Senator MCCLURE. I ask unanimous consent that a statement by the distinguished Senator from Oregon, Senator Mark Hatfield, be made a part of the record at this point. The CHAIRMAN. Yes, without objection. [The prepared statement of Senator Hatfield follows:] Senator Mark O. Hatfield Statement Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Mr. Chairman, I thank you for holding these hearings so soon after the Committee decided to proceed to a decision on the ANWR issue. You have set an ambitious timeline for the Committee and it is my hope that we can meet it. I must stress at the outset, however, that my mind is not yet made up on whether we should open ANWR. Accordingly, I appreciate your holding these hearings now. As members of the Committee know, I long have been involved in efforts to make this country energy independent. The Committee was very active during the oil crises of the 1970s in developing policies which allowed us to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. However, we have seen these efforts reversed during this Administration, and I see no indication that policy will be changed in the next fifteen months. With the decline in oil production on the North Slope expected to begin early in the next decade, I am concerned how we will deal with less domestic production. The oil reserves geologists believe to be under the 1002 area would help reduce our dependence on oil imports by as much as 9 billion barrels, but so would an increase in conservation and R&D for renewable energy sources. The choices with which we are faced are not as simple as whether to develop ANWR or to leave the 1002 area as wilderness. Therefore, the Committee must take its policy-making responsibilities seriously and look at all available options. During the course of these hearings I will be listening carefully to see what options are available to us. I hope Members and witnesses will see the necessity for the Committee to examine more than the narrow range of options we have been presented thus far. The CHAIRMAN. Senator Ford. Senator FORD. I have no statement, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. The CHAIRMAN. Senator Murkowski. STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK H. MURKOWSKI, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF ALASKA Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First of all, I want to thank you for scheduling these hearings today. I think that the manner in which you have proceeded under the four oversight hearings that we have had and the debate, while somewhat unusual, has been most enlightening to us all. We are holding these hearings today, tomorrow, and Thursday, and authorizing the reauthorization of oil and gas leasing in the coastal plain. And of course, this issue is very important, not only to my state of Alaska, but to the national security of our nation as well. We have had an opportunity to have many of our members tour Alaska, and as a consequence of that I feel that the straw poll taken by the committee two to one in favor of going ahead and considering legislation in this session, in the balance of our current session, is not only appropriate, but I think reflects the commitment that this committee has in the area of oil and gas legislation and to identify certainly the most promising area, and that is the ANWR. In the past, Mr. Chairman, the main concern, the environmental objection, seemed to dwell on the question of the caribou herd. As a consequence of the migration this year and the realities of the winter season, most of the caribou appear to have calved outside of the particular 1002 area. That is significant in itself, but the environmental concern has simply moved to another objective, and that is a concern over the ecosystem and the suggestion that millions of acres would be developed if leasing occurs. Well, as we know, that is not necessarily the case. There are some 19 million acres in ANWR and less than eight percent, about 1.5 million acres of the coastal plain, is the area proposed for leasing. The amount of land that would be actually impacted, of course, would be far less than that. In fact, if the entire 1002 area were to be developed, which of course is not likely, the footprint on the coastal plain would be less than one-tenth of 1 percent of the area. It is my understanding that pro formas have been developed on various drilling proposals, and one scenario suggests that, with today's technology, as much as 500 million barrels of oil can be produced from only two drill pads in the lease area, impacting only 120 acres. I think one also has to consider as we deliberate on this legislation the reality that Alaska contains 56 million acres of wilderness set aside in perpetuity. So one has to reflect on the balance, what is practical and what is impractical, and the question of just how much is enough. As we all know, Prudhoe Bay's oil production currently is somewhere in excess of 22, 23, close to 25 percent of the domestic oil produced in the United States today and the reality that in 10 to 20 years that field will be almost depleted in its entirety. As a consequence of our increased dependence on imported oil, the question comes to mind quite quickly, where are we going to find another domestic alternative? What we are talking about here, Mr. Chairman, is putting up the area for lease to determine if in fact there are recoverable reserves that are capable of development. Make no mistake about it, if you are lucky enough to find oil in Alaska, that is not good enough. You better find a lot of oil. One thing about the wilderness, Mr. Chairman, I think deserves a reflection. One of the comments of one of the members who visited ANWR, who got out of the helicopter and looked around and he asked the question, where is the wilderness? Now that may sound trite, but I think it represents the reality that the wilderness is a perception. That particular individual looked at the area and assumed it was an arctic desert, and that is another perception. So as we reflect on the realities that make decisions, I think we should keep in perspective the fact that we have dealt quite successfully in the Prudhoe Bay area. We have learned from the Prudhoe Bay experience. We have advanced technology that can be applicable in ANWR if indeed we are fortunate enough to find oil. And I would request of my colleagues consideration on the obligation and the national security of this Nation that we have an adequate inventory of our resources. It makes little sense to have the strategic petroleum reserve and supplies of various strategic minerals if indeed we do not know whether we have a sufficient discovery of oil in ANWR as is estimated in the sense of being one of the highest and most likely areas left in North America. What we have today, Mr. Chairman, is Senate bill 1217. Senator Stevens and I introduced this bill last May as a vehicle to authorize oil and gas leasings in the promising onshore area and gas prospects considered to be in North America within ANWR. Our bill, S. 1217, is a straightforward directive to the Secretary of the Interior to conduct simple oil and gas lease sales on the coastal plain of ANWR. I hold no illusions that this committee's final product will closely resemble the initial bill. Nonetheless, I believe that it is an appropriate place to start for the committee in its legislative deliberations. As we proceed for the next 3 days, I hope that we will receive contructive advice on ways to make this legislation better. Following the hearings, I believe it would be wise to proceed with a markup as soon as possible. I leave you with one other thought, Mr. Chairman, and that is the reality that we have some 30 to 40 ships in the Persian Gulf, some 15,000 American service personnel that are prepared to die if necessary to maintain the flow of oil in the Persian Gulf. I think that sends the message to this committee that it is indeed our responsibility to move ahead and inventory our domestic reserves to determine indeed whether we are going to continue to have to depend increasingly on foreign imports or whether we have an alternative. And that alternative I think is in the legislation that we are beginning today with this hearing. |