HOUSE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE February 10, 1995 8:08 a.m. MEMBERS PRESENT Representative Joe Green, Co-Chairman Representative Bill Williams, Co-Chairman Representative Scott Ogan, Vice Chairman Representative Alan Austerman Representative John Davies MEMBERS ABSENT Representative Ramona Barnes Representative Pete Kott Representative Eileen MacLean Representative Irene Nicholia COMMITTEE CALENDAR Presentation by the Federal Arctic Research Commission WITNESS REGISTER DR. DONALD O'DOWD, Chairman U.S. Arctic Research Commission 1550 La Vista Del Oceano Santa Barbara, CA 93109 Phone: (805)965-4505 POSITION STATEMENT: Presented overview of the Federal Arctic Research Commission GARRETT BRASS, Executive Director U.S. Arctic Research Commission 4350 N. Fairfax Drive, Suite 630 Arlington, VA 22203 Phone: (703)525-0111 POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions regarding the Federal Arctic Research Commission CLIFFORD GROH, Member U.S. Arctic Research Commission 2550 Denali Street, 17th Floor Anchorage, AK 99503 Phone: 272-6474 POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions regarding the Federal Arctic Research Commission ACTION NARRATIVE TAPE 95-12, SIDE A Number 000 The House Resources Committee was called to order by Co-Chairman Green at 8:08 a.m. Members present at the call to order were Representatives Green, Williams, Ogan, Austerman and Davies. Members absent were Representatives Barnes, Kott, MacLean and Nicholia. DR. DON O'DOWD, CHAIRMAN, FEDERAL ARCTIC RESEARCH COMMISSION, stated the commission has offices in Washington, D.C. and Anchorage and is not a large commission in terms of staff. He said the commission has two people in Washington and one person in Anchorage. The commission has seven members. He explained the commission was established under the Arctic Research and Policy Act of 1984, which was initiated by the Alaska congressional delegation. This act was enacted and the commission created because the United States (U.S.) had an array of polar programs for a long time but the pole always meant the South Pole. Most of the activities of the U.S. government in research and science were focused in the Antarctic rather than the Arctic. He noted that Senators Stevens and Murkowski, and Representative Young decided the Arctic should get more attention in regard to research. DR. O'DOWD stated what happens in the Arctic is of great importance to people in Alaska and the lower 48 including the weather which is generated, pollution, the ozone hole, etc. He said it has been difficult to get the U.S. government and its research enterprise to focus on the Arctic. He pointed out the commission is dedicated to focusing attention of the federal agencies who do research and fund research on the Arctic and its challenges. DR. O'DOWD told committee members the Arctic is a line defined by the Arctic Circle, the Porcupine River, the Yukon and Kuskokwim, the Aleutians and the Bering Sea. He stated there are seven members on the commission including one Alaska Native who lives in the Arctic, two representatives who are people involved in Alaska industry, and four representatives who are scientists or academic people. He noted the commission members are appointed by the President for a four year term and serve until replaced. Number 077 DR. O'DOWD commented on the duties of the Arctic Research Commission. The commission is responsible for developing and recommending an integrated national Arctic research policy. He said the term integrate is an interesting one because the nation has never had an integrated national research policy, but rather every agency has tended to do what it wanted to do. Another duty of the commission is to facilitate cooperation between the federal government and state and local governments with respect to Arctic research. Next, the commission is responsible for reviewing federal research programs in the Arctic and recommend improvements in coordination among programs. DR. O'DOWD said another duty of the commission is to cooperate with the Governor of the state of Alaska, and with agencies and organizations of that state which the Governor may designate in regard to the formation of Arctic research policy. The commission is responsible for recommending to the interagency committee the means for developing international scientific cooperation in the Arctic. He stated the interagency committee involves 14 federal agencies. Another duty of the commission is that the interagency committee, in consultation with the commission, the Governor of the state of Alaska, the residents of the Arctic, the private sector and public interest groups shall prepare a comprehensive five-year program plan for the overall federal effort in Arctic research. The plan shall be prepared and submitted to the President for transmittal to the Congress within one year after the enactment of the act and then biannually thereafter. DR. O'DOWD explained the commission has worked with the federal agencies to develop the five-year plan. The commission develops a goals report every two years which sets the commission's judgment as to what the priorities should be for Arctic research. Those in turn feed into the five-year plan. He said one of the commission's obligations is to try and guide the future of Arctic research. Number 117 DR. O'DOWD stated the commission meets four times a year and one of those meetings is in Alaska. He said the commission is currently working on several initiatives including a health initiative. The commission is interested in increasing the involvement of the federal government in health and medical research as it relates to the problems and the needs of the Arctic and the Arctic people. There are specific and distinctive health problems in the Arctic. He noted the greatest concentration of accidental injury and death in the U.S. is in the Arctic. He stressed there has been a considerable rise in diabetes, heart disease, and specific cancers among Alaska Native peoples. He added that alcoholism is a long term problem and diseases like hepatitis have been a concern for a long time. DR. O'DOWD stressed the commission believes that more federal attention should be directed toward these problems. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) spend approximately $7 billion a year in research funding outside of the institute and only about $500,000 a year has come to Alaska in recent years, which is not a very good penetration. He said the commission has been working with the NIH, bringing them together with university people from Alaska, with state government people, with federal agencies, and with the Alaska Federation of Natives (AFN) in an effort to explore the possibilities of increasing this type of research activity. DR. O'DOWD noted the commission has had some success. A planning grant is being prepared to get help from the federal government to build the commission's capabilities in this research area. He said there also has been almost a doubling of funding from the federal government in the last year, probably as a result of the commission conducting a seminar with NIH and Alaska people in this health and medical area. He stated the main problem has involved getting the federal government to realize there are talents present who can make use of that funding if the right people know the right people. He stressed the commission is working on that. DR. O'DOWD stated another area the commission spent time on about two years ago was oil spills in ice infested waters. He explained a couple of years ago there was a plan to have a demonstration burn north of Prudhoe Bay with the U.S. Coast Guard and Alaska Clean Seas being the agencies putting the demonstration together. The planning was completed, the burn was prepared to go ahead, and then at the last minute, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in Washington, D.C. refused to issue a permit, even though the regional EPA office had signed off. He added that the commission spent a lot of time working on the protocols as to what kind of research could be done for this kind of study, what kind of data could be gathered, and the risks involved, as a design to guide the people who would be conducting the research in a way that it would do minimal environmental damage and give the maximum amount of information. Number 178 DR. O'DOWD noted that engineers who work in the oil spill burn area say the only thing that can be done with an oil spill in the ice is burn it. He predicted some day there is going to be an oil spill in the high Arctic and as of today, no one knows how to deal with it. He said there has not been an opportunity to conduct meaningful experimentation to determine how. He felt it is a great loss, but noted the protocols are still in place. He added there have been a few test burns in calmer waters but not ice infested waters. DR. O'DOWD said the commission is also working on an engineering initiative. Within the last few months, the commission has determined that more attention should be spent on housing, the provision of clean drinking water, and waste water disposal in Arctic settings. The commission believes there should be more federal research dedicated to developing appropriate housing standards, which have been adequately tested, good water management standards, as well as waste water management standards. He stated the commission's suggestion is to get federal agencies to focus on these areas with more of their attention and to come to an agreement to set up test sites, so if a model system is developed, it not be installed somewhere and then discovered after three years it does not work anymore. Rather, the model system should be installed in some kind of test bed setting where people live in the housing, use the water system, and work with the waste water disposal system for a period of time and improve it as a result, until the system is ready to be installed with a higher degree of expectation that it will work properly. He added that the commission will conduct a workshop in Washington, D.C. March 9 and 10 to bring the federal agencies together with some Alaska people to begin the process of moving ahead on this issue. Number 220 DR. O'DOWD stated during the last three years, the commission has sponsored an effort to get the U.S. Navy to commit a nuclear attack submarine to be used as a research platform under the Arctic ice. He said the Arctic Ocean can be studied from under the ice in a way that it cannot be done from any other setting. He noted an ice breaker is fine but it goes one course through the ice, takes measurements along the way and does that once a year which is not very much in the way of investigating the Arctic Ocean. There is little known about the Arctic Ocean. He stressed less is known about the Arctic Ocean than any other major body of water on the globe. He explained that is due partly to not having ways of getting at it and partly due to it having been a strategic point of focus in the Cold War for the last 40-50 years. DR. O'DOWD said the commission was successful in getting the first nuclear submarine cruise in 1993 and added that another one leaves in March. He stated the commission now has a guarantee from the U.S. Navy for cruises annually until 1999. Therefore, the commission will now have the ability to study aspects of the Arctic Ocean never before studied such as water quality, pollution, contamination, currents, temperatures, and a whole variety of things. DR. O'DOWD noted a recent U.S. Coast Guard report indicated one significant layer of Arctic water, which is about 500 meters deep on average and covers the entire Arctic starting down several hundred meters below the ice, has increased in temperature by one degree centigrade between 1991 and 1994. He stated that change does not sound like much but reminded committee members that this involves hundreds of thousands of cubic miles of water. He told committee members the commission has been trying to get the U.S. Navy to commit a submarine permanently, on a 365-days-a-year basis, to be outfitted as a research station. DR. O'DOWD said the commission can play an important role, to the extent where there are issues the state legislature deals with that data information and new research might strengthen their understanding when making decisions, the commission may be able to persuade the federal government to fund some kinds of research which could be of benefit to the legislature and to the state and its people. Number 287 CO-CHAIRMAN GREEN wondered what motivates commission members, who do not live in the Arctic, to be so interested in the Arctic. DR. O'DOWD responded Ben Gerwick has worked on Arctic engineering problems such as oil platforms his entire life; George Newton, a former submarine commander and engineer, has a hobby of Arctic research; Luis Proenza has spent the last eight years living in Alaska and was the principle research officer of the University of Alaska. Dr. O'Dowd felt research in the state is a critical industry. He said the University of Alaska is probably doing $50 million worth of research a year currently, all of which is funded from outside the state. He noted the state's investment is approximately $7 million of matching money, against about $50 million of primarily federal money. CO-CHAIRMAN GREEN asked if the terms of the commission are staggered. MR. O'DOWD said they are. CO-CHAIRMAN GREEN asked if the commission appointments are confirmed by the legislature. MR. O'DOWD responded Congress is not involved. The President's appointments office makes the appointments and added that office is the most secretive agency he has ever dealt with. CO-CHAIRMAN GREEN recalled the commission has a five-year plan. He wondered if the annual review keeps the five-year plan moving forward. GARRETT BRASS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, U.S. ARCTIC RESEARCH COMMISSION, said the plan is of five years duration and the starting point of the five years is restarted every other year. The commission publishes the goals report at the end of January which outlines goals to achieve in the plan and the plan is then published, which is the multiple agency response to the goals report. CO-CHAIRMAN GREEN wondered if the committee could get a copy of the plan. MR. BRASS replied he would send the plan, as well as the commission's annual report. Number 350 REPRESENTATIVE JOHN DAVIES stated he has an array of issues and concerns to discuss. He said an area of great concern to the state is the design and delivery of clean water in the Arctic and rural settings and added it is a generalized concern under the heading of permafrost engineering. He noted the single largest geological hazard in Alaska is permafrost. There is a great deal of damage done to structures and to financial investments in the state if the existence of permafrost is not detected and/or engineered for. He pointed out that in many settings, there are no good solutions currently. Therefore, he felt that issue is a prime candidate for research. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES observed that housing and highways are other major issues where good solutions have also not been found. He said another area of concern is earthquake and volcano hazards. In the realm of volcano hazards, he has two concerns. The first concern involves interagency coordination at the federal level. He noted when there is a volcano hazards warning in Alaska, three principle agencies are involved: The Federal Aviation Administration, the National Weather Service, and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). He felt the coordination among those agencies in the past was less than desirable and in some cases, resulted in a direct risk to human safety. He stated a functioning aircraft warning system has not been achieved yet, even though the technology is in place. He stressed the ongoing research needs to be strengthened. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES said in regard to great earthquakes, Alaska is one of the best laboratories for studying great earthquakes. He noted that Dr. O'Dowd had mentioned the Arctic extends to the Aleutian Island chain. He pointed out that is the area which has generated three of the great earthquakes out of the ten largest earthquakes in recorded history. He felt more research is needed on tsunami generation mechanisms in that area and on providing warnings for close by sites and in shallow waters. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES said in respect to earthquake monitoring in the state, there is a great deal of data collected by the U.S. Air Force under the old seismic monitoring of global test band. That data is technically not classified. However, he spent eight years as the state's seismologist trying to get that data and was only marginal successful. He felt it is an enormous waste of federal dollars to be collecting that data and throwing it away, when it could be used for other purposes while not compromising the original intent. He thought the Arctic Research Commission could be helpful in making data already collected available. Number 441 MR. BRASS wondered if Representative Davies was familiar with the Institutional Researchers and Interest in Seismic. He felt perhaps that group would be of assistance. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES responded he had tried that. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES stated in light of ongoing budget cuts and reorganizations, there have been rumors about the closing of the Alaska branch of the USGS. He expressed he would not be concerned if there was only a reorganization in order to realign the USGS's mission in Alaska. He noted the Alaska branch was a special creation because of Alaska's unique circumstance. He said reducing the presence of the USGS would be of great concern to him. He added that only about ten percent of state and federal lands in Alaska have been mapped on a reasonable geological scale and there is a great deal of basic fundamental geological research remaining to be done in the state, which is important for all kinds of resource development issues in the state. MR. BRASS noted in the budget plan, which went along with the Contract for America, there was an intention to zero out the USGS. He stressed if the committee were to make their interest in preserving the Alaska branch and the activities of the USGS known, it would help in keeping that body moving forward. CO-CHAIRMAN GREEN wondered to whom the committee should make that interest known. MR. BRASS stated he would get names to the committee of the appropriate Congressional committee chairmen to contact. DR. O'DOWD added that another threat is to close down all of the earthquake monitoring the USGS does in southern California which has not been popular with the people who live there. Number 499 REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES stressed the USGS plays a major role in earthquake monitoring in the state of Alaska also. The monitoring effort is a joint effort between the state of Alaska and the USGS. He said another area of concern is radiation monitoring. He stated what is not known is how many different agencies are actually involved in radiation monitoring in the state. He felt there is a need for coordination, and perhaps an overview of the strategy being looked at in terms of what the state is trying to accomplish and how those accomplishments can be done most efficiently. MR. BRASS said there is a program called the Arctic Nuclear Waste Assessment program which is run through the Office of Naval Research which looks at the potential for leakage from former Soviet nuclear facilities. He added that program is funded by money set aside to maintain the nuclear infrastructure in the former Soviet Union. He noted the U.S. Navy has no assurance that money will continue. The U.S. Navy runs the system so at the end of every year if they have to shut down, they can provide a plan based on the knowledge gained thus far. He mentioned that again, he would be happy to provide points of contact to encourage continuation of the program. CO-CHAIRMAN GREEN responded he would appreciate that information because the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) is also involved. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES added that much of DEC's effort is funded through the federal government. He said radiation monitoring is important for determining the health status of subsistence foods in Alaska and is an important means for understanding the problem. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES stated another area of concern is alternate energy. There is a great need to develop cost effective, small scale energy delivery systems in rural settings. The state of Alaska has some fledgling efforts directed at that problem, looking at coalbed methane, small hydroplants, and a variety of those types of efforts. He felt a lot of research is still needed on how to make these smaller scale power delivery systems cost effective. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES said the last concern is renewable resources such as exporting seed potatoes, understanding the boreal forests and what sustained yield means, etc. He stated the federal government is heavily involved in fisheries research, noting that the fishing industry is the single largest employer in the state. Therefore, basic research for fisheries is always of concern to the state. MR. BRASS responded there is an international program called the Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy (AEPS). He said the President recently issued a presidential decision directive on Arctic policy which lead to the commission's commitment to the AEPS. He stated there are three important components in the AEPS: the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program, the Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna, and the Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment. He said the funding for participation in the AEPS system last year was $190,000 from the state department, which they have not guaranteed to provide this year. He noted that the Norwegians spent $800,000. He told committee members the commission's goals report will call for, at a minimum, $500,000. Number 621 CO-CHAIRMAN GREEN commented the new Congress and certainly the legislature is dedicated to cost cutting and observed that some of these scientific programs are probably either on the cutting block or are being looked at for possible cuts. He wondered if the state is in a conjectural mode that on one hand saying let's cut and cut, but on the other hand, do not make those cuts in Alaska, not in the environment which is so critical to us. He wondered if that was being received in Washington. MR. BRASS replied what is important in Washington is the ratio of benefits to costs. He felt if the cost yields great benefits such as in safety of aircraft traffic in the state or in the productivity of the most valuable fishery in the country, etc., those programs can succeed. He stated the legislature's input to Congress on what the benefits of these programs are is important. He noted that legislators have to make very important decisions on very low levels of information. Therefore, the more information given to the national legislature about the importance of these problems and issues, the better the decisions will be made. CLIFF GROH, MEMBER, FEDERAL ARCTIC COMMISSION, commented the composition of the commission is interesting. The commission consists of four scientists, engineers, an indigenous resident of the Arctic plus two private industry representatives, of which he is one. In representing private industry, his purpose is to determine what the needs and interests of industry are for resource development in the Arctic and try to direct some research in order to help private industry. He added that is a facet of the commission which has not been completely utilized and is a facet needing to be explained to industry because there is the ability to get federal research into areas which could be helpful to industry. CO-CHAIRMAN GREEN said next week two representatives from industry will be giving a presentation to the committee and he would pass that information on to them. CO-CHAIRMAN GREEN recalled one of the issues mentioned was health. He said the state has a disproportionate amount of hepatitis in a few of the coastal villages. He felt sewage treatment would help alleviate the problem but added that cure would be energy intensive, especially in a cold climate. He wondered if there is a way to begin research without having the energy yet developed. He noted something that will come out of this legislature is to take a look at developing energy in these remote sites which is not commercial to ship out, but worth developing for local use. However, he felt it is something which will be delayed. TAPE 95-12, SIDE B Number 000 DR. O'DOWD stated an area which needs to be looked at is how the commission can contribute to addressing the issue of cost effective maintainable energy sources in small settings. He said the Cold Regions Laboratory has been working on this issue from a military point of view, which may be adaptable to the kind of situations in Alaska. MR. BRASS stated commission members have gained a growing awareness, just by traveling around, about solid waste disposal problems in the state. He felt small energy supplies and solid waste could be the topics for next year's workshop. He pointed out that in addition to energy utilization, an important problem in these systems, is the level of sophistication relative to the people available to operate and maintain them. Therefore, a reason to test the systems in the field is to determine not only if they work, but can they be kept working by the people who have to keep them working. CO-CHAIRMAN GREEN commented he toured a facility last year and the theme he kept hearing was no system will work without proper maintenance. Number 026 REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT OGAN stressed the bush communities in Alaska have a tremendous problem with fuel storage tanks. He felt federal agencies have looked the other way with the environmental liability occurring out there. He added there is a lot of coal in the northwest Arctic. He wondered if any research had been done concerning small, coal fired electrical generation plants. MR. BRASS said he did not know, but would get him the answer. He stated one of the most interesting applications of coal is in the production of alternative fuels. Unfortunately, the alternative fuels division of the Department of Energy is also on the list for zeroing out. MR. O'DOWD noted the fuel tank issue is a critical one in the villages and in many cases, involves multiple fuel tanks. REPRESENTATIVE OGAN felt it is an issue that will come up in the future and cost the state dearly. MR. BRASS stated the commission has made an interesting connection with a group called the Civil Engineering Research Foundation which is sponsored by industry and has very good connections with all of the civil engineering branches in the federal government. CO-CHAIRMAN GREEN added there is proposed legislation in the state to combine utilities. He said perhaps while in the process of trying to find alternative energy, the legislature can combine and reduce the number of these fuel tanks. MR. BRASS thought the federal Rural Electrification Administration is also on the cutting block. Number 074 CO-CHAIRMAN GREEN recalled it was mentioned that there is a potential for annual sub ice pack nuclear research. He wondered what effect the possible out fall might have on the food chain, the environment, etc. He also asked if the commission would have anything to provide the state to reduce the potential fear which might come from a nuclear sub running about under an ice pack. MR. BRASS responded the commission is not increasing the number of submarine cruises but is going along as riders. Those submarines are already there and have been for 40 years. He said he would talk to Commissioner Newton about that potential fear however. CO-CHAIRMAN GREEN stated there has been a real interest in the North Sea route. He said there is a natural gyre of a large amount of ice and he assumed that part of the research would address issues concerning that ice. In regard to oil spill burns on ice infested waters, he pointed out the proven technology is there, but the concern is what happens when there is a lot of ice and an oil spill occurs. He recalled there was a potential for this kind of demonstration burn with Russians about two years ago. He said the state authorized a $1 million investment. He wondered if there is any benefit in reenergizing that effort and doing a burn in the same kind of environment, but perhaps not in U.S. waters. MR. O'DOWD recalled the Russian project also broke down. He said he did not know what the status is at this time. He added that the U.S. Coast Guard has jurisdiction for any such research and Alaska Clean Seas has the technology to deal with the burns. MR. GROH asked Mr. Brass to comment on the Arctic Research Vessel. Number 147 MR. BRASS said he worked with the University of Alaska on the design of the new vessel. He stated progress on the vessel has been very slow due to the political system. It was agreed to abide by the decision of a General Accounting Office (GAO) audit which would decide whether buying or leasing such a vessel is superior from the point of view of the federal government. He noted that audit has not been reported but he spoke with the auditors and they have confirmed that buying is superior to leasing. MR. BRASS added that the GAO audit has brought up some questions about how many ice breakers the nation needs. He noted the U.S. Coast Guard is also building a new ice breaker. As a result of this concern, the National Academy of Sciences, through the Ocean Studies Board of the Polar Research Board, is going to conduct a study of research plans in the Arctic Ocean. After several upcoming meetings are conducted, the report will be written. MR. GROH added the vessel is going to be 343 feet and said he would be happy to send the committee the design studies. He added that the cost of the vessel is estimated at $120 million to $125 million. He noted the U.S. Coast Guard's ice breaker is costing $340 million. He stated Senator Stevens and Senator Murkowski have made it very clear, they expect the National Science Foundation to proceed on the vessel. Number 193 CO-CHAIRMAN GREEN wondered if a time frame has been established. MR. BRASS stated the National Science Foundation has recently instituted a fund within their budget for major research facilities. He said in a year or two that fund will be freed up. He believed there was an agreement at the last National Science Foundation board meeting to consider a proposal that the Arctic Research Vessel be injected in this stream for capitol support. He added there is an expectation that the state of Alaska will help on the project in the following way. If the state, through its bonding and borrowing authority, could spread the $125 million out over 10-15 years, with the agreement the federal government could pay the amount back over 10-15 years with an appropriate interest payment, it will be much easier rather than going up on the hill and trying to get an extra $125 million in one year. He said the vessel probably would not hit the water until the year 2000. MR. O'DOWD said there is an $8 million annual operating budget involved with the Arctic Research Vessel, which would be located in Seward. He felt it will be a significant addition to Seward's economy. CO-CHAIRMAN GREEN asked what the make up of the crew on the vessel would be. MR. BRASS replied the crew would consist of employees of the University of Alaska. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES wondered if this would be another area where some kind of resolution or letters would be helpful. MR. BRASS said as he understands it, the legislature has already memorialized the Congress on their belief in this proposition and added the Alaska congressional delegation is working on it. He felt the support was already there. CO-CHAIRMAN GREEN said, "If we were to get into a situation where either sub sea completions or the scary thought perhaps (as far as my limited knowledge) of structures able to withstand ice impacts, would there be, or is there any consideration being given, that with the nuclear research that there may be, either through laser or some other Buck Rogers type of thing that could be utilized in an emergency to prevent a collision of a huge ice flow against a sub floor completion or structure? Is the research which is going to be conducted in your vein more temperature, salinity, water movements, and leave all of this other stuff to the military?" MR. BRASS responded one of the technologies growing in the maritime community is the ability to image the bottom of the sea floor. He stated in regard to hardening the connections, he felt that was a very hard proposition. He added there is a great deal of industry research ongoing. He said what has raised his interest is the development of a system called the differential global positioning system (GPS). Once that system is in place, the navigational precision will be on the order of ten centimeters and when a well head or a valve handle needs to be found, the GPS readout will indicate when the vessel is over it. He stressed this system will also be great for search and rescue, a tremendous scientific tool, and a huge boost to industry. He noted the installation has been accelerated in Alaska because it is the region with the most difficulty in navigation. However, there currently is no intention to carry the system on around the north side of the coast, which he feels is a mistake. Number 298 CO-CHAIRMAN GREEN noted there have been discussions about harnessing the energy created by the aurora borealis. He assumed that issue is low on the priority list. MR. BRASS said the commission is not proceeding in that direction but added that the Institute of Geophysics is and has received substantial funding to do so. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES stated the research in regard to the aurora borealis is directed more toward using the aurora as a natural laboratory. He said it is a plasma state up there and it is very difficult to maintain plasma states in a lab on the ground. He added that the research allows an understanding of the fundamental physics of how materials behave in that kind of plasma environment. He noted from that point of view, it has some potential, long term future implications about energy. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the House Resources Committee, Co-Chairman Green adjourned the meeting.