you have from the 2007 energy bill, the atvm. and then you have section 1705 from the 2009 stimulus. and while there are certain similarities between the three, there's some very important distinctions and differences between the three programs. i just will take a quick moment, mr. chairman, to review them. section 1703 was created by a republican congress, relied heavily upon credit subsidy costs being self-paid by the applicants, made any project using new or significantly improved technologies eligible. unfortunately, is not closed on a single loan guarantee. then you have section 1705, which was created by a democratic congress, accompanied by $6 billion to pay for applicants' credit subsidy costs, narrowly limited eligibility to renewable and transmission projects. this program has closed on 27 loan guarantees worth approximately $16 billion. then you have the atvm, designed to offer direct loans to automakers. over $7 billion appropriated to cover credit subsidy costs, but just five loans have been issued. we've heard concer

we're in total agreement with regard to the importance of the atvm loans. we believe the atvm loans, for example, to ford and to nissan save or generate many, many thousands of jobs. it's about 30,000. a big success story because that loan enabled ford to retool, to sell is now a major leader internationally in selling very desirable, competitive cars. this is exactly what that loan program was intended to do. >> right. >> and it's a great success. i think the loan to nissan, to generate tennessee in the united states, another great success. now, having said that, we have to look at taxpayer money and as conditions change we have to say, again, going back to the original covenant of the law, which says in these loans, is there a reasonable chance of repayment? in many instances we feel that we would like to see private equity be invested in these companies and then there are milestones after that private investment so we can say all right, we can help you grow your business and so we are very, very sensitive to those things. again, trying to balance the lin

i know that the senator is going to ask about the atvm program and the fact that we haven't seen those loans go out the door under the '05 act we haven't seen any of those loans go forward. and then from the results from the stimulus dollars that came in, we had a lot of money go out the door and that's where we're seeing some pretty serious concerns. i'm looking at this. if i had to give a grade, if i had to assign a letter grade to the department at this point in time, it's not a passing grade. i think we need to be able to do much, much better. i would like to think, you suggested that you're going to be moving forward with some policy changes. but i think we need to be aggressive about that. let me ask a question. this is kind of a follow on to what i had asked mr. allison. some of the conditions that are in the '05 energy bill as it relates to the loan guarantee programs. one of them is the reasonable prospect of repayment. we certainly face that with solyndra and beacon's failure to repay the loan. there's another requirement in the law that says no guarantee shall be made unless

and at least as it relates to the atvm program, that's very much what the goal of that is, is to make sure that we are providing that support to keep jobs here in america. what would you recommend to make this retooling program more effective at this point? >> first of all, i would point out that these programs are intended to encourage risk-taking. that's the whole point, really. and so, having risk in the portfolio is understandable. i think what is important going forward is to make sure that this portfolio is well managed by professionals, that there is independent risk oversight of this portfolio, that there is ample public reporting on each of these projects and how they're doing, so that the public and the congress is kept well informed. and while these programs are being managed, again, there is some room for improvement. and i think that with the recommendations that we are putting forth, if those are adopted, i think that this portfolio can be very responsibly managed going forward. >> well, speaking more about the risk, because i know there's a concern and there's been crit

i know that senator stabenow is probably going to ask about the atvm program and the fact we haven't seen those loans go out the door under the 05 fact we haven't seen any of the loans go forward and then from vara results from the stimulus dollars that came in, we had a lot of money about the door and that is where we are seeing some pretty serious concerns, so i'm looking at this and if i had to give a great as if i had to assign a letter grade to the department at this point in time it isn't a passing grade. and i think that we need to be able to do much, much better, and i would like to think if you said just that you are going to be moving forward with some policy changes. but i think that we need to be aggressive about that. let me ask a question, this is kind of a follow-on to what i had asked mr. allison. some of the conditions that are in the 05 energy bill as it relates to the loan guarantee programs, one of the midst of reasonable prospect of repayment. we certainly faced with solyndra and the failure to repay the loan. there is another requirement in the law that says no

the other class or investments in clean and innovative and manufacturing, whether it is atvm or whether it is something in the energy generation business. that might carry a different risk. the mechanism that we were taxed with using -- tasked with use it tries to assess the risk to the loans. the allison report says we were a little bit higher but essentially on par with their evaluation of the risks of those loans and the congress had appropriated the money -- that money could have been spent on other things. it could have been spent on research. but they chose to appropriated because they recognize it was an opportunity to help these industries and help create jobs. >> let me ask one other question. mr. allison said to the important that you get the right professionals, employees working in the management and oversight of this loan portfolio. to do that, you need to have a short funding for this activity so that people consider leaving the private sector and coming to work for the department's to pursue this management's of these loans -- coming to work for the department to pursue t

i know that senator stab now is probably going to ask about the abtv -- >> atvm. >> thank you and the fact that we haven't seen those loans go out the door under the 2005 act we haven't seen any of those loans go forward and then from the results from the stimulus dollars that came in we had a lot of money go out the door and that's where we're seeing some pretty serious concerns. so i'm looking at this and if i had to give a grade, if i had to assign a letter grade to the department at this point in time, it's not a passing grade. and i think we need to be able to do much, much better and i would like to think you've suggested that you're going to be moving forward with some policy changes. but i think we need to be aggressive about that. let me ask a question. this is kind of a follow-on to what i had asked mr. alison. some of the conditions that are in the 2005 energy bill. one of them is the reasonable prospect of repayment. we certainly face that with solindra and beacon's failure to repay the loan. there's another requirement of the law that says no guarantee shall be made unles

secretary, but -- >> sir, actually, the atvm loans do. but with regard to alternative energies, there are a number of loans that we feel and the allison report also recognizes that are low risk, have a very high probability of being paid back. >> well, my time has expired, but we will follow up in writing, and we will ask that, um, these problem loans on the watch list be provided to the committee so that our people can review them and hopefully work with your administration, your agency to take steps to protect the taxpayer money. thank you. >> at this time we'll recognize the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. mark key, for five minutes -- markey, for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. there are only two tools the president has to bring down gas prices right now, deploy the strategic oil reserve and get other countries to help to put pressure on the marketplace and, two, curbing excessive speculation in oil futures markets through the commodities futures trading commission. the spro has proven effective in helping to bring down pri