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.