Kay Hagan

Mrs. HAGAN

Mrs. HAGAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it recess until 10 a.m. on Tuesday, December 18, 2012; that following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day; that following any leader remarks, the Senate be in a period of morning business for 1 hour with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each, with the time equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees, with the majority controlling the first half and the Republicans controlling the final half; that following morning business, the Senate resume consideration of H.R. 1, the legislative vehicle for the emergency supplemental appropriations bill; and finally, that the Senate recess from 12:30 p.m. until 2:15 p.m. to allow for the weekly caucus meetings.

Mrs. HAGAN

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mrs. HAGAN

Mrs. HAGAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to a period of morning business with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Mrs. HAGAN

Mrs. HAGAN. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the consideration of S. 3666, which was submitted earlier today.

Mrs. HAGAN. I ask unanimous consent that the bill be read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, and that any statements relating to the bill be printed in the Record.

Mrs. HAGAN

Mrs. HAGAN. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 611, which was submitted earlier today.

Mrs. HAGAN. I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table.

Mrs. HAGAN

Mrs. HAGAN. Mr. President, at 5:30 p.m. on Monday there will be a cloture vote on the motion to proceed to S. 3637, the TAG extension legislation.

Mrs. HAGAN

Mrs. HAGAN. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of H.R. 6582, which was received from the House and is at the desk.

Mrs. HAGAN. I ask unanimous consent that the bill be read three times and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, and any statements relating to the bill be printed in the Record.

Mrs. HAGAN

Mrs. HAGAN. Mr. President, I understand that S. 3664, introduced earlier today by Senator Reid, is at the desk, and I ask for its first reading.

Mrs. HAGAN. Mr. President, I now ask for its second reading and object to my own request.

Mrs. HAGAN

Mrs. HAGAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that from Thursday, December 6, through Monday, December 10, the majority leader be authorized to sign duly enrolled bills or joint resolutions.

Mrs. HAGAN

Mrs. HAGAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 2 p.m. on Monday, December 10, 2012; that following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day; that following leader remarks, the Senate be in a period of morning business until 5 p.m., with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each; and that following morning business, the Senate resume consideration of the motion to proceed to S. 3637, the TAG extension legislation, with the time until 5:30 p.m. equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees; further, that the cloture vote on the motion to proceed to S. 3637 occur at 5:30 p.m. Monday.

Mrs. HAGAN

Mrs. HAGAN. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it adjourn under the previous order.

Mrs. HAGAN

Mrs. HAGAN. Madam President, as we conclude our work on S. 3254, the fiscal year 2013 National Defense Authorization Act, I would like to draw attention to yet another important role my State is playing in our national defense. North Carolina is home to the two major lithium suppliers in the United States. Not only are these important employers in my State, but they are serving our defense industry with critical materials that are vital to our Nation's defense capabilities both now and in the future. The Defense Department has recognized through its Defense Production Act Title III office that ``Li Ion batteries are extremely attractive to military customers with the most demanding set of requirements such as the space/satellite communities for spacecraft applications and the Special Operation forces.'' Lithium metal is an important component in a wide range of defense applications. For over a decade, the US military has been widely using non-rechargeable--primary--lithium batteries to provide power for mines, missiles, torpedoes, sonobuoys, guided artillery, fuses, communication devices, countermeasure devices, global positioning systems, and guidance systems. Presently, primary lithium batteries are the power source of choice for a majority of devices that a servicemember uses in combat and realistic training operations. An infantryman on a 72-hour mission in Afghanistan carries around 30 pounds of batteries. Lithium metal used in these defense applications affords today's Armed Forces fluid movement on the battlefield and in remote areas. We need to remain vigilant to the world's lithium supply situation. Offshore suppliers of lithium are poised to expand their capacity at the risk of domestic U.S. lithium production capability. It will be essential to our future national defense needs that we are able protect and enhance our domestic supply chain of battery-grade lithium metal. Mr. President, I recognize the importance of this industry to our Nation's defense. I am proud that over 600 men and women in my State are dedicated to creating these critical materials for our Armed services and urge that we continue to recognize the essential role this industry plays in our future defense strategies. amendment no. 3291

Mrs. HAGAN

Mrs. HAGAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to add Senators Shaheen, Collins, Schumer, Stabenow, Whitehouse, Coons, Udall of New Mexico, and Tester as cosponsors.

Mrs. HAGAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mrs. HAGAN. I call up amendment No. 3095.

Mrs. HAGAN. Mr. President, I spoke about this bill last night at length. I want to give a brief summary today of this amendment. This bipartisan amendment would remove provisions from the underlying bill that prohibit the Department of Defense from participating in a program with the Department of Agriculture and the Department of Energy and private industry to develop advanced biofuels refineries. It is a 1-to-1 match. As the largest single consumer of fuel in the world, the DOD uses approximately 120 million barrels of oil each year, spending over $17 billion in fiscal year 2011. This dependency on a single source of energy leaves our military readiness at risk. When the price of oil goes up $1, it costs the Navy an additional $30 million. We are looking at an investment here of $170 million by the Department of the Navy. Last year alone, this additional fuel cost forced the Navy to pay an additional $500 million more because the price of fuel was $1 higher. Our senior military leaders recognize the importance of diversifying the fuel supply with advanced biofuels. The Navy Secretary Mabus, Chief of Naval Operations ADM Johnathon Greenert, and Marine Corps Commandant GEN James Amos wrote to the Armed Services Committee about this. I ask unanimous consent to have their letter printed in the Record at the conclusion of my remarks.

Mrs. HAGAN. They write that: The demand for fuel in theater means we depend on vulnerable supply lines--the protection of which puts lives at risk. Our potential adversaries, both on land and sea, understand this critical vulnerability and seek to exploit it. The Navy and Marine Corps have been aggressively evaluating how both energy efficiency and alternative sources of energy can provide tactical benefits to our expeditionary forces. If you look back in history, the Navy's leadership on energy innovation is nothing new. It was the Navy that shifted from sailing ships to steam-powered ships in the middle of the 19th century, steam to oil in the 20th, and pioneered nuclear power in the middle of the 20th century. In the 1950s, the Defense Production Act, which is the same entity the Department of the Navy, Department of Energy, and Department of Agriculture are working under, played a critical role in the development of nuclear-powered submarines and the commercial nuclear power industry. Yesterday the Senate approved Senator Udall's amendment having to do with the cost of fuel and being able to invest in biofuels. With strong bipartisan support this amendment passed. However, our work is not done in this area. It is critically important that we approve this amendment so the Navy can continue working with the Department of Agriculture and the Department of Energy to spur the development of advanced biofuels refineries capable of producing cost-competitive drop-in biofuels for our military. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and I yield the floor. Exhibit 1 Department of the Navy, Washington, DC, July 9, 2012. Hon. Carl Levin, Chairman, Committee on Armed Services, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Chairman: We are concerned that certain legislative provisions adopted by the Senate Armed Services Committee may restrict the Department of the Navy's ability to improve its exposure to the price volatility of petroleum- based fuels. The ability to use fuels other than petroleum will increase our flexibility and reduce the services' vulnerability to rapid and unforeseen price changes, which can negatively impact readiness. A $1 change in the price of a barrel of oil, for example. results in an approximately $30 million change in the Navy budget. In addition to alternative fuels, operational and tactical energy efficiencies improve the endurance of our forces, reduce dependence on a vulnerable logistics tail, and in the end, lower total ownership costs. Shore energy efficiency improves the resilience of our facilities and conserves resources that can be reapplied to enhance readiness. The demand for fuel in theater means we depend on vulnerable supply lines--the protection of which puts lives at risk. Our potential adversaries, both on land and at sea. understand this critical vulnerability and seek to exploit it. The Navy and Marine Corps have been aggressively evaluating how both energy efficiency and alternative sources of energy can provide tactical benefits to expeditionary forces by reducing their dependence on external fuel supplies, as is the case at many Combat Outposts in Helmand Province today. We are quickly incorporating these promising technologies into regular procurement. Our military knows how to innovate in areas crucial to our national defense. GPS, the internet. and much of modern medical and surgical procedures owe their existence to military innovation. The Navy has been a leader in energy innovation, moving from wind to coal, coal to oil, and then nuclear power. Our modest investment to qualify and partner in developing alternative sources of energy such as wind, solar, and advanced biofuel, is a continuation of our long tradition of American ingenuity to provide greater energy security. In accordance with Department of Defense Policy. the Department of the Navy is pursuing assured access to enemy with a balanced approach that includes the flexibility to use alternate sources of energy. History highlights that over- reliance on a single critical resource jeopardizes operational success and thereby degrades energy security. We request your support in enabling the Department to pursue a judicious, balanced and diversified energy portfolio. This course of action will enhance combat capability, reduce costs and improve the security of energy supplies for our forces. Sincerely, Jonathan W. Greenert, Chief of Naval Operations. James F. Amos, Commandant of the Marine Corps, Ray Mabus, Secretary of the Navy.

Mrs. HAGAN

Mrs. HAGAN. Mr. President, Mr. President, I wish to call up amendment No.---- Mr. LEVIN. Forgive the interruption again, Mr. President. I hate to interrupt. There will be no amendments called up tonight. The expectation is that you would be recognized tomorrow in that queue to call up the amendment, but that tonight you proceed without calling the amendment up, holding that off until tomorrow.

Mrs. HAGAN. Mr. President, I wish to speak about an amendment I am going to call up tomorrow, amendment No. 3995. I believe it is critical, this amendment to our long-term national security. In August of 2011, the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, Energy, and the Navy signed a memorandum of understanding to invest $170 million each to spur the production of advanced aviation and marine biofuels under the Defense Production Act. This joint memorandum of understanding requires substantial cost sharing from private industry of at least a 1-to-1 match. The main objective of this memorandum of understanding is to spur the construction or retrofit of commercial scale advanced biofuel refineries. These facilities will produce drop-in advanced biofuels meeting military specifications. They will be located in geographically diverse locations for ready market access, and will have no significant impact on the supply of agricultural commodities for the production of food. As the largest single consumer of fuel in the world, the Department of Defense uses approximately 120 million barrels of oil each year, spending over $17 billion in fiscal year 2011 on fuel. This dependency on a single source of energy leaves our military's readiness at risk. When the price of oil goes up $1, it costs the Navy an additional $30 million and the entire Department of Defense over $100 million. Last year alone, this forced the Navy to pay an additional $500 million because the price of fuel was higher than budgeted. DOD is not going to allow these additional fuel costs to directly affect our missions in Afghanistan. However, cost overruns could force the military to curtail training and less urgent operations resulting in increased risk to future missions. Developing a commercially viable biofuels industry could help DOD diversify its fuel source and reduce the risk of energy volatility. Our senior military leaders understand that programs such as this MOU are critical to national security. In July, the Secretary of the Navy, the Chief of Naval Operations, and the Marine Corps Commandant expressed their concern to Chairman Levin. The demand for fuel in theater means we depend on vulnerable supply lines, the protection of which puts lives at risk. Our potential adversaries both on land and at sea understand this critical vulnerability and seek to exploit it. The Navy and the Marine Corps have been aggressively evaluating how both energy efficiency and alternative sources of energy can provide tactical benefits to expeditionary forces. Given the impact of this MOU to our national security, I was disappointed when the Senate Armed Services Committee marked up the fiscal year 2013 Defense authorization bill and an amendment was adopted that would prevent the Defense Department from participating further in the MOU. The bipartisan amendment that I offer today seeks to strike that measure. I believe Senators on both sides of the aisle agree that energy security is a national security imperative. However, there are honest disagreements over how the United States pursues energy independence. These divergent views are reflected in the debate over the joint MOU. One argument used by opponents of the MOU is budget related. Given the current budget restraints, the Department of Defense should not be spending resources to help spur a commercially viable advanced biofuels industry. It is important to put in context the amount of money the Navy is spending on this program. The $170 million dedicated to the MOU in one fiscal year represents .03 percent of the entire fiscal year 2013 budget request of the Department of Defense. Let me repeat that. It is .03 percent. This is not to dismiss concerns about our current budget situation. I too am deeply concerned about our country's fiscal path, and I continue to advocate for Congress to put politics aside and remake the tough choices necessary to ensure future generations are not burdened by unsustainable debt. However, as we tackle our budgetary challenges, we must not harm programs important to our national and economic security. This joint MOU is one such program. What about the cost of advanced biofuels? In the past 2 years, the cost of biofuels purchased for these 50-50 fuel blends used in Navy training exercises has dropped by over 50 percent. Moreover, the Navy has made clear that they will not procure large quantities of biofuels for operations until they are cost competitive with traditional fuels. The MOU is bringing the cost of biofuels in line with petroleum, and now is not the time to stop the program from reaching its goals. As I mentioned earlier, diversifying our energy mix will also help protect our military from the costs associated with price spikes in oil. Sudden energy cost increases force DOD to reallocate finite resources away from long-term priorities. Critics of the MOU often say if the government wants to promote advanced biofuels, we have a Department of Energy. Of course, the Department of Energy has an important role to play, but so does the Navy and the Department of Agriculture. From my perspective, leveraging the unique capabilities of each agency, in partnership with the private sector, exemplifies the type of innovative approach needed to solve our country's most vexing problems. Looking back in history, the Navy's leadership on energy innovation is nothing new. It was the Navy that shifted from sail to steam in the middle of the 19th century, steam to oil in the early 20th century, and pioneered nuclear power in the middle of the 20th century. At each of these transitions, there were those who questioned the need, challenged the cost, or simply opposed change of any kind. I want to make clear that today's debate is not about oil versus biofuels. I was very pleased with the recent International Energy Agency report that projected that the United States would be the world's top oil producer by 2020 and a net exporter of oil around 2030. However, this does not mean we should abandon efforts to diversify our energy supply. In 1913, on the eve of World War I, Winston Churchill made a historic decision to shift the power source for the British Navy ships from coal to oil. This decision was not without controversy, but Churchill successfully argued that safety and certainty in oil lies in ``variety and variety alone.'' Although at the time Churchill was talking about oil, his message is just as applicable to today's debate about biofuels. True energy security requires energy diversity. I urge my colleagues at a later date--tomorrow--to support this amendment. Mr. President, I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. HAGAN

Mrs. HAGAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for up to 15 minutes as in morning business.

Mrs. HAGAN

Mrs. HAGAN. Mr. President, 11 years have now passed since the attacks of September 11, that horrific day that forever changed the world. Although we have killed Osama bin Laden, the fight against the al-Qaida militants is not over. Al-Qaida remains a threat to America, and the brave men and women of our Armed Forces are still fighting every day to protect our way of life. Mr. President, I want us to honor and think about these men and women. There are over 77,000 U.S. servicemembers deployed in Afghanistan right now who remain in harm's way. These men and women willingly joined the military during a time of war. They want nothing more than to serve our country. They fight for our way of life so we don't have to and so that our children and grandchildren will not have to. I am going to highlight three servicemen from North Carolina who have made the ultimate sacrifice. I have personally spoken with their families, and I want to share their great love of country with you because it is so important that all Americans understand our military and their families who sacrifice so much for all of us. From my home State of North Carolina alone there are more than 6,000 of our finest sons and daughters, brothers and sisters, moms and dads deployed in Afghanistan. They are the men and women of the II Marine Expeditionary Force, 2nd Marine Division, 2nd Marine Aircraft Wing, and 2nd Marine Logistics Group from Camp Lejeune and Cherry Point. They are the men and women of the 82nd Airborne Division from Fort Bragg. They are the men and women from the National Guard and Reserve Units from North Carolina. And they are the thousands of other soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines deployed to foreign lands to stand watch over the world and keep us safe. Sometimes I feel as if the war is hardly an issue in the news, in daily life, anywhere, except for those who are personally affected by it. Our focus is too often drawn to the news of the elections, of the economy, of politics, of celebrities, of scandals, of the rich and famous, and of the simply bizarre. We do not hear enough about the brave souls who have lost their lives while trying to make the world safer for the rest of us, who willingly joined the military during a time of war, who want to serve our country. We all need to pay respect, to honor, and to remember the very men and women whose commitment, dedication, and courage are what make our country safe and to respect and remember the families they left behind. As we scale down our presence in Afghanistan and bring our service men and women home, we must remember every day this war is still going on, and it is occurring at a tremendous cost--a cost that is disproportionately paid by the brave men and women who are fighting for the rights and privileges we enjoy. These men and women traded their youth, and they have spent years away from family and friends. They voluntarily put their lives on the line for their friends, for their loved ones, their country, and for people they have never met--for me and for you. These men and women are the almost 50,000 wounded in action since the start of this war. They are the 336 U.S. servicemembers who have died just this past year. They are the 54 coalition forces who died in the month of August alone. They are strangers to most of us, but they are the most important person in the world to someone. They are selfless defenders of our freedom, many of whom have made the ultimate sacrifice, and many of whom are from my home State of North Carolina. They are people such as CPL Darrion Terrell Hicks, U.S. Army, from Raleigh, NC, who died July 19, 2012, just 2 months ago. Darrion was a 2009 graduate of Broughton High School, where he was a standout student who was loved and respected by all. Darrion always wanted to be a soldier. It was a goal he set early on and something that everyone remembers about him. It was a goal he pursued with diligence and honor. He was a model Junior ROTC student who was voted Mr. Junior ROTC by his peers. Darrion is remembered as the kind of young man a teacher wishes all of their students were like. He was a boy you wanted your children to be friends with. He became the kind of man we should all be so thankful to have in this world. When I was speaking with his mom Tracy, she shared with me that he was the kind of boy who never gave her a problem, ever. Corporal Hicks achieved his goal of becoming a soldier when he enlisted in the Army after graduating from high school. He loved the Army, and it seemed he had found his place in life. He loved his family, and he kept in close contact with his mother. Whenever he spoke with his mom, she would always tell him: ``Always pray. Be safe. I love you.'' To which he would respond: ``I am going to be fine. I love you, too.'' This year, Darrion was serving with the 54th Engineer Battalion, 18th Engineer Brigade as a sapper. Sappers are responsible for clearing the way for others, making the way safe for those who follow. This is what Corporal Hicks was doing when he was killed by an enemy IED. He was only 21 years old. As one of his teachers at Broughton said: When we talk about Darrion, we are not talking about a teacher making an impact on a student. We're talking about a student who made an impact on the teacher. Corporal Hicks made an impact on everyone he touched, and I think we all have something to learn from him and the life he chose to lead. There are people such as PO2 Sean E. Brazas, U.S. Navy, from Greensboro, NC, where I have lived for the last 30 years. Sean died on May 30, 2012. Sean was your all-American boy next door. He grew up playing soccer in the same traveling soccer league in which my son played, and Sean was on the swim team. Sean graduated from Western Guilford High School, and he could have done anything, but he wanted to do something important with his life. Sean Brazas joined the Navy after graduation and became a dog handler. He was stationed at Naval Base Kitsap in Washington State, where he met the love of his life, Allie, who was also in the Navy. When Sean met Allie, being the southern gentleman he was, he held the door open for her at the post office when they first met. Putting others first was just how he lived his life. Sean Brazas loved being a dog handler and loved being in the Navy. His wife is now a 23-year-old widow with a young daughter Addison, whom Sean nicknamed Short-stack. They were the center of his world. His life as a sailor, devoted husband, and loving dad was rich and full and tragically short. Petty Officer Brazas had only been in Afghanistan a short time when he died on May 30 while helping a fellow servicemember get into a helicopter when their unit was ambushed. That seems to define Sean--a man who selflessly did what he could to help others. Sean Brazas served his country proudly because he appreciated the rights and privileges that Americans are fortunate to enjoy. He wanted to make sure his daughter never had to worry about anyone telling her what books she could read or where she could go to school or what she could become. He wanted his mom, dad, wife, and daughter to be safe. He died a hero and now rests at Arlington with his grandfather and friends who have left the world far too soon. He died a man his dad Ed looked up to. Ed told me he hopes to be half the man his son was. There are people such as LCpl Christopher Phoenix Jacob Levy, U.S. Marine Corps, from Ramseur, NC, who died September 10, 2011. On 9/11, Jacob had just turned 11 years old. He had gotten a bloody nose at school, and his mom Amanda was called to bring him a change of clothes. She shared with me she was driving to his school when she heard on the radio of the first plane hitting the World Trade Center. When Amanda explained what had happened to Jacob that night, she said Jacob then said he would be in the military. He was only 11 years old at the time. Jacob joined the Junior ROTC at Eastern Randolph High School where he was a standout runner and wrestler. He was also a proud active member of the Lumbee Tribe. That is why he has the name Phoenix, from his Indian heritage. It stands for immortality and renewal. In 2009, Jacob fulfilled the goal he set in 2001. He enlisted in the Marine Corps and graduated from boot camp. He planned on being a marine for 20 years, retiring, and then returning to his hometown to give back to the JROTC in his community. It is clear from an early age Jacob was driven to be a part of something more than himself, to do his part for the greater good. That was just how he lived his life. Lance Corporal Levy deployed to Afghanistan with the 3rd Battalion, 8th Marines and returned home from his first tour on Mother's Day of 2011. However, Jacob told his mom his job was not yet done; that he needed to return to his brothers in arms in Afghanistan. He then volunteered to deploy again in the fall of 2011, this time with the 1st Battalion, 6th Marines out of Camp Lejeune. It was during this deployment he was mortally wounded by a single enemy shot. He was only 21 years old. A couple of weeks before he died, Jacob spoke with his mother for the last time. He told her not to worry about him. He asked for underwear and beef jerky. He asked her to tell everyone he loved them. Jacob left his mom, dad, stepdad and two brothers. Jacob's Indian name Phoenix, for immortality and renewal, has proven a worthy namesake for him. Although his life was tragically short, he lives on in the lives he touched. He inspired a scholarship at his high school that will go to help others, and he was an organ donor. He helped save seven other people he had never met. He gave the loved ones of those seven strangers more time with their parent, spouse, child, or sibling. His death resulted in an outpouring of love and support for the Levy family from the Marines of both the 3rd, 8th, and 1-6. As Jacob's mother told me: ``I may have lost one son, but I gained 30 others.'' To this day, those young men who served with Lance Corporal Levy continue to remember and look after her. These are the people who are paying both your share and my share of the cost of freedom. These servicemembers gave their lives for us and for our country. We must not forget them: Darrion Hicks, Sean Brazas, and Jacob Levy. We must not forget their families. We must not forget the men and women still deployed in harm's way. They come from our small towns, our big cities, and our rural areas. They are our neighbors, they are our fellow Americans, they are our heroes, and they are my fellow North Carolinians. To these men and women, to their families, we owe an eternal debt of gratitude. May God bless them, and may God bless America. Mr. President, I yield the floor.