Feds goals for Arctic Council a concern

Stefanie Moreland, governor’s appointee to Alaska Arctic Policy Commission, reviews issues with US chairmanship of Arctic Council

Steve Quinn

For Petroleum News

Stefanie Moreland came to Juneau two years ago as a special assistant to Gov. Sean Parnell, for whom she would carry a portfolio responsible for fisheries, wildlife, oceans and Arctic policy.

Today, she is a deputy commissioner for the Department of Fish and Game, spending time in Washington, D.C., and Alaska’s rural Arctic communities immersed in emerging and pending Arctic policy issues.

Moreland represents Parnell on the Alaska Arctic Policy Commission, which is wrapping up work in the next several months on a report for the Legislature early next year.

She believes the Arctic represents a chance for economic development, just as it has with the North Slope oil patch for more than 40 years. As the U.S. prepares for a chairmanship in the eight-nation Arctic Council, Moreland says it’s incumbent on Alaska’s leaders to educate those in the Lower 48 that the Arctic is not a swath of barren tundra that needs protecting. Rather, it’s a place where people live and work.

Moreland talked about her work and observations of how Alaska’s Arctic region will soon become a focal point for President Obama’s administration.

Petroleum News: So first talk about your role in the governor’s office.

Moreland: As it pertains to the Arctic, I serve as a coordinator on Arctic policy. I work with commissioner’s offices across the administration, everything from Health and Social Services to Department of Natural Resources to Department of Environmental Conservation. I work closely with the governor’s office, particularly the governor’s D.C. office because of federal focus and their relationships with that office. The governor considers Arctic policy to be Alaska’s policy. That’s why I reach into each of those departments. We have 50 years of experience in the Arctic. With the U.S. chairmanship coming for the Arctic Council, the federal government has been paying a lot more attention to the Arctic region and has started moving on developing a national strategy for the Arctic region and thinking about their chairmanship priorities.

So as the governor’s advisor for Arctic policy, I’m tracking the international, federal, and state Arctic policy discussions. In each of those arenas, I’m finding the need to constantly remind policymakers Alaska policy and U.S. policy must be the foundation of Arctic policy. Any new efforts should be consistent with our laws and regulatory processes, and leverage our experience in the region.

Petroleum News: So where are we right now with Arctic policy and an outlook toward an economic development?

Moreland: The federal government is assessing where we are and they have gone through a lot of exercises to do that formally. It started with (former deputy secretary of the Interior) David Hayes’ report (Managing for the Future in a Rapidly Changing Arctic) - we refer to it as Integrated Arctic Management. It referred to the unique Arctic environment, calling for a new way to conduct business through the whole of government, increased coordination, collaboration and partnership. We already have those strong relationships in Alaska where unlike other states where there are many states, many boundaries and relationships with the federal governments.

So we have a lot of interagency work in coordination and sharing occurring. What this report did was identify a need to do business differently and a need to provide attention in the region. It was very informed by headquarters level leadership and that theme has carried to today where we have a lot of ideas, a lot of presumptions, a lot of gap analyses being done by leadership in Washington, D.C., without an awareness of where we already have strengths and programs in place for information sharing.

It was the first indication that we have new policies coming out, attention to the Arctic from the federal side headquarters level and they are not leveraging the strengths that they have in the Alaska region with federal employees and leadership here who are pretty knowledgeable with what we have going on.

Following the Integrated Arctic Management report, the White House began working on their national strategy for the Arctic region. They put out three priorities: security; stewardship; and international cooperation. That document recognized a role for the federal government for economic development in the Arctic region, and we were pretty encouraged by that, by the outreach and by the product.

And then an implementation plan rolled out and that’s balanced again toward academic focus, and it doesn’t seem as balanced in recognizing a role for federal government in promoting and supporting economic investment and economic opportunity in this region. It’s a lot more precautionary in terms of project priorities.

Petroleum News: So can Alaska have a voice - a meaningful voice rather than a token seat at the table - for Arctic policy, research and development? And what would make that voice valuable?

Moreland: The early documents that rolled out from the federal government committed to partnering with Alaska. We’ve had a lot of exchange on what that means. But now, those communications have dropped off. I’m not blaming anyone in particular. It just is a big bureaucracy to vet all of this.

And there are a lot of pressures and competing priorities coming their way. We are not having as much opportunity for meaningful exchange and participation. There has been good outreach to Alaska in having a presence. There was a lot for federal leadership visiting Alaska, but people came for listening sessions, so they didn’t really provide a strong idea of where the U.S. chairmanship for Arctic Council was headed. They more listened to what’s on people minds here. I’m concerned that input wasn’t informed by what realistic outcomes might be, what might be possible in the current fiscal environment.

We engage in the Arctic Council where we have common objectives, where we have jurisdiction or particular expertise. In those areas where we have some alignment, we do have a true partnership. We do have meaningful participation and dialogue.

Petroleum News: Where would you say those areas are?

Moreland: The governor submitted to the State Department a request for four themes to be considered for Arctic Council chairmanship: promoting economic opportunity; suicide prevention; developing safe sanitation and infrastructure; promoting safe, secure and reliable shipping. They seem to be picking up on some of those themes. I think they are interested in a suicide prevention project, but we are not sure exactly where that’s going to land. They have been enthusiastic about a proposal for safe water, water supply for Arctic communities. I think we are will have an opportunity to advance a project in that area.

Petroleum News: Has there been any discussion on resource development, be it shipping lanes or infrastructure?

Moreland: Over and over in providing input in all of these things, we really have been looking for more tangible progress, tangible outcomes. Instead all we have been faced with I feel like is more process, more suggestion that there needs to be more interagency work. We are looking for commitment to mapping, monitoring, domain awareness, infrastructure investment, progress in coordination on permitting in order to support development activities that are needed.

Petroleum News: With infrastructure, I keep hearing what a priority it is. Do you see it that way?

Moreland: It’s high in the priorities for us. We are sponsoring a study for Arctic sighting and development. The Corps of Engineers is moving on that study. We understand those kinds of infrastructure projects are going to require some creative public partnerships in order to move forward. They are critically needed. We are eager to have that discussion, but it’s unclear who to have it with. There is a lot of energy in these discussions, but who the deciders are is unclear.

Petroleum News: With the U.S. taking over as Arctic Council chair, what do you think the country, and by association, Alaska can gain from this change?

Moreland: The U.S. chairmanship of the Arctic Council provides opportunity to educate the rest of the U.S. that we are an Arctic nation and have significant national interests and responsibilities in the Arctic: security, energy, human health and environmental protection.

So we are hopeful that getting some attention on the Arctic would be beneficial to Arctic residents and to promoting investment in Alaska. Educating the Lower 48 on our unique position for economic and national security I think is a huge opportunity that we are hoping to see focus on. Just the unique environment, that there are residents in this environment, that we do have governance, that we do have systems in place, really rich cultures and information for the pan Arctic discussion.

I feel like a record is building toward starting a climate change agenda in the Arctic first: methane reduction; black carbon reduction; looking at the Arctic Council agenda as a mechanism to advance progress in that area. We are really concerned about any kind of agenda that says let’s start in Alaska first with any kind of more costly or burdensome new regulations.

It will be unfortunate if the Lower 48 is led to believe the melting Arctic ice cap can be effectively or responsibly stemmed by turning much of Alaska and surrounding waters into a park or sacrificing Alaska residents to achieve black carbon or greenhouse gas emission reductions in the name of “leading by example” on the global stage.

What does all of this mean for OCS (exploration and development)? Unless there’s a course correction, I anticipate all of this attention creating more roadblocks and uncertainty for energy permitting and regulation in the U.S. Arctic - not facilitating and coordinating improved domestic governance and decision-making.

Petroleum News: So when you say a climate change agenda first, is that first and only? Is that the predominant priority?

Moreland: Projects for the U.S. chairmanship aren’t final yet, but there have been a lot of events with leadership including Admiral Papp and Ambassador Bolton. Climate change mitigation, methane reduction, black carbon emission reduction was a major theme coming from the leadership. To us, that’s signaling that’s an interest in using the Arctic Council forum as means to provide guidance, best practices, possibly inform decision making toward reductions in these areas. The geography of the Arctic Council is such that it’s the eight Arctic nations at the table. We would hate to see this climate change agenda advanced with only Alaska being what the U.S. is putting on the table.

In recent months, it seems Alaska’s interests and broader national interests in the Arctic region are being set aside to use the chairmanship for a messaging opportunity on the administration’s climate change agenda. We know the chairmanship will be used to advance the Obama administration’s climate change agenda.

Petroleum News: What else should be part of that agenda? Resource development? Infrastructure? It sounds like you’re seeing climate change would be in direct conflict with resource development.

Moreland: I’ve let you know what the governor’s themes are, and in turn what we are seeing is a call for improved Arctic Ocean governance and stewardship, climate change and mitigation, working with Arctic states on regional seas agreements, moral imperative to protect the Arctic. That’s the language coming out from the leadership developing the Arctic council agenda and those things are in contrast to what we’ve been pushing: things that are relevant to Arctic residence, improve living conditions, provide additional opportunity and promote infrastructure investment.

Petroleum News: So let’s go back to educating people in the Lower 48. I continually hear how people in the Lower 48 have a disconnect from what takes place here. Do you find that as well?

Moreland: All the time. It’s difficult for people to understand the scale of the state. People view the Arctic as an untouched environment and that any footprint or disturbance is going to be something that is going to be highly disruptive. The Arctic is a huge geography, and people have lived there for tens of thousands of years. They are seeking opportunity to continue to support healthy communities and there is room for that.

Policy makers with little experience in the U.S. Arctic have stated the Arctic is a blank slate, offering an opportunity to create new approaches to governance. That’s true to some extent for the central Arctic Ocean, but not for Alaska or domestic waters off Alaska where governance authorities are well defined. Any new governance, planning processes, or guidance would be a new layer of bureaucracy for Alaska residents and business.

If there’s a gap, let’s consider how best to address it. I’m only seeing a flood of ideas for new precautionary management and spatial planning tools that could actually impede economic opportunity and our ability to manage adaptively in changing Arctic conditions.

Petroleum News: Canada now holds the chairmanship. Is there anything we can learn from their leadership, and the way they held the position?

Moreland: Absolutely. Canadian leadership’s theme was development for people of the north. That’s a theme that our federal counterparts have not supported. The Canadian theme has been one we have supported. They are interested in the Arctic Council being relevant to the lives of the people who live in the north. They have the advantage of Canadians viewing themselves as northerners; they don’t have the disconnect we do in the Lower 48 of not having that direct tie to the Arctic. The other major difference is the Canadians started with the northern territories informing their federal priorities. We’ve had the opportunity to participate; we certainly aren’t driving the content on the agenda.

Petroleum News: You’re on the state’s Arctic Policy Commission. How helpful has that commission been in building a voice for Alaska?

Moreland: It showed that the members of the Legislature do want to be at the table and do want to be providing input in shaping federal policy. It’s also been an opportunity for the legislative members and members of the private sector to educate each other and their colleagues on the importance of these Arctic discussions and get them thinking that we do have a new waterway. So the Arctic Policy Commission is readily drawing attention to the issues.

Petroleum News: What have you learned from the people who live in the places you’ve visited with the commission: Nome, Kotzebue, Dillingham, Barrow?

Moreland: They are excited about the interest in their communities and the challenges that they face. They are looking for a response to be supportive to priorities established at the community level. Just as we want a voice at the table when we are talking about federal policy development, we are hearing communities want to be at the table for the Arctic Policy Commission. The interests in Arctic policy are vast. There is a lot of interest in ensuring we have good science to inform good decision making and have processes in place to appropriately balance economic opportunity and resource development with environmental protection. There is a lot of interest in really addressing the issue of getting infrastructure in place quickly in the Arctic region.

Petroleum News: Going back to discussions you’ve had with people in the Lower 48, is there a sense of fear that allowing development could destroy pristine waters and land perhaps unawareness that oil has been produced for nearly 40 years to the tune of 17 billion barrels of oil?

Moreland: The state of Alaska has a great record of permitting development in the Arctic with success. I don’t think people in the Lower 48 understand that people live there - much less have the type of development that we do, much less with a small footprint. It’s been done without significant risk and without significant sacrifice to our environment.

I think that education is important. With the chairmanship theme shaping up the way it is and how I’m hearing about them in a public message in a call for stewardship and a moral imperative to protect this area, I’m concerned that it’s going to stir up fear in the Lower 48 of tremendous risk, that any development is going to come at a major sacrifice to the environment and that any activity is a threat to our fish and wildlife resources. That’s not been our experience. We’ve been able to operate successfully in an Arctic environment. We are looking forward to investing in infrastructure. I think we have a good story to tell. With the federal government leaning more toward protection and an overly cautionary approach they argue is necessary in the face of uncertainty or absence of information, it would lead people in the Lower 48 to conclude that we are not ready to support development. That’s just not the case.

Petroleum News: So what can the state do, be it this office, the Legislature, the Arctic Policy Commission or the people who live in Barrow, Nome, Kotzebue or Kaktovik?

Moreland: I think it’s important that we influence the Arctic Council agenda, chairmanship themes and messages coming from the federal government - that they need to recognize they do have a role in promoting economic development and opportunity for Arctic residents. That existing law and permitting processes is sufficient for us to continue.

We’re keeping an eye these efforts and urging the federal government to work with us to make real and tangible progress towards advancing national security, economic opportunity and environmental protection to meet national obligations in the Arctic region and promote healthy, sustainable Arctic communities.

There is still time for Robert Papp to make room in the U.S. chairmanship for measureable outcomes that would foster healthy economies and thriving communities, consistent with Canada’s theme for their time as Arctic Council chair.