Lisa Murkowski

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it stand adjourned under the previous order.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 10 a.m., Tuesday, February 2; that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, 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 leader remarks, the Senate be in a period of morning business until 11 a.m., with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each; further, that following morning business, the Senate resume consideration of S. 2012; finally, that the Senate recess from 12:30 p.m. until 2:15 p.m. to allow for the weekly conference meetings.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, we have had an opportunity to have a few speakers here this afternoon. Senator Cantwell and I have come to the floor and urged our colleagues to help us as we work to advance the Energy Policy Modernization Act. We have, for the information of colleagues, an order, in terms of several--a couple of votes tomorrow. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that it be in order to call up the following amendments: amendment No. 3023 by Senator Lee and amendment No. 3115 by Senator Franken; that on Tuesday, February 2, 2016, at 2:30 p.m., the Senate proceed to vote in relation to the above amendments in the order listed, with no second-degree amendments in order prior to the votes and a 60-vote affirmative threshold required for adoption; further, that the time between 2:15 p.m. and 2:30 p.m. be equally divided in the usual form and that there be 2 minutes of debate equally divided prior to each vote.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I know of no further debate on these amendments.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, before I begin my remarks, I want to welcome the new pages to the Senate. We said goodbye to a great group of young men and young women from around the country last week, their last day being Friday. Here we are on Monday, and we have a whole new batch. So to you all, through the Chair, welcome. Know that you are here at a most exciting and interesting time. We rely on our pages a great deal, and it is always nice to see these young ambassadors who come to us from around the country to serve us in the Senate. Welcome. Mr. President, I wish to give an update as to where we are on the status of our broad bipartisan energy bill. Last week we started out a little rough because of the blizzard, the snow days. But once we began the debate, we heard some very strong statements in support of our Energy Policy Modernization Act. We heard it from Members on both sides of the aisle, and that was very encouraging. We heard Members tout provisions that relate to supply, to innovation, to efficiency, really the whole gamut. As we promised, we began an open amendment process, which has already drawn close to 200 proposals now. Last week we accepted 11 amendments. We had three rollcall votes, and we had eight voice votes. I think it is important to recognize that those amendments were sponsored by 10 different Senators. They were cosponsored by many, many others, and they really add to the Members whose priorities we have seen incorporated into the energy bill through the process that we had in committee. So the benefit of really getting back to regular order, where you have good, robust committee work, then being able to come to the floor, to go through the amendment process, and then to gain input from other Members is kind of good, old-fashioned governing. I like the fact that we are back to it. We agreed to boost our efforts to develop advanced nuclear energy technologies. This came to us by way of an amendment from a very diverse group. Some might not have anticipated the collection of Senators that this advanced nuclear energy technology measure brought together. It was the two Senators from Idaho, Risch and Crapo, and we had Senator Booker, both Senator Kirk and Senator Durbin from Illinois, as well as Senator Hatch and Senator Whitehouse. With this amendment, we have all different perspectives in terms of political perspectives as well as geographic. We also agreed to a proposal from Senator Daines and Senator Tester that will help facilitate the use of clean, renewable hydropower in their State of Montana. Among others, we agreed to an amendment from Senator Capito and Senator Manchin to study the feasibility of an ethane storage and distribution hub in this country. I think that is a real possibility as a result of the shale gas revolution. We moved through 11 amendments. Eleven is a good number, but, honestly, I would have hoped that we would have been able to process more amendments last week. What we are going to do this week--and I am going to put everybody on notice--is that we are going to redouble our efforts. I want to move forward and process even more over these next couple of days. Our staffs have been extraordinarily busy over this weekend, as have I and as has been Senator Cantwell, my ranking member. We were going through all of the amendments that have been offered to the bill, determining which ones we can clear, which ones we need to bring up for a vote, and which may not be offered at all. We are moving right along, and that is good. We need to keep moving right along because we know that time on the floor is not unlimited. As important as the energy bill is and as important as modernizing our energy policies are, we are not the only show in town here. There are Members and there are other committees that are either on deck or want to be on deck. They are waiting for their turn and are waiting to move to advance their bills. If we still have Members who are thinking about filing amendments, I strongly encourage that be done today. We have dozens of options to vote on. So at this point, unfiled amendments are really at a disadvantage, just given all that we are dealing with. Know that we are going to process as many amendments as possible, but the window for advancing them is closing rapidly. Many of the amendments we are seeing would address opportunities and challenges from across the energy spectrum. I really am thankful for the Senators who have come forward with very, very constructive suggestions and for their work to make this bill even better. As we resume consideration of this legislation today, I also want to explain how the provisions that are already within the Energy Policy Modernization Act will help our country. I want to do that today--to spend a few minutes this afternoon--by explaining how it will benefit my home State of Alaska, how it will help Alaskans produce more energy and more minerals, how it will help Alaskans pay less for their energy, and how it will boost Alaska's economy at a time when we really need a boost. The most obvious place to start is with supply. Alaska, as all my colleagues know, is a producer for the rest of the country--really, for the rest of the world. That is our legacy. It is also our future. That is because we are blessed with an amazing abundance of resources that most States--and, really, even most countries--cannot even dream of. You name the resource, and there is a pretty good chance that we have it. In fact, there is a pretty good chance that we have a lot of it. How will our bill help Alaska produce more energy and minerals? For starters, it boosts hydropower development. Hydropower right now provides 24 percent of our State's electricity, which is good and critically important. There are however more than 200 promising sites with untapped hydropower potential. So our commitment to this clean, renewable resource and our efforts to improve the regulatory process for it could benefit communities throughout the southeastern part of the State, the south-central part, and the southwest. It provides benefit for all. Our bill also streamlines the approval process for LNG exports. The Presiding Officer knows full well the benefit that this will bring to the country, but it will also ensure that in Alaska our efforts to market its stranded natural gas can proceed in a timely manner without Federal delay, which is extremely important for us as we move forward with our efforts to move Alaska's natural gas. It will also help Alaskans harness more of our geothermal potential. We have enormous quantities of geothermal, but we have some challenges, as you know, with our extensive geography. But we are looking to develop a renewable resource that could potentially help power one- quarter of our States' communities, particularly in some very remote, high-cost energy States. Our bill also reauthorizes a program to advance the development of electricity from ocean and river currents as well as tides and waves. I have mentioned before that Alaska has some 33,000 miles of coastline. That is a lot of area to harness the power of the tides and waves. There is considerable potential to generate electricity from our extensive river systems as well. So working to do more with our marine hydrokinetic and our ocean energy could really provide a boost to projects that are showcasing some new technologies, such as those that we have proposed in Igiugig. Yakutat is looking at a project south of Kenai and along the Yukon River. Within the bill we also promote the production of heat and electricity from the tremendous biomass resources within our forests, which could help the development of technology to aid the construction of wood pellet plants across the State, again taking that resource that is there and helping to reduce our energy costs. It will also renew a research program to develop Alaska's immense resources of frozen methane hydrates. This is something they sometimes call fire ice. It has significant promise as a secure, long-term source of American energy, but making sure that we are able to move out on that research is going to be important. Then there is a subtitle on minerals, a very important part of our bill. I spoke on Thursday that we have incorporated much of the text of my American Mineral Security Act, which is designed to focus on our Nation's deepening dependence on foreign minerals and the concern that we do not want to get in the same place with our minerals that we once saw with oil, where we are reliant on foreign sources to supply the things that we need. We are obviously known in Alaska for our oil production, but Alaska also has nearly unparalleled potential for mineral production. We had a hearing last year before the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, and we had the deputy commissioner of the Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Ed Fogels, testify. He said: If Alaska were a country, we would be in the top 10 in the world for coal, copper, lead, gold, zinc, and silver. He also noted that we have the potential to produce many of the minerals that we import from abroad. One example is our State government has already identified over 70 deposits of rare earth elements just within the borders of the State. As I mentioned last week on the floor, we use rare earth for everything from renewable energy technologies and smartphones to defense applications. Right now in this country we are not producing any of that supply--none of that supply on our own--yet we have the potential to do so in Alaska. If we pass this bill, our Nation will begin to place a much greater priority on resource assessments so that we can understand what we have. If we have not done an inventory, if we have not done an assessment, how do we really know the extent of our mineral resources? We will finally make some commonsense reforms to improve our notoriously slow Federal permitting system, which could benefit some of the projects that we have that we would like to get moving on. We have a project on Prince of Wales Island called Bokan Mountain that has rare earth potential. We also have a graphite deposit near Nome, and making sure that we help some of the changes that we see within this bill will be important. As we produce more of our natural resources, Alaskans will benefit significantly. We will see new jobs created, new revenues will be generated for our State's treasury, and local energy costs, which is the next area I want to focus on, will decline, allowing Alaskans to keep more of their money for other purposes and needs. This is an issue when I am at home and I am talking to Alaskans about what their No. 1 concerns and priorities are. I do not care what part of the State I am talking to folks. It is all about the high energy costs and what we can do to make a difference. What can we do to bring down our energy costs? The Energy Policy Modernization Act will not only boost our energy supplies, but it is also designed to help lower the costs of energy and to help lower the cost of energy for Alaskans. We are an energy and a mineral producer in the State, but due to our vast geography, energy is still extremely expensive in many parts of the State. It is always an eyepopper for people to do a comparison of what is going on with energy costs. Right now in the lower 48, people are enjoying going to the filling station and seeing prices that are less than $2 a gallon. I was in Nome, AK, just a few weeks ago, and they are paying over $5.50 a gallon at the pump. It is not unusual that in many of our communities around the State, we are still looking at $5 a gallon for fuel. This is not only fuel for your vehicles or your snow machine or your four- wheeler to move you around or for your boat. It is also your stove oil and how you are keeping warm. So it is moving around, keeping you warm, and you are paying extraordinarily high costs. In many cases, our electricity costs are two to three times higher than in most other States. When we think about what it means to live in a community where effectively 40 to 50 percent of the household budget goes to stay warm and to keep the lights on--what does that leave for educating your kids, for feeding your kids, and for retirement? It does not leave you with much when you are spending half of your income to stay warm and to keep your lights on. This is part of the reality in Alaska that every day we work to address and every day we work to make a difference. State Senator Lymon Hoffman is from the Bethel region and has been a voice for rural Alaska. He sent me a letter last year. He wrote that ``the high cost of diesel and home heating fuels are just crushing'' in rural Alaska and that he believes ``the energy situation is the single, most important problem facing the lives and well-being of rural Alaskans.'' I agree with him. That is why we worked so hard within the Energy Policy Modernization Act to make sure that as we are modernizing our energy policies, we are working to do everything we can to lower the costs of energy for Americans and for Alaskans. We reauthorized the Weatherization Assistance Program, which provides our State with funding to improve the energy efficiency for low-income families' homes. We also renewed the State Energy Program, which allows Alaska to invest in energy efficiency, renewable energy, emergency preparedness, and other priorities. As we have heard talked about on the floor, we have an entire title of the bill--Senator Portman and Senator Shaheen have been working on this--devoted to efficiency for everything from voluntary building code improvements to the retrofitting of schools. As our vehicles, our appliances, and our homes are all becoming more energy efficient, that in turn works to reduce energy consumption as well as energy costs throughout the State. This bill also has a provision to promote the development of hybrid microgrid systems. I get excited about this part of the bill because I can see the direct application in my State. It allows communities to utilize local resources and storage technologies. Microgrids are critical within the State of Alaska. We have multiple dozens of isolated communities that are not connected to anybody's grid. In fact, they are hundreds of miles from anything that could even be considered a grid. So how do they get their energy? They are basically burning diesel to meet their electricity needs. So what we are seeing come together are energy solutions where you take a little bit of wind and perhaps a little bit of hydromarine, hydrokinetic, coupled with battery and storage, and we are finding some solutions. It is innovative. In fact, it is so innovative we have a hearing scheduled over the Presidents Day recess up in Bethel, AK, so Members can see what we are doing when it comes to energy innovation and coupling things together to make them work. We are never going to be part of a big energy grid in many parts of our State. We have had some great successes--such as Kodiak, a huge fishing port, which now produces 99.7 percent of its electricity from renewables. They have wind, they have hydro, and they have a storage system that has allowed it to work. But think about it. This is a major fishing port which, during the summer, needs a lot of energy when they are processing the fish. During the winter months, the local people there do not have energy needs that are as high as the demand during the summer. So how do you even this out? How do you make it meet during the highs and the lows? This is what Kodiak has done. They have taken themselves, as a community that was once 100 percent dependent on diesel for their energy needs, to being 99.7 percent on renewables. One of the best provisions in the bill to help address energy costs is a modification that we make within DOE's Loan Guarantee Program. Instead of allowing only major corporations to apply, we allow States with energy-financing institutions to seek funding and to advance a range of energy projects. Just to give a little context here, if the bill becomes law, the State of Alaska would be able to apply for a loan guarantee and then use those funds to help rural communities finance small hydropower projects, geothermal wells, MHK technology, marine hydrokinetic technologies, and the hybrid microgrids that I have been talking about. So instead of these top-down, government-driven programs, we would see the State DOE programs and other elements contained within this Energy Policy Modernization Act leveraging the innovation of local people-- leveraging the innovation of Alaskans, the American people, and the private sector--to improve our energy landscapes. These are just a few of the ways that this Energy Policy Modernization Act will help Alaskans produce more energy, save energy, and reduce local energy costs. In the process, the extra gain and benefit is that we create new jobs, generate new revenues, and provide other economic benefits we sorely need right now. I have talked about Alaska and the impacts on my State as a result of modernizing our energy policies, but know that as Alaska benefits, other States benefit as well. Many of the provisions I have mentioned in my comments this afternoon are just as applicable in Louisiana, Maine, Arizona, and Montana as they are in my State. This bill will fairly bring economic benefits to every State, and as it brings economic benefits, the energy security that stems from the economic security that leads to the national security makes us all stronger--yet another reason I encourage the Senate to work with Senator Cantwell and me over these next couple of days to move forward this broad, bipartisan effort to modernize our Nation's energy policies. Mr. President, I know we have Members who are anxious to speak this afternoon. Again, I will make the same request I made earlier: If Members are interested in submitting any amendments to the Energy Policy Modernization Act, now is the time because we are going to be moving--and hopefully moving quickly--so we can proceed with some expediency and efficiency throughout this week. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now vote on these amendments en bloc.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. We are now ready to process a handful of amendments with a series of voice votes. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following amendments be called up and reported by number: Gardner amendment No. 2970; Reed amendment No. 2989; Inhofe amendment No. 2991; Daines amendment No. 3119; Murphy amendment No. 3019; Hirono amendment No. 3066; Udall amendment No. 3137; and Flake amendment No. 3056, as modified.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action and debate.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 354, S. Res. 347.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate be in a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Just an inquiry, Mr. President, into how much time the Senator is seeking at this moment.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, good morning. This morning we are on day 2 of the Energy Policy Modernization Act. Yesterday, we took up this broad, bipartisan energy bill, the first of its kind in more than 8 years. Taking this up was a good moment for the Senate. It was an important step. It is the beginning of a series of steps that we will take to modernizing our Nation's energy as well as our mineral policies. I am hopeful we are going to have a good day of debate today. As we begin this morning, I would like to summarize very briefly where we are in this process and what Members might expect over the course of the day. As of this morning, we have a total of 89 amendments that have now been filed to the underlying bill. We are already starting to process those amendments. We recognize that some will go by voice vote, some will of course need rollcall votes, and others simply will not be voted at all. Right now we do have six amendments pending before the body. We have amendment No. 2963 that I have offered, which improves a provision in the underlying bill related to reliability impact statements. We have amendment No. 2968 from Senator Shaheen to clarify a definition for the term ``smart manufacturing'' that is contained within the underlying bill. We have an amendment from Senator Markey, amendment No. 2982, to require the Government Accountability Office to study the economic aspects of crude oil exports annually for 3 years. We have an amendment from Senator Barrasso, amendment No. 3017, to establish a prize for technologies that can separate carbon dioxide molecules from dilute sources such as ambient air. At noon we are scheduled to proceed to a rollcall vote on amendment No. 3021 to promote research into nuclear energy. There is a strong list of Members who are supporting this amendment: Senators Crapo and Risch from Idaho, along with Senator Whitehouse of Rhode Island, Senator Booker of New Jersey, Senator Hatch of Utah, and Senators Kirk and Durbin from Illinois. There is a good bipartisan mix of Senators from around the country coming together to promote nuclear research with this amendment. At 1:45 p.m. we will proceed to amendment No. 2965. This has been offered by Senator Schatz, and it will increase the authorized funding levels for ARPA-E in the underlying Energy bill. Senator Cantwell and I are both working with our staffs to reach agreement on any additional amendments that can be brought up for votes today. We will try to keep Members apprised as to what they can expect. I think both of us are hopeful that we will see more votes added to the list I have just described. We may have one as early as 11:30 this morning. That has not been worked out yet, but there is an option of course for more amendments in the afternoon, if Members are willing to stick with us on this. As I mentioned yesterday in terms of some housekeeping details, and it is worth repeating today, I would urge Members not to wait to file amendments. Get your amendments in so we can be looking at them and assessing where they might fit, in terms of how we handle and process them. I think the earlier you are able to file these amendments the greater the likelihood that you will see a vote on them. Again, as I mentioned yesterday, any amendments that cost money, any amendment that is going to score, you are going to need to find a viable offset in order for us to consider it. Further, if it is a measure that would result in a blue slip because it involves a tax provision or a tax amendment, know that is something we cannot consider. Before I make some comments about some individuals, I want to make a few more brief remarks about the bill itself, this broad and bipartisan Energy Policy Modernization Act. I mentioned yesterday that we have a total of five titles within the bill, and we did not just construct them for organizational purposes. They represent some important themes in our policies within these areas. The first title is ``Efficiency.'' When you think about the importance of efficiency in the energy sector, it is a critical component. We should all always be looking for ways to be saving energy. It is just smart. It is smart from a cost perspective. It is smart from being a good steward perspective. It is just smart all the way around. It helps our businesses and our families save money. It makes our resources last longer. It is good for our environment. Efficiency is good overall. ``Infrastructure'' is our second title. Typically, when we think about infrastructure, we think about the roads and bridges, but our energy infrastructure is integral to the daily operation of commerce that goes on around us when we are talking about energy infrastructure. It may be the big infrastructure such as the Hoover Dam. It is also the electric wires, pipelines, and it is the whole infrastructure package. We have a responsibility to keep our infrastructure in good shape so that we can reliably and safely transport energy from the place where it is produced to the place where it is needed. I joke sometimes, saying it is frustrating because there is not more education or understanding about our energy and our energy resources and how they work as much as we would like. I have joked that some ascribe to this ``immaculate conception'' theory of energy--it just happens. The lights come on, the temperature is what we would like it to be, and we do not care how or why it came to us or the fact that we might not have that energy resource right here in our neighborhood. It is just here, and as long as we are not inconvenienced because it is not too expensive and it is reliable, we are good with it. We do not think about how it gets to us and the necessity of reliable, safe infrastructure to take that from the source to the customer. The fourth title is accountability. Again, like efficiency, it just makes good sense to ensure that, as we are building out our energy policies, there is a level of accountability that comes with it--that our Federal agencies work efficiently and effectively as good stewards of taxpayer dollars. I think we have plenty of room for improvement when it comes to accountability right now. I mentioned yesterday that in addition to a pretty robust accountability title, we remove some deadwood, some reports and requirements that have built up over the years that get incorporated into our United States Code, and then they just sit there. As they sit there, it is not just that they are benign. The agencies still go ahead, and they have the reports that we here in Congress have required of them. That costs money. Nobody reads them. We have taken care of that within the accountability title. Then the fifth title is the title that relates to conservation aspects as it relates to the Land and Water Conservation Fund, an issue that I know the Presiding Officer is very interested in and would like making sure there are reforms there. We want to work to make sure that the reforms are good and sound, also making sure that our national parks have the focus on maintenance that they need. We have a responsibility to ensure that we are taking care of our parks and public lands, to not let the addition of more parks come at the cost of not taking care of what we already have. Rather than just kind of doing the 30,000-foot level on each of these various titles, I want to highlight today a little bit about the third title of this bill, the title that deals with energy supply. Over the past few years, we have seen several things. We have seen a lot of good things that happen when we are producing our own energy here in this country and the benefits that accrue to us when our energy is abundant. It is not just access to energy, but it is also what allows us in terms of energy economic security, something that leads to the creation of good jobs. As the economy grows here, our security increases. Really, we become far more competitive. So, again, when I talk about energy, strong energy policies, and an energy security focus, keep in mind these things reinforce one another. You have energy security leading to economic security, leading to national security. It moves all the way around. That, again, allows us to be more competitive over all other nations. Our bill would help keep our Nation's oil and natural gas production going strong. We have included a pilot program from Senator Hoeven for oil and gas permitting. We would expedite the process for liquefied natural gas exports, which could help us raise our domestic production levels. I want to say also that we did not just focus on oil and gas in this bill because we recognize drawing our energy from a variety of sources creates reliability and stability. We all know that Alaska is an oil-producing State. We focus a lot in our State on oil and being able to access it responsibly. We also know that when you are reliant on one source, there is a vulnerability. So when we talk about an ``all of the above'' approach to energy production, we mean it. This kind of approach just makes sense. It makes sense because it lessens your vulnerability. It increases not only your energy security, but your economic security and your national security as well. So focusing on all aspects of our energy sources is key to what we do within this bill. We took some good steps to produce more hydropower in this country by helping to reduce the regulatory barriers and extending the licensing period for hydropower projects. This is important to us as a nation, especially when we think about resources that already exist through hydropower and the additional capacity that we could potentially gain from these already exiting hydropower resources. This is significant. Geothermal is another area where we have an emissions-free source of baseload energy. Again, so much of what we talk about with renewables and part of the big problem that we face is that some renewables are intermittent. The wind does not always blow and the sun is not always out, so you have to have a reliable baseload. Our reliable baseload for a century has been coal. We have a reliable baseload with nuclear. When others think about those other areas where we have reliable baseloads, they also ought to think about the potential of geothermal. Our bill includes a number of provisions to help us expand the use and reduce the cost of this important renewable resource. We are doing some exciting things up in Alaska, as we are identifying sources to access geothermal energy resources. In another area, in Alaska and in some of the other coastal States, whether it is Maine or down in Oregon, we are seeing some good progress, some interesting progress when it comes to marine hydrokinetic energy, which has the potential to draw the power from the movement of the oceans and river currents. I just mentioned reliable baseload. You need to have something that you can rely on. The Presiding Officer comes from the interior part of the country. I come from a State that has almost 34,000 miles of coastline. One of the things that we know in Alaska is how the tides come and go. We can print up tide books because there is reliability as to when the tide is in and when the tide is out. So think about the potential for energy resources from our oceans, from our river currents. What we do within the bill is help advance marine hydrokinetic energy. We are attempting to help move it out of its infancy and focus the DOE on some pretty critical research areas. We also have a great subtitle on minerals. Oftentimes we forget about the strategic importance of critical minerals. Every one of us is walking around nowadays with a smartphone. Every one of us, therefore, is reliant on some form of critical mineral. For those who want to advance the energy future in the direction of renewables, well, in order for you to have a wind turbine, you are going to need some of these critical minerals from the Earth to allow us to really build out technologies. Minerals are really the foundation of our modern society. We need them for everything, as I said, from our smartphones to our military assets. Yet, despite this importance, we have really failed as policymakers to focus on mineral security. We have not been thinking about it enough. We have been talking a lot about this: Oh, we do not want to be reliant on oil. We do not want to be reliant on OPEC, and we work to address that. In the meantime, we have taken our eye off the ball when it comes to mineral security. We now import 100 percent of 19 separate mineral commodities and more than 50 percent of some 24 additional commodities. This is happening despite the growing importance of those minerals in our everyday lives and despite what we have here in this country, which is a world-class mineral base. When we talk about energy security and making sure that we are able to produce more here to reduce our vulnerability, energy security also needs to include that mineral security. We also have provisions to promote our domestic supply of helium. A lot of people do not think about helium in the energy space. We promote nuclear power, particularly our advanced nuclear power, to help foster a strong energy workforce. So when we talk about the direction that this energy bill goes, I mentioned yesterday that innovation is the key to so much of what we are trying to push out as we modernize our energy policies. As important as innovation is, supply is a case where more really is better. As a result of this good title that we have contained in the Energy Policy Modernization Act, I think our energy and our mineral supplies will increase in the years ahead to the benefit of America. Tribute to Mike Brumas Mr. President, I know my colleague from Hawaii is here on the floor, but I want to take just a few minutes to acknowledge something the leader mentioned regarding an individual in his office, someone that has served him well, Mike Brumas. Mike has been working for Leader McConnell now for a number of years and has done a great job in the communications department. I too am very privileged to have had him leading my communications department between 2008 and 2010. Mike is one of those men whom you can call a southern gentleman. He has a little bit of a twang that did not quite fit with the Alaska reporters, but it did not matter because he was so knowledgeable on all issues--all issues that we dealt with, including some of the most parochial and local of Alaskan issues. Mike Brumas embraced his job with an enthusiasm and a professionalism that was genuinely and sincerely appreciated. I know that he and his wife Ann are probably going to be spending a lot more time out on their bicycles and enjoying their time together. We happen to share timing; their two sons are just about the same age as the two sons that Vern and I have been raising. So we kind of shared parenting experiences as our sons grew into men. It has just been a delight to spend the time getting to know Michael Brumas and seeing him as an exceptional professional here serving the Senate, both for me and for Leader McConnell. So I wish him well and great adventures in his retirement. Tribute to Karen Billups Mr. President, as I am speaking about retirement, I must mention a woman who is not with us as we are debating and navigating this Energy Policy Modernization Act. That woman is a friend and an incredible professional who headed up the Energy and Natural Resources Committee for me for the majority of the past several years. After 25 years in the Senate, Karen Billups has said: I am moving on to more excitement, moving on to spend that time with a young son that she has. Karen is an individual with an incredible reputation, incredible integrity, and a graciousness that will be long remembered on this floor and around this body. She first joined the Energy and Natural Resources Committee back in 1995. Before that, she had served with distinction at the Department of Energy during the first Bush administration. She was in private law practice, and she was also on the staff of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. She has had a breadth of experience on the private side, within the Executive branch, in the House and then, of course, in the Senate. After joining the committee again in 1995, Karen served as counsel and then she came on as senior counsel. I think it is worth noting that Karen has worked through--or perhaps lived through--two Murkowskis because when my father was the chairman of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, Karen Billups worked for him. And when I came to the Senate and had Karen at the helm working as counsel, I have to tell you it was extraordinarily reassuring. In those early years, she focused on a whole host of different issues that face our Nation, from energy to civilian and defense nuclear waste. She was also the troubleshooter. She mentored our younger committee staff and ensured that Members and senior staff were all in alignment and that the direction was clear. Again, this was with a focus that was firm but yet very appreciative of the different dimensions she had to deal with. She is a woman who was able to navigate with a level of finesse. She is a woman who is able to navigate with finesse. After service in the private sector, Karen came back as deputy chief counsel in 2003, and I was very grateful when she accepted a promotion to be my chief counsel in 2009. Then in 2013 she agreed to step up to serve as my staff director and had been in that capacity until we concluded the end of 2015. I think it is so important to acknowledge what Karen not only lent to the committee, to me, to my office, but also to the many on the floor who worked with her on energy issues. Karen set a standard for excellence and achievement, and she worked tirelessly--truly tirelessly--to improve our policies to upgrade and to improve our Nation's energy resource, lands, and forestry policies. You might say she was a policy wonk, but you didn't get that impression from her because she did it with a genuineness and a passion that clearly showed. Karen steered a wide range of legislation into law, everything from boundary adjustments, to helping the economies of small western towns, to the landmark Energy Policy Act of 2005. Then as we wrapped up last year, she was able to pull together the end-of-year omnibus with the energy pieces that we had attached to that, the Transportation bill that had an energy title that had come over from the House side, and tax extenders. She worked in a way that was quiet and amenable but, again, firm and effective. In many ways her work continues today through this bipartisan Energy bill and the other legislation she guided to introduction. What we are seeing today has been done with the assistance--the mastermind, if you will-- of Karen Billups. As the ranking member and now chairman of the committee, I depended daily on Karen's thoughtful leadership, her patient counsel, and her wise judgment. I mean it when I say she was not only a trusted advisor but deeply skilled and motivated by the best traditions of service to the Senate and to the Nation on every issue that came before the committee. She had an understanding of the operations of this body. I know those who work the floor appreciated Karen's evenhanded skills. She helped point the way with a strategic vision for policy and oversight. I think she is probably one of the best lawyers I have ever met. Again, she was not just a leader for the staff, she was a mentor for them. She was an advocate for them. That is very telling of true leadership. Karen's service to the Senate was marked not by length but by distinction and by grace. She has truly earned the tremendous respect that she enjoys here and all throughout our Nation's Capital. Her legacy speaks for itself--a stronger energy policy that benefits every American and an Energy and Natural Resources Committee that continues to work together to tackle our toughest challenges. For all of these reasons and so many more, Karen truly stands out in my mind not only as a leader but as a real friend. As she embarks on this very well-deserved retirement, she knows that I wish her, her family, her husband Ray, and her great son Davis all the best as she goes off to her new endeavor. I wanted to take a moment to acknowledge the good work of a great lady who has helped shepherd this bill we have before us. Mr. President, I notice that we have a couple of Members on the floor who I am assuming would like to speak to the Energy bill before us. I yield the floor.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I now ask unanimous consent that Senator Crapo and Senator Whitehouse each have 1 minute of debate prior to the vote on the Crapo amendment.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I know of no further debate on the amendment.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I call for the regular order with respect to the Shaheen amendment No. 2968.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I know of no further debate on this amendment.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I send a modification to the desk for Barrasso amendment No. 3017.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, now we are ready to dispose of a couple of amendments by voice vote. Amendment No. 3017 I call for the regular order with respect to the Barrasso amendment No. 3017.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. I also understand that Senator Whitehouse wishes to speak to an amendment that is pending. Is that correct?

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

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, we are winding down the day here. We have had a good opportunity for good discussion and debate about the Energy Policy Modernization Act. We took votes on three amendments, and we just concluded voice votes on six additional ones on top of the two voice votes that we had. So we are moving through some of the amendments, and I think that bodes well for us. As I mentioned earlier, we will hopefully have an opportunity to line up a series of votes in advance so that when Members come back next week we all know where we will be going and the direction. I wish to take just a few minutes tonight, before we wrap things up, to talk about a section in the bill that I believe is very important--not only important to the Energy Policy Modernization Act but really very important to our Nation as a whole. The Presiding Officer and I hail from a State that has been an oil producer for decades now. It is oil that sustains us, fills our coffers, and allows for us to have an economy that is thriving and strong. It is struggling right now as we look at low production combined with low cost, but we also are a State that enjoys great resources when it comes to our minerals. We have long talked in this body over the course of years about the vulnerability that we have as a nation when we have to rely on others for our energy resources. We talk about energy independence, we talk about energy security, and, I think we recognize that when we can produce more on our own without others, it makes us less vulnerable. Energy security translates to national security. I think we pretty much got that message around here, and we are doing more within this Energy Policy Modernization Act to make sure that we are less reliant on others for our energy sources, whether it is what we are doing to produce more fossil fuels or being able to leverage technologies that will allow us to access our renewable resources in a way that is stronger and more robust, again to ensure we have greater energy security. When we think about energy security, we should not forget mineral security--the minerals that also help to make us a great nation, and a nation that is less vulnerable when we are able to produce more of our own. For several Congresses--this is actually the third consecutive Congress--I have introduced legislation on this subject. It is a bill that I have titled the ``American Mineral Security Act.'' What we have done within the energy bill is take much of that legislation and include it as part of a subtitle on critical minerals. Maybe it is because I authored it, but I feel pretty strongly that this is a pretty good version. This is a pretty good title that is contained in the EPMA, and I think that passage of not only the critical minerals piece as part of EPMA is key for our economic security, energy security, and our national security. It is just the right thing for us to be doing. We take for granted that our minerals and metals that we have available to us are going to continue to be available. Unfortunately, most of us do not really pay attention to the fact that so many of the things that we rely on for so much of what we need in our everyday world come from minerals. We just do not think about it. We assume that stuff just gets here. We do not think about where it comes from. We should not ever take for granted our mineral security. We should not ever take for granted what it is that we need. People talk about rare earth elements, rare earth minerals. When we think ``rare,'' what is ``rare''? What exactly does that mean? Why do we need them? What do we use them in? Rare earth elements make many aspects of our modern life possible. We talk a lot about how we are going to move to more renewable energy sources. You are going to need rare earth elements for wind turbines. You are going to need it for your solar panels. You are going to need it for your rechargeable batteries. You are going to need it for your hard drives, your smartphones, and the screens on your computer. You are going to need it for your digital cameras, for your defense applications, for audio amplification. That is just what we put on this particular chart. It is important to recognize that so much of what allows us to do the good things that we do--to communicate, to help defend, to help power our country--comes to us because we have access to certain minerals. According to the National Research Council, more than 25,000 pounds of new minerals are needed per person per year in the United States to make the items that we use for basic human needs, infrastructure, energy, transportation, communication, and defense. You might say: Whoa, 25,000 pounds per person per year--I cannot possibly need all that stuff. But, Mr. President, you and I fly back and forth to Alaska. Those airplanes we fly on need these minerals. Every one of these young people, as well as us sitting in here, all have a smartphone or some way we are communicating, and we all need this. All of the staff who are working on their computers need that screen to look at, and we all need this. When you think about it, it is like OK, maybe that number is right. Bill Gates put it quite memorably last year. He wrote a blog post entitled: ``Have You Hugged a Concrete Pillar Today?'' It is really a very interesting read, and it reminds us that you take for granted the things that we need, the things that we use on a daily basis, the things that are under our feet as we are walking here to work. Minerals and metals are really the foundation of our modern society. Our access to them enables a range of products and technologies that greatly add to our quality of life. Yet many of the trends are going in the wrong direction, which creates vulnerabilities for our country. We have a real problem on our hands right now as a result of this reliance on minerals and the fact that so many of our minerals that we need today we must import. You are thinking: 25,000 pounds per person per year is a lot; where are we getting it from? How much of it are we relying on other countries, asking their permission to bring it in? It is not just rare earth elements. The reality is that the United States now depends on many, many other nations for a vast array of minerals and metals. We have the numbers to back that up. In 1978 the U.S. Geological Survey reported that the United States was importing at least 50 percent of our supply of 25 minerals, and 100 percent of 7. We recently got the latest figures from the USGS. Our foreign mineral dependence is now far deeper. In 2015, last year, we imported at least 50 percent of 47 different minerals, including 100 percent of 19 of them. On this list you have the minerals for which we are 100-percent reliant on foreign nations, whether it is bauxite, cesium--which we have in Alaska--graphite--which we have in Alaska--indium, iodine, manganese, mica, niobium, quartz, crystal. I am going to stop now because they get more difficult to pronounce. These are the minerals that we are 100-percent reliant on other nations for. What do we use them in? We use them in transistors, electrical components, mirrors, rubber, vacuum tubes, photo cells, bicycles, fishing rods, golf iron shafts, baseball bats, defense applications, medical equipment, atomic clocks, aluminum, glass, enamel, batteries, gaskets, brake lining, fire retardant, magnets. Again, that is just what we can put on the charts. We are 100-percent reliant on other countries for some of the things that are basic everyday products that we do not think about. Again, we take for granted that these things are going to continue to be readily available--that it is always going to be there for us. For example, look at the cell phone. Let us look at the elements that it takes to make a smartphone. When you look at what goes into the smartphone, for your screen, indium is part of the screen. Alumina and silica are part of the screen. It is a variety of rare earth. All of these rare earths that we are looking at are 100-percent reliant on other nations for what goes into the screen. For the battery for your smartphone, we have lithium, graphite, and manganese. Manganese and graphite are 100-percent reliant on foreign sources. We are 50-percent reliant on lithium. You have tantalum, and we are 100-percent reliant on that. There is tin, lead, copper, silver. We are 70-percent reliant on tin. It goes to show that the things that we take for granted, the things that we are all using all the time to communicate, to send messages home, to do our business, we cannot have them unless we get this from somebody else, from some other country. There are options for us though, just as there are options for us with energy sources. We can find ways to help us produce more when it comes to minerals and mineral capacity so that we are less reliant. We had a hearing before our energy committee, and we had a witness by the name of Dan McGroarty, who leads the American Resources Policy Network. He provided some pretty good examples of our Nation's foreign mineral dependence. He pointed out that the minerals needed for clean energy technologies often come from abroad, threatening our ability to manufacture those technologies here at home. This is what he wrote in his prepared testimony: Graphite is key to [electric vehicle] batteries and energy storage. The U.S. produces zero natural graphite--we are 100 percent import dependent. Indium is needed for flat-screen TVs and solar photovoltaic panels. Most indium is derived from zinc mining--the U.S. is 81 percent dependent for the zinc we use, and we produce zero indium. Thin-film solar panels are made of C-I-G-S materials--those letters stand for Copper, Indium, Gallium, and Selenium. We have a 600,000 metric ton copper gap at present--demand exceeding supply. Selenium is recovered from copper processing. Gallium comes from aluminum processing--we are 99% import- dependent--and we are closing American aluminum smelters at a record pace. Mr. McGroarty also highlighted the national security implications of our foreign mineral dependence, explaining: We need rhenium for high-strength alloy in the jet turbines in the F-35 and other fighter aircraft. Rhenium is dependent on copper processing--and we are 83% import-dependent. Congress has directed the Defense Department to purchase electrolytic manganese, used in key super-alloys, for the [defense stockpile]--the U.S. produces zero manganese. We need rare earths in too many applications to list: Wind turbines, lasers for medical and national security applications, smart phones and smart bombs. We produce zero rare earths--and we are once again 100% dependent on China. You may recall not too many years ago now when there was a little bit of an issue going on between Japan and China. China withheld delivery of certain rare earth elements that Japan needed for its manufacturing. China was holding the keys. China is holding the keys with many of these minerals. Our foreign dependence is dangerous enough. You know that full well, Mr. President. The concentration of our foreign supply presents additional challenges. Our minerals often come from a handful of countries that are less than stable or that might be willing to cut off the supply to us to serve their own purposes or to meet their own needs. They are going to take care of themselves first. If they do not have much supply, they are going to help themselves first. When I look at our foreign mineral dependence and where those minerals are coming from, I see reason after reason to be concerned. It is not hard to see the prospect of a day of reckoning when this will become real to all of us, when we simply cannot acquire a mineral or when the market for a mineral changes so dramatically that entire industries are affected. To put it even more bluntly, our foreign mineral dependence is a mounting threat to our economy, to our national security, and to our international competitiveness. We cannot lose sight of that international competitiveness. The absence of just one critical mineral or metal could disrupt entire technologies, entire industries, and create a ripple effect throughout our entire economy. I think it is well past time for us to be taking this seriously. We have seen some good signs from the administration. However, the reality is that our executive agencies are not as coordinated about this as they really should be. They do not have all of the statutory authorities needed to make the necessary progress on this issue. There is just no substitute for legislation, and that is why I am very pleased that the members of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee accepted my language in our bill to rebuild this mineral supply chain. We did this in committee with almost no substantive changes. When it comes to permitting delays for new mines--you have heard me say this before--our Nation is among the worst in the world. We are almost dead last. We are stumbling right out of the gate, right out of the very start of the supply chain, and then we do not ever seem to be able to catch up. Where do you place the blame? The fall begins with us here. When we decide that a mineral is critical, we need to understand what we have. We need to survey our lands. We need to determine the extent of our resource base so we know what we can produce right here at home. If we do not know, it makes it pretty difficult to get anybody interested in production. We should keep working on alternatives, on efficiency, and recycling options. That is not what this is about. We need to keep doing that, especially for those minerals where our Nation does not and will not ever have significant abundance there. We should build out a forecasting capability so that we can gain a better understanding of mineral-related trends and also an early warning when we see that there might be issues arising. We also need to have a qualified workforce. We need to make sure that we have those that can access this mineral resource, this mineral wealth. The United States right now is down to a handful of mining schools. A large share of their faculty will be eligible to retire in the near future. We need some smart, young people who are interested and want to go into these fields. Provisions to tackle all of these challenges are contained within the bill. They have good support. The Director of the United States Geological Survey, the CEOs of the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, and the National Electrical Manufacturers Association are among some. State witnesses, former military officials, and many others have endorsed this approach. We have a good opportunity to bring our mineral policies into the 21st century, and the mineral subtitle in this bipartisan Energy bill offers us that chance. I want to note the other members of the energy committee who have been very helpful in helping to advance this legislation. Senator Risch was very helpful as was Senator Crapo of Idaho and Senator Heller. They were all cosponsors of the original bill with me. There were many other cosponsors from both sides of the aisle in recent Congresses, and we also thank the Presiding Officer for his support as well. I also wish to acknowledge Secretary Moniz, the Secretary of Energy, and his team over there at DOE, and Director Kimball, who is the Director of the U.S. Geological Survey. They helped us a lot when it came to drafting this bill, and I thank them for that. I have consumed more time than I should, but I hope everyone can hear the enthusiasm I have in ensuring that as we modernize our energy policies, we do not take a step forward to help address what we need to do on the energy front and fail to bring along the growing concerns that we have in needing to modernize and understand our mineral resources and how we can ensure that there is that level of true energy security that helps us with our economic security and certainly our national security. With that, I see that my colleague from Alabama is here, so I yield the floor.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

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

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Select Committee on Intelligence be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on January 28, 2016, at 2:30 p.m.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on January 28, 2016, at 10 a.m. in room SR-428A of the Russell Senate Office Building to conduct a hearing entitled ``Reauthorization of the SBIR/STTR Programs--The Importance of Small Business Innovation to National and Economic Security.''