Legislature(2017 - 2018)BARNES 124
01/27/2017 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 | |
| HJR6 | |
| HB6 | |
| HJR5 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 6 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HJR 4 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HJR 5 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HJR 6 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HJR 5-ENDORSING ANWR LEASING; RELATED ISSUES
[Contains discussion of HJR 4]
2:16:03 PM
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON announced that the next order of business
would be HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 5, Urging the United States
Congress to pass legislation to open the coastal plain of the
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil and gas development;
urging the United States Department of the Interior to recognize
the private property rights of owners of land in and adjacent to
the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge; relating to oil and gas
exploration, development, production, and royalties; and
relating to renewable and alternative energy technologies.
2:16:24 PM
CO-CHAIR TARR moved to adopt the committee substitute (CS) for
HJR [5](AET), Version 30-LS0314\J. There being no objection,
Version J was before the committee.
2:16:53 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WESTLAKE, sponsor, informed the committee [CSHJR
5(AET)] is a resolution urging Congress to pass legislation to
open the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
(ANWR) to oil and gas development. Although subsistence
activities are the first priority in this region, jobs are also
important, and opening ANWR would be beneficial for Alaska and
all of the U.S. Alaska would receive 90 percent of the revenue
from bonus payments and royalties from ANWR in the future and -
at this time - development will create tens of thousands of
jobs. Representative Westlake expressed his constituents'
belief that development in ANWR can be done in an
environmentally-responsible way.
2:18:28 PM
JESSE LOGAN, staff, Representative Dean Westlake, Alaska State
Legislature, informed the committee the changes in the committee
substitute (CS) brought by the House Special Committee on Arctic
Policy, Economic Development, and Tourism (AET) provided clarity
on resource availability. On page 2, following line 4, a new
WHEREAS was inserted as follows:
WHEREAS, in 1998, the United States Geological Survey
estimated the central North Slope and 1002 study area
combined could contain up to 46,000,000,000,000 cubic
feet of natural gas; and
MR. LOGAN stated further, on page 3, lines 27 and 28, a change
was made as follows:
Delete: President Barack Obama's recent action to
withdraw millions of acres of land in the Arctic from
new offshore oil and gas drilling
Insert: the executive action
MR. LOGAN said the new line on page 4, lines 4 and 5, read:
WHEREAS the executive action threatens future
development and national energy security; and
MR. LOGAN continued, noting the final change beginning on page
2, line 30, and continuing through page 3, line 3, read:
WHEREAS, in December 2016, President Barack Obama,
through executive action, closed 125,000,000 acres of
the Arctic Ocean, a vast majority of the United States
Arctic offshore water, from future leasing
consideration, thus preventing extraction of an
estimated 27,000,000,000 barrels of oil; and
WHEREAS the Alaska Congressional delegation decried
the executive action; and
MR. LOGAN added that the resolution, if passed by the
legislature, would signify a unified voice to Congress and the
new administration, that the Alaska State Legislature supports
opening the coastal plain of ANWR for oil and gas development.
The bill is specific to opening the 1002 Area: urges the U.S.
Department of the Interior to recognize the private property
rights of landowners in and adjacent to ANWR and the efforts the
State of Alaska has made in developing and deploying renewable
energy statewide.
2:21:16 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PARISH directed attention to page 5, lines 2 and
3, which read:
the 90 percent of the oil, gas, and mineral royalties
from the federal land in the state that was promised
to the state at statehood.
REPRESENTATIVE PARISH asked where, and in what form, the
foregoing promise was made.
MR. LOGAN answered that is a reference to the [Alaska Statehood
Act, enacted 7/7/58 and effective 1/3/59].
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER directed attention to page 5, line 1,
which read in part:
... any attempt to coerce the state into accepting
less than
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSHER remarked,
That doesn't really mean they could do it on their own
if they wanted. That doesn't stop them from doing it
on their own if they wanted does it, or how does this
read out? I guess I don't understand the, the intent
of the language and ... what it really means when you
actually adopt it.
MR. LOGAN explained that the abovementioned [FURTHER] RESOLVED
says that the legislature opposes any unilateral reduction and
anything done by the administration to reduce the 90 percent as
promised at statehood.
REPRESENTATIVE PARISH asked:
It may be more of a question for [legislative legal
services] but ... based on some of our interactions
with the federal government in the past, how certain
are we that we would ... win in court ... were there
an attempt to coerce us into accepting less than the
full value we were promised at statehood?
REPRESENTATIVE WESTLAKE recalled that the state recently
exchanged a huge amount of land in order to get a little
[federal] parcel and gain security.
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH expressed his support for the bill.
2:25:04 PM
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON opened public testimony on CSHJR 5(AET).
2:25:16 PM
LIN DAVIS informed the committee she is a 24-year resident of
Alaska, a retired state worker, and she strongly supports
permanently protecting ANWR. She said there is a misperception
that everyone in Alaska supports developing ANWR; however, she
prefers no development in the coastal plain or in the 1002 Area.
In 2002, she spent time on the Kongakut River in ANWR and in
Arctic Village where she heard the mayor speak of the land and
the fears of the Gwich'in people for the caribou. Ms. Davis
said Americans have a duty to protect the Gwich'in homeland, and
opined ANWR should become a [UNESCO] World Heritage Site as one
of the last places Native people can live a subsistence
lifestyle. It is in the interest of Americans and Alaskans to
transition off of fossil fuels. She said the proposed
legislation contains "terrific language" about how
environmentally conscious the oil companies will be, but she
does not trust the promises of oil companies; in fact, oil
companies acknowledge the constant risk and lack of technology
to clean a major spill. Alaskan engineers and innovators can
create sustainable energy, and she urged for the committee to
let Alaska show the world how to use sustainable energy instead
of fossil fuels.
2:29:53 PM
KARLA BROLLIER, Environmental Justice Director, Alaska
Wilderness League, informed the committee she is an Ahtna
Athabascan who was born and raised in Alaska. She said the
Alaska Wilderness League works to preserve the land and the
water in Alaska, and she expressed her opposition to the
resolution to open ANWR to oil development. Her family is from
the Interior and has lived in this land for millennia. Some
places, such as ANWR, are too special to drill: development of
this land is not worth the price. Ms. Brollier said the land
must be protected and preserved for future generations, and
expressed her solidarity with the Gwich'in people and their
right to continue their way of life. She said she was
testifying in opposition to HJR 5 because she believes the
resolution is not the answer to Alaska's problems; although oil
and gas revenue is important to the state, there is a better way
to maintain a strong economy in Alaska. Ms. Broillier urged for
the committee to find a new way to find energy, and a
sustainable way of life, that does not compromise the land,
animals, and a traditional way of life.
2:31:31 PM
HALEY JOHNSTON, Wilderness Guide and Operations Manager, Alaska
Alpine Adventures, expressed her opposition to HJR 5. She
informed the committee ANWR to her represents employment,
recreation, and spiritual escape; she has been working and
traveling in the refuge and throughout the Brooks Range for the
past seven years. From the tundra to the coastal plain,
exploring ANWR is a passion for her. The refuge encompasses 19
million acres and along with 3.5 million acres of protected land
adjacent in Canada, polar bears, nesting sites, hunting grounds,
caribou, wolves, other animals, birds, plants, and cultural
sites are protected. Damage to the natural world, even in a
small corner of the area, could "send waves of disruption across
the whole refuge." Ms. Johnston travels with visitors from
around the world who come to the refuge because the refuge is
wild, and has an intact ecosystem and wildlife, that may not
endure. Tourism creates many jobs for Alaskans, and other
industries should not take a back seat to natural resource
extraction. As the world moves away from its dependence on oil
and gas, over 70 percent of Alaskans worry about the effects of
climate change. She urged that the committee not sacrifice one
of Alaska's last wild spaces.
2:34:28 PM
ANDY MODEROW, State Director, Alaska Wilderness League,
characterized HJR 5 as a shortsighted proposal that does not do
justice to Alaska's long history, nor build a legacy for future
generations. The lands of Alaska have provided for people for
thousands of years, and he cautioned against affecting clean
air, land, and waters. The transition from Alaska's main
commodity has become a necessity, not just because of the
impacts of climate change, but because world markets have moved
on to something new. Mr. Moderow advised that the state needs
to seek long-term strategies and not short-term fixes. He
referred to a letter provided to the committee that was signed
by 1,245 Alaskans who believe Alaska's economic problems won't
be solved by simply drilling. He urged the committee to make a
do not pass recommendation of HJR 5.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON inquired as to whether the [pending
congressional legislation] could pass with the support of 51
U.S. Senators.
MR. MODEROW said he did not know.
REPRESENTATIVE PARISH asked whether there is a commitment that
industry or a stakeholder group could make to "set your minds at
ease."
MR. MODEROW opined that the Arctic refuge needs to remain
untouched. He has heard from those in Arctic Village and from
Gwich'in, the story of the land and its history and importance
that makes drilling of the refuge an untenable proposition.
2:37:56 PM
SUZANNE BOSTROM, staff attorney, Trustees for Alaska, said her
public interest environmental law firm was founded 40 years ago
and works to protect the Arctic refuge from oil and gas
activities. She directed attention to the resolution related to
Sections 1002 and 1003 of the Alaska National Interest Lands
Conservation Act (ANILCA) [passed in the U.S. Congress on
11/12/80] that read:
WHEREAS, in 16 U.S.C. 3143 (sec. 1003 of the Alaska
National Interest Lands Conservation Act), the United
States Congress reserved the right to permit oil and
gas development and production within the coastal
plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge; and
WHEREAS, in 16 U.S.C. 3142 (sec. 1002 of the Alaska
National Interest Lands Conservation Act), the United
States Congress authorized nondrilling exploratory
activity within the coastal plain of the Arctic
National Wildlife Refuge (the "1002 study area"); and
MS. BOSTROM said the foregoing language is misleading and
legally inaccurate; there is a common misunderstanding that the
coastal plain was set aside for future oil and gas development,
which is reiterated by the first WHEREAS in the resolution.
Congress barred oil and gas development and production on the
coastal plain, and Section 1003 prohibits the production of oil
and gas in the Arctic refuge, and leasing or other development
leading to production of oil and gas. The second WHEREAS
statement is also inaccurate; Congress was concerned about
impacts to the coastal plain, and it only authorized a time-
limited exploration program - which was completed in the 1980s -
thus exploration is no longer allowed on the coastal plain. Ms.
Bostrom also pointed out that HJR 5 states that development
would take place with minimal impacts to the environment;
however, the bills proposed in Congress do not achieve these
goals, but undercut and eliminate environmental reviews and
protections for the Porcupine caribou herd and other "values" in
the refuge. She said her organization strongly urged the
committee not to adopt the resolution.
2:40:33 PM
YOSUHIRO OZURU informed the committee he has been an Anchorage
resident for seven years. He questioned the benefit of
developing oil and the assumption that oil development brings
economic development, happiness, and wellbeing to Alaskans;
however, low oil prices are introducing instability to the
Alaska economy and he posed the alternative vision that the
Alaska economy can be based on more communal (indisc.).
2:41:34 PM
LOIS EPSTEIN, Arctic Program Director, The Wilderness Society,
informed the committee she is a licensed engineer and has lived
in Alaska since 2001. Ms. Epstein said ANWR's coastal plain is
a sensitive ecological area; in fact, the coastal plain, also
known as the 1002 Area, is the home to polar bears, migratory
birds, and the Porcupine caribou head, consisting of 200,000
animals. Arctic conditions are changing with global warming and
although the Porcupine caribou herd is now healthy, the Central
Arctic caribou herd near Prudhoe Bay is down from 70,000 to
22,000 animals. As an engineer and a member of an Alyeska
pipeline advisory committee, she said she is very familiar with
the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System (TAPS), and advised that
engineering and economic studies have shown that TAPS can
operate for another 50 years with known reserves - not including
additional oil from ANWR - which further belies the need for oil
exploration in the coastal plain [documents not provided].
Furthermore, recent major finds in Nanushuk and in the Greater
Mooses Tooth Unit will support TAPS longer. She observed that
HJR 5 differs from previous related resolutions in its context:
the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) may be scaled
back. Currently, EPA provides grants to the Department of
Environmental Conservation for spill prevention and response;
said grants are now in jeopardy, and responding to spills on the
North Slope is expensive. Because of the sensitivity of the
coastal plain, the lack of need for ANWR oil to maintain TAPS
operations, and the Trump Administration's hostility to
environmental concerns, she asked the committee not to support
HJR 5. Legislators should ensure that House legislative
resolutions are an accurate reflection of facts and of
legislators' intent.
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH asked whether Ms. Epstein has consulted
Alyeska Pipeline Service Company regarding its great concern
about the reduction in throughput and the need for increased oil
exploration and development to keep pipeline volumes up.
MS. EPSTEIN said yes. She advised that from an operational
standpoint there are a number of measures to address any
diminished quantities [of oil]; in fact, it is not clear that in
the next decade there will be less throughput with the new
finds.
2:46:25 PM
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON said he shared Ms. Epstein's concern about
the new administration's hostility toward environmental
interests.
2:46:48 PM
STANLEY EDWIN said he is Gwich'in from the Yukon Flats area and
holds Bachelors of Science in Physics and Atmospheric Science,
and is a PhD student at the University of Alaska Fairbanks. His
is a unique situation in that he also subsists, and thus can see
environmental changes when he is hunting and in his research.
Mr. Edwin spoke in opposition to [HJR 5 and HJR 4]. There is
now a gag order on the National Science Foundation and EPA and
"everybody wants to jump into oil development." However, the
name Arctic implies sensitivity to any form of development or
disturbance in wildlife; for example, everything in the world is
linked and nothing stands alone. For future generations, he
said he opposes any form of development, and asked the committee
to think of the generations of people who have lived off of the
land and animals in a very harsh environment.
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH has heard anecdotally that there are more
caribou in the proximity of TAPS, and asked whether in the last
40 years there has been a reduction in the caribou population
"farther east."
MR. EDWIN said he lives further east of ANWR and his relatives
and extended family live all over the Interior. He was unsure
of the nature of the caribou herd; however, the Arctic is a
wildlife refuge to protect everything for future generations.
2:51:09 PM
EMMA FUNK said she is a lifelong Alaskan from Fairbanks. She
spoke in opposition to HJR 4 and HJR 5 and the opening of ANWR
to drilling. The refuge is one of the largest intact ecosystems
in the world and is uniquely valuable due to its Arctic
biodiversity, including caribou and migratory birds. The
coastal plain represents over one million acres of the refuge;
the infrastructure required for drilling, such as roads,
pipelines, and airstrips, would destroy habitat and interrupt
migratory patterns. Further, drilling would contribute to
climate change. Preservation of the land is also an issue of
Alaska Native cultural heritage and subsistence. Drilling is
not a sustainable fix for Alaska's economic problems and would
cause irrevocable ecological damage. She urged the committee to
vote no and protect ANWR.
2:52:24 PM
LACHLAN GILLISPIE said he is a lifelong Alaskan born and raised
in Fairbanks. The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge covers nearly
20 million acres of Arctic habitat with 1.2 million acres of the
coastal plain at the heart of the refuge. Drilling in the
coastal plain will have major adverse effects on biodiversity
throughout the refuge. Developing the coastal plain would
involve stripping rivers and streambeds of millions of cubic
yards of gravel for roads, airstrips, and drill pad
construction, and will also include diversions of freshwater and
exposure of wetlands to contamination. Further, it would
destroy tundra to build infrastructure such as housing and sewer
facilities. Studies have shown that drilling in ANWR would
impact muskox and caribou populations, taint and reduce water
supplies, and place polar bears at risk from oil spills
[documents not provided]. In 1989, the Exxon Valdez tanker oil
spill [in Prince William Sound on 3/24/89] reduced populations
of harbor seals by over 30 percent in the four years following
the spill. Mr. Gillespie spoke of the irreplaceable wilderness
and cultural heritage of ANWR, and encouraged the committee to
oppose HJR 4 and HJR 5.
2:54:20 PM
FRAN MAUER stated he has worked as a wildlife biologist in ANWR
for 21 years, where he studied wildlife including the Porcupine
caribou herd, moose, Dall sheep, and birds of prey. In addition
to learning about the wildlife, he saw the land in the context
of its value to Alaskans and the world. The caribou have
received the most attention, due to impacts that may occur to
them from oil development, and that they are crucial to the
survival of Gwich'in people in Alaska and Canada. The coastal
plain is the most heavily used calving grounds of the Porcupine
herd, and impacts to the herd would be far-ranging. The coastal
plain is unlike the North Slope tundra near Prudhoe Bay; in
the refuge, the mountains leave only a narrow area where females
give birth; there are five times as many animals as in the
Prudhoe Bay area, yet they depend upon one-fifth as much
habitat. Studies have shown that if females are displaced from
development areas during calving season there is generally ample
habitat at Prudhoe Bay, but in the refuge, if caribou are
displaced they will be pushed to areas of higher predation
mortality near the mountains leading to a decline of the herd
[documents not provided]. Other wildlife would be adversely
affected. Mr. Mauer said ANWR is an immensely valuable place
and urged the committee to oppose [HJR 5].
2:56:46 PM
BERNADETTE DEMIENTIEFF, Executive Director, Gwich'in Steering
Committee, stated she is Gwichyaa Gwich'in from Fort Yukon and
as the executive director of the Gwich'in Steering Committee,
represents 8,000 people who depend upon the Porcupine caribou
herd and who have a spiritual and cultural connection to them.
She said she is speaking for all children because parents and
grandparents don't want their children to struggle to survive
because we failed to protect our land and animals. It is our
responsibility to leave a healthy place for our children to
live, and it is the responsibility of legislators to take care
of not only the people, but of the land and animals. On behalf
of her people, she asked the committee to protect the heart of
Alaska, the Porcupine caribou herd, and the Gwich'in way of
life, and oppose [HJR] 4 and [HJR] 5.
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH suggested that witnesses submit written
testimony to the committee to aid in his research.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON supplied email addresses for the co-chairs.
CO-CHAIR TARR noted email testimony to the committee is
available online.
[HJR 5 was held over with public testimony left open.]