U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

94–048 2015

S. HRG. 114–15 

U.S. ARCTIC OPPORTUNITIES 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON 

ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

TO

EVALUATE OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE UNITED STATES TO BUILD ON ITS 

STATUS AS AN ARCTIC NATION FOR THE BETTERMENT OF THE NATION AND THOSE WHO LIVE IN THE ARCTIC 

MARCH 5, 2015 

( 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
(III) 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska, Chairman 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming 

JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho 

MIKE LEE, Utah 

JEFF FLAKE, Arizona 

STEVE DAINES, Montana 

BILL CASSIDY, Louisiana 

CORY GARDNER, Colorado 

ROB PORTMAN, Ohio 

JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota 

LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee 

SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

RON WYDEN, Oregon 

BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont 

DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan 

AL FRANKEN, Minnesota 

JOE MANCHIN III, West Virginia 

MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico 

MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii 

ANGUS S. KING, JR., Maine 

ELIZABETH WARREN, Massachusetts 

KAREN K. BILLUPS, Staff Director 

PATRICK J. MCCORMICK III, Chief Counsel 

ISAAC EDWARDS, Senior Counsel 

ANGELA BECKER-DIPPMANN, Democratic Staff Director 

SAM E. FOWLER, Democratic Chief Counsel 

TARA BILLINGSLEY, Democratic Senior Professional Staff Member 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
(V) 

C O N T E N T S 

OPENING STATEMENTS 

Page 

Murkowski, Hon. Lisa, Chairman, and a U.S. Senator from Alaska .................. 1 

Cantwell, Hon. Maria, Ranking Member, and a U.S. Senator from Washington .................................................................................................................... 4 

WITNESSES 

Papp, Jr., Admiral Robert J., Special Representative for the Arctic, U.S. 

Department of State ............................................................................................ 9 

Herron, Hon. Bob, Representative, Alaska State Legislature ............................. 23 

McGuire, Hon. Lesil, Senator, Alaska State Legislature ..................................... 24 

Brower, Hon. Charlotte, Mayor, North Slope Borough ........................................ 133 

Bitz, Dr. Cecilia, College of the Environment, School of Atmosphere, University of Washington ............................................................................................... 141 

Arnold, Patrick R., Director of Operations & Business Development, Maine 

Port Authority ...................................................................................................... 160 

ALPHABETICAL LISTING AND APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED 

Alaska Native Women 

Statement for the Record ................................................................................. 203 

Arnold, Patrick R. 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 160 

Written Testimony ............................................................................................ 162 

Bitz, Dr. Cecilia 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 141 

Written Testimony ............................................................................................ 143 

Responses to Questions for the Record ........................................................... 193 

Brower, Hon. Charlotte 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 133 

Written Testimony ............................................................................................ 136 

Cantwell, Hon. Maria 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 4 

Center for American Progress 

Statement for the Record ................................................................................. 207 

Herron, Hon. Bob 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 23 

Written Testimony ............................................................................................ 27 

King, Jr., Hon. Angus S. 

Chart: Least Sea Ice Extent ............................................................................ 179 

Murkowski, Hon. Lisa 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 1 

McGuire, Hon. Lesil 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 24 

Written Testimony ............................................................................................ 27 

Papp, Jr., Admiral Robert J. 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 9 

Written Testimony ............................................................................................ 12 

Responses to Questions for the Record ........................................................... 184 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
(1) 

TO EVALUATE OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE 

UNITED STATES TO BUILD ON ITS STATUS 

AS AN ARCTIC NATION FOR THE BETTERMENT OF THE NATION AND THOSE WHO 

LIVE IN THE ARCTIC 

THURSDAY, MARCH 5, 2015 

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES, Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:06 a.m. in room 

SD–366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Lisa Murkowski, 

Chairman of the Committee, presiding. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. LISA MURKOWSKI, U.S. 

SENATOR FROM ALASKA 

The CHAIRMAN. Good morning. We will convene this morning’s 

hearing on the Arctic. 

It is, I think, appropriate that the first ever Arctic hearing scheduled in a full Senate Committee is held on a day that has Washington gripped with anxiety. [Laughter.] 

In anticipation of weather. If there’s one thing the Arctic knows, 

it’s weather. The people of the Arctic, their lives depend on knowing what will happen with the weather. Being able to predict 

whether it is safe to go out on the ice, anticipating winter, anticipating the seasons. There is an awareness, I think, of the people 

of the Arctic about the land and their surroundings that perhaps 

we don’t see in most places in the United States anymore because 

the people of the North depend on their land. 

I have been asked why it should be the Energy Committee that 

would have a full committee meeting on the Arctic, but I’ve pointed 

out that so much of America’s Arctic land, of course within Alaska’s 

sizeable borders, is federal land and that’s where the nexus is with 

this Committee. 

That’s why I wanted to invite the Committee to take a look at 

what I am describing as the Arctic opportunity that is before America and before the world today. It is economic opportunity. It is scientific opportunity. It is environmental opportunity. National security opportunities, and really opportunities for the nation as a 

whole from, quite literally, a ‘‘top of the world’’ point of view. 

I had an opportunity yesterday evening to give a speech on the 

Senate Floor, and I had a map of the Arctic and the eight Arctic 

nations and it was commented on by somebody. They said, ‘‘I didn’t 

recognize it. I didn’t know what that was a map of.’’ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
2 

When you look at planet Earth from above, truly, from the top 

of the world, it is a remarkable area. Remarkable in its topography. 

Remarkable in the extent of our oceans. 

Also more remarkable because of what we’re seeing take place in 

the Arctic today, a level of movement, a level of commerce, a level 

of engagement that is absolutely unprecedented. It’s this aspect of 

the Arctic opportunity that gets me excited about what it is that 

we have to offer as an Arctic nation. 

I want to acknowledge a few people who have joined us today 

that have discovered this is, probably, the only hearing going on in 

the Senate this morning. It may be that some of you are just lost. 

[Laughter.] It may be that others of you are here with great purpose as we are. 

We have the Ambassador to Iceland, Ambassador Barber, who 

has joined us. Welcome. It’s the first time that I have seen him 

since we confirmed him, and we’re pleased that he is here. 

We also have Iceland’s Ambassador to the U.S. who has joined 

us in the group here this morning. 

We have many Alaskans who have traveled quite far to be with 

us, I think, to support not only those who will be testifying this 

morning, but also a series of other meetings that will be going on 

throughout the Hill today. 

PNWER, the Pacific Northwest Economic Region, is having a 

North American Arctic Leaders Forum this afternoon in the Russell Office Building, Room 485, beginning at 12:45. I’d like to invite 

folks to attend if they would so desire. There are those meetings 

going on and again, we’ve had a good deal of focus on the Arctic 

here in the Senate as well. 

Now I mentioned that we are an Arctic nation because of Alaska, 

but truly every state in this union has a stake in the Arctic whether it’s from trade with other Arctic nations or research activity. The 

Arctic touches all 50 states and really needs to be a national priority. 

When I was on the Floor yesterday it was Senator Gardner who 

was sitting in the chair, and I reminded him that in his state of 

Colorado the percent of total exports from Colorado to the Arctic 

nations is 30 percent of Colorado’s exports. 30.5 percent of Colorado’s exports go to Arctic nations. That’s from Colorado. 

My friend and partner here on the Energy Committee was also 

on the Floor yesterday, and I reminded him that in Wyoming, 

again, the numbers are pretty impressive, Wyoming’s Arctic exports are 28 percent of Wyoming’s total exports. 

I guess I should look up Washington while I’m sitting here 

thumbing through. Washington. We need to up our game here in 

Washington a little bit. 14 percent of Washington’s total exports go 

to the Arctic. 

Maine, and I think my colleague from Maine knows this because 

I think it’s one of the reasons that he has become so engaged in 

Arctic issues, but in Maine it’s 52 percent of Maine’s total exports 

that go to the seven other Arctic nations. So it was not surprising 

to me that Maine should have a very substantial contingent at the 

Arctic Circle meeting in Reykjavik back in October, and that was 

good to see. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
3 

Minnesota. You need to know, Senator Franken, that it’s just 

about 30 percent for you as well, 29.9 percent and—— 

Senator FRANKEN. A lot of that is to Alaska, though. [Laughter.] 

The CHAIRMAN. We’re going to work on our friends and neighbors 

to the south of us. 

In Hawaii it’s a little less than four percent, but I think what 

happens with Alaska and Hawaii is we export a lot of our Alaskans 

in this time of year to you for tourism. So I think you appreciate, 

very well, the full benefit coming out of the Arctic. 

I mentioned my colleague from Colorado already sitting at 30 

percent, so we welcome him to the Committee as well. 

My point in putting these numbers out here is because I think 

many of us just don’t even think about the significance of the Arctic from a trade perspective and what that might mean to us. 

On April 25th, just a couple months away, the United States will 

assume the Chair of the Arctic Council at the ministerial meeting 

in Iqaluit in the Nunavut territory. I’ve had the opportunity to attend the past two ministerial meetings. One was with Secretary 

Clinton when we traveled to Greenland, and then again with Secretary Kerry when we were in Kiruna, Sweden. 

It was impressive in both of those ministerials to see the growth 

in interest in the Arctic by the non-Arctic nations. At the last meeting we had six additional non-Arctic nations that were added as observers to the Arctic Council bringing the number of observer nations to 12 and overall observers to 32. So what is happening is 

this is not just Arctic nations that are focusing on the Arctic. It is 

nations from around the world. It is not to be missed that Singapore has had a presence at the Arctic Circle meetings and at the 

Arctic Council meetings. It is not to be overlooked that the contingent from Great Britain, when we were in Reykjavik at the Arctic 

Circle meeting, was larger than the delegation from the United 

States. Great Britain is hardly an Arctic nation. 

So it causes you to question what is it that they see that perhaps 

we’re missing here in Alaska? I shouldn’t say it. We’re not missing 

it in Alaska. We’re missing it in the rest of the lower 48 here. 

The Arctic is notable within the international community from 

an economic perspective as our shipping lanes are opening up, additional areas become accessible for resource development and 

clearly we see tourism on the rise. 

Our neighbors, Russia to the west and Canada to the east, continue with their very determined national plans combined with 

state investment to develop Arctic resources and advance commerce 

in the north. Their plans are working to create jobs and economic 

growth in areas that, I think, we would acknowledge face some extraordinary challenges. 

Even non-Arctic nations are embracing the opportunities that are 

coming with diminished polar sea ice. They’re reaping the transit 

benefits. They’re moving ahead with resource exploration and development activities. 

We can debate here in the Congress the pros and cons of offshore 

development in the Arctic, but I am one who believes, very strongly, that we can access our resources. But even if you suggest that 

we take that off the table, the reality is these activities in the Arctic will continue with or without the United States’ involvement. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
4 

The maritime activity is only going to increase. What we’re seeing 

happening on the Russian side of the Arctic is going to just accelerate. We’re seeing it in Canada. It is everywhere. It is within the 

entire Arctic except, perhaps, in the U.S. Arctic. 

During our Chairmanship of the Arctic Council I am hopeful that 

the United States will embrace the work of the Arctic Economic 

Council, recognize its formal connection with the Arctic Council 

and support its work in order to help those who live in the Arctic 

to develop their economies and improve their qualities of life. 

I think today is a somewhat fitting reminder as we’re out in the 

snow and talking about weather, an element. Unfortunately I think 

so many people associate the Arctic with just weather. That’s all 

they think about, and it’s important that we remind them of the 

people of the Arctic, the people who have been there for thousands 

of years, the 4,000,000 people who live in the Arctic. 

So as we have these discussions about the challenges that face 

us, the challenges of climate change and environment, the challenges of moving from a time when it was truly a subsistence lifestyle to one where commerce is opening up. Activities are opening 

up, and perhaps we lack, not perhaps, but we do lack the infrastructure necessary to be a major participant. 

We cannot forget about the people of the north, so I’m pleased 

today that we will have those who will address those issues as we 

work together to discuss the Arctic opportunity in front of us. 

With that I will turn to my colleague and Ranking Member and 

one who benefits greatly from the activities in the Arctic because 

we all jump off from Washington State in heading northward. So 

with that, I turn to my Ranking Member. 

STATEMENT OF HON. MARIA CANTWELL, U.S. SENATOR FROM 

WASHINGTON 

Senator CANTWELL. Well, thank you, Madam Chairman, and 

thank you for keeping this important and historic hearing on the 

schedule. And thank you to our constituents who are here to testify. 

There is a bit of irony that the backdrop of this hearing is weather when, in fact, the changes of weather conditions demands that 

the United States come up with an Arctic strategy and implement 

it. So I’m very grateful that your passion and leadership prevailed 

here today. 

I think the Arctic is something we can find significant common 

ground on. The United States Arctic strategy is tremendously important to both the economies of Washington and Alaska and, as 

we’ve heard from many of our colleagues here on the Committee, 

it is critically important to the United States of America as well. 

I think that we will hear that from our witnesses today. 

I believe we can agree on the fact that our Coast Guard needs 

the tools and infrastructure required to operate in the Arctic which 

means developing a polar ice breaker fleet. 

We must have strategic investments in Arctic science which will 

help us understand the impacts of climate change on Arctic communities but will also better inform our strategies for dealing with 

everything from rescue operations to potential oil spills. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
5 

I think we can agree that the United States must ratify the Law 

of the Sea Treaty which clarifies the rights and responsibilities of 

nations on our oceans. 

The Arctic already contributes a great deal to the American economy, and we must have a seat at the table. The Chinese and the 

Russians are already aggressive in their resource development in 

the Arctic area, and as our climate continues to change, the economic importance of the Arctic will only continue to grow in the 

years ahead. 

This year the United States assumes the rotating Chair of the 

Arctic Council. In this capacity we have a great opportunity to 

draw Arctic nations closer together to address a wide range of 

issues. The U.S. efforts, hopefully, will prioritize important efforts 

in addressing climate change, increasing regional cooperation and 

facilitating new and reliable shipping routes. 

On January 21st President Obama issued an executive order to 

improve coordination and implementation of the United States Arctic strategy, and this order created the Arctic Executive Steering 

Committee, chaired by the Office of Science and Technology Policy 

at the White House. The Steering Committee will help to increase 

coordination, reduce duplication, and address any potential gaps in 

implementation. In my view, the Obama Administration is pursuing an Arctic strategy not just on paper, but they have to have 

significant actions proportional to the challenges and opportunities 

that we face here with the Arctic. 

That’s why I’m so pleased that Admiral Papp is here today, because he fully appreciates the role the Coast Guard plays in the 

Arctic and will play in the future. As we evaluate opportunities and 

challenges that we face in the Arctic, we need to make sure the 

Coast Guard has the adequate resources to meet those missions 

and do so safely. 

Admiral Papp, given your role in signing the Coast Guard Arctic 

Strategy in 2013 when you served as the 24th Commandant, you 

bring a unique viewpoint on these issues. I look forward to hearing 

your perspective this morning on your role as the Special Representative for the Arctic. 

While all ice breaking operations in the Arctic have been delegated to the Coast Guard, it is clear that we have not yet provided 

these men and women with the resources to meet this mission. According to a 2010 study, the Coast Guard determined that it either 

needs three heavy or three medium ice breakers to fill its statutory 

obligations or six heavy and four medium ice breakers to both meet 

its statutory obligations and the requirements established under 

the Naval operations concept. Yet today the Coast Guard only has 

two ice breakers in operation, one heavy and one medium, and the 

medium vessel, the Healy, is primarily a research vessel. 

Madam Chair, I know this isn’t the Commerce Committee where 

we often discuss these issues, but it is very important as we discuss our Arctic strategy that the United States of America understands it needs to make an investment in ice breakers. These 

issues of lack of resources are particularly troubling when we consider that Russia currently has 29 operating ice breakers and is in 

the process of building eight more. I found out this morning even 

India is building an ice breaker. According to a report for the CenVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:11 May 21, 2015 Jkt 094048 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A048.XXX A048

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
6 

ter of American Progress released this morning, ‘‘Without this decisive action to fund and build a new heavy ice breaker fleet for the 

U.S. Coast Guard, the United States puts its environmental and 

national security in harm’s way.’’ 

The Coast Guard is already spread too thin, and earlier this year 

the Polar Star broke through ice to deliver supplies to the American base in Antarctica. A commercial fishing vessel got stuck in 

ice nearly 900 miles away. The Polar Star launched an international rescue mission traveling 860 miles, 150 miles required 

breaking thick ice in the Antarctic ice. When all was said and done, 

our Coast Guard rescued 26 people. 

I’m very proud of our Coast Guard, especially the crew that calls 

Seattle home, and I’m concerned that we only have one heavy ice 

breaker. What if the Polar Star too had been stuck? So as the Commandant, Admiral Zukunft, said in his State of the Coast Guard 

address last week, ‘‘There is no one to rescue the rescuer.’’ We need 

to provide the Coast Guard with more resources, and that means 

more ice breakers. I’m sure ice breakers are one of the topics we’ll 

hear about from a number of our witnesses. 

I’m pleased to have Dr. Bitz, from the University of Washington, 

here today to talk about the impacts of climate change as we will 

discuss we’re seeing tremendous impacts on the Arctic region. And 

this is something we need to address in a comprehensive, regional 

policy. 

It’s also worth noting that last October Defense Secretary Hagel 

referred to climate change as a ‘‘threat multiplier.’’ These threat 

impacts include impacts to property from sea level rises and erosion, and access to natural resources, including our fisheries. Further extreme weather can impact our military readiness and continue to stretch already limited resources. 

Warming has serious implications for America’s national security 

in the Arctic, and this impact is especially acute because climate 

change is affecting the Arctic region twice as fast as the continental 

United States. Over 5.4 million miles of the Arctic Sea melted between March and September 2012 and the level of Arctic ice measured in January of 2015 was the lowest amount for the month of 

January in history. 

We’ve already seen significant ways in which climate change is 

altering the life of the Arctic. Juvenile salmon populations have decreased as they have lost access to traditional food sources under 

the Bering Sea coast. I’m sure the Chair could name many things 

that are happening, everything from affecting Alaska villages to 

coastal flooding and erosion to threats to homes. 

But it is also important that we note the impacts of melting ice 

in the Arctic also have broad, national economic implications. According to a recent report by the Natural Resources Defense Council, melting ice in the Arctic will have a severe impact on agriculture in the continental United States. Kansas, for example, will 

be four degrees warmer in the winter without Arctic ice, which normally generates cold air masses that slide southward. Warmer winters are bad for wheat farmers who need freezing temperatures to 

grow wheat. In the summer warmer days would rob Kansas soil of 

10 percent of its moisture for drying out valuable farmland. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
7 

My point to our colleagues is that this affects all of us, and the 

fate of the Arctic ice will have broad economic implications in the 

lower 48. 

I want to talk for a second just about the importance here of 

trade in the economy, because I know we do have guests from all 

over. They’ve already seen how important the Arctic is for this. In 

the coming years economic activity in the Arctic is poised to increase substantially. This will have a dramatic downstream impact 

on Pacific ports like Seattle and Tacoma. The economy of my home 

state and Alaska too is already deeply interwoven. 

According to a recent study by the McDowell Group, Alaska-related jobs in the Puget Sound area increased by nine percent in the 

last ten years. 3.4 million tons of cargo moves between our states 

every year, and an increase in commerce in the Arctic will certainly 

provide new economic opportunities to both our states. 

It is also important that we assess how the melting ice in the 

Arctic would have a significant impact on global trade. The opening 

of the Northwest Passage, for example, would reduce the amount 

of time it would take to travel from Korea and the Netherlands by 

ten days compared to the route through the Suez Canal. A 2009 report from the Arctic Council estimates that the northern sea route 

would offer an overall estimated savings of 35 to 60 percent for 

ships traveling from East Asia to Europe. It would also allow ships 

to circumvent regional conflicts that are at risk of piracy, everything from the African Coast or Malaysia. 

It is also important that we not lose track of the significant challenges this economic opportunity will also present. Although melting ice sheets will increase traffic, there still will be significant ice 

cover, severe storms, minimal maritime and weather data to assist 

vessels transiting those routes. That is why we all need to work together on a strategic plan in the Arctic sciences, tools and infrastructure. 

One of the key steps in addressing, I believe, our Arctic activities 

is also in ratifying the Law of the Sea under the United Nations 

convention. I know my colleague knows well this issue and all the 

challenges that we have faced in trying to address this here in the 

United States Senate, but I just want to point out that President 

George W. Bush and President Obama and Secretaries of State and 

Defense have all supported this effort including many, many people 

in the private sector, everyone from shippers to fishing businesses. 

I think it’s an important issue we need to try to engage our colleagues on. 

So the Arctic is certainly a region of great economic importance 

to our country, and at the same time we must work to confront the 

climate change issues that are posing a threat to the region. I look 

forward to hearing from many of the witnesses. 

Again, Madam Chair, I really do want to complement you on 

your perseverance in making sure that we had this historic Arctic 

hearing today. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Cantwell. It will be just the 

first of many, I’m sure. 

Along with Senator King, I have invited each of our colleagues 

to join us as part of the Arctic Caucus. We’ve got a lot of caucuses 

around here but, I think, it is something that we will use as a 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
8 

means of outreach and education and collaboration on some of 

these issues that you have raised in your comments. 

I appreciate your comments, particularly about the issue of ice 

breakers and our lack of capacity in that area. While there are 

many things that can be used as a barometer for progress that 

we’re making, if you can’t move it makes it tough to do much of 

anything. And as a nation we are woefully behind. 

While we do have the Polar Star, the fact of the matter is that 

the Polar Star is on contract for the next five years down in Antarctica. When she’s not down there, she’s going to be being patched 

up because of being banged around in the ice down there. So we’re 

not going to see her in our northern waters for five years. 

And then you think, well, okay, we get her after that. She’s got 

a youthful life expectancy of between six to eight years now. So 

when you keep in mind that it takes at least ten years to build a 

new ice breaker and it takes about $1 billion we needed to get 

started yesterday. So I look forward to your commitment in working on that. 

Let’s stop talking and listen to those who truly get up every day 

to focus on the issues of the Arctic. 

I will welcome each of you with introductions and then we will 

start with your comments. I am particularly pleased this morning 

that we have Admiral Papp joining the Committee. I know, Admiral, that you rearranged your schedule to be here, and I greatly, 

greatly appreciate that. I know where your heart is on these issues. 

We’ve had an opportunity to travel together. 

Admiral Papp has been with the Coast Guard for his entire career. He served with great distinction as the 24th Commandant of 

the U.S. Coast Guard, and he was a career Cutterman serving on 

six Coast Guard Cutters. He began his Coast Guard career in 

Adak, and it is a wonderful story for those of us who have an appreciation of the remoteness and some of the unique attributes of 

being out in Adak with a new bride. But the good news story for 

Admiral Papp and his wife, Linda, is that journey that began in 

Adak continues after many decades of a wonderful relationship. 

He’s got a fabulous family, and I have been pleased to be able to 

make their acquaintance as well. 

Admiral Papp became the State Department’s Special Representative for the Arctic in July of 2014. He has a considerable task in 

front of him as he works to really coordinate and facilitate so much 

of what is happening whether it’s through the State Department, 

the White House, the legislative branch, or working and communicating with local governments at all levels. I truly appreciate the 

leadership that Admiral Papp has presented. 

Next to Admiral Papp is Representative Bob Herron. He is a 

member of Alaska’s State House of Representatives, and he is cochair of the Alaska Arctic Policy Commission. He hails from Bethel. 

He was elected to the House back in 2008, but his passion for all 

things Arctic is manifested in all of what he does. I appreciate you 

being here and for what you and Senator McGuire have done with 

the Arctic Policy Commission. It has been a considerable effort and 

is greatly appreciated and respected. 

Senator McGuire, welcome to you. Senator McGuire is also a 

member of the Alaska legislature, serving in the Alaska State SenVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:11 May 21, 2015 Jkt 094048 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A048.XXX A048

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
9 

ate. She’s co-chair, again, of the Alaska Arctic Policy Commission, 

and she was first elected to the State Senate back in 2006. 

She served in the House of Representatives, and I’m pleased to 

be able to say that we were able to serve together in our legislature. She has done a wonderful job for us. She is also, along with 

Representative Herron, co-chair of the Pacific Northwest Economic 

Region Arctic Caucus. Again, that meeting will be going on this 

afternoon. 

In the middle we have the Honorable Mayor Charlotte Brower, 

who is the Mayor of the North Slope Borough. The Borough encompasses an area of nearly 95,000 miles. I’m told, Mayor Brower, 

that’s about the size of Wyoming. And you are mayor of this amazing area. Over 70 percent of the borough’s residents, there’s about 

7,500 residents up there, about 70 percent are Inupiat Eskimo. 

Charlotte is the first woman to serve as mayor. She was recently 

reelected to another three year term. She’s the wife of a whaling 

captain and has a wonderful family there in Barrow, Alaska. Welcome and we appreciate your leadership, Mayor Brower. 

Dr. Cecilia Bitz, welcome to the Committee. Dr. Bitz is a professor in the Atmospheric Sciences Department, an affiliate physicist for the Polar Science Center and part of the program on climate change, all at the University of Washington. We welcome you 

to the Committee as well. 

Her work includes research into the role of ice in the climate system and high latitude climate and climate change. So we’ll look forward to your comments. 

Rounding out the panel we have Mr. Patrick Arnold. Mr. Arnold 

is the Director of Operations and Business Development at the 

Maine Port Authority. 

Again, I think it’s significant that the two states that book end 

the country, Maine and Alaska, are significantly represented as we 

discuss these issues of Arctic policy. 

Thank you to all of you for coming here, many of you flying great 

distances to be here, rearranging your schedules and coming 

through the Arctic weather. 

With that, Admiral Papp, if we can begin with you and thank 

you again, for your service to our country in so many different 

ways. 

STATEMENT OF ADMIRAL ROBERT J. PAPP, JR., SPECIAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ARCTIC, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF 

STATE 

Admiral PAPP. Thanks, Madam Chairman, and let me say, congratulations. It’s the first time for me to see you in the Chair. And 

as you are a member of our Coast Guard family as well, due to 

your father’s service, we’re really proud of you to be there. 

And Senator Cantwell, another long term friend of the Coast 

Guard and to me personally. She substituted for Senator Rockefeller five years ago to Chair my confirmation hearing, so I’m indebted to her for that. 

To the rest of the members, good morning to all of you. Also good 

morning to my good friends that I’ve been able to make over the 

years of visiting Alaska, Representative Herron, Senator McGuire 

and Mayor Brower. I’ve spent a lot of time with them, not only over 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
10 

the last six or seven months in this job, but also over the last four 

years. 

As you noted I started my career in Alaska, and it taught me 

many lessons that lasted me throughout my entire career. 

First of all the tyranny of time and distance in Alaska, the severity of the weather, but also the beauty and the ice and the challenges that people face while they’re living and working in that environment. 

It also laid down a marker for me because then visiting almost 

four decades later as the Commandant of the Coast Guard, I saw 

firsthand the changes that are occurring in that very sensitive and 

beautiful environment. So my interest in Alaska, in particular, and 

in the Arctic, more broadly, has been for about four decades now. 

I’m very proud and privileged to be the first United States Special 

Representative for the Arctic. 

I don’t have a long statement here in the interest of time. I want 

to get to the questions and answers just like you do, so I just wanted to point out a couple of things. 

Our program that we’ve developed for our Chairmanship of the 

Arctic Council is probably the most aggressive and ambitious that’s 

ever been proposed by any one of the Arctic countries. It was well 

underway before I came into the job nearly seven months ago. My 

job, when coming into the State Department, was more to organize 

it and to market it and put it in a form that we could bring it forward. 

Much of that depended upon getting input from our friends and 

neighbors in Alaska, so I immediately went to Alaska for my first 

visit in this job. I spent a week up there talking to the entire 

breadth of constituency groups, came back, we revised our program 

slightly, gave it to Secretary Kerry for tentative approval, and then 

made a second visit to Alaska to do some more listening sessions 

and find out where we might improve our program. 

We came back, prepared the program and then started our efforts towards advertising and bringing it to the public. I spoke to 

a number of groups both environmental, security and others then, 

of course, traveled to Reykjavik, Iceland. 

I would say also, good morning to Ambassador Barber and Ambassador Gerhard, good friends of ours and my first international 

speaking engagement was with you in Reykjavik at the Arctic Circle. 

Once again, refining our program, getting more input from constituents and also the entire federal family, and then coming and 

taking it to Europe. Just three weeks ago I returned from two 

weeks in Europe going to Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Finland and 

to Russia to discuss, at the highest levels in their governments, the 

implications and the agreement on our program for the Arctic 

Council. 

So I wanted to give you the feedback on what I received across 

the board on our program for the Arctic Council. 

First and foremost we have, when I speak to environmental 

groups, they say, well you got the climate issues right, but you’re 

a little strong on security. When I talk to security groups they say, 

well, you got the security stuff right, but you’re a little strong on 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
11 

climate. So I suspect we hit the sweet spot there in terms of balance in our program. 

The second comment I get, particularly from the other seven 

countries, is that’s a very ambitious program. Are you sure we’re 

not taking on too much? 

The only person that contradicts that is Secretary Kerry. He always asks me, are we doing enough? Can we do more? So once 

again I think we’ve found a sweet spot there. 

There are complaints about economic development and that the 

United States might not be committed to the Arctic Economic 

Council. I think that’s a misperception, and I look forward to answering questions about that. 

The next question we get is are we going to cooperate with Russia? And that was part of the reason for me going to Moscow was 

to make sure that we can keep the lines of communication open 

with Russia and reassure the other Arctic countries that those 

lines of communication will remain open for the success of the Arctic Council. 

Then the final thing is the other countries are excited about the 

United States’ leadership. They will admit that this is a very ambitious program, but they’re excited because we’re showing leadership. Leaders set high goals, and once you set those goals you have 

to look for measureable results. 

What we’re trying to do with the Arctic Council is to 

operationalize the Arctic Council, get it out of just policy decisions 

and start taking some actions. For instance, implementing the 

search and rescue agreement. Implementing the pollution response 

agreement, and showing and identifying where our strengths and 

weaknesses are. 

Under U.S. leadership the only question that I have coming up 

from the other countries is, you know, we really like what you’re 

doing. We’re excited, but is the United States really committed? We 

don’t sense that you’re fully committed to the Arctic yet. 

And then what it always reverts to when you talk to either the 

other countries or our friends in Alaska, they say its resources. 

When is the United States going to commit resources? When are 

you going to spend the first dollar on building a new ice breaker? 

That’s not within my purview at the State Department, and it’s 

not within the purview of the Arctic Council to run domestic issues 

for the United States; however, our public diplomacy program, we 

hope, will bring attention to the Arctic and to Alaska and hopefully 

lead to those considerations. 

Madam Chair, I look forward to your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Admiral Papp follows:] 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
12 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 34 here 94048A.001
13 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 35 here 94048A.002
14 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 36 here 94048A.003
15 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 37 here 94048A.004
16 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 38 here 94048A.005
17 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 39 here 94048A.006
18 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 40 here 94048A.007
19 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 41 here 94048A.008
20 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 42 here 94048A.009
21 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 43 here 94048A.010
22 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 44 here 94048A.011
23 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Admiral Papp. I greatly appreciate, 

again, your leadership and your willingness to be here with us this 

morning. 

Representative Herron. 

STATEMENT OF HON. BOB HERRON, REPRESENTATIVE, 

ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE 

Mr. HERRON. Yes. Good morning, Madam Chair and to all the 

other members of this Committee. 

We’re going to explain to you this morning a little bit about the 

Alaska Arctic Policy Commission’s report, and I’ll take the implementation plan and the House bill that my colleagues in the Alaska Senate will vote on next week. 

The implementation plan and the bill follow four priority lines of 

effort. Promoting economic and resource development. Addressing 

the infrastructure and response capacity in the Arctic. Supporting 

healthy communities, and strengthening a state-based agenda for 

Arctic science and research. 

Now Madam Chair, when we started out in this adventure four 

years ago we had three audiences we wanted to target for learning 

what it is to be in Arctic jurisdiction, the legislature itself, the executive branch and our federal partners. I think we’ve addressed 

that in the implementation plan and the report as well. 

It comprises that the articulation of Alaska’s Arctic policy. We 

want to be a leader in Arctic policy, and we want to effectively 

partner with the federal government on shaping a prosperous Arctic future. 

Alaskans are on the forefront of new exploration, new uses of 

Arctic resources and new circumpolar cooperation. Alaska is providing relevant information about the reality of an emerging Arctic 

and understand in communicating the critical issue that affects our 

state and instilling confidence in the promise of safety and prosperity is essential as Alaska and for America as we move forward. 

Now, Senator, we’ve had this conversation privately, but we feel 

that it’s important to share with everyone, we’re not a snow globe. 

We’re not little Eskimos in a museum and in an environment that 

needs no development. We’re not ready for it. We don’t want that. 

Madam Chair, you have copies of the final report on the implementation plan, but I’ll just point out four efforts that we’ve identified that are important. On page 17 there are three lines of effort 

that fit into the Arctic Council’s initiatives and will bolster the 

Council’s activities for economic security for the people who live in 

the Arctic. Another line of effort is strengthen and develop a mechanism for resource production related revenue sharing. That cannot 

be emphasized enough because any revenue that comes off the offshore has to come onshore, and those communities will be impacted. 

The third effort is economic returns to Alaska and Alaska communities and the individuals in the maritime fishing activities. 

But the other one, this is a shout out to the Coast Guard, Admiral Able of the 17th District has already visited the capital and my 

office and the Senator’s office, is that there is three initiatives that 

are on pages 22 and 23 that the Coast Guard is already working 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
24 

on. They appreciated the partnership because they know that the 

Coast Guard is key to Alaska’s future. 

I’d like to note just for the record, Madam Chair, that this journey I said started four years ago included the Northern Waters 

Task Force that was chaired by then Representative Reggie Joule. 

Those two years identified the questions and hopefully this implementation plan provides some of the answers and some of directives we need to go forward with. 

Also, Senator, you mentioned the PNWER Arctic Caucus and 

that’s Alaska, the Yukon and Northwest Territories. I’m proud to 

say that Honorable David Ramsay is in the audience observing as 

well. Those Canadian neighbors are key to Alaska’s future and to 

America’s future as well. 

And in closing, Madam Chair, is that you represent a state that 

has many faces, but in our Arctic face, Barrow, of course, Kotz, 

Nome, Bethel, Dillingham and King Cove are all in the Arctic. 

Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. Herron. 

Senator McGuire. 

STATEMENT OF HON. LESIL MCGUIRE, SENATOR, ALASKA 

STATE LEGISLATURE 

Ms. MCGUIRE. Good morning, Madam Chair and congratulations 

on behalf of all the Alaskans here in the room today, it’s an honor 

to see you sitting here and thank you to the other members who 

braved the weather to come out today on this important issue. 

As a State Senator, I know how these hearings can bring you relevance and can also drain on in other areas. So I’m going to try 

to synthesize a few points down if I were on your side what I would 

want to know. 

The first thing is you heard from my colleague next to me, Representative Herron. The two of us have been chairing the Alaska 

Arctic Policy Commission now for the last two years. There is a series of reports that are here for you. They’re online. Your staff will 

have them. And we hope that you’ll look to them as a resource to 

guide you in crafting Arctic policy on behalf of the federal government. 

The most important thing that I want to say to you today is it 

is Alaska that makes the United States an Arctic nation, but it’s 

all of you and going to take all of you to really bring the Arctic into 

the forefront of federal policy making and efforts in the infrastructure development. 

As it’s been noted by the Chair and by you, yourself, Senator 

Cantwell, we’re behind. In all the places that I’ve traveled and visited along with Representative Herron, we’re the one of the eight 

that’s the furthest behind. We’re lacking in any deep water ports. 

We’re lacking when it comes to support for spill response, and yet 

our federal government has taken in over $4 billion in lease returns. 

And so, if I were sitting on your side one of the takeaways that 

I would have would be because it affects all of us so greatly there 

are resources that have been taken in by the federal government. 

It’s time for us to start investing in infrastructure and policies that 

will move us forward, not just words. These are nice words. These 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
25 

are nice policies, but the actual investment of infrastructure is 

something that, I think, we’ll be looking to you two women to lead 

on. 

The state has been doing its part. We have a fund that has over 

$50 million in spill response dollars that are sitting there in case 

something would happen. 

We also have one of the greatest, most innovative vessel response 

tracking systems, and I know you both have seen this. Captain Ed 

Page, has presented this. 

We have been a foremost leader in Arctic logistics and microgrid 

technology, hybrid wind diesel electric systems, Arctic engineering 

and of course, the Trans Alaska pipeline, the one major Arctic infrastructure project that the world has seen. Over 40 years now in 

existence. Great jobs. We’ve preserved and grown the porcupine 

caribou herd. We’ve provided safe, environmentally friendly, energy 

to America. At one point 20 percent of the domestic supply of energy to this country came from that one line. 

So I just want to emphasize that point as well that’s entirely appropriate that we’re here before you today, Madam Chair, in the 

Senate Energy Committee, because the Arctic really is that place 

that holds America’s energy security right there in its clutches. Between ANWR, between the National Petroleum Reserve of America 

and the Chukchi and the Beaufort Sea we have America’s energy 

security sitting right there. 

And so those policies are for you as you move forward, but I just 

encourage us when we do think about the Arctic to remember that 

it was just in 2012 that America was importing over 40 percent of 

its energy from other foreign countries that don’t favor our belief 

in women’s rights, our belief in human rights and in many cases, 

are our enemies. So that’s something for this Committee, as you 

look at Arctic policy. 

The last point that I want to make is the opportunity. Madam 

Chair, you have labeled the Committee hearing today as an opportunity. And that is how we, in the Alaska Arctic Policy Commission, 26 Commissioners, I want to point out only 10 of them were 

lawmakers, the other 16 subject matter experts. We traveled for 

two years all over the state. 

The first day of every meeting was a listening session, and what 

we heard from Alaskans was opportunity. We’ve been dealing with 

climate change. We’ve been dealing with global warming for thousands of years, and Alaskans adapt, just like we do today. We put 

on our coats and we get out and we muck through it and we adapt. 

What we don’t need are policies that might come from the federal 

government that would hamstring us or make it more difficult for 

us to adapt. We’re looking for partnership and help to adapt to that 

climate change. But as we move forward the opportunity, the $100 

billion worth of private capital that’s out there waiting to come into 

the Arctic, Alaskans are looking forward to that as that next chapter for their economy to fill up our pipeline and to develop jobs. 

So I’m not going to read into the record our vision statements or 

our policy statements. They’re here for you in these three documents. You’re members of a Senate Committee. You’re fully aware 

of how you can access those and look at them. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
26 

I wanted to try to bring a personal face to it. As an Alaskan Senator what I would be thinking about if I were on your side. And 

I thank you so much, Senator Murkowski for having us today. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Herron and Ms. McGuire follow:] 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
27 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 57 here 94048A.012
28 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 58 here 94048A.013
29 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 59 here 94048A.014
30 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 60 here 94048A.015
31 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 61 here 94048A.016
32 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 62 here 94048A.017
33 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 63 here 94048A.018
34 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 64 here 94048A.019
35 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 65 here 94048A.020
36 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 66 here 94048A.021
37 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 67 here 94048A.022
38 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 68 here 94048A.023
39 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 69 here 94048A.024
40 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 70 here 94048A.025
41 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 71 here 94048A.026
42 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 72 here 94048A.027
43 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 73 here 94048A.028
44 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 74 here 94048A.029
45 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 75 here 94048A.030
46 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 76 here 94048A.031
47 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 77 here 94048A.032
48 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 78 here 94048A.033
49 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 79 here 94048A.034
50 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 80 here 94048A.035
51 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 81 here 94048A.036
52 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 82 here 94048A.037
53 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 83 here 94048A.038
54 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 84 here 94048A.039
55 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 85 here 94048A.040
56 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 86 here 94048A.041
57 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 87 here 94048A.042
58 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 88 here 94048A.043
59 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 89 here 94048A.044
60 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 90 here 94048A.045
61 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 91 here 94048A.046
62 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 92 here 94048A.047
63 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 93 here 94048A.048
64 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 94 here 94048A.049
65 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 95 here 94048A.050
66 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 96 here 94048A.051
67 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 97 here 94048A.052
68 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 98 here 94048A.053
69 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 99 here 94048A.054
70 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 100 here 94048A.055
71 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 101 here 94048A.056
72 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 102 here 94048A.057
73 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 103 here 94048A.058
74 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 104 here 94048A.059
75 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 105 here 94048A.060
76 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 106 here 94048A.061
77 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 107 here 94048A.062
78 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 108 here 94048A.063
79 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 109 here 94048A.064
80 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 110 here 94048A.065
81 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 111 here 94048A.066
82 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 112 here 94048A.067
83 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 113 here 94048A.068
84 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 114 here 94048A.069
85 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 115 here 94048A.070
86 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 116 here 94048A.071
87 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 117 here 94048A.072
88 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 118 here 94048A.073
89 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 119 here 94048A.074
90 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 120 here 94048A.075
91 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 121 here 94048A.076
92 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 122 here 94048A.077
93 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 123 here 94048A.078
94 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 124 here 94048A.079
95 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 125 here 94048A.080
96 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 126 here 94048A.081
97 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 127 here 94048A.082
98 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 128 here 94048A.083
99 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 129 here 94048A.084
100 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 130 here 94048A.085
101 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 131 here 94048A.086
102 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 132 here 94048A.087
103 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 133 here 94048A.088
104 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 134 here 94048A.089
105 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 135 here 94048A.090
106 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 136 here 94048A.091
107 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 137 here 94048A.092
108 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 138 here 94048A.093
109 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 139 here 94048A.094
110 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 140 here 94048A.095
111 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 141 here 94048A.096
112 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 142 here 94048A.097
113 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 143 here 94048A.098
114 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 144 here 94048A.099
115 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 145 here 94048A.100
116 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 146 here 94048A.101
117 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 147 here 94048A.102
118 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 148 here 94048A.103
119 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 149 here 94048A.104
120 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 150 here 94048A.105
121 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 151 here 94048A.106
122 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 152 here 94048A.107
123 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 153 here 94048A.108
124 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 154 here 94048A.109
125 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 155 here 94048A.110
126 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 156 here 94048A.111
127 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 157 here 94048A.112
128 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 158 here 94048A.113
129 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 159 here 94048A.114
130 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 160 here 94048A.115
131 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 161 here 94048A.116
132 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 162 here 94048A.117
133 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, and we do appreciate the good work 

of the Commission. 

Let’s go to Mayor Brower, Mayor of the northernmost borough in 

our great country. Welcome. 

STATEMENT OF HON. CHARLOTTE BROWER, MAYOR, NORTH 

SLOPE BOROUGH 

Ms. BROWER. [Speaking Inupiat language.] That’s my first language. Chairman Murkowski, members of the Committee, my 

name is Charlotte Brower. I’m the Mayor of the North Slope Borough which encompasses 95,000 square miles. We’re on a road-less 

system. 

We have Nuiqsut, Kaktovik, Point Hope, Point Lay, Atqasuk, 

Barrow, Wainwright and Prudhoe Bay. Those are my areas that 

I’m responsible for. 

I’m a wife of a whaling captain. I have six children, 25 grandchildren and three I’m very proud of that are in college. One to be 

a mechanical engineer so that one day that they’ll be able to build 

a rig that could be environmentally safe for footprints of our tundra. I didn’t say offshore. I said tundra. 

I want to thank you for the invitation to address you. I’m always 

very happy because our people have lived in the Arctic since immemorial, and I want to give a valuable perspective of the dialogue 

today. 

As I mentioned I want to thank, very much, our great Senator 

from our great State of Alaska, Senator Lisa Murkowski, who is 

part of us, who is always looking out for the needs of our Inupiat 

people. She’s always been a very tireless champion for those of us 

who are often ignored by policy makers here in Washington and 

her leadership in Arctic issues is vital. Thank you, Lisa, for your 

friendship and support. 

We also want to mention our new governor of our great State of 

Alaska, Bill Walker, our friend, House Speaker, Mike Chenault and 

Senate President Kevin Meyers for their leadership over Arctic 

issues. I believe we’re going on a right track. 

To talk about what our country must do to build upon its status 

as an Arctic nation, I must first share some history. 

If you were to travel to the North Slope 70 years ago, you would 

find a semi-nomadic people subsisting off the land and living in sod 

houses much like their ancestors had for thousands of years. To 

have fresh water they had to melt ice and snow. To have heat 

they’d have to burn whale oil, and to travel from place to place 

they had to walk or use a dog team. 

The discovery of oil in Prudhoe Bay changed the shade of history 

as how we see it today. In a period of roughly 30 years we experienced over 200 years worth of economic development and advancement. We formed a local home rule charter government and built 

roads, airports, schools, hospitals, houses and utilities. We created 

police, fire, first responder and search and rescue. 

As I speak my whole North Slope region is experiencing over 60 

to 70 miles per hour blizzard winds, with visibility very poor, but 

our people are very resilient. They have used their own local resources, our resources within the North Slope, to take care of any 

matters before we discuss any state disaster or national disaster. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
134 

Melting snow for water morphed to turning on a faucet. Whale 

oil was replaced by electricity and natural gas and dog teams gave 

way to automobiles and snow machines. 

The property taxes we collect from oil and gas infrastructure still 

accounts for over 97 percent of the revenue collected by the North 

Slope Borough to provide local public services. It also generates private sector revenue streams and jobs through our native corporations that are shared with other native corporations throughout our 

great State of Alaska and are distributed as dividends to Alaska 

native shareholders. 

These funds provide the economic life blood of our region. They 

allow us to be self sufficient, allow our communities to grow and 

even provide the means for us to support our subsistence activities. 

But as many of you know, our economic realities are changing. 

Oil and gas production on Alaska’s North Slope is shrinking. The 

Trans Alaska pipeline flows at a third of what it used to be. And 

the consequences of changing climate coupled with the large costs 

of building and maintaining vital infrastructure in the Arctic are 

overwhelming to the state and local government. 

Just like our past, responsible resource development promises to 

provide the economic engine to provide future prosperity, but today 

those future prospects for developments lie on the federally-controlled lands and waters. And unfortunately our federal government does not seem to share the same enthusiasm as our state in 

the development of its resources. 

Over the past few years our federal government has closed 50 

percent of NPRA oil-to-oil and gas development, proposed wilderness designations for the oil rich coastal plain of ANWR and has 

refused to lease portions of the Outer Continental Shelf. It seems 

as if this current Administration is doing everything within its 

power to hamper or restrict resource development in our region. 

This bias against resource development is also reflective in our 

country’s Arctic strategy. Instead of focusing on initiatives that 

could improve the economic conditions of America’s Arctic people, 

our government has chosen to side with powerful special interest 

groups and to focus on issues like climate change, creating new layers of governance over the Arctic and ideas for Pan-Arctic marineprotected areas. 

The importance of these issues pales in comparison with the current needs of America’s Arctic residents, and they fail to further 

their status as an Arctic nation. They provide no mechanism for 

things like the construction of ice breakers, transportation, infrastructure and other critical deficiencies. In some ways it seems like 

our national strategy for the Arctic is like fixing the mailbox while 

the house burns down. 

We hope that our government will recognize the importance of 

economic security to those of us who live in the Arctic by including 

more specific economic and resource development initiatives during 

our Chairmanship of the Arctic Council, because if our federal officials were to consult us they might begin to understand that their 

current policies will lead us to a future where we struggle to provide basic public services. Where our subsistence practices and food 

security are put in peril because our people can no longer afford to 

hunt. Where our culture and communities wither because our resiVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:11 May 21, 2015 Jkt 094048 PO 00000 Frm 00140 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A048.XXX A048

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
135 

dents are forced to leave our villages and move to the big cities. 

And where those that remain dwindle in the hopelessness of lost 

jobs and opportunities. 

Our quest for self-determination will be replaced by a complete 

dependency on the government which we have worked very hard 

not to be. 

Perhaps there are some hope to see us revert to the old ways, 

to live in igloos and travel by dog team, relegated to being mere 

exhibits in a large, open air, Arctic museum, but that is not the future that we want to leave to our children and grandchildren. No 

one has better appreciation of the importance of the Arctic than the 

Inupiat. 

We are the first Arctic nation. Our spiritual connection with the 

land coupled with our knowledge and experience have enabled us 

to strike the proper balance between protecting the environment 

and developing our resources throughout our history. We have a 

keen understanding of what it will take to continue to grow the 

economic prosperity of America’s Arctic people, and we’ve already 

demonstrated our willingness to lead through local initiative such 

as the Arctic Waterway Safety Committee and the North Slope 

Port Authority. 

It is our hope that our federal policy makers will partner with 

us instead of opposing us so that we can build a strong Arctic nation together. 

[Speaking Inupiat language.] 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Brower follows:] 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
136 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 170 94048A.118
137 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 171 94048A.119
138 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 172 94048A.120
139 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 173 94048A.121
140 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 174 94048A.122
141 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mayor Brower. 

Let’s go to Dr. Bitz, please. 

STATEMENT OF DR. CECILIA BITZ, COLLEGE OF THE ENVIRONMENT, SCHOOL OF ATMOSPHERE, UNIVERSITY OF 

WASHINGTON 

Dr. BITZ. Thank you, Chairman Murkowski, Ranking Member 

Cantwell and members of the Committee. I appreciate the opportunity to discuss Arctic climate change and new frontiers in an Arctic environmental research with you today. 

The climate has changed in many ways across the globe since 

pre-industrial times. Global surface temperature has warmed about 

one and a half degrees Fahrenheit. The pace and characteristics of 

climate change are consistent with scientific understanding of the 

climate response to human activities. 

For a region of its size the Arctic has experienced the fastest surface warming on Earth. In addition, the subsurface of the Arctic 

Ocean is warming faster than anywhere else in the world’s oceans. 

When I was a graduate student I first looked at the sea ice extent records from satellites when the record was half as long as it 

is today. We knew then that the sea ice extent was retreating, but 

the limited observations available did not signal the rapid decline 

in summer sea ice that we know today. 

Now with expanded observations and understanding, we have developed global Earth system models with historical simulations of 

the Arctic sea ice loss in reasonably good agreement with reality. 

These models predict the Arctic will be nearly sea ice free by the 

end of summer, roughly at mid-century. 

I’ve emphasized the loss of Arctic sea ice because it is an amplifier of climate change and air warmed over sea ice is transported 

towards the land surrounding the Arctic. Warmer air in winter increases the likelihood of freezing rain and rain on snow events. 

Both can significantly disrupt mobility of humans and animals. 

Subsistence hunters suffer twice with the difficulty of traveling and 

a diminished population to hunt. 

Warmer air leads to thawing permafrost that can damage roads 

and buildings and lead to greater particulate runoff into the rivers 

and the Arctic Ocean, changing ocean chemistry and affecting fish 

and marine animals. Atmosphere and ocean warming are causing 

land ice mass loss which is the highest contributor to observed 

global sea level rise today. Greenland alone contributes one quarter 

of the global sea level rise, and sea level rise affects us all. 

Arctic coastal villages are threatened by rapid coastal erosion 

from a combination of fine permafrost, sea level rise, greater wave 

heights and worse storm surges due to reduced sea ice. 

In July 2007 I was an instructor at a course on sea ice that was 

an activity of the International Polar Year. More than 100 students 

and instructors were present at an Arctic village. We had grown accustomed to seeing sea ice set records. Though with the evidence 

surrounding us at that time, we did not predict that in September 

2007, just two months later, the sea ice would shatter the previous 

record low by 20 percent. 

Today I co-lead a community effort known as the Sea Ice Prediction Network which coordinates and leads scientists worldwide 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
142 

to improve sea ice predictions from a few weeks to a few years in 

advance. Our prediction systems must blend the methods used to 

predict weather and longer term climate signals. Weather forecasting has a half century lead on sea ice forecasting. 

But there is much we can do to make these systems much better, 

and with continued investment in observations and research I believe we could forecast optimal shipping routes and give coastal 

communities advance notice of offshore sea ice type and the potential for damaging waves. Our Earth system models today have the 

capacity to produce wide ranging information that is beneficial to 

society such as chemical cycling, near shore sea ice conditions and 

biological activity. 

Arctic scientists are actively exploring the extent to which a 

changing Arctic can influence the lower latitude weather. For example, longer lasting colder outbreaks is one possibility. Our European colleagues have found that when their models include a more 

realistic Arctic forecasts improve in the lower latitudes as well. 

Sustained observations are essential to our ability to predict the 

Arctic environment. Observations at a process level and across the 

Arctic are needed. An observing network of the Arctic Ocean sea 

ice and surrounding land is challenging to construct, but the payoff 

is clear. 

Investments in Arctic research is essential to a safe and productive future for us all. U.S. research institutions are a key player 

in Arctic research because they offer scientific excellence and 

progress in Arctic science. University scientists are uniquely able 

to include undergraduates in our research and to educate the wider 

population. 

I look forward to your questions. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Bitz follows:] 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
143 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 179 94048A.123
144 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 180 94048A.124
145 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 181 94048A.125
146 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 182 94048A.126
147 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 183 94048A.127
148 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 184 94048A.128
149 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 185 94048A.129
150 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 186 94048A.130
151 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 187 94048A.131
152 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 188 94048A.132
153 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 189 94048A.133
154 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 190 94048A.134
155 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 191 94048A.135
156 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 192 94048A.136
157 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 193 94048A.137
158 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 194 94048A.138
159 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 195 94048A.139
160 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Dr. Bitz. I appreciate your comments 

this morning and your being here. 

Finally let’s go to Mr. Arnold. Welcome to the Committee. 

STATEMENT OF PATRICK R. ARNOLD, DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS AND BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT, MAINE PORT AUTHORITY 

Mr. ARNOLD. Thank you, Madam Chair. I am privileged to join 

you all on this fine Arctic summer day. 

I’d like to thank you for allowing me the opportunity to speak on 

these opportunities in the Arctic. I’d like to especially thank Senator Murkowski and Senator King for the leadership they’re showing working together in forming an Arctic Caucus and Senator 

Cantwell for acknowledging Maine’s recent leadership in this and 

calling me as a witness. 

If there were one take away from this hearing, I would hope it 

would be that anything in the Arctic requires cooperation and that 

openness that sometimes does not come easy. 

Since 2013 the Icelandic steam ship company Eimskip established its single U.S. port of call in Portland, Maine connecting 

Maine directly for the first time in decades to Scandinavia, Northern Europe, Iceland, Greenland and Newfoundland. This shift 

brought Maine as close to these countries from a freight/cost perspective as it is to the Mid-Atlantic. Through a close collaboration 

with Iceland, Maine has entered into dialogue and trade relations 

with several Arctic nations in the high north and has been establishing relationships based on trust and mutual consideration. 

Our approach has been simple. Build trade and mutual economic 

opportunity and all else will follow. We believe this to be true. 

At the Arctic Summit Symposium titled, ‘‘Leadership in the High 

North’’ held in Bangor, Maine in May 2014, hosted by the Maine 

National Guard and the U.S. Coast Guard, retired North Com General Jacoby, said in regards to the Arctic, ‘‘Build the rail and the 

cavalry will follow.’’ The rail being, we believe, economic opportunity and collaboration and the cavalry in this case perhaps being 

ice breakers. 

Maine’s activities in the high north, starting with trade lanes set 

up by Eimskip, have opened opportunities in cultural, educational 

and political exchanges that have benefitted Maine as well as the 

countries and people we exchange with. Through this exchange we 

work towards stability in our Arctic relationship in an environmentally sensitive and culturally inclusive manner and we endeavor to lead by design. This is who we are in Maine. 

In order for trade lanes to be well established, I agree that the 

administrative focus on safety, security and stewardship regarding 

the Arctic Ocean is what is needed. Additionally, with the goal of 

improving economic and living conditions in this region, as this can 

be done with trade as well. 

As a former navigation officer on U.S. Jones Act ships, I spent 

time navigating waters globally including as a navigation officer on 

cruise ships with Norwegian Cruise Lines that transited between 

Seattle and Alaska as well as the waters in Hawaii. Arctic shipping 

lanes would benefit by charting routes and understanding the region’s unique navigational challenges with real time mapping of ice 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
161 

flows being one such challenge. While there are geo-political implications of any action in this region, there are priorities that are 

more important such as the safe ability to transit these waters and 

visible participation supporting right of innocent passage as implied in the Law of the Seas. 

With the Trans Polar route being the furthest from being ice free 

and the northern sea route and the Northwest Passage both requiring cooperation, the U.S. would be well served in ratifying the Law 

of the Seas. 

Ice breaking is the lowest hanging fruit for the U.S. to jump into 

Arctic assistance and Arctic development. Without this capability 

the U.S. does not have the opportunity to lead in a meaningful way 

regarding support of future trade lanes or present natural resource 

opportunities or contributing to search and rescue commitments. 

Maine is merely an example of how this nation can lead alongside Alaska in Arctic affairs. 

First, opening lines of trade that allow for mutual prosperity, 

and then building on top of these trade lanes policies and opportunities for cultural and educational exchange that lead to lasting relationships. 

This will be important given the rapid change in Arctic conditions due to climate change. Regardless of opinions, change is inevitable and what matters is how we adapt to it while mitigating the 

negative aspects of human contribution to it. We can only improve 

and prosper more by working together with the people and the 

countries in the Arctic. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Arnold follows:] 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
162 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 201 94048A.140
163 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 202 94048A.141
164 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. Arnold. We appreciate you being 

here today as well. 

We’ll now turn to a round of questions from the members here. 

I want to let my colleagues know that in addition to what Senator King and I are doing with the Arctic Caucus, I’m looking to 

develop an Arctic infrastructure type bill that—well it’s not the 

deep water ports. It’s some of the basics that, I think, most folks 

assume we have in place up in our Arctic waters. 

First and foremost is better charting, better hydro graphic charting. If we’re going to see the level of commercial activity that we 

are seeing, we need to know that we have accurate maps and 

charts. In addition things like weather stations and ice forecasting 

as Dr. Bitz has mentioned are imperative for us. Weather buoys, 

electronic buoys, navigational aids that assist us. 

So when we look to some of the budget, and I know this isn’t a 

budget hearing, I will tell you that I become concerned that we’re 

not seeing the budget priorities placed in areas that we could be 

making a difference. NOAA’s budget has a reduction in their ocean 

exploration and research program which effectively is the area that 

looks to the mapping and the charting issues. In addition, I’m always worried about our Coast Guard budget, always worried that 

we ask so much of our Coast Guard men and women and we don’t 

resource them properly. 

So we’ve had a lot of discussion about the need for an ice breaker, a billion dollar proposition, but the fact remains that it is more 

than just an ice breaker. The funding for Arctic operations in the 

budget is actually down. We need to make sure that we are 

resourcing appropriately. Admiral Papp, you mentioned that specifically in your comments. 

You also mention, Admiral, that there is perhaps a misperception 

out there about the Administration’s position or support for the 

Arctic Economic Council in promoting economic development within the Arctic. We clearly heard from Mayor Brower as well as our 

two members of the Alaska legislature the imperative for economic 

opportunity. Can you speak to that misperception and perhaps 

clarify? 

Admiral PAPP. Yes, Madam Chairman. It came across loud and 

clear when I started listening sessions that there was both confusion and disappointment over the way we approach the Arctic Economic Council. I would say as I’ve had a chance to put this back 

together and look at it over the last six months, we may have approached it differently if I understood the issue but that was already in motion by the time I came into this job. 

What I would say is I think each one of the eight countries have 

approached it a little bit differently. The United States, in particular, is, I think, different and comes into an apples and oranges 

comparison because many of the other countries in the Arctic 

Council own companies. There are government-owned companies 

that are then selected by the government and placed in positions 

on the Arctic Economic Council. 

As we all know, we have a culture in the United States of staying out of private industry. And granted, there’s regulations and 

other things, but the federal government does not own industries. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
165 

So we approached it from a different perspective and asked that 

the Canadians, when they put out their solicitation, to go to the 

Alaska Chamber of Commerce and ask them for input on the companies to be representing the United States on the Arctic Economic 

Council. So we did approach it differently. I think the Alaskans 

should be pleased that they were able to pick their companies to 

represent us, and as I look across all the companies that are represented or lobbying type firms that have been recommended by 

the other countries, not one of the countries have approached it exactly the same. 

It’s one of the issues that we intend to take on during our chairmanship to clarify the role of the Arctic Economic Council. It’s very 

high on our priority list in terms of strengthening the Arctic Council. We value the input of industry and these companies, and we 

will look on how we can improve and move away from this 

misperception of our lack of support for it. 

The CHAIRMAN. Well, I thank you for that clarification. As you 

know it was an issue that I raised with Secretary Kerry when we 

met several weeks ago, because I think it is an imperative that we 

should carry forward. There are many things that are presented 

within the Arctic Council and, based on who is chairing at that 

time, that initiative either carries forward or it stops. I would suggest to you that this needs to be a priority that the United States 

carries forward from what Canada has built and that when we 

pass the gavel in two years that that will continue. 

Again when we talk about the Arctic and recognizing the priorities that have been laid out in the proposal from the United 

States, climate is one aspect of what we’re dealing with but an 

economy that allows for the people of the north to not only exist, 

but to thrive is critical. So I thank you for that clarification. 

Admiral PAPP. Yes, Ma’am. 

The CHAIRMAN. Let’s turn to Senator Cantwell. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Admiral Papp, I think I want to start with you on this question 

about investment and resources. I’m sure to some people this 

sounds like a lot of the infrastructure investment might cost a lot, 

but it just reminds me of a guy named Jefferson who sent two people named Lewis and Clark and said get out there and define this 

area for us. I’m sure it took, for a very young nation, a lot of focus 

to understand why we would be spending all those resources in the 

Pacific Northwest, but thank God we did. So I think the same 

question is here today. What’s it going to take to get people to 

wake up, to make people realize that you have to have the resource 

investment? 

As the U.S. takes over the Chairmanship of this Council, do you 

have a recommendation yet on infrastructure investments that we 

would need as part of a comprehensive Arctic strategy? 

Admiral PAPP. I’ll say this once so I don’t have to go back to it. 

My job as the U.S. Special Representative is international diplomacy. The State Department doesn’t have an impact directly on domestic issues and domestic resourcing; however, we have taken 

that into account in our program with a very heavy public diplomacy effort to raise the awareness of the Arctic to the extent that 

we can by having meetings in Alaska of our senior officials. We’re 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
166 

hopeful that we can bring the most senior levels of our government 

to Alaska for events and draw the attention to the American people 

to the needs that exist in the United States portion of the Arctic. 

In terms of resourcing I’ve seen, as we all have, what’s in the 

U.S. national strategy for the Arctic. We have the implementation 

plan which is very extensive, but there are about 22 or more agencies or departments that that impacts. 

And that’s why the President came out with the executive order 

which creates the Arctic Executive Steering Committee which just 

had its first meeting, and hopefully they’re going to start and 

produce gaps and overlaps analysis on where we can begin to set 

priorities for resources that are needed in the Arctic. 

What I would say, from my professional experience and having 

been working in Alaska for at least the last five years or so now 

directly observing what needs to go on there, the needs have been 

identified. There are plenty of needs up there that have been identified. 

Senator CANTWELL. Like ice breakers. 

Admiral PAPP. It’s just—pardon me? 

Senator CANTWELL. Like ice breakers. 

Admiral PAPP. Ice breakers is one of them. You can trace the history of this country back to the Federalist Papers that talk about 

the need for maritime safety and security for prosperity of this 

country. Alaska’s maritime is opening up. Their needs for maritime 

safety and security are huge. 

I get accused as any, well, it’s typical that a former Commandant 

on the Coast Guard would speak this way, but that’s who I am and 

I think that’s why I was hired. 

And the maritime needs up there, in particular, charting was already mentioned. Many of the soundings up along the North Slope 

are from Cook’s third voyage back in, I guess it was 1778. And I’ve 

confirmed this with the oceanographer of the Navy. Sounding is up 

there were from led lines in sailing ships. 

But ice breakers, you know, we get wrapped around the axel 

talking about do we need six, do we need three and three, whatever 

it is. The fact of the matter is if you’re talking three and three or 

four and two or whatever it might be then there’s at least a need 

for one. 

Senator CANTWELL. Yes. 

Admiral PAPP. And we haven’t even started on the one yet. 

So there’s plenty of needs that are already identified. We just 

need to get about the business of setting some priorities and having 

the determination to start resourcing them. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you. 

Dr. Bitz, what do we need to get a national scale, federal, robust 

Arctic research program going? 

Dr. BITZ. Are you asking—— 

Senator CANTWELL. I hear that we’re using information from 

Captain Cook’s efforts as the real measurements that we’ve had in 

some of these areas, so what do we need to do to get the data and 

information, the need for which Mr. Arnold laid out in a very robust way? What’s at stake in these new shipping lanes? We’re 

going to have to have good data and information on the Arctic to 

provide people with accuracy. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
167 

Dr. BITZ. Right. We need—— 

Senator CANTWELL. And the Chairman mentioned a magic word 

here. I have my Coast Guard and fisheries staff person here and 

smart buoys would make anybody jump up and cheer, so the Chairman’s mentioning of that is a particular area that all throughout 

the Pacific Northwest we’re interested in. 

Dr. BITZ. Right. We need sustained observing networks. We have 

limited numbers of buoys. These are very useful for prediction and 

for understanding. We utilize all that data, but it’s just in localized 

regions. We have estimates of where we need observing stations 

and at this point we’re limited, and we are under sourcing the 

number we could utilize. 

The satellite networks are also of extreme value. Commitment to 

keeping what we have and improving the number that exists today 

is also critical for us. At this time what we absolutely have need 

for prediction of sea ice and sea ice thickness and type of sea ice. 

And we do not, in the U.S., have a sea ice thickness observing satellite at this time. We use a European satellite which is accurate, 

but we hope we could do better. It’s not as good as we—— 

Senator CANTWELL. So the Europeans have better data on this 

than we do? 

Dr. BITZ. Absolutely, but they share it with us so that’s pretty 

good. And—— 

Senator CANTWELL. Well, all they did with Sandy, but we would 

have been better prepared for Sandy if the U.S. would have had 

the supercomputing data and forecasted that out even further and 

helped the local governments plan. Because once, as we all know 

in the Pacific Northwest, we know events are going to happen, the 

question is having the ability for local governments to plan for 

those events and getting the infrastructure and warning systems 

and everything in place so that we can respond quickly. Thank you. 

I’m sorry. I know my time is expired. 

The CHAIRMAN. Senator King. 

Senator KING. Thank you, Madam Chair, and I have to tell a tale 

on you, Madam Chair, before I begin. I approached the Chair on 

the Floor of the U.S. Senate about a year ago and said I would like 

to be the Arctic Senator. The response was, ‘‘No, you can be the Assistant Arctic Senator.’’ [Laughter.] 

So those of you from Alaska, I want you to know that the hierarchy is very clearly established here. [Laughter.] 

I also recently met with the Speaker of the Icelandic Parliament 

who left me a wonderful book, the Sayings of the Vikings, the eddic 

poems, a thousand years old, and I think apropos of our hearing 

today is the little poem, ‘‘Seeking Knowledge.’’ 

‘‘The cautious guest who comes to the table speaks sparingly, listens with ears, learns with eyes, such is the seeker of knowledge.’’ 

What a lovely thought for us to try to attempt to emulate here in 

the Congress. 

Admiral Papp, a very specific question, your title is U.S. Special 

Representative to the Arctic. How big is your staff? How many people do you have in your office? 

Admiral PAPP. It’s a day-to-day proposition, Senator. Actually 

within my personal staff we have a total of four, including me, but 

my job is to coordinate across the State Department. When I startVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:11 May 21, 2015 Jkt 094048 PO 00000 Frm 00173 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A048.XXX A048

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
168 

ed the job I thought this is a rather small staff and this is going 

to be very difficult, but the fact of the matter is there are people 

in all the regional and functional bureaus across the State Department that have some touch point for the Arctic. 

So what Secretary Kerry has asked me to do is to coordinate 

across all of those. I deal with the Assistant Secretaries primarily 

for Europe and Eurasia, but also the Western Hemisphere because 

of Canada. They cover the countries of the region, but then whether it’s economic development, politics, military, whatever, we have 

people who are matrixed together that literally, I’ve never been 

able to count them all, but literally there are dozens of people who 

work the Arctic issues. And then, of course, we work across the 

interagency as well. I have that latitude. 

Senator KING. I understand that, but I would suggest that a staff 

of three in this situation does not represent a significant commitment by this country. 

Second question. Practical limitations or practical disadvantages 

to the U.S. of not joining the Law of the Sea Treaty? 

Admiral PAPP. Practical on a day-to-day basis, not a lot because—— 

Senator KING. But I’m talking about things like territorial claims 

and the adjudications. I understand by not being members we’re 

out of that process. 

Admiral PAPP. That’s the biggest part of it. That’s probably the 

largest impact is we cannot perfect a legitimate claim on Outer 

Continental Shelf. We can do the research. We can develop our 

claim which we are doing. 

There have been, I think, six voyages over the last eight years 

or so to map out, at least in the Arctic, where we think our extended continental shelf claims are. But we don’t have standing to 

be able to then go to the Continental Shelf Commission to lay our 

claim down and then have it validated and then go into negotiations with the bordering countries. 

Senator KING. Meanwhile the other bordering countries, particularly Russia, are staking claims which are quite extensive. 

Admiral PAPP. For the Arctic the big ones have been Russia, 

Canada is just about ready to go with its claim, and of course, Denmark got a lot of publicity recently by putting its rather large claim 

in including overlapping on the North Pole with Russia. 

Senator KING. I’m running short on time. For the record I’d like 

you, if you could, to supply us with a list of legislative priorities. 

Things that we should be addressing. We don’t need to go into that 

now, but if you can supply that after the hearing. 

Admiral PAPP. Yes, sir. 

Senator KING. Final question, talking about charting. The U.S. 

Navy is up there. I was on a Virginia-class submarine under the 

Arctic ice about a year ago. Are they providing data for charting? 

It strikes me as inefficient if we’ve got ships in the Arctic Ocean 

with amazing capabilities for measuring what the bottom looks like 

if we’re not gathering that data to contribute to charts. 

Admiral PAPP. Well, sir, as you know the discussions of where, 

how, what they are, and what numbers the Navy has up there 

would have to go into a classified session. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
169 

Senator KING. Well, my question is are we gathering data that’s 

being contributed to the public realm for charting? 

Admiral PAPP. They can, but the needs for charting are in the 

more shallow waters. Navy, with the type of assets they have up 

there stay in some rather deep water. I’m sure they gather information, but it cannot contribute to the type of data that we need 

which is coastal in the shallower waters where a lot of that maritime traffic is going to go. 

Senator KING. Thank you very much. 

Madam Chair, I’m out of time. Thank you for all of the very good 

testimony today. I appreciate it and I think the record should show 

you mentioned about witnesses flying from great distances. Our 

man from Maine came overnight on the train in order to get here 

to beat this weather here in Washington, so I wanted to express 

my appreciation to Mr. Arnold. 

The CHAIRMAN. We appreciate that a great deal. 

I just want to add before we go to Senator Hirono, talking about 

what might be available from the Navy and other opportunities to 

help us get better chart data. I think it should also be noted that 

when private industry goes out exploring they also need to be understanding what is happening on the bottom, and so there may be 

some private/public partnerships there that we can be talking 

about. 

Senator Hirono. 

Senator HIRONO. Thank you very much, Madam Chair, and I 

thank all of the panelists. 

Madam Chair, I think those of us who are here should get a gold 

star for showing up. [Laughter.] 

Yes, I think that’s a good idea. 

The CHAIRMAN. Yes, a golden nugget. [Laughter.] 

Senator HIRONO. I’m very glad that Senator King asked Admiral 

Papp the question about the fact that the United States is really 

losing out in making our claims to the Outer Continental Shelf because we are not party to the UN Convention on the Law of the 

Sea, and we can fix this by joining this convention along with 167 

or so other countries that are members, wouldn’t you say? 

Admiral PAPP. Yes, Senator. In my previous assignment I testified before the Foreign Relations Committee when Secretary Kerry 

was the Chairman. That was the last time that that had been 

brought forward in the Senate. In fact it was not just me. It was, 

I think, three other admirals and two generals that were on the 

panel. 

I just think that, as a practical thing, every time, every international venue I go to the conversations with the United States 

starts out with a lecture on why have we not ceded to the Law of 

the Sea Treaty and shown leadership that I think it’s now 186 

other countries have signed onto it. And the countries that have 

not are ones that I would rather not have us associated with. 

So yes, we comply with it, but there are limitations on what we 

can do, particularly for the Continental Shelf. 

Senator HIRONO. I don’t know why the Senate has not confirmed 

our membership, but I think it is high time because as we sit here 

talking about economic development issues in the Arctic area, it 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
170 

doesn’t make a lot of sense to me and I’m sure some of my colleagues that we are not party to that convention. 

Admiral Papp, I would say there’s probably and perhaps to the 

panelists here that in some ways it’s ironic that global warming, 

climate change has opened up areas of the Arctic to further resource extraction of oil and gas. So can you talk about how you will 

fulfill the President’s objectives to reduce U.S. greenhouse gas 

emissions and reach an international agreement to limit global 

emissions in light of the interest of the United States and other 

Arctic nations in developing the oil and natural gas deposits that 

will be opened as Arctic ice recedes? 

Admiral PAPP. Well, Senator, I’m not going to be able to reduce 

those or make any progress on them. My job is to prepare us for 

the Arctic Council, but we’re drawing attention to what climate 

change is doing, not only to the Arctic, but also to the rest of the 

world because of this change. We wouldn’t be there if it were not 

for the change. 

We do have black carbon and methane studies that have been 

going on through the Arctic Council. The reason the Arctic Council 

was started was for environmental protection and then creating 

sustainable development. Those are the key factors that have been 

a part of the Council since its existence. 

So we will highlight those things over the course of our Chairmanship of the Arctic Council as other Departments take the efforts forward to the COP meeting in Paris, and as the President 

negotiates other agreements the Arctic will be highlighted so it 

shows the rapid change that’s occurring with that environment and 

hopefully through our process and our elevations where public diplomacy for the Arctic Council will bring that to the attention of 

the American people. 

Senator HIRONO. So you see the need for balance. Balancing our 

desire to reduce global warming, climate change and the desire for 

the economic activity in that area. So I think that that is really in 

heightened perspective in this area of the world. 

I wanted to just ask, Madam Mayor, you know, Hawaii also has 

a native people, the native Hawaiians, so we are very aware of the 

need to involve the voice of the native peoples in any kind of discussion that would lead to development, economic sustainable communities, etcetera. You noted in your testimony that you did not 

think that our country has given sufficient voice to the native peoples of Alaska. 

So in saying that do you speak for all of the Alaska tribes and 

other leaders in Alaska? 

Ms. BROWER. Through the Chair, Senator Hirono, I want to 

thank you for that question. 

I believe that this has been a discussion ever since President 

Obama had given his executive order that his first consultation 

would be directly with the tribes which had really sustained a lot 

of questions and concerns among, not only municipalities of which 

I serve but also the regional corporations, who are for-profit corporations, village corporations and all for-profit and non-for-profit 

corporations. And through that are all tribal members of which 

there are members in all capacities. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
171 

The whole issue I say is I represent the people that also belong 

to those entities in the region that I serve, and then when you go 

outside of my region which is the whole State of Alaska also represents the same. 

In the instance that we’ve done in the last four years that we 

worked very hard in tribal consultation because we recognize that 

even speaking to our Department of Interior we have to have a 

tribe member with us. We have to have a person who belonged to 

a native village that is an IRA status. So when we realized that 

we needed their consultation, we went back and we decided that 

the best way that we can do this, to have all open communication, 

was to have tribal consultation, government-to-government consultation, meaning that we have to also include the before-profit 

corporations because they are serving the same tribal members. 

So we created what we call Voice of the Arctic which includes all 

entities and all entities meaning that we have our village corporations, our regional corporations, those that serve in the native corporations, city governments, as well as the North Slope Borough. 

And we will have our first official meeting March 9 and 10, and 

we welcome anyone to come and listen. 

In fact, entities such as the Bureau of Land Management will 

take an opportunity to discuss with the tribal leaders along with 

the regional leaders and the municipal governments in discussing 

issues that impact our region. I have great honors to the NANA regional corporation, the AMITA Corporation, all the native, tribal 

organizations from the North West Arctic Borough who has been 

here in discussing a lot of their region issues. 

It’s the same way when you come in numbers you don’t come in 

numbers at times, but you do have a very well representation. And 

that, I believe, I do have that very strong trust in what we do because everything that we’ve done if we were to wait for the federal 

government and the State of Alaska to do our services in the very 

harshest region that we live in in the whole State of Alaska, we’d 

never get anything done. So we have to have trust from our tribal 

entities which are our tribal members. So, yes, I do come with that 

trust. 

Senator HIRONO. Madam Chairman, my time is up, but I do commend Mayor Brower for doing everything she can to bring the various perspectives at the table so that voices are heard. 

Thank you. Mahalo. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Hirono. 

Senator Franken. 

Senator FRANKEN. Thank you, Madam Chair, for having this 

hearing. By the way since both the Ambassador to Iceland and Ambassador from Iceland are here, my wife Frannie and my sister-inlaw went to Iceland for about ten days a couple weeks ago and just 

loved the whole trip. 

Let me ask Dr. Bitz, we’re basically seeing this decline of Arctic 

sea ice, and that’s what’s making available these shipping lanes 

and possible additional areas to explore for oil and gas. This is the 

effect of climate change, right? 

Dr. BITZ. I think at least a large portion of the decline is due to 

climate change, to human activity. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
172 

Senator FRANKEN. Right, and that a lot of climate change is due 

to the burning of fossil fuels, right? 

Dr. BITZ. Yes. 

Senator FRANKEN. Okay, so we have a bit of an ironic situation 

here, do we not? I think everyone sees that the burning of fossil 

fuels is creating an opportunity to find more fossil fuels to burn. 

Dr. BITZ. It is obviously ironic, yes. 

Senator FRANKEN. Yeah, that’s funny how ironic it is. It’s hilarious. So the state is melting to some degree. I mean, that’s what’s 

happening, right? Our Alaska friends? The coastal communities are 

obviously feeling it, and my understanding is this is a very expensive problem to fix when some of these coastal communities have 

to relocate. Is that right? I heard estimates of about $380,000 per 

person to relocate. Is that correct, Mayor? Is that about right? 

Ms. BROWER. At a minimal of that cost. 

Senator FRANKEN. Okay, okay. So this is also expensive. I just 

want to make it clear because very often my colleagues on the 

other side of the aisle do not recognize that climate change is happening, is caused by human beings, and that it has its costs. 

Now it’s creating some opportunities including shipping lanes 

and shipping lanes may be more efficient, actually, but it’s also 

presenting some opportunities that ironically may actually, while 

they create economic opportunities, are also possibly exacerbating 

the situation. 

Is that, Dr. Bitz, a good summary? Am I hitting this over the 

head too hard? 

Dr. BITZ. I think that is true. 

Senator FRANKEN. Okay, can you describe the various aspects of 

climate change that will be amplified by the rapid decline of sea 

ice? I mean, won’t there be areas that now absorb more sunlight 

because, I mean, ice is white? 

Dr. BITZ. Yes, that is the one driver of the amplification that occurs in the high latitudes that a retreat of a highly reflective surface in replacement of a very absorbing one amplifies the initial 

cause of warming. 

Senator FRANKEN. What effect will that have on those who live 

in lower latitudes? 

Dr. BITZ. Right, well this is an area of active debate in the climate community but the hypothesis is that it will cause larger extremes such as have occurred in the eastern coast of U.S. in the 

last two years with very harsh winters, so larger excursions in both 

warmer and cooler. So of course in my home state it was warmer 

than usual this winter. That’s hard to even say winter because it 

was so warm. 

Senator FRANKEN. Well, what state is that in? 

Dr. BITZ. Washington. 

Senator FRANKEN. Oh, the State of Washington. Well my time 

has run out, but I want to thank the Chair for this hearing. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Franken. 

Senator Sanders. 

Senator SANDERS. Thank you, Madam Chair, for this very interesting hearing. I want to pick up on a few of the points that Senator Franken made because I find this really fascinating. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
173 

The scientific community is virtually unanimous in telling us 

that climate change is real. Climate change is caused by human activity. Climate change is already causing devastating problems in 

the United States and around the world, and if we do not get our 

act together and significantly cut carbon emissions that problem 

will only become much worse in years to come. 

That’s what the scientific community virtually unanimously tells 

us. We need to cut carbon emissions. We have to transform our energy system away from fossil fuel. 

I don’t have a whole lot of time. I would like to start with Admiral Papp and just go down the line. Do you believe what the scientific community is saying about the need to transform our energy 

system away from fossil fuel? Admiral? 

Admiral PAPP. Senator, that’s a part of our program, and we 

have put renewable resource—— 

Senator SANDERS. Very briefly. I don’t have a lot of time. Sorry, 

I don’t have a lot of time. Yes, no, maybe? 

Admiral PAPP. Yes, we should broaden out our sources for energy 

beyond fossil fuels, but the reality is we don’t have to depend on 

them. 

Senator SANDERS. Mr. Herron? 

Mr. HERRON. Yes, Senator, in my community we use diesel. At 

remote location, ice bound, six months of the year. 

Senator SANDERS. No, my question is do you agree with the scientific community that we need to transform our energy system 

away from fossil fuel? 

Mr. HERRON. Yes, sir. 

Senator SANDERS. Okay, I apologize, I just don’t have a lot of 

time. Ms. McGuire? 

Ms. MCGUIRE. I think that it will take longer to answer than I 

can give you just to answer. 

Senator SANDERS. Okay, thank you. Mayor? 

Ms. BROWER. Combination of both. 

Senator SANDERS. Okay. Dr. Bitz? 

Dr. BITZ. Yes, we need alternatives. 

Senator SANDERS. Mr. Arnold? 

Mr. ARNOLD. Yes, we should be mitigating alternatives. 

Senator SANDERS. A report by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

predicted that the highest point in the village of Newtok, Alaska, 

I hope I’m pronouncing that correctly, could be underwater by 

2017. A proposed move to higher ground may cost as much as $130 

million. A federal government report found more than 180 other 

native Alaskan villages or 86 percent of all native communities 

were at risk because of climate change. 

In the case of Newtok, those effects were potentially life threatening. Dr. Bitz, is that a true statement? 

Dr. BITZ. Yes, I think the permafrost thaw is a factor there as 

well as rising sea level and higher storm surge. 

Senator SANDERS. I’d like to ask Ms. McGuire and Mayor 

Brower, it sounds to me and maybe I’m wrong, I’m not an expert 

on this, but it sounds to me like climate change is an absolute 

threat to the way of life of native Alaskans. Senator McGuire? 

Ms. MCGUIRE. Through the Chair, Senator Sanders. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
174 

Senator SANDERS. Pardon me, we’re not that formal. You can 

talk to me. 

Ms. MCGUIRE. Through the Chair, Senator Sanders, Alaskans 

are some of the first climate refugees. We’re right there at the forefront, and at the state legislative level we’re dealing, already, with 

the costs of moving these villages. So you’re absolutely right. 

Senator SANDERS. Alright. So I’m going to get back to the irony, 

I think, that the Senator—he’s a victim to irony. He made a fortune on irony, right? [Laughter.] 

Senator FRANKEN. A small fortune. [Laughter.] 

Senator SANDERS. It would seem to me and what I’m hearing 

from—and you come from an extraordinary state. I’ve only been 

there a little, a few days, but it is just an incredibly beautiful state, 

and I’m sure you’re all proud of the beauty of your state. But it 

would seem to me if one is concerned about preserving your way 

of life that one must be a leader in the fight against climate 

change. I understand the economic implications of it, but how can 

we be talking about producing more oil which causes climate 

change which will be devastating to the communities of native 

Alaskans. That I don’t quite understand. 

Mayor Brower, do you want to help me out on that one briefly? 

Ms. BROWER. I believe that this is a ten thousand year old question. We never question anything that comes to us. We live with 

what is coming before us. 

Senator SANDERS. But this one—— 

Ms. BROWER. But, yes—— 

Senator SANDERS. But let me just ask you this. I don’t have a 

whole lot of time. In all due respect, this is not a ten thousand year 

old question. Climate change has been significantly accelerated in 

recent years. The evidence is it’s caused by human activity. 

Ms. BROWER. It’s because of the fossil fuels that’s coming out, 

yes, due to climate change. 

Senator SANDERS. Alright, but what about the point about you 

aren’t or some of you at least, are in favor of more production of 

fossil fuel which is ultimately destroying the very communities that 

your people live in. That does not make a lot of sense to me, in all 

respect. What am I missing? 

Ms. BROWER. Through the Chair. The ones that are being more 

impacted is my region because that is where the whole activity of 

oil, industry, resource, onshore and offshore. And we do have communities in our region that is going through a quite alarming rate 

of permafrost melting. 

Senator SANDERS. And in some years from now may by underwater. 

Ms. BROWER. And some years now the—some villages that already have been created were built on frozen lakes. So yes, it’s a 

matter of technology today. If technology were to say that I 

shouldn’t have had Point Lay built and that it was sinking at 

alarming rate then technology if we were to check, we would have 

found them a more safer place than it is. 

Senator SANDERS. Thank you. 

My time is expired, Madam Chair, but I think your state, your 

beautiful state, is almost a canary in the coal mine here. And well, 

I said what I said. Thank you very much. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
175 

The CHAIRMAN. Well, as you can see we can probably have extended discussion and debate, and I think it is an important part 

of what we are discussing today. I have taken the perspective and 

approach that economic development and opportunities for the people who live and work and raise their families there is not inconsistent with ensuring that we are good environmental stewards. 

I think, Mayor Brower, you note it will be the technologies that 

will allow us to adapt. And this is the question that I want to 

present, probably to you, Mayor Brower, or perhaps to either one 

of our legislators. And that is the issue of revenue sharing. 

Because it’s been pointed out to several colleagues here that we 

face issues like erosion of the coastline. Because we’re seeing sea 

ice further from the shore, allowing the waves to build up, we’re 

seeing threats to our community. 

The statistics that you have cited, Senator Sanders, we commissioned this report to do an assessment about the vulnerability of 

our communities, not only our coastal communities but some of our 

river systems and the threats that are present. It’s been identified 

that it’s not just Newtok. There are other communities such as 

Kivalina and Shishmaref that will need to be relocated. 

I have been out to Newtok, and I have seen the efforts that they 

are making. 

So many in this room are very well aware, Kivalina’s biggest priority right now is an evacuation route off of their barrier island. 

They need a new school, but is the state going to invest the money 

for a new school when the community itself is threatened? 

These are the things that we are weighing as a state right now, 

but the cost to do this, the cost to move Kivalina, a community of 

about 400 people, is somewhere between $100 and $120 million. 

How do you do that? How do you deal with the cost to build revetment in Unalakleet? How do you make sure that in Kotzebue when 

we’ve got the mayor of the North West Arctic Borough here, former 

Representative Joule, how do we ensure that their coastline, the 

erosion that they’re seeing is not eroded to the point that it threatens that community? It does require resourcing. 

Senator SANDERS. But—— 

The CHAIRMAN. This is the discussion and I want to ask the 

question because it actually is a question. A question to Mayor 

Brower and to our legislators here in terms of the imperative for 

revenue sharing as a source, not only to allow for adaptation and 

mitigation funds but also to deal with the other side of it, the opportunity side which is how are we going to build out a deep water 

port? How are we going to ensure, again, that we have whether it’s 

navigational aids or communication aids in an area where we currently lack them? 

There hasn’t been much discussion about revenue sharing, and 

I think it’s an important part of this discussion in this Committee, 

and then we’ll have opportunity for further discussion from members. 

So, Mayor Brower and then either one of our legislators. 

Ms. BROWER. Thank you, through the Chair. Revenue sharing is 

one that we truly support, and we want to commend Senator Murkowski in leading that forum. We believe that revenue sharing, as 

we all know, the State of Alaska has done its revenue sharing. But 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
176 

what we’ve not seen from the federal government is that issue. So 

we truly support revenue sharing because we believe in sharing of 

our resources. 

The CHAIRMAN. Ms. McGuire? 

Ms. MCGUIRE. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

I just want to hold this up really quickly for Senator Hirono. 

We’re going to make sure you guys get a golden patch basically 

with the North Star there from the Alaska Arctic Policy Commission for being here today. 

Yes, revenue sharing. I meant to include that in our short re- marks that that’s one of the areas we feel, with the $4 billion in 

lease revenues the federal government has already taken in, that’s 

one place, one pot of money. But another is that opportunity to 

take one third in revenue sharing as you know the Gulf States do. 

And just to touch back on Senator Sanders, I think what we’re 

asking for is the opportunity to continue to adapt. And so ten thousand years, as the Mayor has said, of our people adapting. What 

we don’t want to do is have a situation right now where we’re still 

reliant on fossil fuels. We’re still going to be developing those. 

Other countries will develop them if we don’t and possibly more 

irresponsibly, so we’re not going to supplant that. We’re moving toward renewables. We’re not there yet. It’s a lot of money, a lot of 

technology that we don’t have. So in the meantime, let’s not hamstring the folks that live on the forefront of the very first effects 

of changing climate by not allowing them to have the resources to 

make their lives better. And part of that is an economy. 

The CHAIRMAN. Ms. McGuire, I thank you for that. 

Mr. HERRON. Senator? 

The CHAIRMAN. Representative Herron? 

Mr. HERRON. Excuse me. To the question of Senator Sanders 

about the irony of it is I represent Newtok. And I’ve been to 

Kivalina with the Chairwoman just recently. Newtok is not just 

about sea ice or lack of. It’s not about storms. It’s also about river 

erosion. It’s also about permafrost melting. But when you talk 

about the irony, why should we drill for more, so we can use more 

fuel products. And that’s what the other speakers have said. It’s 

about having healthy, sustainable communities. 

And so there is no irony to a person that lives in Newtok. 

Kivalina, for example, that barrier reef took many years to build. 

Now the climate has changed its mind, and it’s going to take a few 

years to remove that barrier. But back to Newtok, there is no irony 

there. We need to develop our own resources so that we can have 

a healthy, sustainable community in Western Alaska. 

The CHAIRMAN. My time is expired, and I know members have 

questions for a second round here. 

Senator McGuire, you raised the issue of renewables, and one of 

the things that I’m looking forward to introducing my colleagues to 

is what Alaska is doing as the Arctic state to really be the front 

line leader in developing out our renewable alternatives so that we 

don’t have communities that are reliant on diesel. We are the 

innovators when it comes to the energy microgrids, and it’s pretty 

exciting. 

Senator Cantwell. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you, Madam Chair. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
177 

It’s clear to me that we need to be in the Arctic regardless of 

whether we’re focused on more resource exploration. To me, it’s an 

area that’s critically important to the United States. 

But I do want to ask Admiral Papp, what do we know about oil 

on ice? You know, we had Commandant Zukunft testify before the 

Commerce Committee. I think it’s been more than a year ago now 

because we were very concerned about tar sands oil in in the Pacific Northwest and the fact that we don’t know how to clean up 

tar sands spills. He basically said, we don’t have a very good plan 

for tar sand oil. So what do we know about oil on ice? 

Admiral PAPP. There is not a lot of information, and I’ve discussed that with each one of the Nordic countries as I’ve gone 

there. Obviously because the Nordic areas had open water for thousands of years and they come close to the ice and they’ve done 

much more oil exploration within their portion of the Arctic. 

Even they say they don’t have a lot of experience in terms of how 

we react to a spill in the Arctic ice. What we’re hopeful is through 

our leadership on the Arctic Council to exercise that marine oil 

spill preparedness and response agreement. An agreement is as 

good as the paper that it sits on. 

What we need to do is start exercising that and bringing experts 

together and coming up with experimentation, identifying shortfalls in terms of response equipment. Inventorying what’s available 

amongst the countries that surround the Arctic so that we can get 

a step ahead of what, inevitably, will happen. Someday there will 

be a spill of some sort whether it’s from drilling or whether it’s 

from a marine casualty. And I think we’re behind the power curve 

in terms of being prepared for it. So we need to start moving forward. 

Senator CANTWELL. Can you talk about the impacts of not being 

a signature to the Law of the Sea Treaty? Specifically I’m concerned right now about pirating of fish, everything from crab in the 

Bering Sea by the Russians to other losses in cod or pollock. 

Admiral PAPP. I’m hard pressed to come up with how not signing, 

not being a signator to the Law of the Sea hurts us in terms of 

fisheries because everything is customary. International law is 

what is brought into the Law of the Sea agreement, and we comply 

with all that. 

Really the primary area that we are at a disadvantage is the 

Outer Continental Shelf, particularly the extended Outer Continental Shelf, and we will not be able to perfect a claim that’s recognized by other countries until we accede to the Law of the Sea 

Treaty. So it’s the bottom rights, etcetera. 

Senator CANTWELL. I think the question is we don’t have enforcement authority. I’m sure what happens now when we find violations. 

Admiral PAPP. No, Ma’am. 

The fisheries that’s in the water column is governed by your exclusive economic zone which we are all in agreement on. The extended Continental Shelf gives you rights for exploration on the 

bottom and in fact, even though we have these claims that are occurring there will still be international waters at the center of the 

Arctic. Even though there will be claims for the Continental Shelf, 

the waters themselves that are above the bottom remain interVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:11 May 21, 2015 Jkt 094048 PO 00000 Frm 00183 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A048.XXX A048

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
178 

national waters subject to any country around the world coming in 

and fishing. 

So one of the important things, one of the reasons we are committed to keeping communications open with the Russians is because there are very vital things like the Arctic Council and fisheries agreements that we need to continue to work with the Russians on so that we don’t harm that particular resource. 

Senator CANTWELL. We are talking about Arctic fish here and 

this is part of the issue of whose fish, whose resource. So the question is how much patrolling are we doing in that area? How are 

we defining this? So you don’t see this as a challenge? You don’t 

see—— 

Admiral PAPP. It’s going to—— 

Senator CANTWELL. Current resource allocation and enforcement 

as an issue? 

Admiral PAPP. It’s going to be a challenge. We already have 

science that’s telling us that species are moving north from all the 

countries. I had a chance to meet with some Greenlanders recently 

that are catching species around Greenland that they’ve never seen 

before, and we have science that shows us that other species are 

moving up through the Bering Strait into the Arctic. 

That’s why we placed a moratorium on fishing within U.S. 

waters and have pretty good agreement with the other countries up 

there for a moratorium until science can show what the stocks are 

doing up there, and then we can do it based upon science. 

We’re also working towards an agreement so that that hole up 

at the center of the Arctic that is international waters, we seek to 

have an agreement whether it’s a regional seas program or otherwise, that would prevent other countries from coming up there and 

harvesting resources that we are not sure of because we don’t have 

the science yet. 

Senator CANTWELL. Okay, thank you. I see that my time is expired. 

The CHAIRMAN. Senator King. 

Senator KING. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

On that point, lobstermen in Maine, Admiral Papp, are now 

catching seahorses in their lobster traps which is astonishing in 

terms of species moving north. 

A couple of points, Madam Chair, that I think might be helpful. 

We’ve been talking about ice breakers. To me an ice breaker is 

a piece of infrastructure. It’s like a highway, and on a back of the 

envelope calculation one new ice breaker is equivalent of about 100 

miles of interstate highway. Putting that in perspective and the importance of these ice breakers, I think, is important in terms of our 

national expenditures on infrastructure. Of course, we’re doing a 

pretty poor job on infrastructure generally, nationally, but we 

ought to be able to build the equivalent of 100 miles of interstate 

highway to provide access to this incredible new region. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
179 

The way I think of it is it’s as if we have discovered the Mediterranean Sea. It’s an entirely new body of water that has been essentially locked up for most of human history with neighbors, and 

hopefully we’re going to be able to develop and work in this new 

place peacefully rather than have to go through centuries of war 

which surrounded the development of the Mediterranean Sea because we have the international organizations that we never had 

before. 

I think one of the important data points on this is this chart of 

the Arctic and the principal sea route now is right along the Russian coast. [The information referred to follows:] 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 242A 94048A.142
180 

It’s another reason that this has to be done. This route is useable 

in many cases today. This is the summer ice. The polar route will 

be many years. The Northwest Passage will come sooner than the 

polar route, but the principal route now is right along the Russian 

coast and that’s something that we need to take into account. It’s 

another reason that these international relationships have to be developed in a systematic and deliberate way that I think make this 

so important. 

One final point and then I wanted to ask Mr. Arnold a question. 

I would recommend to the Committee and to the witnesses and 

to our friends who are here today an animation prepared by NOAA, 

and you can find it if you go to You Tube and type in NOAA Arctic 

Ice Animation. You’ll see the aged iced from 1987 to 2014, and 

what you see over time is it’s contracting. It’s very dramatic. It 

makes the point much more dramatically than any of us could 

make in a speech. I recommend that to you. I think it’s so important. 

It’s another connection between Maine and the Arctic. We have 

two companies in Maine, Ocean Renewable Power and Pika Industries. Ocean Renewable Power actually has an experimental tidal 

facility in Alaska. Pika is doing microgrid work that I think would 

be very interesting because I’m sure, Madam Mayor, your energy, 

your electricity costs are probably above 70 cents a kilowatt hour. 

It’s all imported diesel, and it’s not very clean. So renewables, it 

seems to me, is a huge opportunity for you. 

Mr. Arnold, you worked on port development around the world. 

You’ve been a navigator. Talk to me about the opportunities that 

are created by transit through the Arctic and when do you see that 

coming to fruition and what’s the potential? 

Mr. ARNOLD. Sure. So one thing to point out is that moving 

freight by water is the greenest form of transportation when it 

comes to carbon emissions and on a freight per ton mile. It’s important to have that consideration where we’re talking about trade 

and we’re talking about the sea lanes over the Arctic. 

Another element to that, Senator Franken had pointed out, was 

that a reduction in transit time is also a greener aspect to this in 

that if you’re reducing the amount of distance from say, China or 

Japan or Korea and the United States eastern seaboard by anywhere from 20 to 50 percent, because that’s the reduction that you 

would experience in the case of using either the northern sea route 

or northwestern passage then you’re reducing the equivalent 

amount of fuel consumption to move that same freight which is 

going to move regardless of whether or not that sea route is open 

but your fuel consumption and emissions related will be 20 to 50 

percent less as well. 

So in regards to accessibility there are already more than 70 

ships in 2013 that transited the northern sea route and that was 

with ice breaker assistance from Russia. 

Senator KING. They charge more. 

Mr. ARNOLD. They do charge for that. They’re very cognizant of 

the opportunity that exists with charging every other country and 

every other ship owner for that. And there’s a cost to it. So naturally they would charge for that. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
181 

Right now everyone that we’re working with, Eimskip, the CEO 

of Eimskip is working very closely with the Chinese shipping company, Cosco. And we’re really looking at, kind of, a gradual opening 

of the northern sea route for the summer months over the next five 

to ten years. 

This is a very long term discussion, but it’s the reason the investments in the ice breakers are happening now is because the moment you have that you’re extending the fringe or the shoulder season for when you can transit that passage. 

Senator KING. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator King. 

We’ve been talking Arctic for about two hours and 15 minutes, 

and I just appreciate the indulgence not only of each of the panelists, but those who have come here to listen and to the members. 

Given that there are other things that are happening, the attention 

that has been given to this issue this morning is somewhat representative of the growing interest that so many have in the Arctic 

whether you are a resident of the Arctic or a wannabe. And we 

want to make sure that there are more wannabes. 

I want to recognize before we conclude we have several other legislators that have joined us. I see Representative Millett from Anchorage in the back there. We had Senator Castello here earlier. 

We have former State Senator and President of our State Senate, 

Drue Pearce, in the back. Mayor Joule, who is the Mayor of the 

Northwest Arctic Borough, was also with us. Again, great representation out there. 

I do want to make just a correction here because Senator King 

you noted that in so many parts of Alaska the energy costs are extraordinarily high. One of the amazing benefits that the community 

of Barrow has seen and several of the other communities in the 

North Slope Borough is that when the oil pipeline came on part of 

the agreement was that the communities would have natural gas. 

And so Barrow is blessed to have abundant sources of affordable 

natural gas. 

Mayor, maybe you can tell me within your Borough, how many 

of your villages have natural gas accessible to them? So how many 

diesel communities do you have versus how many that enjoy the 

benefits that come with affordable natural gas? 

Ms. BROWER. Through the Chair, Barrow is the first village 

through the transfer, the Barrow Gas Field Transfer Act, and then 

Nuiqsut which is one closest to Prudhoe Bay in formation of the 

Alpine, one of the agreements was that we would have a gas transmission line to that village. 

All other villages are either through diesel, propane or gas 

and—— 

The CHAIRMAN. And Mayor, can you tell the Committee what 

folks are paying for their diesel or their gas right now in the North 

Slope Borough outside of Barrow and Nuiqsut? 

Ms. BROWER. Propane about this high can cost you $800. A drum can cost you from $500–$800, and in Anaktuvuk Pass the gas to 

run either a snow machine or our services which we provide is as 

high as $10 a gallon for gas. I’m just giving you more recent examples, but the natural gas is the answer in natural heat and the 

emission out of the natural gas is probably less to any type of other 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
182 

carbons that are out there. So we do have it, and it’s just a matter 

of cost of trying to bring it to the communities. 

The Transfer Act does allow for the natural gas to be transmitted 

to Atqasuk and Wainwright, but it’s so cost prohibitive that we’ve 

not been able to do the natural gas transmission to those two villages. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mayor, for the explanation. 

I had the opportunity a couple weeks ago—— 

Ms. BROWER. Oh, if I may? 

The CHAIRMAN. Go ahead. 

Ms. BROWER. One of the villages that is the most impacted that 

is not going to be able to ever see and enjoy the natural gas transmission is the village of Kaktovik which is right adjacent to the 

ANWR. And that is something that we have to work with and very 

hard in how we’re to do it. If they can build Point Thomson which 

is adjacent to ANWR, we should be able to build a transmission of 

gas, natural gas, to that village, but today that’s been designated 

a wilderness, not even a pipe can go through that. 

Senator KING. You planted that question, Madam Chair. 

The CHAIRMAN. I didn’t plant that question. [Laughter.] 

But I will tell you that I did see a picture of Kaktovik last week 

where literally the buildings were buried with snow from a blizzard, and the article that described the storm that Kaktovik had 

faced said that the dumpsters in the community were flying about 

the community. It was that tough out there. 

It’s hard when the only way to keep warm and keep the lights 

on is expensive diesel or propane or oil, so I appreciate you mentioning that. 

I was going to conclude my comments by saying that the Mayor 

hosted me in Barrow a few weekends ago. It was actually Valentine’s Day, and it was a gathering called Kivgiq which is the dance 

festival that is held about every three years or so where people 

from all of the North Slope villages come together for days of 

dance. We were there for the final day, and the grand finale was 

celebrated at about 2 a.m. with the most amazing drumming and 

dancing, a beautiful expression of the culture of beautiful people, 

truly the heart of the Arctic. And I was honored to be included as 

part of that. 

But it’s a constant reminder to me that as we face these challenges, as we face these opportunities in the Arctic, we not ever forget the people of the Arctic. So, thank you for your representation. 

Thank you to my colleagues for being so attentive on these issues 

that, again, we’re not talking about Alaskan earmarks when we’re 

talking about an ice breaker. We’re talking about national assets. 

And I appreciate the help of my colleagues. 

And with that, we stand adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 12:21 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
183 

APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
184 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 252 here 94048A.143
185 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 253 here 94048A.144
186 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 254 here 94048A.145
187 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 255 here 94048A.146
188 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 256 here 94048A.147
189 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 257 here 94048A.148
190 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 258 here 94048A.149
191 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 259 here 94048A.150
192 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 260 here 94048A.151
193 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 261 here 94048A.152
194 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 262 here 94048A.153
195 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 263 here 94048A.154
196 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 264 here 94048A.155
197 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 265 here 94048A.156
198 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 266 here 94048A.157
199 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 267 here 94048A.158
200 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 268 here 94048A.159
201 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 269 here 94048A.160
202 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 270 here 94048A.161
203 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 271 here 94048A.162
204 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 272 here 94048A.163
205 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 273 here 94048A.164
206 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 274 here 94048A.165
207 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 275 here 94048A.166
208 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 276 here 94048A.167
209 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 277 here 94048A.168
210 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 278 here 94048A.169
211 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 279 here 94048A.170
212 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 280 here 94048A.171
213 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 281 here 94048A.172
214 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 282 here 94048A.173
215 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 283 here 94048A.174