mr. chairman , i rise in opposition to the amendment . 
mr. chairman , we have not built a new refinery in the united states since 1976 . 
now , we have expanded some existing refineries , but we have closed dozens , if not hundreds , of small refineries . 
we are importing refined product because we do not have the ability to meet our needs for refined petroleum products with our existing refinery base . 
our refineries are operating at 95 percent capacity every day . 
now , this amendment that the gentlewoman from california wants to strike would say that we are going to go out and do an inventory of existing refinery sites that have been closed or manufacturing sites that have been closed where there is high unemployment , high unemployment . 
so you have to have two things . 
you have to have an existing refinery site or a manufacturing site that is no longer in use , and you have to have very high unemployment . 
we think there are around 100 of those sites . 
i think the exact number is 96 ; and under this part of the bill , if a community wants to solicit a refinery , we set up an expedited procedure that is led by the department of energy where you can go and request all the number of permits . 
we do not waive any permit . 
we do not eliminate any permit . 
we are not mandating that anybody has to seek one of these , but i think it would be a positive to build 5 , 6 , 7 million barrels of new refinery capacity in this country using state-of-the-art technology so that we can meet 100 percent of our refined product needs , take some load off the existing refinery base , and , yes , create some jobs in america . 
i think that would be a good thing , not a bad thing . 
so i strongly oppose this amendment and would encourage all the other members to oppose the amendment . 
mr. chairman , i yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from texas ( mr. gene green ) . 
