Jeff Bingaman

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, I certainly agree with what my colleague has said. Unless there is other business at this particular moment, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, I ask for the regular order to return to the Feinstein amendment.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, this amendment is one I offered on behalf of myself and Senator Domenici. It is an amendment that was adopted by the 106th Congress. It merely tries to ensure maximum possible cooperation between our two countries along our common border on issues related to health and energy production and to ensure that the Department of Energy environmental management technologies are used to help clean up serious and pressing public health problems along the border. This is an amendment that I believe has strong support on all sides. I believe it has been cleared on both sides. I urge it be adopted.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, in response to my friend from Alaska, my understanding is the leader intends that we remain in session until approximately 5 o'clock and then go out of session. I do have one amendment that I believe has been cleared related to U.S.-Mexico technology cooperation which both myself and Senator Domenici have sponsored. It has passed the Senate before. I hope to do that by voice vote in the near future. Then, as I say, the intent is to recess the Senate around 5 o'clock. Then tomorrow morning, it is my understanding the majority leader intends to have a vote at 10:30. I am not sure the subject of that vote.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that there now be a period of morning business with Senators permitted to speak for up to 5 minutes each.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, as in executive session, I ask unanimous consent that it be in order to ask for the yeas and nays on the nomination at this time.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that on Tuesday, March 12, immediately following the Pledge of Allegiance, the Senate proceed to executive session to consider Calendar No. 706; that the time prior to 10:45 a.m. be equally divided between the chairman and the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, or their designees, for debate on the nomination; that at 10:45 a.m. the Senate vote on confirmation of the nomination, the motion to reconsider be laid on the table, the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action, that any statements thereon be printed in the Record, and the Senate return to legislative session.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, for the information of all Senators, the Senate will be on the energy bill for the remainder of the day. There are no rollcall votes to occur today. The next rollcall vote will occur on Tuesday at approximately 10:30 a.m. Today, the floor will be open for debate on any amendment or for the consideration of any amendment that does not require a rollcall vote.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, I send an amendment to the desk on behalf of Senator Akaka and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, I send an amendment to the desk.

Mr. BINGAMAN. I understand the concerns of the issue also and would agree to work with all Senators to see if we can address this intent issue prior to the end of consideration of energy legislation.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, this is a bipartisan amendment offered by myself, Senator Inhofe from Oklahoma, and by various other of our colleagues--Senators Baucus, Bond, Breaux, Campbell, Conrad, Dorgan, Landrieu, Lincoln, and Thomas. I thank my colleagues. The proposed amendment concerns hydraulic fracturing. That is a valuable tool in reducing our dependence on foreign energy supplies. It is one that the oil and gas industry uses on a very regular basis. It is necessary if we are to develop the majority of our onshore natural gas wells. Hydraulically fractured wells produce about 10 trillion cubic feet of natural gas annually. Through injecting fluids under high pressure, hydraulic fracturing creates pathways for gas to flow to the well. The amendment I have sent to the desk and have offered sets up a study process to determine whether high fracturing should be regulated by the Federal Government under the Safe Drinking Water Act. Let me give the context for this proposed amendment. States already have the authority to regulate hydraulic fracturing. They do that through measures such as requiring casing or lining of oil and gas wells where those wells cross through aquifers. The State regulatory programs have been effective to date. And although there have been over a million hydraulic fracturing jobs conducted in the last 5 years, there have been zero confirmed instances of hydraulic fracturing contaminating drinking water. There is not one time that contamination has been established. Where no one has been able to confirm any harm from hydraulic fracturing, it is sensible to study whether there is a real problem before we rush forward to impose additional Federal regulation. That is precisely what the amendment I have sent to the desk would do. The Environmental Protection Agency must first study whether hydraulic fracturing has any effects on underground sources of drinking water. After that, the National Academy of Sciences, as an independent scientific body, would review EPA's study. Then based upon all the evidence, EPA must determine whether in addition to State regulation, Federal regulation of hydraulic fracturing under the Safe Drinking Water Act is necessary to protect underground sources of drinking water. While the study is being prepared, States would fully retain their own existing programs and EPA would fully retain its emergency powers to prevent any contamination of drinking water that would immediately threaten public health. The proposed amendment's reliance on existing State programs while a study is prepared has received extensive bipartisan support. It has received that support both in the Senate but also in the executive branch. During both the previous administration, the Clinton administration, and the current administration, the EPA has maintained that Federal regulation of hydraulic fracturing is not required. In fact, the previous administration's EPA argued in Federal court--I quote from one of their briefs: Alabama is appropriately regulating production of methane via hydraulic fracturing. There is no need for EPA to supplant these efforts. The previous administration's EPA also cited the absence of any evidence that hydraulic fracturing has harmed drinking water and Alabama's close regulation of hydraulic fracturing in denying a 1994 petition to impose Federal regulations on Alabama. Mr. President, let me at this point submit for the record a letter from Carol Browner, then the head of the EPA, sent to David Ludder, general counsel for the Legal Environmental Assistance Foundation. This is a 1995 letter in which she says: EPA does not regulate--and does not believe it is legally required to regulate--the hydraulic fracturing of methane gas production wells under its UIC program. Continuing the quotation: There is no evidence that the hydraulic fracturing at issue has resulted in any contamination or endangerment of underground sources of drinking water. I ask unanimous consent that that letter be printed in the Record at the end of my statement.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, in response to my friend from Alaska, once the debate is concluded on the Price-Anderson amendment Senator Voinovich has offered, it is our intent to set that aside and go to an amendment on hydraulic fracturing, which I would offer. I think Senator Inhofe and various other Senators are cosponsoring that. Then I believe it is the whip's intent to have us stack a couple of votes on those two issues right after lunch.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, this amendment makes technical corrections in section 1702 of the substitute bill that is before us, which requires the Secretary of Energy to study the economic risk posed by the dependence of Hawaii on oil as the State's principal source of energy. The changes in the original text were proposed by the minority. They are acceptable to Senator Akaka, who was the original proponent of section 1702. They have been cleared on both sides. So I urge that they be agreed to at this point.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Madam President, this is an amendment which tries to address some very serious health and energy production issues, environmental issues, along the 2,000-mile common border that we have with Mexico. There are tire dumps in that region that routinely catch fire and which have been determined to breed airborne dengue fever, which is a major health risk that we will face in the next decade. There are brick kilns that use wood and plastic and cause serious health-related problems in the metropolitan area of Juarez/El Paso. There are serious water contamination issues with regard to ground water along the United States-Mexico border. This amendment, which I am offering on behalf of myself and Senator Domenici, is one which directs the transfer of Department of Energy environmental management technologies to help clean up many of these serious and pressing health-related problems along the border. The amendment will develop joint research programs between U.S. and Mexican universities on technologies to help develop clean materials processing technologies such as leadless solders for microelectronics plants, techniques to control air pollution from border region heavy manufacturing plants, and energy-efficient methods to recover nonpotable water for irrigation. This is an amendment that was passed unanimously as S. 397 in the last Congress, the 106th Congress. That was after we had a full markup of the legislation in the Energy Committee. It is consistent with the current administration's views on developing close ties with Mexico in both the fields of environmental sciences and energy production. It is a very good amendment, which I understand I will be given the opportunity to explain again tomorrow morning before a vote occurs. It is one of the amendments the majority leader has indicated he would like to have a vote on tomorrow morning. So I will not, at this point, belabor the issue but indicate to my colleagues that it has been supported unanimously, on a bipartisan basis, in the prior Congress. It is a good piece of legislation and one that I would very much like to see added to this pending energy bill. I hope we will do that tomorrow morning when the issue comes up for a vote. Madam President, with that, I once again yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.