|
Senate, House panels OK ANWR exploration Different versions of drilling provisions win berths as budget packages sail through committees; Herrera: opposition softening Rose Ragsdale Petroleum News Contributing Writer
The drive to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge coastal plain to oil and gas drilling picked up momentum Oct. 26 when two congressional committees voted to include the provision in budget reconciliation legislation that Congress hopes to pass this session.
The U.S. Senate Budget Committee voted 12-10 to approve a deficit reduction package that will draw down government spending by $39 billion over the next five years, in part by raising $2.4 billion from the sale of energy leases in ANWR’s 1.5-million-acre 1002 area.
The Deficit Reduction Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 2005 is now headed to the Senate floor in early November where it will be put to a vote after a mandatory 20 hours of debate, according to Elliott Bundy, a spokesman for U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska.
“The senator is certainly pleased by the vote. It’s another significant step in the process of getting ANWR open to drilling,” Bundy said Oct. 26. “Indications are looking better and better that (ANWR drilling) will pass.” Drilling measure in broader energy bill Less than an hour after the Budget Committee vote, the U.S. House Resources Committee approved a budget package, 24-16, that directs the Interior Department to offer leases in the Arctic coastal plain.
Responding during the committee’s final roll-call vote, U.S. Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska, yelled, “Yes, yes, yes.” To which, another congressman replied: “No, no, no,” when his name was called next. Widespread laughter followed the exchange.
The House bill also authorizes offshore oil and gas leasing with an opt-out provision for states that don’t want it; incentives for development of the nation’s estimated 1.5 trillion barrels of oil locked in shale deposits and changes in hard-rock mining rules that would raise $150 million and modernize mining laws, according to Resources Chairman Richard W. Pombo, R-Calif.
The House Budget Committee is expected to consider the measure and other bills in its markup of budget reconciliation legislation the week of Oct. 31. Democratic amendments defeated Three Democratic amendments to the ANWR provision failed, along with several amendments proposed for other parts of the legislation.
Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass., a strident opponent of ANWR drilling, sought unsuccessfully to replace the ANWR provision with a proposal to increase fees levied on oil and gas leases on federal lands nationwide.
Republicans countered that such fee increases would increase costs for oil companies and drive them to increasingly explore for and develop foreign sources of oil, and possibly spur litigation where the fee increases affected existing leases. The measure failed 10-21.
Another amendment offered by Rep. Ron Kind, D-Wis., sought the State of Alaska’s agreement to a 50-50 split of revenues raised from ANWR leasing as a precondition for allowing drilling on the coastal plain. Kind quoted published reports that Young and Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens intend to sue the federal government for the 90-10 split in ANWR revenues the state says it was promised under the Statehood Act.
Pombo said Alaska already took the case to the U.S. Supreme Court and lost and Young assured him the state will not seek to litigate the issue again. The amendment failed 11-25.
A third amendment proposed by Rep. Raul M. Grijalva, D-Ariz., sought to require Arctic Slope Regional Corp. to share anticipated revenues it should receive from energy exploration and development in ANWR with other Alaska Native groups.
Pombo argued against the amendment, saying the issue had been settled earlier in court and wasn’t necessary. It failed 17-20. More details in House bill The Resources bill contained many of the same provisions included in a parallel but much trimmer version of ANWR-drilling language approved by the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Oct. 19.
These included limiting development to 2,000 acres and requiring lawsuits over any aspect of the law or agency action to be filed within 90 days.
But the more detailed House version also would prohibit export of ANWR oil; require project labor agreements; order a lease sale offering at least 200,000 acres within 22 months of the law’s enactment; and allow the Interior secretary to exclude up to 45,000 acres in “special areas” that can’t be drilled.
Senate Republicans introduced separate legislation Oct. 19 with many of the same requirements rather than include them in the budget bill, hoping to avoid violating procedural rules that could kill the ANWR drilling provision on the Senate floor.
The House has no such procedural rules. Herrera: Congress softens on new energy Pro-ANWR lobbyist Roger Herrera said he and others working Capital Hill in recent days have noticed a discernible softening in opposition to ANWR and to new energy development. However, he can’t determine whether it’s due to post-Katrina concerns, high gasoline prices or polls showing the American people want new energy development, Herrera said Oct. 26.
“We’ve gone into 100 offices, and we’ve found very few diehard opponents to ANWR,” Herrera said. “Conversely, the supporters are more supportive than before.”
Still, the battle to open ANWR is far from over, he said.
“We’ve a lot of hurdles yet. It’s not just plain sailing because we got through the committees,” he said. Both houses are expected to vote on budget reconciliation in early November.
For example, when the House and Senate versions of the budget package get to Conference Committee, Herrera said the conferees might decide to retain the detailed House language in the bill, which could be death a sentence for the ANWR provision on the Senate floor.
| 