Lisa Murkowski

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, the Senator from Oklahoma who has just spoken, who is the author of this amendment, has indicated we need to be making sacrifices. I do not think anyone in the State of Alaska feels we should not be contributing, but we do not feel in the State of Alaska that it should be coming entirely from one State. This amendment puts the sacrifice on one State. I urge rejection of this amendment.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. I rise today in support of a resolution that commemorates the annual ``Red Ribbon Week.'' I am pleased to have Mr. Grassley, Mr. Biden, Mr. Talent, Mrs. Dole, Mr. Stevens, Mr. Dominici, and Mr. Chambliss join me in introducing this resolution. The purpose of Red Ribbon Week is to educate and advocate a commitment to a drug- free lifestyle. Red Ribbon Week also remembers the contribution of one soldier in the war against drugs, Drug Enforcement Administration Special Agent Enrique ``Kiki'' Camarena. I am honored to be here to seek the Senate's recognition and support again for the annual Red Ribbon Week Campaign. In Alaska, Red Ribbon Week will be a statewide celebration involving thousands of school children and those people and organizations who care about the welfare of our children and communities. On October 24, the city of Anchorage of will celebrate with a series of Red Ribbon events coordinated with the Anchorage School District, the Alaska National Guard, the Alaska State Troopers, the mayor of Anchorage, the Boys & Girls Clubs of Alaska, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the local U.S. Attorney's Office, many PTA groups and many others throughout the community. Throughout the week, Alaskans will be encouraged to show gratitude for everyone who remains drug-free and pledges to live a safe and drug- free life and remember those we have lost in the fight against drugs. The Red Ribbon Week Campaign was started in 1988 by the Federation of Parents. It was organized as an 8-day event and was then chaired by then-President and Mrs. Reagan. The event began as a tribute to DEA Special Agent Enrique ``Kiki'' Camarena who was kidnapped, tortured, and murdered by drug traffickers in 1985. Those who advocate that drug addiction is a victimless crime should talk to the widow and children of Agent Camarena. His sons, Erik and Enrique, Jr. continue to honor their father and work to help children and families who are victims of drug- related crimes. The Red Ribbon that we wear during Red Ribbon Week is a symbol of zero tolerance for illegal drug use and a commitment to drug abuse prevention. The ribbon will be worn or displayed in the upcoming Red Ribbon Week by millions of Americans in an act of unity and remembrance of Agent ``Kiki'' Camarena. The distribution and abuse of illicit drugs is not a private matter. Drugs harm children. Drugs harm our communities. Illegal drugs only facilitate dependency, addiction and the breakdown of families. We must encourage our children to make better choices by making the same commitment in our own lives. We as parents and leaders must set good examples. Our children are growing up in a culture that continues to send confusing and mixed signals. Therefore, our children are confronting difficult choices on a continuous basis. Celebrities in the media, movies, television, and music often encourage them to make the wrong decisions. The Red Ribbon Campaign is one effort to help our children make the right decisions. I thank my colleagues for joining me in support of this resolution to help illustrate the Senate's commitment in ensuring that our children know the benefits of a drug-free lifestyle and encouraging all people to live such a lifestyle.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a hearing has been scheduled before the Subcommittee on Water and Power of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The hearing will be held on Thursday, October 6, 2005 at 3 p.m. in Room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. The purpose of the hearing is to receive testimony on S. 1025, to amend the Act entitled ``An Act to provide for the construction of the Cheney division, Wichita Federal reclamation project, Kansas, and for other purposes'' to authorize the Equus Beds Division of the Wichita Project; S. 1498, to direct the Secretary of the Interior to convey certain water distribution facilities to the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District; S. 1529, to provide for the conveyance of certain Federal land in the city of Yuma, Arizona; S. 1578, to reauthorize the Upper Colorado and San Juan River Basin endangered fish recovery implementation programs; and S. 1760, to authorize early repayment of obligations to the Bureau of Reclamation within the Rogue River Valley Irrigation District or within the Medford Irrigation District, and for other purposes. Because of the limited time available for the hearing, witnesses may testify by invitation only. However, those wishing to submit written testimony for the hearing record should send two copies of their testimony to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, DC 20510-6150. For further information, please contact Kellie Donnelly 202-224-9360 or Shannon Ewan at 202-224-7555. committee on energy and natural resources

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I rise this afternoon to join many of my colleagues speaking in strong support of the nomination of Judge John Roberts to the position of Chief Justice to the United States. It is unquestionable that Judge Roberts is eminently qualified to take on the position of Chief Justice. He has an impeccable resume. You can look at that and say: There is a person who has given his life to the law. An encyclopedic recitation of the law and a solid record as both a lawyer and a judge void of an ideological agenda indicate that he will be a thoughtful and impartial Justice. I had an opportunity to speak with Judge Roberts. There are some individuals whose knowledge of the law is so overwhelming and so impressive that, quite honestly, they are leaps and bounds above the rest of us and it is difficult to follow the conversation. The conversation I had with John Roberts was one where you are carrying on a conversation, he is able to bring in and impart his legal knowledge and continue a conversation that both flows and is comfortable. That is a unique talent. Of interest to me and my State of Alaska is that John Roberts has litigated on behalf of Alaskan clients. When the Mayor of Juneau, who was Bruce Botelho, testified on behalf of Judge Roberts before the Judiciary Committee, he did so as a former attorney general for the State of Alaska and as a Democrat. He had this to say in his testimony about Judge John Roberts. He said: Working with Judge Roberts, I was fortunate to get to know the most remarkable and inspiring lawyer I have ever met. He will lead the Court in a way that will instill public confidence in the fairness, justice and wisdom of the judiciary. When he was attorney general, Mayor Botelho retained John Roberts to represent Alaska in cases, to defend Alaska's sex offender registry, Alaska's right to submerged lands, and most notably a case involving Indian country, an Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act. While he was retained by the State of Alaska, John Roberts, I think very eagerly, traveled up to the State to learn firsthand those things that he was going to be speaking to. He toured the waters of Glacier Bay in a Fish and Game boat, went out on a little riverboat, a skiff by most people's standards, in the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta for a couple of days just traveling around. He traveled around and not only talked with the other lawyers who might be with the group, but he spoke with the people. He talked to the crews on the fishing boats. He engaged the people where they were. He talked with them about their local concerns. He practiced the pronunciation of the native village names. He was engaged. He was a real person to those Alaskans he met. So often when we have kind of your east coast lawyers coming back to visit us up North, they are viewed with a little bit of suspicion. But I think it is fair to say that John Roberts made a very serious and a very genuine effort to know and appreciate firsthand the facts that were going to be presented to him, the facts he was going to be arguing. He was not just going to read some brief in the comfort of his study, he was going to come and learn for himself. As Alaskans, we are fortunate to have a nominee who understands Alaska's unique landscape, our people, and its laws. We have some Federal laws and acts that are unique to where we are and our people and our land up there, so much so that it is very difficult to become well versed in the law. Sometimes I think it is fair to say we think those on the outside, those in the lower 48, just don't get what happens up North and how it applies with us. But I think we have learned with Judge John Roberts that he will take the time to know and understand not only Alaska's people but the facts and circumstances all over. As Americans, we have yet to imagine some of the legal questions John Roberts will consider in his tenure. But with his breadth of experience and his desire to wholly understand the legal matters before him, I believe Judge John Roberts will serve the court with integrity, thoughtfulness, and dedication to the law. John Roberts has made it clear as a judge that it is not his place to use the law to further politics or to seek to question settled law. The role of justice is one of great restraint, of strict application of the law and not judicial activism. I believe John Roberts when he unequivocally pledged to uphold impartiality in the law. Judge Roberts has explicitly assured us that his respect for the law and legal principle vastly outweigh his personal values, his views, or loyalty to anyone or anything other than the rule of law. This is the basis, the fundamental standard from which we should consider Judge Roberts' nomination. In my mind, there is simply no clear cause for opposing his nomination. If in his testimony Judge Roberts did not communicate his views on legal matters which may come before the Court during his tenure, he was entirely forthcoming on his judicial philosophy. Judge Roberts stated repeatedly that he would bring no agenda to his work as Chief Justice. He stated he would judge each issue on its merits and approach each case with an open mind, that legal precedent and not his personal views would be his guide. Perhaps more so than any other recent nominee, Judge Roberts has demonstrated a sound understanding and appreciation of the role of a Justice and the necessary constraints within which the third branch of government should operate. So today, I call on my Senate colleagues to take a step back from our politically charged setting to consider fairly a man who is incredibly qualified to become our Chief Justice. I will quote from Roberts' testimony as I end here. He said: The rule of law--that's the only client I have as a judge. The Constitution is the only interest I have as a judge. The notion I would compromise my commitment to that principle . . . because of views toward a particular administration is one that I reject entirely. That would be inconsistent with the judicial oath. John Roberts has what it takes to be the Chief Justice of the United States, which is complete love for the law, an erudite legal mind, and judicial modesty. I lend my support to the nominee and look forward to this body confirming him. I yield the floor.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. 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 unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, by raising awareness one moment at a time, we can minimize the harm that drinking during pregnancy causes our most vulnerable population--our children. In February of 1999, a small group of parents, raising children afflicted with fetal alcohol spectrum disorders, set out to change the world. That small group started an ``online support group'' which quickly became a worldwide grassroots movement to observe September 9 as International Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders Awareness Day. Former Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle was instrumental in having the Senate take notice of this important issue. This year for the seventh consecutive year, communities across the Nation are pausing at the hour of 9:09 a.m. to acknowledge this day. Events are occurring in cities and towns not just across the country, but around the world--from Chilliwack, British Columbia to Cape Town, South Africa to Madagascar--families are joining together today to raise awareness of fetal alcohol syndrome disorders or FASD. My State of Alaska will observe this day with solemn events in Anchorage, Juneau, Kenai, and Fairbanks. FASD is an umbrella term that describes a range of physical and mental birth defects that can occur in a fetus when a pregnant woman drinks alcohol. It is a leading cause of nonhereditary mental retardation in the U.S. Many children affected by maternal drinking during pregnancy have irreversible conditions--including severe brain damage--that cause permanent, lifelong disability. FASD is 100 percent preventable. Prevention merely requires a woman to abstain from alcohol during pregnancy. Yet every year in America, an estimated one in every 100 babies born are born with FASD--that's 40,000 infants. FASD affects more children than Down syndrome, cerebral palsy, spina bifida and muscular dystrophy combined. The cost of FASD is high--more than $3 billion each year in direct health care costs, and many times that amount in lost human potential. Lifetime health costs for an individual living with FASD averages $860,000. The indirect financial and social costs to the Nation are even greater--including the cost of incarceration, specialized health care, education, foster care, job training and general support services. All in all, the direct and indirect economic costs of FASD in the U.S. are estimated to be $5.4 billion. You can find FASD in every community in America--native, non-native, rich, poor--it doesn't discriminate. That is why, last February, the U.S. Surgeon General Richard Carmona again issued another advisory to pregnant women, or women who plan to become pregnant, to completely abstain from all alcohol use. In Alaska, I am troubled to report that we have the highest rate of FASD in the Nation. Approximately 163 Alaskan babies are born each year affected by maternal alcohol use during pregnancy. Among our native communities, the rate of FASD is 15 times higher than non-Native areas in the state. And again, FASD is 100 percent preventable. We can save so many children and families so much heartache simply by increasing people's awareness of what FASD is and how we can prevent it. In fact, prevention of FASD is seven times more cost effective than treating the disorder. That is why Senator Tim Johnson and I--and several others from both sides of the aisle--will soon be introducing legislation to direct more resources toward this terrible problem. The ``Advancing FASD Research, Prevention, and Services Act'' will--develop and implement targeted state and community-based outreach programs; improve coordination among Federal agencies involved in FASD treatment and research by establishing stronger communication with these programs, and improve support services for families and strengthen educational outreach efforts to doctors, teachers, judges and others whose work puts them in contact with people with FASD. Forty-thousand American children a year are born with FASD. Our investment today in prevention, treatment and research will save countless in future health costs of this devastating but completely preventable disorder. I ask my colleagues to support the Advancing FASD, Research, Prevention and Services Act. On Fetal Alcohol Awareness Day, we remember all innocent babies inflicted with this disorder and imagine the potential that they could have been but for the damage done by alcohol. I hope that we will continue to pause in the ninth hour of the ninth day each September until fetal alcohol spectrum disorders are eradicated.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

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

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, so many Members of this Chamber have stood on the floor this past week to speak about the victims of the disaster, the catastrophe down in the gulf region, to speak of the victims of Hurricane Katrina. This morning I would like to spend a few brief moments to talk about some other victims, some very young victims, victims of a disease that is absolutely entirely preventable. This morning I speak very briefly about those young children who are born with a fetal alcohol disorder. The ninth hour of the ninth day of the ninth month having arrived today, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate observe a very brief moment of reflection to remind women who are pregnant or those who may soon become pregnant that no amount of alcohol--none at all--is safe to consume during the 9 months of pregnancy. If we may have a brief moment of reflection.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, thank you. By raising awareness one moment, one person at a time, we can minimize the harm that drinking during pregnancy causes to our most vulnerable population, and that is our children. In February of 1999, there was a small group of parents who were raising children afflicted with fetal alcohol spectrum disorders. These parents set out to change the world. That small group started an online support group which quickly became a worldwide grassroots movement to observe September 9 as International Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders Awareness Day. Former Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle was instrumental in having the Senate take notice of this important issue. He has worked very hard on this issue, and continues so today. We thank him for his efforts. This year, for the seventh consecutive year, communities across the Nation are pausing at the hour of 9:09 a.m. to acknowledge this day. Events are occurring in cities and towns not just across the country but around the world--from Chilliwack, British Columbia, to Cape Town, South Africa, to Madagascar. Families are joining today to raise awareness of Fetal Alcohol Syndrome Disorder, or FASD. In Alaska, Alaskans will observe this day in solemn events in Anchorage, Juneau, Kenai, Fairbanks, and other communities. FASD is an umbrella term that describes a range of physical and mental birth defects that can occur in a fetus when a pregnant woman consumes alcohol. It is a leading cause of nonhereditary mental retardation in the United States. Many children affected by maternal drinking during pregnancy have irreversible conditions, including severe brain damage. It is causing permanent lifelong disability. We have to keep this in perspective. FASD is 100 percent preventable. Prevention merely requires a woman to abstain from alcohol during pregnancy. Knowing that it is entirely preventable, it is amazing to me to think that every year in this country an estimated 1 in every 100 babies are born with FASD. That is about 40,000 infants annually. FASD affects more children than Down's syndrome, cerebral palsy, spina bifida, and muscular dystrophy combined. The cost of FASD is huge: More than $3 billion each year in direct health care costs and many times that amount in lost human potential. Lifetime health costs for an individual living with FASD can average $860,000. The indirect financial and social costs to the Nation are even greater, including specialized health care, education, foster care, job training, cost of incarceration, general support services. All in all, the direct and indirect economic costs of FASD in the United States are estimated to be $5.4 billion. FASD is found in every community in America, in Native, non-Native, rich, poor. It does not discriminate. That is why, last February, the U.S. Surgeon General, Richard Carmona, again issued another advisory, to protect women, to completely abstain from alcohol use. In Alaska, we have very troubling statistics as they relate to FASD. We have the highest rate of FASD in the Nation. Approximately 163 Alaskan babies are born each year affected by maternal alcohol use during pregnancy. Among our Native communities, the statistics are even worse. The rate of FASD is 15 times higher than non-Native areas in our State. This is a disease syndrome that is 100 percent preventable. We can save so many children, so many families, so much heartache simply by increasing people's awareness of what FASD is and how we can prevent it. In fact, prevention of FASD is seven times more cost effective than treating the disorder. That is why Senator Johnson and I and several other Senators from both sides of the aisle will soon introduce legislation to direct more resources toward this terrible problem. The legislation we are introducing is called the Advancing FASD Research, Prevention and Services Act. It is designed to develop and implement targeted State and community-based outreach programs to improve coordination among Federal agencies involved in FASD treatment and research by establishing stronger communication with these programs and also to improve support services for families and strengthening educational outreach efforts to doctors, teachers, judges, and others whose work puts them in contact with those with FASD. Mr. President, 40,000 American children a year are born with FASD. Our investment today in prevention, treatment, and research will save countless and future health care costs of this devastating, but entirely preventable, disorder. I ask my colleagues to join with Senator Johnson and I in supporting the advancing FASD Research, Prevention and Services Act. Today, on Fetal Alcohol Awareness Day, let us remember all innocent babies afflicted with this disorder and let us imagine the potential they could have but for this damage from alcohol. I hope we continue to recognize, to pause in the ninth hour of the ninth day of each September until fetal alcohol syndrome disorders are eradicated. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I have waited my time in the queue this evening because I wanted to take a few minutes to speak not only about the importance of this Energy bill we are poised to vote on tomorrow, but to acknowledge those who did I think yeoman's work in getting us to where we are. As my friend from Oregon has pointed out, this is not a perfect piece of legislation. He and I would disagree on certain areas of it. But I think when we look at the work product of what we do in the Senate, the day that we come to complete agreement--complete agreement--on all aspects of legislation we move forward, I think we will have all lost our collective senses. We will always find room to improve our legislation. We will always find room to make something better. We need to look at where we are at this point in time with the Energy bill we have before us. As was pointed out earlier this evening, we have not had an energy policy updated or presented or worked through this Congress for 13 years. Thirteen years is a long time to be floating without a specific policy, a specific policy direction, particularly in an area that is as important as energy. I had the opportunity yesterday to address a group of a couple hundred young people in a junior statesman-type forum. It was an opportunity for me to speak on the subject of my choosing. Since we have been so focused on energy these past couple weeks and we have been moving this bill through the conference process, I spent my time to talk about what we had been doing and the significance of energy to us as a nation, as a people, and particularly to these young people. As Senator Alexander, the Senator from Tennessee, mentioned earlier, energy is not typically something we talk about at the dinner table. We need to understand as a country how important energy is to our daily world. I have often described the way Americans think about energy--we have this kind of immaculate conception notion of energy: It just happens. You flip the switch and the lights go on; you adjust the thermostat and you are cooler or warmer, and it just happens. There is no connection between how we respond to the energy we have, whether it powers us, heats us, cools us, it moves us. We do not think about it. We do not connect the dots between what we are consuming and where from it comes. As I explained to this group of young people, we get most of our energy from the ground. It comes from underneath, whether it is oil or whether it is natural gas that is extracted off our shores, say, in Louisiana, or whether it is from our coal resources that we mine. Sometimes that is not a particularly visually appealing thought, to think that we have to dig it out, we have to drill it out, we have to extract. But the fact of the matter is, we are energy consumers. We are a nation that is dependent on our energy for what we do, for who we are, for the strength of this Nation. If we couldn't move, if we couldn't communicate the way we do, we would not be the Nation we are. So it is important for us as Americans to realize, to appreciate, to connect those dots and say, this is important to us. It is important to us to have an energy policy that is comprehensive, that is sound, that is balanced, that not only looks to the production from the traditional sources, such as oil, gas, and coal, but looks to the production from the sources for the future in the renewables, in the alternative sources of energy. That also has as a component of our energy policy the conservation aspects, the efficiencies. This must be part of the plan. That is what this Energy bill we have before us is and does. It is comprehensive in those ways. The point has been made tonight that we have done nothing in this Energy bill that is going to bring down the price of gasoline at the pump tomorrow. I am not going to stand before you tonight and say that if we pass this legislation tomorrow and if the President signs off on this in the next couple of weeks the American consumer is all of a sudden going to see the price of gasoline drop at the pump. I cannot make that promise, and I would be foolish to do so. We know that is not going to happen just because we enact this bill. Here is the point: If we had done this 8 years, 10 years ago, 5 years ago when we had been working on energy policies over this period of time, perhaps we would not be at this point where we are paying $2.40 at the pump, as we are paying in my hometown of Anchorage right now. Perhaps we would not be at this point if we had enacted an energy policy some years prior to this. But we did not, and we are here now. Now we have an opportunity to do something, to move forward with a policy that does make some sense. So we have to start somewhere. We have to put in place the procedures and the mechanisms that will work. We have to understand that we cannot expect an immediate fix. We did not get to $2.40 a gallon gasoline overnight. We are not going to remedy it overnight. So our expectations need to be realistic. As the Senator from Tennessee said when he was talking about natural gas, one of the things we will see through what we are putting in place with this legislation is a stabilizing effect, hopefully, with our natural gas prices as we are able to provide for those incentives and encourage more LNG facilities around our coasts so we can get more of the natural gas into this country. Those things have to all start somewhere, but the recognition is let's be realistic in terms of when we are going to see the results. People want to know, What does it mean to me today? We need to appreciate the fact that we have to look to what it is going to mean to us tomorrow. With the provisions we have put in place, hopefully we will not see the blackout we had a couple years back. We have enhanced the reliability standards of our electricity grids so that we are not going to see that. Points have been made on the floor tonight that what will come out of this Energy bill is not a cleaner America. I challenge that absolutely. The provisions that have been put in place, the incentives that have been put in place, whether it is the clean coal gasification that will work to reduce those emissions, to reduce the carbon, to make our air more clean, our waters more clean--these are things we are putting in place through the incentives. My colleague called them subsidies. The fact is, when you are changing technology, when you are making things different to make them better, to make them cleaner, to make them more efficient, it is going to cost some money. Should we not help to make it cleaner, to make it more efficient? That is what the incentives are for. So let's work to make those happen. Think about these processes. We have provisions in place for enhanced oil recovery, and in my State of Alaska, we have some aging oilfields out in the Cook Inlet. They have been producing and doing a darn fine job for a couple decades, but these fields are declining. With the technology and the processes now available, we can, through enhanced oil recovery, through injection of the carbon dioxide, inject into these aging wells, enhance the oil so that we get more oil from these aging wells while we are sequestering the carbon. We have a win-win situation. It is an environmentally more sophisticated and more helpful process, and we are getting more of the energy source we are seeking. It is through these types of technologies that we benefit, that we proceed to win in so many different ways. Again, I want to reinforce that what we will have an opportunity to accept tomorrow is a comprehensive policy, a policy that has balance to it, that is not totally loaded to the production side. I come from a State where, quite honestly, we want to see additional production coming out of the State of Alaska because we have the resource there and we want to be able to help meet the Nation's energy needs. But we know--I know--that is not necessarily the energy for the long-term future of this country; that the direction we take is in the area of renewables and the alternatives. We have to start. We are making a start with this legislation. It is not just a focus on production, it is the renewables, the biomass, the geothermal, the solar, the wind, ocean currents; we have ocean energy for the first time. Think about the possibility of harnessing the currents in our oceans, the temperature differentials in the ocean waters. There is so much potential out there. Again, when we are talking about new technology and new processes, it takes a little bit of money, it takes a little bit of help, and this is where we can step in to provide that. Senator Bingaman made a comment at the conclusion of his initial remarks that we do not want to wait another 13 years to take up an energy policy again. It is probably premature to be talking about the next energy policy when we have not even concluded this one, but I think we need to recognize that what is happening in this country now and as we collaborate with other nations in clean energy research, the technology changes so quickly--or we hope we can encourage the technology to change so quickly--that we have to keep on top of this. We have to have an energy policy that is current, that does look toward tomorrow. So we want to make sure this is not the end of the conversation, that once we conclude with the Energy bill, we close the books and don't start looking at it for another 10 years. I am not willing to do that, and I think most of my colleagues would be joining me in saying we need to be constantly on top of and involved with this. I want to comment before I conclude that there have been several of my colleagues on the other side who have mentioned there is absolutely nothing in this Energy bill that reduces our reliance on foreign sources of oil, that, in fact, we become more dependent on foreign oil. I do have to tell my colleagues, as one of the Senators from Alaska who has been very focused on ANWR and opening ANWR, I am sitting back in my chair here listening to this, scratching my head--scratching my head-- because they are saying to me we are not doing anything to reduce our reliance on foreign sources of oil, we must do more domestically. We have been saying we have a portion of the answer. Opening ANWR is not going to make us not rely on foreign sources of oil. We know that. But it can help us. Should we not be doing all that we can domestically to help us? I know the critics and that we are going to go into this argument in September all over again so I do not need to take the body's time tonight to dwell on these facts, but for those who say there is not enough there to make a difference, the mean estimate coming out of ANWR will be what we have been getting from the State of Texas for the past 75 years. The mean estimate coming out of ANWR is what we have received from Saudi Arabia for 25 years. That is not insignificant amounts of oil. This can help us. ANWR is not contained in this Energy bill, much to my dismay. The House included it on their side. We know that in the Senate ANWR, when it was tried to be placed in the Energy bill, was subject to a filibuster. It was subject to a filibuster by some of the same individuals who tonight have stood and said this Energy bill does not provide for any lessening of foreign dependence on oil. Well, I would like to suggest that this energy policy that we are about to vote on tomorrow is one piece of what we need to look to as a Nation. The piece tomorrow will be the piece that includes the focus on conservation, the focus on renewables, alternatives, the focus on efficiencies. Last year we were successful in moving forward the Natural Gas Act that provided incentives for construction of the natural gas pipeline coming out of Alaska, where we hope we will be able to provide to this Nation a good source of domestic natural gas. That is a huge piece for us. I would also like to think that before the end of the year we would also be able to put into place the rest of the comprehensive energy policy that would include oil coming out of a tiny sliver of the Coastal Plain of Alaska's North Slope. I publicly thank Chairman Domenici and the ranking member, Senator Bingaman, of the Energy Committee. Both Senators did an incredible task shepherding this legislation through the floor. Their staffs were excellent. There was a great deal of hard work. It was a pleasure to sit in my first conference and see the manner in which it was conducted. It was a very open, very respectful deliberation of some very difficult issues conducted by the Members on our side as well as Chairman Barton from the House side. It was a pleasure to be a part of it. I am proud of the product that has come out of this body, and I urge the Members' support. I yield the floor.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, today I introduce a bill that is very important to a small community in my home State of Alaska. This bill will authorize the U.S. Forest Service to convey approximately 12 acres of land, which it no longer needs but continues to own in Coffman Cove, AK to the city of Coffman Cove. The bill authorizes that the land, a former administrative site, be conveyed without charge to the city which has a population of about 230 people. Coffman Cove was founded in 1965 as a logging community to provide support for the timber industry on Prince of Wales Island in the Tongass National Forest. It operated for almost 35 years in that capacity. Due to changes in Federal policy, the timber industry on the island no longer provides the economic base necessary to sustain Coffman Cove. Attempts at economic diversification are very difficult so long as the Forest Service holds in Federal ownership these 12 acres which literally occupy the center of this small community. Just a few years ago, the Forest Service in conjunction with the timber industry completed the environmental cleanup of the logging site and facility at Coffman Cove. That cleanup was funded by the timber industry as good corporate citizens. The result of the cleanup is that the 12 acres can now be made available for disposal to the city. This bill, in which I am joined by my colleague Mr. Stevens, would convey title to the City without cost so that it can begin a redevelopment plan for the community. The city of Coffman Cove needs this land if it is to hope to reorient its economy from a principally logging community to a more diversified economic community. A small town of 230 people simply does not have the funds to purchase this land and the Federal Government needs to pitch in by conveying full title without cost to the community. This is only fair since the Federal Government's change in timber policy has created the city's dilemma. As a result of the change in timber policy with which the Senate is so familiar, the city has been set adrift to fend for itself economically. And it has done a good job. It will soon become the southern terminus for the Inter-Island Ferry Authority's new northern route which will connect Prince of Wales Island with Wrangell and Petersburg. The new route will go into service in the next few months and this should provide an economic boost to the community. But, Coffman Cove must control the land in the heart of its community if it is to economically diversify. For the new ferry route to bring economic development to the City, the City must able to sell, rent, or develop its local land base. The 12 acres which are the subject of my bill are the 12 key acres right in the center of town. Now this is a small town and without control of this land, the City cannot ever successfully diversity and recovers from the change in its economy as a result of the change in Federal timber policy. This Forest Service desires to retain a 3 acre site for its continued administrative purposes. My bill does not affect that site and I expect the Forest Service to have no problem with the land conveyance locations provided in this bill. I appreciate the assistance of the Forest Service in helping me to draft the legislation. This conveyance fulfills the Federal Government's commitment that changes in Federal timber policy would be matched by Federal help to the local communities to diversify. It is absolutely appropriate and fair to offer Coffman Cove this former Forest Service administrative site that no longer has value to the Federal government but that is crucial to Coffman Cove as it plans its future. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the legislation be printed in the Record.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, today I introduce a bill that is very important to a small community in my home State of Alaska. This bill will authorize the U.S. Forest Service to convey approximately 12 acres of land, which it no longer needs but continues to own in Coffman Cove, AK to the city of Coffman Cove. The bill authorizes that the land, a former administrative site, be conveyed without charge to the city which has a population of about 230 people. Coffman Cove was founded in 1965 as a logging community to provide support for the timber industry on Prince of Wales Island in the Tongass National Forest. It operated for almost 35 years in that capacity. Due to changes in Federal policy, the timber industry on the island no longer provides the economic base necessary to sustain Coffman Cove. Attempts at economic diversification are very difficult so long as the Forest Service holds in Federal ownership these 12 acres which literally occupy the center of this small community. Just a few years ago, the Forest Service in conjunction with the timber industry completed the environmental cleanup of the logging site and facility at Coffman Cove. That cleanup was funded by the timber industry as good corporate citizens. The result of the cleanup is that the 12 acres can now be made available for disposal to the city. This bill, in which I am joined by my colleague Mr. Stevens, would convey title to the City without cost so that it can begin a redevelopment plan for the community. The city of Coffman Cove needs this land if it is to hope to reorient its economy from a principally logging community to a more diversified economic community. A small town of 230 people simply does not have the funds to purchase this land and the Federal Government needs to pitch in by conveying full title without cost to the community. This is only fair since the Federal Government's change in timber policy has created the city's dilemma. As a result of the change in timber policy with which the Senate is so familiar, the city has been set adrift to fend for itself economically. And it has done a good job. It will soon become the southern terminus for the Inter-Island Ferry Authority's new northern route which will connect Prince of Wales Island with Wrangell and Petersburg. The new route will go into service in the next few months and this should provide an economic boost to the community. But, Coffman Cove must control the land in the heart of its community if it is to economically diversify. For the new ferry route to bring economic development to the City, the City must able to sell, rent, or develop its local land base. The 12 acres which are the subject of my bill are the 12 key acres right in the center of town. Now this is a small town and without control of this land, the City cannot ever successfully diversity and recovers from the change in its economy as a result of the change in Federal timber policy. This Forest Service desires to retain a 3 acre site for its continued administrative purposes. My bill does not affect that site and I expect the Forest Service to have no problem with the land conveyance locations provided in this bill. I appreciate the assistance of the Forest Service in helping me to draft the legislation. This conveyance fulfills the Federal Government's commitment that changes in Federal timber policy would be matched by Federal help to the local communities to diversify. It is absolutely appropriate and fair to offer Coffman Cove this former Forest Service administrative site that no longer has value to the Federal government but that is crucial to Coffman Cove as it plans its future. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the legislation be printed in the Record.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

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

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, when people ask me what is the best thing about Alaska, I can talk about the mountains, I can talk about the trees, I can talk about our great salmon. They are all very wonderful, very special. But the very best thing about Alaska is its people. The spirit of voluntarism and civic engagement is what makes Alaska one of the best places in the Nation to live and to raise families. Alaskans not only invest their time and energy in their own children, they also invest it in the development of their neighbors' children. This spirit of giving manifests itself in the thousands of hours that adult volunteers contribute to youth activities, such as Scouting. Scouting enriches the lives of young people in many parts of my State because adult volunteers give generously of their time to work with our young people. My two boys have proudly participated in Scouting in the Mat-Su Western District as members of Troop 176 in Anchorage. I am very proud of the opportunities they have through Boy Scouts. Now, as we know, last evening there were four adult volunteers who were associated with the Western Alaskan Council of the Boy Scouts of America who lost their lives at the Boy Scout Jamboree which is taking place at Fort A.P. Hill near Fredricksburg, VA. Accounts in the newspapers this morning back home in Anchorage were riveting, tragic, and I think they hit all of us in a place in our heart we are always going to remember. Mr. President, the four gentlemen who were killed last evening were: Ron Bitzer of Anchorage. Ron and his wife Karen had just recently made the decision to move out of State. They were selling their home, and they were going to be moving out of State. Michael LaCroix, who I had the privilege of working with on the Boys & Girls Club board. Mike was a small businessman and owned a very successful business in Anchorage. He was with his son here in the jamboree. Michael Shibe of Anchorage was also here with two of his sons, twin boys. The fourth individual was Scott Powell. Scott moved from Alaska, as I understand, just last year. He had served for more than 20 years as the program director of Camp Gorsuch, which is the Boy Scout camp in Alaska. In my office today, we were talking about Scott Powell and the recognition that just about every Boy Scout in Alaska and the moms and dads who go either to help out at the camp or go there for the end-of- camp ceremonies knew, recognized, and loved Scott Powell. He touched the lives of countless Alaskan youth. All of these gentlemen are going to be terribly, terribly missed. Another Alaskan volunteer, Larry Call, of Anchorage, was injured in the incident. We understand he is hospitalized. Of course, we are praying for his speedy recovery. I do not intend to dwell this afternoon on the tragic details of what has happened. The fact is, these men are heroes and should not be remembered for the way they lost their lives but for how they lived their lives. This is a phrase that was coined by Vivian Eney, the widow of a U.S. Capitol Police officer, who lost her husband in a sudden and unexpected training accident. The four Scout leaders who we pause to think about today will be remembered for the way they lived their lives. They will be remembered as heroes for the service they gave to the young people of Alaska. At this time, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate observe a moment of silence so we may reflect upon the events that occurred last evening and so we may also express our love and our support for the Scouts and their family members.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, my message to the families of these five outstanding leaders and to all of the Boy Scouts in Alaska and around the world is simple: Please know that the Senate and, indeed, the Nation grieves with you on this very difficult day. I thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor.

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

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I rise to introduce a bill that will allow the Environmental Protection Agency to continue to provide grant funding and technical assistance to small, rural communities in Alaska for critical water and sewer projects. These rural communities are only accessible by either aircraft or boat. This important funding was originally authorized as part of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996 and was reauthorized in 2000. The authorization for this program expires at the end of fiscal year 2005. Every fiscal year, the EPA transfers funding authorized by this program to the State of Alaska's Village Safe Water Program, which is managed by the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation. The water and sewer conditions in the villages in Alaska that still need this critical funding rival the conditions in rural communities in third world countries. For example, residents in some villages in Alaska have to go to a central source in the community to get fresh water. This source is usually a well. Instead of flushing toilets, residents have to use a device called a ``honeybucket.'' This device is a large bucket with a toilet seat on top. When the honeybucket is full, it is usually dumped in a lagoon or on land. Sometimes, these dump locations are near sources of drinking water. The Village Safe Water program has been a success over the years. Many homes in Alaska's rural communities now have plumbing due to funds authorized by this program. However, thirty-three percent of homes in these communities still do not have in-house plumbing. It is unacceptable that the residents of these communities still do not have access to conventional plumbing in their homes in 2005. Earlier this year, the Office of Management and Budget published a Program Assessment Rating Tool report concerning this program. This report found several deficiencies concerning the administration of this program. However, I have been assured that the EPA and the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation are working closely together to correct these deficiencies. It is imperative that we reauthorize this critically important program before the end of this fiscal year. The health and well-being of rural Alaskans is at stake. I ask unanimous consent that the text of this bill be printed in the Record.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I rise to introduce a bill that will allow the Environmental Protection Agency to continue to provide grant funding and technical assistance to small, rural communities in Alaska for critical water and sewer projects. These rural communities are only accessible by either aircraft or boat. This important funding was originally authorized as part of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996 and was reauthorized in 2000. The authorization for this program expires at the end of fiscal year 2005. Every fiscal year, the EPA transfers funding authorized by this program to the State of Alaska's Village Safe Water Program, which is managed by the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation. The water and sewer conditions in the villages in Alaska that still need this critical funding rival the conditions in rural communities in third world countries. For example, residents in some villages in Alaska have to go to a central source in the community to get fresh water. This source is usually a well. Instead of flushing toilets, residents have to use a device called a ``honeybucket.'' This device is a large bucket with a toilet seat on top. When the honeybucket is full, it is usually dumped in a lagoon or on land. Sometimes, these dump locations are near sources of drinking water. The Village Safe Water program has been a success over the years. Many homes in Alaska's rural communities now have plumbing due to funds authorized by this program. However, thirty-three percent of homes in these communities still do not have in-house plumbing. It is unacceptable that the residents of these communities still do not have access to conventional plumbing in their homes in 2005. Earlier this year, the Office of Management and Budget published a Program Assessment Rating Tool report concerning this program. This report found several deficiencies concerning the administration of this program. However, I have been assured that the EPA and the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation are working closely together to correct these deficiencies. It is imperative that we reauthorize this critically important program before the end of this fiscal year. The health and well-being of rural Alaskans is at stake. I ask unanimous consent that the text of this bill be printed in the Record.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a hearing has been scheduled before the Subcommittee on Water and Power of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The hearing will be held on Tuesday, July 12, 2005 at 3 p.m., in Room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. The purpose of the hearing is to receive testimony on S. 49, to establish a joint Federal-State Floodplain and Erosion Mitigation Commission for the State of Alaska; S. 247, to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to assist in the planning, design, and construction of the Tumalo Irrigation District Water Conservation Project in Deschutes County, OR; S. 648, to amend the Reclamation States Emergency Drought Relief Act of 1991 to extend the authority for drought assistance; S. 819, to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to reallocate costs of the Pactola Dam and Reservoir, SD, to reflect increased demands for municipal, industrial, and fish and wildlife purposes; S. 891, to extend the water service contract for the Ainsworth Unit, Sandhills Division, Pick-Sloan Missouri Basin Program, NE; and S. 1338, to require the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Bureau of Reclamation and the United States Geological Survey, to conduct a study on groundwater resources in the State of Alaska, and for other purposes. Because of the limited time available for the hearing, witnesses may testify by invitation only. However, those wishing to submit written testimony for the hearing record should send two copies of their testimony to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, DC 20510-6150. Subcommittee on National Parks

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a measure of benefit to my home State of Alaska, the Alaska Water Resources Act of 2005. The importance of water resource data collection to a State that has a resource-based economy cannot be overstated. Economic development is predicated on access to an adequate water supply, and in my State there is inadequate hydrologic data upon which to secure both economic development and the health and welfare of Alaskan citizens. Alaska is an amazing State from a hydrological viewpoint. It is home to more than 3 million lakes--only about 100 being larger than 10 square miles--more than 12,000 rivers and uncounted thousands of streams, creeks and ponds. Together these water bodies hold about one- third of all the fresh water found in the United States. Alaska is home to a number of large rivers. The Yukon, which originates in western Canada, runs 1,400 miles--discharging from 25,000 cubic feet of water per second in early spring to more than 600,000 cubic feet per second in May during the spring thaw. The Yukon drains roughly 330,000 square miles of Alaska and Canada, about one-third of the State. Besides the Yukon, Alaska is home to nine other major rivers and creeks all running more than 300 miles in length: the Porcupine, Koyukuk, Kuskokwim, Tanana, Innoko, Colville, Noatak, Kobuk and Birch Creek. Alaska residents from early spring to fall face substantial flood threats, from spring flooding caused by breakup and ice damming to fall's heavy rains, but the State has fewer than 100 stream gaging stations operated by the U.S. Geological Survey--Alaska having less than 10 percent of the stream flow information that is taken for granted by all other States in the Nation. Alaska averages one working gage for each 10,000 square miles, while, as an example, Pacific Northwest States average one gage for each 365 square miles. To emphasize the lack of data now available for Alaska, I would point out that to equal the stream gage density of the Pacific Northwest States, my State would need to have over 1,600 total gage sites. Alaska also supports the Nation's least modern and undeveloped potable water distribution system. Water for Alaska towns outside of the more densely populated ``Railbelt'' comes predominately from surface water sources Surface water sources often result in supply/ storage problems since these surface sources freeze and are unavailable for up to half the year. The chances for water-borne contaminants to affect potable water supplies, including fecal matter from Alaska's plentiful wildlife populations, human waste from inadequate or nonexistent sewage treatment facilities, and natural mineral deposits (natural arsenic levels in mineralized zone creeks frequently exceeding EPA standards) are present and increasing. In areas that predominately depend on groundwater sources, such as the ``Railbelt,'' there is only very limited knowledge of the nature and extent of the aquifers that support those critical groundwater supplies. Extensive permafrost further complicates the potential for adverse impacts to Alaska. In portions of Southcentral Alaska where there is a dependence on groundwater as the source for an adequate healthy water supply, the availability of that supply is starting to be in jeopardy. Allocations of water need to be based on scientific data, and the data needed upon which the allocations are made is unavailable. Users of water are only beginning to realize the potential conflicts that may arise, and the limits on future economic development that may result from inadequate knowledge of the water resource, particularly in the Matanuska-Susitna Borough, on the Kenai Peninsula and to a lesser extent in portions of the Municipality of Anchorage where groundwater provided by wells is a crucial part of the State's water distribution system and where there is little known about the size, capacity, extent and recharge capability of the aquifers that these wells tap. Alaska, according to the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, still has some 16,000 homes in 71 generally Native villages not being served by piped water or enclosed water haul systems. There are still 55 villages in Alaska where up to 29 percent of the residents are not served by sanitary water systems, with more than 60 percent of residents not being served in 16 villages. Even though since Statehood the State and Federal governments have spent $1.3 billion on rural water-sanitation system improvements in Alaska, the state has an estimated need for nearly $650 million in additional funding to complete installation of a modern water- sanitation system. Planning and engineering for those locations cannot be completed without better information as to the availability and extent of supply of water and better analysis of new technologies that could be used for water system installations, including possible desalination for some island and coastal communities. For all these reasons, today I am introducing legislation authorizing the Department of the Interior's Commissioner of Reclamation and the Director of the U.S. Geological Survey to conduct a series of water resource studies in Alaska. The studies will include a survey of water treatment needs and technologies including desalination treatment, which may be applicable to the water resources development in Alaska. The study will review the need for enhancement of the National Streamflow Information Program administered by the U.S. Geological Survey. The Streamflow review will determine whether more stream gaging stations are necessary for flood forecasting, aiding resource extraction, determining the risk to the state's transportation system and for wildfire management. Groundwater resources will also be further evaluated and documented to determine the availability of water, the quality of that groundwater, and the extent of the aquifers in urban areas. This type of study, already conducted for most all other Sates in the Nation, should help Alaska better plan and design water systems and transportation infrastructure and also better prepare for floods and summer wildfires. There is literally ``water, water everywhere'' in Alaska, but too often, especially in communities such as Ketchikan that take water from surface sources, or the rapidly growing Mat-Su Valley, there may be less water to drink during unusually dry summers, There is a real and growing problem of maintaining an adequate supply of sufficient, pure water. This problem is only going to grow with a growing population and economy. This bill is designed to provide more information to help communities plan for future water needs and to help State officials plan for flood and fire safety concerns and economic development.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I think my colleague from Alaska will allow the other side to go next, if that is OK with my colleague.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. I yield a minute and a half to my colleague from Idaho, with the balance of the time to be yielded to my colleague from Alaska.

Ms. MURKOWSKI. I yield 1 minute to the Senator from Nevada.

Ms. MURKOWSKI

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a measure of benefit to my home State of Alaska, the Alaska Water Resources Act of 2005. The importance of water resource data collection to a State that has a resource-based economy cannot be overstated. Economic development is predicated on access to an adequate water supply, and in my State there is inadequate hydrologic data upon which to secure both economic development and the health and welfare of Alaskan citizens. Alaska is an amazing State from a hydrological viewpoint. It is home to more than 3 million lakes--only about 100 being larger than 10 square miles--more than 12,000 rivers and uncounted thousands of streams, creeks and ponds. Together these water bodies hold about one- third of all the fresh water found in the United States. Alaska is home to a number of large rivers. The Yukon, which originates in western Canada, runs 1,400 miles--discharging from 25,000 cubic feet of water per second in early spring to more than 600,000 cubic feet per second in May during the spring thaw. The Yukon drains roughly 330,000 square miles of Alaska and Canada, about one-third of the State. Besides the Yukon, Alaska is home to nine other major rivers and creeks all running more than 300 miles in length: the Porcupine, Koyukuk, Kuskokwim, Tanana, Innoko, Colville, Noatak, Kobuk and Birch Creek. Alaska residents from early spring to fall face substantial flood threats, from spring flooding caused by breakup and ice damming to fall's heavy rains, but the State has fewer than 100 stream gaging stations operated by the U.S. Geological Survey--Alaska having less than 10 percent of the stream flow information that is taken for granted by all other States in the Nation. Alaska averages one working gage for each 10,000 square miles, while, as an example, Pacific Northwest States average one gage for each 365 square miles. To emphasize the lack of data now available for Alaska, I would point out that to equal the stream gage density of the Pacific Northwest States, my State would need to have over 1,600 total gage sites. Alaska also supports the Nation's least modern and undeveloped potable water distribution system. Water for Alaska towns outside of the more densely populated ``Railbelt'' comes predominately from surface water sources Surface water sources often result in supply/ storage problems since these surface sources freeze and are unavailable for up to half the year. The chances for water-borne contaminants to affect potable water supplies, including fecal matter from Alaska's plentiful wildlife populations, human waste from inadequate or nonexistent sewage treatment facilities, and natural mineral deposits (natural arsenic levels in mineralized zone creeks frequently exceeding EPA standards) are present and increasing. In areas that predominately depend on groundwater sources, such as the ``Railbelt,'' there is only very limited knowledge of the nature and extent of the aquifers that support those critical groundwater supplies. Extensive permafrost further complicates the potential for adverse impacts to Alaska. In portions of Southcentral Alaska where there is a dependence on groundwater as the source for an adequate healthy water supply, the availability of that supply is starting to be in jeopardy. Allocations of water need to be based on scientific data, and the data needed upon which the allocations are made is unavailable. Users of water are only beginning to realize the potential conflicts that may arise, and the limits on future economic development that may result from inadequate knowledge of the water resource, particularly in the Matanuska-Susitna Borough, on the Kenai Peninsula and to a lesser extent in portions of the Municipality of Anchorage where groundwater provided by wells is a crucial part of the State's water distribution system and where there is little known about the size, capacity, extent and recharge capability of the aquifers that these wells tap. Alaska, according to the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, still has some 16,000 homes in 71 generally Native villages not being served by piped water or enclosed water haul systems. There are still 55 villages in Alaska where up to 29 percent of the residents are not served by sanitary water systems, with more than 60 percent of residents not being served in 16 villages. Even though since Statehood the State and Federal governments have spent $1.3 billion on rural water-sanitation system improvements in Alaska, the state has an estimated need for nearly $650 million in additional funding to complete installation of a modern water- sanitation system. Planning and engineering for those locations cannot be completed without better information as to the availability and extent of supply of water and better analysis of new technologies that could be used for water system installations, including possible desalination for some island and coastal communities. For all these reasons, today I am introducing legislation authorizing the Department of the Interior's Commissioner of Reclamation and the Director of the U.S. Geological Survey to conduct a series of water resource studies in Alaska. The studies will include a survey of water treatment needs and technologies including desalination treatment, which may be applicable to the water resources development in Alaska. The study will review the need for enhancement of the National Streamflow Information Program administered by the U.S. Geological Survey. The Streamflow review will determine whether more stream gaging stations are necessary for flood forecasting, aiding resource extraction, determining the risk to the state's transportation system and for wildfire management. Groundwater resources will also be further evaluated and documented to determine the availability of water, the quality of that groundwater, and the extent of the aquifers in urban areas. This type of study, already conducted for most all other Sates in the Nation, should help Alaska better plan and design water systems and transportation infrastructure and also better prepare for floods and summer wildfires. There is literally ``water, water everywhere'' in Alaska, but too often, especially in communities such as Ketchikan that take water from surface sources, or the rapidly growing Mat-Su Valley, there may be less water to drink during unusually dry summers, There is a real and growing problem of maintaining an adequate supply of sufficient, pure water. This problem is only going to grow with a growing population and economy. This bill is designed to provide more information to help communities plan for future water needs and to help State officials plan for flood and fire safety concerns and economic development.