Ron Wyden

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, today Senator Stabenow and I are introducing legislation designed to reduce our dependence on oil in the transportation sector by replacing it with cleaner, domestic sources of energy to power our cars, trucks, buses, tractors, and ships. Until very recently, our nation was dependent upon foreign, often unstable governments for its energy supply--particularly for the oil that fuels our transport--70 percent of which was imported from overseas. Now, recent advances in drilling technologies have uncovered abundant domestic energy resources and it is predicted that the U.S. will be a net oil and gas exporter in the near future. Today, we are introducing legislation that builds on our introduction of a similar bill last Congress which was approved by Committee, our continual work with a broad array of stakeholders and the feedback received during the series of natural gas forums held by the Energy and Natural Resources Committee. Those forums served as a reminder of the great opportunity no one imagined we'd have even a few years ago, of being able to chart our own energy future rather than relying on other countries or single technologies to drive our economy forward. While the natural gas forums served as a reminder, it is crucial that we don't just supplant reliance on oil for reliance on another single resource or technology. At the end of the day, different fuels are going to work better in different types of vehicles and in different parts of the country. For that reason, our bill does not pick technology winners and losers. It is ``technology neutral,'' ``geography neutral'' and ``market neutral.'' An alternative fuel that is readily available in one part of the country may not be readily available in every part of the country, or it may not work as well in an 18 wheel tractor-trailer as in the family car. Our bill does not choose which fuel is used where, or for what kinds of vehicles. We leave that up to the free market so that fuel providers and vehicle manufacturers can compete for what works best for their customers. This bill brings us closer to the day when conventional gas stations give way to the ``Fueling Station of the Future'' where consumers will have the option to choose between whichever fuel serves their needs. Energy legislation, including the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, have instituted a number of programs at the Department of Energy and the Environmental Protection Agency to address the need to strengthen our energy security by replacing a significant portion of the oil Americans use for transportation with alternative fuels such as electricity, natural gas, propane, biofuels, and hydrogen. However, these programs currently fail to provide workable solutions for many of the obstacles alternative fuels suppliers and alternative fuel vehicles manufacturers face when attempting to get their technologies to market. Modifying these existing programs--and bolstering them with cohesive policies enshrined in law to make them more useful for potential applicants--will help our nation exploit our newfound abundant energy resources, target climate change by incentivizing more widespread use of cleaner transportation fuels, and create jobs by catalyzing new businesses in the diverse alternative fuel and alternative fuel vehicles sector. Our bottom line goal is to help American businesses, which build vehicles and supply fuel, provide genuine alternatives to conventional fuels and engine technologies so that Americans can reduce our dependence on oil as a transportation fuel. The bill does this by providing a set of tools to promote the deployment of these technologies. In several instances, the bill modifies existing programs, rather than creating new ones. First, the bill takes the existing advanced vehicle manufacturing support program at the Department of Energy, which is now focused on providing financial support to major manufacturers of light duty vehicles, and opens it up to alternative fuel technologies. It also expands the program to component manufacturers further down the supply chain and to the production of medium and heavy trucks, buses, and transit vehicles and lifts the cap on the amount of loans that can be made to American manufacturers and their suppliers. Alternative fuel vehicles need alternative fuel. So the next major initiative in the bill is to provide financial support for the production and distribution of those alternative fuels. Again, instead of creating a whole new program to support this alternative fuel infrastructure, the bill modifies the existing clean energy Department of Energy loan guarantee program created in section 1703 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005. This loan program was aimed at financing new, innovative low-carbon electricity generation technologies. That is all well and good, but those investments do not address the very real energy security challenge facing our country from oil imports, especially since so little electricity in the U.S. is actually generated using oil. Our bill would allow this already existing program to be used for alternative fuel infrastructure. The bill includes additional measures to provide technical assistance to States, local and tribal governments, public-private partnerships, and utility companies and utility commissions to help overcome barriers to the deployment of these alternative fuel vehicles. The bill further provides worker training provisions to ensure our nation has a skilled workforce capable of making the goals of this bill a reality. Taken altogether, these provisions are designed to provide the tools for manufacturers, parts suppliers, fuel providers, transportation planners, utility regulators, and State, local, and tribal officials to deploy alternative fuel vehicles, and the fuels to power them, in numbers that make a difference and truly reduce our dependence on imported oil. Our bill has broad support from industry groups and has been endorsed by the Alliance for Automobile Manufacturers, Natural Gas Vehicles for America, Global Automakers, the American Public Gas Association, Drive Oregon, the National Electrical Manufacturers Association, and the Electric Drive Transportation Association. We ask our colleagues to stand with us in support of this bill. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. WYDEN

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

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, there certainly is a lot of discussion--and understandably so--about the fact that so often there really aren't bipartisan efforts here in the Senate on major issues. We can turn on practically any talk show in America, and the constant refrain is, they are just not working together down there. The Democrats and Republicans can't find common ground and in many instances aren't even trying. The issue before the Senate right now shows that is certainly not the case. We all understand how important this immigration issue is. It is an economic issue. It is a justice issue. It affects scores and scores of communities across the country. And for many months now here in the Senate, four Democrats and four Republicans, hour after hour after hour, have sought to come together in a bipartisan way to tackle a major issue. I certainly don't support every single provision in the bill. I am sure that is the case for most Senators. But I think in terms of its large implications, this is an extraordinarily important effort. The immigration system is broken. Our country knows it needs to be fixed. And what this shows is that we can find some common ground to really address principled bipartisanship--not just bipartisanship for the sake of patting ourselves on the back but bipartisanship in terms of actually showing that the values important to both sides of the aisle can be addressed and at the same time the Senate can come together, work together, and pass a law and actually succeed in the business we are sent here to do, which is to pass legislation. I particularly wish to commend three on our side of the aisle whom I have worked with on these and many other issues--Chairman Leahy, Senator Schumer, and, of course, our majority leader. They have constantly put the focus on trying to show that Senators will have a chance to be heard on this issue. We have had a lot of debate on it. They had literally scores and scores of amendments in the Judiciary Committee. We have had a lot of debate here on the floor of the Senate. Chairman Leahy, Senator Schumer, and Senator Reid have all indicated that Senators are going to have an extensive opportunity to be heard. But, yes, when there is a bipartisan bill produced by four Democratic leaders and four Republican leaders, those three have been resolute in saying that we are actually going to get it in front of the Senate, and I commend them for their very important work. In addition to making it clear that I think bipartisanship is valuable, I wish to highlight for a moment three amendments that I hope that I will be able to make pending and that we will be able to get votes on. In particular, I am troubled by the fact that the bill as written waives our country's environmental laws in order to secure the border. I am of the view that strengthening our immigration system should not come at the cost of throwing our environmental laws aside. These are bedrock principles with respect to protecting our environment, our public lands, and our natural resources. So I and seven other colleagues in the Senate have introduced an amendment that would strike several of the unnecessary provisions in the bill that thwart the rule of law and ensure, as we go forward with the very important security agenda in securing the border, that, as I have indicated, we don't do long-term damage to our environment that may take generations to recover from, if at all. If we are talking about waiving the laws that protect our public resources--and I know the distinguished Presiding Officer cares a great deal about these issues--we ought to waive those laws only where there is compelling evidence that it is necessary, and even then it ought to be done in a narrow and targeted way. So my first amendment I hope to be able to get pending and hope to be able to offer is amendment No. 1543. It would allow the Secretary of Homeland Security to work with the Department of the Interior and the Department of Agriculture, local landowners, and State and Indian tribes to determine if any negative impacts can be mitigated. This means that if in order to secure the border there is damage to important environmental concerns--private property, public lands, tribal lands--the Secretary could take action to reduce that damage. So if, for example, the wall along the border causes unintended flooding in a city, the Secretary would be able to look at measures such as new infrastructure, dikes, or drainage systems to prevent flooding. If a road has to be built through a wetland or the habitat of an endangered species, the Secretary would have the authority to restore wetlands or conserve habitat for that species elsewhere. All I want understood is that the Department has testified--Secretary Napolitano has testified several times before the Congress, including recent testimony before the Judiciary Committee, that the Department of Homeland Security does not need these blanket authorities to waive the environmental law. They have not requested blanket authority to waive the environmental law. I think the Secretary's view in this regard speaks volumes to the need to carefully review what the legislation does so as to make sure, when we are talking about a matter of such enormous concern--and really also setting a precedent--that we think through how to ensure that we provide the security the American people want, and at the same time, if we are talking about waiving environmental laws, at least we provide the authority to the Department to mitigate the damages in doing that, particularly given the fact that the Department has not sought the authority in the first place. They didn't seek the authority in the first place, so let's at least give them the authority to mitigate the damages. Another amendment I seek to offer is amendment No. 1544, which would simply sunset this provision to waive the environmental laws when what is called the second trigger in the legislation is met. There has been considerable interest in the committee with respect to sunset authority and provisions to do that in one additional area. We ought to make sure we sunset the provision to waive the environmental laws when the second trigger is met. Finally, I hope to be able to offer amendment No. 1545, which creates a definition for ``physical tactical infrastructure'' in the waiver of all of the environmental laws. The amendment would define it as ``roads; vehicles and pedestrian fences; port of entry barriers; lights; bridges; and towers for technology and surveillance.'' So, again, what we are talking about is not getting rid of the waiver. I understand that isn't going to happen. But let's at least mitigate these damages that I think are very real threats, and let's set forward some unambiguous terms that relate to how this waiver is going to be used. In my view these are amendments that improve the bill. They don't take away any of the authorities that are granted in this bill, but they are going to ensure that private property, public lands, and our environmental values are also going to be a priority while allowing the border to be secured as quickly as possible. So in wrapping up, let me say again for all those who may be following this debate and who have been skeptical about whether there was enough good will to do anything bipartisan here, I think the Senate, in a bipartisan way, with a pretty significant vote next week-- I will not join the parlor debates of speculating about how many Senators will vote for the bill, but I believe it is going to be a very substantial majority. It will, in fact, be a bipartisan law that is passed, that responds to a significant issue, not just some kind of issue du jour that may have come up in the last few days and all of a sudden a few Senators get interested and come to the floor. This is a major, substantive issue. It has gone on and on. It has been tackled in a bipartisan way. Initially, eight Senators were willing to stick their necks out and take a fair amount of flak, as invariably happens when trying to work on a partisan issue in a bipartisan way. Again, it is also important to acknowledge, particularly on our side of the aisle, Chairman Leahy, Senator Schumer, and Leader Reid, who have tirelessly focused on trying to make sure Senators have a chance to be heard, and have done so, and I commend them for that effort. I will conclude today by saying I think the three amendments I seek to make pending and get votes on will deal with another important issue. The bill as written waives the environmental laws in order to secure the border, and I and a number of other Senators would like, at a minimum, to make sure the Department of Homeland Security has the legal authority to mitigate the damage associated with that waiver wherever possible. We think it is particularly important that those provisions that would mitigate the damages be allowed since the Secretary has actually testified she does not need those authorities in the first place. Mr. President, with that, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. 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 Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The hearing will be held on Tuesday, July 16, 2013, at 2:30 p.m., in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. The purpose of this hearing is to receive testimony on the Bureau of Reclamation's Colorado River Basin Water Supply and Demand Study. 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 may do so by sending it to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, D.C. 20510-6150, or by e-mail to John Assini@energy .senate.gov. For further information, please contact Sara Tucker at (202) 224-6224 or John Assini at (202) 224-9313.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. 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 Energy of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The hearing will be held on Tuesday, June 25, 2013, at 2:30 p.m., in room 366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. The purpose of this oversight hearing is to receive testimony on S. 1084, S. 717 and other pending energy efficiency legislation. 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 may do so by sending it to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, DC 20510-6150, or by e-mail to Danielle_Deraneyenergy .senate.gov. For further information, please contact Lara Pierpoint at (202) 224- 6689 or Danielle Deraney at (202) 224-1219.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I rise today with Senator Grassley to introduce the Medicare Data Access for Transparency and Accountability Act. I would like to begin by thanking my friend and esteemed colleague for his unwavering commitment to greater transparency and accountability in government. This Medicare DATA Act advances that goal. Sunshine continues to be the greatest disinfectant. In that light, the Medicare DATA Act ensures all taxpayers have access to Medicare Claims Database, both to aid them in making medical decisions, and in understanding what their money is paying for in this vital, yet enormous, health program. The Medicare Claims Database is an important resource for public and private stakeholders as it captures healthcare provider payment and claims information for roughly one-third of the United States healthcare system. But why isn't this information already available? In 1978, the Department of Health Education and Welfare attempted to release this information, upon request, under the premise that accessibility to the source data was in the public interest and therefore should be made available for public consumption. An injunction by a Florida court, however, ordered otherwise. I am pleased that the Florida court has reevaluated that decision and recently lifted the injunction. This is a step in the right direction, but the decision still leaves access to this data ``opaque.'' Data requests are still subject to the Freedom of Information Act and can be denied by Health and Human Services. Passage of the Medicare DATA Act would put an end to that loophole. Information affecting the American taxpayer should be part of the public domain in a free society. With this principle in mind, I join with Senator Grassley in changing ``business as usual.'' I urge my colleagues to support this legislation so that Medicare data is finally fully transparent and available to Medicare beneficiaries and taxpayers alike. I look forward to working with my colleagues in this effort.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I rise today with Senator Grassley to introduce the Medicare Data Access for Transparency and Accountability Act. I would like to begin by thanking my friend and esteemed colleague for his unwavering commitment to greater transparency and accountability in government. This Medicare DATA Act advances that goal. Sunshine continues to be the greatest disinfectant. In that light, the Medicare DATA Act ensures all taxpayers have access to Medicare Claims Database, both to aid them in making medical decisions, and in understanding what their money is paying for in this vital, yet enormous, health program. The Medicare Claims Database is an important resource for public and private stakeholders as it captures healthcare provider payment and claims information for roughly one-third of the United States healthcare system. But why isn't this information already available? In 1978, the Department of Health Education and Welfare attempted to release this information, upon request, under the premise that accessibility to the source data was in the public interest and therefore should be made available for public consumption. An injunction by a Florida court, however, ordered otherwise. I am pleased that the Florida court has reevaluated that decision and recently lifted the injunction. This is a step in the right direction, but the decision still leaves access to this data ``opaque.'' Data requests are still subject to the Freedom of Information Act and can be denied by Health and Human Services. Passage of the Medicare DATA Act would put an end to that loophole. Information affecting the American taxpayer should be part of the public domain in a free society. With this principle in mind, I join with Senator Grassley in changing ``business as usual.'' I urge my colleagues to support this legislation so that Medicare data is finally fully transparent and available to Medicare beneficiaries and taxpayers alike. I look forward to working with my colleagues in this effort.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a hearing has been scheduled before the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The hearing will be held on Tuesday, June 25, 2013, at 10 a.m., in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. The purpose of this oversight hearing is to receive testimony on the challenges and opportunities for improving forest management on Federal lands. 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 may do so by sending it to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, D.C. 20510-6150, or by e-mail to John_Assini@energy .senate.gov. For further information, please contact Michele Miranda at (202) 224- 7556 or John Assini at (202) 224-9313.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a hearing scheduled before the Subcommittee on Water and Power of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources has been postponed. This hearing was scheduled to be held on Tuesday, June 11, 2013, at 10 a.m., in room 366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. The purpose of the hearing was to receive testimony on the November 6, 2012, referendum on the political status of Puerto Rico and the administration's response. For further information, please contact Allen Stayman at (202) 224- 7865 or Danielle Deraney at (202) 224-1219. committee on rules and administration

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, today I am pleased to join Senators Portman, Blumenthal, Cantwell, Brown, and Kirk to introduce the Child Sex Trafficking Data and Response Act of 2013. This bipartisan legislation will help us to better understand and combat the unforgivable and fast-growing criminal enterprise of trafficking children for sex right here in the U.S. We cannot bury our heads in the sand and ignore this terrible problem. Child victims of sex trafficking need and deserve the full range of coordinated assistance and care required to help them recover from this trauma. Unfortunately, some people still refuse to acknowledge that American children are being bought and sold for sex and they criticize the few estimates surrounding trafficking rates that do exist. As a policymaker, it is hard to advance an issue when there are critics who deny its very existence. For those of us who have spoken to law enforcement officers, child welfare workers and judges who work with these victims every day, we know that denying that the problem exists will not make it go away. I became engaged in efforts to address child trafficking a few years ago when I had the opportunity to accompany police officers along 82nd Avenue in my hometown of Portland. I will never forget a 15-year-old girl working out there with the tools of the trade--a cell phone to stay in constant contact with her pimp and report how much money she had made; a 15-inch butcher knife to try to protect herself; and, a purse full of condoms. This problem does exist, but we still do not know its full scope--we do not know how many children in the U.S. are victimized by pimps, Johns and traffickers every year. Quantifying the problem, as simple a step as that may seem, is truly is the first step in bringing these children out of the shadows to help them progress from victims to survivors. The Child Sex Trafficking Data and Response Act of 2013 provides a framework for systematically identifying and tracking the number of child trafficking victims who are in our Nation's foster care system. It would further require child welfare agencies to promptly report information on missing and abducted children to law enforcement and would require law enforcement authorities to notify the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, NCMEC, when a child is missing from State care. The bill would also take steps to ensure children who are sex trafficked or exploited are treated as victims, not criminals. The protections, services and protocols established for abused and neglected children within the child welfare system are rarely extended to trafficked children and youth, and in most States, such children aren't even categorized as victims. Instead, they are often sent to the juvenile justice system and criminalized for being raped and trafficked. The Child Sex Trafficking Data and Response Act would amend Federal law to say all child victims of sex trafficking are victims of abuse and neglect. It would require state plans, under the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act, designed to improve child protection services contain: provisions and procedures requiring identification and assessment of all reports involving children known or suspected to be victims of sex trafficking; provisions and procedures for training child protective services workers to identify and provide comprehensive services for children who are victims of sex trafficking; a description of efforts to coordinate with State law enforcement, juvenile justice, and social service agencies such as runaway and homeless youth shelters to serve these victims; and an annual State data report on the number of children identified as known or suspected to be victims of trafficking. These steps alone will not solve the problem before us. These are still some very daunting problems that need to be overcome, and the current fiscal climate alone presents a significant barrier to providing resources needed by victims, child welfare workers, law enforcement and service providers. Still, this is an important step toward making sure that vulnerable foster children are protected from pimps, Johns and traffickers.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, today I am pleased to join Senators Portman, Blumenthal, Cantwell, Brown, and Kirk to introduce the Child Sex Trafficking Data and Response Act of 2013. This bipartisan legislation will help us to better understand and combat the unforgivable and fast-growing criminal enterprise of trafficking children for sex right here in the U.S. We cannot bury our heads in the sand and ignore this terrible problem. Child victims of sex trafficking need and deserve the full range of coordinated assistance and care required to help them recover from this trauma. Unfortunately, some people still refuse to acknowledge that American children are being bought and sold for sex and they criticize the few estimates surrounding trafficking rates that do exist. As a policymaker, it is hard to advance an issue when there are critics who deny its very existence. For those of us who have spoken to law enforcement officers, child welfare workers and judges who work with these victims every day, we know that denying that the problem exists will not make it go away. I became engaged in efforts to address child trafficking a few years ago when I had the opportunity to accompany police officers along 82nd Avenue in my hometown of Portland. I will never forget a 15-year-old girl working out there with the tools of the trade--a cell phone to stay in constant contact with her pimp and report how much money she had made; a 15-inch butcher knife to try to protect herself; and, a purse full of condoms. This problem does exist, but we still do not know its full scope--we do not know how many children in the U.S. are victimized by pimps, Johns and traffickers every year. Quantifying the problem, as simple a step as that may seem, is truly is the first step in bringing these children out of the shadows to help them progress from victims to survivors. The Child Sex Trafficking Data and Response Act of 2013 provides a framework for systematically identifying and tracking the number of child trafficking victims who are in our Nation's foster care system. It would further require child welfare agencies to promptly report information on missing and abducted children to law enforcement and would require law enforcement authorities to notify the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, NCMEC, when a child is missing from State care. The bill would also take steps to ensure children who are sex trafficked or exploited are treated as victims, not criminals. The protections, services and protocols established for abused and neglected children within the child welfare system are rarely extended to trafficked children and youth, and in most States, such children aren't even categorized as victims. Instead, they are often sent to the juvenile justice system and criminalized for being raped and trafficked. The Child Sex Trafficking Data and Response Act would amend Federal law to say all child victims of sex trafficking are victims of abuse and neglect. It would require state plans, under the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act, designed to improve child protection services contain: provisions and procedures requiring identification and assessment of all reports involving children known or suspected to be victims of sex trafficking; provisions and procedures for training child protective services workers to identify and provide comprehensive services for children who are victims of sex trafficking; a description of efforts to coordinate with State law enforcement, juvenile justice, and social service agencies such as runaway and homeless youth shelters to serve these victims; and an annual State data report on the number of children identified as known or suspected to be victims of trafficking. These steps alone will not solve the problem before us. These are still some very daunting problems that need to be overcome, and the current fiscal climate alone presents a significant barrier to providing resources needed by victims, child welfare workers, law enforcement and service providers. Still, this is an important step toward making sure that vulnerable foster children are protected from pimps, Johns and traffickers.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr President, I wish to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a business meeting has been scheduled before the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The business meeting will be held on Tuesday, June 18, 2013, at 10:00 a.m. in room 366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. The purpose of the business meeting is to consider pending calendar business. For further information, please contact Sam Fowler at (202) 224-7571 or Abigail Campbell at (202) 224-4905.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a hearing scheduled before the Subcommittee on Water and Power of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources has been postponed. This hearing was scheduled to be held on Thursday, June 6, 2013, at 2:30 p.m., in room 366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. The purpose of this oversight hearing is to examine the progress made by Native Hawaiians toward stated goals of the Hawaiian Homelands Commission Act. For further information, please contact Cisco Minthorn at (202) 224- 4756 or Danielle Deraney at (202) 224-1219. committee on energy and natural resources

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a hearing has been scheduled before the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The hearing will be held on Tuesday, June 11, 2013, at 10 a.m., in room 366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. The purpose of the hearing is to receive testimony on the November 6, 2012 referendum on the political status of Puerto Rico and the Administration's response. 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 may do so by sending it to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, D.C. 20510-6150, or by e-mail to danielle_deraney@energy.senate.gov. For further information, please contact Allen Stayman at (202) 224- 7865 or Danielle Deraney at (202) 224-1219. committee on indian affairs

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, today I am being joined by my colleagues Senators Collins, Merkley, and King on the introduction of the Storage Technology for Renewable and Green Energy Act of 2013 or the STORAGE 2013 Act. The purpose of the bill is to promote the deployment of energy storage technologies to make the electric grid operate more efficiently and help manage intermittent renewable energy generation from wind, solar, and other sources that vary with the time of day and the weather. Traditionally, peak demand has been met by building more generation and transmission facilities, many of which sit idle much of the time. The Electric Power Research Institute's White Paper on storage technology observed that 25 percent of the equipment and capacity of the U.S. electric distribution system and 10 percent of the generation and transmission system is needed less than 400 hours a year. Peak generation is also often met with the least efficient, most costly power plants. Energy storage systems offer an alternative to simply building more generation and transmission to meet peak demand because they allow the current system to meet peak demands by storing less expensive off-peak power, from the most cost-efficient plants, for use during peak demand. The growth of renewable energy from wind and solar and other intermittent renewable sources, like wave and tidal energy, raises yet another challenge for the electric grid that storage can help address. These renewable sources deliver power at times of the day or night when they might not be needed or fluctuate with the weather. Energy storage technology allows these intermittent sources to store power as it is generated and allow it to be dispatched when it is most needed and in a predictable, steady of stream of electricity no longer at the vagaries of weather conditions. And equally important, it allows this intermittent generation to more closely match demand. Instead of trying to find a place to sell power at 3:00 am in the morning when demand is down, wind farms for example would be able to sell their power at 3:00 pm in the afternoon when demand is up. The STORAGE 2013 Act is substantially similar to the STORAGE Act of 2011 I introduced last Congress. It offers investment tax credits for three categories of energy storage facilities that temporarily store energy for delivery or use at a later time. The bill is technology neutral and does not pick storage technology ``winners'' and ``losers'' either in terms of the storage technology that is used or in terms of the source of the energy that is stored. The electricity can come from a wind farm or it can come for a coal or nuclear plant. Pumped hydro, compressed air, batteries, flywheels, and thermal storage are all eligible technologies as are smart-grid enabled plug-in electric vehicles. First, the STORAGE 2013 Act provides a 20 percent investment tax credit of up to $40 million per project for storage systems connected to the electric grid and distribution system. A total of $1.5 billion in these investment credits are available for these grid connected systems. Developers would have to apply to the Treasury Department and DOE for the credits, similar to the process used for the green energy manufacturing credits the ``48C'' program. This is a 20 percent credit so that means the actual cost of the project that would be eligible for the full credit would be $200 million. The act also provides a 30 percent investment tax credit of up to $1 million per project to businesses for on-site storage, such as an ice- storage facility in on office building, where ice is made at night using low-cost, off-peak power and then used to help air-condition the building luring the day while reducing peak demand. This is a 30 percent credit so the cost of the actual projects that would get the full credit amount would be around $3.3 million. One change from last year's version of the bill is that the minimum size for storage systems to be eligible for this credit is now 5 kWh, whereas it was 20 kWh before. 20 kWh is a reasonable size or industrial energy consumers and big-box stores, but a 5 kWh limit is a size that makes sense for small businesses. This change will allow small businesses to participate in pioneering storage on the grid, and will incentivize storage companies to create leasing models for residential users. Leasing models are proving very successful at increasing grid- connected residential solar, and this credit will open up a whole new market for storage to follow suit. But if homeowners want to install storage on their own, they will be able to. The Act also provides for 30 percent tax credit for homeowners for on-site storage projects to store off-peak electricity from solar panels or from the grid for later use during peak hours. As the EPRI white paper noted ``(d)espite the large anticipated need for energy storage solutions within the electric enterprise, very few grid-integrated storage installations are in actual operation in the United States today.'' The purpose of the STORAGE 2013 Act is to help jump start the deployment of these storage solutions so that renewable energy technologies can increase their economic value to the electric grid while reducing their power integration costs as well as to improve the overall efficiency of the electrical system. I urge my colleagues to take a closer look at what storage technologies can do to help reduce the cost of electricity and improve the performance of the electric grid and renewable energy technologies. If they do, I am confident my colleagues will join Senators Collins, Merkley, and King in supporting this bipartisan legislation. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, today I am being joined by my colleagues Senators Collins, Merkley, and King on the introduction of the Storage Technology for Renewable and Green Energy Act of 2013 or the STORAGE 2013 Act. The purpose of the bill is to promote the deployment of energy storage technologies to make the electric grid operate more efficiently and help manage intermittent renewable energy generation from wind, solar, and other sources that vary with the time of day and the weather. Traditionally, peak demand has been met by building more generation and transmission facilities, many of which sit idle much of the time. The Electric Power Research Institute's White Paper on storage technology observed that 25 percent of the equipment and capacity of the U.S. electric distribution system and 10 percent of the generation and transmission system is needed less than 400 hours a year. Peak generation is also often met with the least efficient, most costly power plants. Energy storage systems offer an alternative to simply building more generation and transmission to meet peak demand because they allow the current system to meet peak demands by storing less expensive off-peak power, from the most cost-efficient plants, for use during peak demand. The growth of renewable energy from wind and solar and other intermittent renewable sources, like wave and tidal energy, raises yet another challenge for the electric grid that storage can help address. These renewable sources deliver power at times of the day or night when they might not be needed or fluctuate with the weather. Energy storage technology allows these intermittent sources to store power as it is generated and allow it to be dispatched when it is most needed and in a predictable, steady of stream of electricity no longer at the vagaries of weather conditions. And equally important, it allows this intermittent generation to more closely match demand. Instead of trying to find a place to sell power at 3:00 am in the morning when demand is down, wind farms for example would be able to sell their power at 3:00 pm in the afternoon when demand is up. The STORAGE 2013 Act is substantially similar to the STORAGE Act of 2011 I introduced last Congress. It offers investment tax credits for three categories of energy storage facilities that temporarily store energy for delivery or use at a later time. The bill is technology neutral and does not pick storage technology ``winners'' and ``losers'' either in terms of the storage technology that is used or in terms of the source of the energy that is stored. The electricity can come from a wind farm or it can come for a coal or nuclear plant. Pumped hydro, compressed air, batteries, flywheels, and thermal storage are all eligible technologies as are smart-grid enabled plug-in electric vehicles. First, the STORAGE 2013 Act provides a 20 percent investment tax credit of up to $40 million per project for storage systems connected to the electric grid and distribution system. A total of $1.5 billion in these investment credits are available for these grid connected systems. Developers would have to apply to the Treasury Department and DOE for the credits, similar to the process used for the green energy manufacturing credits the ``48C'' program. This is a 20 percent credit so that means the actual cost of the project that would be eligible for the full credit would be $200 million. The act also provides a 30 percent investment tax credit of up to $1 million per project to businesses for on-site storage, such as an ice- storage facility in on office building, where ice is made at night using low-cost, off-peak power and then used to help air-condition the building luring the day while reducing peak demand. This is a 30 percent credit so the cost of the actual projects that would get the full credit amount would be around $3.3 million. One change from last year's version of the bill is that the minimum size for storage systems to be eligible for this credit is now 5 kWh, whereas it was 20 kWh before. 20 kWh is a reasonable size or industrial energy consumers and big-box stores, but a 5 kWh limit is a size that makes sense for small businesses. This change will allow small businesses to participate in pioneering storage on the grid, and will incentivize storage companies to create leasing models for residential users. Leasing models are proving very successful at increasing grid- connected residential solar, and this credit will open up a whole new market for storage to follow suit. But if homeowners want to install storage on their own, they will be able to. The Act also provides for 30 percent tax credit for homeowners for on-site storage projects to store off-peak electricity from solar panels or from the grid for later use during peak hours. As the EPRI white paper noted ``(d)espite the large anticipated need for energy storage solutions within the electric enterprise, very few grid-integrated storage installations are in actual operation in the United States today.'' The purpose of the STORAGE 2013 Act is to help jump start the deployment of these storage solutions so that renewable energy technologies can increase their economic value to the electric grid while reducing their power integration costs as well as to improve the overall efficiency of the electrical system. I urge my colleagues to take a closer look at what storage technologies can do to help reduce the cost of electricity and improve the performance of the electric grid and renewable energy technologies. If they do, I am confident my colleagues will join Senators Collins, Merkley, and King in supporting this bipartisan legislation. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. 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, June 6, 2013, at 2:30 p.m., in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. The purpose of this oversight hearing is to examine the progress made by Native Hawaiians toward stated goals of the Hawaiian Homelands Commission Act. 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 may do so by sending it to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, D.C. 20510-6150, or by e-mail to danielle_deraney@energy .senate.gov. For further information, please contact Cisco Minthorn at (202) 224- 4756 or Danielle Deraney at (202) 224-1219. Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a hearing has been scheduled before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The hearing will be held on Thursday, June 6, 2013, at 9:30 a.m. in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. The purpose of the hearing is to review the programs and activities of the Department of the Interior. 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 it to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, 304 Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, DC 20510-6150, or by email to john_assini@energy.senate.gov. For further information, please contact David Brooks (202) 224-9863 or John Assini (202) 224-9313.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a hearing has been scheduled before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The hearing will be held on Tuesday, June 4, 2013, at 10 a.m. in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. The purpose of this hearing is to explore wildland fire management. 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 it to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, 304 Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, DC 20510-6150, or by email to John_Assini@energy.senate.gov. For further information, please contact Meghan Conklin (202) 224-8046 or John Assini (202) 224-9313.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate, on May 20, 2013, at 10 a.m., in SH-216 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, to continue its executive business meeting.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I am pleased that the Senate will be voting on the confirmation of Judge Michael McShane today to serve as U.S. district court judge for the District of Oregon. Judge McShane is a product of the judicial selection committee that I have organized at home in Oregon. Senator Merkley has been in full support of this effort. Judge McShane is coming forward for consideration by the Senate as a result of the work of that special judicial selection committee made up of individuals with a variety of different philosophical views, and I am very pleased that the President has seen fit to send Judge McShane's name to the Senate. In a sentence, Judge McShane has a heart for people, a head for the law, and a high-minded sense of justice. I start by way of saying he certainly has outstanding academic credentials. He was a magna cum laude graduate from Gonzaga University. He attended the Northwestern School of Law at Lewis and Clark College where he graduated in the top 10 percent of his class, and his accomplishments in the courtroom have earned him very high ratings by the American Bar Association. From an academic standpoint, Judge McShane is clearly qualified for this position. What I feel particularly strongly about--and what was evidently very important to our judicial selection committee--is that he has been an extraordinary member of our community. He always steps up when asked to help his community. For instance, he stepped up when he was called and asked to be an advocate for inner- city and HIV-positive youngsters. While in these various leadership and volunteer roles, he has always come forward, not just to help but also to come up with innovative approaches in terms of his work with kids. We especially see this in his advocacy for at-risk youngsters in the Job Corps Program. Judge McShane brings these young people into his courtroom as interns to help with the day-to-day operations where they are given the opportunity to see the inner workings of our judicial system. In many instances Judge McShane literally guides them through the process and sets about to make it possible for them to be involved in ways we normally would not think of when we are looking at the role of a judge. For example, in many cases Judge McShane buys sport coats and khakis for these youngsters who might otherwise feel uncomfortable in a courtroom setting. Judge McShane, in his own words, has been known to say: I want to make sure those young people have a chance to ``blossom.'' Those are the words he uses. He makes it possible for them to get the sport coats and khakis with his own money so they can participate in this unique training. This past year he was awarded the 2012 Oregon State Bar President's Public Service Award for his service to the community. He is involved in the Northwestern School of Law mentoring program, and in 2009 he was named the law school's Mentor of the Year. Also, through the classroom law project Judge McShane presides over Summer Law Camp for inner-city kids. On top of that, Judge McShane plays an important role as a foster--and now adoptive--parent through the Oregon Department of Human Services. We looked at that kind of community caring, and we said this is truly an exceptional individual. We juxtaposed that wonderful record of community service alongside of his legal track record. Judge McShane began his legal career as an attorney with the Metropolitan Public Defender's Office in Portland. We all understand the importance of public defenders. In 1997, as a result of his good work, he was appointed by the Oregon Supreme Court as a full-time pro tem judge. For the last decade he has been an adjunct professor at his alma mater, the Northwestern School of Law at Lewis and Clark College, where he teaches trial advocacy and the criminal practice seminar. Among the many reasons I believe he is academically and professionally very qualified to be a judge is because his litigation experience includes both complex criminal and civil cases. He is the senior member of the Multnomah County Circuit Court's Death Penalty Panel and presided over more capital cases than any other sitting judge in our State. He has been a proven advocate for evidence-based sentencing, and he has a proof-based sentencing model for driving under the influence of intoxicants offenders that has now become the standard in Multnomah County. It is for all of those reasons--especially his track record in terms of community service as well as those outstanding professional experiences starting as a public defender and teaching in the classroom--that I am very hopeful the Senate will agree with me on a bipartisan basis that Judge McShane is qualified to serve as the U.S. district court judge for the District of Oregon. As I indicated, Judge McShane has a heart for people, a head for the law, and a high-minded sense of justice. We have a long history in our State, as I think the President pro tempore of the Senate is aware, of some of those who have been part of our network of distinguished judges, and I have every confidence Judge McShane will join that list. I thank Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Leahy and Ranking Member Grassley for advancing Judge McShane's confirmation through the committee. I also wish to thank Leader Reid and Minority Leader McConnell for bringing this nomination to the floor, and I look forward to the vote we will have later today. I hope my colleagues, on a bipartisan basis, will vote to confirm Judge Michael McShane as U.S. district court judge for the District of Oregon. I yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum.