|
Murkowski wants justification of EIS for pipeline renewal
Sen. Frank Murkowski has questioned the decision of the U.S. Department of the Interior to require a full environmental impact statement as part of the renewal process for the federal right-of-way for the trans-Alaska pipeline.
At a Sept. 15 confirmation hearing into the qualifications of Sylvia Baca to be assistant secretary of Interior for Lands and Mineral Management, Murkowski asked why the agency is proposing to spend millions of dollars to require the EIS.
“We have 26 years of real data on the impacts of the pipeline,” the senator said. “It proves that the line can operate safely without harming wildlife or the environment. We don’t need endless studies to guess about future impacts. There were dire predictions of the consequences of operating the pipeline in the 1960s and early 1970s and they were all wrong. We don’t need to spend millions of dollars on studies to prove what is patently obvious. An environmental assessment clearly is all that is needed.”
In response Baca said the agency decided on requiring the lengthy study because the line has proven “controversial.”
Alaska always controversial “There is nothing in Alaska that will not be considered controversial by environmental groups,” Murkowski said. “That doesn’t mean there is a good reason to require a full EIS.”
Murkowski asked Baca to report on how many other existing pipelines have been required to undergo a full environmental review prior to reauthorization of their operating permits. Murkowski said his information is that in the last 5 years the agency has reviewed 1,800 pipelines and has required only 24 full environmental impact statements during that time — and none for renewals.
Murkowski also questioned the scope of the pending review, saying it appears to be broader than needed to protect the environment.
| 