Lisa Murkowski

I have expressed a great deal of concern about this cumulative impact on reliability from this slew of EPA regulations.

Four years is reasonable.

We must thoroughly examine our responses to storm caused outages so that we can plan better and prepare for the next emergency because we know that there's going to be another storm that comes our way that will drag down the power lines.

I think all we need to do is look to Alaska to see what it is that we have been doing to identify those areas at risk.

I was in Louisiana a few weeks ago, as I mentioned. I think that is one of the most graphic examples that we have in this country of the impact to our energy infrastructure.

They're lousy right now, by the way.

Our reality is that with the Federal agencies that exist, they are there to help after the disaster has happened.

It's no secret that the discussion of climate change, of which sea level rise is just one aspect, has become highly politicized here in the Congress.

As Senator Murkowski noted in her opening statements, Alaska is also seeing very large and rapid changes both due to sea level rise, but also due to the loss of ice and dramatically increased erosion which has the capacity to effect energy…

The Nation requests that the Committee include the provisions of S. 630, and include tribes in those provisions, in S. 1684.

Senator Murkowski has introduced an important bill, S. 630, which will improve marine and hydrokinetic renewable energy research and development.

Well, I guess it remains to be seen.

Clearly very important to States like mine and to many on this panel.

Last year in the appropriations bill, language was included that temporarily prevented this ruling from taking place.

I think it is an area where we looked and said, okay, we might be able to get around this, this court decision, which I think you and I would both agree, has the potential to really snarl things up through a process.

But, we're assuming that that's going to be the case. We get lucky, basically?

So, will the USFS notify these permit holders and the contract holders if their operations next season are going to be delayed or cancelled because of this decision out there?

And I think we'll all look forward to seeing that plan when you bring it up then.

So this is kind of a 'trust me' moment.

Well, I'd like to take you up on that offer. Again, my concern is that you have a diversion of resources that goes toward the stewardship contracts at the expense of the other projects and how we affect these commercial sales.

I don't think we've got the information from these three regions that would provide for an informed judgment on the merits of the proposal.

I would like to raise a recent court decision that I believe has the potential to severely hamper the ability of the USFS to get work done on the ground.

It's hard for me to imagine any USFS action that some group could not appeal or delay.

I do hope, Chief, that you can assure me today that USFS plans to appeal the court's decision in Sequoia ForestKeeper vs. Tidwell.

I think we're already seeing some absurd consequences.