[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 106 (Friday, July 29, 2005)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1735-E1736]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




         CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 6, ENERGY POLICY ACT OF 2005

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                             HON. TOM UDALL

                             of new mexico

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, July 28, 2005

  Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the 
energy bill conference report, but I do so with very strong 
reservations. Although I believe we missed many opportunities to make 
this energy bill truly comprehensive, I also believe that the 
conference report is an improvement over the House-passed energy bill.
  It is a sad indictment of the way the Majority is running this 
Congress that it has taken us 5 years to pass an energy bill and the 
final product falls far short of what I believe the American public 
wants. I will vote for this conference report, but this bill lacks 
boldness and vision. There is more we can and must do to reduce our 
dependence on foreign oil, lower skyrocketing gas prices, protect our 
environment, and steer our country in a more forward-thinking direction 
on energy policy. I am pleased, however, that the bill makes strides in 
encouraging alternative energy research and production. Specifically, 
$3.2 billion is included for renewable energy production incentives and 
$1.3 billion is allotted for energy efficiency and conservation.
  I was disappointed to see that a Renewable Portfolio Standard, RPS, 
was not included in the bill. The Senate-passed bill included an RPS 
that would have required utilities to generate 10 percent of their 
electricity from renewable energy sources such as wind, solar, biomass, 
and geothermal, by the year 2020. Studies conducted by the Energy 
Information Administration illustrate that a federal RPS could save 
consumers $19 billion. Moreover, 20 States have already enacted RPS 
requirement, many of which go beyond the Senate-passed provision. A 
federal RPS would have established a nationwide market-based trading 
system to ensure that renewables are developed at the lowest possible 
price. I strongly supported this provision, and over 70 of my 
colleagues signed onto a letter with me to conferees urging them to 
keep the RPS in the bill. The Senate conferees voted in a bipartisan 
manner to keep the RPS in the bill, but the House conferees stripped 
the provision. I hope that my colleagues will work with me in the 
future to support H.R. 983, a bill with bipartisan support that I 
introduced to create a federal RPS of 20 percent by 2027. The time for 
a federal RPS has come.
  We also missed an opportunity to address the serious problem of 
global warming. I believe that the amendment Senator Bingaman offered, 
and that passed, expressing the sense of the Senate that mandatory 
action on climate change should be enacted was an important step 
towards congressional action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. While 
I am disappointed that we could not do more, and that this sense of the 
Senate amendment was stripped from the conference report, I am pleased 
that the conference report includes a provision to establish a new 
cabinet-level advisory committee, charged with developing a national 
policy to address climate change and to promote technologies to reduce 
greenhouse gas emissions. In addition, the provision allows the Energy 
Department to authorize demonstration projects designed to test 
technologies that limit harmful emissions. The long-term solution to 
solving the global warming problem lies in the creation of new 
technologies and the Federal Government has a key role to play in 
promoting technological innovations. I believe we should have done 
more, something along the lines of the recommendations made recently by 
the National Commission on Energy Policy, but it is critical that we do 
something, and this climate change provision is the least we can do to 
begin the process of slowing global warming.

  I am very pleased that a provision included in the House-passed bill, 
giving $30 million to uranium mining companies, was stripped from the 
bill. If enacted, this provision would have posed a grave threat to the 
water resources of two Navajo communities in northwestern New Mexico 
where four uranium in-situ leach mines have been granted conditional 
licenses by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The proposed ISL 
mining--which could still happen

[[Page E1736]]

even without the $30 million subsidy--would leach uranium from an 
aquifer that provides high-quality groundwater to municipal wells in 
and near these communities--an aquifer that is the sole source of 
drinking water for an estimated 15,000 Navajos. I thank the conferees 
for heeding the wishes of over 200 members of the House--as well as the 
Navajo Nation Council--to strip this provision from the bill.
  The liability waiver for oil companies who used methyl tertiary-butyl 
ether, MTBE, which has contaminated 1,861 water systems serving 45 
million Americans in 29 States, including New Mexico, was also changed 
in the final bill. I strongly opposed that provision, which would have 
placed the coffers of oil companies ahead of Americans whose lives have 
been adversely affected by this negligence.
  Finally, one of my great concerns with the House-passed bill was a 
provision allowing drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge 
(ANWR). I am glad this provision was stripped in conference, and I will 
continue to oppose efforts by the oil industry to drill in ANWR. I have 
witnessed first-hand the tremendously diverse wildlife that will be 
hurt if drilling occurs in the area. The small benefits are simply not 
worth the cost.
  I would like to commend my home State Senators--Domenici and 
Bingaman--who worked together in a very bipartisan manner to write this 
bill. I know it was a difficult task. I look forward to working with 
them and with their counterparts here in the House, to continue work on 
energy policy issues such as global warming, fuel efficiency standards, 
and further reducing our energy dependence.

                          ____________________