HOME PAGE SUBSCRIPTIONS, Print Editions, Newsletter PRODUCTS READ THE PETROLEUM NEWS ARCHIVE! ADVERTISING INFORMATION EVENTS PETROLEUM NEWS BAKKEN MINING NEWS

Providing coverage of Alaska and northern Canada's oil and gas industry
April 2011

Vol. 16, No. 14 Week of April 03, 2011

ACMP sunsets without action this year

Testimony in House Resources in favor of extension; coastal areas want changes now; administration wants 6 years to work on program

Kristen Nelson

Petroleum News

The Alaska Coastal Management Program continues to create tension between Alaska’s coastal communities, the state and industry as the administration struggles to get legislators to extend the program, which sunsets July 1.

Gov. Sean Parnell wants the program extended, as is, for six years and has introduced a barebones bill to do just that — and only that — a position supported by industry.

Coastal communities and districts, and legislators from those areas, don’t want a barebones renewal. Coastal districts told the House Resources Committee that they’ve already spent years trying to get changes in the program.

The current tension grows out of legislation passed in 2003 which substantially changed the program in response to industry complaints that the process, and in particular the coastal policy council, was slowing down permitting.

The 2003 changes were substantial, and included eliminating the council and transferring authority over ACMP to the commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources. This required a rewrite of regulation, along with all of the coastal district plans. Under the revised program the coastal districts were limited in writing what are called local enforceable policies, primarily by a requirement that those policies not incorporate or duplicate state or federal statutes or regulations.

House, Senate bills

The administration has been defending the program.

Gov. Sean Parnell said at a March 24 press availability that communities have meaningful input.

DNR Commissioner Dan Sullivan, appearing before House Resources March 23 with Deputy Commissioner Joe Balash, said the administration is willing to engage meaningfully on the program, but that it must be maintained as a strong state program with a meaningful role for the districts, but no veto power.

House Resources has been holding hearings on House Bill 106, the governor’s six-year extension of ACMP. Co-Chair Paul Seaton, R-Homer, presented a work draft which included a coastal policy council and appeal board and made a number of other changes in the program.

The committee began discussing and voting on amendments to the original bill March 28, a process which continued March 30 and which Seaton said he hoped would conclude April 1.

There have been no hearings in the Senate, where the governor’s six-year extension and a bill from Senate Finance authorizing a one-year extension have been in the Community and Regional Affairs Committee since January. Sen. Donny Olson, D-Golovin, the chair of that committee, is one of the most outspoken legislative critics of the existing program.

The Associated Press reported that Senate Finance eliminated ACMP funding from the operating budget, saying that since there is the possibility the program will be discontinued, funding should be in a fiscal note accompanying an extension bill.

Public comment at House Resources reflected the industry-coastal area split over the program, with the Alaska Oil and Gas Association, the

Industry concerns

Alaska Chamber of Commerce and the Resource Development Council among those testifying in favor of maintaining the existing program.

AOGA Executive Director Marilyn Crockett said the organization supports continuance of the program in its present form.

Rachael Petro, president and CEO of the Alaska Chamber of Commerce, said continuation of ACMP was one of the organization’s top three legislative priorities. She said the chamber wants to see the program continued in its present form, and believes any changes should be made later when there is time to vet them in a public process.

Executive Director Jason Brune of the Resource Development Council told the committee he had spoken with RDC industry, borough and Native corporation members, trying to find a win-win. He said the middle ground was an extension of the program, but said RDC will “vigorously oppose” amendments which shift decision making from DNR to other entities and said “any changes that diminish the sovereignty of the state as represented by the administration should not be accepted by the committee.” He urged the committee to extend the program and deal with any changes separately.

Feds an alternative

Do coastal communities have an alternative to having input on projects through the state? What about federal agencies?

That was the gauntlet thrown down to House Resources by Mayor Edward Itta of the North Slope Borough.

Itta said he favored the work draft Seaton had put on the table “because it makes substantive and logical changes to the existing program, which is really no program at all.”

He called the present system “a hollow program” which “ignores community input.”

Coastal communities are closest to coastal development, “have unique concerns and deserve a voice and a chance to contribute their local expertise especially when it comes to projects in their own backyard,” he said.

“Hasn’t the state been aggressively making that same point with respect to federal actions in Alaska?” Itta asked.

He said the North Slope Borough is not anti development but when the borough sits down with the state to talk about coastal zone proposals, from the view that there is nothing that cannot be modified, “the state thus far declined to discuss any significant changes in the program.”

Itta said in meetings over changes the state’s “energy goes into explaining how well the program works for the state.”

As to suggestions that more time is needed to work on changes, he said that’s frustrating to hear because the borough and other coastal districts “have already spent huge amounts of time and money on that effort over the past eight years.”

“At this point delaying action is no action; it’s just kicking the issue down the road for someone else to deal with later.”

Without a meaningful program, communities are left with one option, Itta said: “If the state has no interest in addressing our concerns then we’ll have to turn to federal agencies for help.”

It’s an unfortunate corner to be forced into, he said.

“The borough has been really clear that on most federal issues like NPR-A development or endangered species listings, we have a lot more in common with the state than we have with the feds or the NGOs (nongovernmental organizations).”

Itta said he doesn’t see why the state would want to push in that direction, but: “Either the state can align with local communities whose interests it ought to represent or the federal agencies and local communities can align.”

And as for extending the program, if the Legislature is going to leave ACMP as it is “and let coastal management work for everybody except those coastal communities who clearly have the most at stake, it probably makes more sense to go ahead and let the program sunset.”

Coastal concerns

Among others testifying in favor of changes was the Northwest Arctic Borough, which like the North Slope Borough lacks an approved coastal plan under the revised ACMP.

John Chase, community planner and coastal area specialist, told House Resources the borough “promotes responsible and sustainable development but it is important that we have a meaningful seat at the table” because of “potential impacts to our coastal resources,” including subsistence which is an “important way of life in the borough.”

He said the borough supports Seaton’s work draft because it fixes three of the biggest problems: lack of a coastal policy council, lack of district enforceable policies and the separation of Department of Environmental Conservation permits from the ACMP consistency review, the so-called DEC carve out.

Chase said the limited policy board proposed in the work draft would be more efficient than the former coastal policy council because its duties would be limited to three things: approving changes to ACMP regulations with DNR; resolving differences in elevations; and making a final decision on coastal district plans when the district and DNR cannot reach agreement even after mediation.

Kathie Wasserman, executive director of the Alaska Municipal League, said the league would like to see some changes made to the program so that communities once again have — not veto power — but a seat at the table.

The league supported a resolution to extend ACMP, establish a policy board, bring back air and quality issues in the ACMP consistency review, eliminate requirements for designations of subsistence use areas and allow meaningful local enforcement policies.






Petroleum News - Phone: 1-907 522-9469 - Fax: 1-907 522-9583
[email protected] --- http://www.petroleumnews.com ---
S U B S C R I B E

Copyright Petroleum Newspapers of Alaska, LLC (Petroleum News)(PNA)©2013 All rights reserved. The content of this article and web site may not be copied, replaced, distributed, published, displayed or transferred in any form or by any means except with the prior written permission of Petroleum Newspapers of Alaska, LLC (Petroleum News)(PNA). Copyright infringement is a violation of federal law subject to criminal and civil penalties.