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.