Legislature(2011 - 2012)BARNES 124
02/04/2011 01:00 PM House RESOURCES
Audio | Topic |
---|---|
Start | |
HCR2 | |
HJR11 | |
Overview: Department of Natural Resources - Division of Geological & Geophysical Surveys | |
Overview: Alaska Department of Fish & Game - Division of Wildlife Conservation | |
Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
*+ | HCR 2 | TELECONFERENCED | |
*+ | HJR 11 | TELECONFERENCED | |
+ | TELECONFERENCED | ||
HJR 11-OPPOSING ANWR WILDERNESS DESIGNATION 1:10:11 PM CO-CHAIR FEIGE announced that the next order of business would be HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 11, Urging the United States Congress to refrain from passing legislation that designates land in Area 1002 of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge as wilderness. 1:10:33 PM REPRESENTATIVE CHARISSE MILLETT, Alaska State Legislature, explained that HJR 11 relates the legislature's opposition to any wilderness designation in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), particularly in Area 1002. With the passage of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) in the 1980s the federal government made a promise that Area 1002 would and could be developed for oil and gas resources. Representative Millett informed the committee that ANWR resolutions and legislation are the main topic of energy discussions in Congress. A notable resolution that has been introduced by Congressman Markey is H.R. 139, which proposes designating [ANWR] as a wilderness area. Furthermore, Secretarial Order 3310 basically provides the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) the ability to make a wilderness area designation. Representative Millet opined that all of Alaska's ANWR lands are under attack, but particularly Area 1002. She pointed out that a resolution, such as HJR 11, provides for the legislature's voice to be heard. She noted that she has been assured that these types of resolutions make it into the hands of those who need to see them and relay that Alaskans are environmentalists by nature and that the state's resources are developed in a careful and mindful manner. 1:13:14 PM REPRESENTATIVE HERRON related his support for HJR 11, but asked whether the sponsor would accept [the inclusion] of a "WHEREAS" clause regarding national security. REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT said she would be amenable to the addition of such a provision. 1:13:51 PM REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ inquired as to the status of U.S. Congressman Markey's resolution. REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT related that usually a Congressional resolution supporting the opening of ANWR garners 50-80 cosponsors, which isn't a lot. However, the concern is that every year such efforts gain momentum. She noted that such Congressional action has been stopped because of the actions of the Alaska State Legislature. She also noted that 78 percent of Alaskans are in favor of opening ANWR for development. Representative Millett said that she could obtain the status of the Congressional legislation. 1:14:53 PM CO-CHAIR FEIGE opened public testimony. 1:15:07 PM ADRIAN HERRERA, Arctic Power, began by informing the committee that he is responsible for running the Arctic Power Offices in Washington, D.C., and promoting the environmentally responsible opening of ANWR, Area 1002, to oil and gas [development]. He mentioned that he has been working in this capacity for about six years now. He also mentioned that Arctic Power is a 501(c)(6) Alaska-based grass roots organization with the sole goal of the successful passage of environmentally responsible oil and gas development legislation on Capitol Hill. Mr. Herrera then related that Arctic Power strongly supports HJR 11 and encourages passage of it. Arctic Power does its upmost to prevent the passage of legislation proposing to declare Area 1002 as wilderness lands. It's important, he opined, to have a basis to argue these points, which HJR 11 provides and codifies in a manner that's acceptable to Congress. Resolutions such as HJR 11 are helpful when Arctic Power debates these matters with congressmen who disagree with Arctic Power's position. 1:16:51 PM MR. HERRERA highlighted the provision of HJR 11 that speaks to the September 2010 announcement by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service that it will conduct a wilderness review in its environmental impact statement (EIS) regarding all three areas of ANWR: refuge lands, wilderness lands, and Area 1002 that is neither. The opinion of the Alaska attorney general, as well as Arctic Power, is that the decision to include a wilderness review is in direct conflict with ANILCA and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). He related that ANILCA specifies that no study for removal or any removal of land in Alaska may take place without Congressional approval. Therefore, Arctic Power believes [the EIS] violates that principle. With regard to NEPA, when considering an EIS that discusses wilderness plans, all alternative land uses must be considered. However, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service forbade the discussion of oil and gas exploration in Area 1002 when it heard public testimony last year. The draft report for the Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP) will be submitted April 2011 and the final report in April 2012. He recalled that it has been said that fighting this issue on Capitol Hill is a long-term process due to the checks and balances of democratic government. However, if it's ever declared wilderness, the process to undo it would be even more difficult. In fact, he personally believes such a designation would be impossible to change. Therefore, Arctic Power strongly encourages the state to do what it can to fight legislation or reports that prevent the option of exploration in Area 1002. 1:18:50 PM REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ requested that Mr. Herrera provide a brief history regarding the establishment of Area 1002 and how it was compromised in the ANWR legislation. MR. HERRERA explained that in 1980 ANILCA was implemented, which expanded what was originally referred to as the Arctic National Wildlife Range to 19.5 million acres and divided it into the existing three sections. The southern section was designated as refuge lands as defined by the National Wildlife Refuge Act, the center/original section was designated as wilderness lands, and Area 1002 that was neither wilderness or refuge lands but rather designated as an area that was set aside for the study of potential oil and gas exploration and development. The ANILCA stipulated that it was up to Congress to decide and couldn't be decided by national monument status from the president or through an administrative act. The study took place between 1980 and 1986 and in 1986 the first report from the U.S. Department of Interior recommended development of Area 1002. Coincidentally, the first ANWR CCP by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Services was released in 1986. Therefore, between 1987 and 1995 there was fairly contentious debate. In 1995 both bodies of Congress passed an act to allow development of Area 1002, but it was vetoed by President Clinton. To date, 12 pro-ANWR development pieces of legislation have passed the U.S House and 3 such have passed the U.S. Senate, for a total of 15 pieces of legislation that have passed through Capitol Hill in support of the development of ANWR legislation. Mr. Herrera said he didn't recall any successful passage of legislation against the development of ANWR. 1:21:35 PM REPRESENTATIVE HERRON asked if Arctic Power still has the support of the community of Kaktovik. MR. HERRERA replied yes, adding his belief that the majority of the residents of Kaktovik support this issue as does Mayor Annie Tikluk. 1:22:24 PM REPRESENTATIVE HERRON related that in a 2007 League of Conservation Voters questionnaire, President Obama said he strongly rejects drilling in the refuge [ANWR]. He asked if there have been any other documented statements on ANWR from President Obama. MR. HERRERA offered his belief that President Obama's position remains the same, although he hasn't made many direct statements on ANWR in the past few years. Of note, December 6, 2010, was ANWR's 50th anniversary and there was a large push by the environmental movement to support national monument status for ANWR. Letters promoting the aforementioned were sent to the White House, but there was no response other than stating the need to review all alternative energies when devising the nation's energy plan. He opined that the lack of comment from the White House and the president is a significant message. 1:24:28 PM CO-CHAIR FEIGE, upon ascertaining no one else wished to testify, closed public testimony. 1:24:46 PM REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON moved to report HJR 11 out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying zero fiscal note. There being no objections, HJR 11 was reported out of the House Resources Standing Committee.