped in somalia. those containers don't have signs, nothing written on them. we don't know the day they explode what will happen to those areas. fishing, illegal fishing, billions of dollars have been estimated. the fish that are illegal being taken. all this is happening because somalia cannot afford to protect its own resources. this is what's more important for the generations of somalia
to come, and this cannot happen without having a functioning state in place in somalia. and this is the priority, the top priority of somali government. after prolonging statelessness in somalia, after a long time civil war, we do not expect the wounds will be healed overnight. but we are in the process of healing the past wounds. we are in the process of addressing the reasons for those grievances that happened in the past, building the trust among our people. and building the trust of our people towards the states. this is very important. the last time somali went to the elections was 1969. 47 years have passed since then. who is there in somalia today who participated in that
election of 1969? and who can do this today? one of the benefits of the electoral process this year is it's a learning process. so that in 2020 we will be doing perfect elections. we will do the mistake and pitfalls now in 2016. i thank you very much. [ applause ] mr. president, thank you very very much for a great presentation. we've got a few minutes to take questions. i'm going to invite you over here to sit down. and we have a few from the audience coming in. mr. president, somalia under your leadership and under the leadership of your predecessor
have made extraordinary process. as one of the former un special representatives has said recently somalia has moved from a failed state to a fragile state. the question i have this afternoon to start off with, is do you believe that the international community and the un who have been strong partners with you have become wary of working with somalia? and i ask that because we've recently seen several things that have come up. the european union has reduced its stipends for some of the troops as one indication. do you think you're getting the
continued support from the international community and the un that you need to go the next step? >> thank you, ambassador. i think one important thing is next year 2017, is ten years. for a country, ten years looks like it's too long. for somalia, it's not. however, the space that we're talking today that we're going to do elections, we need the first cut of the federal system of the country, all this was become possible because of the collaboration with somalia national army that has widens the space that the government to exercise and do its mandate. so i think armstrong has been a useful tool for somalia.
african problems for african solutions. it's been an experiment that's been successful. there is nothing that continue -- this was a gift -- it cannot continue. the world now after all this long years. investing armstrong is getting fatigue. what we've been asking the world, which was -- it was short of what the world was supposed to do, investing somalia national army or security forces. this has not been enough, enough has not been given in the past unilaterally, bilaterally, there are many countries that have supported us unanimously, among which, united states. but the very small amount of what has been spent will make a
lot of difference in somalia, that's what today we are brought that the world has realized a rebust reliable well-equipped security forces to maintain another ten years is not possible. what we're expecting in a short period of time we will have these forces. today discussions are going on on how to make sure that of the shortest period of time that somali's security forces will be developed to take over. and that's going and we would like to say tangible changes will be seen soon. >> mr. president i'm going to do this in rapid fire since we only have a limited amount of time. a question from the audience, how is your administration
addressing the deep seated clan animosities that have been built up over the decades in somalia? >> i do agree with the person that asked that question there is a level of mistrust among somalis. this mistrust is a quality that's always available to any post conflict environment. as i said, the wounds of the civil war has not been healed completely. it's not been healed well. the healing process is a process that takes time. we started with and healing cannot happen isolated. i have been working in this building, reconciliation at the local level for 15 years before i became the president. i would like to share my experience with you is that even this is not possible without institutions in place.
as far as when a criminal kills someone, we call that person a martyr. but in a post conflict environment. that killer or martyr become not a criminal a citizen but he becomes clan x who killed clan y as far as we isolate the responsibility of the crime to the individual. this type of trust and animosity will continue. that's possible only when we have functioning institutions in place. the other way someone can say how can we get a functioning institution without the having trust. trust is not purchased it has to be built. the federal government of
somalia has started that. we're very much involved. and there has always been reconciliation conferences going on in many places. we believe the healing process has started. it's been achieved at tremendous progress. there is long way to go yet to have restored fully restored trust within the society and the society and the state takes a little more time. >> mr. president you have two large powerful and influential neighbors, both of whom have large somali indigenous populations. they both have been countries that have contributed to the efforts to bring about stablt. i'm thinking of ethiopia and
kenya. how are your relations with those two neighbors? >> first of all, kenya, we don't have a long history with kenya. our history with kenya starts at the time in 1960. before that there was no long -- because kenya was not independent we were not independent. powers were dealing among them. there was clan conflicts. just traditional. what we have a long long history in ethiopia, 700 years. most of this history is not good history. history of conflict history of crusade. history of jihad. that's been very difficult history for that couple of centuries. that history ended up in 1990 both somali and ethiopian state
collapsed because of the difficult problems that we're having and we are making the other one to fail. failed both of us. ethiopia may be for different reasons, it took three years to bring back the state. at the beginning. still they are in the process of a state building after more than 20 years. somalia it took longer. for it's own odd reasons. what we have realized is that both somalia and ethiopia has no choice or option other than to peacefully coexist and to do that, we need to make some shared interests among the two nations. this itself is not something that can happen overnight. but we started and that discussion has reached a very good level at the political level. there are still difficulties.
i will not say this is going to happen. this good relationship that we're looking forward is not going to happen in one term or two terms or short term. but it is -- has a beginning and we begin. somalia has realized that the political highest level discussion within the government they also see that they don't have anymore appetite to continue that old history. yes, today somalia, there are kenyan forces, ethiopian forces. ugandans, all of them came to somalia with the good intention of supporting somalia to defeat this international agenda of al shabaab. and i do believe that once that is out of place, they will not be in somalia. it's the responsibility of the somalis to do whatever possible that makes somalia a peaceful
place. if that is to give the final defeat of al shabaab. if that causes us to negotiate with al shabaab peacefully. whatever makes somalia a stable country. that's our duty. we do believe that those forces will leave somalia sooner rather than later. >> mr. president, our time is up this afternoon. but i want to take this opportunity to thank you again to -- for coming to usip. and to compliment you and your colleagues and your fellow citizens on the enormous progress that has been made over the last six or seven or eight years in rebuilding and strengthening somalia. bringing it back. so thank you again for your presence here this afternoon. and i'm sorry that our time has exhausted. i know you've got a busy
schedule. >> thank you, mr. ambassador. thank you very much. and i give my apology to my friends, we would have taken more time. but we will have time -- we have a very hectic schedule. and to run early, i apologize. and i thank you very much for coming and giving me this opportunity to present to you somalia. i hope -- i'm selling somalia, many of you -- i'm not selling somalia from you but you are also selling somalia. i thank you very much. >> we hope to have you back again. [ applause ]
former virginia governor bob mcdonald faces prison. the conviction stems from mr. mcdonald and his wife expecting gifts and loans from a local businessman. in exchange for promoting a dietary supplement. the case is under appeal in the supreme court. which will decide whether it was fair to classify the former governor's actions as accepting bribes. you can hear oral argument to the case later today at 7:45 p.m. eastern on cspan. later this evening, a look at the work and influence of willi willi willi william shakespeare on the 4 hundredth anniversary of his death.
you can watch that program tonight at 9:00 eastern on cspan. it's known as one of washington's premier events bringing together officials members of the press and hollywood stars. we have live coverage of the 2016 correspondents dinner. our live coverage includes red carpet arrivals background on the dinner and award presentations. 2,700 people are expected to attend. larry will more will headline. and this year president obama will give his final speech as commander in chief. join us to watch the 2016 white house correspondents dinner beginning saturday at 6:00 p.m. eastern. live on cspan. now, a conversation with agriculture secretary about hunger in the u.s. and the challenges facing rural communities. he also discussed efforts by his
department to make communities more aware of food assistance programs. from the brookings institution this is about an hour and a half. good morning. i'm bob ruben, and my sole assignment is to welcome all of you. today's hamilton project discussion of food security. having said that, let me make two comments. number one, the hamilton project began about ten years ago and our purposes from the beginning would support policy development around the country, and to promote purpose in policy dialogue. i think those purposes, the
policy development and most particularly seriousness of purpose in policy dialogue. have become ever more important as the -- what goes for policy dialogue in our country has descended ever more into ideology, politics and partisanship. our commitment is to try to do our little part in keeping alive that seriousness of purpose. from the beginning our bedrock objectives with respect to economic policy have been growth, broad based participation in the benefits of growth and economic security. and is argued they are interdependent. and that they can reinforce each other. in that context, food insecurity, in this the richest country in the world is not only morally wrong, but it is also a serious impediment to economic growth. sufficient nutrition is a requisite for