02/08/2017 01:00 PM House RESOURCES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Overview: Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission | |
| HB40 | |
| HB111 | |
| HJR5 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| *+ | HB 111 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 40 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| = | HJR 5 | ||
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE
February 8, 2017
1:50 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Andy Josephson, Co-Chair
Representative Geran Tarr, Co-Chair
Representative Harriet Drummond
Representative Justin Parish
Representative Chris Birch
Representative DeLena Johnson
Representative George Rauscher
Representative David Talerico
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Dean Westlake, Vice Chair
Representative Mike Chenault (alternate)
Representative Chris Tuck (alternate)
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
OVERVIEW: ALASKA OIL AND GAS CONSERVATION COMMISSION
- HEARD
HOUSE BILL NO. 40
"An Act prohibiting and providing penalties and civil remedies
for trapping within 200 feet of certain public facilities,
areas, and trails; and providing for an effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 111
"An Act relating to the oil and gas production tax, tax
payments, and credits; relating to interest applicable to
delinquent oil and gas production tax; and providing for an
effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
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.
- MOVED CSHJR 5(AET) OUT OF COMMITTEE
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 40
SHORT TITLE: TRAPPING NEAR PUBLIC TRAILS
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) JOSEPHSON
01/18/17 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/13/17
01/18/17 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/18/17 (H) RES, FIN
02/06/17 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
02/06/17 (H) Heard & Held
02/06/17 (H) MINUTE(RES)
02/08/17 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
BILL: HJR 5
SHORT TITLE: ENDORSING ANWR LEASING; RELATED ISSUES
SPONSOR(s): WESTLAKE
01/18/17 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/18/17 (H) RES
01/20/17 (H) AET REFERRAL ADDED BEFORE RES
01/20/17 (H) BILL REPRINTED 1/20/17
01/24/17 (H) AET AT 11:30 AM BARNES 124
01/24/17 (H) Heard & Held
01/24/17 (H) MINUTE(AET)
01/26/17 (H) AET AT 11:30 AM BARNES 124
01/26/17 (H) Moved CSHJR 5(AET) Out of Committee
01/26/17 (H) MINUTE(AET)
01/27/17 (H) AET RPT CS(AET) 4DP
01/27/17 (H) DP: TUCK, JOSEPHSON, TALERICO, WESTLAKE
01/27/17 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
01/27/17 (H) Heard & Held
01/27/17 (H) MINUTE(RES)
02/08/17 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
BILL: HB 111
SHORT TITLE: OIL & GAS PRODUCTION TAX;PAYMENTS;CREDITS
SPONSOR(s): RESOURCES
02/08/17 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/08/17 (H) RES, FIN
02/08/17 (H) TALERICO OBJECTED TO INTRODUCTION
02/08/17 (H) INTRODUCTION RULED IN ORDER
02/08/17 (H) SUSTAINED RULING OF CHAIR Y23 N15 E2
02/08/17 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
WITNESS REGISTER
CATHY FOERSTER, Commissioner/Chair
Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission
Department of Administration
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided a PowerPoint presentation
entitled, "Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission," and
answered questions.
JIM KOWALSKY, Spokesperson
Alaskans for Wildlife
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 40.
KENNY BARBER
Palmer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: His testimony in opposition to HB 40 was
read by Patti Barber.
PATTI BARBER
Palmer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 40.
ALYSON PYTTE
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 40.
JONATHAN ZEPPA, Spokesperson
Alaska Frontier Trappers Association, Inc.
Palmer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 40.
MARK LUTRELL
Seward, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 40.
ROBERT MATHEWS
Delta Sportsmans Association Inc.
Delta Junction, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 40.
JAMES SQUYRES
Deltana, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Stated his support for portions of HB 40
and his opposition to portions of HB 40.
DAN DUNAWAY
Dillingham, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 40.
DAN BOYD
Dillingham, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 40.
ASHLEY STRAUCH, Staff
Representative Scott Kawasaki
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Speaking on her own behalf, testified in
support of HB 40.
LINDA DEFOLIART
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 40.
KERI PETERSON
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the hearing of HB 40.
PAMELA GOODE
Deltana, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Spoke on a topic not on the committee
calendar, and testified in opposition to HB 40.
RICHARD PERSON
Chugiak, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 40.
TOM LESSARD
Cooper Landing, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 40.
LYNN KEOGH
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 40.
AL BARRETTE
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 40.
MIKE SATRE
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HJR 5.
FRANK BERGSTROM
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HJR 5.
JULIA YORK
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HJR 5.
STEVEN GREENLAW
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HJR 5.
RICHARD GLENN, Vice President
Land and Natural Resources
Arctic Slope Regional Corporation
Barrow/Utqiaguik, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HJR 5.
KARA MORIARTY, President/CEO
Alaska Oil and Gas Association
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HJR 5.
ALEXANDER GEDSCHINSKY
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HJR 5.
PRINCESS JOHNSON
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HJR 5.
ANNE SENECA, Spokesperson
Consumer Energy Alliance Alaska
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the hearing of HJR 5.
DONETTA TRITT
Arctic Village, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HJR 5.
RON YARNELL, Owner
All About Adventure
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HJR 5.
NARIEEZH PETER
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HJR 5.
MATT GILBERT
Arctic Village, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HJR 5.
ENEI PETER
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HJR 5.
LINDA DEFOLIART
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HJR 5.
JUSTINA BEAGNYAM
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HJR 5.
JENNA JONAS
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HJR 5.
CHRISTINA EDWIN
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HJR 5.
KEITH SILVER
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HJR 5.
MISTY NICKOLI
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HJR 5.
KERI PETERSON
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HJR 5.
ODIN MILLER
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the hearing of HJR 5.
SAM ALEXANDER
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HJR 5.
JESSICA GIRARD
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HJR 5.
MICHELLE TOOHEY
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HJR 5.
MELINDA CHASE, Spokesperson
Fairbanks Climate Coalition
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HJR 5.
SHANNON BUSBY
Ester, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HJR 5.
BARBARA HUFF TUCKESS, Director
Legislative Affairs
Teamsters Local 959
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of CSHJR 5.
KIM HEACOX
Gustavus, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HJR 5.
JEANINE ST. JOHN, Spokesperson
Lynden Transport
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HJR 5.
SARAH JAMES
Arctic Village
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HJR 5.
ELLA EDE
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HJR 5.
MICHELLE EGAN, Spokesperson
Alyeska Pipeline Service Company
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HJR 5.
CARL PORTMAN, Deputy Director
Resource Development Council
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HJR 5.
CAROLYN KREMERS
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HJR 5.
JAMES SQUYRES
Deltana, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HJR 5.
JOHN HYDE
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HJR 5.
KRISTINA OLESKA (indisc.)
Sutton, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HJR 5.
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:50:29 PM
CO-CHAIR ANDY JOSEPHSON called the House Resources Standing
Committee meeting to order at 1:50 p.m. Representatives
Josephson, Rauscher, Drummond, Johnson, Parish, and Talerico
were present at the call to order. Representatives Tarr and
Birch arrived as the meeting was in progress.
^OVERVIEW: ALASKA OIL AND GAS CONSERVATION COMMISSION
OVERVIEW: ALASKA OIL AND GAS CONSERVATION COMMISSION
1:50:56 PM
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON announced that the first order of business
would be a presentation by the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation
Commission (AOGCC).
1:52:16 PM
CATHY FOERSTER, Commissioner/Chair, Alaska Oil and Gas
Conservation Commission, Department of Administration, provided
a PowerPoint presentation entitled, "Alaska Oil and Gas
Conservation Commission (AOGCC)." Ms. Foerster informed the
committee AOGCC is an independent quasi-judicial body that holds
hearings and makes rulings on well spacing and other exceptions,
pool rules, gas offtake allowables, drilling wells, and
wellwork. The commission has three commissioners with six-year
terms that are staggered every two years, and she urged the
committee to advance the appointment of Mr. Hollis French to the
public seat and the reappointment of Mr. Dan Seamount to the
petroleum geologist seat. The commission is staffed by two
geologists, six engineers, nine field inspectors, and various
administrative support positions, and has a budget of $7.8
million. She asked the committee to note that none of AOGCC's
funding comes from general funds, but is assessed to the
regulated industry; in addition, a cut to AOGCC's budget will
slow permitting and inspections which in turn, will slow the
industry and its production of revenue (slide 1).
1:57:17 PM
MS. FOERSTER stated AOGCC is charged with preventing waste and
encouraging greater recovery of hydrocarbon and geothermal
resources, protecting fresh groundwater sources during oil
productions operations, correlative rights, and human health and
safety during wellwork operations. The duties and
responsibilities of AOGCC differ from those of the Department of
Natural Resources (DNR) in that DNR ensures the state's
resources are developed to provide maximum benefit to Alaskans,
and AOGCC's role is to regulate the industry throughout the
state. As an independent agency, AOGCC can serve to adjudicate
between DNR and industry. In 2016, AOGCC's activities were as
follows: providing adequate regulatory oversight for the
exploration and development activities in Cook Inlet, on the
North Slope, and in remote areas of the state; updating and
modifying regulations in order to stay current with technology,
and new information; working with the Bureau of Land Management
(BLM), U.S. Department of the Interior, on the legacy well
cleanup; working with small operator bankruptcy and lease
relinquishments to avoid adding orphan wells to the existing
inventory (slides 2 and 3).
2:00:52 PM
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON asked how an orphan well differs from a
legacy well.
MS. FOERSTER explained orphan wells have not been properly
plugged and abandoned, and no one is responsible; however,
legacy wells were drilled by the federal government, which must
take responsibility. She returned to the presentation and
advised in spite of lower oil prices, drilling and wellwork
activity continued at a steady pace in 2016; BP and
ConocoPhillips Alaska, Inc. continued to drill and workover
wells at Prudhoe Bay, Kuparuk and Colville, and Hilcorp
continued fixing broken wells at Milne Point other fields.
Further, in 2017, AOGCC expects industry activity to continue at
the same pace, with Blue Crest development at Cosmopolitan and
AIX working in the Kenai Loop field. Armstrong will follow
Repsol on the North Slope, there will be one shale exploratory
well, and Cook Inlet Energy and Furie will each drill an
exploratory well in Cook Inlet. Caelus will not have wellwork
in Smith Bay (slide 4). Ms. Foerster said AOGCC constantly
evaluates its regulations, and proposed changes are to be heard
in the near future. Proposed changes are to accomplish the
following: stay current with technology and operating
practices; fill a gap; clarify something that was being
misinterpreted.
2:03:44 PM
MS. FOERSTER informed the committee AOGCC has been updating its
hydraulic fracturing regulations to relate to current technology
and political climate; the regulations were reviewed by the
State Review of Oil and Natural Gas Environmental Regulations
Inc. (STRONGER), which is a nationally recognized consortium,
and received a favorable outcome. In fact, it is considered
that Alaska has the most comprehensive and stringent regulations
in the country for hydraulic fracturing, and AOGCC continues to
analyze its regulations in response to public requests. Also in
2017, AOGCC will work with the Department of Environmental
Conservation (DEC) to transfer the regulatory responsibility for
blowout contingency planning to AOGCC, although DEC will retain
control of the portion of the contingency plan related to spill
cleanup (slide 5). Ms. Foerster explained improperly abandoned
wells are more of a problem in the Lower 48, where there has
been oil and gas activity for over a century, with the exception
of the travesty wells in Northwest Alaska that were drilled and
operated by the federal government. In 2014, $50 million was
allocated for cleanup and BLM began work on two wells, but
neither the cleanup plan nor state regulations were followed,
thus the wells are not plugged and are in worse disrepair. This
year AOGCC negotiated a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with
BLM to ensure BLM will follow all of Alaska's applicable laws
(slide 6 and 7).
2:08:53 PM
MS. FOERSTER, in response to Representative Drummond, will
identify the oil rigs illustrated in the presentation. Turning
to orphan wells, she said as oil fields mature, and new and
smaller companies come to work in the state, the threat of
orphan wells increases. In 2016, two operating companies went
bankrupt; if their assets are not purchased by another company,
the landowner, frequently the state, is responsible for plugging
the well(s).
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON questioned whether the state has a bond
system for wells.
2:10:41 PM
MS. FOERSTER said the present system collects two $100,000
plugging and abandonment bonds to cover all of the wells one
company operates. In addition, privately-held companies can be
less financially secure than are ConocoPhillips Alaska, Inc., or
BP. In further response to Co-Chair Josephson, she said all of
the companies are treated the same, "and we need to change
that." Ms. Foerster further explained that there are a few
orphan wells in the state, all of which were drilled by
companies that no longer exist.
2:12:48 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PARISH asked for the approximate cost of plugging
one well on the North Slope or in Cook Inlet.
MS. FOERSTER said there is no one answer; the cost depends on
its location, and estimates range from $100,000 to $20,000,000.
REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND suggested the state should require
insurance to support the bonds.
MS. FOERSTER agreed a different type of coverage is needed for
smaller companies. In further response to Representative
Drummond, she opined further regulation will not require
legislation; the plan is to advise the administration and the
industry of the needed changes, gather testimony from the
affected parties through hearings, and provide sufficient notice
of AOGCC's final decision. Returning attention to the
presentation, she noted also in 2016, two companies relinquished
leases that had wells; DNR regulations related to relinquishment
conflict with those of AOGCC, thus AOGCC seeks to work with DNR
to avoid this situation. In order to protect the state from a
huge orphan well liability, AOGCC will accomplish the following:
collect the bond from failing companies; work with DNR to
eliminate the aforementioned gaps in lease relinquishment
procedures; change the state's bonding structure; work with
operators to prudently identify and plug wells that have no
future utility (slide 7).
2:19:19 PM
MS. FOERSTER reviewed the role of AOGCC in gas offtake and
advised all of the gas from Prudhoe Bay is used to get more oil
out of the ground; however, at Point Thomson, gas production
will leave a significant amount of condensate unrecoverable. In
addition, producing gas strands oil, but when oil is produced
and gas is reinjected, the gas remains recoverable at a later
date. Therefore, AOGCC is disinclined to allow gas offtake that
would cause oil waste; however, AOGCC granted gas offtake
allowables to Prudhoe Bay and Point Thomson for a "2025ish"
timeframe based on a window of opportunity for selling gas in
the mid-20s, and reservoir studies that have indicated the pool
of oil at risk of being lost is smaller than the value of the
gas.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON questioned whether AOGCC has the authority to
rescind its gas offtake allowables.
MS. FOERSTER said if data indicated there would be waste of the
resource, AOGCC would make any changes necessary. In response
to Representative Talerico, she said Furie and Cook Inlet Energy
may each drill one well in Cook Inlet.
REPRESENTATIVE PARISH surmised the current situation is that the
state would have $200,000 to plug all of BP's wells should it go
out of business in the distant future.
MS. FOERSTER said AOGCC is working on a new process designed "to
ensure that that is not a problem."
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH appreciated the work done by AOGCC.
REPRESENTATIVE TALERICO inquired as to whether regulations need
to be updated for both technological and mechanical innovations.
MS. FOERSTER said yes. Sometimes regulations become out-of-date
or information is received from the Interstate Oil and Gas
Compact Commission indicating a change is warranted.
HB 40-TRAPPING NEAR PUBLIC TRAILS
2:27:44 PM
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON announced that the next order of business
would be HOUSE BILL NO. 40, "An Act prohibiting and providing
penalties and civil remedies for trapping within 200 feet of
certain public facilities, areas, and trails; and providing for
an effective date."
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON opened public testimony on HB 40.
2:28:04 PM
JIM KOWALSKY said he was speaking for Alaskans for Wildlife
which is a nonprofit organization promoting respect for
wildlife. He expressed support for HB 40 as presented, and
opined this is not a Board of Game (BOG), Alaska Department of
Fish & Game (ADF&G), matter or an allocation matter, but a
matter of public safety and public health; in fact, BOG has
refused to address this issue, thus Alaskans for Wildlife has
turned to the legislative process. The topic may be more
germane to urban areas where conflict between trail users is
frequent. Mr. Kowalsky expressed his organization's strong
support for the bill, including identifying traps with tags in
order to aid the enforcement of regulations.
2:30:38 PM
PATTI BARBER, on behalf of Kenny Barber, read the following
testimony:
I am opposed to HB 40, the reason is because trap tags
are another way to create problems for trappers in the
field. Trap tags have been removed by people that
don't agree with the activity and place them in
another location to harm the trapper. The fines and
imprisonment portion of this bill are too high for the
trapper and no mention of consequences for dogs off
leash. Where is the justice? As a trapper for over
55 years, 10 years as a child in New York and 45 years
in Alaska, I have never caught a domesticated animal.
My trap line was on one of the highest recreational
use areas in the state, the Knik River. Trapping is a
legal activity. Dogs off leash are illegal in many
areas of the state such as state parks and the
Matanuska-Susitna (Mat-Su) Borough. Dogs off leash do
not, and not under voice control are left to run free
and have been known to run in packs and kill other
wildlife such as moose and caribou calves, rabbits,
birds, and other small animals. Dog bites to humans
occur more often than a dog being caught in a trap.
Currently, there have been only five dogs caught in
traps in the Mat-Su Borough in 2016. In the state of
Alaska epidemiology reports there have been 292 total
dog bite related injuries or hospitalizations in 11-
year study period. Many were children aged zero to
four years as the highest rate. A hundred and thirty-
three of these injuries were within the Anchorage and
Mat-Su boroughs, the highest injury count in the
state. When we came to Alaska in 1970 I worked for
Valley Memory Garden Cemetery, while there I helped
bury two children that were killed by dogs. In years
past there have been 1,176 dogs euthanized in one year
at the Mat-Su animal control center. I am unaware of
a child or adult being maimed or caught in a trap.
During testimony on Monday there was mention that the
board of game was unwilling to address the problem of
dogs and trapping. I was appointed by board of game
chairman, (indisc.) to sit on a committee to address
this problem. The committee consisted of fish and
game advisory committee members, Anchorage, Mat-Su,
and Soldotna, one state trapper organization member,
three anti-trapping members, and one member of the
board of game was picked to chair the committee. We
met for two years on this issue alone. We came up
with some solutions such as signage at trailheads,
educating the public that trapping occurs from
November to April, and that dogs should be on a leash
during that timeframe. The 330 and 220 conibear traps
could only be used underwater or ice within 100 feet
of a maintained trail. The Mat-Su Borough is working
on an ordinance to restrict trapping on portions of
the Crevasse Moraine Trail and on school property. I
sit on the parks and recreation advisory committee.
As a committee we have discussed the ordinance at
length, and I am not speaking on this for that
committee.
2:35:16 PM
PATTI BARBER, speaking on her own behalf, said she is opposed to
HB 40 because trapping is legal and dogs off leash are illegal
in many portions of the state. Signage alerting users to the
presence of traps from November to April is appropriate. Dogs
are attracted to bait and in some areas of the state underwater
trapping for beaver, mink, or muskrat occurs earlier in the year
and is not a threat to dogs. Instead of requiring trap tags,
she suggested creating a dog park so dogs can be off leash
during trapping season; dogs would be safe from traps in a
fenced area. She noted that many dogs and cats are loose. Dog
owners use trails all of the time, and also use trappers'
personal trails. Ms. Barber said trappers have to pay fines and
suffer imprisonment for violations, but dog owners do not, and
opined all illegal parties should pay at the same rate.
REPRESENTATIVE PARISH questioned whether Mr. or Ms. Barber would
support a bill targeted at graveled and paved trails.
MR. BARBER said yes to paved trails, but questioned the
definition of a maintained trail, of which there are few. He
said most trappers are known to ADF&G and it has the right to
ticket a trapper. There is no problem with paved trails or bike
trails in Anchorage.
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH observed some have expressed a preference
for a local government control option in regard to trapping, and
asked how a local government is empowered "to manage trapping."
MR. BARBER said he cannot speak for "that" committee, but Alaska
Safe Trails [proposed restrictions] to school property and the
Crevasse Moraine Trail; however, there were "amendments to the
bill" [document not provided] because the bill as written "would
make you an outlaw to go to a school with a trap in your truck
...." Another amendment was to limit the restrictions on the
Crevasse Moraine Trail, because the definition of "any
maintained trail in the borough" is too vague.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER asked where to find statistics on dogs
and people caught in traps.
MR. BARBER said he did not know.
2:43:42 PM
ALYSON PYTTE said she is a dog owner and a daily user of public
trails. She thanked the sponsor of the bill, and trappers who
trap at a safe distance from public trails. Like others, she
lets her dog off leash and is concerned about her dogs getting
caught in a trap, and avoids areas where incidents have
occurred. Ms. Pytte spoke of previous legislation that
addressed the wellbeing of pets in custody disputes, which
supports the modern view that pets are part of one's family.
She opined there is broad public support for the restrictions
written in HB 40, and suggested a similar ballot initiative
would pass if there is continued inaction by the legislature.
The bill proposes minimal burdens on trappers and helps by
providing guidance on the placement of traps. She urged the
committee to improve the bill by making the following changes:
include public trails in state game refuges, on state land,
municipal land, and federal refuges and parks; require traps to
be tagged; increase the distance to 500 feet.
2:47:09 PM
JONATHAN ZEPPA, representing the Alaska Frontier Trappers
Association, Inc., said his organization is a statewide
organization with a majority of members who reside within the
Mat-Su valley. Alaska Frontier Trappers Association, Inc.,
recognizes change is needed to minimize conflict between
trapping and other recreational users with dogs in or adjacent
to semi-urban areas. However, the change must come through
local authorities, as the conflict is restricted to population
centers. Although boroughs differ throughout the state, the
Mat-Su Borough has drafted legislation for school campuses and
the Crevasse Moraine Trail system which has not been presented
to the assembly, and his organization has proposed working with
the borough fish and wildlife commission to develop realistic
requirements and a mapped urban trapping management area
proposal to submit to BOG. He opined BOG will appreciate
recommendations from a trappers' association in this regard.
Turning to risk, he said in the Mat-Su valley almost all dogs
caught are off leash in violation of leash laws and he
questioned the lack of risk statistics in support of the bill.
In fact, the risk to dogs and people from other dogs is much
greater. Mr. Zeppa said the risk to people from traps is so low
statistics are not maintained by health organizations in Alaska;
however, 3.9 people per 100,000 have been hospitalized after
suffering dog bites in Alaska during a 10-year period. He
opined evidence supports trapping is not dangerous. Regarding
enforcement, he said there are thousands of miles of Revised
Statute 2477 (RS 2477) trails maintained by the state, that are
not surveyed, and questioned how to measure 200 feet; further,
trails change, therefore law enforcement is impossible without
surveys and maps. He summarized, saying the issue is a local
matter and to prohibit all trapping within 200 feet is unfair
and prejudiced against trapping.
REPRESENTATIVE PARISH requested a copy of the pertinent draft
regulations from the Mat-Su Borough.
2:53:20 PM
MARK LUTRELL expressed support for HB 40 which is common-sense
protection of family members without significant restrictions on
trappers. The entire community including trappers and non-
trappers, families, residents, visitors, tourists, and companion
animals will benefit from added safety during activities without
the threat and fear of traps. He related a personal experience
of finding a dog caught in a trap on a trail, and said dogs
should be allowed to romp and run. Mr. Lutrell said the bill is
not anti-trapping, but is a "very minor inconvenience," and good
for the trapping community's reputation. He expressed his hope
the committee would support the bill.
2:56:10 PM
ROBERT MATHEWS, speaking on behalf of the Delta Sportsmans
Association Inc., informed the committee the association does
not support the bill, as the bill appears to relate to a local
issue that needs to be addressed through the borough and city
assemblies. The issue has been studied by BOG and brought to
its attention, but there was no consensus in regard to action on
this issue. He restated the Delta Sportsmans Association has
about 250 members who do not support bill.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON understood there is a community of trappers
in Delta Junction that may support a compromise version of the
bill.
MR. MATHEWS said no, the trappers he spoke with do not support
the 200-feet restriction, tagging, the measurement of a
meandering trail, or the definition of a trail.
2:58:04 PM
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON announced HB 40 was held over with public
testimony open.
HB 111-OIL & GAS PRODUCTION TAX;PAYMENTS;CREDITS
2:58:24 PM
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON announced that the final order of business
would be HOUSE BILL NO. 111, "An Act relating to the oil and gas
production tax, tax payments, and credits; relating to interest
applicable to delinquent oil and gas production tax; and
providing for an effective date."
[Although stated on the recording Co-Chair Josephson handed the
gavel to Co-Chair Tarr, Co-Chair Josephson retained the gavel.]
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH referred to HB 111 and asked whether there
is a signed signature sheet to advance the bill as a committee
bill.
CO-CHAIR TARR said the matter was dealt with on the House floor.
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH restated his request for a copy of the
signature sheet, noting that five signatures would imply a
majority but his concern centers on consensus.
CO-CHAIR TARR said a copy could be provided. She informed the
committee there would be a brief introduction of HB 111 to
provide the committee with an opportunity to preview the bill,
and have ample time to prepare for hearings next week.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON read from a document provided 1/18/17
entitled House Resources Bill Hearing Request Requirements
[document not provided], and inquired as to whether there is a
bill packet available in order for the committee to follow along
during the introduction of the bill.
CO-CHAIR TARR stated the committee would not be working on the
bill today, the intent of the introduction of the bill is to
provide the committee several days to review the bill. She
related her previous experience in this regard and advised all
materials will be available online to the committee and to
members of the public.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON remarked:
I object because what we were given in the memorandum
regarding the, a, discussion of scheduling in
committee [has] not been met.
3:02:43 PM
CO-CHAIR TARR advised it is the prerogative of the chair to
schedule and introduce bills. Directing attention to HB 111,
she listed the major features of the bill as follows: reduces
the net operating losses from 35 percent to 15 percent; limits
the abilities of companies to earn net operating losses to
companies producing less than 15,000 barrels per day; caps the
annual to 35 million from 70 million; limits repurchases after
2018; raises the minimum tax from 4 percent to 5 percent and
hardens the floor; addresses the interest rate; reduces the per-
barrel credit.
[HB 111 was held over]
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER said there was some confusion as to who
was responding as the chair and who was giving testimony. In
response to Co-Chair Josephson's request for clarification of
his question, he stated:
If she was giving testimony and you were the chair and
she was talking through the chair on the actual
process, she answered about the process. I was just
wondering, does the chair, which you were at the time,
agree with that process. That's all.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON opined the ruling of the [Speaker of the
House of Representatives, Alaska State Legislature (Speaker)]
was proper and under the pertinent statute, when five members
sign a request for a committee bill, the committee can entertain
that bill. He said the committee would recess until 6:00 p.m.,
to continue hearing public testimony on HJR 5 and HB 40.
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH asked who has a copy of the signature
sheet.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON expressed his belief the Speaker has a copy.
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH responded:
He did not when we asked earlier. ... Is that where
it's supposed to reside? And again, it's not knowing.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON deferred to Co-Chair Tarr.
CO-CHAIR TARR assured the committee the co-chairs will provide a
copy, and said a copy was provided to the Speaker this date.
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH asked Co-Chair Josephson to provide a copy
of the signature sheet at the 6:00 p.m. meeting.
3:06:09 PM
[Although on the audio recording Co-Chair Josephson misspoke and
adjourned the meeting, at timestamp 3:05:05 p.m., he stated his
intent to recess the meeting to 6:00 p.m., 2/8/17.]
The House Resources Standing Committee meeting was [recessed to
6:00 p.m., 2/8/17.]
6:04:40 PM
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON called the House Resources Standing Committee
meeting back to order. [Present at the call back to order were
Representatives Josephson, Talerico, Drummond, Birch, Johnson,
Rauscher, and Tarr. Representative Parish arrived as the
meeting was in progress. Attendance can be heard on the audio
recording at timestamp 6:16:45 p.m.]
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON questioned whether the 1:00 p.m.,
[2/8/17] meeting was adjourned or recessed.
6:04:51 PM
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON answered the meeting was recessed. He
remarked:
I think part of the frustration I heard from some of
the members, is with the ruling of the [House of
Representatives, Alaska State Legislature] floor, and
what happened on the floor and that the Speaker's
ruling was affirmed. The bill that was transmitted to
us is like any other bill, although a committee bill,
it is fully before us in every respect. It is, it is
a committee substitute like any committee substitute
and I want to mention something else: committee
substitutes are not crafted generally, I've never seen
it, with the consensus of the committee's members.
That is not the process and in fact, I just talked to
a former co-chairman of finance in the other body, who
said, "Often, we had a committee substitute that the
members had never seen, including majority members."
... The second matter is relative to the five
signatures, you asked for the five signatures, I think
you're entitled to that. I'm not the keeper of the
five signatures, I saw it on the Speaker's dais, I
would go look there for it. Ms. Johnson, you talked
about the memorandum, and whether we complied with the
memorandum. The memorandum in question ... refers to
prime sponsors, sponsor statements, and the like. It
is, it is clearly for a personal piece of legislation,
not a committee piece of legislation ....
6:07:13 PM
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH acknowledged he received a copy of the
signatures on a memo dated 2/6/17. He remarked:
I believe we met on February sixth, last, and five
people are named on here with signatures, so I guess,
my question is ... was this discussed on February
sixth and just purposely avoided any discussion when
we last met as a committee, and if so was this, was
this done in secret? ... At least there's four
members of this body that weren't involved on February
sixth when this was circulated and discussed. ... In
the interest of transparency and equity and process,
... it seems to me like if, if everybody's circulating
HB 111 ... it seem[s] like we would've had a look at
it on February sixth, when this memo was dated.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON restated that committee substitutes are not
vetted through committee members and the matter was dealt with
on the floor.
6:08:42 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON stated:
... one of the things that I feel at a loss with ...
as a freshman, I don't know what the procedures are, I
just go by what I see in Mason's Manual or what ...
the rules that are actually out there. So, I just,
just want to remind you that us freshmen that haven't
been here, that have not seen what happened in other
places, we just really don't know, we're just trying
to make sure that we follow the rules.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON invited further public testimony on HB 40.
6:09:59 PM
JAMES SQUYRES said he lives in a rural area deep in an
unorganized borough and supports portions of the bill, but not
all of the bill. He cautioned against the bill becoming an
anti-trapping bill. In the area where he lives, "real trappers"
have cut over 150 miles of sourdough trails deep in the
wilderness, but there are others who trap in the road right-of-
way. A concern in his neighborhood is a recreational trail that
has traps 15 feet to 20 feet off of the road against the edge of
the trail. Mr. Squyres has been warned not to spring or remove
traps, but he does spring and remove traps on his posted,
private land. He said he supports the portion of the bill
related to recreational trails, however, he advised that many
state, unmaintained roads that are privately maintained for
private land access are often narrower than the right-of-way,
and "lazy trappers" place traps on the road right-of-way next
to, but not on, private land. In winter, the privately
maintained state roads are used for skiing and snow machine
riders, putting users at risk. He urged for an amendment to the
bill, adding "or road" on line 11, page 2, of Version U, which
would then read, "public trail or road developed or improved
with public funds." Mr. Squyres said he opposes the tag
requirements because real trappers set traps deep in the
wilderness; if the bill makes traps on recreational trails
illegal, they could simply be removed by law enforcement and
avoid increasing the size and scope of government.
6:13:50 PM
DAN DUNAWAY informed the committee he was speaking on his own
behalf and said he is a member of the Nushagak Advisory
Committee, Alaska Department of Fish & Game, and the Bristol Bay
Federal Subsistence Regional Advisory Council, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. He related
the Nushagak Advisory Committee addressed similar issues last
year. He and others are generally opposed to regulations for
trap tags and believe the issues are best handled by
municipalities, as there are unique situations in each area. It
is difficult to determine the distance from trails and whether
trails are public, and he expressed his opposition to the bill.
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH asked whether there is any merit to
addressing this issue with a local preference so that
regulations focused on the Anchorage area would not affect those
in Dillingham, Kotzebue, or other rural communities.
MR. DUNAWAY opined that would be better. He also pointed out
the city has asked him to trap nuisance beaver in areas that
would be proscribed by the bill.
6:16:50 PM
DAN BOYD, speaking in favor of HB 40, said he is a Dillingham
resident. He said he has personal experience with some
unethical trappers. This winter, in the Dillingham small boat
harbor and park with playground equipment, an unethical trapper
set a snare trap which caught a dog. There have also been fatal
instances with traps set along road rights-of-way. He said he
favored regulations concerning trapping and that require tags on
traps with a number. Mr. Boyd also supports local control, but
in Dillingham there is no municipal ordinance against trapping
anywhere in the city.
6:19:07 PM
ASHLEY STRAUCH disclosed she is staff to Representative Scott
Kawasaki, Alaska State Legislature, and is testifying on her own
behalf. She related a personal experience when 13 years ago her
dog was killed by a trap set 150 feet from the entrance to
Chugach State Park. Now she lives with constant fear for her
dog in the wilderness in Fairbanks on designated trails. She
acknowledged this is a sensitive issue but a balance can be
struck between the interests of trappers and recreational users.
There are responsible trappers who support the bill; however,
without a solution by the legislature, incidents will continue.
Ms. Strauch pointed out an identification tag on a conibear trap
will not affect the outcome of an incident because conibear
traps kill instantly. She said this is a statewide issue and
the committee should consider all users of land.
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH asked whether the incident with her dog was
near Chugach State Park.
MS. STRAUCH said the incident occurred near Anchorage in Arctic
Valley at the trailhead where there was an illegally set trap.
She has heard trappers are concerned traps can be traced to
owners by a member of the public, and suggested ADF&G should
keep trappers' names confidential, thereby preventing any
possible harassment. In further response to Representative
Birch, she said without a tag on the trap, her family could not
prove who set the trap illegally.
6:25:12 PM
The committee took an at ease from 6:25 p.m. to 6:33 p.m.
6:33:03 PM
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON resumed public testimony on HB 40.
6:33:25 PM
LINDA DEFOLIART stated she served on the Fairbanks North Star
Borough Trails Advisory Commission for a few years and whenever
this issue arose, a member of the Alaska Trappers Association
would attend the meeting. She said a person walking a dog off
leash far from a trail can be fined $100, but a trapper can put
a trap on a trail to a cabin in the White Mountains National
Recreation Area and is within his/her legal rights. A trapper's
response to the advisory committee, in regard to restricting the
placement of traps, is that responsible trappers do not place
traps inappropriately, but not all trappers are responsible.
Ms. DeFoliart said she knew of two dogs in a dog team that were
caught, and opined a person walking or mushing a dog on a leash
on a major trail should not have to worry about a member of
their party stepping in a trap.
6:34:40 PM
KERI PETERSON told of her friends' anguish because their dogs
were injured or killed by traps. She recommended that all who
walk on a trail carry heavy-duty wire cutters and gauze.
6:35:36 PM
PAMELA GOODE informed the committee many people in rural Alaska
are unable to listen to the House [floor sessions] because there
is no teleconference line, although there is one in the Senate.
She said she is from the Interior and is opposed to HB 40 as
written, although she strongly supports protecting public trails
from traps. However, if no one is harmed, the trap should be
removed with no fine or jail time for the trapper. In addition,
trapping is part of Alaska's heritage and it is important to
protect trappers, and the many miles of trap lines into the
wilderness, from bureaucracy. She cautioned that "trails
associations" may be anti-trap people; in fact, trappers cut
fine trails through the wilderness and over time the trail
becomes a public trail, thus trappers should be protected from
others using their trails. Ms. Goode explained trappers put
traps in the middle of their trails for efficiency. Finally,
requiring trap tags is burdensome for trappers, expands the
scope of government, and is state overreach. She urged the
committee to make appropriate amendments to the bill.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked whether the fiscal note pertinent
to the cost of tags on traps was available.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON advised the fiscal note is posted on the
legislative Bill Action Status Inquiry System (BASIS), and he
will provide additional copies to the committee.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER asked Ms. Goode to propose an amendment
to improve the bill.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON posed a defense that the trail in question is
historically a trapping trail and not a public trail, and asked
whether that would change Ms. Goode's position on that portion
of the bill.
MS. GOODE observed there are many trails in the unorganized
borough put in place by trappers, and was unsure how to identify
each. Also, trappers are unaware of new legislation and need to
be informed.
REPRESENTATIVE PARISH questioned if the definition of trails was
narrowed to those with a gravel top would exclude trappers'
trails and their trap lines.
MS. GOODE said it should. For example, there is a well-known
trail in the unorganized borough that is publicized and has
signage, which would be sufficient.
6:44:08 PM
MS. GOODE, in response to Co-Chair Josephson, identified the
aforementioned trail as the Craig Lake Trail, which has a trap
in the middle of the trail. In further response to Co-Chair
Josephson, she said she would not object to a 200-foot "buffer"
for the Craig Lake Trail, a public trail.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER asked whether lesser footage would be a
solution.
MS. GOODE said she did not believe so.
6:45:30 PM
RICHARD PERSON said he is a lifelong Alaskan who is a member of
the Alaska Trappers Association (ATA), speaking on his own
behalf. Mr. Person expressed his opposition to HB 40 because it
pertains to issues that should be addressed by local entities.
As a member of the Southcentral Chapter of ATA, he has personal
experience attempting to address the conflict between trappers
and pet owners in the Mat-Su and Kenai Peninsula areas. Both
trappers and pet owners must be educated, and ATA has produced
shared trails DVDs to explain how traps work and how to avoid
them. Also, ATA gives workshops and produced with ADF&G a pet
safety brochure, as ATA seriously seeks a resolution to this
issue. At high-use areas and on multi-use trails, ATA provides
signage asking trappers to avoid sets that will cause conflict
with other trail users, and asking dog owners to keep their dogs
close and on a leash. There is also a public service
announcement broadcast by Anchorage television stations.
Currently, Mr. Person said ATA is trying to set up voluntary
trap-free areas including Crevasse Moraine, Government Peak, and
West Trail Butte System, but is being stonewalled by the Mat-Su
Borough Assembly.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked for more information and
clarification on Mr. Person's comment about being stonewalled.
MR. PERSON said over the past two years, ATA has attempted to
create voluntarily trap-free areas where signage discourages
trapping, but interest in this proposal stops with Mat-Su
Borough staff, and the proposal has not been presented to the
assembly. Mr. Person opined the assembly may have been
influenced by legislation supported by Alaska Safe Trails; in
fact, if ATA's proposal had remained on schedule, some incidents
may have been avoided.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked Mr. Person to provide any pertinent
written proposals that might be in progress in the Mat-Su valley
area.
6:51:05 PM
TOM LESSARD said he is opposed to HB 40 because the issue is not
a public safety issue, and his nationwide research shows it is
extremely rare for a person to get injured in a trap. On the
other hand, bear baiting is a legitimate public safety issue
because one could come upon a bear, thus bear baiting sites have
existing setback rules. He opined the best solutions are found
at a local level, such as designated dog parks and trap free
zones that clearly have parameters. He was negotiating in
Cooper Landing last winter with non-trappers, but after HB 40
was introduced the meetings were discontinued. Regarding
setbacks, in mountainous areas a 200-foot setback may send a
trapper up a mountain or down in a canyon. Further, dogs will
get caught beyond the setback.
6:54:10 PM
LYNN KEOGH said he is a lifelong Alaskan opposed to HB 40. He
is working with ADF&G, providing a mail-out to over 28,000
licensed trappers, which is a much higher number than previous
testimony indicting there were 2,500 to 3,000 trappers in the
state. Because this issue is often portrayed as a public safety
issue to BOG, he contacted the Department of Public Safety
(DPS), but DPS has no record of a person injured by a trap. He
opined this is a localized issue and should be dealt with on a
local level by boroughs and assemblies. Regarding trails, he
asked the committee to consider many trail systems meander over
time, so the law would be unenforceable unless trails were
surveyed. Mr. Keogh opined a 200-foot closure is unnecessary;
there may be certain trails that should be closed to open or
ground sets, but there is no risk to pets for underwater,
elevated, or enclosed trap sets.
6:57:01 PM
AL BARRETTE said he is opposed to HB 40 because the bill does
not address the issue, but shifts the responsibility for the pet
owner's negligence from pet owners to the trapper. His 40-mile
trap line, on a state-maintained RS 2477 right-of-way, has
approximately 200 trap sites. If the bill is enacted, a 200-
foot setback would add 16 miles to his trap line which currently
takes 10 hours to check. An additional 16 walking miles would
add 5.3 hours to his time checking traps. He pointed out that
those under 18 years-of-age are not required to have a license,
and the bill would not require them to have trap tags. Also, if
trappers have partners, traps would need multiple tags. Mr.
Barrette said a medical situation caused him to have a friend
run his trap line and - under the terms of the bill - his friend
would have had to obtain 500-750 tags to lawfully run his trap
line. He spoke of "trap line adventures" which offer
experiences to non-Alaskans and who would also be required to
have additional tags. He inquired as to whether ADF&G will have
a sufficient number of unique tags for traps, and questioned the
justification for the punitive measures in the bill. Mr.
Barrette concluded is difficult to measure a braided trail, and
trappers may not be sufficiently physically fit to walk off the
trail and set their traps.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON asked whether Mr. Barrette served on BOG.
7:00:14 PM
MR. BARRETTE said yes. He then advised two Alaska regulations
within [5 Alaska Administrative Code 92.029] prohibit releasing
a dog into the wild and BOG may remove "from the clean list"
dogs if there is a predominance of evidence that the species is
capable of surviving in the wild, and is capable of causing a
genetic alteration of a species indigenous to Alaska. Mr.
Barrette pointed out dogs make hybrid wolves or hybrid dogs,
thus dog owners could be required by BOG to have a permit and
keep dogs leashed at all times.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON pointed out HB 40 has a zero fiscal note,
although the bill includes registering traps and issuing tags.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON said under the bill people would pay for the
registration of traps. In further response to Representative
Johnson, he said fiscal notes are brought forward by departments
that are impacted by bills. Speaking from his experience, he
said the court system may attach a fiscal note to a bill
referred to the House Judiciary Standing Committee. He
remarked:
... they don't necessarily come when you need them.
... Generally the departments, when they track bills,
and they say, "that one's going to a hearing, we need
a fiscal note," that's the general policy .... So,
there could be other fiscal notes coming ....
7:02:07 PM
[HB 40 was held over with public testimony open.]
HJR 5-ENDORSING ANWR LEASING; RELATED ISSUES
7:02:40 PM
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON announced that the final order of business
would be CS FOR HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 5(AET), 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.
7:02:48 PM
MIKE SATRE expressed his support of HJR 5, and urged the opening
of leasing and oil and gas development in the Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). He said Alaskans and previous
legislatures have historically supported this action. Mr. Satre
explained the resolution does not open all of ANWR to oil and
gas development, but does open approximately 0.01 percent of the
refuge close to existing development on the North Slope. Alaska
has a history of responsibly developing oil and gas resources in
that area, and can leverage the existing infrastructure, in
order to provide oil and gas for the decades of world demand
ahead. Alaska's future depends upon increased oil and gas
development on state and federal lands. Taxing a declining
resource will not provide fiscal stability because the state
needs more oil in the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System. This issue
is critical to his family's future. Mr. Satre urged the
committee to expeditiously pass the resolution.
7:05:26 PM
FRANK BERGSTROM provided a brief description of his many
positive experiences on the North Slope and said he intends to
return. Alaska needs ANWR's oil, and the magnitude of [oil and
gas] development there is minimal; in fact, it is known it would
take only 2,000 acres to recover all of the oil located there.
He said there is no unmanageable downside to the thoughtful
development of ANWR. At [Prudhoe Bay], one sees a large
industrial plant: the footprint of development is small. This
is a wonderful opportunity and he encouraged the committee to
support the development of ANWR.
7:07:24 PM
JULIA YORK informed the committee she was born and raised in
Fairbanks and holds a master's degree in biology. She said she
is aware of the state's budget crisis as her family has been
affected, but the crisis is occurring because the state has been
dependent upon oil revenue for too long; it is time to invest in
a more reliable future for Alaska. The bill is financially and
environmentally irresponsible and is based on outdated polling.
In fact, oil development cannot be done in an environmentally
responsible manner on the tundra. Ms. York said she has been to
the North Slope oil fields and advised that restoration by oil
companies after spills and disturbance is measured by "how much
area is green," which is achieved by planting grass. She opined
this is a misunderstanding of the coastal plain and is
misleading; furthermore, the testimony of oil companies should
be discounted as they have a direct financial incentive. Ms.
York said this is not a matter of 2,000 acres of land, but of
wide-reaching and permanent effects on a sensitive ecosystem,
including multiplying the effect of climate change. She
concluded that villages are in imminent danger.
7:11:08 PM
STEVEN GREENLAW said he has lived in Alaska for four years and
is a student at the University of Alaska Fairbanks. He stated
there is a moral imperative to protecting ANWR because the
dignity of the human person is tied to the land, and opening up
the area for oil development would be a shortsighted and short-
term benefit for a few. Further, there is an urgent need to
substitute renewable resources for fossil fuels, for a new
economy in Alaska that values its indigenous voices and lives.
Mr. Greenlaw urged the co-chairs to consider the dignity of a
human person in their ethics; to Gwich'in, ANWR is home and
turning the land into resources would alienate and displace
them. He quoted from a source in regard to the environmental
crisis and the suffering of the excluded [document not
provided], and expressed his opposition to HJR 5 "for the 1002
area."
7:13:19 PM
RICHARD GLENN, Vice President, Land and Natural Resources,
Arctic Slope Regional Corporation (ASRC), informed the committee
ASRC, together with the Kaktovik Inupiat Corporation, own
approximately 91,000 acres of land within the coastal plain of
ANWR. He said ownership of the land is true, legitimate, and
legal ownership of the land, but its owners are prevented from
developing their land unless Congress acts to open ANWR for
exploration. The 13,000 shareholders of ASRC, the village
corporation, residents of Kaktovik, and the North Slope Borough
have fought for the responsible exploration of the coastal
plain, which can be done safely on the land where residents
hunt, fish, and catch caribou. Mr. Glenn advised only through
exploration of the area will a determination be made that there
are resources for development - and the location of said
resources - so responsible decisions can be made. He urged for
the passage of the resolution.
7:15:37 PM
KARA MORIARTY, President/CEO, Alaska Oil and Gas Association,
said she was representing the Alaska oil and gas industry and
referred to a letter of support for the resolution provided in
the committee packet. She said opportunities to explore for
resources cannot commence until the land is available for
purchasing a lease. The resolution endorses Congress opening
the land for the leasing process, which is extensive and
requires environmental impact studies before and after lease
sales. Furthermore, she pointed out the 1002 area was set aside
specifically for oil and gas development in the Alaska Native
Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) and in the Alaska National
Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA), in order to protect
"90-some percent" of the refuge and allow development in a
certain area. Ms. Moriarty opined safe development is underway
"right next door" and will continue for decades. She said the
issue is on the national stage, and the industry has long
supported increased access to this area.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER asked for the average cost of a lease.
MS. MORIARTY stated that is very difficult to speculate; for
example, lease sales can generate from $200,000 to
$2,100,000,000 in bids.
7:18:41 PM
ALEXANDER GEDSCHINSKY acknowledged the state depends on oil and
the exploration for oil should not be unreasonably stopped;
however, ANWR should not be exploited. He pointed out
ConocoPhillips Alaska, Inc. has announced a massive discovery of
oil in the National Petroleum Reserve Alaska (NPRA), which can
be brought to market quickly and cheaply. He said he was
speaking for younger residents whose voices are not heard, and
questioned why when forty people testified in opposition to the
bill and one was in favor, legislators continued to support the
bill. He asked whether constituents' comments matter as much as
those of oil companies.
7:20:23 PM
PRINCESS JOHNSON drew attention to a map in the committee room
and pointed out about 95 percent of the North Slope is open to
oil development; of the 5 percent left, she questioned when
there will be protection for the remaining places. She said she
is Neets'aii Gwich'in, a member of the Fairbanks Climate Action
Coalition, a mother, a daughter, a sister, and has been speaking
out on this issue, along with her home village of Vashraii K'oo,
or Arctic Village, since she was 15 years old. Ms. Johnson
referred to earlier testimony, noting people love Alaska because
of its hunting, fishing, and natural resources. In regard to
transparency, equity, and [governmental] process, she said over
the past three years the U.S. Department of Interior updated the
comprehensive conservation plan for ANWR, and during public
testimony in Fairbanks the majority of Alaskans opposed
development. As a result of that public process, the Obama
Administration recommended to Congress to designate wilderness
for the coastal plain of ANWR thus the resolution disregards,
silences, and marginalizes the voices of Alaskans. In addition,
continuing to privatize and enclose Alaska robs residents of
their ability to enjoy the land and to feed their families. Ms.
Johnson said the belief that all Alaskans want development in
the coastal plain of ANWR is untrue.
7:22:47 PM
ANNE SENECA, Spokesperson, Consumer Energy Alliance (CEA)
Alaska, informed the committee CEA Alaska seeks to raise
awareness about Alaska's contribution to domestic energy
production for the Lower 48. Alaska's onshore and offshore
production supplies oil to America's western region and
establishes America's geopolitical presence in the Arctic
region, which plays a role in consumer energy prices. The
Arctic is a region of growing geopolitical significance, and CEA
Alaska works to remind consumers of the importance of the Arctic
region. Representative Westlake's leadership affords CEA Alaska
the opportunity to educate consumers and advocate for lower
energy prices through the following key points: only 8 percent
of ANWR would be considered for exploration; if oil is
discovered, 2,000 acres of the 1002 area would be used for
surface structures; exploration would have a positive impact on
the economy in Alaska and the Lower 48; there will be a need for
tens of thousands of manufacturing and service jobs nationwide;
history shows that oil and gas development and wildlife can
peacefully coexist in the Arctic; in the oilfields there is a
healthy population of brown bear, fox, musk ox, birds, and fish;
dependence on imported oil contributes to national debt and
threatens national security. Ms. Seneca concluded CEA Alaska
supports an energy policy that includes renewable energy sources
and fossil fuels, and supports exploration in the 1002 area of
ANWR.
7:25:59 PM
DONETTA TRITT said she is originally from Arctic Village. She
informed the committee in late July or August, the Porcupine
Caribou Herd leaves the 1001 area, also known as the calving
grounds in the refuge, and then migrates to Canada. The
migration route travels near Arctic Village, providing for the
village as it has done for thousands of years. However in 2015,
for an unknown reason, the caribou traveled directly to Canada,
and that fall elders in Arctic Village were sick because Native
foods were not available that winter. Ms. Tritt opined this is
a hint of what could happen.
7:27:43 PM
RON YARNELL said he owns a wilderness guiding business, All
About Adventure, and has been leading trips in the Brooks Range
since the early '70s and in ANWR since 1976. The Arctic refuge
has provided his living for over 40 years, and for others as
well. He questioned why some are anxious to open Alaska's
treasures because over 95 percent of the north slope of the
Brooks Range is already open to oil development, or is being
opened, and opined protecting the 5 percent left is enough of a
compromise. Mr. Yarnell inquired as to why one would destroy
what one loves about Alaska: wilderness. His significant
amount of experience in the coastal plain reveals that a unique
wilderness experience, available only there, would not survive
oil development. He said he has guided thousands across the
coastal plain of the refuge and opined one should not vote for
this resolution if one has not spent time there. In fact, the
federal government is needed to protect special areas from local
pressure which seeks to exploit other resources. Mr. Yarnell
urged the committee to drop this resolution and concentrate
development in Prudhoe Bay, which has high potential and fewer
conflicts.
7:30:12 PM
NARIEEZH PETER said she lives in Fairbanks and is Neets'aii
Gwich'in and Navajo. She expressed her belief that not all
Alaskans support oil drilling, especially in ANWR. Ms. Peter
said oil is not bad, but through its extraction humans destroy
the world, cause climate change, and hurt the land, which is
bad. In the future she wants there to be caribou, moose,
salmon, ducks, and blueberries that have supplied people with
food and energy for generations; however, opening ANWR for
drilling will disturb wildlife, the Porcupine Caribou Herd may
be forced to find new birthing grounds, and the amount of salmon
may be decreased. In addition, plants may become polluted which
will diminish Native food sources thus ANWR should be protected.
Ms. Peter went to Arctic Village with her family and wants to go
again to see the beauty and eat Native foods. She said this is
her future. In response to Co-Chair Josephson, she said she is
12 years old and goes to middle school in Fairbanks.
7:32:45 PM
MATT GILBERT said he is Gwich'in Athabascan and is self-
employed. He has a master's degree in rural development and is
speaking from an economic point of view and from his Gwich'in
culture worldview. He has learned the legislature gives up to a
$500 million tax credit to oil companies just for drilling. In
addition, oil companies make more from Alaska wellheads than
from those in other countries - a 30 percent return - which he
compared to corporate welfare. Mr. Gilbert opined if the state
stopped the aforementioned [corporate welfare], it wouldn't need
to develop ANWR. Also, climate change is worsening, and
continuing the use of fossil fuels is suicidal; he urged for
diversification and suggested the use of federal grants for
renewable energy.
7:35:06 PM
ENEI PETER said she is Navajo and (indisc.) and the mother of
three Gwich'in Alaska Native daughters. She asked the committee
to oppose HJR 5 because disturbing the refuge would be an
affront to the Gwich'in way of life and to the cultural and
subsistence survival of Alaska Native people; further, the
severity of climate change demands that resources remain in the
ground in some places. Opening more places for development will
prevent the U.S. from meeting its commitment to curb climate
change. Ms. Peter said there are other ways to find new
opportunities for the economy and for jobs; in fact, there is no
other choice but to diversify the state's economy. The existing
policies that encourage more oil and gas development are
outdated, and are based on a history of colonization and
corporate structures that were set up to profit from Native
people.
7:37:37 PM
LINDA DEFOLIART spoke in opposition to HJR 5. Although oil
companies assure development can occur safely and with a small
footprint, climate change is warming the Arctic ground bringing
different conditions such as thawing, freezing, sinking,
heaving, and melting, which are unknown conditions. She
questioned how oil companies can guarantee safety following the
many spills from drilling and transporting oil; in addition, the
viewshed in the refuge is huge and equipment could been seen for
miles. The original footprint for Prudhoe Bay was 2,100 acres
and is now over 600,000 acres. If the current course continues,
eventually there will be no more fossil fuel, and she opined
Alaska needs to find long term fiscal stability from another
source. Ms. DeFoliart urged for the committee to take the long
view and save the refuge for its intrinsic value and sustainable
renewable resources.
7:38:48 PM
JUSTINA BEAGNYAM spoke in opposition to HJR 5. She said she
moved from Texas last year to Alaska because it is the last
great wilderness, and she wished to merge her education in
business with a career in environmental policies. She read a
quote [document not provided]. Ms. Beagnym pointed out ANWR is
one of the last remaining intact ecosystems in the world with a
rich and fragile habitat, heritage, and culture. Ms. Beagnyam
agreed there is too much reliance on fossil fuels and urged for
a transition to renewable energy with no new leases on any land,
and further research into renewable energy, which would lead to
a more diversified economy.
7:41:55 PM
JENNA JONAS stated the coastal plain of ANWR is a special place
to her as she works as a guide in summer and explores and hunts
with a dog team in fall, winter, and spring. Her personal
experience has shown ANWR is a lush and delicate ecosystem;
further, over the past 10 years, she has studied this issue,
"and how much the narrative is changing." Decisions made today
will have repercussions far in the future due to Alaska's
position in the global crisis of climate change. Alaskans take
pride in their independence, the land, their management of fish
and game, and their respect for Native cultures. Ms. Jonas
opined drilling for oil in one of the world's last great
ecosystems does not honor the aforementioned values or improve
the lives of future generations. She encouraged the committee
to recognize that the value of oil will increase as it becomes
scarcer, to value the opinion of those who live in the region,
and to consider the long term effects of its decision on future
generations.
7:43:53 PM
CHRISTINA EDWIN stated her hope is the legislature is based on
the core ideology of respect, obligation to the community, and
stewardship. Based on this core ideology, she said she was
present for the public process and noted there are different
visions for the future: some wish to drill in the Arctic and
some do not. Ms. Edwin urged members of the committee to follow
their core ideology and serve their community; her core ideology
is to oppose the resolution.
7:46:19 PM
KEITH SILVER spoke in support of HJR 5 and advised he does not
work for an oil company. The issue under discussion addresses
0.5 of 1 percent of ANWR and can be compared to Point Thomson,
which is nearby and is an example of oil development done right
in a small development. Point Thomson has been developed with
long reach drilling and stringent safety environmental
standards, as has Alpine. Mr. Silver said 70 percent of
Alaskans agree with developing ANWR, which should be their
decision. Recently, 9,000 jobs have been lost mostly due to the
lack of oil and gas development work. He observed the 1002 area
is about 150 miles north of Arctic Village over a mountain
range, and the land has multiple uses. He urged for passage of
the resolution in order to put oil in the pipeline and people to
work.
7:48:24 PM
MISTY NICKOLI said she is a lifelong Alaskan from Fairbanks.
She read a quote [document not provided]. Ms. Nickoli said she
and others have met with numerous legislators who have expressed
the following: 1.) a desire to maintain the Alaska way of life
and its ecosystems; 2.) frustration that "big oil" spent money
from Permanent Fund Dividends (PFDs) instead of risking their
tax subsidies; 3.) support of the economy by big oil is
overshadowed by the fact the state does not profit, but pays out
$319 million annually to big oil for mostly out-of-state
workers, and Alaskan employees are the first to be laid off.
Further, many legislators indicated an unwillingness to contest
the refuge as that would mean political suicide. Ms. Nickoli
said anti-Alaska policies cannot be conducted in shadow, and it
is past time for legislators and Alaskans to develop sustainable
industries and to stop the welfare system provided to big oil.
7:52:18 PM
KERI PETERSON spoke against the bill. Her personal experience
from spending a lot of time in the refuge is that it is not a
wasteland, unlike what politicians and the oil companies say.
She said she was happy that about 150 years ago, others had the
foresight to preserve Yellowstone, Yosemite, the Grand Canyon,
and other national parks, and ANWR is more wild and special.
She worked at Prudhoe Bay, which is the opposite of wilderness,
and it would be criminal to put this type of development in a
pristine wilderness; in fact, there is no true wilderness left
in the Lower 48, and now that it is known the earth is finite,
existing intact wildlife systems should be preserved. The
entire refuge, including the 1002 area, is critical habitat for
wildlife, and its loss would be devastating, especially to the
caribou and the Gwich'in people. If the refuge is not drilled,
it will still exist after the oil is gone, which is important
for tourism.
7:54:10 PM
ODIN MILLER said according to a 2010 estimate, 95 percent of the
food Alaskans eat is imported [document not provided]. Although
Alaskans pride themselves on self-reliance, the state is
vulnerable to disruptions in its food pipeline, such as after
[the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001]. A large portion
of the 5 percent of local and wild food sources comes from
salmon, salmonberries, and caribou, which are depended upon by
indigenous rural Alaskans. Mr. Miller said he is a lifelong
Alaskan and is an anthropology student studying
human/reindeer/caribou interactions in Northwest Alaska.
Caribou are facing challenges from climate change and have
disappeared from parts of the circumpolar North, and caribou as
a food source cannot be replaced. He questioned whether one can
trust a presidential administration that is going to dismantle
existing environmental regulations, to conduct responsible
environmental impact studies in ANWR.
7:56:57 PM
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER asked to call for the question.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON said there is no question.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON offered to make a motion to move [the
resolution] out of committee.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON said, "I would decline that, if I can."
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON opined a vote on her request is needed.
7:57:32 PM
The committee took an at ease from 7:57 p.m. to 8:25 p.m.
8:25:36 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON removed [her request to make a motion].
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON, stating there was no objection, continued
public testimony.
8:26:01 PM
SAM ALEXANDER spoke in opposition to HJR 5. He stated he is a
Gwich'in from Fort Yukon and a lifelong Alaskan who is tired of
seeing Alaska kick the can of fiscal responsibility down the
road. For 40 years oil fields have bestowed immense wealth upon
the state, but the state remains addicted to oil and more
revenue, and willing to gamble its children's birthright to a
truly wild and natural world. As a veteran serving in Iraq, he
saw the waste and death the effect of greed for oil had on the
Iraqi people. The same oil companies are destroying Alaska and
do not have a long term interest in the state, except to make
money. Mr. Alexander advised drilling for oil will not provide
national security; in fact, oil development contributes to peril
by causing climate change and emitting greenhouse gasses. He
urged the committee to stop gambling with the future of Alaska.
8:27:37 PM
JESSICA GIRARD stated she is a disabled combat veteran who
served twice in Iraq. She said the addiction to oil sent her to
Iraq, and she has been fighting against the addiction ever
since. The answer to security is to "transition" so wars are
not fought over oil, and refugees will not need to come from
other states to untainted places. Alaska has immense resources
and a culture that provides depth and essence to the land. Ms.
Girard served in the military for the diversity of culture and
said the Gwich'in cannot be separated from the caribou they
depend upon, or from the land which is theirs.
8:29:42 PM
MICHELLE TOOHEY stated she is one of the 70 percent of Alaskans
who support opening exploration and production of oil and gas in
the small portion known as the 1002 area of ANWR. The
percentage of 70 percent support comes from polls conducted in
2016 which also showed support has been consistent since the
1990s. Strong support should not be a surprise as the 1002 area
was intentionally set aside from being designated wilderness as
part of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act; in
fact, 19 million acres is federally designated wilderness and 92
percent of the refuge is closed for development. Ms. Toohey
opined showing Congress that Alaskans support the resolution is
a must. She recommended the resolution move through the process
as quickly as possible in order to inform Congress that Alaskans
firmly stand behind oil and gas development in ANWR.
8:31:38 PM
MELINDA CHASE, spokesperson, Fairbanks Climate Coalition, said
she strongly believes fossil fuel should be left in the ground
because Interior Alaska is experiencing an increasingly warming
climate. Last year in the Interior, there were four deaths
related to open water and two of the victims had traditional
knowledge of the land; however, the weather has become variable.
She urged for the committee to look beyond Alaska to the
environment of the world, and advance Alaska to a more just
economy, as children need the land. Ms. Chase referred to
national plans to keep the atmosphere clear. As the only Arctic
state in the nation, Alaska has a responsibility to its children
and the nation, and she urged that the resolution not pass, and
for members of the committee to educate themselves on the
changing climate and its effects on Alaska.
8:34:39 PM
SHANNON BUSBY said she was speaking in opposition to HJR 5. The
practice of assigning numbers to places distances one from a
sense of place. The beautiful coastal plain and ANWR are
beautiful places to be left untouched.
8:35:33 PM
BARBARA HUFF TUCKESS, Director, Legislative Affairs, Teamsters
Local 959, spoke in support of the committee substitute (CS) for
HJR 5. Teamsters Local 959 represents approximately 7,000
members working in industries except for fish, and represents
members who work in the oil and gas industry. The opportunity
for Congress to open the 1002 area and ANWR would create
additional jobs as well as put additional barrels of oil in the
pipeline. She directed attention to her written testimony
provided in the committee packet.
8:37:16 PM
KIM HEACOX said he was opposed to HJR 5. He is a contract
writer with National Geographic who has lived in Alaska for 35
years, and has visited the coastal plain of ANWR which he found
to be a beautiful and compelling place. Mr. Heacox opined wild,
natural beauty is essential to one's mental and spiritual health
and inspires one to care for the planet. He read a quote
[document not provided]. Although burning oil has brought
wealth, it would be a poor decision to drill for oil and gas in
the 1002 area, which is the biological heart of ANWR. He read
another quote [document not provided]. Science warns if 20
percent of known oil reserves in the world are burned, the
global environment and the geopolitical sphere will be
destabilized and condemn future generations to a diminished
quality of life. However, the GOP in Congress refuses to
acknowledge human-caused climate change. He read another quote
[document not provided]. Mr. Heacox has heard fears that the
fossil fuel economy is becoming immoral, in a manner similar to
200 years ago in the Old South, when its economy was based on
slavery. He concluded drilling for oil is an economic narcotic
and a short term solution to a long term problem, and suggested
the clean energy revolution is waiting.
8:40:35 PM
JEANINE ST. JOHN said she was representing the Lynden family of
transportation and logistics companies, which is a multimodal
transportation company providing transportation links that bring
essential goods and services to Alaska, and transporting Alaska
products to world markets for over 100 years, and she further
described Lynden companies' services. Ms. St. John said Alaska
is a resource state and all benefit from a healthful economy;
Alaskans rely on the ability to develop resources whether they
are fish, minerals, oil and gas, and Alaska's robust economy is
based on the ability to produce resources. She said Lynden's
support of the development of the 1002 area is based on history
that development of energy resources can be accomplished in an
environmentally safe manner. She stated concern about the
recession and the budget deficit and, on behalf of Lynden and
its over 900 Alaska employees, urged support for HJR 5.
8:42:48 PM
SARAH JAMES said she against HJR 5 and grew up in the Arctic
Village area where she and her family hunt, fish, and gather in
a remote village and live a good life. She is proud Gwich'in
Athabascan Alaskan, and (indisc.) Indian, an elder, and she
respects elders of the past. She said she was speaking on
behalf of the Gwich'in nation, and she was one of four chosen to
speak for her nation, for the caribou, and her way of life. In
Arctic Village in 1988, there was a rebirth of the Gwich'in
nation after it was divided by the U.S. and Canada border.
Before first contact, the coastal plain of ANWR was the
birthplace of the Porcupine Caribou Herd and was not threatened
by oil and gas development. Since then, the Gwich'in nation
fought hard with others and won battles without compromise to
say "no" to oil and gas. Ms. James stated 75 percent of her
food is wild meat, mostly caribou, which also provides materials
for clothing, arts and crafts, and tools. She further described
life and a culture focused on caribou, and urged the committee
to permanently protect the coastal plain of ANWR, which is a
sacred place.
8:47:02 PM
ELLA EDE said she is one of thousands of Alaskans who have been
laid off due to industry layoffs in the past few years. She
said she was proud of having worked in the industry for over 25
years in the environmental field and stakeholder relations, and
helping the industry responsibly develop the North Slope. Ms.
Ede questioned why anyone would oppose the resolution, and
expressed her support of HJR 5 on behalf of her husband and four
children. She said she hopes her children will be able to live
in Alaska and earn a living wage. Her entire family is in
support of opening ANWR and continuing to develop resources,
which is mandated by the state constitution, the Alaska Native
Claims Settlement Act, and Native corporations. Ms. Ede said
she was not paid to testify, but felt it was important to speak
on behalf of the resolution.
8:49:33 PM
MICHELLE EGAN said she was speaking on behalf of the Alyeska
Pipeline Service Company (Alyeska) in support of HJR 5.
Expanded access to responsible development of oil and natural
gas resources on the North Slope is vitally important to
national energy security, job prosperity, the Alaska economy,
and the future of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System (TAPS). The
ongoing success of the pipeline system is dependent upon healthy
levels of Alaska crude oil production; in fact, TAPS once
delivered 2,100,000 barrels of oil per day, but in 2016, after
the first throughput increase since 2002, delivery averaged
517,000 barrels per day. Although Alyeska can respond, the
lesser flow creates long term challenges that will grow in
difficulty if the decline trend continues. The most effective
solution is to deliver more oil into TAPS from the North Slope.
Ms. Egan said Alyeska strongly supports responsible exploration
efforts that result in increased throughput into TAPS, including
the 1002 area of ANWR.
8:51:49 PM
CARL PORTMAN, Deputy Director, Resource Development Council
(RDC), informed the committee RDC strongly supports HJR 5 and
has consistently supported the opening of the 1002 area of ANWR
to oil and gas development. According to a study, oil and
development in ANWR could increase domestic production from
510,000 to nearly 1,500,000 barrels per day for approximately 12
years, saving the nation billions of dollars in imported oil,
creating thousands of new job, refilling TAPS and generating new
state and federal revenue. He said the 1002 area is the most
prospective conventional onshore prospect in the country,
holding an estimated 5.7 [billion] to 16 billion barrels of
technically recoverable oil. Not one acre of designated
wilderness would be disturbed by opening the 1002 area due to
advances in technology; it is possible to develop the energy
reserves inside ANWR using only a fraction of the area and
without significant disturbance to wildlife. He concluded that
the 1002 area of ANWR should be open to exploration and
development for national security and the Alaska economy,
because the Arctic outer continental shelf (OCS) is not
available, and RDC strongly urges for the passage of HJR 5.
8:54:00 PM
CAROLYN KREMERS said she has lived in Alaska for thirty years
and served in Russia for two years as a U.S. Fulbright Scholar.
In 1999, she began writing a poem which she submitted as her
testimony in opposition to HJR 5. She read from the poem in
part [document not provided].
8:56:44 PM
JAMES SQUYRES recommended a book on ANWR and spoke in support of
HJR 5. He urged for the bill to move from committee.
8:57:38 PM
JOHN HYDE spoke in opposition to the bill. He questioned how
much the oil in the 1002 area is worth, in order to define
whether it is worth the risk of destroying what exists there.
He observed most wildlife refuges and national parks have a
buffer zone surrounding them, but ANWR has none, and wildlife
does not adhere to boundaries. In his experience working for
the Alaska Department of Fish & Game, he learned safety cannot
be guaranteed; for example, shortly after the [Exxon Valdez oil
spill of 3/24/28], he witnessed what was caused by human error,
and all errors cannot be prevented.
9:00:04 PM
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON closed public testimony.
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH directed attention to a letter provided in
the committee packet from Governor Walker that indicated the
governor's support for HJR 5. He questioned whether comments
from Representative Westlake's staff should be heard at this
time.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON expressed his confidence that Representative
Westlake supports moving the resolution from committee.
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH encouraged a yes vote on the resolution.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON addressed the witnesses in the room who
testified about their concerns, and opined their concerns are
not wrong in their "long view" of [environmental impacts to the
planet]; however, the state needs revenue, which is also an
important factor.
9:02:57 PM
The committee took a brief at ease.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON announced public testimony was reopened.
9:05:08 PM
KRISTINA OLESKA (indisc.) said she does not want the resolution
to pass. Her community of Sutton has experienced what happens
when the fossil fuel industry destroys habitat; Moose Creek is a
place that has taken millions of dollars, work by the community,
and decades, to return to "a fraction of what it was in the
past." She pointed out the oil and gas industry has a poor
record of placing the health and safety of people and the
environment over that of its profits. In Alaska, the Exxon
Valdez oil spill affected the economy through the losses in
commercial fishing, recreation, and tourism. She opined there
is a need for the state to stop giving [disasters] a chance.
The former chief executive officer of the company responsible
for the Exxon Valdez spill is now the Secretary of State, and
she does not trust him or the federal administration to protect
the lives of Alaskans, thus it is now up to the committee. She
referred to recent oil spills and other disasters and opined the
state cannot afford to clean up after industry - putting the
burden on the younger generation - and she urged the committee
to not pass the resolution.
9:07:49 PM
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON closed public testimony.
9:08:05 PM
CO-CHAIR TARR said she shares concerns and the sense of urgency
about climate change; however, the state's current revenue
situation is very resource dependent. She recalled during
former Governor Sarah Palin's administration there was a
statewide energy plan coordinator and a climate change
subcabinet, and cautioned the state has missed opportunities
without those positions in place. Co-Chair Tarr expressed her
hope the current administration will reconvene the subcabinet,
and spoke of relevant legislation that will come before the
committee. The committee seeks to support environmentally
responsible development, to meet the state's energy needs, and
to share concerns about the urgency of climate change action.
9:10:10 PM
CO-CHAIR TARR moved to report [CSHJR 5(AET)] out of committee
with individual recommendations and the attached zero fiscal
note.
CO-CHAIR TARR objected.
9:10:39 PM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Birch, Johnson,
Rauscher, Talerico, Drummond, Parish, and Josephson voted in
favor of CSHJR 5(AET). Representative Tarr voted against it.
Therefore, CSHJR 5 (AET) was reported out of the House Resources
Standing Committee by a vote of 7-1.
9:12:00 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Resources Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 9:12 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| House Resources 2017 AOGCC.ppt |
HRES 2/8/2017 1:00:00 PM |
|
| House Resources 2017 AOGCC.pdf |
HRES 2/8/2017 1:00:00 PM |
|
| HB040 CS ver U.pdf |
HRES 2/8/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 40 |
| HB040 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HRES 2/8/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 40 |
| HB040 Summary of changes.pdf |
HRES 2/8/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 40 |
| HB040 Supporting Documents 1.pdf |
HRES 2/8/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 40 |
| HB 40 support.pdf |
HRES 2/8/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 40 |
| hb040 fiscal note 1 vers D.pdf |
HRES 2/8/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 40 |
| hb040 fiscal note 2 vers D.pdf |
HRES 2/8/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 40 |
| hb040 fiscal note 3 vers D.pdf |
HRES 2/8/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 40 |
| hb040 fiscal note 1 vers U.pdf |
HRES 2/8/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 40 |
| hb040 fiscal note 2 vers U.pdf |
HRES 2/8/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 40 |
| hb040 fiscal note 3 vers U.pdf |
HRES 2/8/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 40 |
| HB040 CS ver U.pdf |
HRES 2/8/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 40 |
| HB040 Summary of changes.pdf |
HRES 2/8/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 40 |
| HB040 Supporting Documents 1.pdf |
HRES 2/8/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 40 |