Northern California Coastal Wild Heritage Wilderness Act

Mr. President, I am pleased to join Senator Domenici, Chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, and my colleagues Senator Lieberman, Senator Kyl, Senator Reid, Senator Bayh, and Senator Inouye, in introducing legislation that affirms the priority and importance of hydrogen programs in Federal research and development initiatives and charts a course of action toward the ``hydrogen economy.'' The legislation reauthorizes the hydrogen programs in the Department of Energy and strengthens the Federal interagency effort to promote hydrogen research and development programs. It establishes a new program to demonstrate hydrogen technologies and their integration with fuel cells at Federal, State, and local government facilities.

Growing numbers of my colleagues in the Senate and in the House have indicated their interest in and commitment to promoting a hydrogen economy for the future. This commitment comes from a substantial legacy in the House and the Senate. This bill carries the names of two former Congressmen--the late George E. Brown, Jr., and Robert S. Walker--to honor their formidable and dedicated advocacy of hydrogen as a fuel source. In the Senate, my predecessor, Senator Spark Matsunaga, created the first formal hydrogen research program in this country, designed to accelerate development of a domestic capability to produce an economically renewable energy source. He introduced legislation in 1982 and his perseverance led to the Matsunaga Hydrogen Act, enacted in 1990 shortly after his death. When I succeeded Spark in the Senate, I took up the cause of hydrogen and continue to believe that it is one of our best hopes for independence from fossil fuels.

The Hydrogen Future Act of 1996, which followed the Matsunaga Hydrogen Act, expanded the research, development, and demonstration program. It authorized activities leading to production, storage, transformation, and use of hydrogen for industrial, residential, transportation, and utility applications. It has enjoyed bipartisan support in Congress.

More recently in the 107th Congress, I have worked closely with Senator Harkin and my colleagues on the Energy Committee to reauthorize the Hydrogen Future Act. We were able to include it in the Energy Policy Act of 2002, the comprehensive energy policy bill considered by the Senate during the spring of 2002. While the Senate and House were unable to come to agreement on the omnibus bill itself, progress was made on the research and development provisions, including hydrogen. I am pleased that many of my colleagues have begun to recognize the potential of hydrogen as a clean source of energy. I expect the numbers will only increase.

You may well ask, ``Why do we need the Hydrogen Future Act of 2003 when we have the President's initiatives for hydrogen?'' Because we need to reauthorize the underlying Federal framework for the direction of and investment in hydrogen research and development. The authorization for the program expired at the end of calendar year 2001. While I share the President's enthusiasm for hydrogen, I believe we must provide a robust legislative foundation for research and development involving hydrogen--for fuel cells, for demonstration projects at Government facilities, stationary and mobile projects, and near- and short-term goals, as well as long-term goals. The Hydrogen Future Act of 2003 reauthorizes and improves this strong foundation. I like to call my bill a ``workhorse'' bill. It is not fancy, but we need it and it gets the job done.

The bill highlights hydrogen's potential as an efficient and environmentally friendly source of energy. It emphasizes the need for strong partnerships between the Federal Government, industry, and academia; and it underscores the importance of hydrogen research. The bill also encourages private sector investment and cost sharing for the development of hydrogen as an energy source. These basic steps will move hydrogen closer to being a fuel we can rely on in many different aspects of our lives.

In these days of soaring energy prices, oil cartels, air pollution, global climate change and greenhouse gases, hydrogen is a dazzling alternative. We can have a zero-pollution fuel. It can be produced domestically, ending our dependence on foreign oil. The question is not whether there will be a hydrogen age but when.

Hydrogen as a fuel can help us resolve our energy problems and satisfy much of the world's energy needs. I am convinced that sometime in the 21st century, hydrogen will join electricity as one of our Nation's primary energy carriers, and hydrogen will ultimately be produced from renewable sources.

In the next twenty years, increasing concerns about global climate change and energy security will help bring about the penetration of hydrogen in several niche markets. The growth of fuel cell technology will allow the introduction of hydrogen in both the transportation and electricity sectors. I realize that fossil fuels are and will continue to be a significant long-term transitional resource as we move toward renewables. I am optimistic, however, that in my lifetime I will be able to see hospitals, homes, military bases and cars running on locally-produced sources of hydrogen.

Clearly, this is a long-term vision for hydrogen energy as a renewable resource. Progress on hydrogen technology is being made, and challenges and barriers are being surmounted, at an accelerating pace on a global scale. According to the Japanese Automobile Manufacturers Association, Toyota and Honda will sell or lease fuel cell vehicles in the U.S. and Japan this year. Ford Motor Company is now showing its new hydrogen powered prototype, the Ford Model U. Fuel cells for distributed stationary power are being commercialized and installed in various locations in the United States and worldwide. General Motors recently unveiled a stationary, hydrogen-powered generator that could be used to provide energy for homes and businesses. Transit bus demonstrations are underway in the U.S. and Europe. The Nation's capital city, Washington, DC, is one of the cities participating in the project.

We are all familiar with Iceland's far-sighted bid to become the world's first hydrogen-based economy. It has already made great strides in using renewable resources for its heating and electricity needs. The Nation is committed to transforming its remaining fossil fuel-based transportation sector, and its economically important fishing fleet, to hydrogen power. Iceland will have no need to import oil. Now there is a revolutionary thought!

Closer to home, I am particularly pleased that the State of Hawaii is taking the lead in ushering in the hydrogen era. The State has identified hydrogen-based renewable fuels, and the jobs it can create, as a high priority, high-tech opportunity that can jump-start and diversify our economy. The

cost of electricity and gasoline in Hawaii are important incentives for finding cheaper, home-grown power. The Hawaii Natural Energy Institute of the University of Hawaii concluded that large-scale hydrogen use for transportation can be competitive this decade.

I am particularly pleased with the public-private partnership between the University of Hawaii's Natural Energy Institute, the Naval Research Laboratory, United Technologies Fuel Cells, and Hawaiian Electric Company. In January 2002, the Institute announced a partnership with the Department of Defense to establish a hydrogen fuel cell test facility in Honolulu. The facility will house up to eight state-of-the art fuel cell test stands and related operations supporting fuel cell development. The Institute has made Hawaii a leader in the development and testing of advanced fuel cell systems and fuels processing.

In California, the State's zero emissions vehicle requirements favor early introduction of hydrogen-powered vehicles. The city of Richmond, CA, opened the area's first hydrogen fueling station in October, 2002. The hydrogen fueling station looks like a gasoline pump, and can supply the daily fueling needs of a small fleet of vehicles at a fueling rate of one to two minutes per vehicle. These are important initiatives and illustrate the value of public-private partnerships along the pathway to a different energy source that requires an entirely different infrastructure.

Despite the progress, problems and challenges remain. First, hydrogen production costs from fossil and renewable energy sources remain high. Second, attractive low-cost storage technologies are not available. Third, the infrastructure is inadequate. We need to address these challenges and barriers if we are to enjoy the benefits of an efficient and environmentally friendly energy sources.

An aggressive research and development program can help us overcome these challenges by reducing production costs from fossil and renewable sources, advancing storage technologies, and addressing safety concerns with efforts in establishing codes and standards. Our Nation needs a sustained and focused research, development, and demonstration program to make hydrogen a viable source of energy.

The strategy should focus on mid-term and long-term goals. We must support development of technologies that enable distributed electric- generation fuel cell systems and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles for transportation applications. For the long term, we should look to hydrogen technologies that enhance renewable systems and offer us the promise of clean, abundant fuels.

The current Hydrogen Program, administered by the Department of Energy, supports a broad range of research and development projects in the areas of hydrogen production, storage, and use in a safe and cost- effective manner. Some of these new technologies may become available for wider use in the next few years. The most promising include advanced natural gas- and biomass-based hydrogen production technologies, high pressure gaseous and cryogas storage systems, and reversible Proton Exchange Membrane, PEM, fuel cell systems. Other projects lay the groundwork for long range opportunities. These activities need continued support if the Nation is to enjoy the benefits of a clean energy source.

The Hydrogen Program utilizes the talents of our national laboratories and our universities. The Lawrence Livermore, Los Alamos, Sandia, and Oak Ridge National Laboratories, as well as Jet Propulsion Laboratory and National Renewable Energy Laboratory, are involved in the program. The DOE Field Office at Golden, Colorado, and Nevada Operations Office in Nevada are also involved. University-led centers- of-excellence have been established at the University of Miami and the University of Hawaii. U.S. participation in the International Energy Agency contributes to the advancement of DOE hydrogen research through international cooperation. The program has also built strong links with the industry. This has resulted in strong industry participation and cost sharing. Cooperation between government, industry, universities, and the national laboratories is key to the successful development and commercialization of new and environmentally friendly energy technologies.

Today we are introducing legislation that reauthorizes and expands the Hydrogen Future Act of 1996. It highlights the need for a strong partnership between the Federal government, industry, and academia, and the importance of continued support for hydrogen research. It fosters collaboration between Federal agencies, state and local governments, universities, and industry, and modifies the current cost-sharing requirements to enable more participation in research projects by small companies. It adds provisions for the demonstration of hydrogen technologies at government facilities to expedite wider application of these technologies. The bill includes language to encourage international activities where appropriate in the DOE programs, both because of the need to develop world markets for our products and to encourage international development on a sustainable path. The legislation clarifies the composition of the Hydrogen Technical Advisory Panel that oversees the program for DOE and enhances inter- agency and inter-governmental cooperation in the hydrogen program.

The legislation we are introducing today authorizes $300 million over the next five years for research and development for hydrogen production, storage and use. This will allow advancement of technologies such as smaller-scale production systems that are applicable to distributed-generation and vehicle applications, advanced pressure vessels, photobiological and photocatalytic production of hydrogen, and carbon nanotubes, graphite nanofibers, and fullerenes.

The bill also authorizes $135 million for conducting integrated demonstrations of hydrogen technologies at governmental facilities. This provision will help secure industry participation through competitive solicitations for technology development and testing. It will test the viability of hydrogen production, storage, and use, and lead to the development of hydrogen-based operating experience acceptable to meet safety codes and standards.

By supporting this bill, we will be ushering in a new era of non- polluting energy. I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on July 21, 2004, at 9:30 a.m., in open session to consider the following nominations:

1. Vice Admiral Timothy J. Keating, USN, for appointment to the grade of Admiral and to be Commander, United States Northern Command/ Commander, North American Aerospace Defense Command;

2. Lieutenant General Bantz J. Craddock, USA, for appointment to the grade of General and to be Commander, United States Southern Command;

3. Peter Cyril Wyche Flory to be Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Policy; and

4. Valerie Lynn Baldwin to be Assistant Secretary of the Army for Financial Management and Comptroller.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking, Housing, and

Urban Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, July 21, 2004, at 10 a.m., to conduct an oversight hearing on ``Regulation N.M.S. and Developments in Market Structure.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be authorized to meet during the session on Wednesday, July 21, 2004, at 10 a.m., to hear testimony on ``Bridging the Tax Gap.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, July 21, 2004 at 9:30 a.m. to hold a hearing on ``The Multilateral Development Banks.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Governmental Affairs be authorized to meet on Wednesday, July 21, 2004, at 10 a.m., to hold a business meeting to consider pending committee business.

Agenda

Legislation

1. S. 1230, a bill to provide for additional responsibilities for the Chief Information Officer of the Department of Homeland Security relating to geospatial information.

2. S. 2347, a bill to amend the District of Columbia Access Act of 1999 to permanently authorize the public school and private school tuition assistance programs established under the Act.

3. S. 2409, a bill to provide for continued health benefits coverage for certain federal employees.

4. S. 2628, a bill to amend chapter 23 of title 5, United States Code, to clarify the disclosures of information protected from prohibited personnel practices, require a statement in nondisclosure policies, forms, and agreements that such policies, forms, and agreements conform with certain disclosure protections, provide certain authority for the Special Counsel, and for other purposes.

5. S. 2536, the Homeland Security Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Protection Act of 2004.

6. S. 2635, a bill to establish an intergovernmental grant program to identify and develop homeland security information, equipment, capabilities, technologies, and services to further the homeland security needs of Federal, State, and local governments.

7. S. 2657, a bill to amend part III of title 5, United States Code, to provide for the establishment of programs under which supplemental dental and vision benefits are made available to Federal employees, retirees, and their dependents, to expand the contracting authority of the Office of Personnel Management, and for other purposes.

8. S. 2639, a bill to reauthorize the Congressional Award Act.

9. S. 2275, the High Risk Nonprofit Security Enhancement Act of 2004.

10. S. 593, Reservists Pay Security Act of 2003.

11. H.R. 3797, the 2004 District of Columbia Omnibus Authorization Act.

Post Office Naming Bills

1. S. 2501/H.R. 4427, a bill to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 73 South Euclid Avenue in Montauk, New York, as the ``Perry B. Duryea, Jr. Post Office''.

2. S. 2640, a bill to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 1050 North Hills Boulevard in Reno, Nevada, as the ``Guardians of Freedom Memorial Post Office Building'' and to authorize the installation of a plaque at such site, and for other purposes.

3. H.R. 3340, an act to redesignate the facilities of the United States Postal Service located at 7715 and 7748 S. Cottage Grove Avenue in Chicago, Illinois, as the ``James E. Worsham Post Office'' and the ``James E. Worsham Carrier Annex Building'', respectively, and for other purposes.

4. H.R. 4222, an act to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 550 Nebraska Avenue in Kansas City, Kansas, as the ``Newell George Post Office Building''.

5. H.R. 4327, an act to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 7450 Natural Bridge Road in St. Louis, Missouri, as the ``Vitilas `Veto' Reid Post Office Building''.

6. H.R. 4380, an act to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 4737 Mile Stretch Drive in Holiday, Florida, as the ``Sergeant First Class Paul Ray Smith Post Office Building''.

Nominations

1. Neil McPhine to be Chairman, Merit Systems Protection Board.

2. Barbara J. Sapin to be a Member, Merit Systems Protection Board.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions be authorized to meet in Executive Session during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, July 21, 2004.

Agenda

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Indian Affairs be authorized to meet on Wednesday, July 21, 2004, at 2 p.m. in Room 216 of the Hart Senate Office Building to conduct an oversight hearing on pending legislation to reauthorize the Indian Health Care Improvement Act.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Indian Affairs be authorized to meet on Wednesday, July 21, 2004, at 10 a.m. in Room 485 of the Russell Senate Office Building to conduct a business meeting on pending Committee matters, to be followed immediately by a hearing on S. 519, the Native American Capital Formation and Economic Development Act of 2003.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet to conduct a hearing on Wednesday, July 21, 2004, at 10 a.m., on ``An Overview of the Radiation Exposure Compensation Program'' in the Dirksen Senate Office Building room 226.

Witness List

Panel I: Jeffrey S. Bucholtz, Deputy Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division, Department of Justice, Washington, DC.

Panel II: Helen Bandley Houghton, San Antonio, TX; Jeffrey Thompson, San Antonio, TX; Jeffrey Thompson, Jacksonville, AK; Rita Torres, Surprise, AZ.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, Subcommittee on Children and Families and Committee on Armed Services, Subcommittee on Personnel be authorized to meet for a joint hearing on The Needs of Military Families: How Are States and the Pentagon Responding, Especially for the Guard and Reservists? during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, July 21, 2004., at 2 p.m., in SD-430.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Personnel of the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on July 21, 2004, at 2 p.m., in open session to receive testimony on how States have responded to military families' unique challenges during military deployments and what the Federal Government can do to support States in this important work.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forests of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, July 21, at 2:30 p.m.

The purpose of the hearing is to receive testimony on S. 738, to designate certain public lands in Humboldt, Del Norte, Mendocino, Lake, Napa, and Yolo counties in the State of California as wilderness, to designate certain segments of the Black Butte River in Mendocino County, California, as a wild or scenic river, and for other purposes; S. 1614, to designate a portion of White Salmon River as a component of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System; S. 2221, to authorize the Secretary of Agriculture to sell or exchange certain National Forest System land in the State of Oregon, and for other purposes; S. 2253, to permit young adults to perform projects to prevent fire and suppress fires, and provide disaster relief on public land through a Healthy Forest Youth Conservation Corps; S. 2334, to designate certain National Forest System Land in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico as components of the National Wilderness Preservation System; and S. 2408, to adjust the boundaries of the Helena, Lolo, and Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forests in the State of Montana.

Mr. President, I rise today in order to bring attention to a problem that unfortunately goes largely unnoticed except by those who are directly affected. Livestock and food animal producers, pet owners, zoo and wildlife biologists, and animals themselves face a severe shortage of approved animal drugs for use in minor species.

Minor species include thousands of animal species, including all fish, most birds, and sheep. By definition, minor species are any animals other than the major species--cattle, horses, chickens, turkeys, dogs, and cats. A similar shortage of drugs and medicines for major animal species exists for diseases that occur infrequently or which occur in limited geographic areas. Due to the lack of availabiliity for these minor use drugs, millions of animals go untreated or treatment is delayed. Unnecessary animal physical and human emotional suffering results, and human health may be threatened as well.

Without access to these necessary minor use drugs, farmers and ranchers also suffer. An unhealthy animal that is left untreated can spread disease throughout an entire stock of its fellow specie. This causes severe economic hardship to struggling ranchers and farmers. For example, sheep ranchers lost nearly $42 million worth of livestock alone in 2002. The sheep industry estimates that if it had access to effective and necessary drugs to treat diseases, growers' reproduction costs for their animals would be cut by up to 15 percent. In addition, feedlot deaths would be reduced by 1 to 2 percent, adding approximately $8 million of revenue to the industry.

Alabama's catfish industry ranks second in the Nation. Though it is not the State's only aquacultural commodity, catfish is by far its largest. The catfish industry generates enormous economic opportunity in the State, particularly in West Alabama, one of the poorest regions in the State.

The catfish industry estimates its losses at $60 million per year attributable to diseases for which drugs are not available. Indeed, it is not uncommon for a catfish producer to lose half his stock due to disease. The U.S. aquaculture industry overall, including food fish and ornamental fish, produces and raises over 800 different species. Unfortunately, this industry has only 6 drugs approved and available for use in treating aquaculture animal diseases. This results in tremendous economic hardship and animal suffering.

Because of limited market opportunity, low profit margins, and the enormous capital investment required, it is seldom economically feasible for drug manufacturers to pursue research and development and then seek approval for drugs used in treating minor species and for infrequent conditions and diseases in all animals.

I, along with Senator Bingaman, Senator Allard, Senator Collins, Senator Crapo, Senator Miller, Senator Craig, Senator Ensign, and Senator Lincoln, resolve to improve this situation by introducing the Minor Use and Minor Species Animal Health Act of 2003. This legislation will allow animal drug manufacturers the opportunity to develop and obtain approval for minor use drugs which are vitally needed by a wide variety of animal industries. Our legislation incorporates the major proposals of the FDA's Center for Veterinary Medicine to increase the availability of drugs for minor animal species and rare diseases in all animals. The Act creates incentives for animal drug manufacturers to invest in product development and obtain FDA marketing approvals.

This legislation creates a program very similar to the successful Human Orphan Drug Program that has dramatically increased the availability of drugs to treat rare human diseases over the past 20 years.

The bill establishes two new ways to lawfully market new animal drugs:

First, it establishes a conditional approval mechanism for new animal drugs for minor uses and minor species. Conditionally approved new animal drugs must meet the same new approval requirements for safety as new animal drugs approved under section 512 of the FDC Act. However, the effectiveness standard for conditionally approved drugs would differ from the effectiveness standard for new drugs approved under Section 512 in that a ``reasonable expectation of effectiveness'' rather than ``substantial evidence of effectiveness'' would be demonstrated. If the FDA approves an application for conditional approval, this approval will be in effect for 1 year, renewable for a maximum of 4 additional 1 year terms. This conditional approval is intended to allow drug sponsors to recoup some development costs through marketing the product prior to full, unconditional approval.

Second, this legislation provides for an index of legally marketed unapproved new animal drugs for some non-food minor animal species. The index is intended to provide a way to lawfully market those minor species drugs for which there is unlikely to be sufficient financial incentive to seek a full or conditional approval. If the FDA determines that a new animal drug is eligible for listing on the index, the new drug will be added to the index if the

benefits of using the drug outweigh the risks, taking into account the harm caused by the absence of an approved or conditionally approved drug for the use in question. The addition of a drug to the index will be based in large part on a report of an independent expert panel.

The Minor Use and Minor Species Animal Health Act will not alter FDA drug-approval responsibilities that ensure the safety of animal drugs to the public. The FDA Center for Veterinary Medicine currently evaluates new animal drug products prior to approval and use. This rigorous testing and review process provides consumers with the confidence that animal drugs are safe for animals and consumers of products derived from treated animals. Current FDA requirements include guidelines to prevent harmful residues and evaluations to examine the potential for the selection guidelines to prevent harmful residues and evaluations to examine the potential for the selection of resistant pathogens. Any food animal medicine or drug considered for approval under this bill would be subject to these same assessments.

The Minor Use and Minor Species Animal Health Act is supported by 43 organizations, including the American Farm Bureau Federation, the Animal Health Institute, the American Veterinary Medical Association, and the National Aquaculture Association. This is vital legislation.

This Act will reduce the economic risks and hardships which fall upon ranchers and farmers as a result of livestock diseases. It will benefit pets and their owners and benefit various endangered species and aquatic animals. The Act also will promote the health of all animal species while protecting human health and will alleviate unnecessary animal suffering. This is common-sense legislation which will benefit millions of American pet owners, farmers, and ranchers.

Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2003.

The Coast Guard serves as the guardian of our maritime homeland security and provides many critical services for our Nation. Last year alone, the Coast Guard responded to over 39,000 calls for assistance, assisted $1.5 billion in property, and saved 3,653 lives. These brave men and women risk their lives to defend our borders from drugs, illegal immigrants, act of terror, and other national security threats. In 2002, the Coast Guard seized 117,780 pounds of cocaine and 40,316 pounds of marijuana preventing them from reaching our streets and playgrounds. They also stopped over 5,100 illegal migrants from reaching our shores. They conducted patrols to protect our vital fisheries stocks and they responded to over 12,000 pollution incidents.

In the wake of September 11, the men and women of the Coast Guard have been working harder than ever in the service's largest peace-time port security operation since World War II. This rapid escalation of the Coast Guard's homeland security mission continues today. Last year alone, the Coast Guard aggressively defended our homeland by conducting more than 36,000 port security patrols, boarded over 10,000 vessels, escorted over 6,000 vessels, and maintained more than 115 security zones. While our new reality requires the Coast Guard to maintain a robust homeland security posture, these new priorities must not diminish the Coast Guard's focus on its traditional missions such as marine safety, search and rescue, aids to navigation, fisheries law enforcement, and marine environmental protection.

And recently we have asked even more of the Coast Guard. Last November we passed the Homeland Security Act of 2002 which recently transferred the Coast Guard from the Department of Transportation to the new Department of Homeland Security. This historic law positions the Coast Guard as a cornerstone of the new Department, but also recognizes that the Coast Guard is responsible for many other missions on which Americans depend.

First and foremost, it ensures that the Coast Guard will remain a distinct entity and continue in its role as one of the five Armed Services. The Coast Guard plays a unique role in our government, by serving both an armed service as well as a law enforcement agency and this must not be changed or altered. It also contains language which maintains the primacy of the Coast Guard's diverse missions, prevents the Secretary of this new department from making substantial or significant changes to the Coast Guard's non-homeland security missions, and prohibits the new department from

transferring any Coast Guard personnel or assets to another agency except for personnel details and assignment that do not reduce the Service's capability to perform its non-homeland security missions.

By introducing the Coast Guard Authorization bill today, I intend to continue giving the Coast Guard my full support, and I hope my colleagues will work with me to provide the Coast Guard with the resources that it needs to carry out its many critically important missions. Unfortunately Coast Guard's rapid operational escalation has come on the backs of its 38,000 men and women who faithfully serve our country. I believe we need to shift this burden off our people and instead adequately provide the Coast Guard with the resources it needs.

The bill I introduce today authorizes funding and personnel levels for the Coast Guard in Fiscal Year 2004. The bill authorizes funding for FY 2004 at $6.7 billion. This represents a 9.4 percent increase over the levels contained in last year's authorization bill and a 13 percent increase over the funds requested for Fiscal Year 2003. This authorization will help restore the Coast Guard's non-homeland security missions such as search and rescue, fisheries enforcement, and marine environmental protection to near their pre-September 11, 2001 levels.

This bill also includes numerous measures which will improve the Coast Guard's ability to recruit, reward, and retain high-quality personnel. It addresses various Coast Guard personnel management and quality of life issues such by providing eligible enlisted personnel with a critical skills training bonus, amending the number and distribution of commissioned officers to retain needed skill sets and experiences, expanding the Coast Guard's housing authorities to ease housing shortages, and including several measures that grant the Coast Guard parity with the other Armed Services.

Another critical provision in the bill will enable us to better oversee the historic and beautiful lighthouses that we have entrusted to non-profit groups across the country. Over the years we have transferred numerous lighthouses and we need to ensure that these groups continue to be responsible stewards of these national treasures. Unfortunately, we have recently learned of lighthouses which have been allowed to deteriorate and one that was even offered for sale through a real estate broker. This provision will ensure these national treasures are protected and will allow the Secretary of Interior to monitor future lighthouse conveyances and ensure that they meet all of the conditions of the original transfers.

Finally, we must recognize that the United States Coast Guard is a force conducting 21st century operations with 20th century technology. To accomplish its many vital missions, the Coast Guard desperately needs to recapitalize its offshore fleet of cutters and aircraft. The Coast Guard operates the third oldest of the world's 39 similar naval fleets with several cutters dating back to World War II. These platforms are technologically obsolete, require excessive maintenance, lack essential speed, and have poor interoperability which in turn limit their overall mission effectiveness and efficiency. Unfortunately they are reaching the end of their serviceable life just as the Coast Guard needs them the most.

The Coast Guard is in the early stages of a major recapitalization program for the ships and aircraft designed to operate more than 50 miles offshore. The Integrated Deepwater System acquisition program is critical to the future viability of the Coast Guard. I wholeheartedly support this initiative and the system-of-systems procurement strategy the Coast Guard is utilizing. This bill authorizes full funding for this critical long-term recapitalization program.

I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, time after time, coal has been there for this country. Coal has been and will continue to be an important part of America--its history, its economy, and its people.

During World War I, when coal supplied the Nation's heat and powered our battleships and industries, President Woodrow Wilson proclaimed that the Nation's war effort ``rested on the shoulders of [the American coal] miner.''

During World War II, when enemy conquests in Asia and Africa threatened to stop the worldwide flow of oil, the American government responded by initiating a federally sponsored synthetic fuels program based on coal. Secretary of the Interior Harold Ickes acknowledged, ``We should not have waited until war was upon us to begin the development of synthetic fuels.''

After the war, that program was dismantled. Far-sighted men warned of the dangers of this decision. John L. Lewis, President of the United Mine Workers, predicted a growing reliance upon foreign oil in the post-war era would one day result in outrageous prices at the gas pump and cars lined up for blocks to purchase gasoline.

Those of us old enough to remember the oil embargoes and energy crises of the 1970s know how accurate that prediction was. Those oil embargoes and energy crises prompted the Carter Administration to establish a national synthetic fuels program largely based on coal as the United States was labeled ``the Saudi Arabia of coal.''

However, the Reagan Administration all but eliminated the Department of Energy's fossil fuels and renewable energy programs, and withdrew support for the development of alternative energy technologies.

How short-sighted that was. I correct myself. It wasn't just short- sighted, it was blind, and I said so at the time. In a speech on this Senate floor, I warned that the Reagan administration's cutbacks in our energy programs were ``leaving us dangerously vulnerable to foreign transgressions.'' Historians like to point out that those who do not remember the past are condemned to relive it. Why must we continue to relive yesterday's mistakes? Can we not learn from the past?

Once again, concerns about our Nation's current and future energy needs are on the minds of citizens across the country. Worrisome gas prices, erratic fuel costs, electricity supply needs, energy efficiency improvements, and U.S. dependence on foreign oil are major challenges that we must tackle. To develop a bipartisan, national energy plan, Congress must establish balanced energy policies that recognize the need for both economic growth, energy security, and environmental protection.

Coal will play a key role in that strategy.

It is paramount that we develop a comprehensive plan built on a balanced portfolio of resources, technologies, and ideas. Such a plan must look broadly across all sectors of the economy and set objectives to meet these needs both today and down the road. And, as we look at the needs of our economy and our future, we need to better understand where to put critical and precious research and development resources and how to best stimulate these technologies in the marketplace.

Undoubtedly, fossil fuels will continue to be a primary source for meeting our energy needs into the coming decades. Coal, used in cleaner and more efficient ways, will be a key component of that energy strategy. Coal is this country's most abundant natural resource, providing over half of the Nation's electricity and accounting for one third of our Nation's total energy production.

Today, a bipartisan group of Members join me in introducing the National Coal Research, Development, and Demonstration Act of 2003. I very much appreciate the support of Senators Rockefeller, Thomas, Burns, Dorgan, Allard, Durbin, Voinovich, Bayh, Enzi, Campbell, and Conrad. We believe that this legislation will help to maintain our Nation's fuel diversity by ensuring a key role for coal in our Nation's energy future.

This initiative provides a roadmap to the future by authorizing $2 billion over that next ten years for a clean coal technology demonstration program to help speed these technologies from the laboratory to the marketplace. Our legislation aims to improve air quality as well as the efficiency of the current fleet of coal-fired power plants by providing targeted tax incentives for the installation of these technologies at existing coal-fired facilities.

Additionally, this legislation will help meet the need for new infrastructure by providing incentives to deploy a targeted number of advanced clean coal technologies to prove their viability in the marketplace now and in the future. Finally, it ensures that all generators of coal can compete for these targeted tax incentives on an equal basis. This initiative is an important component of a strategy to achieve energy diversity and independence.

I have been around Congress for a very long time--more than 50 years. Recently, I became the third longest serving Member of Congress. My association with coal started early in my life and has continued throughout my many years of service in Congress. Coal has always been with me, it has been there fore us. Coal is abundant. Coal is affordable. Coal is ours!

Clean coal research and development funding and tax incentive legislation gained significant bipartisan and bicameral support during the energy bill debates in the 107th Congress. This success was built on the framework outlined, developed, and refined with my support in past Congress.

There is a little verse that goes:

God and soldier all men adore,

in time of trouble and no more,

for when war is over, and all things righted,

God is neglected and the old soldier slighted.

In times of national struggle and adversity, in times of war, coal has been there. But in times of calm, when the urgency subsides, so does our national determination to establish and implement a comprehensive energy strategy. To fail to incorporate a comprehensive energy plan into our vision for the Nation's future would ultimately be to America's detriment.

The development of clean coal technologies is essential to the betterment of our Nation's economic, energy, environmental, and security future. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.