Legislature(1999 - 2000)
04/13/1999 02:17 PM House TRA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE TRANSPORTATION STANDING COMMITTEE
April 13, 1999
2:17 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Beverly Masek, Chair
Representative Andrew Halcro, Vice Chair
Representative Bill Hudson
Representative John Cowdery
Representative Jerry Sanders
Representative Allen Kemplen
Representative Albert Kookesh
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 5
Relating to extension of the James Dalton Highway to the Arctic
Ocean.
- HEARD AND HELD
(* First public hearing)
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HCR 5
SHORT TITLE: EXTEND DALTON HWY TO ARCTIC OCEAN
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) JAMES
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
3/13/99 Text (H) TRA AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 17
3/24/99 553 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
3/24/99 554 (H) TRA, FIN
4/13/99 Text (H) TRA AT 2:00 PM CAPITOL 17
WITNESS REGISTER
RICHARD SCHMITZ, Legislative Secretary
to Representative Jeannette James
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 102
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Telephone: (907) 465-3743
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented sponsor statement for HCR 5.
REPRESENTATIVE JEANNETTE JAMES
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 102
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Telephone: (907) 465-3743
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as sponsor of HCR 5.
DENNIS POSHARD, Legislative Liaison
Office of the Commissioner
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities
3132 Channel Drive
Juneau, Alaska 99801-7898
Telephone: (907) 465-3904
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HCR 5.
W.T. REEVES
1213 9th Avenue
Fairbanks, Alaska 99701
Telephone: (907) 452-7745
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HCR 5.
NANCY WELCH, Regional Manager
Northern Region Office
Department of Natural Resources
3700 Airport Way
Fairbanks, Alaska 99709-4699
Telephone: (907) 451-2777
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HCR 5.
DON LOWELL, Special Assistant
Office of the Commissioner
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities
2301 Peger Road
Fairbanks, Alaska 99709-5316
Telephone: (907) 451-5320
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HCR 5.
STEVE FRANK, Former Alaska Legislator
3165 Riverview
Fairbanks, Alaska 99709
Telephone: (907) 474-0883
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HCR 5.
GERALD GALLAGHER, Manager of Government Relations
ARCO Alaska, Incorporated
P.O. Box 100360
Anchorage, Alaska 99510-0360
Telephone: (907) 276-1215
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions pertaining to HCR 5.
DAWN PATIENCE, Tour Guide
ARCO Alaska, Inc.
P.O. Box 100360
Anchorage, Alaska 99510-0360
Telephone: (907) 276-1215
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions pertaining to HCR 5.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 99-17, SIDE A
Number 0001
CHAIR BEVERLY MASEK reconvened the House Transportation Standing
Committee meeting at 2:17 p.m. Members present at the call to
order were Representatives Masek, Hudson, Cowdery, Sanders and
Kemplen. Representatives Halcro and Kookesh arrived at 2:26 p.m.
and 2:38 p.m., respectively.
HCR 5 - EXTEND DALTON HWY TO ARCTIC OCEAN
CHAIR MASEK announced the next order of business as HOUSE
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 5, relating to extension of the James
Dalton Highway to the Arctic Ocean.
Number 0035
RICHARD SCHMITZ, Legislative Secretary to Representative Jeannette
James, Alaska State Legislature, spoke on behalf of Representative
James, sponsor of HCR 5. He stated the Dalton Highway was open to
the public up until two oil company checkpoints approximately eight
miles from the Arctic Ocean. Beyond that point, the only means of
reaching the Arctic Ocean is a $20 per-person tour bus ride. He
mentioned this was a point of contention for many people. He
indicated there was a statute relating to the Dalton Highway which
refers to a road from the Yukon River to the Arctic Ocean. Another
statute refers to access to a navigable waterway [Arctic Ocean].
He stressed that Alaskans should be able to go the Arctic Ocean and
there is no need for completely restricting access to this area.
REPRESENTATIVE COWDERY asked who manned the security gates.
MR. SCHMITZ believed the security gates were manned by ARCO Alaska,
Incorporated [ARCO] or by oil company employees.
REPRESENTATIVE COWDERY inquired if the Dalton Highway was a state
owned road and whether it was maintained all the way to the Arctic
Ocean.
Number 0272
MR. SCHMITZ said the Dalton Highway was a state-owned road, but was
only maintained up until the checkpoints.
REPRESENTATIVE COWDERY referred to a letter dated April 17, 1995,
from ARCO, written to John Shively, Commissioner of the Department
of Natural Resources, which states, "ARCO and BP [BP Petroleum
(Alaska) Incorporated] do not charge the tour operators for access
to Prudhoe Bay and plays no role in determining what tour operators
charge for their services." It seemed to him that ARCO and BP were
giving somebody a "sweetheart deal" by restricting public access to
the Arctic Ocean. He felt that "anybody that drives the Dalton
Highway ... should deserve to go the last eight miles if they want
to stick their foot in the water or take a picture ... just for the
effort that they drove there." He understood the need for
restrictive access to certain areas, though.
Number 0394
REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS asked, "What claim do the oil companies
have on this land? Do they own it or do they lease it?"
MR. SCHMITZ stated that his research indicated there are two kinds
of land the Dalton Highway passes through [he referred to a map
included in the bill packet]: 1.) private land owned by the oil
companies and 2.) state-owned land leased to oil companies. He
explained that the statute does indicate that "even if this land is
sold, there should be an easement to a navigable waterway."
REPRESENTATIVE JEANNETTE JAMES, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor,
stated that negotiations occurred even before the Dalton Highway
was proclaimed a federal highway. She indicated that in addition
to having to pay $20 to take a bus, the public was being limited to
a half -our visit to the Arctic Ocean. She felt there should be a
better way to get people up to that area and allow them to stay
there if they choose to. She further expressed the importance of
discussing this issue in order to come up with a reasonable way to
provide access to the Arctic Ocean.
Number 0610
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON said he remembered that security and the cost
of public accommodations were two major issues that concerned the
oil industry. He also agreed it would not be a bad idea to further
discuss the issue.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES said in other states the public drives through
oil country. It seemed to her Alaska was one of the only places
blocking access to areas where there is oil activity, but she felt
there should be provisions allowing people to go through these
areas. She added that it was also important to protect oil
activities because they are a source of revenue for the state. She
stated that the tourism industry is also interested in access to
the Arctic Ocean and we should not close that option off. With
respect to facilities in that region, she said:
I don't know if any of you have been to Healy lately, but
we have the camp that was there at Deadhorse, brought
down by Bernie Carl (ph), incidently, and put up in Healy
to house the folks who were working on the (indisc.) coal
plant when it was put in and which is almost finished.
And that serves as a tourist thing. And that was up
there at Deadhorse. If they had been able to get to the
ocean, they could have operated it there. It was really
a fairly nice camp ... I know that, certainly, even going
up the Dalton Highway now, and I've been up it several
times myself, there are very little services along the
road.
I have been negotiating and worked with Senator Sharp on
the issue of getting little places, little development
nodes along the road, and they've have had two different
task forces now to figure out how they are going to do
that. And it gets hung up on the issue of whether or not
you can let somebody fail in some endeavor. Because what
they want to do is they want to make, if you want to put
some kind of a development ... in one of these little
nodes, and they've identified the nodes ... so that the
BLM [Bureau of Land Management] has given those little
nodes to the state, so they have the land there to spread
out to put in either service stations or food or
bathrooms or whatever it is. And then what the state has
been prone to do is to make the rules and regulations,
... make it unworkable.
She expressed that a good deal of work needed to be done to make
going to the Arctic Ocean a "real, true tourism experience."
Number 0888
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON said emergency treatment facilities and other
accommodations have been addressed before as major concerns of the
oil industries. He stated that other legislators in the past, such
as Senator Sharp and Senator Frank, have tried to find the best
accommodations so that driving to the Arctic Ocean was possible.
He understood the concerns involved and said, "I suppose if the oil
industry wanted to open it all up for the convenience of the broad
public, they would also ask that the government provide for ...
some of these essential needs."
REPRESENTATIVE COWDERY seemed to think the only issue involved
should be access to navigable water since the land was owned and
leased by the state. He mentioned that there was some distinction
made between non-commercial and commercial vehicles. He wondered
how a commercial vehicle was described and asked, "Is it a taxi cab
... or something like that?"
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON figured "it was by weight and that it was by
so many passengers."
Number 0999
REPRESENTATIVE COWDERY responded that he did not think
Representative Hudson's answer actually described a commercial
vehicle. He believed access to the Arctic Ocean should be a part
of the negotiations.
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO commented that liability is a huge issue for
the oil industry and, furthermore, he felt that unfettered access
to the Arctic Ocean posed tremendous liability questions.
Additionally, he felt the road was unfit for driving. He expressed
concern that opening up the Dalton Highway to the Arctic Ocean
would "encourage a lot of traffic into an area that is restricted
and should be restricted for a good reason."
Number 1122
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES responded that she understood the argument
Representative Halcro presented. She realized the potential
dangers and problems involved, but said access cannot be denied
because the Dalton Highway is a federal highway. Instead of trying
to stop access to the Arctic Ocean, she felt efforts should be made
to improve the road.
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON recalled that one of the biggest concerns was
terrorism and not vandalism. He said he would not want to do
anything that would jeopardize the security of the pipeline.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES agreed those were all valid concerns, but she
felt they were all concerns that could be met. She said we have an
obligation to let people go to the Arctic Ocean. She thought it
was wrong to block access to it in the first place. She suggested
that each issue be addressed one at a time.
CHAIR MASEK believed that one of the issues brought up dealt with
who was responsible for maintenance beyond the checkpoints.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES said she did not know the answer. She
suspected the maintenance was done by the oil companies. She felt
there were better ways to get through the area than what is
currently available.
Number 1375
DENNIS POSHARD, Legislative Liaison, Office of the Commissioner,
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (DOT/PF),
stated, in terms of unrestricted access to the Dalton Highway, that
Governor Knowles appointed the Dalton Highway Advisory and Planning
Board in 1995 with the charge to craft a master plan for sound
economic development, public safety and prudent natural resource
management along the Dalton Highway. The board came out with a
plan which addresses the impacts of additional public use of the
road and the best ways of managing and providing for this use. He
said the recommendations of the plan include a section listed as
unresolved issues. Specifically included in that section was
access to the Arctic Ocean. The board looked at this issue and
heard testimony for and against access from Deadhorse to the Arctic
Ocean.
He stated that the board concluded there were several unresolved
issues and questions which could not be agreed upon. These
included safety, impacts on wildlife, enforcement of existing laws,
security and lease management. Because of the interest in the
topic and the time spent on it, he said the majority of the board
members expressed that they do not endorse free and open public
access to the Arctic Ocean through the Prudhoe Bay complex at this
time. This recommendation was made in a March 1998 master plan.
Mr. Poshard commented that DOT/PF would be more than willing to
discuss these issues and determine if they can be resolved. He
pointed out that the last "WHEREAS" of HCR 5 states, "The Alaska
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, by taking the
lead in working with industry, regulatory agencies, and the North
Slope Borough, can resolve concerns that would allow citizens to
journey to the Arctic Ocean without charge." He felt this was a
"heavy statement in terms that we can resolve them." He did not
want to lead people to believe that these issues will indeed be
resolved.
Number 1530
REPRESENTATIVE COWDERY inquired who maintains the Dalton Highway.
MR. POSHARD responded that DOT/PF maintains the road up to
Deadhorse, but not beyond the restricted access.
REPRESENTATIVE COWDERY wondered if it was possible for DOT/PF or
someone else to issue permits to the private areas.
MR. POSHARD replied that he had not given any thought to that
issue. He felt DOT/PF would probably not want to be stationed
there issuing permits for individual travelers. He said it could
probably be done, but there would be a cost involved. He was not
certain that DOT/PF would be the appropriate agency to do this.
REPRESENTATIVE COWDERY commented that he did not feel the public
should be denied public access to navigable water.
REPRESENTATIVE MASEK asked who was responsible for the land and
access going to the Arctic Ocean.
MR. POSHARD replied that it is state land, and the oil companies
who have the leases for that land are the ones who allow the
access. With respect to large commercial vehicles, DOT/PF does
allow these vehicles on the highway. Some of these vehicles exceed
certain limits, and special permits have to be issued. He did not
believe that the department was opposed to Arctic Ocean access and
clarified that, unless certain issues could be resolved, access to
the ocean was not viewed as prudent. He reiterated that the
department would be willing to discuss the issues.
REPRESENTATIVE COWDERY pointed out that the department denies
access to international airports. He felt there should be some
way, such as a fence, to keep people from entering areas where
access was denied.
Number 1811
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO asked Mr. Poshard, "If you were put in a
position to maintain the road to the restricted access for private
vehicle travel, would your maintenance be different?"
MR. POSHARD responded that he did not imagine maintenance would be
very different since the road to Deadhorse was already maintained
by the department. He stated that there would clearly be a cost
involved.
W.T. REEVES testified via teleconference from Fairbanks. He stated
that the Dalton Highway existed in 1968, and ARCO purchased
approximately 581 acres of land that the road passed through. He
said when the Department of Natural Resources recommended that the
road be left open, ARCO came up with excuses for closing the road
to the public. Mr. Reeves further stated:
In their [ARCO] letter ... they say here, "There are
hundreds of thousands of square miles of (indisc.) access
available in this general area. We will not be blocking
anyone access to any portion of this area except land on
which our facility is built." Well, shortly after buying
that 581 acres, they turned around and leased the
(indisc.), and then they did block access all the way
around. Now, the shortest route to that ocean is over to
East Dock ... I can't figure out how on 581 acres you
could possibly get a route in there with a length of
seven miles. I'd say they are already blocking access on
land that is leased, which would be illegal for them to
do. And they only mention one mile; they say only on
where the stuff is built would they not want people in
there. That area is not being used very much now and, as
they keep moving farther to the west, there'll be even
less pressure on this area. But, if you've ever been up
there, they have run pipelines and feeder lines all
around the Prudhoe Bay. The only access possible in
there is either at East Dock or West Dock. ...
Number 2035
... If ARCO doesn't want us to go into East Dock, then
why not just have ARCO go out there and bury all those
little lines and build their own route in there? Now, I
doubt very seriously if there'd be people going in up
there more than a couple months out of the year, abusing
this road (indisc.) East Dock. And the law has been
broken here for years. That road was supposed to be
turned over to the state of Alaska the very minute the
first barrel of oil was pumped. It was turned over on
paper only. The Secretary of the Interior recommended
that Jay Hammond try to keep it closed and when he did,
Jay Hammond took it over and it has been that way ever
since. Each governor passes this thing down and keeps it
closed. You make any kind of excuses ... but, it's
funny, nobody looks at it when it comes to Mount
McKinley. You know, we have people come in from all over
the world, and we go up there and rescue them at the
taxpayers' expense, but nobody wants to rescue anybody
off this highway if they get in trouble. ... I think it's
about time we sat down with ARCO and, if they don't want
to open the road up to the public, then simply build
another road; ... we definitely need access to that
ocean. The law says we have a right to go to that ocean,
and I think ... if the governor and (indisc.) intend to
do their job and give us that right, then it's about time
the people stand up and say, "Hey, let's get a new,
different governor." Mr. Shively's job is to see that
every one mile along that ocean front up there have an
access anytime they're putting in a pipeline. ... Now,
they just built 27 more miles up there. ... They're still
doing the same thing now that they did back in 1968 and
1969. They're totally neglecting the people. It's as
though, we might as well live in Russia or somewhere. ...
They can tell you where you can and can't go when you get
to the North Slope, and that is not right.
Number 2186
NANCY WELCH, Regional Manager, Northern Region Office, Department
of Natural Resources, stated that she was familiar with the area
and was the liaison for the Dalton Highway Advisory and Planning
Board. She said after the checkpoints the road is maintained and
operated by ARCO. ARCO does this through a "valid lease operations
approval" for their oil and gas lease. She stated that in 1980
there was a lease agreement issued for the tidelands at the East
Dock. In the lease agreement there are stipulations and an
agreement which address specifically the access issues. Appendix
A, Section D, of the lease agreement says:
Tourists desiring to view the Arctic Ocean and not on
tours conducted by one of the Prudhoe Bay Unit Operators
shall be permitted access on this dock only by a tour bus
authorized by ARCO and open and available to the public.
Number 2260
MS. WELCH indicated there were other restrictions in Appendix A
dealing with behavioral issues, such as possession of alcohol and
marijuana, possession of firearms or other lethal weapons, hunting
and trapping, prohibition of gambling and disruptive behavior. She
indicated that some of what ARCO has done, as a result of the
road's opening in 1994, with the availability of commercial tours
for the summer of 1995, is in direct response to the agreement that
was developed between the state and the oil companies. She said
the department amended Title 19 in 1994 through the legislature,
allowing the state to dispose of state land for commercial uses.
Prior to that, Title 19 restricted use of the land on the Dalton
Highway to oil and gas or mineral exploration. When the Governor
signed the bill, he appointed the advisory and planning board. She
said the board developed a plan at their first meeting in late
1995. She noted that the department had received funding for a
scenic byway management plan that could help address some of the
issues surrounding the Dalton Highway.
Number 2348
DON LOWELL, Special Assistant, Office of the Commissioner,
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, testified as a
concerned citizen. He found HCR 5 correct and accurate, and hoped
the committee would endorse it. Attempts have been made for years
to obtain the cooperation of ARCO and BP to work constructively
with the state to provide public access to the Arctic Ocean. He
felt ARCO and BP were and remain hostile to any cooperative
agreement. He stated that ARCO and BP offer a whole range of
excuses why the public should be denied access to the Arctic Ocean.
Some of these excuses include liability, law enforcement, safety,
security, litter, restrooms, dump stations, oil spills, animal and
bird harassment, and battery acid gas. He expressed that these
same concerns exist in the 11.5-mile area they maintain in the
Deadhorse area that is open to the public. Many of those concerns
address the entire Dalton Highway. He believed our concerns could
be resolved if ARCO and BP cooperate. He said that the only access
being asked for is a short seven mile road that by-passes the
Prudhoe Bay airport operated by ARCO which is, incidently, planning
to close. The road also by-passes ARCO headquarters, which he
understood would be open even after ARCO merges with BP.
Number 2450
MR. LOWELL further noted that there was very little traffic on the
road. He stated that Fairbanks is the gateway to what could be
North America's only highway access to the Arctic Ocean.
TAPE 99-17, SIDE B
Number 0012
MR. LOWELL stated that DOT/PF met with the Dalton Highway
Consulting Group last week. The North Slope Borough had hired a
consulting firm to study the Dalton Highway. Mr. Lowell said the
study revealed there were 27,633 independent travelers on the
Dalton Highway in 1997. Additionally, there were 9,060 in tour
groups and 6,161 industrial travelers that same year. Many of the
individual travelers wanted to go to the Arctic Ocean, but were
told they had to pay $20 per-person. Apparently, ARCO and BP have
been running full-page ads promising they will work cooperatively
and collaboratively with all levels of government. He said this
has not happened as of yet.
STEVE FRANK, former Alaska legislator, stated that he had worked on
this issue for at least ten years and felt it was important for the
public to have the opportunity to drive all the way to the Arctic
Ocean. He said, "It was a long, hard battle to try to get the
Dalton Road open in the first place. I was never successful as a
legislator in opening it. Governor Hickel opened it
administratively." He expressed disbelief that the Dalton Highway
was not already open all the way to the Arctic Ocean. He believed
the issues pertaining to the Dalton Highway could be resolved if
the Governor met with the oil companies. He felt the language in
HCR 5 was more deferential and did not really mandate anything.
Instead, HCR 5 asks the Governor to direct DOT/PF.
REPRESENTATIVE COWDERY asked former-Senator Frank what his opinion
was on permitting in order to prevent the public from accessing
restricted areas.
FORMER-SENATOR FRANK replied that those were legitimate concerns
the oil companies have. He believed that "when people take the
time to drive all the way up there, that you'll have a high class
of people, people that aren't mischief-prone and that they would
obey rules if they're informed of them. ... I like the idea of free
and open access to the ocean, but if there had to be a system where
you ... check in and check out. ... You could keep track of who's
there and ... there would be ideas like that could ... give the
companies some assurance that people wouldn't be ill-informed about
where they're supposed to go and unaware of consequences if they
did trespass or something like that."
REPRESENTATIVE COWDERY asked what the distance of the Dalton
Highway was.
Number 0297
FORMER-SENATOR FRANK replied that it was 500 miles from Fairbanks.
He did not think the Dalton Highway would be overwhelmed with
traffic, but it might be good to have a development node along the
way.
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO referred to page 2, lines 19 and 20, of HCR
5, stating, "WHEREAS the only public access to the Arctic Ocean is
through a $20 payment to an oil company tour operator for a guided
half hour on the beach". He believed he had read another document
which stated that the oil companies do not have anything to do with
the commercial tour operator. He asked if the oil companies ran
the commercial tour operator.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES replied that the commercial tour operators are
only those the oil companies approve. She explained that the oil
companies do not charge for travel to the Arctic Ocean, but the
commercial tour operators do.
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO wondered whether, "the reason for that might
be because they've been trained as far as where they can go and
what they can do."
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES answered that it might be the reason, or it
might be "that they just happened to be the one that wanted to do
it and made application to do it and were allowed to do it, and I'm
certain that they had some instructions of where they can and can't
go and what they can and can't do."
Number 0406
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO wanted to clarify that the tour operator was
a private tour operator and not an oil company tour operator.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES confirmed that it was a private tour operator.
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO referred to page 2, lines 30 and 31, of HCR
5, stating, "WHEREAS the East Dock gravel pad is vacant except for
some storage and offers and ideal site for a visitor wayside". He
asked who paid for the creation of the gravel pad.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES responded that she was sure it was the oil
company who established the gravel pad, and there would not have
been one there unless they had established it.
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO further inquired about the type of storage
located at East Dock.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES did not know.
MR. LOWELL replied that he was sure ARCO had paid for the East Dock
gravel pad. With respect to storage, he stated that there was a
fenced-in area where there were various types of structural
equipment. He thought the storage was maybe on only one-third of
the gravel pad on the east side.
REPRESENTATIVE COWDERY referred to page 2, line 20, of HCR 5, and
asked if the phrase "oil company" could be deleted.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES stated that she was not sure it was not an oil
company tour operator. She thought Gerald Gallagher would know
what the correct wording should be.
Number 0522
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO referred to an April 17, 1995 letter from
ARCO and BP and read the following:
ARCO and BP do not charge the tour operators for access
to Prudhoe Bay and plays no role in determining what tour
operators charge for their services.
He said he was not sure if this statement was still effective.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES did not know.
MR. LOWELL clarified that it was "oil company authorized tour
operator."
Number 0558
GERALD GALLAGHER, Manager of Government Relations, ARCO Alaska,
Inc., said he and Dawn Patience should be able to answer specific
questions about what is on the site and any other questions.
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO asked what the storage was on the East Dock
gravel pad.
DAWN PATIENCE, Tour Guide, ARCO Alaska Inc., explained that the
storage at East Dock is used as a staging area, and various types
of equipment are stored there.
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO wanted to know if heavy equipment was stored
there.
Number 0626
MS. PATIENCE thought the area being referred to was off of the
opposite side of East Dock behind the fenced area, and she replied,
"East Dock itself is used for storage aside from that."
CHAIR MASEK wondered if that area was shown on the map provided in
the bill packet.
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO inquired if Ms. Patience conducted the tours
herself or if she oversaw the tour operator.
MS. PATIENCE replied she that had conducted many tours herself.
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO asked what type of vehicle was used for the
tours.
Number 0681
MR. GALLAGHER interjected and asked Representative Halcro if he was
referring to the private tours coming out of Deadhorse rather than
ARCO-led tours.
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO said he was referring to the private tours
run by the commercial operators.
MR. GALLAGHER stated that ARCO has provided training to three
commercial operators. Access is provided to the main construction
camp, where there is a visitor facility. He explained that the
commercial operators run the tours and charge for them, but ARCO
does not collect any fees.
REPRESENTED HALCRO again wanted to know what types of vehicles were
used.
MS. PATIENCE said the vehicles range from small vans to large tour
buses.
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO asked Mr. Gallagher, "If tomorrow I started
a tour company and wanted to do those [tours], would you allow me
to do them so long as I went through the training you [ARCO] offer,
or do you limit that?"
MS. PATIENCE responded that there are some restrictions, but it is
open to other providers as long as certain requirements were met.
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH asked if there were problems with grizzly
bears in that area.
MR. GALLAGHER explained that employees receive a minimum of eight
hours of training in the field for a variety of issues before they
go to work. He said, "Bears are something we're always aware of
... for the safety of our employees."
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH wondered if the tour companies could be
asked to go through the same kind of training so they understand
how to deal with bears in the area.
MR. GALLAGHER stated that this was part of the requirement to go
into the field. He believed the tour operators had been trained in
the wildlife aspects of the concerns.
Number 0834
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES asked if there was any record of bears or
other animals in the area of East Dock.
MR. GALLAGHER did not know if bears had been in the East Dock area.
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH inquired if the oil companies were still
actively using the East Dock.
MR. GALLAGHER said the East Dock and the route there were both
active industrial sites.
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH asked if the oil companies would agree to a
visitor center in that area.
Number 0888
MR. GALLAGHER stated that ARCO has concerns regarding unrestricted
public access in the field.
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH wanted to know who would be responsible if
a person drove an unreliable vehicle up in that area and it broke
down.
MR. GALLAGHER indicated that was a concern that still needed to be
addressed.
CHAIR MASEK believed people traveling on the Dalton Highway are
aware that there are no services beyond Deadhorse and they are
traveling at their own risk.
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH felt that some people would disregard this
information and travel to the Arctic Ocean anyway.
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO noted a letter dated December 23, 1997 from
the United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife
Service, suggested that DOT/PF "initiate steps to control the
extent and location of foot traffic on adjacent tundra along the
highway corridor from the Deadhorse area to the Beaufort Sea." He
stated that road maintenance and policing an area are two different
things, and it would be cost-prohibitive for DOT/PF to control foot
traffic in that area.
Number 1059
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES read the following from the "Unrestricted
Public Access to the Arctic Ocean-Background" handout from DOT/PF:
While the oil industry may be restricted in their
operation in order to protect wildlife and habitat, those
permits are industry specific and are not directed to
activities of the general public. Officials from both
the Alaska State Department of Fish and Game and the
Federal Fish and Wildlife agree the East Dock Road can be
opened to unrestricted public travel with no more impact
on wildlife than any other road to the beach, noting the
public is allowed unrestricted access within our National
Wildlife Refuges. Both agencies have offered to
participate in planning highway access to the ocean.
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO informed Representative James that the letter
from the United States Department of Interior, dated December 23,
1997, conveys the opposite of the statement she read. He expressed
that his biggest concerns revolved around liability. He agreed
with some of the comments made on having access to navigable water.
He wondered why the background handout from DOT/PF did not address
liability.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES said she understood the concerns addressed.
She said, "We cannot base everything we do on fear." She commented
that liability was important to address. She further stated:
I agree that the North Slope is not like downtown
Anchorage or it's not like down on the Kenai Peninsula,
but North Slope is getting more and more attention and
will get more and more attention in the future. And
whether we open this tomorrow or the next day, I think we
should have some real serious conversations about how we
can do it because I think it is something that the people
are interested in. They've already indicated that's
true. I think that as time goes by they'll be interested
in it. I don't think that locking it up is going to take
the interest away. It's been a concern for a long time.
... They drive around oil operations in other parts of
the United States. Maybe they are not as nearly as
serious as this one that we have, and I'm here to protect
the oil companies. I think we want their bucks falling
into our hands. I want their business. I want to be
considered to be business friendly, but, Madam Chairman,
we are also in a very serious financial dilemma in our
state today.
Number 1294
I've been working on a long-term plan, and I've come up
with two conclusions ... to try to make our existing
revenues support us, plus our income revenues. And
there's two things that we have to do. ... One, we need
to get more oil down the pipeline. ... They'll be working
on that in the future, and besides that we also need to
diversify our economy, and tourism is a very important
part of that diversification. ... Those are the two
things we must do if we are going to survive and have the
kind of a community and the kind of a state that we want
to live in, and I think it is imperative that we look at
being able to get people to the Arctic Ocean.
Number 1384
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO wondered if the Fairbanks Chamber of Commerce
had changed their position on opposing unrestricted access to the
Arctic Ocean.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES said she believed they had.
Number 1405
CHAIR MASEK announced that HCR 5 would be held until the next
meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
Number 1477
CHAIR MASEK adjourned the House Transportation Standing Committee
meeting at 3:37 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|