Legislature(2021 - 2022)BARNES 124
03/08/2021 01:00 PM House RESOURCES
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Overview(s): Dept. of Environmental Conservation by Commissioner Jason Brune | |
| HJR12 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| *+ | HJR 12 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE
March 8, 2021
1:01 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Josiah Patkotak, Chair
Representative Grier Hopkins, Vice Chair
Representative Zack Fields (via teleconference)
Representative Calvin Schrage
Representative Sara Hannan
Representative George Rauscher
Representative Mike Cronk (via teleconference)
Representative Ronald Gillham
Representative Tom McKay
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
OVERVIEW(S): DEPT. OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION BY COMMISSIONER
JASON BRUNE
- HEARD
HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 12
Urging the United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of
Land Management, to honor the recent lease sales and proceed
with permitting in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge; urging
the President of the United States to defend the 2020 Record of
Decision approving the Coastal Plain Oil and Gas Leasing Program
in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge; opposing designation of
the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge as a National Monument; and
urging the Alaska delegation in Congress to uphold sec. 20001 of
the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017.
- HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HJR 12
SHORT TITLE: ENDORSING ANWR LEASING; RELATED ISSUES
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) RAUSCHER
02/18/21 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/18/21 (H) RES, STA
02/19/21 (H) STA REFERRAL REMOVED
02/19/21 (H) BILL REPRINTED
03/01/21 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
03/01/21 (H) -- Testimony <Invitation Only> --
03/03/21 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
03/03/21 (H) -- Public Testimony --
03/08/21 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
WITNESS REGISTER
JASON BRUNE, Commissioner
Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Co-provided a PowerPoint presentation
titled "Department of Environmental Conservation," dated 2/26/21
[hard copy included in the committee packet].
EMMA POKON, Deputy Commissioner
Office of the Commissioner
Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Co-provided a PowerPoint presentation
titled "Department of Environmental Conservation," dated 2/26/21
[hard copy included in the committee packet].
KARA MORIARTY, President and CEO
Alaska Oil and Gas Association (AOGA)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HJR 12.
TOM WALSH, Past President (2020)
Alaska Support Industry Alliance
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HJR 12.
KATI CAPOZZI, President & CEO
Alaska Chamber of Commerce
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HJR 12.
MARLEANNA HALL, Executive Director
Resource Development Council for Alaska (RDC)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HJR 12.
MATTHEW REXFORD, President
Kaktovik Inupiat Corporation;
Tribal Administrator,
Native Village of Kaktovik
Kaktovik, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HJR 12.
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:00:52 PM
CHAIR JOSIAH PATKOTAK called the House Resources Standing
Committee meeting to order at 1:01 p.m. Representatives McKay,
Fields (via teleconference), Cronk (via teleconference),
Hopkins, Rauscher, Hannan, Gillham, Schrage, and Patkotak were
present at the call to order.
^OVERVIEW(S): Dept. of Environmental Conservation by
Commissioner Jason Brune
OVERVIEW(S): Dept. of Environmental Conservation by Commissioner
Jason Brune
1:01:55 PM
CHAIR JOSIAH PATKOTAK announced that the first order of business
would be an Overview of the Department of Environmental
Conservation by Commissioner Jason Brune.
1:02:20 PM
JASON BRUNE, Commissioner, Department of Environmental
Conservation (DEC), co-provided a PowerPoint presentation titled
"Department of Environmental Conservation," dated 2/26/21 [hard
copy included in the committee packet]. He began on slide 2
with a highlight of DEC's mission, which is to conserve,
improve, and protect Alaska's natural resources and environment
to enhance the health, safety, economic, and social well-being
of Alaskans. He moved to slide 3 and outlined DEC's values that
he and his directors formed at the administration's outset:
objectivity, accountability, integrity, collaboration, and
customer service. He turned to slide 4 and pointed out that
women comprise over 80 percent of DEC's leadership team, and the
team has over 100 years of state service.
COMMISSIONER BRUNE displayed slide 5 and stated that what DEC
does can be summarized in five divisions. He said the Division
of Administrative Services runs the organization and the
divisions of Air Quality, Spill Prevention and Response (SPAR),
Water Quality, and Environmental Health are the department's
four environmental focus areas.
1:05:54 PM
COMMISSIONER BRUNE moved to slide 6 and related that Governor
Dunleavy wants to show that Alaska is open for business, can
work with the regulated community, and resource extraction and
the protection of human health are not mutually exclusive.
Alaska's economy is completely dependent on resource extraction,
he said, so it's important that the department is partnered with
the regulated community to ensure economic development while
concurrently protecting human health and the environment. The
department is focused on providing predictable, timely, and
science-based permits for the regulated community. This is
important for ensuring and sending the message that Alaska is
open for business and that there is predictability for the
investment and regulated communities. Also important is for DEC
to have partnerships with local governments, Alaska Native
corporations, businesses, and other organizations.
COMMISSIONER BRUNE addressed DEC's three main goals for 2021, as
depicted on slide 7. He said the first goal is to protect human
health and the environment by controlling water, land, and air
pollution. To do this DEC is looking at the processes and
relationships that it has with the regulated community and
determining what is slowing down the issuance of permits and how
the regulations can be improved. The second goal is to improve
employee retention in the department and develop employees.
Upon becoming commissioner two years ago he learned that over 25
percent of DEC's employees didn't have active evaluations and
the turnover rate was 20-30 percent. An objective was set to
cut the turnover rate in half this year. When looking at
providing timely, science based, legally defensible permits, it
must be assured there is the longevity of staff to be able to
finish those permits in a timely manner. The department wants
to ensure that evaluations, personal development plans, and
training plans are put in place, so employees see a future for
themselves at DEC. The department will track, encourage, and
fund the training of staff. Ultimately DEC is making it so that
its relationship with the development community is going to be
extended relationships with DEC employees. The third goal is to
leverage technology and workflow improvements to create
efficiencies, reduce DEC's environmental footprint, and increase
the transparency and visibility of DEC's efforts. This can be
done by using drones, virtual inspections, and increasing
transparency with the public so the public can see the comments
that DEC has received from the conservation community,
development community, and public in general. To become as
efficient as possible, a process has been put in place to meet
on a weekly basis to ensure that DEC's administrative functions
are done in a way that best spends state resources but doesn't
duplicate efforts.
1:10:36 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS shared that he has heard from department
employees that it is good working for Commissioner Brune. He
offered his congratulations to Ms. Emma Pokon for her promotion
to deputy commissioner. He said he looks forward to employee
longevity at DEC.
COMMISSIONER BRUNE stated that 95 percent of the people working
at DEC will be there after he and Ms. Pokon leave, and fostering
them is important so they can continue doing their great work.
1:11:46 PM
COMMISSIONER BRUNE spoke to the outline on slide 8 of DEC's hot
topics for 2021. Regarding the hot topic of COVID, he said the
past year of 2020 cannot be discussed without talking about
COVID. Regarding the Division of Air Quality, the hot topics
are PM 2.5 [the Fairbanks Particulate Matter 2.5 (PM 2.5)
Nonattainment Area] and the Greenhouse Gas Inventory. Regarding
the Division of Spill Prevention and Response (SPAR), the hot
topics are PFAS [per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances] and the
Prevention Account. Regarding the Division of Water, the hot
topics are village safe water (VSW), the Integrated Report, tier
3 waters, transboundary waters, and commercial passenger vessels
(cruise ships). Regarding the Division of Environmental Health,
the hot topics are invasive species, the Yuck-line, and the
issues in DEC's laboratory of dairy safety and mariculture. He
invited committee members to raise other issues of concern with
him or his deputy commissioner.
COMMISSIONER BRUNE turned the presentation over to Emma Pokon,
DEC Deputy Commissioner. He said Ms. Pokon came to DEC from the
Department of Law (DOL) and that for a number of years she
worked at the North Slope Borough and lived in Barrow.
1:13:30 PM
EMMA POKON, Deputy Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner,
Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC), displayed slide
9 and discussed COVID impacts. She specified that about 75
percent of DEC employees are currently teleworking in an
effort to protect staff and the community as a whole. The
department has been able to accomplish its mission and do its
work even with employees working remotely.
MS. POKON said fieldwork safety guidelines have been instituted
given there are still instances in which employees must go into
the field, such as for providing support to facilities or for
inspections. Guidelines are in place for DEC's compliance and
enforcement group to help reduce COVID risk as much as possible.
MS. POKON related that DEC has provided reasonable accommodation
to permittees. She noted DEC has always had enforcement
discretion in how to implement its various programs. Much
thought was given on how to implement that discretion in the
context of a pandemic and the challenges that facilities are
facing. For example, some permits require a permittee
employees to have updated certifications for, say, visible
emissions monitoring every six months and in-person training.
Those trainings were cancelled because of the pandemic, and DEC
didn't want to penalize permittees for requirements that are
literally impossible for them to comply with in the context of
the pandemic. Flexibility and working with permittees was
necessary, so DEC had a need for increased communication from
permittees regarding their challenges and why compliance
couldn't get done.
MS. POKON explained that virtual inspections are a way to
protect staff and communities. She related that many
communities have a concern about people coming in from outside
and potentially being vectors for COVID. The department moved
forward with some of the things that it already had in the works
for doing inspections remotely, such as via FaceTime. A lot can
be told from video inspections of a facility and this has been a
success. A number of these have been done and DEC has worked
with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and other states
to refine its processes and ensure it is providing meaningful
regulatory oversight using this as a tool. The thought is that
this will be a tool going forward; not a replacement for in-
person inspections, but something that will help DEC get to more
facilities more frequently and prioritize which facilities DEC
needs to go to in-person to provide effective oversight.
MS. POKON stated that DEC evaluated its existing workload and
how it could best contribute to the state's response to the
pandemic as a whole. She said the Division of Environmental
Health identified places where it could contribute to the
state's efforts. Folks reviewed the workplace safety plans and
a virologist was loaned to the Department of Health and Social
Services (DHSS), so DEC was thinking about how to accomplish its
own mission as well as contribute to the state's effort.
MS. POKON noted that DEC worked with the [University of Alaska
Anchorage] to pilot surveillance testing of wastewater [for
COVID]. She informed members that national news reported COVID
showing up in wastewater streams, allowing testing of a limited
population for the presence of COVID even when no individuals
had yet tested positive. The department helped the university
get started on examining this method as a tool in Alaska.
MS. POKON discussed DEC's statewide online public comment system
and digitizing files. With so much of DEC's workforce working
remotely, she explained, the need arose to get things even more
into the modern era. While the public has always been able to
submit comments electronically via email, the new format,
SmartComment, accepts comments electronically and puts them on a
platform where the public can see those comments in real time.
The department has helped the rest of the state to get on this
as well. Digitizing files allows employees working remotely to
be able to access the material they need to do their jobs. The
department is learning how to adjust its processes to
accommodate working remotely.
1:19:30 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN inquired about virtual inspections in
relation to those inspections that require the taking of lab
samples; for example, sampling a drain for bacterial growth at a
fish processing plant. She asked who was responsible for taking
those samples at a site inspection or whether those were
delayed, and only visual inspections done.
MS. POKON replied she is not familiar with the specifics of how
DEC handles the samples. She said many facilities must send in
samples on a recurring basis, and those requirements have not
been waived. For the virtual inspections, a lot of preparation
was done to ensure that DEC had all paperwork in order, and
while the inspector wasn't there to take samples in person,
sending them into the lab is always an option.
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN asked what the plan is for continuation of
site inspections during this current year; for example, fish
processing plants and restaurants. She said she wants to make
sure that the state's inspectors are being allowed onsite to
gather the lab samples themselves so that not only is the
counter that's always been clean being inspected, but also the
counters that have been forgotten to be cleaned.
MS. POKON replied that DEC recognizes virtual/remote inspections
are not going to be a replacement for onsite visits and for
getting DEC's inspectors onsite. The department is working with
the EPA, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and other
federal authorities that provide grant funding or that oversee
primacy programs to make sure DEC's inspections fulfill their
requirements as well. For the coming year everything is
uncertain as vaccines are rolled out, so she doesn't want to
make any representations about concrete plans because those will
evolve as the pandemic response evolves.
1:22:10 PM
MS. POKON returned to her presentation and discussed slide 10,
titled "Air: Supporting Primacy Under the Clean Air Act." She
explained DEC has implemented the federal Clean Air Act via
primacy programs for nearly 50 years. These programs assess air
quality, prevent deterioration of air quality, and address
pollution problems within Alaska when they do develop. The
department developed an Alaska Air Quality Control Plan, which
it implements [and maintains to meet federal requirements]. The
primacy programs provide value to the state by ensuring that
it's Alaskans who are implementing these programs and that the
folks directly overseeing compliance have the context and
understanding of local conditions.
MS. POKON spoke to slide 11, titled "Improving Fairbanks Air
Quality." She reported that Fairbanks has been a nonattainment
area for fine particulate matter for some time. The pollution
becomes unhealthy during parts of the year, so DEC has been
working with Fairbanks and improvements are being seen. Due to
measures put in place during the last planning process there is
the possibility of attainment by 2024.
MS. POKON reviewed the graph on Slide 12, titled "Alaska
Greenhouse Gas Inventory." She said the inventory was completed
in 2015 and this coming year the Division of Air Quality will be
updating its inventory of Alaska sources. The department will
use the data for climate change conversations expected to take
place in the near future.
1:24:53 PM
COMMISSIONER BRUNE informed the committee that the entire team
of DEC directors is typing text messages to him and Ms. Pokon
with answers to questions. He elaborated on the answer to
Representative Hannan's question, explaining that samples are
not typically collected during environmental health inspections,
and that includes pre-COVID. For the water team, the benchmark
for inspections for calendar year 2020 was 232 inspections, and
231 were actually completed. The benchmark for calendar year
2021 is 290, and it's likely that 330 inspections will be done.
The Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act are self-reporting
Acts delegated to the state from the federal level. Samples
from [regulated] entities are usually collected and tested by
third parties and the data provided to DEC, and this has not
changed. If entities were unable during COVID to get folks out,
DEC absolutely understood and ensured that that was documented.
More and more, however, third parties have been able to get out
there and collect samples, so the entities are able to comply
with their permit requirements.
COMMISSIONER BRUNE continued the presentation. Moving to slide
13, titled "Responding to PFAS," he explained that all sorts of
items contain PFAS, such as Teflon pans, clothing, and wrappers
from McDonalds. These chemicals are used to repel oil and
grease. In Alaska, PFAS are found in aqueous film forming foam
(AFFF), [a fire suppressant used] at every state certified
airport for putting out high temperature fires to protect human
health and property if a major accident occurs. Until recently,
AFFF was required to be tested on an annual basis by each
airport. It was found that the PFAS in AFFF were contaminating
the drinking water supplies of many of those communities. The
department worked with the legislature for funding and then put
together a risk matrix where DEC identified what airports used
and tested AFFF and whether it was done in close proximity to
community drinking water supplies. The [EPA's] Lifetime Health
Advisory is 70 parts per trillion (the equivalent of one drop in
an Olympic-sized pool) of perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS)
and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), two of the 6,000 types of
PFAS chemicals that have been found harmful to humans. Today's
testing is able to accommodate somewhere between 18 and 25 PFAS
chemicals by using two of the EPA-approved methodologies, either
537.1 or 533. Two years ago testing could only accommodate 5-8
PFAS chemicals, so technology is improving.
1:29:54 PM
COMMISSIONER BRUNE continued addressing slide 13. He said it's
important for the public to know how people may be impacted by
PFAS, so DEC has made it a point to be very transparent with the
risk matrix and the airports and communities that were
identified that could have been impacted. All the testing data
received by DEC has been put on the website for the public to
see. Even if the testing levels don't reach the [EPA's]
Lifetime Health Advisory level of 70 parts per trillion (ppt),
or the state's level of 400 ppt, it's still important for the
public to understand what those levels are so they can make
their own choices if the results are not at the levels that
create the regulatory impact.
COMMISSIONER BRUNE informed members that DEC has seen PFAS
contaminated soils throughout the state at airports and at
military bases in Fairbanks. Also, he said, DEC has seen PFAS
in the bio-solids at many wastewater treatment plants, and in
some areas these bio-solids are composted and distributed in the
community. The department wants to ensure it isn't overseeing a
process where PFAS-contaminated compost is being distributed
into communities. For example, DEC worked with the Fairbanks
wastewater utility and testing showed a higher level of PFAS in
their bio-solids, so distribution was stopped that year. It's
unknown whether the compost of previous years included PFAS, but
DEC wanted to ensure it wasn't being distributed any farther.
COMMISSIONER BRUNE pointed out that the question is what to do
with this contaminated soil. He related that DEC had Dr. Andrew
Gillespie, EPA's lead PFAS researcher, come to Alaska last year.
The previous year DEC authorized an air permit to study what
happens when PFAS contaminated soils are thermally treated to
try to eliminate the PFAS from the soil. This study, done in
partnership with EPA's Office of Research and Development,
looked at whether the PFAS chemicals would switch from one media
to another, in other words go from the soil into the air shed
and then be deposited down the air shed and creating a new
contaminated site. It was found that 99.99 percent of the 18-25
PFAS chemicals being looked at were destroyed and converted into
hydrogen fluoride (HF). What is unknown is the other 5,000-plus
PFAS that weren't looked for. The department looked at shipping
the contaminated soil from Alaska to a landfill in eastern
Oregon, but decided to come up with a local solution for this
local problem, and that's DEC began looking at whether thermal
treatment of the PFAS would work. The department is working
with Alaska Native corporations and other entities that are
looking at remote opportunities for bringing thermal treatment
of PFAS to rural Alaska. One Alaska Native corporation is
looking at permitting a landfill in Alaska rather than shipping
it to the Lower 48.
1:34:45 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN stated that PFAS has been a big concern
for her and her constituents. She asked where DEC is at on the
list of priority airports and evaluations in communities. She
said she knows tests have yet to be done in all the communities
where groundwater contamination is speculated. She further
asked where DEC is at on the ability to address a solution. She
stated she knows there hasn't yet been a solution in North Pole
or Gustavus, and asked whether a solution has been identified
for King Salmon, which was put on bottled water three years ago.
COMMISSIONER BRUNE responded that this issue is high priority.
He said high priority airports were identified in cooperation
with the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities
(DOT&PF). He stated that every one of the high priority
airports has been tested and that testing will begin on the
middle and low priority airports. As additional data becomes
available it will be put on DEC's website. If contamination
levels exceed the EPA's Lifetime Health Advisory or DEC's
regulation, the responsible parties must provide alternative
drinking water to the communities. The responsible party in
this case, DOT&PF, has provided alternative drinking water. In
the North Pole area with the military, a water system is being
put in as an alternative drinking source. The department works
in tandem with the responsible party to address that need.
Short-term needs are met through providing bottled drinking
water, but long-term needs must also be addressed. To address
the PFAS issue a couple years ago, the legislature provided $9.4
million from the Oil and Hazardous Substance Release Prevention
and Response Fund ("Response Fund [also known as the "470
Fund" from the enacting legislation, House Bill 470 passed in
1986]. To date, less than $1 million has been spent but DEC is
working closely with DOT&PF, as the responsible party, to ensure
that long-term solutions for sustainable alternative drinking
water are provided.
1:38:06 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CRONK noted his district includes Moose Creek in
North Pole. He related that in attending meetings during his
campaign, the people felt they had no say in what was going on.
He offered his understanding that people received a letter from
the U.S. Air Force stating that if they signed, then they would
get a certain amount of money, their well would be
decommissioned, and they would be charged $60 per month for
water. The people felt they didn't have the information, were
left out of much of the information, had no voice, were being
forced to sign and decommission their wells, and the water
project was being put in. He said he didn't know whether this
was a military issue only or whether it also involved DEC.
COMMISSIONER BRUNE replied that the ultimate responsibility
falls on the responsible party for providing those alternative
sources of water. He said he understands the concerns of people
who have paid for a well and don't have any utility costs, but
are suddenly told their well is contaminated, a utility is going
to be built, and they will have a monthly expense. Compensation
was given to local residents to offset some of those costs but
it's not an offset in perpetuity. He pointed out that a person
not wanting to sign the agreement can choose to negotiate an
individual agreement with the responsible party.
1:40:45 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS recalled that conversations were had last
year about which of the PFAS chemicals were being tested for and
the test results logged. He asked whether all the test results
for all of the 18-25 PFAS chemicals are being stored on the DEC
website or whether only a certain number of them are being
stored on the website.
COMMISSIONER BRUNE answered that as much data as DEC can put on
the website is put out there, and his understanding is that all
of them are out there. If they're not, or it is heard that they
are not, he will ensure they are placed there because that kind
of transparency and opportunity for the general public to be
informed is one of his highest priorities.
REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS said he hasn't heard anything contrary to
that, but was just following up from last year's conversation.
1:42:15 PM
COMMISSIONER BRUNE returned to his presentation. He skipped
slide 14 and spoke to slide 15, titled "Spill Prevention and
Response, An ounce of prevention is worth more than 260,000
barrels of response." He stated DEC wants to ensure that things
are in place to protect the environment so something like the
Exxon Valdez oil spill never happens again. The contingency
plans ("C plans") put together by DEC require very specific
detail about how an entity might respond if there is an
incident. Day-to-day prevention work within SPAR includes
reviewing the C plans and making sure that those entities are
able to respond. The Prevention Account is funded through a
[surcharge of] $0.04 per barrel of crude oil produced in the
state, as well as a surcharge of $0.0095 per gallon of refined
fuel that goes to fund SPAR's activities. No general funds are
provided to SPAR.
1:44:36 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MCKAY inquired about the difference between the
Response Fund and the 470 Fund. He offered his understanding
that the 470 Fund was established after the Exxon Valdez spill
and has millions of dollars in and it and has rarely been used.
COMMISSIONER BRUNE responded that there are two funds: the
Prevention Account, which is funded by the $0.04 crude oil
production surcharge and the $0.0095 refined fuel surcharge; and
the 470 Fund, or Response Account, which is funded by a $0.01
surcharge per barrel and is used on a very regular basis. That
$0.01 per barrel production surcharge for the Response Account
is subject to shutting off once the [Response Account] reaches
$50 million. Today [the Response Account] in unallocated
amounts is around $30 million, so that $0.01 surcharge will
continue to go into the Response Account until it reaches $50
million. That account is used for the initial work that the DEC
team has to do in responding to oil or other spills, and it
needs to be that amount so DEC can mobilize a team in the event
a large spill happens. It is also used when trucks tip over, or
houses have spills from their buried underground storage tanks,
or other kinds of spills. The department can access the
Response Account to address a spill without legislative
approval, but it does require the DEC commissioner's approval,
and DEC informs the legislature. The department has a statutory
responsibility to cost recover, and therefore DEC must go after
the individuals that created the spill. So, DEC spends the
upfront money to clean up the spill and then goes after the
individuals to recover that amount. He said twice in the last
five years the legislature has appropriated from the Response
Account, the 470 Fund: the $9.4 million referenced earlier for
PFAS, and about $5 million to move materials from the Wrangell
dump to a Lower 48 landfill. Had those amounts not been
appropriated, the Response Account would be around $45 million
rather than the current $30 million, so it is used on a regular
basis.
REPRESENTATIVE MCKAY offered his understanding that the 470
Fund, originally established for oil spills, is being used for
just about every spill imaginable.
COMMISSIONER BRUNE answered yes, that is what the statutory
language allows DEC to do. He said he is able to do no more and
no less than what the legislature gives him the authority to do.
1:48:41 PM
COMMISSIONER BRUNE returned to the presentation. Regarding the
graph on slide 16 titled "Prevention Account Deficit," he
related that when he became commissioner, he was told that in
four years the fund was not sustainable, and 30 positions would
have to be cut. To provide a soft landing, seven positions were
cut last year and this year the proposal is to cut five
positions from Spill Prevention and Response (SPAR).
Concurrently, DEC is looking at ways to increase the funding for
SPAR. Of course the department wants more production, and more
production will lead to more money for SPAR. Secondly, DEC is
supporting the proposal in Representative Josephson's bill to
increase the refined fuel surcharge from 0.95 cents to 1.5
cents. The department is looking to bring sustainability to the
program going forward.
COMMISSIONER BRUNE turned to slide 17, titled "Water: Supporting
Primacy Through APDES [Alaska Pollutant Discharge Elimination
Systems]." He said DEC has primacy of water under provisions of
the Clean Water Act, which delegated that authority to the
state, and the legislature gave DEC that authority in 2007 or
2008. The department is responsible for ensuring that the
requirements of the Clean Water Act are met. Last year the
legislature approved four additional positions within DEC to
make sure the department was doing the inspections and oversight
and not the EPA, although the EPA has the ability to come in
because it has the ultimate oversight.
COMMISSIONER BRUNE addressed slide 18, titled "Village Safe
Water." He said this is very important during COVID. Thirty
communities in Alaska are not served, meaning these communities
are still using honey buckets. The Village Safe Water Program
receives significant contributions from the Alaska State
Legislature and the federal government for improving water and
wastewater treatment opportunities. The average cost of
bringing first-time pipe service to those systems is between
$350,000 and $750,000 per home, so it is a significant economic
consideration. The department has remote maintenance workers,
five of whom work for DEC and twelve who are funded by DEC with
the regional health corporations. These are the workers out
there at 30 degrees below zero trying to restore wastewater
service when pipes are frozen.
1:52:26 PM
COMMISSIONER BRUNE proceeded to slide 19, titled "Integrated
Report and KTN Beaches." He specified that for the last several
years DEC has been testing beaches in a number of communities,
but Ketchikan specifically. This year 11 of the beaches in
Ketchikan will be listed as impaired water bodies. The testing
is reported weekly on DEC's social media pages. The absence of
cruise ships this past year was a great opportunity to see what
the ambient impact would be without cruise ships and whether
there are impacts to high fecal coliform bacteria levels in
these communities. It was found that the Ketchikan beaches were
being impacted even in the absence of cruise ships. That report
just came out and is currently open for comment. Those water
bodies will be put on the impaired water body list going
forward.
COMMISSIONER BRUNE spoke to slide 20, titled "Tier 3 Water
Bodies," a policy put in place by the previous administration.
He said this policy requires that any proposal for a Tier 3
designation be referred to the legislature to act on. The
policy remains in effect today, and while a bill has not been
proposed this session to codify that, there is a lot of interest
in this issue. Such legislation would ensure that that power
rests with the legislature, not the executive branch, because in
a future administration an individual such as him, the
commissioner, can change it just like that. [This
administration's] view is that designating Tier 3 water bodies
is a responsibility of the legislature.
COMMISSIONER BRUNE displayed slide 21, titled "Transboundary
Bilateral Working Group." He explained that the focus is on the
impact of previous mines and potential future mines on Alaska
water bodies. Testing of water bodies in Southeast Alaska was
recently done to see if there has been any historic impacts and
to establish a baseline understanding of what the water quality
is today if any future mines are built. That report was
recently released, he continued, and there haven't been any
historic impacts. Alaska's three members of the Bilateral
Working Group are himself, Commissioner Corri Feige [Department
of Natural Resources (DNR)], Commissioner Doug Vincent-Lang
[Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G)].
1:55:27 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN inquired about the ongoing commitment to
continue gathering data as British Columbia either develops or
continues to let its historic mine sites degrade without regular
monitoring on the British Columbia side.
COMMISSIONER BRUNE replied that DEC wants to ensure it is
emphasizing its limited state dollars to find data that will
help the department in the future. The U.S. Geological Survey
(USGS), he said, has appropriated about $3 million per year to
continue these studies in Southeast Alaska, so DEC felt it
inappropriate to duplicate state funding for this ongoing
research. In addition, the Canadian government is collecting
data upstream on its lands. He and the other two commissioners
in the Bilateral Working Group have been pushing the Canadian
and British Columbia governments very hard to ensure that the
Tulsequah Chief Mine gets cleaned up. The cleanup plan will be
unveiled soon, and the mine will be cleaned up very soon.
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN asked what the lag time is between the
USGS gathering the data and the ability of Alaska to use and act
on it. She related that the concern she is hearing from her
communities located in those transboundary waters is that the
federal agency is collecting data but it's a year or two before
Alaska sees that data and can act on it, and for fishing
communities that's too long.
COMMISSIONER BRUNE responded that he doesn't know the specific
answer but the commitment for transparency exists across the
federal agencies, so when the data is available it will be made
available to the public. New mines are being deliberated, he
continued, but currently no new mines are under construction,
and that type of data is often shared from the mine sites. The
government of Canada has been transparent and willing to share
the data as new projects come to fruition.
1:58:27 PM
COMMISSIONER BRUNE resumed the presentation. He moved to slide
22, titled "Commercial Passenger Vessels Environmental
Oversight," and reported that roughly $5 per head comes from the
cruise ships, of which $4 per berth has been used to fund ocean
rangers. Over the last 10-15 years, more than $40 million has
been spent on ocean rangers, and only six notices of violation
came out of that. The department believes there are more
efficient and appropriate ways for DEC to be regulating that
industry. The department will be coming forward with a bill to
do that, similar to the bill introduced last year that focused
on using technology where appropriate, using DEC staff to do
announced and unannounced inspections, and to use some of the
money that was used for ocean rangers to upgrade the shoreside
wastewater treatment plants that are being used by over one
million cruise ship visitors every year. The department has the
authority to regulate that industry as it is. The department
plans on doing early season inspections of each of the ships as
they enter into Alaska waters. [Commissioner Brune turned to
slide 23] and pointed out that with the lack of a cruise
industry this past year and possibly this year, there is the
potential loss of $15 million in revenue to the Commercial
Passenger Vessels Environmental Oversight (CPVEC) account. He
said the legislature appropriated $4.5 million last year to
ready the communities in Southeast Alaska for accepting cruise
ship visitors because of COVID. This season remains uncertain.
COMMISSIONER BRUNE proceeded to slide 24, titled "Ambient Water
Quality Testing." He noted that last week committee members
received a DEC report regarding the water quality testing done
during the absence of cruise ships [from June-September 2020].
Sixteen ports were studied from Nome to Ketchikan. During this
absence of cruise ships, DEC also conducted ambient water
quality testing [in 20 sites] along major shipping and traffic
lanes throughout Southeast Alaska. The department will use [the
2020 data] as a baseline for when cruise ships return.
2:02:06 PM
COMMISSIONER BRUNE displayed slide 25, titled "Holding Everyone
to the Same High Standards." He said DEC wants to hold everyone
to the same environmental standards, not just the big industries
in the state. For example, cruise ships are allowed a maximum
of 40 fecal coliform bacteria per 100 milliliters of discharge,
while one local wastewater discharge facility has the ability to
discharge up to 1.5 million fecal coliform bacteria per 100
milliliters of water. This is one reason why DEC wants to focus
on upgrading the shoreside wastewater treatment plants.
REPRESENTATIVE SCHRAGE, in regard to the maximum allowance of
1.5 million fecal coliform bacteria per 100 milliliters, asked
what the average discharge is and whether any shoreside
treatment facilities actually approach that 1.5 million limit.
COMMISSIONER BRUNE confirmed that DEC definitely sees levels
that high, and advised that it will require significant capital
improvements to decrease that amount. Oftentimes, he continued,
it is seen that regulated entities will not do any more than
they have to in their permits, and that is often what drives the
economic considerations.
2:04:19 PM
MS. POKON provided a few highlights regarding the Division of
Environmental Health. She displayed slide 26, titled "Multi-
Agency Response to Invasive Species," and explained that DEC
created general pesticide permits to allow ADF&G and DNR to more
rapidly respond when an invasive species is found. The general
permit allows ADF&G and DNR to start work within 15 days rather
than the 70 days that it previously took.
MS. POKON spoke to slide 27, titled "Improving Food Safety
Complaint Process - Yuck Line." She specified that DEC worked
with the Department of Health and Social Services and the
Municipality of Anchorage to implement a phone number that the
public can call with concerns; for example, concern about
something seen at a restaurant.
MS. POKON addressed slide 28, titled "Environmental Health
Laboratory Capacity." She related that the Environmental Health
Laboratory prioritizes the laboratory needs for the regulatory
programs, including dairy safety, shellfish, food safety, animal
health, and drinking water. She noted that in response to
Representative Rauscher, the program name of dairy sanitization
was changed to dairy safety. Any excess lab capacity will be
put toward fish tissue monitoring, Food and Drug Administration
(FDA) cooperative agreements, shellfish sampling for inorganic
arsenic or paralytic shellfish poisoning (PSP) research, and
audit/certification of marijuana testing labs.
2:07:27 PM
COMMISSIONER BRUNE concluded the presentation with slide 29,
titled "Telling Our Story." He offered his appreciation to the
committee for allowing DEC to come tell its story about why the
department matters and what it does. He said any input from
legislators or constituents on how to improve is appreciated.
The department has a social media presence on Facebook and
Twitter where DEC constantly tells the story of the great work
being done by its approximately 470 employees to protect human
health and the environment and to partner with the regulated
community to ensure Alaska has an economy and to responsibly
develop its resources.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER thanked the commissioner for the work he
is doing and for working with the legislature.
CHAIR PATKOTAK offered his appreciation to Commissioner Brune.
HJR 12-ENDORSING ANWR LEASING; RELATED ISSUES
2:10:00 PM
CHAIR PATKOTAK announced that the final order of business would
be HJR 12 HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 12, "Urging the United
States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, to
honor the recent lease sales and proceed with permitting in the
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge; urging the President of the
United States to defend the 2020 Record of Decision approving
the Coastal Plain Oil and Gas Leasing Program in the Arctic
National Wildlife Refuge; opposing designation of the Arctic
National Wildlife Refuge as a National Monument; and urging the
Alaska delegation in Congress to uphold sec. 20001 of the Tax
Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017."
2:10:40 PM
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER, as prime sponsor of HJR 12, explained
the resolution requests continuation of the oil and gas
development program in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
(ANWR) that was recently put on hold. When the Alaska National
Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) was signed into law in
1980, he said, Congress itself reserved the right to permit oil
and gas development and production on the Coastal Plain ["1002
Area"] of the refuge. Within days of the first lease sale in
January 2021 President Biden placed the entire leasing and
development program on hold, and HJR 12 urges a reversal of that
action.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER related that the resolution implores the
U.S. Department of Interior Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to
honor the recent Coastal Plain oil and gas leasing program and
to proceed with permitting in the 1002 Area of the refuge. The
resolution also asks President Biden's administration to defend
the BLM's 2020 Record of Decision approving the Coastal Plain
oil and gas leasing. The resolution asks that when BLM is
considering and taking action on the leasing program that it
take into account the long history of safe and responsible oil
and gas development on the North Slope, as well as the enormous
benefits that the development in the refuge could bring to North
Slope residents, the state of Alaska, and the nation.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER said HJR 12 also states that the Alaska
State Legislature opposes any effort to employ the Antiquities
Act to designate the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge as a
national monument. It implores President Biden to take an
approach of consultation and engagement in these decisions that
affect the state, local communities, Alaska Native tribes and
entities, and residents. The resolution urges President Biden
to immediately rescind the provisions of Executive Order 13990
pertaining to the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER noted that while the Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge isn't in his district, he worked on the
resolution's language with Chair Patkotak whose district does
include the refuge and the North Slope. He stressed that he
believes this is a state's rights issue as well as a jobs issue.
Development within the refuge could create tens of thousands of
jobs across the country and thousands of jobs within Alaska.
2:15:02 PM
CHAIR PATKOTAK opened invited testimony.
2:15:17 PM
KARA MORIARTY, President and CEO, Alaska Oil and Gas Association
(AOGA), testified in support of HJR 12. She paraphrased from
the following written statement [original punctuation provided]:
AOGA is the professional trade association for the
industry and we appreciate the opportunity to testify
today on House Joint Resolution 12 (HJR12). This
resolution provides specific recommendations that
honors the commitment of ANILCA and the will of the
majority of Alaskans who support the safe development
of the Coastal Plain of the Arctic National Wildlife
Refuge (ANWR).
The sponsor did a very nice job summarizing the
specific actions that need to continue to occur to
keeping ANWR as a viable option for long-term
development of our oil and gas resources.
The Arctic National Refuge was expanded from 9 million
acres to over 19 million acres with the passage of
ANILCA in 1980, with over 90 [percent] of the region
permanently protected as wilderness. However, section
1002 of ANILCA specifically states that a small
portion of the Coastal Plain would be set aside for
future oil and gas development. There was always the
intent that oil and gas could occur one day. It was
part of one of the many compromises of ANILCA.
The Tax Act of 2017, referenced in HJR12, does limit
development to 2,000 acres. To give you perspective,
the Dulles International Airport in DC is 12,000
acres, and right here in Alaska, the Ted Stevens
International Airport is just over 4,600 acres.
So, why are even discussing more oil and gas
development down the road? The U.S. Energy Information
Administration (EIA) predicts that, by 2050, petroleum
and other liquids will continue to supply over 50
[percent] of the energy and fuels in the United
States, and the International Energy Administration
(IEA) has a similar prediction for global demand.
So, if the demand for oil and gas is going to be there
at least 30 years from now, why the Coastal Plain? The
federal government has described the potential 10-11
billion barrels of oil recovery from the 1002 Area as
the most significant oil potential in the United
States. And while market conditions and regulatory
risk that currently exist were the likely causes of
the lack of interest from our members in the 2021
January lease sale, the fact remains that the Coastal
Plain is still the largest onshore play on federal
land in the entire country. And it is a long-term
play. Just because companies did not demonstrate
interest two months ago, does not mean it is not an
important component of energy supply for years to
come.
In fact, in 2018 the EIA estimated that production
from the Coastal Plain, if it were to occur from 2031-
2050, could reduce U.S. expenditures on crude oil and
petroleum products imports by almost $600 billion.
One of the last things I would like to stress, and
would like to stress the most, is that Alaska's oil
and gas industry has a history of safe, effective, and
environmentally responsible development of the Arctic
spanning over five decades. Development today does not
occur the same way as it did 40 years ago. In the
1970's, a typical oil pad would be about 65 acres and
the drilling areas underground would extend about
three miles. Today, the surface area has shrunk to
about 12-14 acres, but with the advancement of
technologies and cutting-edge drilling techniques that
are often pioneered in Alaska, the drilling now
extends to up to 55 miles underground. But, with the
advancement of a brand-new drilling rig owned by
Alaska Native Corporation Doyon, commonly referred to
as "The Beast", Alaska is now home to the largest
extended reach drilling rig in North America. Now,
drilling can expand another 100 miles, for a total of
154 square miles underground while still maintaining
only about a 14-acre gravel pad on the surface.
Eventual development of the Coastal Plain will be
safe, be good for the country, and will continue to
build upon the jobs and revenues the industry has
contributed to the State and the local area for
decades.
2:21:00 PM
TOM WALSH, Past President (2020), Alaska Support Industry
Alliance, testified in support of HJR 12. He paraphrased from
the following written statement [original punctuation provided]:
Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony on
this resolution today on behalf of the Alaska Support
Industry Alliance, an organization of which I am the
immediate Past President. The Alliance is an Alaskan
Trade Organization whose mission is To promote
responsible exploration, development and production of
oil, gas and mineral resources for the benefit of all
Alaskans."
The Alliance has a membership of 500+ businesses and
individuals, who in total employ over 30,000 workers.
Alliance education and advocacy efforts focus on our
mission by providing substantiated, credible and
valuable information for our members, the public, and
decision-makers, such as yourselves. I am honored to
inform you today that the subject resolution is very
much aligned with the Alliance mission and objectives,
and I appreciate this opportunity to outline some of
the significant areas of alignment.
The resolution is comprehensive in its
characterization of the many reasons why exploration
and development of ANWR are important to Alaskans and
the citizens of the United States, and supports the
fact that the activity has been congressionally
authorized, and is supported broadly by Alaskans. In
fact, it is critical to Alaskans, given the declining
oil production and associated revenue stream to the
State. The text of the resolution covers all of the
key areas aligned with the Alliance mission, but it
would require more than my allocated 5 minutes just to
read the text. Therefore, I will summarize a few key
points in my testimony.
Revenue
As we all know, the State of Alaska is extremely
dependent on revenue gained from taxes and royalty on
oil production from our declining asset base. Natural
decline of oil production has been aggressively
mitigated by our industry partners through massive
drilling, enhanced recovery, and deployment of
innovative and evolving technology. The cost of
producing a barrel of oil in Alaska has always been
challenging in comparison to most other hydrocarbon
provinces, although our giant field size has provided
some relief through economies of scale. As our giant
fields decline, and overall production rate
diminishes, those economies of scale no longer apply.
Simply put, we need more oil production to sustain
commercial viability. Successful exploration and
production from ANWR can play a key role in extending
oil throughput to TAPS [Trans-Alaska Pipeline System],
and in supporting Alaska's economic engine.
Energy Independence
The United States has remarkably reached a point of
energy independence, largely based on a resurgence of
oil and gas production in the Lower 48 shale basins.
This energy independence is fragile and may prove to
be fleeting in light of economic and sociopolitical
changes[.] The fact remains that our productivity,
economic health, and prosperity as a nation rely on
affordable energy. There is no doubt that climate
change impacts will require a paradigm shift in our
energy production and consumption, but there is no
light switch to turn on renewable energy. A logical
and structured transition from carbon-based fuels to
carbon-neutral will require a logical and structured
effort to reduce carbon release while we transition to
the next source of energy. Alaska can play a major
role in this transition, based on our vast natural gas
resources, and our carbon sequestration opportunities
in depleted subsurface reservoirs. Oil production at
ANWR could help as a bridge to access to our natural
gas resources, and eventually to gas commercialization
of natural gas at ANWR and across the North Slope. The
U.S. Geological Survey has estimated potential
reserves of nearly 8 billion barrels of oil, and 7 TCF
[trillion cubic feet] of gas in the subsurface of the
Coastal Plain of ANWR.
2:25:06 PM
Jobs
Alaska and the nation are suffering from massive
unemployment due to the pandemic, magnified in Alaska
by the collapse in oil price. We are just now seeing
some recovery in oil price, but we all know how
reliable that trend has proven to be. We have yet to
see recovery in energy sector jobs in Alaska, and
Alliance member companies and their employees are
impacted particularly severely. Jobs associated with
exploration and development of ANWR resources will
have significant positive impact for our members, and
indeed the benefit to the State of Alaska and the U.S.
jobs market will be significant, as evidenced by the
activity associated with oil development across the
North Slope of Alaska [historically]. We desperately
need this jobs engine to help our return to a healthy
employment environment.
Environmental Stewardship
Alliance companies have helped the oil industry in
Alaska to be leaders in safe and environmentally sound
exploration and development of oil and gas on a global
level. We strongly believe that Alaskans can explore
for, develop, and produce oil and gas in a more
prudent, safe and environmentally sensitive manner
than anyone in the world. The Alliance is working to
brand this record of safety and environmentally
sensitive development on behalf of our industry in
Alaska, and the industry has long recognized Alaska as
a training ground for their global operations in
minimizing impact and footprint associated with
oilfield development. We can develop and produce oil
and gas from ANWR's Coastal Plain with minimal impact,
and with a tiny footprint. We have proved this across
the North Slope of Alaska.
Access to Resources
A fundamental premise of the resolution is that Alaska
and Alaskans have a right to benefit from our resource
wealth, but we can't benefit from what we cannot
access. Alaska is a resource state, from our
significant mineral resources to our abundant
fisheries, our spectacular natural beauty, and our oil
and gas opportunities. We need to develop a more
diverse economy, no doubt, but we rely almost
exclusively on extraction of our natural resources to
drive our economy, and we have since before Statehood.
It is rational for Alaskans to expect to benefit from
the natural resources with which we've been blessed,
and it is reasonable for us to have access to those
resources and associated jobs and revenue whether on
state, federal or private lands. This resolution makes
a clear case for that access. As stated earlier, this
resolution is aligned with Alliance mission and
objectives, and I believe submittal of this resolution
to the identified parties is not only appropriate but
required to help make Alaskan's voices heard in this
critical time.
2:28:12 PM
KATI CAPOZZI, President & CEO, Alaska Chamber of Commerce,
testified in support of HJR 12. She spoke as follows:
The Alaska Chamber was founded in 1953 and our mission
is to advocate for a healthy business environment in
Alaska. The chamber has more than 700 members and
represents businesses of all sizes and industries from
across the state.
The Alaska Chamber thanks you for introducing HJR 12
and enthusiastically supports HJR 12. Our top federal
priority at the chamber for years has been to support
oil and gas exploration and development in Alaska's
federal areas and to encourage and support the Alaska
Legislature to strongly advocate for responsible
development of these valuable resources.
Our reason for prioritizing this issue is simple.
Developing the 1002 Area of ANWR would provide
incredible opportunity for all Alaskans, especially
economic opportunities. Responsible development in
the 1002 Area would provide an invaluable boost to
America's energy security and bring much needed
economic growth potential to Alaska at a time when we
need it most. Our iconic pipeline also desperately
needs new oil the ANWR development could provide.
ANWR has incredible potential for oil and gas more
than 10 billion barrels by some government estimates.
For reference, the Trans-Alaska Pipeline has moved
just more than 17 billion barrels of oil since startup
more than 40 years ago. So the resource potential in
ANWR is truly incredible. A project the size and
scope of ANWR would create thousands of high-paying
jobs for Alaskans. In addition, with the Point
Thomson development fully operational just to the west
of ANWR, the 1002 Area is closer than ever to existing
infrastructure and could feed into TAPS with a much
smaller footprint than in years past.
The Alaska Chamber was pleased to see potential
development of ANWR making historic progress in recent
years. However, with a new administration in
Washington, DC, ANWR's future is less certain. We
appreciate and applaud the joint resolution's sponsors
for sending a strong bi-partisan signal of support for
maintaining that momentum and hope our collective
Alaskan voices make a difference to federal policy
makers.
Last but not least, the Alaska Chamber's statewide
scientific polling of Alaskans attitudes about ANWR
continually show the vast majority of Alaskans support
opening a small portion of ANWR to oil and gas
development. Two-thirds of Alaskans support it and
they have for decades.
We thank you for introducing a resolution that stands
to improve the business climate and to create jobs
here in Alaska at a time when we need it more than
ever, and we offer our full support.
2:31:04 PM
MARLEANNA HALL, Executive Director, Resource Development Council
for Alaska (RDC), testified in support of HJR 12. She said RDC
is a statewide business association comprised of individuals and
companies from Alaska's oil and gas, fishing, forestry, mining,
and tourism industries. She continued as follows:
Our membership includes all 12 landowning Alaska
Native corporations, local communities, organized
labor, industry support firms, and thousands of
Alaskans supporting responsible development of
Alaska's natural resources.
I am here today to express strong support for HJR 12
as it supports the oil and gas lease program that will
allow limited activity within the non-wilderness
portion of the Coastal Plain of ANWR.
... This legislation well describes measures to
properly address ANILCA and the intent to preserve
areas in the Coastal Plain for oil and gas
development. Further, it is important that we allow
for the eventual development, production, and
transportation of oil and gas in and from the Coastal
Plain that would meet the requirements established by
Congress.
Alaska depends on the responsible development of its
natural resources to expand and support our economy.
Alaskans statewide have long supported oil and gas
exploration and development in the Coastal Plain. ...
Polling has consistently shown 70 percent of Alaskans
in support of development of energy resources beneath
the 1002 Area. In addition, local residents and the
Inupiat people who actually live adjacent to the 1002
Area have also demonstrated support for development.
However, we recognize there are special interests that
are opposed to any further development of America's
energy resources. They advocate for leaving oil in
the ground, but even in the era of climate change
reality requires continued development of America's
oil and gas resources. While ... renewable and
alternative energy will make up a growing part of U.S.
energy portfolio, it will not significantly reduce our
reliance on oil in the near or mid term. We don't
deny renewable energy as a growing part of America's
portfolio, but it is still only projected to account
for a minority of American energy production in 2040.
... New oil and gas production will be required to
power America's energy and can serve as a bridge until
renewable energy becomes a more dominant energy source
decades into the future. Every barrel of oil not
developed in Alaska or America will simply be imported
from overseas where environmental regulations are
often weaker. To further reduce our reliance on
foreign sources of oil, America must continue to
pursue responsible oil and gas development onshore and
offshore Alaska. New production would provide a
bridge to the alternative and renewable energy sources
of the future.
Oil development on a fraction of the Coastal Plain
would create thousands of jobs nationwide and in
Alaska, generate billions of dollars in government
revenues for all public services, ... and further
improve energy security for decades into the future.
Not only does Alaska need oil and gas development on
the Coastal Plain, but the rest of the United States
would benefit from it too. Let's fuel America's
future with ANWR.
2:35:07 PM
MATTHEW REXFORD, President, Kaktovik Inupiat Corporation;,
Tribal Administrator,, Native Village of Kaktovik, testified in
support of HJR 12. He paraphrased from the following written
statement [original punctuation provided]:
My name is Matthew Rexford and I represent the
community of Kaktovik, the only community inside the
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, known as ANWR (also
known and referred to as the Refuge), but more
importantly Kaktovik is the only community inside the
Coastal Plain area of ANWR the area covered by your
Resolution. In many ways, I find it frustrating that
ANWR is still an issue of public debate my community
has supported oil and gas leasing in the Coastal Plain
for many decades and it was not until the Tax Cuts and
Jobs Act of 2017 that we were able to realize our
vision. I have to admit that I am extreme frustrated
that it took seventeen paragraphs before the
Kaktovikmiut are even mentioned in HJR No. 12 and that
caribou are mentioned before the people. You are
speaking of my homeland, our children have been raised
in this region and our ancestors are buried here. It
seems that the Kaktovikmiut, my people, continue to be
overlooked between the arguments over oil and gas and
Caribou which in many national discussions we have
been erased- yet ANWR would not have been opened
without our efforts.
Despite my frustration, I am speaking today to urge
you to support HJR No. 12 and to state that by doing
so you will support the Kaktovikmiut in the farthest
northeast corner of the State. We oppose any attempts
to designate ANWR as a National Monument. I will keep
my comments brief because our list of grievances is
long.
Our community has continually been caught between
federal actions that impactour ability to realize our
visions of a vibrant and sustainable future. The
Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1974 (ANCSA)
was supposed to allow our Kaktovik I?upiat Corporation
(KIC) the economic freedoms to develop its lands to
benefit our community. However, ANCSA was followed by
the passage of the Alaska National Interest Lands
Conservation Act of [1980] (ANILCA) which compromised
KIC's ability to access and develop its lands.
Kaktovik did not want to be an island in the middle of
a Refuge but it happened anyway. Having lived in the
Refuge since ANILCA I am here to tell you that life
has been difficult, and the federal management agency
has not performed its duty to our community as
required. We would not expect that to change if ANWR
was designated a national monument.
By example, in February 2020, our school burned to the
ground. We immediately applied for an overland permit
to move temporary school modules across the coastal
plain as an in-holder of the Refuge we have rights
under ANILCA that were not provided to us. As a last
minute stop-gap measure we were forced to move the
modules over the sea-ice to our community which added
significant risk to the transport operation.
Representative Patkotak, you understand the challenge
that we faced as a community to achieve moving modules
before we lost the sea ice route. This represents a
failure by the Refuge land management agency to
acknowledge our rights.
We support oil and gas development not only on our
lands but on the adjacent federal lands to provide for
economic opportunities to our people through jobs and
new business development. Our tribe, corporation, and
city government all actively participated not only in
the public process, but also in government-to-
government consultation, of the Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) performed the Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) development and supported full
leasing of the entire Coastal Plain with the
mitigations and stipulation presented in the Record of
Decision. Potential development of the coastal plain
is not only important for Kaktovik' s economy, but
also critical for the long-term economic
sustainability of our municipal government, the North
Slope Borough (NSB). Without the services the NSB
provides Kaktovik, and the other seven communities
within the North Slope of Alaska would still be living
in third-world conditions. The life expectancy of the
I?upiat has increased 13-years since development of
oil within our region due to the borough providing for
clean water and sanitation in our communities. We can
not turn the clock back we are part of the United
States and demand first world amenities and until we
find something else to provide for our health and
economic well-being we are fundamentally a people
dependent on resource development. We have been able
to come to terms with that paradox while at the same
time providing appropriate protections to our
subsistence resources and the lands and waters they
are dependent on.
We recognize that exploration is the first phase of
opportunity for our community I am sure that you have
seen in the press last week surrounding our inability
to receive permits to perform a low-impact seismic
program over our lands. Seismic is an important step
to determine whether there are potential drillable
targets for oil and gas. Due to our location, this was
an important project to identify local natural gas
targets that could be developed as a long-term energy
resource and move our community away from its reliance
of diesel and our only energy source. However, again
we were thwarted by the federal government to progress
toward a sustainable future.
Again, I request that you support HJR No. 12. I will
also leave you with this request and that is to not
forget about the people, my people, in the future.
Thank you for your time and invitation.
2:41:33 PM
CHAIR PATKOTAK held over HJR 12 and stated that public testimony
would be taken at the resolution's next hearing.
2:42:46 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Resources Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 2:43 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HJR 12 Supporting Document ADN Editorial 3.1.2021.pdf |
HRES 3/8/2021 1:00:00 PM HRES 3/10/2021 1:00:00 PM |
HJR 12 |
| HJR 12 Testimony Matthew Rexford Kaktovik Inupiat Corporation 2.28.2021.pdf |
HRES 3/8/2021 1:00:00 PM HRES 3/10/2021 1:00:00 PM |
HJR 12 |
| HJR 12 Letter of Support AIDEA 3.2.2021.pdf |
HRES 3/8/2021 1:00:00 PM |
HJR 12 |
| HJR 12 Sponsor Statement 2.22.2021.pdf |
HRES 3/1/2021 1:00:00 PM HRES 3/8/2021 1:00:00 PM HRES 3/10/2021 1:00:00 PM |
HJR 12 |
| HJR 12 Research AOGA Statement on Federal Leasing Ban 01.27.2021.pdf |
HRES 3/1/2021 1:00:00 PM HRES 3/8/2021 1:00:00 PM HRES 3/10/2021 1:00:00 PM |
HJR 12 |
| Dept. of Environmental Conservation Presentation for HRES.pdf |
HRES 3/8/2021 1:00:00 PM |
DEC Overview |
| HJR 12 FN NA.pdf |
HRES 3/8/2021 1:00:00 PM HRES 3/10/2021 1:00:00 PM |
HJR 12 |
| HJR 12 Testimony AOGA 3.8.2021.pdf |
HRES 3/8/2021 1:00:00 PM HRES 3/10/2021 1:00:00 PM |
HJR 12 |
| HJR 12 Testimony Tom Walsh AK Support Industry Alliance 3.8.2021.pdf |
HRES 3/8/2021 1:00:00 PM HRES 3/10/2021 1:00:00 PM |
HJR 12 |