Good morning, everyone. The committee will come to order. We meet this morning to consider opening a very small portion of alaskas 1002 area to responsible Energy Development to meet the 1 billion budget reconciliation instruction that our Committee Received last week. The 1002 area covers 1. 57 million acres of land in northeast alaska within the nonwilderness portion. You can bring it over here sean. I think its important to put this in context in terms of the areas that we are talking about. Anwr itself is 19 million acres. This is approximately the size of south carolina. The nonwilderness area is 1002 area, is 1. 5 million acres, approximately the size of delaware. The area here is designated as wilderness, federal wilderness, 8 million acres there. When we are talking about anwr itself, its important to recognize there are parts of anwr that are designated as wilderness and parts within the refuge and parts of anwr, the 1002 area specifically designated for consideration for oil and Gas Exploration. So, again, i want to be clear, the 1002 area is not federal wilderness. Congress recognized the value of anwr when it designated the more than 7 million acres at the mali beat beatie wilderness here. That is an area that is protected and will not and cannot be touched. The coastal plain, again, is separate from the wilderness in anwr. Its the size of delaware, again, in a refuge the size of the state of south carolina. So, again, the areas we are talking about are significant. What alaskans are asking for is to develop just 2,000 federal acres within it, about 1 10,000 of anwr. Thank you. We should also understand that if we open the 1002 area, the economic benefits will be substantial. Our National Security will be strengthened and the environmental impacts are minimal. We will create thousands of new jobs with wages that support families and put children through college. Revenue for government, tens of billions of dollars over the life of the fields. Theres been some discussion out there as to weather or not we can meet our 1 billion instruction. The answer is a simple yes. I would remind the committee, the first ten years are the start. This is the smallest part of the 40 year period where responsible production raises billions of dollars of revenue every year. They estimated the federal treasury could, depending on oil prices and resources produced and we all put that in a caveat there, it could raise anywhere from 48. 3 billion on the low end to 296. 8 billion over 30 years. Bear in mind, that is new wealth and prosperity. New wealth. It will not be created or repurposed with so much of what we deal with. The revenues will reduce our debt simultaneously creating the growth conditions needed to reduce it on a greater scale. Opening the 1002 area will help keep energy affordable. Here in the lower 48, we have forgotten what it feels like to pay 4 for a gallon of gasoline. Prices are moderate, we realize that but they dont necessarily stay that way. We need to take steps to plan for the long term and we need to do that now, not in ten years, to keep Energy Prices affordable. A number of experts are pointing to the warning signs. You have the International Energy agency that found that, quote, Global Oil Supply could struggle to keep pace with demand after 2020 risking a price unless projects are approved soon. Now, some are going to argue that we are doing just fine. We are producing more, exporting some, so we can turn our attention to other matters. I think thats a mistake. We are projected to remain a significant net importer well into the future and setting aside the shorter term concerns i have mentioned, even the more cautious forecast from Energy Information is energy will be back to 100 a barrel by 2040. I think its misleading to suggest that all the benefits of opening the 1002 area will happen all at once and all in the near term. We know thats not true. We will see the benefit for decades, not just over the tenyear budget window. We talk a lot about where we were back in 1995 when congress had passed anwr and president clinton, at that time, vetoed the effort to open the 1002 area. 1995. Think about where we would have been had that action not taken place. We wouldnt have seen as dramatic run up oil prices in the mid2000s. States like california would not be importing so much oil from abroad. Thats exactly what has happened as supply from alaska has declined. There is no question that opening the 1002 area is important for our state and National Economy and we can be just as confident that the new technologies that are in place and stale coming online will ensure that responsible development does not harm the environment. Between the 1970s and today, the surface footprint of Arctic Development decreased by 80 . Several of our witnesses this morning will speak directly to that. Put it in context. What was once a 65 acre pad now takes about 12 acres or less. Then, below ground, the extended reach drilling from a single pad will grow to an area of 125 square miles by 2020. Just in a few years here. Again, well have mr. Shut speak to that. Thats an increase of 4,000 since we began Oil Production in the 1970s. Development in the arctic always raised concerns about wildlife and the environment and appropriately so. I would remind everyone here this morning, because alaskans have been so careful with development, fears of impact to our wildlife and land have repeatedly proven wrong. Most of our roads are now built from ice and melt in the summertime, leaving no impact on the tundra. Developers follow thousands of regulatory requirements, best practices and mitigation measures. We inventory and assess wildlife and habitat to avoid sensitive places. We talk about the caribou. The central arctic caribou herd, which lives year round in and around the bay, increased from 3,000 animals in 1969, prior to development to 5,000 when Development Began in earnest in 1974 and was at about 22,000 animals just this last year. Its now more than seven times larger than when Development Began. It also may surprise some to learn we are developing energy just outside anwr at Point Thompson,a point my colleague knows very, very well. This is located on state land jst two miles from the border of the 1002 area. That project at Point Thompson is being carried out responsibly and not harming the wildlife that crossed the invisible western boundary, again, defieing the claims we hear about possible harm. For over 40 years now, alaskans have repeatedly proven we can develop stafely and responsibly. We will not harm the caribou or polar bears whose den can be protected. The snow geese whose nesting areas can be safeguarded or other wildlife that visit. We are sensitive to the habitat in the region and care for it. Alaskans understand this. This is why more than 70 of us have supported opening the 1002 area to responsible development. We areless acutely aware that our state needs this and well hear this from our governor. Right now, we have the highest Unemployment Rate in the country. We have massive budget deficits projected to last quite a while. The transatlantic pipeline system, the economic backbone of the state is one quarter full. We know, we know full well that opening the 1002 area is not an immediate cure. We also know that its something that we have to do today because the benefits of development will take time to fully realize. Its like the old saying, we say a lot around here, the best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago. The second best time is now. We need to take that first step today so that we can realize the benefits Going Forward. I was born in alaska. My husband and i have raised our boys there. I hope that they lead long and healthy lives in a place that is so beautiful and so gorgeous that it sometimes takes your breath away. What i know is that no one cares more for alaska as those of us who live and work and raise our families there. We love our state. We respect the land. We would never risk its future for the sake of development. But, we also realize that is not the case here. The 1002 area was created by a congressional compromise. We always knew its future would require another one. Today, alaskans are offering just that. We are not asking to develop all of the 1002 area, but instead, we are asking 2000 acres for about 1 10,000 of the refuge. We have waited nearly 40 years for the right technologies to come along so the footprint of development is small enough to ensure that the environment continues to be respected and will not be harmed. This is not a choice between energy and the environment. We are past that. What we have today is a great lineup of witnesses to help our committee understand that. We have our entire alaska delegation with us, our governor, our congressman, our senator, we have our Lieutenant Governor, a number of alaska that live on the north slope. I thank all our witnesses for being here. I look forward to an excellent and informative hearing. Senator, i turn to you and welcome your remarks. Thank you, madam chair. I welcome the governor and colleagues to todays discussion. I should start this by saying this hearing is a great departure from the strong working relationship that senator myrurkowski and i have t to work on an Energy Agenda to move forward. Its too bad we are not using our resources to force the house colleagues to reconsider the important bill that included over 100 priorities to move our country forward on everything from Cyber Security to Energy Efficiency. I also dont support the make up of todays panels. Two colleagues who do not support opening the wildlife ref zhuszh who carried this bill, senators marquee and bennet were not allowed to be part of the panel. I believe we should have had more witnesses from Indian Country that represent not just the alaska native claim settlement act and corporations and yes, corporations are charged with Economic Development, but individual tribal members throughout alaska and the United States of america dont support this kind of development because they believe in the wildlife nature that god has given us and we are stewards for mother earth. I thank them for that. I thank them for their Strong Spiritual beliefs. Thank you. We are here today because someone came up with a ludicrous idea we can pass a tax reform bill that raises the deficit, increases taxes and that will take a sliver out of a wildlife refuge to do it. I want to call this caribou for millionaires. It is the most ridiculous idea i have heard as it relates to meeting the tax reform agenda. No, i dont like the set up of these three panels. Im always glad to hear from the governor and always glad to hear from our colleagues, but our other colleagues should have had their voices heard and Indian Country better represented. When will we see the language . When will we have any idea about this process . So, i am disturbed. I could go in a direction of saying that we dont have to worry because some of the press reports are that from Bloomberg News and others that, quote, the coastal Arctic Refuge does not have rock formation and there is no great interest in developing the arctic wildlife refuge and there are safer bets. One could have the attitude there are, particularly with the Trump Administrations desire. Im not sure where in the United States of america they dont want to drill, but with their 1. 7 billion acres they want on the outer Continental Shelf and many other places in america, i find it hard to believe there will be the economic incentive to drill in the arctic wildlife refuge. Why put a big x on top of something that is so unique to the United States of america . When i recently researched why we got to this point and heard some of the first people that made their case to the Eisenhower Administration quoting from the reports, quote, we knew it must be preserved as an original fragment of the past. The last opportunity to protect part of this continent as it once was, end quote. Why . Because, as other people said, quote, it was a spiritual place, an arctic wildlife refuge. The fact that, quote, they also said it was an area that was left undisturbed by man. It was the last laboratory in which plants, animals and where they live, as they have always lived, is preserved, end quote. So, this is why we got to this point. This is whats unique about it. This is why, from the Eisenhower Administration to today, we have fought to protect it. Now, is alaskas economy of great concern to us as a nation . Yes. Do we, in the pacific northwest, i think one of the first things i said to the chairwoman is lets talk about why the natural gas pipeline in alaska hasnt been built, because it has a bigger impact than this. There are issues in which we need to be mindful about the Energy Economy moving forward. But this idea is not new and its not better. Theres nothing thats xhanged here. Theres no new science that says we dont have to worry about this wildlife and there is no new science that says the Oil Development will take up a smaller footprint. This map that we will get to everyone basically shows that the development will take up a significant portion of the refuge. The 800 mile long transalaska pipeline, 219 miles of Power Transmission lines and so on and so forth. So, the notion that wildlife can exist in this unique environment in the same way with this development is just wrong. I look forward to hearing from secretary perry on this because i sent him a letter yesterday, asking him how they can exist together. Well look forward to seeing how he answers that. I also point out the uniqueness of this area has entered into an International Agreement. The caribou population is so unique, so specific and so special that we have entered into an agreement with canada on it. Thats because they want to protect this population of caribou as well. So, the notion that we should move forward on a wrong headed idea because all of a sudden people want revenue for a tax bill, and move forward today on something we dont know what we are moving forward on and language is just not the way i think we should be proceeding. I hope that we will have a chance, our colleagues to ask witnesses questions about this, but be assured, even though we dont agree with the process or the process of trying to get 51 votes to change the arctic wildlife refuge, we are never stopping. We are never stopping and trying to protect the arctic wildlife refuge and the uniqueness and working with the people who also support that idea. Thank you. Thank you, senator cantwell. We have several panels this morning. I appreciate not only our delegation being here, but all the alaskans and the visitors that have joined us this morning. Very distinguished panel, we will be led off by our colleague here, senator sullivan. He will be followed by the congressman for all alaska, congressman young, who has represented us in the house of representatives for 45 years . 45 years, going on 46. And the panel will be rounded out by our governor, Governor Walker has been in office now for three years, is a lifelong resident and has great leadership and i appreciate you being here as well governor. Im an independent senator. That is true. He is an independent. We dont talk about political affiliations here of anybody. That is noted for the record. Senator sullivan, if you would like to lead off with the welcome, please. Thank you for the opportunity to say a few words on this very important issue for the country. Many in this room are protectors of alaskas environment. With all due respect, there are three people in congress who care more about alaskas environment than anyone else in the entire body. Senator murkowski, congressman young and myself. The fundamental disconnect and discussion of the 1002 area is the debate has not kept up with alaskas high standards, the highest in the world, and ill talk about that, and advancement in technology. With all due respect to the Ranking Member, a lot has changed. A lot changed. Responsibly developing the 1002 area is a win, win, win for the country. It will create jobs and grow the economy, increase Energy Security for americans and very importantly, it will help protect the Global Environment and strengthen our National Security. The last two points i would like to emphasize in my remarks this morning. M madam chair, alaska has the highest standards for Arctic Development than any place in the world. I was in charge as alaskas commissioner of the department of Natural Resources. Its no impact exploration or specific requirements related to our incredible species like the polar bear or caribou, mandating the best technology. We have a 50 year record of responsible Resource Development in our state. Let me give you one example. No impact exploration. As the chair noted, on the north slope, we only allow for exploration during the winter months, they have required to build ice roads. You can see examples in some of the slides i provided. They have to leave before the winter ends. The ice pads and roads melt and have zero impact. The only thing left is a sm