|
Reduction of ANWR exploration acreage unlikely Anonymous remark puffs up into national news story, Interior says no such proposal forthcoming at this time Steve Sutherlin PNA Managing Editor
A Feb. 26 New York Times Story stirred up discussion on both sides of the issue of oil exploration in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge by suggesting an impending proposal to cut by two-thirds the proposed drilling acreage. The story, with the headline “Bush May Scale Back Alaska Drilling Plan,” said the Interior Department is considering narrowing the acreage to get the drilling plan through the Senate, but the department told PNA Feb. 27 no such proposal exists.
“The option is one of several options that are out there but there is nothing on the table right now,” said Eric Ruff, director of the department’s office of communications. “This has not been proposed.”
Ruff said the department strongly supports the adoption of the House energy bill approved last year, which contains a provision to open ANWR to exploration.
Katherine Q. Seelye, the New York Times reporter that wrote the story told PNA that she was told by a source in the department who spoke on the condition of anonymity that an acreage reduction was under consideration, but she said the story made it clear the idea had not been proposed to the White House.
“It’s in the talking stages at the Department of the Interior,” Seelye said.
While the story did say officials cautioned that the new proposal was one of two or three under consideration and had not been adopted by the White House, a later paragraph in the story suggested otherwise.
“Officials said the administration’s goal with the new proposal was to win approval of a package that would allow some drilling, giving proponents an edge when the Senate meets with the House on final legislation to send to the president,” the story said.
The story, which was picked up by newspapers nationwide, said, “Limiting the scope of oil exploration is a direct pitch to win over six moderate Republicans who have said they are likely to oppose drilling in the refuge…”
However a follow-up piece by the Associated Press reported little enthusiasm for the idea on the part of drilling opponents, who said any drilling in ANWR is too much. Drilling advocates said cutting the acreage would unacceptably limit the nation’s energy options. Energy bill discussed in Senate A spokesman in the Washington office of pro-ANWR development group Arctic Power told PNA discussion of the energy bill, which began Feb. 27, is likely to occupy the Senate for two weeks or more because of a wealth of contentious issues it contains. He said nuclear power, ethanol, electricity policy, pipeline safety, fuel economy standards, bio-waste, hybrid vehicles and other items would be a challenge for the senators to work through.
| 