Lisa Murkowski

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, today I am introducing a bill, with my colleague from Alaska Senator Mark Begich, that will require all oil laden tankers in Prince William Sound to be escorted by at least two towing vessels or other vessels considered appropriate by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security. At 12:04 a.m. on March 24, 1989, the Exxon Valdez, carrying over 53 million gallons of crude oil, failed to turn back into the shipping lane after detouring to avoid ice, and ran aground on Bligh Reef. Alaskans will never forget that morning, waking up to hear about the worst oil spill and environmental disaster in U.S. history and living with the lasting impacts it has had on our State and residents. The National Transportation Safety Board investigated the accident and determined probable causes for the accident. While it determined that it was primarily caused by human error of the captain and crew, it is my belief that we had also become complacent. It had been 12 years since we had begun to tanker oil out of Valdez and there had not been an incident. However, when the spill occurred, we became acutely aware of how woefully unprepared we were. The few prevention measures that were available were inadequate and the spill response and clean-up resources were seriously deficient. The oil eventually fouled some 1,300 miles of shoreline, stretching almost 500 miles, and covered an area of 11,000 square miles. While the captain and crew were found at fault for the immediate cause of the spill, the incident also highlighted huge gaps in regulatory oversight of the oil industry. The response of Congress to the spill was passage of the Oil Spill Pollution Act of 1990 or OPA90. The law overhauled shipping regulations, imposed new liability on the industry, required detailed response plans and added extra safeguards for shipping in Prince William Sound. Since the law took effect, annual oil spills were greatly reduced and lawmakers, marine experts, the oil industry and environmentalists credit the law for major improvements in U.S. oil and shipping industries. Oil spill prevention and response have been greatly improved in Prince William Sound since the passage of OPA90. The U.S. Coast Guard now monitors fully laden tankers all the way through Prince William Sound. Specially trained marine pilots ride the ships for 25 of the 70 mile journey through the Sound and there are weather criteria for safe navigation. Contingency plans, skimmers, dispersants, oil barges and containment booms are all now readily available. An advanced ice- detecting radar system is also in place to monitor the icebergs that flow off of the mighty Columbia Glacier. Two escort tugs accompany each tanker while passing through the Sound and are capable of assisting the tanker in the case of an emergency. This world class safety system recently saw the 11,000th fully loaded tanker safely escorted through Prince William Sound. It is estimated that if the Exxon Valdez would have been double-hulled, the amount of the spill would have been reduced by more than half. While double hulled tankers are a huge improvement over single hulls, they do not prevent oil spills. The legislation that Senator Begich and I are introducing today will maintain the existing escort system in place for all tankers. Presently, the federal requirement that every loaded tanker be accompanied through the Sound by two tugs applies only to single-hulled tankers. Even though, right now, double-hulled tankers are escorted by two vessels, federal law does not require them to be. The last single hulled tanker in the Prince William Sound fleet is expected to be retired from service by August 2012 and our legislation ensures all double hulled tankers will always be escorted by two tugs. Although there have been a number of marine incidents and near misses since the Exxon Valdez oil spill in 1989, over the past 20 years, through the efforts of the U.S. Coast Guard, industry, the State of Alaska, and the Prince William Sound Citizens Advisory Council to implement the requirements of OPA 90, there have been no major oil spills. Today, as a result, the marine transportation safety system established for Prince William Sound is regarded as among the most effective in the world. A key reason for that accomplishment is, in part, because of the safety benefits resulting from having dual escort vessels available to assist oil laden tankers transiting the Sound. Section 4116 (c) of OPA 90 requires that single hulled tankers over 5,000 gross tons transporting oil in bulk in Prince William Sound, Alaska be escorted by at least two towing vessels or other vessels considered appropriate by the Secretary. Subsection (a) makes applicable to double hulled tankers the requirement in existing law including regulations in 33 CFR Part 168 issued to implement that dual escort vessel requirement for single hulled tankers. The subsection leaves the dual escort vessel requirement in place for single hulled tankers. By making those cited regulations applicable to double hulled tankers, the U.S. Coast Guard would not need to issue new regulations as a result of the amendment to section 4116(c) of OPA 90. Rather, the Secretary is authorized and directed to ``carry out subparagraph (A)'' by order without notice and hearing, and without issuing new regulations, under section 553 of title 5 of the U.S. Code. The dual escort plan, as it was constituted and in effect as of March 1, 2009 for Prince William Sound, is described in a document entitled, ``Vessel Emergency Response Plan'' or ``VERP'', and is on file with the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee and the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee. It is envisioned that, as advancements in technology are made in the future, any appropriate and warranted modifications to the VERP cited above implementing the dual escort practice as in effect as of March 1, 2009 and implementing the dual escort requirement in this section, including implementing regulations, will be made by the Prince William Sound Tanker Owners/Operators in consultation with the U.S. Coast Guard, the State of Alaska, and the PWSRCAC and ratified and endorsed by the U.S. Coast Guard before being implemented. The success of this escort system over the past 20 years has shown us that it must not be compromised. We cannot forget the lessons of the Exxon Valdez oil spill and allow ourselves to become complacent. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, this week is National Police Week, the one week each year when tens of thousands of law enforcement officers from around the U.S. and some from foreign lands descend upon Washington, DC to pay homage to the fallen officers who gave their lives in the service of our communities. All around Washington we see police cars and motorcycles from jurisdictions far and wide. Honor guards and drill teams. And many uniformed law enforcement officers with their families and kids. At a hotel in Alexandria, VA, thousands of surviving families and coworkers of fallen law enforcement officers are gathered for the 2009 National Police Survivors Conference, sponsored by Concerns of Police Survivors. Today marks the 25th anniversary of the founding of Concerns of Police Survivors. I thank all of our colleagues for supporting S. Res. 138 commending that organization on the occasion of this significant anniversary. Tomorrow we observe Peace Officers Memorial Day with services at the U.S. Capitol. Last evening the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund conducted its annual candlelight vigil at the memorial on Judiciary Square. I had the privilege of reading the name of a fallen officer, John Patrick Watson of the Kenai Police Department, at the 2004 candlelight vigil. I can attest that this annual event does justice to the memory of the 18,662 names inscribed on the memorial walls. For fifty-one weeks out of every year those memorial walls display names. Just names. There is a story of heroism behind each of these names. Yet for 51 weeks out of each year, those stories are hidden from public view. Visitors to the memorial can discover but a few of these stories by viewing the displays at the Memorial Fund's tiny visitor's center. During National Police Week the memorial comes alive with news clippings, photographs and patches--even the door of a police car-- placed at the memorial by law enforcement agencies and friends and family members of the fallen officers. These ad hoc memorials are removed at the end of Police Week. Those that are left behind become part of the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund's permanent collection. Someday more substantial parts of that collection will be displayed to the public at the National Law Enforcement Museum. In 2000, Congress passed the National Law Enforcement Museum Act, Public Law 106-492, which set aside land across from the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial for a National Law Enforcement Museum. The museum is to be operated by the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund. This National Law Enforcement Museum will tell the story of our law enforcement heroes. It will help ensure that visitors to the Law Enforcement Officers Memorial have an opportunity to reflect on the ways that our fallen officers lived their lives, rather than the way those officers died. Our colleagues may be interested to know that it was Vivian Eney- Cross, the surviving spouse of a fallen U.S. Capitol Police officer, who coined the phrase, ``It is not how these officers died that made them heroes, it is how they lived.'' The National Law Enforcement Museum Act requires that the museum be financed with private contributions. The National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund has been diligent in seeking private financing and hopes to break ground on the museum in November 2010 with a 2013 opening date. I am hopeful that construction of the new museum will begin in 2010 but I am also realistic about the difficulties of raising private funds for worthy projects given current world economic conditions. Fortunately, these economic conditions have neither deterred the Memorial Fund from asking for donations nor have they deterred prospective contributors with the ability to give, from giving. On May 4, the Memorial Fund announced a $1.5 million grant from the Verizon Foundation to develop educational and interactive technology programs at the planned museum. However, I must call the attention of our colleagues to a critical deadline in the National Law Enforcement Museum Act. The act provides that the authority to construct a museum terminates on November 9, 2010 if construction has not begun by that date. Today, I offer legislation that will push the termination date out to November 9, 2013. This legislation will provide a cushion for the Memorial Fund to continue their fundraising efforts. Our law enforcement officers put their lives on the line every day to protect our communities. Giving the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund a bit more time to arrange financing, if they need it, is a small price to pay. A small price to pay for the sacrifices our law enforcement officers and their families make every day. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, this week is National Police Week, the one week each year when tens of thousands of law enforcement officers from around the U.S. and some from foreign lands descend upon Washington, DC to pay homage to the fallen officers who gave their lives in the service of our communities. All around Washington we see police cars and motorcycles from jurisdictions far and wide. Honor guards and drill teams. And many uniformed law enforcement officers with their families and kids. At a hotel in Alexandria, VA, thousands of surviving families and coworkers of fallen law enforcement officers are gathered for the 2009 National Police Survivors Conference, sponsored by Concerns of Police Survivors. Today marks the 25th anniversary of the founding of Concerns of Police Survivors. I thank all of our colleagues for supporting S. Res. 138 commending that organization on the occasion of this significant anniversary. Tomorrow we observe Peace Officers Memorial Day with services at the U.S. Capitol. Last evening the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund conducted its annual candlelight vigil at the memorial on Judiciary Square. I had the privilege of reading the name of a fallen officer, John Patrick Watson of the Kenai Police Department, at the 2004 candlelight vigil. I can attest that this annual event does justice to the memory of the 18,662 names inscribed on the memorial walls. For fifty-one weeks out of every year those memorial walls display names. Just names. There is a story of heroism behind each of these names. Yet for 51 weeks out of each year, those stories are hidden from public view. Visitors to the memorial can discover but a few of these stories by viewing the displays at the Memorial Fund's tiny visitor's center. During National Police Week the memorial comes alive with news clippings, photographs and patches--even the door of a police car-- placed at the memorial by law enforcement agencies and friends and family members of the fallen officers. These ad hoc memorials are removed at the end of Police Week. Those that are left behind become part of the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund's permanent collection. Someday more substantial parts of that collection will be displayed to the public at the National Law Enforcement Museum. In 2000, Congress passed the National Law Enforcement Museum Act, Public Law 106-492, which set aside land across from the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial for a National Law Enforcement Museum. The museum is to be operated by the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund. This National Law Enforcement Museum will tell the story of our law enforcement heroes. It will help ensure that visitors to the Law Enforcement Officers Memorial have an opportunity to reflect on the ways that our fallen officers lived their lives, rather than the way those officers died. Our colleagues may be interested to know that it was Vivian Eney- Cross, the surviving spouse of a fallen U.S. Capitol Police officer, who coined the phrase, ``It is not how these officers died that made them heroes, it is how they lived.'' The National Law Enforcement Museum Act requires that the museum be financed with private contributions. The National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund has been diligent in seeking private financing and hopes to break ground on the museum in November 2010 with a 2013 opening date. I am hopeful that construction of the new museum will begin in 2010 but I am also realistic about the difficulties of raising private funds for worthy projects given current world economic conditions. Fortunately, these economic conditions have neither deterred the Memorial Fund from asking for donations nor have they deterred prospective contributors with the ability to give, from giving. On May 4, the Memorial Fund announced a $1.5 million grant from the Verizon Foundation to develop educational and interactive technology programs at the planned museum. However, I must call the attention of our colleagues to a critical deadline in the National Law Enforcement Museum Act. The act provides that the authority to construct a museum terminates on November 9, 2010 if construction has not begun by that date. Today, I offer legislation that will push the termination date out to November 9, 2013. This legislation will provide a cushion for the Memorial Fund to continue their fundraising efforts. Our law enforcement officers put their lives on the line every day to protect our communities. Giving the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund a bit more time to arrange financing, if they need it, is a small price to pay. A small price to pay for the sacrifices our law enforcement officers and their families make every day. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I ask that my letter to Senator McConnell, dated May 4, 2009, with its attachment, be printed in the Record. The material follows. U.S. Senate, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, Washington, DC, May 4, 2009. Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican Leader, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. Dear Senator McConnell, Under the provisions of the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007 (section 512 of P.L. 110-81), attached please find a notice of my intent to object to proceedings on the nomination of David Hayes, Calendar number 31, reported by the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources on March 18, 2009. The reasons for my objection are included in the notice. Sincerely, Lisa A. Murkowski, Ranking Republican Member. Notice of Intent To Object Under the provisions of the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007 (section 512 of P.L. 110-81), I, Senator Lisa A. Murkowski, intend to object to proceedings on the nomination of David Hayes, Calendar number 31, reported by the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources on March 18, 2009, for the following reasons: During conversations with the nominees at meetings and hearings, they have generally expressed very reasonable views, including an affirmation of the need for continued energy production in the United States. However, actions speak louder than words, and I am disappointed and troubled by the lack of connection between the rhetoric from the Administration and its nominees, and the reality of the Administration's actions. Rarely a week goes by that the Department of the Interior doesn't issue a pronouncement, that, taken together, add up to a wholesale assault on domestic natural resource development. A few examples are: Cancellation of the Utah leases; 180-day delay of the 5-year plan; delay of the new round of oil shale research, demonstration, and development leases; listing of the yellow billed loon; Monday's determination that the mountaintop coal mining rule is ``legally defective,'' and, most recently, the potential application of Endangered Species Act consultation requirements to all activities that may increase carbon output. Further, I have not been satisfied with the responses to questions we have submitted on these matters to nominees that have previously come before this Committee. Therefore, I will add my name to the list of those who intend to object to the confirmation of Deputy Secretary- nominee David Hayes, until we can get some assurance that we will see the actions of the Department of the Interior comport with the transparency and process and policy that they have promised. I will soon be sending a letter to the Department of the Interior with detailed questions regarding my concerns. These are questions of huge significance to not only American energy security, but to our ability to maintain our Nation's entire infrastructure, and grow our economy.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce two pieces of legislation S. 922 and S. 923, that I hope will be the next major step that this Congress takes to help an exciting form of renewable energy to become more established as a viable energy technology. I am referring to helping the expansion of the ocean hydrokinetic energy industry. Today I am introducing the Marine Renewable Energy Promotion Act of 2009 and a companion tax provision. They are companion measures to one that has been introduced in the House of Representatives by Rep. Jay Inslee of Washington. For a number of years this Nation has been providing help with research and other assistance to promote the development of energy from our oceans and rivers, using the tides, currents, waves and even the thermal properties of our oceans to generate electricity. With 70 percent of our planet covered with water, and the energy that the sun produces--each day oceans absorb the energy equivalent of 250 billion barrels of oil--and the energy that winds produce and impart to that water, marine hydrokinetic energy has the potential to be a major source of the world's clean, non-carbon emitting power in the future. The Electric Power Research Institute has estimated that ocean resources in the U.S. could generate 252 million megawatt hours of electricity--6.5 percent of America's entire electricity generation--if ocean energy gained the same financial and research incentives currently enjoyed by other forms of renewable energy. In 2005 in the Energy Policy Act we started the process of leveling the playing field. Besides authorizing a greater Federal research preference, we granted ocean energy the federal purchase requirement and the federal production incentive. In 2007's Energy Independence and Security Act, we furthered energy research and authorized the funding of research and ocean energy demonstration centers. In 2008, ocean energy finally was qualified to receive a renewable energy Production Tax Credit--unfortunately at a lower rate than some other renewables receive. But the PTC establishes the principle that ocean energy is a valuable future technology to meet electricity generation needs. Now we are proposing that additional Federal aid be granted to all potential forms of Marine Renewable Energy to allow the industry's growth to advance more rapidly. The bill authorizes the Department of Energy to increase its research and development effort, working to develop new technologies, reduce manufacturing and operating costs of the devices, improve the reliability and survivability of marine energy facilities and make sure that such power can be integrated into the national electricity grid. The bill also encourages efforts to allow marine energy to work in conjunction with other forms of energy, such as offshore wind, and authorizes more federal aid to assess and deal with any environmental impacts. The bill also authorizes establishment of project standards and provides for incentives to help the industry comply with any standards developed. Allows for the creation of a Federal Marine-Based Energy Device Verification program, so the Government tests and certifies the performance of new marine technologies to reduce market risks for utilities to purchase power from such projects. Authorizes the Federal Government to set up an adaptive management program, and a fund to help pay for the regulatory permitting and development of new marine technologies. A separate bill, likely to be referred to the Senate Finance Committee for consideration, authorizes that marine projects benefit from being able to accelerate the depreciation of their project costs over five years--like some other renewable energy technologies currently can do. That should enhance project economic returns for private developers. The legislation in total authorizes up to $250 million a year of Federal funding for research. It is in keeping with the goals of the Obama administration to markedly increase funding for prospective renewable energy technologies that can help reduce U.S. and global carbon emissions and reduce our dependence on fossil fuels for energy production. The technology this bill could foster could be of immense benefit to coastal regions and the U.S. power grid overall. In my home State of Alaska, for example, there are nearly 150 communities located along the State's 34,000 miles of coastline plus dozens more on the major river systems, which may benefit from the economies that gaining power from the free fuels of nature's currents and waves provides. In a State where rural electricity is currently averaging 65 cents per kilowatt hour when generated from diesel fuels--ocean energy offers the potential to sharply reduce all costs and vastly improve the local economy and thus the economy of the entire Nation. There are a number of difficult challenges ahead to realize the potential of marine renewable energy from building reliable devices at economical costs. But these bills are another step toward getting on with the task of identifying and meeting those challenges. The potential is well worth the cost. I hope this body will quickly include these provisions in comprehensive energy legislation and help this new industry to advance for the benefit of all Americans.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce two pieces of legislation S. 922 and S. 923, that I hope will be the next major step that this Congress takes to help an exciting form of renewable energy to become more established as a viable energy technology. I am referring to helping the expansion of the ocean hydrokinetic energy industry. Today I am introducing the Marine Renewable Energy Promotion Act of 2009 and a companion tax provision. They are companion measures to one that has been introduced in the House of Representatives by Rep. Jay Inslee of Washington. For a number of years this Nation has been providing help with research and other assistance to promote the development of energy from our oceans and rivers, using the tides, currents, waves and even the thermal properties of our oceans to generate electricity. With 70 percent of our planet covered with water, and the energy that the sun produces--each day oceans absorb the energy equivalent of 250 billion barrels of oil--and the energy that winds produce and impart to that water, marine hydrokinetic energy has the potential to be a major source of the world's clean, non-carbon emitting power in the future. The Electric Power Research Institute has estimated that ocean resources in the U.S. could generate 252 million megawatt hours of electricity--6.5 percent of America's entire electricity generation--if ocean energy gained the same financial and research incentives currently enjoyed by other forms of renewable energy. In 2005 in the Energy Policy Act we started the process of leveling the playing field. Besides authorizing a greater Federal research preference, we granted ocean energy the federal purchase requirement and the federal production incentive. In 2007's Energy Independence and Security Act, we furthered energy research and authorized the funding of research and ocean energy demonstration centers. In 2008, ocean energy finally was qualified to receive a renewable energy Production Tax Credit--unfortunately at a lower rate than some other renewables receive. But the PTC establishes the principle that ocean energy is a valuable future technology to meet electricity generation needs. Now we are proposing that additional Federal aid be granted to all potential forms of Marine Renewable Energy to allow the industry's growth to advance more rapidly. The bill authorizes the Department of Energy to increase its research and development effort, working to develop new technologies, reduce manufacturing and operating costs of the devices, improve the reliability and survivability of marine energy facilities and make sure that such power can be integrated into the national electricity grid. The bill also encourages efforts to allow marine energy to work in conjunction with other forms of energy, such as offshore wind, and authorizes more federal aid to assess and deal with any environmental impacts. The bill also authorizes establishment of project standards and provides for incentives to help the industry comply with any standards developed. Allows for the creation of a Federal Marine-Based Energy Device Verification program, so the Government tests and certifies the performance of new marine technologies to reduce market risks for utilities to purchase power from such projects. Authorizes the Federal Government to set up an adaptive management program, and a fund to help pay for the regulatory permitting and development of new marine technologies. A separate bill, likely to be referred to the Senate Finance Committee for consideration, authorizes that marine projects benefit from being able to accelerate the depreciation of their project costs over five years--like some other renewable energy technologies currently can do. That should enhance project economic returns for private developers. The legislation in total authorizes up to $250 million a year of Federal funding for research. It is in keeping with the goals of the Obama administration to markedly increase funding for prospective renewable energy technologies that can help reduce U.S. and global carbon emissions and reduce our dependence on fossil fuels for energy production. The technology this bill could foster could be of immense benefit to coastal regions and the U.S. power grid overall. In my home State of Alaska, for example, there are nearly 150 communities located along the State's 34,000 miles of coastline plus dozens more on the major river systems, which may benefit from the economies that gaining power from the free fuels of nature's currents and waves provides. In a State where rural electricity is currently averaging 65 cents per kilowatt hour when generated from diesel fuels--ocean energy offers the potential to sharply reduce all costs and vastly improve the local economy and thus the economy of the entire Nation. There are a number of difficult challenges ahead to realize the potential of marine renewable energy from building reliable devices at economical costs. But these bills are another step toward getting on with the task of identifying and meeting those challenges. The potential is well worth the cost. I hope this body will quickly include these provisions in comprehensive energy legislation and help this new industry to advance for the benefit of all Americans.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Madam President, I wish to honor a pioneer of Alaska journalism who did much during his 62-year career to make his adopted State of Alaska what it is today. William J. ``Bill'' Tobin died earlier this month at age 81, following a year-long battle with cancer. Bill served 2 years in the U.S. Army during World War II from 1943 to 1945. He started his journalism career in 1948 working for the Associated Press in Indianapolis, IN, while still in college at Butler University. After Indianapolis, he worked for the Associated Press in New York City and Louisville, KY. In 1956, he was moved by the AP to cover Alaska news from Juneau, then the territorial capital, staying until after statehood in 1960. He was Alaska's first national resident newsman. He finished his 17-year AP career as the assistant bureau chief in Baltimore, MD, from 1960 to 1961 and as the bureau chief for the State of Montana from 1961 to 63. Bill and his wife missed the beauty and excitement of Alaska, and in 1963, he began a 45- year career with Anchorage's then largest newspaper, the Anchorage Times, and later with the Voice of the Times editorial and internet publication. He retired in 2008. During his time Mr. Tobin covered or edited stories on every major event in Alaskan history. Stories of his efforts to publish the Times in the aftermath of the Good Friday earthquake of March 27, 1964--at a revised 9.2 on the Richter scale, the largest quake every measured in North America--are legendary. The paper was published even though downtown Anchorage was literally destroyed. He edited stories on the discovery of oil on Alaska's North Slope in 1968, covered and edited debate in Congress on the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, and edited stories on the Trans-Alaska Pipeline Authorization Act in 1974 that permitted construction of the 800-mile pipeline that to this day moves 13 percent of the Nation's domestic oil production to market. Mr. Tobin's career spanned several legislative milestones including the passage of a law that created a 200-mile exclusive fishery management zone around Alaska, the passage of the Alaska lands bill that placed 131 million acres of Alaska--more than a third of the State--into parks and protected land status in 1980, and a career that saw Alaska become a major training and forward deployment base for the U.S. military. His official obituary said it best when it noted that ``he was an ardent supporter of the U.S. military and men and women in uniform'' and that Bill was ``a tireless champion of Alaska and its potential.'' His Saturday and later Sunday columns covered the personal side of life in Alaska for decades. The editorials that he and Anchorage Times Publisher Robert Atwood wrote and published did much to turn Anchorage, which at statehood had a population of several thousand, into the State's largest city with a population today of more than 275,000. Bill was an active civic leader, serving over time as a board member or president of nearly 40 community organizations in Anchorage. At his death, he was active as associate publisher of the Roman Catholic diocese newspaper, the Catholic Anchor, based in Anchorage. He was vice chairman of the Atwood Foundation, a member of the Alaskan Command Civilian Advisory Board, a member of the University of Alaska School of Nursing advisory board, a member of the University of Alaska Fairbanks Snedden Professor advisory board, and a member of the University of Alaska Anchorage Atwood Journalism Chair selection board. He was named Alaskan of the Year in 1988, the 1990 Anchorage Chamber of Commerce Gold Pan Award Winner for Distinguished Individual Community Service, the 2000 Outstanding Civilian of the Year by the Armed Services YMCA, the 2002 Alaska State Chamber of Commerce Alaskan of the Year, the 2004 Junior Achievement of Alaska Business Hall of Fame Laureate, and was a 2006 Honorary Doctor of Laws recipient by Gonzaga University. Born on July 28, 1927, in southwest Missouri in the City of Joplin, Bill grew up in Tulsa, OK, Fort Worth, TX, and South Bend, IN, but he grew wise in Alaska. He knew more about Alaska's history and politics than most any other Alaskan journalist. As a person who got my start in elected office as a State representative from north Anchorage, I have firsthand knowledge that Bill was an old-school journalist who religiously checked his copy for factual accuracy and was always polite and fair to his sources on stories he covered. While he had clear and strong editorial opinions, he was always courageous in support of his newspaper's and city's goals. Bill was a wonderful family man, a devoted member of his church, and a pillar of the Alaska Republican Party, and always a true gentleman. All of Alaska joins in offering condolences to his wife of nearly 57 years, Marjorie, and his three sons, Mike, David, and Jim, and their families. Alaska journalism and the State's political establishment are certainly poorer for his passing.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, The Tlingit and Haida people, the first people of Southeast Alaska, were perhaps the first group of Alaska natives to organize for the purpose of asserting their aboriginal land claims. The native land claims movement in the rest of Alaska did not gain momentum until the 1960s when aboriginal land titles were threatened by the impending construction of the Trans Alaska Pipeline. In Southeast Alaska, the taking of Native lands for the Tongass National Forest and Glacier Bay National Monument spurred the Tlingit and Haida people to fight to recover their lands in the early part of the 20th Century. One of the first steps in this battle came with the formation of the Alaska Native Brotherhood in 1912. In 1935, the Jurisdictional Act, which allowed the Tlingit and Haida Indians to pursue their land claims in the U.S. Court of Claims, was enacted by Congress. After decades of litigation, the native people of Southeast Alaska received a cash settlement in 1968 from the Court of Claims for the land previously taken to create the Tongass National Forest and the Glacier Bay National Monument. Yes, there was a cash settlement of $7.5 million, but the Native people of Southeast Alaska have long believed that it did not adequately compensate them for the loss of their lands and resources. Beware of the law of unintended consequences. When the native people of Southeast Alaska chose to pursue their land claims in court they could not have foreseen that Congress would ultimately settle the land claims of all of Alaska's native people through the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971. Nor could they have foreseen that they would be disadvantaged in obtaining the return of their aboriginal lands because of their early, and ultimately successful, effort to litigate their land claims. Sadly this was the case. The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971 imposed a series of highly prescriptive limitations on the lands that Sealaska Corporation, the regional Alaska Native Corporation formed for Southeast Alaska, could select in satisfaction of the Tlingit and Haida land claim. None of the other 11 Alaska-based regional native corporations were subject to these limitations. Today, I join with my Alaska colleague, Sen. Mark Begich, cosponsored by Sens. Daniel Akaka and Daniel Inouye to introduce legislation to right this wrong. For the most part, Sealaska Corporation has agreed to live within the constraints imposed by the 1971 legislation. It has taken conveyance of roughly 290,000 acres from the pool of lands it was allowed to select under the 1971 act. As Sealaska moves to finalize its land selections it has asked the Congress for flexibility to receive title to certain lands that it was not permitted to select under the prescriptive, and as Sealaska believes, discriminatory, limitations contained in the 1971 legislation. The legislation we are introducing today would allow Sealaska to select its remaining entitlement from outside of the withdrawal areas permitted in the 1971 legislation. It allows the Native Corporation to select up to 3,600 acres of its remaining land entitlement from lands with sacred, cultural, traditional or historical significance throughout the Alaska Panhandle. Substantial restrictions will be placed on the use of these lands. Up to 5,000 acres of land could be selected for non-timber related economic development. These lands are called ``Native Futures'' Sites in the bill. Other lands referred to as ``economic development lands'' in the bill could be used for timber related and non-timber related economic development. These lands are on Prince of Wales Island, on nearby Kosciusko Island. Sealaska observes that if it were required to take title to lands within the constraints prescribed by the 1971 legislation it would take title to large swaths of roadless acres in pristine portions of the Tongass National Forest. The lands it proposes to take for economic uses under this legislation are predominantly in roaded and less sensitive areas of the Tongass National Forest. The pools of lands that would be available to Sealaska under this legislation are depicted on a series of maps referred to in the bill. It must be emphasized that not all of the lands depicted on these maps will end up in Sealaska's ownership. Sealaska cannot receive title to lands in excess of its remaining acreage entitlement under the 1971 legislation and this legislation does not change that entitlement. Early in the 110th Congress, several of our friends in the other body introduced H.R. 3560 to address these issues. Later in September 2008 I introduced legislation similar to this bill to give all parties time to thoroughly review the measure. Over the past two years, Sealaska, and the communities of Southeast Alaska have worked collaboratively in good faith to identify issues that may arise from the transfer of lands on which those communities have relied for subsistence and recreation out of the Tongass National Forest and into native corporation ownership. My colleagues in the Alaska congressional delegation and I have devoted a great deal of time in reaching out and encouraging comment from Southeast Alaska on this new bill. Sealaska has itself conducted numerous public meetings on the bill throughout the region. I believe that these efforts have helped us to formulate a bill that addresses the concerns we most frequently heard. The legislation we are introducing today in the 111th Congress is different from the original bill in numerous respects. In some cases, the lands open to Sealaska selection have changed from those that were available in the first House bill to accommodate community concerns. For example, this bill, compared to last September's version, reduces the economic development timber land selection pool to about 78,000 acres from 80,000 to protect additional boat anchorages by retention of shoreline timber in Shipley Bay on northern Prince of Wales Island and at Cape Pole on southwest Kosciusko Island. It eliminates the Lacy Cover Native Futures Site on northern Chichagof Island, it provides full public access across sacred sites and historic trail conveyances near Yakutat and Kake. It addresses the concern of the Huna Indian Association for management of sacred sites in Glacier Bay and it deals with a complaint about the original bill by the U.S. Forest Service. Our conversations have led to precedent setting commitment by the Sealaska Corporation to maintain public access to the economic development lands it receives on Prince of Wales Island for subsistence uses and recreational access. These commitments are laid out in section 4(d) of this bill. Sealaska also has offered a series of commitments to ensure that the benefits of this legislation flow to the broader Southeast Alaska economy and not just to the Corporation and its native shareholders. These commitments are memorialized in a letter from Sealaska's chairman, Alaska State Senator Albert Kookesh, and its president and chief executive officer, Chris E. McNeil, Jr. We all hope that after 38 years that this measure can advance to passage this Congress and resolve the last 65,000 to 85,000 acres of entitlement that southeast Alaska's 23,000 Native shareholders have long had a right to receive. It is impossible to expect Alaska's native corporations to provide meaningful assistance to Alaska's native community if they continue to be denied the lands that Congress intended them to receive to utilize to provide economic benefits for the native people's of the State. I hope this measure can pass and become law before the 40th anniversary of the claims settlement act in 2011. Justice delayed truly is justice denied. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record. There being no ojbection, the text of the bill was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I rise to speak about a resolution designating April 24 through 26, 2009, as Global Youth Service Days. S. Res. 105 recognizes and commends the significant community service efforts that youth are making in communities across the country and around the world on the last weekend in April and every day. This resolution also encourages the citizens of the United States to acknowledge and support these volunteer efforts. S. Res. 105 passed the Senate by unanimous consent on April 20, 2009. This sends a very strong message of support to the thousands of youth across our great Nation who are contributing positively to their communities your efforts are recognized and appreciated. Over the weekend, beginning this Friday, April 24, youth from across the United States and around the world will carry out community service projects in areas ranging from hunger to literacy to the environment. Through this service, many will embark on a lifelong path of service and civic engagement in more than 100 countries around the world. This event is not isolated to one weekend a year. Global Youth Service Days is an annual public awareness and education campaign that highlights the valuable contributions that young people make to their communities throughout the year. The participation of youth in community service is not just a nice idea for a way to spend a Saturday afternoon. All year long, young people across America, indeed across the globe identify and address the needs of their communities through community service and service- learning opportunities. They make positive differences in the world around them, learn leadership and organizational skills, and gain insights into the problems of their fellow citizens. Youth who are engaged in volunteer service and service-learning activities do better in school than their classmates who do not volunteer because they see a direct connection to what they are learning and the real world in which they live. Youth who engage in volunteering and other positive activities are also more likely to avoid risky behaviors, such as drug and alcohol use, crime, and promiscuity. Service within the community also contributes positively to young people's character development, civic participation, and philanthropic activity as adults. A survey by Civic Enterprises found that 47 percent of high school dropouts reported that boredom in school was a primary reason why they dropped out. High quality service-learning activities can, however, help young people make important connections between the curriculum and the challenges they see in their communities. It is important, therefore, that the Senate encourage youth to engage in community service and to congratulate them for the service they provide. In an effort to recognize and support youth volunteers in my State, I am proud to acknowledge some of the activities that will occur this year in Alaska in observance of National and Global Youth Service Days: Anchorage's Promise, which works to mobilize all sectors of the community to build the character and competence of Anchorage's children and youth, has sponsored the annual Kids' Day 3-day events in Anchorage again this year. Youth provided significant service to their peers and to adults who attended Kids' Day activities last weekend: Students educated the public on the 5 Promises: Caring Adults, Safe Places, Healthy Start and Future, Marketable Skills, and Opportunities to Serve. Students from King Career Center served as volunteer safety patrols. Teens served as greeters and passed out bags, helped vendors set up their booths, and cleaned up during and after the event. Junior ROTC members provided security and helped with parking. Teens assisted Anchorage's Promise Board members with tours and Opening Ceremony activities. Three teens assisted the Kids in Nature Workshop for Parents and Caregivers instructor. One youth volunteer assisted staff at the Alaska Natural History Museum. Youth created cards to express support for our troops. In addition to the Kids' Day events, young people from every region of Alaska will serve their communities in the following ways: Youth volunteers, coordinated by Covenant House, will bring attention to the importance of conservation, recycling, and educate youth about Earth Day. Various youth service projects will be performed by Juneau youth at local nonprofits. Members of the Eagle River Boys & Girls Club provided ``kid power'' to fill 3000 Easter eggs. The Eielson Air Force Base Youth Programs' Inside & Out Club will clean to make it shine as much as the kids do. Youth volunteers, coordinated by the Anchorage Public Library, will help organize summer reading celebration materials. Youth at Chugiak High School have produced and will show a docudrama that simulates a drunk driving collision and help educate their peers about the dangers of drunk driving. Students at Steller Secondary School will provide the Covenant House residents with gift bags containing personal hygiene products. Alaska Youth and Family Network volunteers will promote personal responsibility for wellness that focuses on youth with behavioral health problems. Spirit of Youth volunteers from all across Alaska, including Thorne Bay, Ketchikan, Eagle River, Kodiak, Anchorage, Palmer, Juneau, Cantwell, Kasaan, Nenana, Nome, Shageluk, Cordova, Palmer, and Chugiak, will work with their peers and adults on projects as varied as sharing their artistic talents; organizing a potato feed fundraiser to help the local library; running a girls' study group; offering free babysitting, teaching Sunday school, and helping the elderly at the local hospital; raising money for youth activities and easing community tensions; improving the collective well-being of youth; including people with disabilities in social activities; teaching cheerleading and dance skills; coordinating canned food drives; honoring Haida culture through art and music; working with Native elders to retain Alaska Native boat making skills; responding to emergencies; restoring salmon habitat; learning about climate change and fire science; owning, operating, and crewing a seine fishing boat; giving teens a forum to discuss political issues; educating others about child labor; helping other youth to succeed in realizing their dreams; helping students with disabilities excel in physical education; and educating the public about domestic violence while advocating for justice and change. The Alaska Teen Media Institute will provide teens with the tools and training needed to produce their own stories told in their own voices to be shared through a variety of media. Members of the Mountain View Boys & Girls Club will kick off Mountain View Cleanup Day. Members of Alaska Youth Environmental Action attended the Civics and Conservation Summit in Juneau where they met with legislators to talk about issues they care about in their communities, including the Renewable Energy Campaign. The Anchorage Youth Parent Foundation Peer Outreach Workers will spread awareness of sexual assault in April by hosting an Art Competition at the POWER Teen Clinic. Mr. President, I am so proud of all of these young people. I value their idealism, energy, creativity, and unique perspectives as they volunteer to make their communities better and assist those in need. Many similarly wonderful activities will be taking place all across the Nation. I encourage all of my colleagues to visit the Youth Service America Web site--www.ysa.org_to find out about the selfless and creative youth who are contributing in their own States this year. I thank my colleagues Senators Akaka, Bayh, Begich, Bingaman, Brown, Burr, Cardin, Cochran, Collins, Cornyn, Dodd, Durbin, Feingold, Feinstein, Gillibrand, Gregg, Hagan, Hatch, Inouye, Johnson, Kennedy, Klobuchar, Landrieu, Lautenberg, Levin, Lieberman, Lincoln, Martinez, Menendez, Mikulski, Murray, Ben Nelson, Bill Nelson, Specter, and Whitehouse for standing with me as original cosponsors of this worthwhile legislation, which will ensure that youth across the country and the world know that all of their hard work is greatly appreciated.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, The Tlingit and Haida people, the first people of Southeast Alaska, were perhaps the first group of Alaska natives to organize for the purpose of asserting their aboriginal land claims. The native land claims movement in the rest of Alaska did not gain momentum until the 1960s when aboriginal land titles were threatened by the impending construction of the Trans Alaska Pipeline. In Southeast Alaska, the taking of Native lands for the Tongass National Forest and Glacier Bay National Monument spurred the Tlingit and Haida people to fight to recover their lands in the early part of the 20th Century. One of the first steps in this battle came with the formation of the Alaska Native Brotherhood in 1912. In 1935, the Jurisdictional Act, which allowed the Tlingit and Haida Indians to pursue their land claims in the U.S. Court of Claims, was enacted by Congress. After decades of litigation, the native people of Southeast Alaska received a cash settlement in 1968 from the Court of Claims for the land previously taken to create the Tongass National Forest and the Glacier Bay National Monument. Yes, there was a cash settlement of $7.5 million, but the Native people of Southeast Alaska have long believed that it did not adequately compensate them for the loss of their lands and resources. Beware of the law of unintended consequences. When the native people of Southeast Alaska chose to pursue their land claims in court they could not have foreseen that Congress would ultimately settle the land claims of all of Alaska's native people through the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971. Nor could they have foreseen that they would be disadvantaged in obtaining the return of their aboriginal lands because of their early, and ultimately successful, effort to litigate their land claims. Sadly this was the case. The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971 imposed a series of highly prescriptive limitations on the lands that Sealaska Corporation, the regional Alaska Native Corporation formed for Southeast Alaska, could select in satisfaction of the Tlingit and Haida land claim. None of the other 11 Alaska-based regional native corporations were subject to these limitations. Today, I join with my Alaska colleague, Sen. Mark Begich, cosponsored by Sens. Daniel Akaka and Daniel Inouye to introduce legislation to right this wrong. For the most part, Sealaska Corporation has agreed to live within the constraints imposed by the 1971 legislation. It has taken conveyance of roughly 290,000 acres from the pool of lands it was allowed to select under the 1971 act. As Sealaska moves to finalize its land selections it has asked the Congress for flexibility to receive title to certain lands that it was not permitted to select under the prescriptive, and as Sealaska believes, discriminatory, limitations contained in the 1971 legislation. The legislation we are introducing today would allow Sealaska to select its remaining entitlement from outside of the withdrawal areas permitted in the 1971 legislation. It allows the Native Corporation to select up to 3,600 acres of its remaining land entitlement from lands with sacred, cultural, traditional or historical significance throughout the Alaska Panhandle. Substantial restrictions will be placed on the use of these lands. Up to 5,000 acres of land could be selected for non-timber related economic development. These lands are called ``Native Futures'' Sites in the bill. Other lands referred to as ``economic development lands'' in the bill could be used for timber related and non-timber related economic development. These lands are on Prince of Wales Island, on nearby Kosciusko Island. Sealaska observes that if it were required to take title to lands within the constraints prescribed by the 1971 legislation it would take title to large swaths of roadless acres in pristine portions of the Tongass National Forest. The lands it proposes to take for economic uses under this legislation are predominantly in roaded and less sensitive areas of the Tongass National Forest. The pools of lands that would be available to Sealaska under this legislation are depicted on a series of maps referred to in the bill. It must be emphasized that not all of the lands depicted on these maps will end up in Sealaska's ownership. Sealaska cannot receive title to lands in excess of its remaining acreage entitlement under the 1971 legislation and this legislation does not change that entitlement. Early in the 110th Congress, several of our friends in the other body introduced H.R. 3560 to address these issues. Later in September 2008 I introduced legislation similar to this bill to give all parties time to thoroughly review the measure. Over the past two years, Sealaska, and the communities of Southeast Alaska have worked collaboratively in good faith to identify issues that may arise from the transfer of lands on which those communities have relied for subsistence and recreation out of the Tongass National Forest and into native corporation ownership. My colleagues in the Alaska congressional delegation and I have devoted a great deal of time in reaching out and encouraging comment from Southeast Alaska on this new bill. Sealaska has itself conducted numerous public meetings on the bill throughout the region. I believe that these efforts have helped us to formulate a bill that addresses the concerns we most frequently heard. The legislation we are introducing today in the 111th Congress is different from the original bill in numerous respects. In some cases, the lands open to Sealaska selection have changed from those that were available in the first House bill to accommodate community concerns. For example, this bill, compared to last September's version, reduces the economic development timber land selection pool to about 78,000 acres from 80,000 to protect additional boat anchorages by retention of shoreline timber in Shipley Bay on northern Prince of Wales Island and at Cape Pole on southwest Kosciusko Island. It eliminates the Lacy Cover Native Futures Site on northern Chichagof Island, it provides full public access across sacred sites and historic trail conveyances near Yakutat and Kake. It addresses the concern of the Huna Indian Association for management of sacred sites in Glacier Bay and it deals with a complaint about the original bill by the U.S. Forest Service. Our conversations have led to precedent setting commitment by the Sealaska Corporation to maintain public access to the economic development lands it receives on Prince of Wales Island for subsistence uses and recreational access. These commitments are laid out in section 4(d) of this bill. Sealaska also has offered a series of commitments to ensure that the benefits of this legislation flow to the broader Southeast Alaska economy and not just to the Corporation and its native shareholders. These commitments are memorialized in a letter from Sealaska's chairman, Alaska State Senator Albert Kookesh, and its president and chief executive officer, Chris E. McNeil, Jr. We all hope that after 38 years that this measure can advance to passage this Congress and resolve the last 65,000 to 85,000 acres of entitlement that southeast Alaska's 23,000 Native shareholders have long had a right to receive. It is impossible to expect Alaska's native corporations to provide meaningful assistance to Alaska's native community if they continue to be denied the lands that Congress intended them to receive to utilize to provide economic benefits for the native people's of the State. I hope this measure can pass and become law before the 40th anniversary of the claims settlement act in 2011. Justice delayed truly is justice denied. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record. There being no ojbection, the text of the bill was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, today the people of Interior Alaska--our Native people and the entire Fairbanks community--mourn the loss of one of the most promising Native leaders of this generation. Harold ``Buddy'' Brown died yesterday of cancer at the age of 39. Buddy is survived by his wife Patti and two children, Xavier, age 7, and Alana, age 3. Throughout Indian Country we are witnessing the generational shift in leadership to young people who have mastered the challenge of living in two worlds. They have completed college, gone on to obtain graduate and professional degrees, and returned to serve their people. One foot in the traditional world of their Native communities, the other in the modern worlds of business, finance, management and law. Within the Alaska Native community, Buddy Brown stood at the vanguard of this generational shift. After graduating from the University of New Mexico Law School in 1997, he immediately went to work for the Tanana Chiefs Conference, the consortium of 42 tribes in Interior Alaska. He was hired on as associate counsel. Five years later, Buddy was elected President of the Tanana Chiefs Conference. In this role he led a region which encompasses about 235,000 square miles, an area equal to about 37 percent of the State of Alaska and just slightly smaller than the state of Texas. In 2006, Buddy retired from this position to heal and to spend time with his family. The Tanana Chiefs region is known throughout the State of Alaska for producing leaders of statewide and national repute--Bridge builders who have a particular talent for engaging the broader community to support the causes and concerns of our Native people. The late Morris Thompson, who tragically died in the 2000 crash of Alaska Airlines Flight 261, is the best known Native leader to come from this region, beloved throughout the State for his talent in building bridges. Morris Thompson was Buddy Brown's mentor and friend, and I am told that he expected Buddy Brown would grow to become a leader whose accomplishments would exceed Morris's own. Buddy was widely regarded in Alaska as the best and brightest of this new generation. He reached great heights in a few short years, but I am saddened that Alaska will never realize the true potential of this truly extraordinary individual. There is little I can say to console our grieving community today but I do have a few words for Xavier and Alana and the Native youth of Interior Alaska. Buddy Brown appreciated that youth is no impediment to leadership, that the energy and new ideas of the youth are desperately needed to keep our Native institutions thriving. Buddy devoted his life to preparing to undertake this leadership role. Take inspiration from Buddy's life and become the leader that each of you has the potential to be. I want to help you to achieve this goal for yourself, for your people, and for all of Alaska.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I rise to speak about a bill that I have introduced, the Southeast Alaska Timber Industry Retooling and Restructuring Act, which is intended to stimulate employment in Southeast Alaska, by helping firms that have focused on the region's timber industry to modernize or branch out into new industries. In 1954, the US Department of Agriculture encouraged the development of a sawmill and pulp mill timber industry in the Tongass National Forest in Southeast Alaska, which at 16.98 million acres is the largest national forest in America. From the startup of the pulp mills in Ketchikan and in Sitka in 1961 to passage of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act in 1980, the Tongass was producing about 600 million board feet of timber a year, generating 3,500 direct and 2,500 indirect jobs and providing the largest number of year-round jobs in the region. But following passage of ANILCA that created 14 wilderness areas covering about 4.9 million acres and the follow up Tongass Timber Reform Act of 1990 that placed another 727,762 acres into protected non-roaded status and created another 12 wilderness areas containing 300,000 acres, the timber harvest and thus timber industry-related employment plummeted in the region--an area nearly the size of Maine. While the two pulp mills closed in the mid 1990's, sawmills have tried to survive on the then anticipated 268 mmbf of allowable timber harvest. But a litany of Federal forest policy changes from the Clinton-era roadless policy, to changes in Forest Service sale and road policies, to sale delays caused by litigation have resulted in harvest levels falling to 28 million board feet from Federal lands and less than 50 million from private lands in 2008. That harvest level is far below the 192 mmbf reached in 2006 and about half of the 144 mmbf of 2007. Recent years have been drastically down from the 495 million board feet harvested from all lands as recently as 1997. Year round timber employment, according to U.S. Forest Service in 2007, the last year of current full data, was 402 jobs, just 13 percent of the employment of a decade earlier. The impacts on the region's economy have been clearly documented. According to a report by The McDowell Group consultants, total timber-related payroll in 2007 hit just $17 million, compared to $300 million in 1990. Currently, according to the State of Alaska, unemployment in December 2008 has reached 16.5 percent on Prince of Wales Island, the resource base for traditional southern timber operations, and 24.6 percent in the Hoonah and Angoon area, the former resource base for central timber operations--three times the rising national average. This bill is a measure that calls on the Federal Government to finally acknowledge its role in the reduction of economic activity in the region. By the act, the Government would on a one-time basis, allow the Secretary of Agriculture to provide grants to allow existing timber facilities to retool either to adopt new timber production practices that can operate profitably on far smaller harvests or to convert timber plants to totally new types of manufacturing/business operations, leaving timber-dependent work. Firms--sawmills, logging companies and road construction companies involved in timber work for at least a decade--that seek funding for ``retooling projects'' must submit business plans and demonstrate the likelihood of success. More importantly they must commit to the ``extent practicable'' to continue to employ substantially the same number of employees for a ``reasonable'' period after completion of a retooling project. To limit the impact of the aid, grants may only go to businesses hat operated in the Tongass for not less than 10 years prior to Jan. 1, 2009. The program sunsets within 2 years with the maximum authorization of aid being $40 million subject to appropriation. The bill would allow companies that used to build Forest Service timber roads, for example, to buy more appropriate equipment to bid on Federal highway work and water and sewer line work. It could help firms move into sand and gravel operations. It could allow sawmills with water access to be converted to marine repair facilities or into wood treatment plants. And it might allow some mills to convert to higher value-added products requiring less raw materials, like door and window sash manufacturing. The changes would ease environmental pressures on timber stands, while aiding the economy by helping to replace the former year-round jobs in a region now nearly solely dependent on fishing and tourism income, besides government-sector spending, for employment. In a region where non-government jobs are precious, it could stimulate job retention and help create new employment. At a time when Congress is contemplating spending nearly $1 trillion to stimulate employment, this measure is a reasonable expenditure to help potentially transition employees to 21st century jobs. The Federal Government was the leading advocate for the establishment of a pulp-timber industry in the region following World War II. It is more than fitting that it provide more assistance to help the region transition to a new era of reduced timber harvests--an era prompted by major environmental legislation that this Congress passed in 1980 and 1990 that is largely responsible for the sharp drop in timber harvests. I hope this body will give fair and swift consideration to this measure.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I rise to introduce a bill to allow five Southeast Alaska communities to finally be allowed to form urban corporations under the terms of 1971's Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, the Unrecognized Southeast Alaska Native Communities Recognition and Compensation Act. At the very beginning of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971 there are a series of findings and declarations of congressional policy that explain the underpinnings of this landmark legislation. The first clause reads, ``There is an immediate need for a fair and just settlement of all claims by Natives and Native groups of Alaska, based on aboriginal land claims.'' The second clause states, ``The settlement should be accomplished rapidly, with certainty, in conformity with the real economic and social needs of Natives.'' Mr. President, 37, going on 38, years have passed since the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act became law and still the Native peoples of five communities in Southeast Alaska--Ketchikan, Wrangell, Petersburg, Tenakee and Haines--the five ``landless communities'' are still waiting for their fair and just settlement. The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act awarded $966 million and 44 million acres of land to Alaska Natives and provided for the establishment of Native Corporations to receive and manage such funds and lands. The beneficiaries of the settlement were issued stock in one of 13 regional Alaska Native corporations--12 based in Alaska. Most beneficiaries also had the option to enroll and receive stock in a village, group or urban corporation. For reasons that still defy clear explanation the Native peoples of the ``landless communities,'' were not permitted by the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act to form village or urban corporations. These communities were excluded from this benefit even though they did not differ significantly from other communities in Southeast Alaska that were permitted to form village or urban corporations under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act. For example, Ketchikan had more Native residents in 1970, the year of a member census, than Juneau, which was permitted to form the Goldbelt urban corporation. This finding was confirmed in a February 1994 report submitted by the Secretary of the Interior at the direction of the Congress. That study was conducted by the Institute of Social and Economic Research at the University of Alaska. The Native people of Southeast Alaska have recognized the injustice of this oversight for more than 34 years. An independent study issued more than 12 years ago confirms that the grievance of the landless communities is legitimate. Legislation has been introduced in the past sessions of Congress to remedy this injustice. Hearings have been held and reports written. Yet legislation to right the wrong has inevitably stalled out. This December marks the 38th anniversary of Congress' promise to the Native peoples of Alaska, the promise of a rapid and certain settlement. And still the landless communities of Southeast Alaska are landless. I am convinced that this cause is just, it is right, and it is about time that the Native peoples of the five landless communities receive what has been denied them for so long. The legislation that I am introducing today would enable the Native peoples of the five ``landless communities'' to organize five ``urban corporations,'' one for each unrecognized community. These newly formed corporations would be offered and could accept the surface estate to 23,040 acres of land--one township as granted all other village corporations. Sealaska Corporation, the regional Alaska Native Corporation for Southeast Alaska, would receive title to the subsurface estate to the designated lands. The urban corporations would each receive a lump sum payment to be used as start-up funds for the newly established corporation. The Secretary of the Interior would determine other appropriate compensation to redress the inequities faced by the unrecognized communities. It is long past time that we return to the Native peoples of Southeast Alaska a small slice of the aboriginal lands that were once theirs alone. It is time that we open our minds and open our hearts to correcting this injustice that has gone on far too long and finally give the Native peoples of Southeast Alaska the rapid and certain settlement for which they have been waiting.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I rise to introduce a bill to allow five Southeast Alaska communities to finally be allowed to form urban corporations under the terms of 1971's Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, the Unrecognized Southeast Alaska Native Communities Recognition and Compensation Act. At the very beginning of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971 there are a series of findings and declarations of congressional policy that explain the underpinnings of this landmark legislation. The first clause reads, ``There is an immediate need for a fair and just settlement of all claims by Natives and Native groups of Alaska, based on aboriginal land claims.'' The second clause states, ``The settlement should be accomplished rapidly, with certainty, in conformity with the real economic and social needs of Natives.'' Mr. President, 37, going on 38, years have passed since the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act became law and still the Native peoples of five communities in Southeast Alaska--Ketchikan, Wrangell, Petersburg, Tenakee and Haines--the five ``landless communities'' are still waiting for their fair and just settlement. The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act awarded $966 million and 44 million acres of land to Alaska Natives and provided for the establishment of Native Corporations to receive and manage such funds and lands. The beneficiaries of the settlement were issued stock in one of 13 regional Alaska Native corporations--12 based in Alaska. Most beneficiaries also had the option to enroll and receive stock in a village, group or urban corporation. For reasons that still defy clear explanation the Native peoples of the ``landless communities,'' were not permitted by the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act to form village or urban corporations. These communities were excluded from this benefit even though they did not differ significantly from other communities in Southeast Alaska that were permitted to form village or urban corporations under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act. For example, Ketchikan had more Native residents in 1970, the year of a member census, than Juneau, which was permitted to form the Goldbelt urban corporation. This finding was confirmed in a February 1994 report submitted by the Secretary of the Interior at the direction of the Congress. That study was conducted by the Institute of Social and Economic Research at the University of Alaska. The Native people of Southeast Alaska have recognized the injustice of this oversight for more than 34 years. An independent study issued more than 12 years ago confirms that the grievance of the landless communities is legitimate. Legislation has been introduced in the past sessions of Congress to remedy this injustice. Hearings have been held and reports written. Yet legislation to right the wrong has inevitably stalled out. This December marks the 38th anniversary of Congress' promise to the Native peoples of Alaska, the promise of a rapid and certain settlement. And still the landless communities of Southeast Alaska are landless. I am convinced that this cause is just, it is right, and it is about time that the Native peoples of the five landless communities receive what has been denied them for so long. The legislation that I am introducing today would enable the Native peoples of the five ``landless communities'' to organize five ``urban corporations,'' one for each unrecognized community. These newly formed corporations would be offered and could accept the surface estate to 23,040 acres of land--one township as granted all other village corporations. Sealaska Corporation, the regional Alaska Native Corporation for Southeast Alaska, would receive title to the subsurface estate to the designated lands. The urban corporations would each receive a lump sum payment to be used as start-up funds for the newly established corporation. The Secretary of the Interior would determine other appropriate compensation to redress the inequities faced by the unrecognized communities. It is long past time that we return to the Native peoples of Southeast Alaska a small slice of the aboriginal lands that were once theirs alone. It is time that we open our minds and open our hearts to correcting this injustice that has gone on far too long and finally give the Native peoples of Southeast Alaska the rapid and certain settlement for which they have been waiting.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I rise to speak about a bill that I have introduced, the Southeast Alaska Timber Industry Retooling and Restructuring Act, which is intended to stimulate employment in Southeast Alaska, by helping firms that have focused on the region's timber industry to modernize or branch out into new industries. In 1954, the US Department of Agriculture encouraged the development of a sawmill and pulp mill timber industry in the Tongass National Forest in Southeast Alaska, which at 16.98 million acres is the largest national forest in America. From the startup of the pulp mills in Ketchikan and in Sitka in 1961 to passage of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act in 1980, the Tongass was producing about 600 million board feet of timber a year, generating 3,500 direct and 2,500 indirect jobs and providing the largest number of year-round jobs in the region. But following passage of ANILCA that created 14 wilderness areas covering about 4.9 million acres and the follow up Tongass Timber Reform Act of 1990 that placed another 727,762 acres into protected non-roaded status and created another 12 wilderness areas containing 300,000 acres, the timber harvest and thus timber industry-related employment plummeted in the region--an area nearly the size of Maine. While the two pulp mills closed in the mid 1990's, sawmills have tried to survive on the then anticipated 268 mmbf of allowable timber harvest. But a litany of Federal forest policy changes from the Clinton-era roadless policy, to changes in Forest Service sale and road policies, to sale delays caused by litigation have resulted in harvest levels falling to 28 million board feet from Federal lands and less than 50 million from private lands in 2008. That harvest level is far below the 192 mmbf reached in 2006 and about half of the 144 mmbf of 2007. Recent years have been drastically down from the 495 million board feet harvested from all lands as recently as 1997. Year round timber employment, according to U.S. Forest Service in 2007, the last year of current full data, was 402 jobs, just 13 percent of the employment of a decade earlier. The impacts on the region's economy have been clearly documented. According to a report by The McDowell Group consultants, total timber-related payroll in 2007 hit just $17 million, compared to $300 million in 1990. Currently, according to the State of Alaska, unemployment in December 2008 has reached 16.5 percent on Prince of Wales Island, the resource base for traditional southern timber operations, and 24.6 percent in the Hoonah and Angoon area, the former resource base for central timber operations--three times the rising national average. This bill is a measure that calls on the Federal Government to finally acknowledge its role in the reduction of economic activity in the region. By the act, the Government would on a one-time basis, allow the Secretary of Agriculture to provide grants to allow existing timber facilities to retool either to adopt new timber production practices that can operate profitably on far smaller harvests or to convert timber plants to totally new types of manufacturing/business operations, leaving timber-dependent work. Firms--sawmills, logging companies and road construction companies involved in timber work for at least a decade--that seek funding for ``retooling projects'' must submit business plans and demonstrate the likelihood of success. More importantly they must commit to the ``extent practicable'' to continue to employ substantially the same number of employees for a ``reasonable'' period after completion of a retooling project. To limit the impact of the aid, grants may only go to businesses hat operated in the Tongass for not less than 10 years prior to Jan. 1, 2009. The program sunsets within 2 years with the maximum authorization of aid being $40 million subject to appropriation. The bill would allow companies that used to build Forest Service timber roads, for example, to buy more appropriate equipment to bid on Federal highway work and water and sewer line work. It could help firms move into sand and gravel operations. It could allow sawmills with water access to be converted to marine repair facilities or into wood treatment plants. And it might allow some mills to convert to higher value-added products requiring less raw materials, like door and window sash manufacturing. The changes would ease environmental pressures on timber stands, while aiding the economy by helping to replace the former year-round jobs in a region now nearly solely dependent on fishing and tourism income, besides government-sector spending, for employment. In a region where non-government jobs are precious, it could stimulate job retention and help create new employment. At a time when Congress is contemplating spending nearly $1 trillion to stimulate employment, this measure is a reasonable expenditure to help potentially transition employees to 21st century jobs. The Federal Government was the leading advocate for the establishment of a pulp-timber industry in the region following World War II. It is more than fitting that it provide more assistance to help the region transition to a new era of reduced timber harvests--an era prompted by major environmental legislation that this Congress passed in 1980 and 1990 that is largely responsible for the sharp drop in timber harvests. I hope this body will give fair and swift consideration to this measure.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation that will authorize a right-of-way for Construction of an in-state natural gas pipeline to run along the State's main highway from Fairbanks to Anchorage. This bill would provide a right-of-way for a natural gas pipeline near the shoulder of the Parks Highway for the roughly 7 miles that the highway runs through Denali National Park. I wish to explain I am introducing the bill now, and why, rather than being an infringement on Alaska's most visited Interior national park, the measure is actually the favored route by many in the environmental community to bring natural gas from the foothills of Alaska's North Slope to Southcentral Alaska. While many in this body have heard about plans for a large-volume natural gas pipeline to run from the Prudhoe Bay oil fields to the Lower 48--the project for which many in this body voted to approve a loan guarantee, tax credits and permitting improvements in 2004--there is concern that the big pipeline will not be finished in time to get gas to Southcentral Alaska. That is gas that is vital for electric generation in Anchorage, the Mat-Su Borough and Kenai Peninsula. Currently electricity in Alaska's southern Railbelt, as it is called, is often generated by burning natural gas that has been produced since the 1960s from the gas fields in Cook Inlet, south of Anchorage. But production from Cook Inlet, while the province theoretically holds far more gas, has been falling for years. A major fertilizer plant near Kenai, for example, had to close in 2007 because there was not enough natural gas being produced to allow it to obtain the raw product it needed for urea production. While there are contract issues involving problems with getting sufficient gas quantities for Railbelt utilities starting as early as next year, there are serious concerns about the ability of the region to produce sufficient gas for electric generation and home heating for Alaska's most populated area as early as 2014. To provide a new, reliable natural gas supply, one proposal, the so- called ``bullet'' gas pipeline, is to construct a small diameter natural gas line, 24 inches in size, to run from Alaska's North slope region, pass Fairbanks along the Parks Highway, and terminate near Wasilla, Alaska. This pipeline would tie into existing transmission systems and would bring about 500 million cubic feet of gas a day to Southcentral Alaska. This project would be completed well in advance of when a larger-diameter pipeline might be in service to deliver 4 to 4.5 billion cubic feet a day to Lower 48 markets. Given the pace of planning for construction of the main line, it is unlikely that a larger Alaska natural gas pipeline will be able to deliver gas now until 2018 or 2019, perhaps four or more years too late to aid Southcentral Alaska's growing need for natural gas. Further, any delays in solidifying a new gas supply could permanently end chances to reopen the Agrium fertilizer plant and to continue operations of the Kenai LNG export terminal, both key components of local Kenai Peninsula industry. There are two potentially competing proposals for a small diameter, in-state gas pipeline. I have just described the ``bullet'' line proposal. The second proposal it to run a similarly sized pipeline along the Richardson and Glenn Highways to the east, also tying into existing transmission systems near Palmer, Alaska. There are advantages to both routes, the Parks route delivering gas to communities along the Parks Highway and providing clean natural gas to Denali National Park, while the Richardson/Glenn project would help provide economic activity to differing towns, such as Delta and Glennallen to the east. It is not my desire to prejudge the outcome of which project or route should be selected, since that decision will be made by Alaska state regulators and financial markets. It is my desire, however, to introduce legislation that would clear the lone legal impediment to planning for the Parks route, that being how to get the gas economically through the mountainous central region of the State past Denali National Park and Preserve. According to a recent analysis of routing options through this area, there are two feasible routes for a pipeline through or around the roughly 10-mile bottleneck of the Nenana River Canyon and Denali National Park and Preserve. The shortest and most logical route follows the existing highway through this entire area, 7 miles of which passes through Denali National Park. This route causes the least environmental and visual impact due to its location in an existing corridor, and provides a route that is easily accessible for routine pipeline maintenance. The other feasible pipeline route diverts from the highway to stay outside of the national park boundaries, but in so doing skirts across a steep hillside that dominates a park visitor's view to the east. Furthermore, the route that avoids the park will create a new disturbed corridor in a remote location, and will cause pipeline operations and reliability challenges due to the remoteness and the ruggedness of the route. The route that avoids the park is estimated to cost twice as much as the route along the highway and through the park. Besides being less expensive to construct and operate, the pipeline along the existing, previously disturbed Parks Highway right-of-way, also permits electric generation for the park facilities at Denali to come from natural gas. And for the first time reasonably priced compressed natural gas, CNG, would be available to power park vehicles--another environmental benefit of the Parks Highway route. Currently National Park Service permitted diesel tour buses travel 1 million road miles annually. Converting the buses to operate on CNG would significantly reduce air emissions in the park. A third benefit is that for the pipe to cross the Nenana River, not far from the park's entrance, will require a new bridge to be built that could carry not just the pipe, but provide a new pedestrian access/bicycle path for visitors that today need to walk along the heavily traveled highway rather than on a separated, pedestrian path toward visitors attractions and hotels located just outside of the park's entrance. In all probability the installation work will be conducted in the shoulder seasons to make sure there are no visitor dislocations for tourists visiting the park. For those reasons and others, a group of eight environmental groups: The National Parks and Conservation Association, the Alaska Conservation Alliance, the Denali Citizens Council, The Wilderness Society, Cook Inlet Keeper, the Alaska Center for the Environment, the Wrangell Mountain Center and the Alaska Wildlife Alliance have formally endorsed the granting of a gas line right-of-way through Denali Park, along the existing highway right of way. The granting of a permanent 20-foot easement, and probably a 100-foot construction easement, is not precedent setting. The National Park Service already has granted a permit for an installed fiber-optic cable along the same basic alignment for an Alaska communications company. Obviously the exact right-of-way will have to be delineated to avoid the existing cable and to accommodate park goals, such as routing around a vernal pond viewing area located along the general right-of- way. I am proposing this bill simply to authorize the right-of-way for a Parks Highway route soon so that the decision on which route is best for the state and its citizens--if the ``bullet'' line option is chosen--can be made based on greater certainty in the cost estimates for a Parks Highway project. Removing the uncertainty of permitting and regulatory delays will at least permit the Parks Highway route to be on a level playing field with the Richardson and Glenn Highway route when a routing decision is made. Then the decision on which project makes the most sense for all Alaskans can be made without fear that right-of- way acquisition delays could inflate project costs. If the Parks route is chosen and the project proceeds, then the national park will benefit from the environmental benefits of natural gas and compressed natural gas being available for park activities, cutting air quality concerns, and improving pedestrian access. I truly believe there are no environmental issues with this legislation. I think anyone who has ever traveled on the Parks Highway in Alaska near the park would agree, and I hope it can be considered by Congress relatively soon. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a letter of support be printed in the Record.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation that will authorize a right-of-way for Construction of an in-state natural gas pipeline to run along the State's main highway from Fairbanks to Anchorage. This bill would provide a right-of-way for a natural gas pipeline near the shoulder of the Parks Highway for the roughly 7 miles that the highway runs through Denali National Park. I wish to explain I am introducing the bill now, and why, rather than being an infringement on Alaska's most visited Interior national park, the measure is actually the favored route by many in the environmental community to bring natural gas from the foothills of Alaska's North Slope to Southcentral Alaska. While many in this body have heard about plans for a large-volume natural gas pipeline to run from the Prudhoe Bay oil fields to the Lower 48--the project for which many in this body voted to approve a loan guarantee, tax credits and permitting improvements in 2004--there is concern that the big pipeline will not be finished in time to get gas to Southcentral Alaska. That is gas that is vital for electric generation in Anchorage, the Mat-Su Borough and Kenai Peninsula. Currently electricity in Alaska's southern Railbelt, as it is called, is often generated by burning natural gas that has been produced since the 1960s from the gas fields in Cook Inlet, south of Anchorage. But production from Cook Inlet, while the province theoretically holds far more gas, has been falling for years. A major fertilizer plant near Kenai, for example, had to close in 2007 because there was not enough natural gas being produced to allow it to obtain the raw product it needed for urea production. While there are contract issues involving problems with getting sufficient gas quantities for Railbelt utilities starting as early as next year, there are serious concerns about the ability of the region to produce sufficient gas for electric generation and home heating for Alaska's most populated area as early as 2014. To provide a new, reliable natural gas supply, one proposal, the so- called ``bullet'' gas pipeline, is to construct a small diameter natural gas line, 24 inches in size, to run from Alaska's North slope region, pass Fairbanks along the Parks Highway, and terminate near Wasilla, Alaska. This pipeline would tie into existing transmission systems and would bring about 500 million cubic feet of gas a day to Southcentral Alaska. This project would be completed well in advance of when a larger-diameter pipeline might be in service to deliver 4 to 4.5 billion cubic feet a day to Lower 48 markets. Given the pace of planning for construction of the main line, it is unlikely that a larger Alaska natural gas pipeline will be able to deliver gas now until 2018 or 2019, perhaps four or more years too late to aid Southcentral Alaska's growing need for natural gas. Further, any delays in solidifying a new gas supply could permanently end chances to reopen the Agrium fertilizer plant and to continue operations of the Kenai LNG export terminal, both key components of local Kenai Peninsula industry. There are two potentially competing proposals for a small diameter, in-state gas pipeline. I have just described the ``bullet'' line proposal. The second proposal it to run a similarly sized pipeline along the Richardson and Glenn Highways to the east, also tying into existing transmission systems near Palmer, Alaska. There are advantages to both routes, the Parks route delivering gas to communities along the Parks Highway and providing clean natural gas to Denali National Park, while the Richardson/Glenn project would help provide economic activity to differing towns, such as Delta and Glennallen to the east. It is not my desire to prejudge the outcome of which project or route should be selected, since that decision will be made by Alaska state regulators and financial markets. It is my desire, however, to introduce legislation that would clear the lone legal impediment to planning for the Parks route, that being how to get the gas economically through the mountainous central region of the State past Denali National Park and Preserve. According to a recent analysis of routing options through this area, there are two feasible routes for a pipeline through or around the roughly 10-mile bottleneck of the Nenana River Canyon and Denali National Park and Preserve. The shortest and most logical route follows the existing highway through this entire area, 7 miles of which passes through Denali National Park. This route causes the least environmental and visual impact due to its location in an existing corridor, and provides a route that is easily accessible for routine pipeline maintenance. The other feasible pipeline route diverts from the highway to stay outside of the national park boundaries, but in so doing skirts across a steep hillside that dominates a park visitor's view to the east. Furthermore, the route that avoids the park will create a new disturbed corridor in a remote location, and will cause pipeline operations and reliability challenges due to the remoteness and the ruggedness of the route. The route that avoids the park is estimated to cost twice as much as the route along the highway and through the park. Besides being less expensive to construct and operate, the pipeline along the existing, previously disturbed Parks Highway right-of-way, also permits electric generation for the park facilities at Denali to come from natural gas. And for the first time reasonably priced compressed natural gas, CNG, would be available to power park vehicles--another environmental benefit of the Parks Highway route. Currently National Park Service permitted diesel tour buses travel 1 million road miles annually. Converting the buses to operate on CNG would significantly reduce air emissions in the park. A third benefit is that for the pipe to cross the Nenana River, not far from the park's entrance, will require a new bridge to be built that could carry not just the pipe, but provide a new pedestrian access/bicycle path for visitors that today need to walk along the heavily traveled highway rather than on a separated, pedestrian path toward visitors attractions and hotels located just outside of the park's entrance. In all probability the installation work will be conducted in the shoulder seasons to make sure there are no visitor dislocations for tourists visiting the park. For those reasons and others, a group of eight environmental groups: The National Parks and Conservation Association, the Alaska Conservation Alliance, the Denali Citizens Council, The Wilderness Society, Cook Inlet Keeper, the Alaska Center for the Environment, the Wrangell Mountain Center and the Alaska Wildlife Alliance have formally endorsed the granting of a gas line right-of-way through Denali Park, along the existing highway right of way. The granting of a permanent 20-foot easement, and probably a 100-foot construction easement, is not precedent setting. The National Park Service already has granted a permit for an installed fiber-optic cable along the same basic alignment for an Alaska communications company. Obviously the exact right-of-way will have to be delineated to avoid the existing cable and to accommodate park goals, such as routing around a vernal pond viewing area located along the general right-of- way. I am proposing this bill simply to authorize the right-of-way for a Parks Highway route soon so that the decision on which route is best for the state and its citizens--if the ``bullet'' line option is chosen--can be made based on greater certainty in the cost estimates for a Parks Highway project. Removing the uncertainty of permitting and regulatory delays will at least permit the Parks Highway route to be on a level playing field with the Richardson and Glenn Highway route when a routing decision is made. Then the decision on which project makes the most sense for all Alaskans can be made without fear that right-of- way acquisition delays could inflate project costs. If the Parks route is chosen and the project proceeds, then the national park will benefit from the environmental benefits of natural gas and compressed natural gas being available for park activities, cutting air quality concerns, and improving pedestrian access. I truly believe there are no environmental issues with this legislation. I think anyone who has ever traveled on the Parks Highway in Alaska near the park would agree, and I hope it can be considered by Congress relatively soon. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a letter of support be printed in the Record.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. I am, in morning business.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, today I am rising to talk about an issue that has captivated my constituents in the State of Alaska. We have got a mountain that is erupting. Mount Redoubt, which is located about 150 miles southwest of Anchorage, our largest community, has been more than active in the past week or so generating a great deal of press, a great deal of interest, and a considerable amount of impact in my State. So I wanted to take a few minutes this afternoon to talk about what is happening up North, talk a little bit about the importance of volcano monitoring. I think we are all aware that there have been some recent comments made about Federal spending for volcano monitoring, and the suggestion that perhaps this might be wasteful money in that we do not have any need to be monitoring volcanos. I can assure you that monitoring volcanos is critically important to the Nation, to the world, and particularly to Alaska right now, where, as I say, we are being held hostage by a volcano. A little bit of a personal note here. This afternoon--my boys' spring break concluded last evening. We have been up in the State enjoying spring skiing. And they are grounded by Mount Redoubt. They may be home Wednesday evening. Now, others might think this is a bad thing, but for these young pages here this morning, when you are 17 and you are shut out of school for an additional 3 days after spring break concludes, and you have to stay in Alaska and keep skiing, maybe the volcano is not a bad thing. But there is a very serious aspect to what we are talking about. Mount Redoubt has erupted 17 times now since March 22. And when it was initially under watch, you would see the steam and the haze coming off the volcano. But then we started to see some pretty significant eruptions, eruptions that would go 65,000 feet up into the air. This is a picture of Mount Redoubt. This was actually taken back in 1989, the last time Mount Redoubt was active. But what happens is these plumes go straight up into the air, get caught by the jet stream at 40- or 65,000 feet, and then that ash is dispersed throughout the State. What we have been seeing up North this week, and actually for about the past 10 days, is the cancellation of air flights, complete closure of the Anchorage International Airport over the weekend. Alaska Airlines alone has canceled about 230 flights. It has affected about 10,000 passengers, including my boys. What is happening as a result of this volcano does become quite personal. We have school districts down in the southern part of the State where they have experienced the ash fall-out, where the students have dust masks, respirator masks so they are not breathing the ash that is coming through. Home Depot made a point of staying open 24 hours a day so people could get the masks, the ventilator masks, get tape to put around their windows, around the doors, because this ash, this particulate is so fine that it comes underneath and into your home, it gunks up your computers, it clogs your car engine. It is most worrisome, most threatening, though, with airplane engines, the ash itself, this particulate that is like ground-up stone and has this very debilitating effect of messing up your engine. So what is happening is at the airports, the engines of the airplanes, if they are not inside, which we do not have the capacity for, are being wrapped in Saran Wrap--more sophisticated than Saran Wrap but having to be wrapped. Our military at Elmendorf and Ft. Richardson is looking to relocate their assets, so that these very fine precision aircraft are not in harm's way. A lot is happening as a result of this volcano and the series of eruptions. The volcanoes in Alaska make up well over three-quarters of U.S. volcanoes that have erupted in the last 200 years. About 50 volcanic eruptions occur around the world every year. This is according to USGS. It seems like a high number, but most of them are not eruptions that make much in terms of headlines. The United States ranks third, behind Indonesia and Japan, in the number of historically active volcanoes. That is why it is so very important to fund volcano monitoring, which in Alaska is through the Alaska Volcano Observatory. The AVO, as I call it, is one of five volcano observatories in the United States. It is a joint program of the USGS, the United States Geologic Service, the Geophysical Institute of the University of Alaska-Fairbanks, and the State of Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys. The AVO is unique in the United States, and probably in the world, in that it is a thoroughly collaborative undertaking of Federal scientists, State scientists, university faculty, and students. AVO was formed in 1988, after an eruption of Mt. Augustine, and uses Federal, State, and university resources to monitor and study Alaska's hazardous volcanoes, to predict, to give that early warning, and record eruptive activity, and also to mitigate volcanic hazards to life and property. Alaska has over 30 active volcanoes that are currently being monitored by the AVO. There is no other observatory in the world that even comes close to that. The AVO also analyzes available satellite data twice daily from thermal anomalies and ash plumes at about 80 volcanoes in the North Pacific. Russian volcanos frequently put ash into areas where the United States has aviation safety responsibilities. Alaska's active volcanoes also offer superb opportunities for basic scientific investigation of volcanic processes. An important component of AVO's program is to conduct research at selected volcanic centers. Now, I mentioned the hazard to air traffic. I think it is important for people to understand that when we are talking about volcanic ash being in the air and being distributed, it is not just something that is dirty and an annoyance, but it has the potential to be life threatening and absolutely deadly. If the jet engines ingest the volcanic ash, the potential for catastrophe is very real. Back in 1989, December 15 of 1989, there was a Boeing 747 flying about 150 miles northeast of Anchorage and it went through the ash plume that had erupted from the Redoubt volcano. It was flying at night so they could not see they were flying into an ash cloud. We did not have the monitoring process, so the pilots were flying on through and it sucked in the ash at--I am not entirely certain what altitude they were flying when they first encountered the ash--but the plane, with 231 passengers aboard, lost more than 10,000 feet elevation. All four engines lost power. And they went down 10,000 feet. That is about 2 miles. Now, we do a lot of flying around here. Next time you are up in that airplane, look down and think about losing all of the power in your 747 and falling out of the sky almost 2 miles before these incredibly skilled pilots are able to restart the engines. They were able to land the airplane safely, no lives lost, but I cannot imagine what it would have been like to have been a passenger on that jet aircraft. The airplane suffered about $80 million in damage. All four of those engines were shot. And, again, the good news out of the story is that there was no loss of life. The FAA estimates, based on information provided by the FAA, that more than 80,000 large aircraft per year and 30,000 people per day are in the skies over and potentially downwind of many of Alaska's volcanoes, mostly on the heavily traveled great circle routes between Europe and North America and Asia. It is along this route, which coincidentally follows the northern portion of the Pacific Ring of Fire, that there are over 100 volcanoes capable of depositing ash into the flight path. Some are in Japan, many are in Russia, but about half of them are in Alaska. And by analyzing the satellite imagery and working with the National Weather Service to predict where the winds will carry the ash, AVO assists the FAA in warning aircraft of areas to avoid. Volcanic eruptions from Cook Inlet volcanoes--these are right around the south central area: Spurr, Redoubt, Iliamna, and Augustine--can have severe impacts, as these volcanoes are nearest Anchorage, which is obviously our largest population center. Back in 1989, when Redoubt blew before, I was working in an office, and essentially we were shut down because the ventilation system needed to be turned off, computers needed to be turned off and covered. The impacts economically and in all ways are very real. The last major series of eruptions of Mt. Redoubt were in 1989 and 1990. These eruptions totaled 23. So right now with Redoubt we are already up to 17. The 23 that took place in 1989 occurred over a 6- month period. We are seeing 17 eruptions over a period of about 10 days. These eruptions seriously affected the population, commerce, and oil production throughout Cook Inlet and air traffic about as far away as the State of Texas. Total estimated economic costs were about $160 million, making this eruption of Redoubt the second most costly in U.S. history after Mount St. Helens. It had significant impact on the aviation and oil industries as well as on the people of the Kenai Peninsula. As mentioned, this volcanic ash is fine bits of abrasive glass that can damage lungs, it can damage vehicles, electronic equipment. Right now, as we speak, in the area just outside of Anchorage, at Mount Alyeska, where I was a couple of weeks ago, we are hosting the U.S. National Ski Championships. We have got some of the country's finest athletes who are performing on that hill. They cannot race if they are breathing in this volcanic particulate. The Redoubt eruption also damaged five commercial jetliners. This was again back in 1989. It caused several days' worth of airport closures and airline cancellations in Anchorage and on the Kenai Peninsula. Drifting ash clouds disrupted air traffic as far away as Texas. International volcano monitoring is also a role of the Federal Government. It helped, very likely, to save many lives, and significant money, in the case of the 1991 eruption of Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines, where the United States had military bases at the time. The eruption back in 1991 lasted more than 10 hours and sent a cloud of ash as high as 22 miles into the area that grew to more than 300 miles across. The USGS spent less than $1.5 million monitoring the volcano and was able to warn of the impending eruption which allowed the authorities to evacuate residents, as well as aircraft and other equipment from U.S. bases there. The USGS estimates that the efforts saved thousands of lives and prevented property losses of at least $250 million. It is not enough, though, to justify a program by identifying a danger. The more important question is whether something can be done to reduce the impact of a volcanic eruption in terms of property damage and loss of life. That means getting people out of harm's way by providing advanced warning. That is exactly what the USGS Volcano Hazards Program seeks to do through the existing volcano observatories in the United States. Some may say there is an abundance of caution going on right now by shutting down the airport, by cancelling flights, by diverting flights. But as a mother whose sons are there and going to be relying on air travel, I want to make sure that we err on the side of caution. I want to make sure we are using those scientists who will tell us exactly when it is safe to be back up flying. The advances made in monitoring can now provide much more accurate and timely predictions of eruptions. Back in 1989, AVO was only able to provide a few days' warning before Mount Redoubt erupted. This year, they began to detect activity and notified the public a couple months before it eventually erupted. The biggest challenge remains finding an adequate and stable source of funding. The USGS Volcano Hazards Program has been constantly underfunded. Both USGS and the FAA provide funding, but it is not enough to manage all of the observatories or provide for an expansion of the system to cover increased monitoring and volcano research. It is because of inadequate funding and the critical importance of this program that I intend to introduce a bill that will provide funding stability volcano monitoring needs. This program shows that with a modest investment, a very large benefit can be produced in reducing the impacts of catastrophic events. My legislation will establish a national volcano early warning and monitoring system within the United States Geological Survey to monitor, warn, and protect citizens from undue and avoidable harm from volcanic activity. USGS will coordinate a management plan with other relevant Federal departments, including the Department of Transportation, FAA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency. The legislation authorizes appropriations annually to the Department of Interior to carry out the act. I appreciate the attention given me on this issue this afternoon. As I mentioned, all eyes are upon the State of Alaska right now as we watch this volcano, but this is not the only one we are actively monitoring and watching. We want to make sure that not only the residents of the State of Alaska are provided a level of safety through monitoring and warning but any of those who may be endangered because of Mother Nature doing what Mother Nature does on a very unpredictable trajectory. So what we are attempting by introduction of legislation to establish the national volcano early warning and monitoring system is good, and I look forward to having the support of my colleagues on this very important matter. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. I ask unanimous consent to set aside the pending amendment for purposes of offering an amendment.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, before I speak to the amendment I have sent to the desk on behalf of my colleague, Senator Dorgan, and others, I would like to speak generally to the measure before us, the Serve America Act. I am a strong supporter of volunteer service, including Global Youth Service Day. I am proud and pleased that this reauthorization has been developed and brought to the floor in a bipartisan manner. The work done on this legislation is the product of the best tradition of the Senate HELP Committee and of the Senate itself. I offer my congratulations to those who have worked very hard on this--Senators Kennedy, Mikulski, Hatch, Enzi--and all their very hard-working staff who do a good job. I also thank some very professional and dedicated people in the State of Alaska for their thorough review of and comments on the various drafts of the legislation. We would send it off to them and get good response back, good feedback. I appreciate that. They include: Nita Madsen, executive director of Serve Alaska, and her staff; Rachel Morse and all the great people at RurAL CAP who implement AmeriCorps and VISTA programs; Denise Daniello at the Alaska Commission on Aging; Angela Salerno at the Alaska Department of Health and Social Services; and many others who were helpful in providing insights from the providers' perspective. AmeriCorps and the VISTA programs are a vital part of Alaska's communities. I would like to take a few minutes this morning to give some of the examples of their valuable work in the State and to congratulate the volunteers for their service. For more than 10 years, AmeriCorps volunteers with the Student Conservation Association have served Alaska and the Nation on our public lands in Denali National Park and Preserve, the Kenai Fjords, and Lake Clark National Park and Preserve. Every year over 1 million people visit Alaska to see these natural resources, to hike and camp and fish and explore. The conservation service provided by these students helps protect scenic beauty of our State, including the volcanoes, glaciers, wild rivers, and waterfalls. My family and I hiked the Chilkoot Trail a couple years ago and ran into a group of AmeriCorps volunteers who were out on the trail building and refurbishing some of the old historic cabins along the way and making the trail safe for its many visitors. The students also research and monitor fish and wildlife populations as well as watersheds that are essential for the red salmon. This year 80 of SCA's AmeriCorps volunteers will work in Cook Inlet in the watershed there to monitor and support active fish management. In addition to providing natural resource stewardship, visitor services, and environmental education, their work supports Alaska's key economic engines which are our fisheries and tourism. In 2008, SCA placed over 236 high school students and college interns in Alaska who provided over 76,000 service hours, valued at over $1.5 million. In Alaska last year, there were also 64 VISTA volunteers who served with 18 project sponsors. I will give a little snapshot of one of those projects. It was at Juneau-Douglas High School, the CHOICE project. The CHOICE Program, which is Choosing Healthy Options in Cooperative Education, focuses on improving the academic achievement of 100 at-risk students at Juneau-Douglas High School. The VISTA volunteers help the students develop a sense of belonging and ownership within CHOICE, the high school, and the community at large. So VISTA not only involves the CHOICE students in the community; they also involve the community in the education and learning of the students. Our VISTA coordinator, Jennifer Knaggs, recruited 42 community members to provide internships in State and local offices in the agencies and in the local businesses. In conjunction with the National Council on Alcohol and Drug Dependency, she helped facilitate three Alaska teen institute retreats. She also organized and coordinated the Beyond School Program, in which six community volunteers teach small groups of high school freshmen a hands-on, real life skill, such as Tlingit carving, writing and producing radio public service announcements about healthy choices, creating short video biographies of tribal elders, and visual promotions of healthy choices within the school. In a small community such as Juneau, retention of internships is no small feat. Students have reported very positive experiences with their internships and their hosts, and the performance we are seeing coming out of these kids is great. They are proud of their accomplishments. The students have become involved in the community, and it is a real win. The great public servants who run Alaska's national service programs have noted the many positive aspects of this reauthorization for increasing the recruitment and retention of volunteers, focusing on directions Alaska has already begun to move toward, and increasing the accountability for positive outcomes. In their view, there are a few items they look to in the Serve America Act that are especially helpful. The first is the increase in the living allowance and education awards. It has the potential to increase the recruitment and the retention of AmeriCorps members, especially from rural Alaskan communities. Also, it allows senior volunteers to transfer the education award to a child or a grandchildren. Again, this will help with recruitment efforts. It increases focus on individuals with a disability, paralleling one of the focus areas of our Alaska State Commission. Increasing the connection with the Commission on Aging and Intergenerational Programs also meets another one of Alaska's performance measures. So having this provision in the act will assist with moving this partnership forward. The accountability provisions will strengthen the State service plan. Having a minimum amount for the formula grants for both AmeriCorps and Learn and Serve is very good for the State of Alaska and other States that have equally small populations. The increase for the operation of the State Commission is a positive; even if obtaining the required 1- to-1 match will be challenging for a State such as ours, we believe it is a positive step. From the perspective of one of Alaska's largest service grantees, they noted the following: The effort to expand and improve opportunities for national and community service should positively benefit Alaska's engagement in the service; the grouping of ``corps'' for the service programs into Education Corps, Healthy Future Corps, Clean Energy Service Corps, Opportunity Corps or Veterans Corps, coupled with defined performance indicators, will add value to the existing Corporation for Community and National Service framework; linking the value of the education award to the maximum value of the Pell grant will improve the strength and success of AmeriCorps programs in Alaska; increasing the AmeriCorps living allowance from $16,000 to $18,000 will especially benefit the programs serving rural Alaskan communities. Let me speak to the amendment I have called up. This is amendment No. 691, offered on behalf of my colleague, Senator Dorgan. This amendment to the Serve America Act designates a tribal liaison for the Corporation for National and Community Service and keeps Indian tribes as eligible under existing law for nationally competitive grants. The corporation has recognized the need for a tribal liaison position and has designated an individual to reach out to Native American communities. This amendment will make that position permanent. The tribal liaison will work across all programs and support units to increase Native participation in national service and help to develop and enhance programming to address the unique needs of Native American communities. In addition, we propose to keep Indian tribes as eligible under existing law for nationally competitive grants. Current law allows tribes to compete for funds with States and national nonprofit organizations. This amendment would maintain the eligibility of tribes to compete with States and national nonprofit organizations for national competitive grants. Many of these activities and indicators under the proposed corps in this act are directly applicable to Indian Country, and access to these grants with the assistance of a tribal liaison is important. We recognize that the education of American Indians and Alaska Natives lags far behind that of the rest of the country, and the provisions of the Education Corps will help address these needs by providing mentors and tutors to Native students. Likewise, the Healthy Futures Corps would help address the lack of access to health care on many of our reservations. Likewise, the Healthy Futures Corps will help address the lack of access to health care on many of our reservations. American Indians have higher disease rates and lower life expectancy than the general population. Volunteers serving in the Healthy Futures Corps could assist those who live on reservations or in Alaskan communities in obtaining health services. I encourage my colleagues to look at the amendment and provide support for this important tribal liaison and in retaining tribal eligibility for competitive grants within the Corporation for National and Community Service. I thank Senators Kennedy, Mikulski, Hatch, and Enzi for their dedication to public service and congratulate them on what I believe is good legislation. I yield the floor.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I understand that an amendment is pending; is that correct?

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I wish to remember an Alaskan who has recently passed away, Joseph Sonneman. Joe was born in and attended school in Chicago, IL, but he spent much of his life as an Alaska resident living in our great State. Educated in government finance and an attorney, Joe worked as a budget analyst, photographer, taxi driver, heavy equipment oiler on the Alaska pipeline, postal worker, and university instructor. Joe had a passion for public service and was active in politics his entire life. He was active in the Alaska Democratic Party, served as their treasurer, and ran for the Mayor of Juneau and participated in several U.S. House and U.S. Senate primaries. Having been born in Chicago, Joe had the pleasure of living to see Barack Obama, a Chicagoan, sworn in as President of the United States earlier this year. His political activism extended to my office as well, since Joe would periodically write to me to convey his views on the issues of the day, particularly on veterans' health care and the military. A veteran of the Korean war, Joe served as a radar repairman in Korea between 1963 and 1966. He lived for several years at the Washington State Veterans Home near Seattle, WA, where he courageously battled ALS, or Lou Gherig's disease. I would like to convey my condolences and God's blessings to his family, including his mother Edith and his sisters Eve, Toby and Milly. Joe, you and your family will be in my thoughts and prayers.