[Senate Hearing 112-860]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 112-860
UNITED STATES COAST GUARD OPERATIONS IN ALASKA
=======================================================================
HEARING
before a
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
SPECIAL HEARING
AUGUST 6, 2012--KODIAK, AK
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/browse/
committee.action?chamber=senate&committee=appropriations
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
80-814 PDF WASHINGTON : 2015
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800;
DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii, Chairman
PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi, Ranking
TOM HARKIN, Iowa MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky
BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama
HERB KOHL, Wisconsin KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas
PATTY MURRAY, Washington LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee
DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California SUSAN COLLINS, Maine
RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana MARK KIRK, Illinois
JACK REED, Rhode Island DANIEL COATS, Indiana
FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey ROY BLUNT, Missouri
BEN NELSON, Nebraska JERRY MORAN, Kansas
MARK PRYOR, Arkansas JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota
JON TESTER, Montana RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin
SHERROD BROWN, Ohio
Charles J. Houy, Staff Director
Bruce Evans, Minority Staff Director
------
Subcommittee on the Department of Homeland Security
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana, Chairman
FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey DANIEL COATS, Indiana
DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi
PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama
PATTY MURRAY, Washington LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
JON TESTER, Montana JERRY MORAN, Kansas
Professional Staff
Charles Kieffer
Chip Walgren
Scott Nance
Drenan E. Dudley
Rebecca M. Davies (Minority)
Carol Cribbs (Minority)
Administrative Support
Nora Martin
Courtney Stevens (Minority)
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Opening Statement of Senator Mary L. Landrieu.................... 1
Article by Admiral Robert J. Papp, The Emerging Arctic
Frontier................................................... 2
Prepared Statement of........................................ 11
Statement of Senator Lisa Murkowski.............................. 12
Statement of Admiral Robert J. Papp, Commandant, U.S. Coast Guard 16
Prepared Statement of........................................ 19
Operation Arctic Shield 2012..................................... 19
The Coast Guard in Alaska and the Arctic Region.................. 20
The Coast Guard in Context of National Arctic Policy............. 21
Arctic: Coast Guard Mission...................................... 22
Arctic: Drilling by Shell........................................ 23
Polar Ice Breakers: Number of Vessels............................ 24
Operation Arctic Shield.......................................... 26
Cutters: Replacing Legacy Vessels................................ 28
Polar Icebreakers: Leasing Pros and Cons......................... 31
Fisheries Enforcement............................................ 32
Statement of Dr. Mark Myers, Vice Chancellor for Research,
University of Alaska--Fairbanks, Fairbanks, Alaska............. 34
Prepared Statement of........................................ 36
Major Drivers of Change in the Arctic............................ 37
Needed Investments in the Arctic................................. 37
Government Coordination With Research Universities............... 38
Statement of Merrick Burden, Executive Director, Marine
Conservation Alliance, Seattle, Washington..................... 38
Prepared Statement of........................................ 41
Statement of Bruce Harland, Vice President, Commercial Services,
Crowley Marine, Oakland, California............................ 43
Prepared Statement of........................................ 44
The Arctic Region in Alaska...................................... 44
Strategies To Address Changing Climatic Conditions............... 44
Additional Committee Questions................................... 49
Questions Submitted to the U.S. Coast Guard...................... 50
Questions Submitted by Senator Mary L. Landrieu.................. 50
Polar Icebreakers................................................ 50
Polar Sea........................................................ 50
Offshore Patrol Cutters.......................................... 51
Rescue 21........................................................ 52
Arctic Research.................................................. 52
Letter From Lieutenant Governor Mead Treadwell, State of Alaska.. 53
UNITED STATES COAST GUARD OPERATIONS IN ALASKA
----------
MONDAY, AUGUST 6, 2012
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on Homeland Security,
Committee on Appropriations,
Kodiak, AK.
The subcommittee met at 9:40 a.m., at Hangar No. 3, U.S.
Coast Guard Air Station Kodiak, in Kodiak, Alaska, Hon. Mary L.
Landrieu (chairman) presiding.
Present: Senators Landrieu and Murkowski.
opening statement of senator mary l. landrieu
Senator Landrieu. Thank you so much for joining us for this
Subcommittee on Homeland Security Appropriations, and I would
like to call the hearing to order.
It is truly an honor for me to be back here in Alaska. This
is my third time as a United States Senator. I had the great
pleasure of visiting over a decade ago with a wonderful host,
very well known to my colleague, Senator Murkowski, because I
was a guest of her father, Senator Frank Murkowski. A few years
later, I had the opportunity to come back to Alaska with the
Hon. Ted Stevens.
It really is a joy and a privilege. I thank Senator
Murkowski for encouraging me, as a wonderful member of this
subcommittee, to hold this important field hearing here in
Kodiak, Alaska.
I want to begin by acknowledging Chairman Malutin. Thank
you very much for inviting us to his island. The mayors are
also here, and we have several elected officials.
I know that Senator Murkowski, who has just been a
phenomenal leader for Alaska, and such a strong voice, not only
for this community, but for the entire State, I'm sure that she
will recognize some of those individuals in her opening
statement.
I want to begin with an opening statement, which is our
procedure. I will turn it then over to Senator Murkowski.
I am thrilled to be here at, literally, the largest Coast
Guard station in America, with thousands of men and women from
our Coast Guard. This is a little late, but happy birthday for
your 222nd birthday. We have been celebrating, I'm sure,
Admiral, all over the Nation and the world, because of the
extraordinary work of the Coast Guard. So my belated happy
birthday to all of you.
I wanted to begin with a statement that came from an
article, and I would like to put it in to the record. Admiral
Papp wrote this article. It is called the ``Emerging Arctic
Frontier''. I'm sure that he will refer to it in his opening
statement.
But I think it is appropriate, Senator Murkowski, for us to
begin at your charge to hold this hearing today with the words
of Admiral Papp when he says, ``The world may seem to be
growing smaller, but its seas are growing bigger, particularly
in the great north where a widening water highway beckons both
with resources and challenges.''
That's why Senator Murkowski has asked me to conduct this
hearing this morning. I'm happy to do it. I would like to
submit for the record, and without objection, the entire
article.
[The article, originally published in Proceedings Magazine
on pages 16-21 (February 2012 Vol. 138/2/1,308), follows:]
Article by Admiral Robert J. Papp, The Emerging Arctic
Frontier
As a maritime nation, the United States relies on the sea for our
prosperity, trade, transportation, and security. We are also an Arctic
nation. The Arctic region--the Barents, Beaufort, and Chukchi seas and
the Arctic Ocean--is the emerging maritime frontier, vital to our
national interests, economy and security.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ U.S. Code, Section 4111, ```Arctic' defined,'' http://
codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/15/67/4111.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Arctic Ocean, in the northern region of the Arctic Circle, is
changing from a solid expanse of inaccessible ice fields into a growing
navigable sea, attracting increased human activity and unlocking access
to vast economic potential and energy resources. In the 35 years since
I first saw Kotzebue, Alaska, on the Chukchi Sea as a junior officer,
the sea ice has receded from the coast so much that when I returned
last year the coastal area was ice-free. The shipping, oil-and-gas, and
tourism industries continue to expand with the promise of opportunity
and fortune in previously inaccessible areas. Experts estimate that in
another 25 years the Arctic Ocean could be ice-free during the summer
months.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ RADM David W. Titley, USN, and Courtney C. St. John, ``Arctic
Security Considerations and the U.S. Navy's Roadmap for the Arctic,''
Naval War College Review, vol. 63, no. 2 (Spring 2010), pp. 35-48.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This change from ``hard'' to ``soft'' water, growing economic
interests and energy demands, and increasing use of the seas for
maritime activities by commercial, native, and recreational users
demands a persistent, capable U.S. Coast Guard presence in the Arctic
region. Our mandate to protect people on the sea, protect people from
threats delivered by sea, and protect the sea itself applies in the
Arctic equally as in the Atlantic and Pacific oceans and Gulf of Mexico
and Caribbean Sea.
The difference is that in the rest of the maritime domain, we have
an established presence of shore-based forces, small boats, cutters,
and aircraft supported by permanent infrastructure and significant
operating experience. Although the Coast Guard has operated in southern
Alaska, the Gulf of Alaska, and Bering Sea for much of our history, in
the higher latitudes we have little infrastructure and limited
operating experience, other than icebreaking. Historically, such
capabilities were not needed. Year-round ice, extreme weather, and the
vast distances to logistical support, prevented all but icebreakers or
ice-strengthened ships from operating there. As a result, commercial
enterprise on any significant scale was nonexistent. But the Arctic is
emerging as the new maritime frontier, and the Coast Guard is
challenged in responding to the current and emerging demands.
resource-rich realm
The economic promise of oil and gas production in the Arctic is
increasingly attractive as supply of energy resources from traditional
sources will struggle to meet demand without significant price
increases. The Arctic today holds potentially 90 billion barrels of
oil, 1.6 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, and 44 billion barrels of
natural gas liquids, 84 percent of which is expected to be found in
offshore areas. This is estimated to be 15 percent of the world's
undiscovered oil reserves and 30 percent of natural gas reserves. Oil
companies are bidding hundreds of millions of dollars to lease U.S.
mineral rights in these waters and continue to invest in developing
commercial infrastructure in preparation for exploration and
production, and readiness to respond to potential oil spills or other
emergencies.\3\ In August, the Department of the Interior granted Royal
Dutch Shell conditional approval to begin drilling exploratory wells in
the Beaufort Sea north of Alaska starting next summer. ConocoPhillips
may begin drilling in the Chukchi Sea in the next few years. Also,
Russia has announced plans for two oil giants to begin drilling as
early as 2015, and Canada has granted exploration permits for Arctic
drilling.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ U.S. Geological Survey Circum-Arctic Resource Appraisal, http:/
/pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2008/3049/fs2008-3049.pdf. ``Climate Change in the
Arctic: Beating a Retreat,'' The Economist, 24 September 2011, p. 100.
``U.S. to Offer Oil Leases in the Gulf,'' The New York Times, 19 August
2011.
\4\ ``Shell Gets Tentative Approval to Drill in Arctic,'' The New
York Times, 4 August 2011. Arctic Economic Development Summit, Chukchi
Exploration Activities, ConocoPhillips Alaska, 5 August 2011,
www.nwabor.org/AEDSdocs/22-35ConocoPhillips.pdf. ``Russia Embraces
Offshore Arctic Drilling,'' The New York Times, 15 February 2011.
``Russia, Exxon Mobil strike deal for Arctic offshore oil drilling,''
Anchorage Daily News, 30 August 2011. ``PEW Study urges Canada to
suspend Arctic oil exploration,'' Terra.Wire, 9 September 2011,
www.terradaily.com/afp/110909155430.fnr4r8w9.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Icebreaker Essential To Resolve Nome Fuel Crisis
As this article went to print, the Coast Guard cutter Healy had
just cleared a path through hundreds of miles of Arctic ice to allow
the commercial tanker Renda to deliver gasoline and diesel fuel to
Nome, Alaska, which is currently inaccessible by road. The fuel will
replenish Nome's scarce supplies and sustain the residents through the
winter freeze. The situation arose after a regularly scheduled shipment
was delayed in November by severe storms in the Bering Strait. The
Healy was completing a scheduled science mission when it diverted to
assist. The Coast Guard is responsible for providing U.S. domestic and
polar icebreaking capability.
----------------------------------------------------------------
The fisheries and seafood industry in the southern Arctic region
(the Bering Sea and Gulf of Alaska) sustains thousands of jobs and
annually produces approximately 1.8 million metric tons' worth of catch
valued at more than $1.3 billion.\5\ Although subsistence-hunting has
occurred in the higher latitudes for centuries, as waters warm, fish
and other commercial stocks may migrate north, luring the commercial
fishing industry with them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ ``The Seafood Industry in Alaska's Economy,'' 2011 update of
the Executive Summary, www.marineconservationalliance.org/wp-content/
uploads/2011/02/SIAE_Feb2011a.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As the Arctic Ocean becomes increasingly navigable it will offer
new routes for global maritime trade from Russia and Europe to Asia and
the Americas, saving substantial transit time and fuel costs from
traditional trade routes. In summer 2011, two Neste oil tankers
transited the Northeast Passage from Murmansk to the Pacific Ocean and
onward to South Korea, and Russian Prime Minister Vladimir V. Putin
pledged to turn it into an important shipping route.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ ``Breaking the Ice: Arctic Development and Maritime
Transportation,'' Iceland Ministry for Foreign Affairs conference, 27-
28 March 2007, www.mfa.is/media/Utgafa/
Breaking_The_Ice_Conference_Report.pdf. ``Neste oil ships operate
successfully along the Northeast Passage,'' Neste Oil Corporation press
release, 30 September 2011, www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/30/
idUS136183+30-Sep-2011+HUG20110930. ``On Our Radar: Putin Covets
Northeast Passage, The New York Times Green Blog, 23 September 2011,
http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/23/on-our-radar-putin-covets-
northeast-passage/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
resolving an old liability on the rule of law
Because of these opportunities and the clamor of activities they
bring, a legally certain and predictable set of rights and obligations
addressing activity in the Arctic is paramount. The United States must
be part of such a legal regime to protect and advance our security and
economic interests.
In particular, for the past several years there has been a race by
countries other than the United States to file internationally
recognized claims on the maritime regions and seabeds of the Arctic.
Alaska has more than 1,000 miles of coastline above the Arctic Circle
on the Beaufort and Chukchi seas.\7\ Our territorial waters extend 12
nautical miles from the coast, and the exclusive economic zone extends
to 200 nautical miles from shore (just as along the rest of the U.S.
coastline). That's more than 200,000 square miles of water over which
the Coast Guard has jurisdiction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Department of Defense, Report to Congress on Arctic Operations
and the Northwest Passage, May 2011, www.defense.gov/pubs/pdfs/
Tab_A_Arctic_Report_Public.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Below the surface, the United States also may assert sovereign
rights over natural resources on its continental shelf out to 200
nautical miles. However, with accession to the Law of the Sea
Convention, the United States has the potential to exercise additional
sovereign rights over resources on an extended outer continental shelf,
which might reach as far as 600 nautical miles into the Arctic from the
Alaskan coast. Last summer, the Coast Guard cutter USCGC Healy (WAGB-
20) was under way in the Arctic Ocean, working with the Canadian
icebreaker Louis S. St-Laurent to continue efforts to map the extent of
the continental shelf.
The United States is not a party to the Law of the Sea Convention.
While this country stands by, other nations are moving ahead in
perfecting rights over resources on an extended continental shelf.
Russia, Canada, Denmark (through Greenland), and Norway--also Arctic
nations--have filed extended continental-shelf claims under the Law of
the Sea Convention that would give them exclusive rights to oil and gas
resources on that shelf. They are making their case publicly in the
media, in construction of vessels to patrol these waters, and in
infrastructure along their Arctic coastline. Even China, which has no
land-mass connectivity with the Arctic Ocean, has raised interest by
conducting research in the region and building icebreakers.\8\ The
United States should accede to the Law of the Sea Convention without
delay to protect our national security interests: sovereignty, economy,
and energy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ ``Group: China preparing for Arctic melt commercial
opportunities,'' USA Today, 1 March 2010. ``China to launch 8
Antarctic, Arctic expeditions, ChinaDaily.com, 25 September 2011,
www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2011-09/25/content_13788608.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
arctic responsibility
Wherever human activity thrives, government has a responsibility to
uphold the rule of law and ensure the safety and security of the
people. The Coast Guard is responsible for performing this mission on
the nation's waters, as we have done in parts of Alaska over our 221-
year history.
Coast Guard operations in the Arctic region are not new. Nearly 150
years ago, we were the Federal presence in the ``District of Alaska,''
administering justice, settling disputes, providing medical care,
enforcing sovereignty, and rescuing people in distress. Our heritage is
filled with passages of Coast Guardsmen who braved the sea and ice in
sailing ships and early steam ships to rescue mariners, quash illegal
poaching, and explore the great North. World War II ushered in the
service's first icebreakers. In 1957, three Coast Guard cutters made
headlines by becoming the first American vessels to circumnavigate the
North American continent through the Northwest Passage. That mission
was in support of an early Arctic imperative to establish the Distant
Early Warning Line radar stations to detect ballistic-missile launches
targeting the United States during the Cold War.
The Coast Guard presence in southern Alaska, the Bering Sea, and
Gulf of Alaska continues to be persistent and capable, matching the
major population and economic concentrations and focus of maritime
activities. The 17th Coast Guard District is responsible for directing
the service's operations in Alaska with:
--two sectors;
--two air stations;
--12 permanently stationed cutters and normally one major cutter
forward-deployed from another area;
--three small-boat stations;
--six marine safety units or detachments;
--one regional-fisheries training center;
--five other major mission-support commands.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ U.S. Coast Guard, ``Protecting the Last Frontier,''
www.uscg.mil/d17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We ensure maritime safety, security, and stewardship in the region
by conducting search and rescue, fisheries enforcement, inspection and
certification of ships and marine facilities to ensure compliance with
U.S. and international safety and security laws and regulations, and
preventing and responding to oil spills and other water pollution.
The Coast Guard strengthens U.S. leadership in the Arctic region by
relying on effective partnerships with other Federal, State, local, and
tribal governments and industry members. We are working with other
Federal partners within the Department of Homeland Security, the
military services and combatant commanders within the Department of
Defense, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the
Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement within the departments
of Interior, State, and Justice to achieve unity of effort within the
interagency team at the port and regional level. And we rely on
cooperation from international partners, be they permanent close allies
such as Canada or our maritime counterparts in Russia and China, with
whom we are developing ties.
Although we have lived and served in southern Alaska for most of
the Coast Guard's existence, our access to and operations in northern
Alaska on the North Slope have been only temporary and occasional, with
no permanent infrastructure or operating forces along the Beaufort or
Chukchi seas. There are no deepwater ports there.
Throughout the history of the region, the Coast Guard's presence in the
North was often the only Federal presence. Today, the USCG Healy is a
salient element of the service's profile there, keeping busy on
missions ranging from scientific surveys to icebreaking.
``The Coast Guard strengthens U.S. leadership in the Arctic region,''
notes the author, ``by relying on effective partnerships. . . '' Here,
a Coast Guard MH-60 Jayhawk rescue helicopter lands on the tarmac at
Kotzebue, Alaska, with an Army National Guard UH-60 Pavehawk coming in
close behind during a joint outreach mission to remote Alaskan
villages.
However, the acceleration of human activity in the northern Arctic
region, the opening of the seas, and the inevitable increase in
maritime activity mean increased risk: of maritime accidents, oil
spills, illegal fishing and harvesting of other natural resources from
U.S. waters, and threats to U.S. sovereignty. Those growing risks--
inevitable with growth of human activity--demand the Coast Guard's
attention and commitment to meet our responsibilities to the nation.
preparing to lead
Our first challenge is simply to better understand the Arctic
operating environment and its risks, including knowing which Coast
Guard capabilities and operations will be needed to meet our mission
requirements. Operating in the Arctic region presents challenges to
personnel, equipment, and tactics. What would be normal cutter, boat,
or aircraft operations almost anywhere else become more risky and
complex. The climate can be one of extremes many months of the year,
with continuous sub-zero temperatures and more hurricane-force storms
each year than in the Caribbean. It's hard on equipment: Industrial
fluids freeze, metal becomes brittle, and electronic parts fail. It's
also hard on people, who must acclimate to exaggerated daylight and
darkness, harsh weather conditions, limited services, and isolation
from family.
One of the most significant challenges is the lack of Coast Guard
infrastructure in key locations along the northern Alaskan coastline
that will be needed to sustain even basic shore-based operations. Today
we rely on partner agencies and industry to support any sustained
operations. Cutters, aircraft, boats, vehicles, and people require
constant mission support and logistics. We are already exploring
requirements to establish temporary forward-operating bases on the
North Slope to support shore-based operations, enabling temporary crews
and equipment to deploy to support a specific operation, and then
return to home station when complete.
We have been improving our understanding by increasing operations.
We conduct regular Arctic Domain Awareness flights by long-range
maritime-patrol aircraft along the North Slope and over the Arctic
Ocean, assessing aircraft endurance and performance and monitoring
maritime activity. Since 2008, we have conducted Operation Arctic
Crossroads, deploying personnel, boats, and aircraft to small villages
on the Arctic coast such as Barrow, Kotzebue, and Nome. While there, we
test boats for usability at these high latitudes and conduct flight
operations. We also work closely with the Army and Air National Guard
and the Public Health Service to provide medical, dental, and
veterinary care to outlying villages. In return, we learn from their
expertise about living and operating in this environment. These
services invest in deepening our partnerships with and understanding of
local peoples.
Next, we must prepare by ensuring that Coast Guard men and women
have the policy, doctrine, and training to operate safely and
effectively in the northern Arctic region. We have relearned
fundamental lessons in recent years about the need to be prepared when
taking on new operational challenges. We will train personnel beyond
qualification to proficiency to live and work for extended periods in
the extreme cold and other harsh conditions there. We will ensure
cutters, aircraft, boats, deployable specialized forces, and mission-
support personnel have the equipment, training, and support they
require to succeed.
Finally, we are working closely with other key Federal partners to
lead the interagency effort in the Arctic. The Coast Guard has
significant experience and success with speaking the interagency
language, bridging the traditional divides between military and law
enforcement at the Federal level, and synchronizing efforts between
Federal, State, local, tribal, and private-sector stakeholders.
Simultaneously a military service, a law-enforcement and regulatory
agency, and an intelligence-community member that is part of the
Department of Homeland Security, the Coast Guard is in a unique
position to exercise leadership in this emerging maritime frontier.
prevention and response
Coast Guard missions rely on the twin pillars of prevention and
response. We will take actions to prevent maritime safety, security,
and pollution incidents in the Arctic. In our regulatory role, we are
working with the Department of the Interior to review oil-spill
response plans and preparedness by the oil-and-gas and maritime
industries prior to exploration activities, especially on the outer
continental shelf. We are taking the lessons from the 2010 Deepwater
Horizon disaster to ensure that type of incident does not happen again,
especially in the Arctic. We regulate U.S. mariners and inspect vessel-
and facility-security plans. When a marine casualty does occur, we will
investigate and take appropriate action to prevent it from happening
again.
As a law-enforcement agency, we will provide security in the ports,
coastal areas, and exclusive economic zone to enforce U.S. laws
governing fisheries and pollution, while ensuring the security of
lawfully permitted activities, including energy exploration, in the
region. We will deploy cutters, boats, aircraft, and deployable
specialized forces--maritime safety-and-security teams, strike teams,
dive teams--when the mission demands.
As a military service, we will enforce U.S. sovereignty where
necessary, ensuring freedom of navigation and maritime homeland
security. The Healy --our only operational icebreaker--and other ice-
strengthened cutters will patrol where they can safely operate to
provide persistent presence on the high seas and maritime approaches to
the United States.
We are developing and will execute starting summer 2012 an Arctic
Maritime Campaign with the objective of establishing a path forward for
the Coast Guard to meet our responsibilities to the nation in the
Arctic. This campaign will:
--Define the required mission activities for the Coast Guard in the
northern Arctic region;
--Determine capabilities (personnel, equipment, facilities) necessary
to plan, execute, and support operations there;
--Identify available resources for the mission and resource gaps;
--Fully prepare our service and Coast Guard personnel to safely and
effectively operate there.
Initially, the Arctic Maritime Campaign will be a Coast Guard plan
for service operations in coordination with other partners--a basic
first step for any mission. From there, we will work to improve
interagency coordination as activities and operations increase.
My years at sea taught me many life lessons; chief among those is
vigilance, the art of keeping a weather eye on emerging challenges so
that the service can adequately prepare and take early and effective
action to prevent and respond to trouble. As I scan the horizon, one
area demanding our immediate attention is the Arctic. America is a
maritime nation and an Arctic nation. We must recognize this reality
and act accordingly. The Coast Guard is working to do its part. For
more than 221 years, we have overseen the safety, security, and
stewardship of our nation's waters. Our challenge today is to ensure we
are prepared with a Coast Guard capable and ready to meet our
responsibilities in the emerging maritime frontier of the Arctic.
deg.Senator Landrieu. I welcome the Coast Guard men and
women, citizens of Kodiak, and others who were able to join us
today.
Any given year, the Coast Guard saves approximately 3,800
lives. It removed, last year, 166,000 pounds of cocaine in
transit to the United States. It interdicted more than 2,500
undocumented migrants attempting illegally to enter the
country, and conducted more than 1,700 boardings of high-
interest vessels bound for the United States.
Even more impressively, in an average month in Alaska, the
Coast Guard conducts 51 search-and-rescue cases, conducts 161
vessel boardings, saves or assists 74 people, services 59 aids
to navigation, and responds and investigates at least 10
pollution incidents, and monitors the transit of 25 tankers
carrying more than 700 million gallons of oil safely through
Prince William Sound, and ensures that more than 1.38 million
pounds of explosives are safely transported through Alaska's
maritime transportation network.
Just an average day at work for the thousand men and women
that wear the uniform proudly and support Alaska, our Nation,
and the world.
As I said, I am so pleased to join my dear friend and
colleague and partner, Senator Lisa Murkowski. We not only
serve on Homeland Security together, but we have served for
many years on the Energy Committee together, and are excited
about our adventures and opportunities in exploring resources
for this Nation.
But we are here today to discuss Coast Guard operations in
Alaska, the strategic importance of the Arctic, and the
challenges facing the Coast Guard in this region.
Approximately 2,500 Coast Guard personnel support
operations in Alaska, which encompasses 3.8 million square
miles and more than 44,000 miles of coastline.
Much of the Alaskan way of life occurs on the water. At
times, this environment can be harsh and unforgiving. That's
what makes it so important, I believe, for our subcommittee and
others in the Congress to support the work of the Coast Guard
here on the ground.
Their many missions include fisheries enforcement, search
and rescue, port security, and environmental response, and I
would like to believe, in partnership with the oil and gas
industry, oversight, yes; enforcement, yes; but a real
partnership with the private sector to deliver the resources
essential for our Nation.
Not only has Senator Murkowski been a leading advocate, but
Senator Begich, who is not with us today at the hearing but is
at work in Alaska with other officials, touring another part of
the State.
We are pleased to have on our first panel Admiral Papp,
Commandant of the Coast Guard. Our second panel, chosen by
Senator Murkowski, is Dr. Mark Myers, vice chancellor for
research at the University of Fairbanks; Merrick Burden,
executive director of the Marine Conservation Alliance; and
Bruce Harland, vice president, contract services, Crowley
Marine. We are thrilled to have you all, and we'll call on you
in just a moment, after our opening statements.
The work of the Coast Guard, or the work the Coast Guard
does in Alaska, is not unfamiliar to us in Louisiana. We, too,
have a very large Coast Guard, very vibrant fishery, and
extraordinarily robust oil and gas drilling off of our coast.
In fact, 80 percent of the offshore oil and gas resources of
the Nation come off the coast of Louisiana, Texas, Mississippi,
and Alabama.
So these assets and these challenges are very, very
familiar to me.
I would be remiss, Senator Murkowski, if I did not mention
the special place the Coast Guard holds in my heart and in the
hearts of the 4.5 million Louisianans that I represent, and 10
million people along the gulf coast, because, Admiral, as you
know, the Coast Guard was first on the job after Hurricanes
Katrina and Rita, and rescued, at that time, 33,000 people, not
over open water, where the Coast Guard had trained, but flying
in and out of tall buildings, over and under electrical lines,
literally rescuing people out of 14- and 20-foot floodwaters in
the middle of the city. What an amazing vision for the Coast
Guard, and they carried it out beautifully.
Admiral, the people of Louisiana will always be grateful
for the heroic efforts of the Coast Guard, along with our Cajun
navy, as we say, and coasties, too, to help you in that effort.
Let me hit just a few other highlights of the fiscal year
2013 appropriations bill that Senator Murkowski helped me
draft. With her help and input, we have been able to plus-up
some of the Coast Guard assets, even in tight budget times. She
and I believe that we need to direct more of the limited
resources we have to support this arm of our military.
With her help, our bill will include $10.36 billion for the
Coast Guard, $282 million above the President's request. The
bill provides targeted increases above the request to ensure
Coast Guard personnel serving on the front line have the
resources they need to accomplish these important missions.
Some of the benefits that will come directly to the Nation and
Alaska include: $620 million for the sixth national security
cutter (NSC); $77 million for long-lead materials for the
seventh NSC; $335 million for six fast response cutters (FRCs),
two of which will be homeported here in Alaska; $25 million for
the continued development of the offshore patrol cutter (OPC);
$8 million for initial acquisition planning and design of a new
polar icebreaker, a priority to both Senator Murkowski and
myself. I'm sure she'll speak more about this in the coming
minutes.
And, $10 million is for military family housing. I want to
give Admiral Papp a shout-out for his advocacy for housing
issues, and particularly Linda Papp for her extraordinary
advocacy on behalf of the Coast Guard families that live in
very rural areas sometimes in our country, and don't have
access to all of the bells and whistles, Senator, that some of
our other communities enjoy. Housing is important for them, to
have that kind of comfort and quality of life, not luxurious,
but comforting for themselves and their children. As a mother
and a wife, she most certainly understands that, and so do we.
So we are really focused on upgrading the housing for our
military, and hope we can report some good results.
We have $69 million for construction and upgrades of shore
facilities; $5 million to renovate the aircraft hangar in Cold
Bay right here in Alaska; and $1.1 million for new fuel tanks
in Sitkinak; $8 million to slow the retirement of one of our
high endurance cutters (WHECs). I could go on.
These are just some of examples of what we have invested in
this budget, as soon as we can get it passed for the Coast
Guard this year.
A specific focus of ours today, in trying to conclude here,
is the diminishing ice, or the retreating ice in the Arctic,
and resulting implications for the Coast Guard's
responsibilities, and the assets needed to respond.
Scientists predict that the Arctic will be ice-free in the
summer months by late 2030. This is truly an extraordinary
change on our planet, and we must be ready for it.
Rarely used shipping routes, such as the Northwest Passage,
the Northern Sea Route, will likely be used more frequently.
Exploration for natural resources is expected to intensify.
The United States Geological Survey estimates that the
Arctic accounts for about 13 percent of the world's
undiscovered oil, and 30 percent of its undiscovered natural
gas.
The Commandant has been vocal about the trend of
diminishing ice and what it means for the Coast Guard. I
referred to the article he wrote. Let me quote again. He says:
``This change from `hard' to `soft' water, growing economic
interest and energy demands, and increasing use of the seas for
maritime activities by commercial, native, and recreational
users demand a persistent, capable U.S. Coast Guard presence in
the Arctic region. Our mandate to protect people on the sea,
protect people from threats delivered by the sea, and protect
the sea itself applies in the Arctic equally as well as the
Atlantic, Pacific Oceans and the Gulf of Mexico and the
Caribbean Sea.''
Unfortunately, today, two of our Coast Guard's three polar
icebreakers, the Polar Star and the Polar Sea, have well
exceeded their intended 30-year service lives and are not
currently operational.
The Polar Star is being refurbished to reenter service in
2013 for another 7 to 10 years. The Coast Guard plans to
decommission the Polar Sea.
We all saw the importance of the Coast Guard's icebreaking
capabilities this past winter when one of the active
icebreakers, the Healy, which I am so proud was built by the
strong and wonderful people in Avondale shipyards in my
hometown of New Orleans, Louisiana, broke through the ice to
deliver fuel to the people of Nome. Louisiana and Alaska have
very strong partnerships, and I am so pleased that that ship
was built at home in my State.
Many comprehensive studies of icebreaker requirements have
been conducted over the years. All have concluded that a polar
icebreaking fleet is essential to the national interest.
PREPARED STATEMENT
I want to thank Senator Murkowski for her tireless efforts
advocating for the polar fleet, reminding us that we are an
Arctic Nation. I'm very happy to turn the mike over to Senator
Murkowski for her opening statement, and want to commit to
her--she has heard me say this in Washington, but I wanted to
come to Alaska to say it, that I want to be a partner with her
to develop assets that our Nation needs to stay first in global
competition, first in commercial, and first in proper natural
resource development. Alaska is really that frontier and so is
the Arctic.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Senator Mary L. Landrieu
Good morning. I call the subcommittee to order.
I welcome the Coast Guard men and women, citizens of Kodiak, and
others who were able to join us today. Saturday was the Coast Guard's
222nd birthday, so I want to wish everyone in the Coast Guard a belated
happy birthday. In 2011, the Coast Guard saved over 3,800 lives,
removed over 166,000 pounds of cocaine in transit to the United States,
interdicted over 2,500 undocumented migrants attempting to illegally
enter the country, and conducted over 1,700 boardings of high interest
vessels bound for the United States. In an average month in Alaska, the
Coast Guard conducts 51 search-and-rescue cases; conducts 161 vessel
boardings; saves or assists 74 people; services 59 aids to navigation;
responds and investigates 10 pollution incidents; monitors the transits
of 25 tankers carrying more than 700 million gallons of oil safely
through Prince William Sound, and ensures that more than 1.38 million
pounds of explosives are safely transported through Alaska's maritime
transportation network.
I am pleased to join my friend and colleague, Senator Lisa
Murkowski, to discuss Coast Guard operations in Alaska, the strategic
importance of the Arctic, and the challenges facing the Coast Guard in
the region. Approximately 2,500 Coast Guard personnel support
operations in Alaska, which encompasses 3.85 million square miles and
more than 44,000 miles of coastline. Much of the Alaskan way of life
occurs on the water, and the harsh and unforgiving environment makes it
critical that our Coast Guard men and women have the resources to
perform their many missions here, including: fisheries enforcement,
search and rescue, port security, and environmental response. We are
joined today by two panels of distinguished witnesses to discuss these
matters.
Our first panel includes:
--Admiral Robert J. Papp, Commandant of the Coast Guard; and
Our second panel includes:
--Dr. Mark Myers, Vice Chancellor for Research, University of
Fairbanks;
--Merrick Burden, Executive Director, Marine Conservation Alliance;
and
--Bruce Harland, Vice President--Contract Services, Crowley Marine.
The Coast Guard will forever be in my heart and in the hearts of my
Louisiana constituents in light of its heroic efforts following
Hurricane Katrina. The Coast Guard rescued over 33,000 of our citizens
during the largest search and rescue mission in Coast Guard history.
When Katrina hit, Admiral Papp was the Commander of the Ninth Coast
Guard District, an area that covers the Great Lakes. To help in the
response effort, he ordered the deployment of several hundred personnel
under his command to the gulf region. I am forever grateful to him and
the Coast Guard men and women who helped aid those in need following
the hurricane.
In May of this year, Admiral Papp testified before this
subcommittee on the Coast Guard's budget request for fiscal year 2013.
At that hearing, we were able to discuss some of the challenges facing
the Coast Guard, including the need to recapitalize its aging fleet of
ships and planes. That hearing helped the Senate Homeland Security
Appropriations Subcommittee make key funding decisions for the Coast
Guard's fiscal year 2013 budget. With the help of Senator Murkowski,
the fiscal year 2013 Senate appropriations bill includes $10.336
billion for the Coast Guard, $282 million above the administration's
request. The bill provides targeted increases above the request to
ensure that Coast Guard personnel serving on the front lines have the
resources to accomplish their missions in fiscal year 2013 and in the
future. Specific investments that will benefit the Nation and Alaska
include:
--$620 million for the sixth national security cutter;
--$77 million for long-lead material for the seventh national
security cutter;
--$335 million for six fast response cutters, two of which are
expected to be homeported in Alaska;
--$25 million for the continued development of the offshore patrol
cutter;
--$8 million for initial acquisition planning and design of a new
polar icebreaker;
--$10 million for military family housing;
--$3.1 million for 26 billets to enhance oil spill response
capabilities; and
--$69 million for construction and upgrades of shore facilities,
including $5 million to renovate an aircraft hangar in Cold Bay
and $1.1 million for new fuel tanks in Sitkinak (pronounced
``sit-ki-nak'');
--$8 million to slow the retirement of one 378 foot high endurance
cutter until it can be replaced.
A specific focus of mine today will be on the diminishing ice in
the Arctic, the resulting implications on Coast Guard responsibilities,
and the assets needed to respond. Scientists predict that the Arctic
will be ice-free in the summer months by the late 2030s. Rarely used
shipping routes, such as the Northwest Passage and Northern Sea Route,
will likely be used more frequently. Exploration for natural resources
is expected to intensify--the United States Geological Survey estimates
that the Arctic accounts for about 13 percent of the world's
undiscovered oil and 30 percent of its undiscovered natural gas.
The Commandant has been vocal about the trend of diminishing ice
and what it means for the Coast Guard. In an article he wrote earlier
this year for the U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings Magazine, entitled
``The Emerging Arctic Frontier'', he said:
``This change from `hard' to `soft' water, growing economic
interests and energy demands, and increasing use of the seas for
maritime activities by commercial, native, and recreational users
demands a persistent, capable U.S. Coast Guard presence in the Arctic
region. Our mandate to protect people on the sea, protect people from
threats delivered by sea, and protect the sea itself applies in the
Arctic equally as in the Atlantic and Pacific oceans and Gulf of Mexico
and Caribbean Sea.''
Unfortunately today, two of the Coast Guard's three polar
icebreakers, the Polar Star and Polar Sea, have exceeded their intended
30-year service lives and are currently not operational. The Polar Star
is being refurbished to re-enter service in 2013 for another 7-10 years
and the Coast Guard plans to decommission the Polar Sea. We all saw the
importance of the Coast Guard's icebreaking capabilities this past
winter when the one active icebreaker, the Healy, which was built by
Avondale Shipyards in Louisiana, broke ice to help deliver fuel to the
people of Nome.
Many comprehensive studies of icebreaker requirements have been
conducted over the years and all have concluded that a polar
icebreaking fleet is essential to the national interest. The most
recent study, commissioned by the Coast Guard and completed in 2010,
concluded that a minimum of six icebreakers, three heavy and three
medium, are required to fulfill Coast Guard statutory missions.
However, while other countries like Russia and Canada are quickly
building icebreakers to increase their presence in the Arctic, the
United States has been slow to respond. The alarm has sounded, but we
keep hitting the snooze button.
Senator Murkowski and I discussed the need for new icebreakers at
our budget hearing with the Commandant in May, and I want to continue
that conversation today.
I want to thank Senator Murkowski for inviting me to Alaska to
chair this field hearing and thank the Coast Guard for providing us
with such a dramatic location here at Air Station Kodiak. I now
recognize Senator Murkowski for an opening statement before turning to
our witnesses for their testimonies.
Senator Landrieu. Senator Murkowski.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR LISA MURKOWSKI
Senator Murkowski. Senator Landrieu, thank you, first, for
your commitment to come to Alaska to see and understand a
little bit more about the role that the Coast Guard plays in
our northern waters.
In my time in the United States Senate, I can honestly say
that there is no other colleague in the Senate that has more of
a commitment and a passion to our Coast Guard than you, perhaps
maybe me. But between the two of us, I think it is recognized
that there is a level of advocacy and a commitment and a care
for the men and women of the Coast Guard.
So to be able to share some time in this hangar today,
discussing what can be done to help those who are serving, and
serving sometimes in some somewhat adverse conditions, giving
them the assets, the training, and truly the attention that
they need, this is something that I want to continue our work
together.
Your leadership has been critical, absolutely critical, in
advancing some of the platforms that we need, some of the
issues you mentioned, the housing, but the priority that you
have placed on it is greatly, greatly appreciated.
And I appreciate the fact that you have come to Alaska. It
is not easy to get here from Louisiana. And to come out to
Kodiak here today and spend a couple days within the State is
greatly appreciated. We recognize that time is valuable, and
the time that you spend away from your constituents to come and
understand others is greatly appreciated.
I want to also welcome you, Admiral Papp. It is indeed an
honor and a pleasure to have you back here at Air Station
Kodiak. I think this is the third summer now that you have made
that commitment to come to Alaska to visit, to speak personally
with, to observe, to better understand, and to truly lead. And
your leadership is greatly appreciated.
I also appreciate the commitment you have given to the role
here in the Arctic, and your leadership has truly made a
difference.
I also want to recognize Admiral Ostebo, who is sitting
behind you. Admiral Ostebo is head of the 17th District here,
and he's doing a fine job for us. We appreciate your leadership
as well, sir.
I also want to recognize Linda Papp. Ever ready, always
working, and speaking strongly for the Coast Guard families,
which is greatly, greatly appreciated.
And I do want to recognize some of the local officials that
are here. Mayor Jerome Selby, Mayor Pat Branson, we have
Representative Alan Austerman, some other folks from the
community, I appreciate you being here.
I think it is significant, Senator Landrieu, that we're
sitting in this hangar. The last time I was here, I was able to
greet some of the crewmen who had just concluded several pretty
fantastic rescues. We have, again, some adverse conditions that
we deal with, but the role that the Coast Guard plays here in
Alaska from a search-and-rescue perspective is something that
is, quote, ``made-for-TV''. And in fact, you do see it on TV.
But it is the everyday role of these everyday heroes that
are truly making a difference in the lives of Alaskans. So to
be back in this hangar with so many is important.
As you look around the room, those frames that you see up
there are from vessels that have gone down, and the Coast Guard
has played a role--the name over there, you can't see the full
name. The Selendang Ayu was a pretty tough tragedy here in
Alaska. So some of the history around the walls is worth
noting.
I do hope that as we leave this field hearing this morning,
not only Senator Landrieu gets a little bit deeper appreciation
of the role that the Coast Guard is playing, but how the other
stepped-up activities in our northern waters is putting a level
of responsibility on our Coast Guard.
We're going to be hearing from Mark Myers with the
University of Alaska about some of the changes on the ground,
in the water, that we are seeing. Our other witnesses that are
here today will speak to the commercial shipping interest that
they're seeing, the level of activity that we're seeing in our
northern waters that, again, puts the Coast Guard operations
here in Alaska at a different level, beyond the protecting
lives and property that we might see down here, but the
position of enforcing our fisheries, preserving our living
marine resources, promoting our national security, all
exceptionally important within the mission.
Now, I believe that the Commandant will describe in more
detail the 17th District area of responsibility stretches from
the North Pacific Ocean to the Arctic Ocean and everything in
between. It is a lot of water. It is one of the biggest areas
of responsibility within the Coast Guard.
And along with the operational challenges that the Coast
Guard currently faces, the future opening of the Arctic and
increased activity that the Coast Guard currently faces in that
area, I think we recognize there are challenges there. We
appreciate that.
But these challenges must be met by the administration with
adequate budgeting for the resources necessary to get the job
done. And it's tough to be talking about budgeting back in
Washington, DC, right now, because things are tough and tight.
We recognize that. But I think we also recognize that we cannot
shirk from that responsibility and the requirements that are
out there.
Legacy Coast Guard assets in this State are aging. The
current acquisition timeline leaves Alaska pretty far down the
list for replacement of lost assets.
In the last few years, we have seen the decommissioning of
the Acushnet. This was a medium endurance cutter (WMEC) with 67
years of service. It was homeported down in Ketchikan. The
Acushnet patrolled the North Pacific and the Bering Sea. It
could stay underway for weeks at a time.
Now the replacement for the Acushnet is going to be one of
the FRCs that you mentioned, Senator Landrieu.
This is going to arrive in service in 2014, so we have a
gap there. Another issue with the FRC is it will stay underway
for only 5 days, which is the equivalent of our legacy patrol
boats.
So while the FRC will be a stop gap solution until the OPCs
are in service, it will be years before an OPC is eventually
homeported here in the State.
In the meantime, our only WHEC, which is the Munro, which
is stationed here in Kodiak, is quickly exceeding its useful
life. It was commissioned back in 1971.
The Munro has the ability to spend up to 30 days at sea. It
was fairly recently brought to Alaska, back in 2007 from
Alameda, California. Before then, we did not have a WHEC.
In 2008, the Munro served a vital role in rescuing 20 souls
from the sinking of the Alaska Ranger fishing vessel. Again, a
pretty remarkable story.
But unfortunately, in the not too distant future, I worry
that we may again be without a WHEC, and multimission
responsibilities here in District 17 could overwhelm the
Alaska-based assets. The Bertholf, which we will have an
opportunity to see tomorrow, one of the NSCs that will replace
the WHECs, will continue to patrol the North Pacific and the
Bering, but it's going to do so from Alameda, California.
I am concerned about all of this because there was a recent
Government Accountability Office (GAO) report found that
reduced operational capacity of the WHECs has hindered mission
performance. The report says that WHECs and the replacement
NSCs are the only vessels in the Coast Guard capable of safely
launching and recovering small boats and aircraft in the Bering
Sea.
Now, it takes about 24 days roundtrip for the Bertholf to
travel the 3,000 nautical miles from Alameda to here in Kodiak.
That is 24 days that could be spent underway in the Bering Sea.
So I do have concerns, and I think it is appropriate to
express them.
Recently, the North Pacific Fishery Management Council met
here in Kodiak, and it came to their attention the District 17
is facing a 19-percent reduction this summer in the available
major cutter days for fisheries law enforcement. The council is
concerned with this reduction in cutter days because of the
vital importance that the Coast Guard plays in enforcing the
domestic fishing regulations and the international treaties.
This is including the enforcement of the maritime boundary and
the high seas driftnet violations.
We had an opportunity to talk about the challenges that we
face, the limited capacity that we have, and truly so many of
the issues that are out there.
But even without this reduction in cutter days, the Coast
Guard already faces operational challenges of enforcing in this
vast Bering Sea. Ten percent of this area within the Bering Sea
is what they call a doughnut hole of international waters,
where you have foreign factory trawlers who are quite often
illegally overfishing.
I believe the case is clear that America needs an NSC
homeported here in Kodiak when the Munro is decommissioned.
Now finally, and you touched on this briefly, Madam
Chairman, this is the need, the desperate need, for icebreaking
capacity.
We saw last year how important it is to have polar
icebreaking capacity to respond to mission needs. It was
reported everywhere from the New York Times to the local radio
station here the heroic efforts of the cutter Healy as she
provided a path for the Renda to bring much-needed fuel to the
community of Nome and the surrounding villages in northwestern
Alaska.
I think you are certainly aware, the Commandant is aware,
of where we all stand on meeting additional icebreaking
capacity, so I'm not going to take any more time here today,
except to say that I am pleased that the administration has
finally begun budgeting for a new polar icebreaker. I think we
recognize it is far less than we all want, but we need to be
working together to continue in the fiscal year 2014 budget a
request for this critically important need.
As I convey my comments, I recognize that it may appear
that I am not satisfied with what I have here in District 17,
with the assets. I am grateful for the Coast Guard, the men and
women, and the presence of all that you do. But I also
recognize that we ask an extraordinary amount of the men and
women who serve us. And we have an obligation to provide you
with those assets that allow you to do the job, do it well, and
do it safely, so that you return home to your families.
And I worry. I worry because that water is big and deep and
broad, and many, many, many times dangerous. Whether you're on
the sea or whether you are in a helo in the air plucking
fishermen out of waves that are 20 feet high and gales that are
blasting, we put you in harm's way, and we have an obligation
to ensure that you have the assets to do what you do so
honorably.
So I look forward to working with my colleague, and with
you, Admiral, and with so many of our leaders.
And again I thank the Senator for her time and attention
here in Alaska.
Senator Landrieu. Thank you, Senator.
And, Admiral, we will go right into your opening statement.
STATEMENT OF ADMIRAL ROBERT J. PAPP, COMMANDANT, U.S.
COAST GUARD
Admiral Papp. Good morning, Madam Chair, Senator Murkowski.
It is great to be back in Alaska. I think I have visited Alaska
and the 17th Coast Guard District more often than any other
location in our Coast Guard, and that is because of the
importance of what we do up here, how vital the Coast Guard is
to Alaska and the Arctic. And also, it is a very challenging
operation area as well, and I want to stay in touch with what
our people are doing up here, the challenges they are facing,
and their needs.
So I'm deeply appreciative to this subcommittee for its
strong show of support through the budget process to make sure
that our Coast Guard people are getting what they need. I also
want to thank you for giving focus to Alaska and the Arctic,
but more importantly, for your continuing support to our
hardworking Coast Guard people.
I've stated before it is my highest honor to be able to
work with them, to lead them, and to represent them.
And I also want to thank Captain Jerry Woloszynski, who is
the base commander here, and Captain Melissa Rivera, who is the
new air station commanding officer, for their support to put on
this hearing today, and all my fellow coasties that are up here
who have worked so hard in displaying the hospitality to all of
us as we are visiting.
I appreciate the opportunity to speak with you today and
the chance this week to show you those hardworking men and
women in action. It is important to see and hear firsthand,
just like I have done over the last three summers, what it is
like to live and serve in one of our most extreme and
challenging areas of Coast Guard operations.
I started out this weekend, and it has been a great Coast
Guard birthday. I started out by going to Florida, where I
presided at the commissioning of our newest patrol boat, the
Richard Etheridge, produced in the great State of Louisiana,
and then flew up immediately to Ketchikan, Alaska, where we had
a chance to spend part of our Coast Guard birthday and attend
the Blueberry Festival before proceeding over here and spending
some of Coast Guard Day with our people here at Kodiak.
We have, of course, traveled yesterday up to Barrow, so we
could observe Coast Guard operations in the difficult
conditions that we find 300 miles north of the Arctic Circle,
and observe some of our people who are involved in Operation
Arctic Shield, which is showing and demonstrating our expanding
work up there, and demonstrating why it is so important for us
to be there.
During this 9-month operation, we have deployed the NSC,
the Bertholf, and we are also celebrating Bertholf's
commissioning of 4 years ago this week, and we will get a
chance to see her and her crew in operation.
I can report that our Coast Guard is on station and ready
to meet today's traditional mission demands, like protecting
Alaska's $3.1 billion fisheries industry, while we also prepare
for the future.
Activity in the most remote reaches of Alaska continues to
evolve and grow, including planned drilling operations in the
Chukchi Sea and the Beaufort Sea. Foreign tankers will be using
the Northern Sea routes, which transit through the Bering
Strait and into the Bering Sea, and cruise liners will continue
to press even further into the Arctic.
We must continue to work to refine our ability to provide
and then support a persistent operational presence during this
period of increased human activity or environmental risk.
And that is why Operation Arctic Shield is so important to
us. During this 9-month operation, we'll be deploying the
Bertholf, as I said, and two of our 225-foot oceangoing, ice-
capable buoy tenders. We have also forward deployed two of our
H-60 helicopters to Barrow and will test and deploy the spilled
oil recovery system for the first time north of the Arctic
Circle, and will continue to examine the requirements to
protect living marine resources in the higher latitudes.
We will also continue to evaluate the best methods by which
to manage the waterways in the area.
Given the challenges of operating in this region, we know
we can't do it all by ourselves. This takes a whole-of-
government approach, and we're working very closely with other
Federal agencies, and State, local, and tribal partners.
We must also carefully consider the resource requirements
needed to sustain operations in this environment.
I'm reminded of our earliest days of operations in Alaska.
I'm a student of history, and in the late 1800s, in fact
starting in 1867, when our first cutters came up to Alaska,
they plied these waters most often under sail, but they also
had coal-fired engines.
We didn't have a lot of infrastructure up here, and we even
have historic records that show our crews going ashore in
Unalaska and mining coal so they could keep their ships going.
So while we didn't have permanent infrastructure, over
time, because of the increased demand of deploying cutters up
here, a coaling station was built in Dutch Harbor on the island
of Unalaska and served for many years and still serves as a
place for logistic support for our cutters operating in the
Bering Sea.
So we still have limited infrastructure in Alaska today,
but we have an advantage over our predecessor cutters that were
up in our early history. We now have remarkably capable cutters
able to operate offshore with greater endurance and autonomy.
Thanks to your continuing support and that of the
administration, we are currently building a very capable
offshore infrastructure, our NSCs. They don't rely upon a
supply of coal to operate and conduct these missions. And in
fact, these cutters can carry all the supplies they need to
provide a sustained presence, and they can carry and launch
both small boats and helicopters to conduct the full range of
Coast Guard missions, and also can provide a robust suite of
command and control communications capabilities.
That is why the completion of the NSC fleet is critical to
our ability to continue to meet our mission demands in this
area, and why it has continuously been my No. 1 priority for
our acquisitions money.
And of course, you will see the Bertholf on Tuesday, and
you will get a chance to experience firsthand why her
tremendous capabilities are in such need up here in the Bering
Sea.
Additionally, with the support of the Congress and the
administration, we are also making smart investments now with
the fiscal year 2013 budget to ensure we are ready to operate
effectively in the Arctic in the future. The fiscal year 2013
budget provides funding to expand and upgrade the aviation
facilities at Cold Bay, which you will also see this week. And
it also initiates the acquisition of a new polar-class
icebreaker.
The budget also provides for operational funding for our
medium polar icebreaker Healy, and it reactivates the Polar
Star, so we can get her back into service in 2013.
We remain committed to Alaska, as borne out by our
investments for the future and our operations today, and our
presence here each summer to make sure we are providing the
type of resources that our people need to operate in this
environment.
And finally, I can't forget our hardworking coastguardsmen
and their families who serve here, many in remote locations.
I thank you for recognizing Linda, both of you. She has
been working very hard, and I am very proud of her, because she
is focused on housing concerns and childcare services for our
families.
Just during this trip alone, she has met with housing
officers here and in Ketchikan, and I'm very proud to report
that in Cordova, as you know, we recently constructed 26 brand-
new homes for our people to alleviate a housing shortage there.
I'm committed to providing for the needs of the 1,600 Coast
Guard active-duty families stationed throughout Alaska, and we
appreciate your continued support, along with the
administration, in making the welfare of our military families
a top priority.
In the Coast Guard, we work as a crew, but we serve as a
family. We will continue to find that balance between
maintaining our operations, recapitalizing our fleet and our
infrastructure, and ensuring the needs of our Coast Guard
families are being met. So it is with deep appreciation that I
thank you for putting a spotlight on those needs, so we can
continue to work together to make sure our Coast Guard people
are getting the tools they need.
PREPARED STATEMENT
So I thank you for the opportunity. I look forward to your
questions.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Admiral Robert J. Papp
Chairman Landrieu, Ranking Member Coats, and distinguished members
of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I
am honored to join you in Alaska to discuss the Coast Guard's Arctic
responsibilities and operations. This summer we are preparing for
Arctic activity driven by the oil industry's planned drilling
operations in the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas. Partnering closely with
Federal, State, local, and tribal government partners, and working with
industry as the regulated parties, the Coast Guard is ready for
operations this summer in the Arctic with Operation Arctic Shield. The
lessons we learn this year will inform our planning and strategy, to
ensure we remain always ready to ensure the safety, security and
stewardship of the emerging maritime frontier of the Arctic.
operation arctic shield 2012
Arctic Shield 2012 is a three-pronged interagency operation in
Alaska's coastal Arctic domain consisting of outreach, operations, and
assessment of capabilities from February through October 2012. Outreach
is comprised of delivering education, awareness and health services for
Arctic communities and outlying native villages. Operations involve
deployment of major cutter forces, air assets, communication equipment,
and mission support to conduct the Coast Guard's missions. Assessment
of capabilities involves an analysis of our front-line operations and
mission support assets in Arctic conditions. Additionally, an oil spill
contingency exercise in Barrow, Alaska, will test Coast Guard and Navy
skimming equipment launched from a 225-foot Coast Guard buoy tender.
Arctic Shield 2012 has been carefully tailored to deliver the
appropriate set of capabilities to this remote area. I am very proud of
our team in the 17th Coast Guard District for bringing the Arctic
Shield plan to fruition.
The following unclassified schematic outlines our planned force lay
down for Arctic Shield 2012. The graphic demonstrates our key
challenge--moving Coast Guard resources from our long-established bases
in south Alaska to the emerging frontier of northern Alaska.
For the first time, we have two MH-60 helicopters in Barrow
standing the watch and ready to respond. This means that, readiness and
weather permitting, we can meet a 30-minute launch window for imminent
missions such as search and rescue, environmental protection and law
enforcement. The following photo shows the MH-60s in their leased
hangar in Barrow.
We have deployed USCGC Bertholf, the first National Security
Cutter, to the southern Arctic region, providing persistent operational
presence, and command and control, in areas where we lack the permanent
infrastructure of a coastal Sector. We have also deployed two light-ice
capable 225-foot ocean-going buoy tenders to increase offshore
operational capability in the region.
the coast guard in alaska and the arctic region
The Coast Guard has been operating in the Arctic Ocean since 1867,
when Alaska was just a territory. Then, as now, our mission is to
assist scientific exploration, chart the waters, provide humanitarian
assistance to native tribes, conduct search and rescue, and enforce
U.S. laws and regulations.
In Alaska, Coast Guard aircraft and vessels monitor more than
950,000 square miles off the Alaskan coast to enforce U.S. laws. We
patrol an even larger area of the north Pacific Ocean to stop large-
scale high seas drift netting and other illegal fishing practices,
including foreign incursions into the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone. We
also conduct maritime safety and environmental protection missions in
the region.
To protect the Arctic environment, we are engaging industry and the
private sector to address their significant responsibilities for
pollution prevention, preparedness, and response. Recognizing that
pollution response is significantly more difficult in cold, ice, and
darkness, enhancing preventative measures is critical. Those engaging
in offshore commercial activity in the Arctic must also plan and
prepare for emergency response in the face of a harsh environment, long
transit distances for air and surface assets, and limited response
resources. We continue to work to improve awareness, contingency
planning, and communications. We are also actively participating in the
Department of Interior-led interagency working group on Coordination of
Domestic Energy Development and Permitting in Alaska, (established by
Executive Order 13580), to synchronize the efforts of Federal agencies
responsible for overseeing the safe and responsible development of
Alaska's onshore and offshore energy.
While prevention is critical, the Coast Guard must be able to
manage the response to pollution incidents where responsible parties
are not known or fail to adequately respond. In 2010, we deployed an
emergency vessel towing system north of the Arctic Circle. We have also
exercised the Vessel of Opportunity Skimming System (VOSS) and the
Spilled Oil Recovery System (SORS) in Alaskan waters, but we have yet
to conduct exercises north of the Arctic Circle. Both of these systems
enable vessels to collect oil in the event of a discharge, however,
these systems have limited capacity and are only effective in ice-free
conditions. We plan on again testing and deploying the SORS in the
vicinity of Barrow in a Field Training Exercise this summer during
Arctic Shield 2012.
Fisheries are also a major concern. The National Marine Fisheries
Service, based upon a recommendation from the North Pacific Fisheries
Management Council, has imposed a moratorium on fishing within the U.S.
Exclusive Economic Zone north of the Bering Strait until an assessment
of the practicality of sustained commercial fishing is completed. The
Coast Guard will continue to carry out its mission to enforce and
protect living marine resources in the high latitudes.
We are employing our Waterways Analysis and Management System to
assess vessel traffic density and determine the need for improved aids
to navigation and other safety requirements. We are also moving forward
with a Bering Strait Port Access Route Study, in coordination with our
international partners, which is a preliminary analysis to evaluate
vessel traffic management and appropriate ship routing measures.
The Coast Guard continues to support international and multilateral
organizations, studies, projects, and initiatives. We are actively
working with the Arctic Council, IMO and their respective working
groups. We are leading the U.S. delegation to the Arctic Council Oil
Spill Task Force that is developing an International Instrument on
Arctic Marine Oil Pollution Preparedness and Response. We are also
conducting joint contingency response exercises with Canada and we
maintain communications and working relationships with Canadian and
Russian agencies responsible for regional operations including Search
and Rescue (SAR), law enforcement and oil spill response. We maintain
bilateral response relationships with Canada and Russia, and last month
we hosted representatives from the Russian State Marine Pollution
Control Salvage and Rescue Administration (SMPCSRA) to sign an expanded
memorandum of understanding and joint contingency plan to foster closer
cooperation in oil spill response. We will continue to engage Arctic
nations, international organizations, industry, academia and Alaskan
State, local, and tribal governments to strengthen our partnerships and
inter-operability.
Our engagement with Alaska Native Tribes continues to be highly
beneficial. Our continued partnership has made our operations safer and
more successful. We are working hard to ensure tribal equities are
recognized, and that indigenous peoples and their way of life are
protected. We look forward to continuing to strengthen our partnerships
with our Alaskan Native partners.
The Coast Guard continues to push forward and assess our
capabilities to conduct operations in the Arctic. Since 2008, we set up
small, temporary Forward Operating Locations on the North Slope in
Prudhoe Bay, Nome, Barrow and Kotzebue to test our capabilities with
boats, helicopters, and Maritime Safety and Security Teams. We also
deployed our light-ice capable 225-foot ocean-going buoy tenders to
test our equipment, train our crews and increase our awareness of
activity. Additionally, each year from April to November we have flown
two sorties a month to evaluate activities in the region
Looking ahead, the Coast Guard's regional mission profile has
evolved significantly. Increasing human activity will increase the
significance and volume of maritime issues, such as freedom of
navigation, offshore resource exploration, and environmental
preservation.
the coast guard in context of national arctic policy
U.S. Arctic policy is set forth in the 2009 National Security
Presidential Directive (NSPD) 66/Homeland Security Presidential
Directive (HSPD) 25. For the past 4 years, as we are today with Arctic
Shield 2012, we have been conducting limited Arctic operations during
open water periods. However, we face many challenges. Some Arctic
operations demand specialized capabilities and personnel trained and
equipped to operate in extreme climates. Our assessments of the
Nation's requirements for operating in ice-laden waters consider
infrastructure requirements to support operations, and requirements for
personnel and equipment to operate in extreme cold and ice.
Given the scope of these challenges, we have been conducting oil-
in-ice research since 2010 to evaluate, develop, and test equipment and
techniques that can be used to successfully track and recover oil in
any ice filled waters, and have explored promising technologies, such
as heated skimmers. The Coast Guard's strategic approach is to ensure
we pursue the capabilities to perform our statutory missions so we can
ensure the Arctic is safe, secure, and environmentally sustainable.
This strategy is consistent with our Service's approach to performing
its Maritime Safety, Security and Stewardship functions.
conclusion
Arctic Shield 2012 is an appropriate plan to meet projected mission
requirements this year. Moving forward, we will continue building our
strategy using a whole-of-government approach that will inform national
dialogue and policy development for this critical region.
While there are many challenges, the increasingly open Arctic Ocean
also presents unique opportunities. We look forward to working with the
Congress on how our Coast Guard can continue to support our national
Arctic objectives, protect its fragile environment and remain Semper
Paratus--Always Ready in this new ocean.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I look forward to
your questions.
ARCTIC: COAST GUARD MISSION
Senator Landrieu. Thank you. I will start out with about 5
or 6 minutes of questions, turn it over to Senator Murkowski.
We may go through a second round, because there are some
important things we would like to get on the record.
We have all mentioned this in our opening statements, but I
would like to give you an opportunity to take 1 minute to
describe in even more detail for the subcommittee how the
retreating Arctic ice will dramatically change the Coast
Guard's responsibilities, looking into the future. The
northward migration of fish stock potentially; offshore oil
exploration sites, which you mentioned; the extraordinary
increase in commercial shipping that I think we have not really
contemplated or really fathomed how significant that could be;
and how these developments are affecting Coast Guard plans for
your budget, given the pressures on your budget, yet at the
same time this growing very new and extraordinary,
unprecedented, opening of these waters.
If you could just hit a few more details on that, so that
we can try to grasp the real needs that you have.
Admiral Papp. Thank you, Chairman.
Many people, as I travel around the country, ask the same
question. The good thing is there is a lot of interest in the
Arctic now. I think the work of this subcommittee, the two of
you, some speaking engagements I have had, are causing people
to ask the questions now.
And when I try to relate this to a landsman, someone who is
from the interior of the country who doesn't quite understand,
is to think about if your city, or your county, or your parish
incorporated a new portion of land or gained some additional
space and area, but you never increased your police force or
you never increased your fire department. They would take on
added responsibilities, added burdens, and they would have to
spread the existing resources a little bit thinner in order to
accomplish the mission.
So up here in the Arctic--and first of all, this country,
the United States, has the largest maritime exclusive economic
zone in the world, 3.3 million square miles of exclusive
economic zone. And fully a third of that is here in Alaska.
When the ice was covering the Arctic most of the time,
there was no human activity. We didn't have to deploy any Coast
Guard resources up there. But now during the summer months,
when we are having much more open water, soft water, as I refer
to it in the article, we have responsibilities up there. We're
the maritime law enforcement, first responder service for this
country. So we have the authorities; we have the
responsibilities; and we need to set priorities and distribute
our resources up there to take care of an emerging mission and
operation in those waters.
So, with no significant increase in our resources right
now--in fact, sort of a little bit of a budget that is reducing
some of our operational capability and capacity, what we are
doing is we are making reasoned decisions across our mission
sets and deciding where our highest priorities are.
So, obviously, our WHECs and now our NSCs are used for
fisheries, search and rescue, law enforcement, drug
interdiction, and migrant interdiction. We still have all those
responsibilities, but we are deploying resources up here in the
summertime to account for the increased human activity.
Most of the year we have one WHEC in the 17th Coast Guard
District. As we speak today, we have three under the tactical
control of Admiral Ostebo. The Rush, one of our WHECs, is
prosecuting a high-seas driftnet case, almost all the way over
to Japan right now, because they have been pursuing this
vessel.
We have the Munro, which is patrolling the maritime
boundary, protecting the fisheries in the Bering Sea.
And the Bertholf will be on her way up to the Arctic to be
up there on standby for operations that are occurring off the
North Slope.
So it is like I always tell people, the Coast Guard doesn't
have resources to do 100 percent of every mission that we have,
so what we do is we make reasoned decisions based on risk and
priorities on a daily basis, and allocate those ships and
aircraft that we do have to what we consider to be the highest
mission. And right now, the Arctic is one of our highest
missions.
ARCTIC: DRILLING BY SHELL
Senator Landrieu. Thank you. Let me put this into the
record, which I think may be shocking to people from Alaska
that were focused but maybe not as focused as we were in the
gulf when this is happening, but as you all know, in 2010, 2
years ago, the Deepwater Horizon exploded in the gulf.
Now, we drilled 40,000 deepwater wells relatively safely in
the Gulf of Mexico. I like to say, as an advocate for the
industry, but also for good environmental practices, that until
the Deepwater Horizon, there was more natural seepage of oil
into the ocean than oil ever spilled from a rig. The Deepwater
Horizon blew those numbers up and put 5 million barrels of oil
into the gulf.
It may be shocking, Senator, to think about this, but
47,000 personnel and 7,000 vessels responded to that accident.
I mean, we're sitting in the largest airbase here, and we only
have 1,000 personnel. I don't think you have nearly 7,000
vessels anywhere close. The Deepwater Horizon response had to
be done immediately.
I think the Nation has to really come to grips with the
exploration opportunities for oil and gas, the great need of
the Nation to have our own domestic resource, but the extra
responsibility that comes with that to provide the vessels and
the manpower to take care of something if, like in that
situation, something went terribly wrong.
So could you talk for 1 minute about Shell's hopes to begin
exploratory drilling? Give us just a little bit of an update
about what is going on, and how you and the Coast Guard plan to
be at the ready in the event that something terrible happened.
We hope it doesn't. We know the technology is good. We know
there are containment measures.
But like every industry, you have to have some fallback
safeguard, and the Coast Guard is it.
Admiral Papp. Yes, ma'am.
Taking lessons learned from Deepwater Horizon, I think
there are some things that are directly applicable to the
challenges of drilling up in the Arctic. We have had a chance,
along with the Department of the Interior, to review the
response plans that Shell has put forward.
When Deepwater Horizon occurred, the drill rig, and that
was a production well, but the drill rig was out there and
basically was there by itself, for the most part.
Shell is going to be drilling in much shallower water,
about 150 feet as opposed to 5,000 feet. You don't necessarily
have to have just remotely operated vehicles up here. You can
actually put divers down.
And Shell is going to have up there 22 vessels that are all
designed either as ice vessels, as anchor vessels, as skimmers,
response vessels. They will have everything in place and ready
to go in an overabundance of caution, in case something
happens.
First of all, looking at it from a layman's point of view,
it is a much easier operation in 150 feet of water. And they
believe that the reservoirs that are up there are under much
less pressure than down on the gulf.
So to a certain extent, you're dealing with apples and
oranges. But even saying that, we're looking at the worst-case
discharge possibility, and I think Shell has well-prepared for
that. The Coast Guard has had an opportunity to review their
response plan, along with the Department of Interior, the
Bureau of Safety and Energy Enforcement (BSEE).
And all of us will need to sign off on that and approve
that before they start drilling.
Most of their vessels are here already. They do have one
vessel, which is an Arctic containment system, which is their
tertiary response system in the unlikely event of a spill. That
is still down in Bellingham, Washington, right now, going
through review by the American Bureau of Shipping and our Coast
Guard inspectors. There's still a work list of things to be
done on that before we can certify that as safe to operate.
And until the Arctic Challenger is released and gets up
here, they will have to wait until that drilling begins. But
they have primary, secondary, and tertiary systems to deal with
any possible discharge up there.
And, quite frankly, I have to say I am impressed with the
amount of effort, work, and commitment of resources that Shell
has done.
POLAR ICE BREAKERS: NUMBER OF VESSELS
Senator Landrieu. Thank you.
My final question for this round, again, is to focus on the
polar icebreakers. It is a very important investment and
significant investment that our country is going to have to
make. A recent study sanctioned by the Coast Guard, named the
``High Latitude Study'', calls for a minimum of three heavy
polar icebreakers and a minimum of three medium polar
icebreakers.
How many new heavy polar icebreakers does the Coast Guard
intend to procure? What would be the future implications for
the budget? And if you could comment on what some of our
competitors, China and Russia, are doing in this area, and
really how far behind we are right now in this initiative?
Admiral Papp. Yes, ma'am.
First of all, I need to focus on what we can do today to
make sure we have icebreaking capability and capacity for our
country.
In the law, the Coast Guard is responsible for maintaining
our icebreaker fleet. And as I stated, we are in woeful
condition right now. Healy is the one bright spot, because
Healy is only about a dozen years old and is in good shape. And
thank goodness we had that ship to call upon last year when we
had the situation up in Nome.
You both are fully aware of the dreadful condition of Polar
Sea and Polar Star. They are well past their service life, very
difficult and expensive to maintain. And I have had limited
funding in order to be able to deal with them.
The bright spot there is the operating money has been
transferred back into the Coast Guard's budget in fiscal year
2013 from the National Science Foundation, which will give us
sufficient funds to operate Healy properly and to operate one
of the Polars.
We also received some money in past budget cycles to put
Polar Star back into service. Polar Star is in the shipyard
down in Seattle right now undergoing renovation, and we will
have her back in service in 2013.
So that'll give us one heavy breaker and one medium
breaker, and that is my bridging strategy over the next
probably decade until we get the new polar icebreaker built.
And once again, I look at that optimistic----
Senator Landrieu. How much do those new polar icebreakers
cost, approximately?
Admiral Papp. We are estimating anywhere between $800
million to $1 billion, looking across the world at the price
that we see in other countries and what Canada is allocating to
build their new icebreakers.
Senator Landrieu. Do you know how many Canada has, how many
Russia has, and how many China has?
Admiral Papp. I would have to get back to you with the
exact numbers for the record.
[The information was not available at press time.]
Senator Landrieu. They have more than we do?
Admiral Papp. Absolutely. Russia has in the neighborhood of
a dozen heavy icebreakers. Canada, I believe, has four right
now heavy icebreakers. And of course, we have the two, but they
are out of service right now. We are rapidly working to get
Polar Star back and active.
Senator Landrieu. I'm going to turn it over to Senator
Murkowski, but one of the challenges that our subcommittee has,
and the Senator and I have talked about this publicly and
privately many times, is the Federal Government requires us to
basically pay cash up front for these investments. When we
build an aircraft carrier, when we build a billion-dollar ship,
there has to be a better way to do this, because we have to
take that money out of the Coast Guard budget. We have to find
the money in the Coast Guard budget to build this polar
icebreaker, this new fleet.
We're going to have to figure out a better way, Senator, to
do that.
I'm going to ask, when the Senator is finished, one or two
more questions about that. But there might be some partnerships
with the private sector, there might be some foreign
partnerships, allies, that we can maybe share some of these
expenses with. There has to be some way we can, particularly
with the crunch that is coming to our budget, figure out a way.
I know lots of people like to say we have to do more with
less, but sometimes you just can't do more without more. I
think this is an example of what we're running into here.
And I turn it over to you, Senator.
OPERATION ARCTIC SHIELD
Senator Murkowski. Senator Landrieu, I appreciate you
focusing so much of your questions on the issue of icebreaker
and icebreaking capacity. It is extraordinarily important to us
here in the State, but it is extraordinarily important to us as
a Nation. We are an Arctic Nation. And as an Arctic Nation, to
know that we do not have an icebreaker that is a polar-class
icebreaker, a heavy icebreaker, given all that is happening, is
really quite remarkable.
And, Commandant, you and I have had an opportunity to
discuss the situation with the Healy last year and how close we
were as a Nation to not even having the Healy accessible to us,
that you were in a situation where you effectively had to turn
down a request to send the Healy down on a mission to
Antarctic.
Had you made the decision another way, when the people of
Nome needed help, needed assistance at a very difficult time,
we would not have been able to provide the level of assistance,
and to help those people out, because our one medium-strength
icebreaker would not have been available. So think about the
what-ifs.
And it's not a situation that I think we want to be in.
Again, we are in Arctic Nation, but sometimes you wouldn't know
it when you look at the assets.
I had an opportunity to be with you Barrow yesterday, to
talk with some of the Coast Guard's men and women that are up
north right now, working that Barrow mission. And I found it
interesting that some of those that I was speaking with
yesterday were coming back today, coming back home.
So they are working up north; they are living down here.
And for those who haven't checked their maps, the distance
between the Barrow and Kodiak is 820 nautical miles.
So when we appreciate how we are going to have a Coast
Guard that will be serving the area with the Arctic Shield
Operation, I think it is important to recognize that there's a
financial strain here. To move these men and women back and
forth is going to be challenging. To move the assets back and
forth is going to be challenging.
If you're staging out of a Dutch Harbor, it is 1,125 miles.
So whether you're moving the Bertholf up or you're going by
helicopter, you're going by C-130, I think it is a recognition
we're dealing with some considerable issues with the distance.
And that leads to cost as well.
I would like you to address just generally how the Coast
Guard's preparedness in moving forward with Operation Arctic
Shield this summer with the assets that we currently have--we
mentioned the Bertholf is moving her way up north. I think you
mentioned two H-60s that would be moving back and forth.
But as we talk about how we manage the waterways, how we
move the necessary personnel, can you describe to Alaskans how
well-manned, how our capabilities are at this point for the
operations this summer?
And then if you can then address the practical reality that
we do not have a polar-class icebreaker, whether or not the
mission capability is compromised at all, because we do not
have that icebreaking capacity for whether it is Arctic Shield
or the other mission sets that the Coast Guard has here.
Admiral Papp. I have three levels of concerns. First of all
is tactical. What are we doing this summer on the basis of that
activity that is up there? What are we doing to prepare
ourselves for perhaps the next decade question? And then what
is the long-term plan up there?
The President, through directives, has challenged all of
Government to look at the Arctic and start thinking about and
planning for what we need to do in the future. And because of
the Coast Guard's broad authorities and responsibility, we are
taking that very seriously.
We have devoted staff to this effort. And we have also
devoted--even though Arctic Shield, this is the first time
we're doing that operation. We did something called Arctic
Crossroads for 3 years before that. We have known that our
activity is going to increase up there, so we have been taking
our equipment up, experimenting, seeing how it performs, and
trying to learn more about the operating environment as the
activity starts to flow up toward the North Slope.
Another important aspect is getting to know the people up
there. That is their world. So the people who inhabit the
villages, we have been engaged in outreach with them, to help
us understand the culture and the environment up there, because
they have literally thousands of years of experience and
history with the operating environment, and that helps us.
So for right now, we are well-prepared, because like we
always do traditionally, we have multimission assets that we
can deploy that are very capable and that are sufficient for
the level of human activity that is going on this summer and
perhaps for the next three or four summers.
But as we finish up Arctic Shield this year, we will do a
hot wash of that entire operation, and decide what went well,
what didn't go as well, what sort of resources we might need
for the next year. Then we can begin that planning evolution.
At the same time, that feedback will go back to Washington
to our staff that is working at headquarters, developing our
Arctic strategy, our long-range strategy for what we need to do
up here. And that will inform our future budget years, how we
start planning for resource proposals for perhaps more
permanent infrastructure.
As was noted during the opening statement, we don't expect
it to be ice-free during the summertime probably until about
2030. But it is still going to freeze up during the wintertime.
And there will be ice that we will have to deal with during
certain periods of the year.
So what we need during those periods of the year when the
ice is there is some sort of short access that can only be
provided by an icebreaker.
So our multimission assets, our helicopters, our fixed-wing
aircraft, the NSC, these are all very versatile assets that we
can apply during the temporary times that there is human
activity up there. But there'll be other times when things
start freezing up, as happened last fall with Nome, that we
need to have that assured access of an icebreaker.
I wouldn't say I am comfortable at this point, but we do
have Healy that is on call. And as I said, by next year, we
will have Polar Star back in service, which will give us two
icebreakers. Not an abundance of resources, but enough that
will make me comfortable that we will be able to respond to the
types of challenges that we are facing over the next 10 years
as we continue to work our way forward to determine the other
resources that we need.
CUTTERS: REPLACING LEGACY VESSELS
Senator Murkowski. Until the Polar Star is back in the
water, I sure hope that we are able to keep Healy up here and
not send her down on a research mission to Antarctica.
That is just my ask. I am sure that you have thought of
that as well.
I mentioned in my opening remarks that the legacy vessels,
and how we deal with what I would describe as the gaps that are
out there. Two of the vessels that are covered in this GAO
report are homeported here. I mentioned the Munro, the WHEC,
but we also have the Alex Haley that is here.
The Alex Haley is 41 years old. The Munro is 45 years old.
Can you give me some sense as to what the plans are to
replace these legacy vessels?
Admiral Papp. Yes, ma'am.
Fortunately, with the support of the administration and the
strong support shown by this subcommittee, the national
security project is moving forward. We will be prepared to
award the contract for NSC No. 6 within the 2013 budget as soon
as we have an approved budget. And we already have long-lead
materials on order for No. 6.
And as was indicated with the opening statement, for the
fiscal year 2013 budget, there has also been long-lead money
put in there for No. 7, which should help us along as well.
We hope to build out eight of the NSCs, which will replace
the 12 WHECs that we currently have right now. And then we will
immediately get into what is called the offshore patrol cutter,
or the OPC.
We just got out a request for proposal on the OPC, and that
project is on schedule. And we hope to be able to award the
construction for the first OPC in the fiscal year 2015 budget.
So ultimately, though, we will have--today we have 41 major
ships. They will be replaced by 33 major ships when the project
is done.
But they will be more capable ships. But they won't be able
to be in as many places as the legacy fleet.
Having said that, the legacy fleet, many of them were only
getting about two-thirds of the underway days that we
programmed for, because of major casualties and breakdowns.
So the best solution is to get these new ships built as
quickly as possible, because they will be more reliable and
substantially more capable than the ships they are replacing.
Senator Murkowski. I mentioned also in my statement about
the loss of underway days, the importance of these cutters
actually being underway, conducting the mission, and the fact
that the outside cutters are spending 25 to 30 days underway
every deployment as they transit from, in this case, from
California up here.
So the desire, the importance, to have these vessels
homeported here I think it is an issue I think we look at as we
try to address how the mission is fulfilled.
Do you have any sense in terms of when the decommissioning
of the Munro or the Healy may come about?
Admiral Papp. I am trying to keep them going as long as we
can.
Senator Murkowski. I appreciate that.
Admiral Papp. If my recollection is correct, Munro is the
youngest of our WHECs and, as you note, is in excess of 40
years old.
A lot of people, when you speak to our citizens and you say
40, 45 years old, they don't perceive that as being very much.
But in the life of a ship, that really makes it well beyond
senior citizen status.
The Navy's service life is usually about 25 years for a
ship. We in the Coast Guard work our ships very hard in very
challenging and very demanding conditions. So these 12 WHECs
that we had have had a pretty rough life, spending a lot of
time in the Bering Sea.
And you have what amounts to--because they were built in
the 1960s, there is a lot of 1950s technology that is still on
these ships. Many components that you just can't get spare
parts for nowadays unless they are hand manufactured.
So when we have a breakdown, part of the problem is it
takes us so long to get replacement parts and put them back
into service that we lose those underway days and our
effectiveness out there.
Senator Murkowski. I appreciate the need, the desire, to
get our new vessels on, but, again, I'm worried about the gaps,
where we have ships that are decommissioned without that
replacement vessel on-site in the water.
And I think those that rely on our Coast Guard are looking
very critically at the timing as well. So I just put that out
there.
Madam Chairman, I probably have a couple more, but I will
turn it to you.
Senator Landrieu. I would like to follow up on this
technology issue.
I had the privilege, the responsibility and privilege, to
go down to Guatemala as chair of the Homeland Security
Committee and look at some of the drug interdiction situations
down there. I have to just say for the record, it is shocking
to see the technology that the drug cartels have.
New materials, submarines that are undetectable, running
drugs from Mexico through Guatemala into the United States, and
we are operating our boats, Senator, with 1950s technology.
I mean, we are trying to keep up with other countries. We
also have to keep up with the drug cartels. I know that,
Admiral, you were restricted in your budget, and the Senator
and I have some restrictions. But where there's a will, there
is a way. We are going to have to find a way to get the assets
for this Nation that we need to protect our homeland and to
monitor the great industries that we have responsibility for
that produce wealth and opportunity for our country.
It is very concerning to me, and I want to ask you this,
because I'm trying to really understand, as we change our
fleets, how can you sort of compare the OPCs for operations in
Alaskan waters, how will the capabilities compare to the NSC?
Can you just explain that, and make sure that we are
building the kind of ships that Alaska needs? Because the needs
of the Gulf of Mexico are going to be a little bit different,
of course. Our waters are a little tamer, as we don't, of
course, have any ice anywhere around. Although we can have
terrible storms and hurricanes, I want to make sure that our
country is building the right kinds of ships for the east
coast, the west coast, the gulf coast, and for Alaska.
So do you have any concerns at all that the plans are not
providing the assets that Alaska and our Arctic boundaries
need?
Admiral Papp. Ma'am, when we finish this shipbuilding
project, we'll basically have two major cutters, the NSC and
the OPC.
Today we have two classes. We call them the WHEC and the
WMEC.
Our challenge is the WMECs that we have right now are
incapable of operating in the Arctic and the Bering Sea. They
cannot take the seas. We can't launch small boats, we can't
launch helicopters from them, because they just can't take the
conditions that are found up in the Bering Sea and Gulf of
Alaska.
Consequently, we moved all our WHECs a number of years ago,
took them off the east coast, and moved them to the west coast,
because, particularly for Alaska patrol, Bering Sea patrol, the
WHECs are the only ships that we have been able to use year-
round up here.
When we get to this new fleet, in the requirements that we
put out for the OPC, which is the WMEC replacement, we put
requirements in there for it to be able to operate, launch
small boats, land and launch helicopters in sea state five,
which will allow it to operate in the Bering Sea.
So there'll be times when we are able, in the future, even
though we will have only a reduced number, 8 instead of 12, the
high-end ships will have the opportunity, the option, to send
the OPC up here as well.
In fact, we have plans to station two of our OPCs up here
in Alaska, hopefully here at Kodiak.
So that will give us much more versatility in where we can
deploy those. Right now, there are only, basically, 12 ships
that we can send up here. When we get the new fleet built out,
any of the ships we have in those 33 will be able to come up
here.
Obviously, in the worst weather, you want the NSC up here,
because that gives us our best capability for the conditions
that are found up in Alaska.
POLAR ICEBREAKERS: LEASING PROS AND CONS
Senator Landrieu. I want to say that we're getting some
pushback, Senator, from some people in Washington that think
that the Navy is the only operational group that should have
these very large ships. But I want to go on record strongly,
and I'm a very big supporter of the Navy and the need for them
to have the kind of ships that they need, but we just cannot
patrol waters--we are not patrolling waters within just 15
miles, as you know, of our coastline.
We have up to 200 miles as our economic zone. Under the Law
of the Sea Treaty, if we can ever get that resolved, we may
have up to 600 miles, I understand, here off of the coast.
So this is not just patrol boats going up and down a few
miles off the coast. These boats need to be seaworthy and have
a very different mission, of course, than the Navy, but they
have to be big and strong and able to maintain.
My last question, and we talked about this, Commandant,
about the pros and cons of having the private sector build an
icebreaker and lease it back.
Both the Senator and I are very concerned about not getting
one or two but several, and getting them much more quickly than
the plans that we have in place. I think you are making the
best lemonade you can out of the sort of lemon situation that
you have been given, but what are the pros and cons of having
the private sector build an icebreaker, leasing it back to the
Coast Guard?
I know there are some disadvantages in your mind, but what
might be some of the disadvantages and advantages, if you
could?
And I'm ready to close out and go to the next panel, unless
you have----
Admiral Papp. Yes, ma'am.
I think the biggest con is that the Coast Guard generally
builds and operates ships for 30-plus years. It is something we
can rely upon. It is a capability the country knows it has.
And if you build a ship and you invest in it, if you were
to lease over that time period, it ends up costing you way
more.
And I know your interest in this, so we had a chance to do
a rudimentary business case analysis, and also look at the
legal implications of what missions we could conduct for the
Coast Guard under Coast Guard-owned or leased.
I would say, at this point, because we are struggling right
now just to have one polar icebreaker, there's a certain level
we want to have Coast Guard-owned, because we can rely upon
that.
And it's sort of like, if I can use a very simple
illustration, a number of years ago, I wasn't certain whether I
was going to retire or not. And we had one car that we owned,
and we know that's ours and we can rely upon it all the time.
But because I wasn't sure what was happening, we leased another
car.
We spent a lot of money on that lease. And at the end of
the day, it wasn't ours, and we had to turn it back in, so we
could fall back on the car that we owned.
I want to have an icebreaker that we own, maybe a couple
icebreakers that we own. And then I think leasing is more of an
option, in my mind, when you need surge capabilities for a
couple years and you can go out and perhaps invest in a lease
that gets you through a tough period. But then at the end of
the day, you don't have the responsibility for maintaining it
afterward.
So right now I am focused on procuring, getting the
appropriation, and building an icebreaker that we will have for
a good three decades and be able to rely upon, and use it for
the full set of Coast Guard missions.
And that brings in the other argument, the legal argument.
Under the various leasing options that we have looked at, you
can use it for icebreaking, but you can't necessarily use it
for law enforcement and defense-related operations, where you
need a sovereign military vessel that belongs to the United
States.
So my recommendation, my strongest recommendation to you,
is we proceed in getting a Coast Guard-owned icebreaker or two
as we go forward, and put our efforts into that. And then who
knows what happens in the future. Maybe there are some times
where you need to surge for a couple years, because of
conditions, and a lease might make sense for that.
But my strongest recommendation is staying with the Coast
Guard-owned.
Senator Landrieu. Thank you. I think this has been a very,
very good first panel. And, Admiral, thank you for your
testimony.
Admiral Papp. Thank you, Chairman, for having this hearing.
Senator Murkowski. Chairman.
Senator Landrieu. Yes, go ahead.
FISHERIES ENFORCEMENT
Senator Murkowski. If I might just ask one more brief
question, because we focused a lot about the activities up
north, but I think we also recognize that one of the very
significant responsibilities of the Coast Guard in this region
is fisheries enforcement.
And unfortunately, we have seen an increase in the illegal,
unreported, the high seas driftnet fisheries. Could you just
comment, briefly, Admiral, on what we're seeing out there? Is
it an increased volume of traffic, a level of sophistication
that we haven't seen before? And how are we doing in combating
this illegal activity?
Admiral Papp. Yes, ma'am.
And I would like to have my staff or myself, when both of
you get back to Washington, and give you a classified briefing
on what is going on there.
But I would call this fishing piracy that is going on.
Right now, we are prosecuting a case--the WHEC Rush, as I
mentioned, is almost all the way to Japan but still under
Admiral Ostebo's tactical control.
And we have been working across the Government. We have
something called the Maritime Operational Threat Response
Organization, which works across State and Justice and other
departments. And we have come to a national objective of
seizing what amounts to, we found out now, a stateless vessel
that has 40 tons of fish.
They put 8 miles of net out there and collect everything
that flows through it, killing off a lot of species, and
picking up migratory stocks that perhaps would come back to
Alaska waters. And they have 40 tons of fish onboard.
We have a boarding team on board right now on the cutter
Rush, and we are working to come to either pass this off to
China, perhaps, for prosecution, because there is a claim--
well, there are Chinese citizens on board that are manning the
ship. But it is stateless, as far as we can determine. And as a
fallback, we can bring it back to the United States for
prosecution as well.
Senator Landrieu. I hope we are filing charges not just
against the man operating the ship but the buyers of these fish
and tracking it down to the networks that are really funding
these kinds of illegal operations. And we will commit to work
on that.
I think people would be horrified at home to hear--the
lower 48--about what is really going on here in these waters.
But thank you, Admiral, we appreciate it.
Admiral Papp. Thank you, Chairman, and thank you, Senator
Murkowski.
Senator Landrieu. And our next panel, and we're going to
conduct the next panel for about 30 to 35 minutes.
As you are introduced, if you come forward? There'll be
very brief introductions and the Senator may want to add some
words.
Mark Meyer serves as vice chancellor for research at the
University of Alaska at Fairbanks, where he oversees
administration of the university's $123 million per year
research enterprise that supervises the university's stand-
alone initiatives. Prior to serving in this capacity,
Chancellor Myers held various senior executive and scientific
research in petroleum industry positions, including the State
of Alaska pipeline coordinator.
Welcome, Dr. Myers.
Our next is Merrick Burden, executive director of the
Marine Conservation Alliance. Mr. Burden is executive director
of a group of industry harvesters, processors, and communities
engaged in the North Pacific and Bering Sea seafood industry.
He can probably shed some light on what we just spoke about.
Their role is to seek practical solutions to sustainable
fisheries management through sound science and application of
law.
And finally, Mr. Bruce Harland, vice president of Alaskan
international contract service, Crowley Marine Services, a
business unit responsible for the U.S. West Coast international
markets. Crowley provides ship-assisted and escort services,
salvage, and oil spill response equipment; contract towing
services; Atlantic transportation services; et cetera, et
cetera.
So, all three of these gentlemen have tremendous experience
in areas that our subcommittee is exploring today.
Dr. Myers, why don't we begin with you? I think we have
asked for 5 minutes of opening testimony. Then we will go
through probably just one round of questioning, but go right
ahead.
Try to pull the mike a little closer to you, and you may
have to adjust it, or you can pull it off, like I did. I am not
sure it's on. One of the staff may turn that on.
STATEMENT OF DR. MARK MYERS, VICE CHANCELLOR FOR
RESEARCH, UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA--FAIRBANKS,
FAIRBANKS, ALASKA
Dr. Myers. Thank you, Chairman Landrieu, Senator Murkowski,
for the opportunity to speak. But also, thank you for coming to
Alaska.
You can't get a perspective on the size and scope of the
State and the challenges the Coast Guard faces until you
actually see it in place.
The State is vast. The Coast Guard's mission is vast. Just
to give you an example, almost 30 years ago, I worked in the
oil and gas industry, and we did an exploration well in the
Navarin Basin. That was after working in Louisiana.
Senator Landrieu. You're going to have to speak a little
louder. It is going to be hard, so just kind of lean into your
mike.
Dr. Myers. Is that better?
Senator Landrieu. That's better.
Dr. Myers. Almost 30 years ago, when I first came up to
Alaska, I worked on an oil exploration well in the Navarin
Basin. And we used a much larger helicopter, a Chinook, then
the H-60 here, much more capable in terms of distance.
In order to get to the well site, we had to replace almost
all the seats on the helicopter with inboard fuel tanks, and we
could only take a few people at a time, over 4 hours of over-
ocean conditions out of Nome, the closest major port and
facility with fuel and an airport.
And we didn't wear our exposure suits. To simply explain
that, if you went down, the exposure suit, you would not
survive long enough. There would be no rescue.
So to give you scope, that was one well almost 400 miles
offshore in Alaska. That is the scale and scope of issues.
And we went off in the closest possible location that had
an airport and fuel.
So the areas we're talking about are huge in scope, and the
Coast Guard's mission is very, very challenging in that way.
I'm going to focus my testimony on the Arctic itself, the
Arctic region, so sort of the Bering Strait into the north. And
in addition to the huge responsibilities the 17th District has,
the Arctic is going to be a very big challenge.
As you had mentioned, we are seeing major changes in
environmental conditions. We're also seeing a significant drive
toward resource development, circumpolar in the Arctic, a lot
of that driven by oil and gas potential, the U.S. Geological
Survey 2008 study pointed out, as you did, 13 percent of the
undiscovered resources. That equates to about 90 billion
barrels of oil and about 44 billion barrels of natural gas
liquids. That is a huge amount of petroleum potential out
there. And countries are exploring, whether it be the United
States or other countries, it is happening as we speak.
At the same time, there are immense mineral deposits in the
Arctic, in addition. Coal deposits, lead, zinc, iron ore,
nickel in the Arctic that are being considered for development,
now that we're seeing possibilities for shipping.
Ecotourism has been mentioned. That is becoming a much
larger industry in the Arctic as people want to get north and
see this country.
And then, finally, Arctic shipping and possibly Arctic
fishing. As we see opportunities to develop resources in the
Arctic, the ability of the northern sea route becomes a real
possibility with ice-strengthened hulls.
So we're seeing those major pushes in the development side.
At the same time, the change that is happening in the Arctic is
happening very rapidly.
As a simple analog, it is really about water.
Fundamentally, the Arctic is frozen. And as it warms up, it is
becoming much less frozen.
Simply put, that means seasonally, much longer open water
seasons. And also, the glue that holds the Arctic coast
together is permafrost. Permafrost is really just ice within
the soil. As we lose that, as it changes, the coast erodes much
more quickly.
As we lose sea ice, there are huge environmental feedback
mechanisms that take place that increase warming. Again, ice
reflects really well, reflects sunlight. The open ocean absorbs
sunlight. Ocean acidification and other factors are occurring.
So we're seeing in the Arctic in major transition, both in
the case of the resources that are available, but also in the
environmental conditions.
So research to understand those conditions is extremely
important. And the Coast Guard has a significant role in that
through the Healy.
The Healy is a unique U.S. asset. It can carry about 35
scientists. It has tremendous laboratory capacity. It is,
basically, our major Arctic research vessel that can work in
the areas to the north, where we have ice conditions still.
Again, the ice changes we're seeing both on the fringes of
the summer months--September is the least amount of sea ice--
but also as you move further north, it is still very much ice.
The Healy can break about 4.5 feet of ice. It can work in
conditions that no other surface vessel that the U.S.
Government operates can. It has been doing that work very well.
For instance, in determining the basic shape and conditions
of the Arctic basin and any potential claim that the United
States might make in the future under the Law of the Sea, the
Healy, along with the St. Laurent, the Canadian service, has
been for multiple years working to acquire the basic seismic
and bathymetric data sets so we understand both the Canadian
and Russian claims, and a U.S. claim or protest should we
decide to go that route.
So it's a critical vessel. That vessel is also the only
working icebreaker we have. So if it gets called off for other
search-and-rescue areas, the scientific missions must quit.
So it is a very challenging condition to have only a single
icebreaker. The Polar Star will become critical, to see it
operational. Also, a medium icebreaker can only really work in
single season ice. It can't do the heavy lifting that a heavy
icebreaker can, in the sense of dealing with more severe ice
conditions.
But again, the Healy becomes a critical asset. The Coast
Guard cooperation with the National Science Foundation has led
to fundamental research changes and understandings in the
Arctic. And if we lose that capacity, or if we can't maximize
that capacity, the country will lose a significant amount of
research capacity.
Second, the opportunity to do transformational approaches
is available. If you think about these helicopters, there are
very few of them. The H-60 is land-based only. That is really
the only seaborne helicopter that can be carried by cutter.
They can't cover much of the ground.
We need to start using more unmanned systems, unmanned
aerial vehicles (UAVs), unmanned submarines, submarine gliders,
and remote sensing systems, coupled with the fundamental
traditional way that we do Arctic domain awareness.
The university is working in strong partnership with the
Department of Homeland Security through various funded research
projects, one of which is a cooperative between the Department
of Homeland Security and the universities of Alaska and Hawaii
working jointly.
One of the products of that research is an Arctic domain
awareness system that uses very small portable radars with
their own small portable supply mostly powered by wind and
solar, but a little bit of backup diesel. Those radars can
sense sea ice.
Along with UAVs, along with satellites, we can do a much
better job of detecting ice along the coast. We can also use
it, potentially, to locate vessels. The power source and the
communication system then can be used to relay critical
information for other sensors.
So the ability to put coastal, small-scale, portable
systems out there, combined with other assets, really
revolutionizes our ability to see and understand the conditions
that are occurring in the Arctic, giving a better picture.
It is crucial that we build systems that can work under
ice. Again, if you look fundamentally, much of the year, the
coast is still covered. We need to understand what is under the
ice. We need to understand, should there be a catastrophic oil
spill, to be able to model and actually map the movement of
that oil under ice, also to understand the ecological changes
that are occurring under the ice as well.
So there's a lot of new technology and approaches that
universities are in the forefront, that the partnership with
Homeland Security are really important.
PREPARED STATEMENT
At the same time, it is very important the Coast Guard, in
my opinion, start adapting and using more of these approaches.
Being able to launch small, UAVs off their ships, for example,
would be a huge leveraging system.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dr. Mark Myers
Thank you, Chairwoman Mary Landrieu, Ranking Member Dan Coats, and
distinguished members of the subcommittee. It is a pleasure to appear
before you today to discuss the resources necessary to respond to
changes in the Arctic, and the United States Coast Guard's many
responsibilities in Alaska.
The U.S. Coast Guard is actively engaged in missions throughout
maritime Alaska. For this testimony I will focus on the Arctic and the
great challenges that the Coast Guard and the Nation will face in light
of the environmental and human use changes we are observing. I will
stress the importance of research both enabled and conducted with the
support of the Coast Guard and needed by the Coast Guard to develop
effective mission capabilities in this challenging environment.
major drivers of change in the arctic
Two major drivers of change in the Arctic are: (1) a warming
climate with its corresponding ecosystem changes; and (2) an increased
demand for the Arctic's abundant natural resources. A major result of a
warming Arctic has been a significant reduction in seasonal ice cover
along with a decrease in multi-season ice in the central Arctic Ocean.
This has created more seasonal near shore open water and a longer
potential shipping season in areas of the Arctic. These circumstances
have contributed to increased interest in resource exploration and
development along with more ship based tourism and seasonal marine
transport. The increased human activity in the Arctic is coupled with
challenges faced by Arctic communities due to increased coastal
erosion, storm surge and permafrost thawing and the associated
challenges to infrastructure along with concern about maintaining the
quality of and access to subsistence food sources in a changing
environment.
These changes in the Arctic place additional burdens on the Coast
Guard to focus more efforts further North in the challenging
environments of the Arctic in key missions including marine
environmental protection, search and rescue, protecting marine living
resources, maintaining maritime domain awareness and presence and
managing ice operations. The U.S. Arctic is a challenging environment
in which to perform these missions because it has little built
infrastructure (for example no deep water ports), severe operating
conditions, and a rapid ecosystem change.
needed investments in the arctic
A significant investment in research will be necessary for the
Coast Guard to understand the changing conditions successfully and
their effects on its key missions and incorporate new approaches and
technologies into arctic operations. This will include robust capacity
to support and understand and integrate the results of wide ranging
Arctic research fields including physical oceanography, atmospheric and
weather science, ecosystem analysis and social science. The Interagency
Arctic Research Policy Committee (IARPC) Research Plan for 2013-2017
highlights many of the needed study directions including sea ice and
marine ecosystem studies, terrestrial ecosystem studies, atmospheric
studies of surface heat, energy and mass balances, observing systems,
regional climate models, adaptation tools for sustaining communities
and human health studies.
With respect to observing systems, new approaches to integrated
Arctic monitoring are necessary some of which can be provided by
unmanned systems including aircraft (from hand launched to Global Hawk)
ocean surface and underwater vehicles (submarine gliders and powered)
which can be used in conjunction with aircraft, ship, buoys, and cabled
ocean observing systems, and satellite systems. In addition, small
portable and remotely powered land based systems such as small high
frequency coastal radar can greatly assist in tracking ships, measuring
surface currents and tracking sea ice.
Key to successful research and operations in the Arctic are ice
breakers and long endurance aircraft. The Healy is the only currently
operational U.S. ice breaker in the Arctic and a crucial and unique
research platform for working in and moving through ice up to 4.5 feet
thick. With its 4,200 square feet of lab space, sensor systems and
winches the Healy can accommodate 35 scientists (up to 50 in surge
capacity). The Healy is the only U.S. Government surface vessel capable
of performing broad based scientific research in the northern and
central regions of the Arctic Ocean. In recent years the Healy has
worked collaboratively with the Canadian ice breaker St-Laurent to
gather key bathymetric and seismic data critical to understanding the
basis for future claims for an extended continental shelf that may be
filed under UNCLOS by either Canada or Russia. In October 2012 the
United States will launch the National Science Foundation funded,
University of Alaska Fairbanks operated global class ice-capable
research vessel R/V Sikuliaq. With its Arctic specific design the
Sikuliaq will be able to break through up to 1 meter of ice and perform
similar research missions. However, the Sikuliaq will not be able to
operate as far north or for the length of season that the Healy can.
The Sikuliaq is best seen as a complimentary vessel to the Healy. Until
the Polar Star is refurbished the Healy will be the only operational
U.S. polar ice breaker. That means that in addition to its scientific
mission the Healy must perform all the other key northern missions
including such things as rescue and emergency escort, marine
environmental protection and maintaining maritime domain awareness and
protection. Even with the refurbishment of the Polar Star new ice
breaking capacity will be necessary for the United States to maintain a
credible long term Arctic presence and conduct effective research in
ice covered waters.
government coordination with research universities
It is important that the Coast Guard and Department of Homeland
Security (DHS) continue to be an active partner with Federal and State
research agencies and universities which conduct arctic research. These
include but are not limited to partnerships with National Science
Foundation, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, United
States Geological Service, National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, Department of Defense, the Environmental Protection
Agency, the State of Alaska, the United States Antarctic Resource
Center, and U.S. universities including Alaska, New Hampshire, Hawaii
and others. One example of a successful university/DHS collaboration
with the University of Hawaii/University of Alaska Fairbanks DHS funded
Center for Island, Maritime and Extreme Environment Security (CIMES).
The CIMES Arctic Maritime Domain Awareness component will deliver to
the Coast Guard in the summer of 2013 a demonstration of integrated
satellite, UAV, and high frequency radar for collecting and analyzing
``ice-water interface'' data in near real-time for navigation
assistance off the coast of Barrow. The purpose of the demonstration is
to validate that the technologies and models created as a result of
CIMES funding from DHS can directly enhance Coast Guard operations by
improving the understanding between sea ice and open water, in near
real-time, for: (1) search and rescue, (2) environmental protection,
and (3) border security missions, in the Arctic.
In summary, the Coast Guard will play an increasingly important
role in the Arctic in the upcoming decades. Increased investment will
be needed in many areas of research and technology necessary to
understand and respond to increased maritime activity and the changing
environment. Increased investment will be needed in building and
maintaining a capable ice breaker fleet, forward operating
infrastructure and capacities, strong agency and university
partnerships, and new technological enablers including unmanned systems
and advanced sensors.
Senator Landrieu. Thank you very much.
I am very happy that you mentioned that, because, as the
Senator knows, I plussed-up the research budget of Homeland
Security by $200 million. I feel very strongly in investing in
research dollars.
And, Senator, we can work to direct a portion of that, I
think, with the support of the department, to more of this kind
of research for the Arctic, because we have to operate more
smartly. And I think the new technology with this unmanned
technology could give us more eyes in the sky, using our
satellites, et cetera, a smarter way for the Coast Guard to
catch these perpetrators, like this one that put an 8-mile net
across the ocean, as well as using it for others.
So, thank you.
Mr. Burden.
STATEMENT OF MERRICK BURDEN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MARINE
CONSERVATION ALLIANCE, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON
Mr. Burden. Before I start, I would just like to express my
thanks. It is a great honor to be here this morning. I
appreciate the invitation. So I will just go ahead and get
started.
I would like to thank the chair and ranking member of the
subcommittee for holding this hearing today. I would also like
to thank Senator Murkowski for her ongoing commitment to the
Coast Guard, the Alaska fishing industry, and fishing-dependent
coastal communities.
For the record, my name is Merrick Burden, and I am the
executive director of the Marine Conservation Alliance (MCA).
MCA is a broad-based coalition of seafood harvesters,
processors, fishing-dependent coastal communities, Western
Alaska community development port organizations involved in the
Federal ground fish and shellfish fisheries off of Alaska.
MCA was formed to promote the sustainable use of North
Pacific marine resources by present and future generations. MCA
supports research and public education regarding the fishery
resources of the North Pacific and seeks practical solutions to
resource conservation issues.
The fishing industry off Alaska generates more than $3
billion at the wholesale level and supports more than 80,000
jobs directly and indirectly on an annual basis. It is the
largest private-sector employer in the State of Alaska, and it
employs individuals from all over the United States who come to
Alaska to work as fishermen, seafood processors, or in support
industries.
In many areas of coastal Alaska, the seafood industry is
the dominant source of employment, and is the economic driver
for those communities.
The fisheries of the North Pacific have often been called
one of the success stories of fishery management. The volume of
fishery resources extracted from the North Pacific and Bering
Sea number in the millions of tons annually, and many fisheries
in the region have been certified as sustainable by third-party
verification processes.
This multibillion-dollar economic engine relies upon
sustainable management practices, which means domestic
regulations and international treaties must be enforced.
These fisheries take place in some of the most remote areas
of the United States and in some of the most hazardous maritime
conditions found on Earth. Sea ice and gale force winds are
commonplace in the region and frequently provide hardship for
those that live and work in the area.
In the fall of 2011, for instance, the city of Nome,
Alaska, required that an icebreaker assist in getting a fuel
tanker to the city, in order for residents there to have heat
and energy for the long winter.
During the snow crab season of this past winter, the crab
industry was forced to hire a tug for 3 months to regularly
clear ice from the St. Paul Harbor so that crab vessels could
safely access the harbor to deliver their catch.
In addition to these specific examples, each year fishermen
injured at sea are airlifted from their vessels and transported
via helicopter to Kodiak or Anchorage, more than 100 miles
away.
Despite the remoteness of this region, substantial amounts
of commerce make their way between North America and Asia via
the North Pacific great circle route. Ships traveling between
the U.S. west coast thread their way through the Aleutian
Islands, typically passing through Unimak Pass, which lies to
the east of Dutch Harbor.
Occasionally, these ships find themselves in distress and
in need of assistance. At times, these ships have drifted
ashore and broken apart, spilling fuel oil or their cargo into
the waters of the North Pacific.
Only a handful of years ago, this very thing occurred and
threatened to impact the fishing industry due to concerns from
consumers over the possibility of contaminated seafood. The
fishing industry responded by conducting water quality
assessments and fish contamination tests to alleviate these
concerns.
While these assessments cost a great deal, the seafood
industry in Alaska depends on consumer confidence in their
products. Although there have not been any apparent impacts on
the seafood industry from these events yet, increased shipping
traffic increases a risk that there may be impacts in the
future.
Madam Chair, the Coast Guard plays an important part role
in these waters, which matter a great deal to the North Pacific
seafood industry.
The seafood industry has long viewed the Coast Guard as not
only a welcome presence but a necessary partner. The Coast
Guard's task in this region is enormous. At times, the Coast
Guard is the lifeline of the industry as they aid fishermen in
distress. They play the part of incident management and
response.
At other times, they enforce domestic regulation and
international treaties or agreements, such as the observed
Russia-United States maritime boundary.
These activities often take place in severe conditions
where gale force winds, heavy seas, sea ice, and freezing spray
are present that not only affect the ability of fishing vessels
to harvest fish from these waters but also affect the ability
of the Coast Guard to perform rescue operations, or to respond
to other incidents.
In these instances, mere minutes can mean the difference
between a successful response and an unsuccessful one.
This means that reliable, up-to-date equipment that can
stand up to these conditions is a vital component of the Coast
Guard's mission in Alaska and to the people that rely upon the
Coast Guard for their well-being.
The fishing industry is inherently at the whim of the
natural environment. As the natural environment changes, so
must the seafood industry.
One place that is experiencing relatively dramatic change
is the Arctic. Information indicates that crab, salmon, and
some species of ground fish may be extending their range
northward from the Bering Sea and spilling into the Arctic. If
commercially valuable fish and shellfish become established in
sufficient numbers, it is possible that fisheries will look to
expand northward as well.
Recently, however, the North Pacific Fishery Management
Council voted to close these waters to fishing for many types
of species until more is known regarding the ability of this
environment to support commercial fishing activities. This
means that for the foreseeable future, we do not expect to see
much fishing in this region.
Over the longer term, it appears possible for fisheries to
develop in the Arctic. But due to conditions that are present
in this area, it is difficult for us to imagine fishing
activity occurring at the same scale which it does in the
Bering Sea.
In any event, when you U.S.-based commercial fishing
activity takes place in the Arctic, if it does at all, it is
almost certainly many years away and, therefore, the needs of
Coast Guard as it relates to domestic fishing activity in the
Arctic appears limited for some time.
However, other user groups are eyeing the Arctic, such as
the oil and gas industry. These developments will require
additional resources, which further expand the Coast Guard's
mission off Alaska.
It recently came to our attention that the Coast Guard's
17th District is facing a 19-percent reduction in the number of
cutter days that can be used for fisheries law enforcement. Our
understanding is that this reduction is being driven by the
retirement of older Coast Guard assets, which have not been
replaced, and the reprioritization of remaining assets to
operations in the Arctic.
The seafood industry is concerned that this reduction will
impact safety, enforcement, and management of North Pacific
fisheries.
We would ask that the Congress provided funding necessary
to maintain a fisheries-based Coast Guard presence that is more
similar to recent years, while also providing funding that will
be necessary for the Coast Guard's expanding role in the
Arctic.
PREPARED STATEMENT
Madam Chair, I want to thank you and members of this
subcommittee for providing this opportunity to testify to you
today. I would be happy to answer any questions.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Merrick Burden
I would like to thank the Chair and Ranking member of the
subcommittee for holding this hearing today. I would also like to thank
Senator Murkowski for her ongoing commitment to the United States Coast
Guard, the Alaska fishing industry, and fishing dependent coastal
communities. For the record, my name is Merrick Burden, and I am the
Executive Director of the Marine Conservation Alliance (MCA). MCA is a
broad based coalition of seafood harvesters, processors, fishing
dependent coastal communities, and western Alaska Community Development
Quota (CDQ) organizations involved in the Federal groundfish and
shellfish fisheries off Alaska. MCA was formed to promote the
sustainable use of North Pacific marine resources by present and future
generations. MCA supports research and public education regarding the
fishery resources of the North Pacific, and seeks practical solutions
to resource conservation issues.
The fishing industry off Alaska generates over $3 billion at the
wholesale level and supports over 80,000 jobs directly and indirectly
on an annual basis. It is the largest private sector employer in the
State of Alaska, and it employs individuals from all over the United
States who come to Alaska to work as fishermen, seafood processors, or
in support industries. In many areas of coastal Alaska the seafood
industry is the dominant source of employment and is the economic
driver for those communities.
The fisheries of the North Pacific have often been called one of
the success stories of fishery management. The volume of fishery
resources extracted from the North Pacific and Bering Sea number in the
millions of tons annually and many fisheries in the region have been
certified as sustainable by third-party verification processes. This
multi-billion dollar economic engine relies upon sustainable management
practices, which means domestic regulations and international treaties
must be enforced.
These fisheries take place in some of the most remote areas of the
United States and in some of the most hazardous maritime conditions
found on Earth. Sea ice and gale force winds are commonplace in the
region and frequently provide hardship to those that live and work in
the area. In the fall of 2011 for instance, the city of Nome, Alaska,
required that an ice breaker assist in getting a fuel tanker to the
city in order for residents there to have heat and energy for the long
winter. During the snow crab season of this past winter, the crab
industry was forced to hire a tug for 3 months to regularly clear ice
from the St. Paul harbor so that crab vessels could safely access the
harbor to deliver their catch. In addition to these specific examples,
each year fishermen injured at sea are airlifted from their vessels and
transported via helicopter to Kodiak or Anchorage, several hundred
miles away.
Despite the remoteness of this region, substantial amounts of
commerce make their way between North America and Asia via the North
Pacific Great Circle route. Ships traveling between the U.S. west coast
thread their way through the Aleutian Islands, typically passing
through Unimak pass which lies to the east of Dutch Harbor.
Occasionally these ships find themselves in distress and in need of
assistance. At times these ships have drifted ashore and broken apart,
spilling fuel oil or their cargo into the waters of the North Pacific.
Only a handful of years ago this very thing occurred and threatened to
impact the fishing industry due to concerns from consumers over the
possibility of contaminated seafood. The fishing industry responded by
conducting water quality assessments and fish contamination tests to
alleviate these concerns. While these assessments cost a great deal,
the seafood industry in Alaska depends on consumer confidence in their
products. Although there have not been any apparent impacts to the
seafood industry from these events yet, increased shipping traffic
increases the risk that there may be impacts in the future.
Madame Chair, the United States Coast Guard plays an important role
in these waters which matter a great deal to the North Pacific seafood
industry. The seafood industry has long viewed the United States Coast
Guard as not only a welcome presence, but a necessary partner. The
Coast Guard's task in this region is enormous. At times the Coast Guard
is the lifeline of the industry as they aid fishermen in distress; they
play the part of incident management and response; at other times they
enforce domestic regulation and international treaties or agreements,
such as the observed Russian/U.S. maritime boundary. These activities
often take place in severe conditions where gale force winds, heavy
seas, sea ice, and freezing spray are present that not only affect the
ability of fishing vessels to harvest fish from these waters, but also
affect the ability of the Coast Guard to perform rescue operations or
to respond to other incidents. In these instances, mere minutes can
mean the difference between a successful response and an unsuccessful
one. This means that reliable, up to date equipment that can stand up
to these conditions is a vital component of the Coast Guard's mission
in Alaska, and to the people that rely upon the Coast Guard for their
well-being.
The seafood industry is inherently at the whim of the natural
environment. As the natural environment changes, so must the seafood
industry. One place that is experiencing relatively dramatic change is
the Arctic. Information indicates that crab, salmon, and some species
of groundfish may be extending their range northward from the Bering
Sea and spilling into the Arctic. If commercially-valuable fish and
shellfish become established in sufficient numbers, it is possible that
fisheries will look to expand northward as well. Recently, however, the
North Pacific Fishery Management Council voted to close these waters to
fishing for many types of species until more is known regarding the
ability of this environment to support commercial fishing activities.
This means that for the foreseeable future we do not expect to see much
fishing in this region. Over the longer term it appears possible for
fisheries to develop in the Arctic, but due to the conditions which are
present in this area it is difficult for us to imagine fishing activity
occurring at the same scale which it does in the Bering Sea. In any
event, when U.S.-based commercial fishing activity takes place in the
Arctic, if it does at all, is almost certainly many years away and
therefore the needs of the Coast Guard as it relates to domestic
fishing activity in the Arctic appears to be limited for some time.
However, other user groups are eyeing the Arctic, such as the oil and
gas industry. These developments will require additional resources
which will further expand the Coast Guard's mission off Alaska.
It recently came to our attention that the Coast Guard 17th
District is facing a 19-percent reduction in the number of cutter days
that can be used for fisheries law enforcement. Our understanding is
that this reduction is being driven by the retirement of older Coast
Guard assets which have not been replaced, and the reprioritization of
remaining assets to operations in the Arctic. The seafood industry is
concerned that this reduction will impact safety, enforcement, and
management of North Pacific fisheries. We would ask that Congress
provide funding necessary to maintain a fisheries-based Coast Guard
presence that is more similar to recent years while also providing
funding that will be necessary for the Coast Guard's expanding role in
the Arctic.
Madame Chair, I want to thank you and members of the Committee for
providing this opportunity to testify before you today. I will be happy
to answer any questions you may have.
Senator Landrieu. Thank you very much.
Mr. Harland.
STATEMENT OF BRUCE HARLAND, VICE PRESIDENT, COMMERCIAL
SERVICES, CROWLEY MARINE, OAKLAND,
CALIFORNIA
Mr. Harland. Good morning, and thank you for allowing me to
speak with you this morning.
My name is Bruce Harland, and I am the vice president of
contract services for Crowley Marine Services, a company that
has been operating in the Alaskan Arctic continuously since
1957.
I'm also here as a representative of the American Waterway
Operators (AWO) and its member companies that supply valuable
transportation services to Alaskans.
In preparation for the meeting, the members first agreed on
our definition of the Alaskan Arctic as the region west and the
north of the Unimak Pass.
This area is characterized by extreme weather events,
changing and unpredictable ice conditions from year to year,
draft limitations, and above all, a remote region where
assistance can be many hours or even days away.
AWO-member companies have worked within these limitations
to develop a safe, efficient, and cost-effective system to
provide transportation and fuel delivery services to villages
and businesses in the region. The tools we have developed
include fleets to deliver supplies in shallow waters; operating
material such as float hoses to deliver to island tanks; spill
response plans; landing craft used where no docks exist;
procedures to be followed that capture best practices; and
above all, experienced, professional mariners who have an
intimate knowledge of the region.
Over the last 5 years, we have witnessed a dramatic change
in the Arctic with reduced but still unpredictable ice
conditions, increased interest in resource development in the
outer continental shelf, adventure tourism, and talk of new
polar shipping routes.
The Coast Guard is now developing strategies to respond to
this change and AWO-member companies would propose these areas
of focus:
Accurate charting and hydrographic information. Most areas
in the region have little or no up-to-date charts. Increased
use of electronic charting and aids to navigation embedded into
electronic charts would be a significant improvement. The
navigable rivers and bays are especially critical for safe
navigation.
Increased Automatic Identification System coverage in the
area to identify other vessels for security, collision
avoidance, and potential assistance.
Vessel traffic system for Unimak Pass and the Bering Strait
to improve safe passage.
More accurate weather and tide information for the region.
Improved search-and-rescue capabilities and incident
response in the region. This could be with a combination of new
assets and facilities in the region.
Improved icebreaking capabilities. This would again provide
search-and-rescue capability, security for the region, and
could potentially extend the marine season by opening up the
ice for shipping during the shoulder seasons.
A deepwater Arctic port. This is currently being
investigated by the State and the Army Corps, and could be
utilized as a forward deployment point for the Coast Guard.
PREPARED STATEMENT
In conclusion, we would like to leave you with a final
thought. AWO members have been safely operating in the region
for many years and, in conjunction with both the Coast Guard
and the State of Alaska Department of Environmental
Conservation, have developed effective systems for the safe
transportation of cargo and bulk fuels vital to the health and
development of the local cities and villages in Alaska.
Significant regulatory changes that would alter this
transportation system could have a very large impact on the
fragile economic health of the region already suffering from
the high cost of basic necessities, such as heating fuel.
Thank you.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Bruce Harland
Good morning and thank you for allowing me to speak with you this
morning. My name is Bruce Harland and I am the vice president of
Contract Services for Crowley Marine Services, a company that has been
operating in the Alaskan Arctic continuously since 1957. I am also here
as a representative of the American Waterways Operators and its member
companies that supply valuable transportation services to Alaskans.
the arctic region in alaska
In preparation for this meeting, the members first agreed on our
definition of the Alaskan Arctic as the region west and north of Unimak
Pass. This area is characterized by extreme weather events, changing
and unpredictable ice conditions from year to year, draft limitations
and above all a remote region where assistance could be many hours or
days away. AWO-member companies have worked within these limitations to
develop a safe, efficient, and cost-effective system to provide
transportation and fuel delivery services to villages and business in
the region. The tools we have developed include lighterage fleets to
deliver supplies in shallow waters, operating materials such as float
hoses to deliver to inland tanks, spill response plans, landing craft
for where no docks exist, procedures to be followed which capture best
practices and above all experienced professional mariners who have an
intimate knowledge of the region.
strategies to address changing climatic conditions
Over the last 5 years we have witnessed a dramatic change in the
arctic with reduced but still unpredictable ice conditions, increased
interest in resource development in the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS),
adventure tourism and talk of new polar shipping routes. The USCG is
now developing strategies to respond to this change and the AWO-member
companies would propose these areas of focus.
--Accurate charting and hydrographic information. Most areas in the
region have no up to date charts. Increased use of electronic
charting and aids to navigation embedded into electronic charts
would be a significant improvement. The navigable rivers and
bays are especially critical for safe navigation.
--Increased AIS coverage in the area to identify other vessels for
security, collision avoidance, and potential assistance.
--Vessel traffic system for Unimak Pass and Bering Straits to improve
safe passage.
--More accurate weather and tide information for the region.
--Improved Search and Rescue capabilities and incident response in
the region. This could be with a combination of new assets and
facilities in the region.
--Improved ice-breaking capabilities. This would again provide Search
and Rescue capabilities, security for the region and could
potentially extend the marine season by opening up the ice for
shipping during the shoulder seasons.
--Deepwater Arctic Port. This is currently being investigated by the
State and the Army Corps and could be utilized as a forward
deployment point for the USCG.
conclusion
We would like to leave you with a final thought; AWO members have
been safely operating in the region for many years and in conjunction
with both the USCG and State of Alaska Department of Environmental
Conservation have developed effective systems for the safe
transportation of cargo and bulk fuels vital to the health and
development of the local cities and villages in Alaska. Significant
regulatory changes that would alter this transportation system could
have a devastating impact on the fragile economic health of the region
already suffering from the high cost of basic necessities such as
heating fuel.
Senator Landrieu. Thank you.
We're going to start with Senator Murkowski's questioning.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, each of you, for your
contribution here. I think as we think about the role of the
Coast Guard, it is easy to think about the icebreaking
capacity, the helos that we need, the response cutters. But I
think the recognition is that there is an expanding role in so
many different sectors.
And, Bruce, you mentioned what we are seeing with the
increased shipping traffic. As there is more water, you are
going to see more ships. As there are opportunities to decrease
your costs by moving through the northern waterways routes or
up around the Northwest Passage, we are seeing changes. And
again, the Coast Guard's responsibility just becomes that much
more enhanced.
So I would like to focus just real quickly in terms of what
we're seeing with the volume of commercial shipping and
traffic.
I am going to show the chairman here a picture that shows
the volume of ships. These are the numbers of ships that move
through Unimak Pass.
Now, Unimak Pass is here on the Aleutian Islands. And when
you're transiting from the lower 48 from Seattle, you either
come around the Aleutian chain, which is all the way up here,
or you cut through Unimak. So you have a choke point here at
Unimak. The distance here is about 12 miles, I understand.
You also have a choke point here in the Bering Sea, where
it is about 50 miles across.
But right now, we don't have any rules of the road, so to
speak. And you have a level of shipping traffic that is heading
north.
Mr. Harland, can you speak to what you are seeing, how you
view the significance of waterway management, I guess for lack
of better terminology, as we're seeing the volume of ship
traffic in and around our Arctic and northern waters?
Mr. Harland. Waterway traffic is one of the most critical
issues facing the State of Alaska, and we have seen that
transportation of oil and refined products, those incidents
have dropped dramatically. And where we see the difficulty is
in the foreign cargo ships, which are using Unimak Pass. It's
innocent passage. They are on their way from an international
voyage to a U.S. port or a Canadian port.
And if they have engine trouble, if they have steering gear
go out, then they are at the whim of the weather. And the
Selendang Ayu is an incident that was a devastating impact to
the city of Unalaska and the region, which spilled oil and a
whole cargo of soybeans.
And part of that funding from that incident is doing the
Aleutian Islands risk assessment study. And they are looking at
how we can make Unimak Pass and the Bering Sea routes safer,
and what kind of vessel traffic system can be put in place that
still abides by international law, that you can't impede
innocent passage, but allows some safeguards and some
regulation of the traffic.
We're seeing 70 or so ships a year ago that go to Red Dog
Mine and come back down through the straits. As the Northwest
Passage and the northern sea route become more popular,
especially in the marine season, the 120 days they can operate,
you're going to see continued traffic increases through there.
I suspect that it will be a slow buildup, but right now,
Unimak Pass is the single largest transit point in the State of
Alaska and the most risk for an incident.
Senator Murkowski. It is appropriate that we note it is not
only the commercial shipping traffic.
We have cruise ships, Madam Chairman, that are now going
through the Northwest Passage there.
You mentioned the ore. We have the minerals coming out of
Red Dog. It is a level of ship activity that is truly
unprecedented.
Let me ask this question to you, Mr. Burden. And in my
opening comments I noted that District 17 is facing a 19-
percent reduction in the availability of cutter days for
fisheries law enforcement. And you spoke to not only the role
that Coast Guard plays in terms of search and rescue, I think
it is important to note for the record that, last year,
District 17 responded to 586 search-and-rescue cases. They
saved 146 lives, and they assisted 712 mariners.
I think our fishermen know and respect the role of the
Coast Guard here, but it speaks to the significance of the role
of the Coast Guard within the fisheries industry.
So if the Coast Guard is seeing a reduction, will see a
reduction in the number of days they are actually out there on
the water, whether it is for fisheries law enforcement, or
whether it is for search-and-rescue cases, what does that mean
to you in the industry?
Mr. Burden. Thank you, Senator Murkowski.
It is very difficult to stress the significance of those
statistics that you just cited. They are not only significant,
they are also heroic, in many ways.
As you know, the environment of the Bering Sea can be quite
treacherous. And the expanse of the Bering Sea is immense.
When it comes to the perspective of the seafood industry,
we are operating in some very hazardous environments. And it
often comes down to a matter of minutes in response time. And
those minutes mean the difference between life and death,
between a successful response and an unsuccessful one.
And so, from the seafood industry's perspective, we believe
there is a certain level, a minimum amount of resources that
are necessary to adequately patrol not only for enforcement but
also to respond to safety incidents as they occur, and not only
a certain quantity of resources, but also a certain quality of
resources.
As you know, and as we have been speaking about here,
routinely, is the hazardous conditions. And I think it would be
a real tragedy to have an incident begin to occur and have a
delay in response time due to the inability to start up
something, for instance.
So we really are concerned about the level of response
capability and also the quality of that response capability.
Senator Murkowski. And, Dr. Myers, I appreciate also your
discussion about the role that UAVs can play. I think it is
significant that when Healy was escorting the Renda north,
you're looking to find that path of least resistance through
the ice. And we have some pretty smart folks out there that I
think realized toward the end that one of the better, more
effective ways to find those leads, those breaks in the ice,
was through the use of UAVs that they were able to launch and
run out there. And it made the passage doable.
I think we appreciate that we can do so much more. As
Senator Landrieu has mentioned, we can utilize these for
fisheries enforcement, as you're out over incredible open areas
where to have manned aircraft and a helicopter out there, it's
tough. So how we can utilize that more I think is going to be
critically important to us.
You also mentioned the mapping. I think it is important to
acknowledge that, as we speak, the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is out there, gathering
additional coastal topography data.
Madam Chairman, they are essentially mapping an area that
has not been mapped since Captain Cook was sailing these shores
in the 1800s. Now, if you're a navigator, you're a mariner out
there, I think you'd like to know that your data is just a
little bit more up to date.
But, Dr. Myers, can you give me any other examples where
the University of Alaska is cooperating, whether it is with
what NOAA and Fairweather are doing, whether it is your
research with the UAVs, how are you partnering with the Coast
Guard to help with the expanding role in the Arctic?
Dr. Myers. Thank you, Senator Murkowski.
First of all, I would like to really say how pleased the
university is with the support we have been getting from the
Coast Guard. Admiral Ostebo has been up to the university many
times. We have had great conversations on emerging
technological approaches, both how we can get support from the
Coast Guard but also how the Coast Guard might employ some of
the new systems and ideas coming online.
So it has been a very, very constructive dialogue. And as
you have pointed out, and other panelists have pointed out, the
Arctic has really some unique characteristics, not the least
of, it is very dark and very cold for much of the year. And
traditional observational systems that might work in the gulf
don't work so well in the Arctic for those reasons. We lack
support infrastructure.
So as we look at those concepts, again, any time we combine
and merge sensor technologies together, we have a better
picture of the Arctic.
You mentioned the UAVs, in the example. UAVs can be used
with all sorts of other instruments, not just optical cameras.
They have 3-D presence. They can loiter longer than aircraft
can. They don't risk a pilot. You can afford to lose them if
you have to.
So they are a key technology, but they are not unique.
Better integration of the satellite technologies that are out
there, new technologies like hyperspectral being used.
I will just give you an example. When you have oil in ice,
you get a very different spectral signature. You have a very
hard time telling pond water from oil, just because of the
characteristics. Now take that into the darkness.
So you can see, you have to use different sensors. You have
to use a different set of mixtures. We have to understand those
systems. We need not only to do the research, but we then need
to operationally integrate those in.
So, there is one example, better fusion and approaches of
the technology.
One area we are very excited about is the National Science
Foundation is funding a new oceanographic research vessel
specifically designed to work in Arctic waters, the Sikuliaq,
which will launch in October.
Now, it is capable of breaking about a meter of ice. Again,
not nearly as capable as a heavy or medium icebreaker, but can
work on the fringes. It has very good scientific capacity. So
we see great opportunities for collaboration between the
Sikuliaq and the Healy, for example, real opportunities.
You mentioned the mapping. We need much more multi-beam
sonar data, to get to the bathymetric data down, particularly
as we move further north, it gets pretty shallow pretty
quickly.
Deepwater port studies to look at possible locations, at
port clearance, and really look at what are the conditions,
what are the challenges there environmentally, what is the
utility.
And then finally, an area of important collaboration is the
university has operated local community colleges out in the
rural communities. We have strong, established relationships
with these communities of trust between and collaborative
education and participatory science where the communities
participate. That relationship is very handy in terms of
developing a core trust and core communications in the social
sciences.
So as you look at resiliency of communities, that is
another area. And social response to change, and to disasters,
and to search and rescue, the university can play a really good
role working with the Coast Guard in terms of building better
relationships and more resiliency in local communities, and
bidirectional information flowing from those communities to our
agencies.
Senator Murkowski. We appreciate what you are doing.
Thank you, Madam Chairman.
Senator Landrieu. Thank you.
Our hearing is just about ready to come to a close. I think
the testimony has been terrific.
I just would like to end with one question to you, Dr.
Myers. You oversee a research budget of about $123 million.
What are the two or three areas that you're focusing your own
budget on, believing that you would be setting your own
priorities that might serve as some guidance to the Federal
Government, in terms of our research dollars?
Dr. Myers. A lot of those priorities have been driven by
gaps of knowledge and also by my experience as director of the
U.S. Geological Survey and seeing where some of those gaps are.
Senator Landrieu. Could you list just one, two, or three
that you are directing?
Dr. Myers. Yes. No. 1 is oil-spill response in the Arctic.
We have to do it differently. As you mentioned, we don't have
the capacity, and we so we need to be a lot smarter in terms of
how we do it. So new and emerging technology and approaches to
understand oil, to build better predictive models of where oil
would flow, to be able to monitor oil better, should we get to
a worst case scenario.
The university is targeting not the current exploration
stage, but 10 or 15 years down, should we have, as expected--at
least in my opinion, as expected--development of year-round
production from the Outer Continental Shelf.
So building those capacities, filling those gaps, has been
something we have invested quite significantly in.
Fundamental oceanographic research and partnerships. For
instance, ocean acidification is something we are investing in,
to understand, because we have so little data. And there is
really very little funding coming out of Federal agencies to
look at ocean acidification in the Arctic. They're looking at
it elsewhere, but not so much in the Arctic. Another key area.
Understanding the social drivers and dynamics of
resiliency. How do we build better communications and trust? I
think the example of the Macondo spill and the community
response is a key example of where we can do a better job of
communications, how can we develop better approaches of
bidirectional communication with communities, how do we pump
out reliable information to communities that they trust?
So authoritative data coming to these communities, so they
can be part of the solution and engaged early on, which has
been a challenge, whether it be the Exxon Valdez or whether it
be the Macondo spill. Those are, I think, another area, so the
social science research piece is also a place where we
prioritize.
Senator Landrieu. I think this has been excellent
testimony.
And again, Senator, thank you for suggesting that we have
this field hearing. It has been really eye-opening, and it is
just the beginning. It is my first day, and I am looking
forward to 3 more days down here on the ground.
I thank Admiral Papp. I thank the men and women of the
Coast Guard Air Station hear in Kodiak for hosting this
wonderful event.
I remain committed to providing the men and women of the
Coast Guard the tools they need to accomplish your many
missions.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
We will leave the record open, as is customary, for 2 weeks
for other members to submit questions or for other testimony to
come from the community at large, comments from the community
at large.
So the subcommittee will hold the record open for 2 weeks,
until close of business Monday, August 20.
[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
were submitted for response subsequent to the hearing:]
Questions Submitted to the U.S. Coast Guard
Questions Submitted by Senator Mary L. Landrieu
polar icebreakers
Question. Currently, the Coast Guard has two heavy polar
icebreakers, the Polar Sea and the Polar Star. The Polar Star is being
refurbished and will be reactivated in 2013 for another 10 years of
service, and the Coast Guard has plans to decommission the Polar Sea.
The fiscal year 2013 budget request and the Senate bill include initial
funding for a new icebreaker, but it will take 8-10 years to complete.
A recent study sanctioned by the Coast Guard, named the High Latitude
Study, calls for a minimum of three heavy polar icebreakers and three
medium polar icebreakers.
How many new heavy polar icebreakers does the Coast Guard intend to
procure and what would be the implications for future Coast Guard
operations of having a polar icebreaking fleet that includes only one
heavy polar icebreaker?
Answer. The Coast Guard plans to acquire one new polar icebreaker.
The Coast Guard can meet known mission demands with the addition of one
polar icebreaker. The number of icebreakers needed for Coast Guard
operations in the future is dependent upon actual demand in the Polar
regions.
Question. Please elaborate on the challenges that the Coast Guard
faces in building a new icebreaker, including affordability, industrial
supplier base, and schedule?
Answer. The last polar icebreaker constructed in the United States
was the CGC Healy, delivered in 1999. Healy was built at Avondale
shipyard. The current industry may require production line upgrades and
acquisition of specialized tools, material, and equipment. The 10-year
estimated schedule to complete reflects the challenges associated with
the special design of the ship. As a current example, the Canadian
Coast Guard is currently constructing a new heavy icebreaker. The
Diefenbaker project was formally approved in 2008 and is projected to
be delivered in 2018.
Scheduled elements include acquisition or development of a current
design, time necessary to place the design and construction on
contract, production engineering preparation time, vessel construction,
post delivery work, and ice trials. Due to the need for special grades
of steel, much thicker than normal and a unique hull form, developing a
production design may prove more challenging than with conventional
ships.
Question. Instead of building an icebreaker from scratch, are there
parent-craft designs, perhaps one built by a foreign partner, that the
Coast Guard is looking into that would speed up the acquisition
timeline?
Answer. An Alternatives Analysis study will examine the potential
for a parent-craft or parent-design. The U.S. Coast Guard is already
working closely with the Canadian Coast Guard as they work through
detailed-design efforts on their heavy icebreaker project, CCGS John G.
Diefenbaker, which is projected to be delivered in 2018.
polar sea
Question. The Polar Sea was placed in inactive status in November
2011 based on its current mechanical state and cost to repair, and you
plan to decommission the Polar Sea at the end of 2012.
Given the growing need for icebreaking capabilities, why is the
Coast Guard decommissioning this vessel? Does the cost to repair the
Polar Sea outweigh the benefits of having it return to service?
Answer. Based on the estimated cost to repair and reactivate Polar
Sea and given a maximum service life extension of 7 to 10 years, the
cost to return Polar Sea to operations as a near-term stopgap measure
exceeds the benefits a return to service would provide. Additionally,
icebreakers Healy and Polar Star will meet Coast Guard's icebreaking
needs for the next 7 to 10 years, thus Coast Guard is concerned only
with maintaining its capability beyond this time period. Moving
forward, the Coast Guard will focus resources on the acquisition of a
new polar icebreaker.
Question. Is there an option for the Coast Guard to provide this
vessel to a private shipyard for repair and then have the shipyard
lease it back to the Coast Guard until a new icebreaker is built?
Answer. The direct transfer of Polar Sea to a private shipyard has
not been analyzed by the Coast Guard. Leasing a vessel is a short-term
strategy to close a current capability gap, as a Government-owned asset
provides greater operational flexibility and long-term, reliable
capacity to meet current and future requirements. The reactivation of
Polar Star will mitigate the current capability gap. The capability gap
assumed from the High Latitude Study Mission Analysis Report is based
on long-term projections through 2040; a short-term leasing option is
not a cost-effective strategy to fill these gaps.
offshore patrol cutters
Question. During the next decade, the offshore patrol cutter (OPC)
is scheduled to replace 270-foot and 210-foot medium endurance cutters
that are nearing the end of their service lives. Compared to the
national security cutter (NSC), the OPC will be smaller, less
expensive, and in some respects less capable. Construction of the first
OPC is expected to begin in fiscal year 2017 with delivery in fiscal
year 2020.
To what extent, if any, does the Coast Guard plan to use OPCs for
operations in Alaskan waters? How will the capabilities of the OPC
compare to those of the NSC?
Answer. Offshore patrol cutters will be designed to perform Living
Marine Resources Enforcement, Search and Rescue, and Maritime Boundary
Line Enforcement while in Alaskan waters. The OPCs will be capable of
operating year round in the Gulf of Alaska and Bering Sea, and per the
Operational Requirements Document and Concept of Operations, may
operate in areas of less than 100 percent coverage of broken plate,
pancake, and sea ice ranging from 10 to 30 inches thick (though the OPC
will not conduct icebreaking as a mission). The ability to operate in
such ice conditions is an objective capability.
The national security cutter and offshore patrol cutter
capabilities are listed in the following table:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offshore patrol National security
Capability cutter (projected) cutter
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Seakeeping...................... Sea State 5 (up to Sea State 5 (up to
13-foot seas)-- 13-foot seas)--
Boat and Helo ops. Boat and Helo ops
Endurance....................... 8,500-9,500 12,000 nautical
nautical miles/45- miles/60 days
60 days.
Boats and Aviation (Hangar)..... 2-3 boats and H-60/ 3 boats and H-60/
Vertical Unmanned Vertical Unmanned
Aerial Vehicle (H- Aerial Vehicle (2
65). H-65)
Speed........................... 22-25 knots....... 28 knots
Accommodations (maximum)........ 120-126........... 146
Command and Control............. Some integration & NATO
interoperability. interoperable,
Integrated,
Tactical datalink
Intelligence Collection......... Partial........... Full
Force Protection, including Ballistic, Forward Collective
Chemical. weapons, Protection System
Countermeasure and
Washdown. Countermeasure
Washdown, Forward
& Aft weapons.
Deployer........................ Independent, Full battle group
Theater Security
Cooperation.
Underway resupply............... Fueling at Sea/ Fueling at Sea/
Provide to patrol Provide to patrol
boats. boats
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Both the OPC and the NSC will have the necessary seakeeping to
operate year-round in Alaskan waters, but the NSC has increased range
and endurance as compared to the OPC, allowing it to remain in the
patrol area for a longer period without refueling.
Question. What missions in Alaskan waters would be better performed
by NSCs than OPCs?
Answer. Both the OPC and the NSC will have the necessary seakeeping
to operate year-round in Alaskan waters, but the NSC has increased
speed, range, and endurance as compared to the OPC, allowing it to
remain in the patrol area for a longer period without refueling. The
NSC also carries three boats as compared to two planned on the OPC, and
has an additional helicopter hangar. These additional capabilities are
critical for executing search and rescue and law enforcement operations
in the harsh weather of the vast Alaskan region. Specific advantages in
capability of the NSC as compared to the OPC include:
--28 knots sustained as compared to projected 22-25 knots of speed
for the OPC. This capability is useful in the Alaska region
where there are limited forward operating locations for Coast
Guard helicopters to stage from during the peak search and
rescue (SAR) season.
--A range of 12,000 nautical miles as compared to 8,500 nautical
miles for the OPC. This additional range is useful for
executing long-range fisheries enforcement actions, such as
with the recent case in which the Coast Guard turned over a
vessel suspected of illicit drift net fishing east of Japan in
the North Pacific Ocean to the China Fishery Law Enforcement
Command.
--60 days endurance, which is a full 2-week advantage over the OPC.
This capability is useful as long as oilers to conduct at-sea
replenishment are scarce in the Alaska region, and ports to
resupply are limited (only Dutch Harbor and Kodiak, Alaska).
Question. Will some of the OPCs be built with ice-strengthened
hulls to operate in the Arctic?
Answer. The Operational Requirements Document and Concept of
Operations for the offshore patrol cutter include a brief discussion of
an OPC variant that could operate in areas of less than 100 percent
coverage of broken plate, pancake, and sea ice ranging from 10 to 30
inches thick (though the OPC will not conduct icebreaking as a
mission). The ability to operate in such areas and conditions is an
objective capability.
rescue 21
Question. Rescue 21 is the Coast Guard's advanced direction-finding
communications system that is deployed on U.S. coastlines to better
locate mariners in distress and save lives. Rescue 21 is replacing the
National Distress and Response System, which has been in use since the
1970s. The Rescue 21 system began initial operations in 2005 and has
since been deployed across the continental United States and Hawaii,
but Alaska has been a challenge due to its rough terrain and extreme
weather.
What are the Coast Guard's plans with respect to expanding Rescue
21 throughout Alaska?
Answer. The Coast Guard will recapitalize the legacy National
Distress Response System (NDRS) in Alaska. Rescue 21 Alaska will differ
from the system currently being deployed by General Dynamics C4 Systems
(GDC4S) due to the unique geographic, operational, and environmental
challenges. Starting in fiscal year 2013, the Coast Guard will
recapitalize the console control systems and increase VHF FM voice
capability at existing remote tower sites.
The Coast Guard will also increase system coverage in a minimum of
three areas prioritized by the Pacific Area and Alaska (District 17)
Commanders through their review of actual Search and Rescue case data
and meetings with Alaska operational stakeholders. These new areas are
Middle Cape, Peril Strait, and Fairweather Banks. New tower sites
planned for these areas will require design and construction activities
including completion of all logistics planning, permitting, and
environmental compliance requirements.
Additionally in fiscal year 2013, the project will add Digital
Selective Calling (DSC) functionality and complete network
infrastructure upgrades. This will allow command centers to
automatically receive GPS position data from vessels in distress with
properly configured DSC radios.
arctic research
Question. Dr. Mark Myers, the vice chancellor for research at the
University of Fairbanks included in his written testimony, the
following: ``A significant investment in research will be necessary for
the Coast Guard to understand the changing conditions successfully and
their effects on its key missions and incorporate new approaches and
technologies into Arctic operations.''
What is the Coast Guard is doing in terms of Arctic research or
other projects related to challenges in Alaska?
Answer. The Coast Guard has been actively engaged in Arctic related
research since 2009, when the Coast Guard began evaluating technologies
and developing approaches for responding to oil spills in ice-covered
waters.
To date, the Coast Guard has conducted two spill response
demonstrations in the Great Lakes prior to testing in the Arctic region
to evaluate the efficacy of current oil-in-ice response capabilities.
These demonstrations included participants from multiple State and
Federal agencies, spill response organizations, foreign governments and
both Coast Guard and commercial vessels. Preliminary results indicate
that heated skimmers, and emerging techniques such as oil herding, show
promise and warrant further field evaluation. The Coast Guard also
conducted a spill response demonstration during the Coast Guard's
Arctic Shield exercise in the Arctic region in August 2012, deploying a
Spilled Oil Recovery System (SORS) and a heated skimmer from a Coast
Guard buoy tender. The Coast Guard also plans to conduct another Great
Lakes exercise in January 2013 that will include greater in-depth
testing of the SORS plus additional response technologies, to include
oil detection on and under ice.
The Coast Guard is also investigating vessel capabilities for
Arctic operations. The investigation included an Arctic craft
demonstration that took place off Barrow, Alaska, in August 2012.
During this demonstration two amphibious vehicle technologies were
evaluated for performance across unimproved shore, through open water,
and transiting through or over ice flows. The goal of the effort is to
identify the most appropriate craft/boat for Coast Guard operations off
the North Slope of Alaska and off cutters operating in and around ice-
covered waters.
The Coast Guard is also researching Arctic communication
alternatives. One project is assessing the operational use of the U.S.
Navy-led joint mission Tactical Microsatellite (TacSat) 4 for Arctic
communications. Testing will use satellite communication systems aboard
Coast Guard cutters and aircraft operating in the Chukchi and Beaufort
Seas. The satellite's unique coverage pattern, a ``low HEO'' (highly
elliptical orbit) with long dwells on theaters, may provide the Coast
Guard with communications capabilities not always available in the high
latitudes. The Coast Guard also plans to research High Frequency (HF)
communication gaps and options in the Arctic region. The study will
model current capabilities and identify potential future solutions to
close gaps.
Search and Rescue (SAR) in waters that are partially or completely
ice-covered is another area of current Coast Guard research. While
testing has yet to occur in Alaska, realistic search performance tests
approximating procedures for Coast Guard helicopters and airboats in an
Arctic environment have taken place in the Great Lakes. These tests may
prove to be useful in developing tactics and procedures for use in the
environment in Alaska.
The Coast Guard also continues to partner with other agencies and
entities conducting Arctic research. One such example is the Coast
Guard's partnership with the Army Corps of Engineers' Cold Regions
Research and Engineering Laboratory (CRREL). The partnership
underscores anti-icing technologies, as they relate to vessels,
aircraft, and shore infrastructure (e.g., antennas aboard cutters,
boats, and aircraft and how this impacts vessel-to-shore communication
in Arctic conditions).
Senator Murkowski. And, Madam Chairman, I would just ask
unanimous consent that the testimony that we have received from
Lieutenant Governor Treadwell that was submitted to the
subcommittee be submitted for the record. We do have that. He
had asked me to do just that.
Senator Landrieu. Absolutely. We will, without objection.
[The statement follows:]
Letter From Lieutenant Governor Mead Treadwell, State of Alaska
August 6, 2012.
Hon. Mary L. Landrieu,
Chairman, Subcommittee on Homeland Security,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Lisa Murkowski,
Member, Subcommittee on Homeland Security,
Washington, DC.
RE: Hearing on the Need for a Robust United States Coast Guard Presence
in Alaska
Dear Senator Landrieu and Senator Murkowski: Thank you for the
invitation to today's hearing. A family commitment has kept me out of
town.
This letter submits comments to the Senate Subcommittee on Homeland
Security Appropriations for its hearing held in Kodiak, Alaska on the
need for a robust U.S. Coast Guard presence in the U.S. Arctic.
First, on behalf of the State of Alaska and its grateful people,
who are part of a grateful nation, we honor the work of the United
States Coast Guard and two of its fallen Kodiak Guardsmen, Petty
Officer 1st Class James Hopkins, an electronics technician, and Richard
Belisle, a civilian employee and retired Coast Guard chief petty
officer, who were killed this spring while on duty. Alaska mourns with
the families and friends of Jim and Rich. We are enduringly grateful
for the work of the Coast Guard everywhere in Alaska.
The United States must prepare now to realize and act on the
significant opportunities and address the changing needs in the Arctic
over the coming decade. We are already seeing an increase in activity
in the Arctic from oil and gas exploration, mineral development,
tourism and marine transportation. This testimony addresses four
specific needs that relate to the work of the USCG in America's Arctic:
permitting needs for new infrastructure, planning for offshore energy
exploration and development, preparing for new global shipping
patterns, and addressing gaps in science and research.
1. Alaska has extensive amounts of stranded resources. The State is
hard at work planning pipelines and roads to bring these resources to
world markets and to communities suffering from crippling energy
prices. Nearly all these mineral and energy projects need roads and
pipelines with river crossings--bridges that must be approved by the
USCG. We understand the Coast Guard has just one permit administrator
in Alaska. While a ``general permit'' approach should be considered, we
urge the Congress and the Coast Guard to make sure staff resources are
sufficient in this area to streamline permitting and help access to
Arctic resources and communities.
2. Offshore oil and gas exploration and development is a present
reality. The USCG has a leading role in ensuring marine safety and
environmental protection. This year's drilling season is the beginning
of what we expect could be sustained exploration and development. Land,
air, and sea-based Coast Guard resources will become increasingly more
necessary. If Shell, ConocoPhillips, StatOil and others are successful
in their exploration, regular Coast Guard presence will be necessary
for enforcement and oil spill prevention. These important duties can't
be performed from a distant base such as Kodiak or even Unalaska. The
Coast Guard needs to have heated hanger space, housing and other basic
infrastructure in the Arctic that will allow for sustained
surveillance, search and rescue, inspections and enforcement, and
coordination of spill response efforts.
3. As the Arctic Ocean becomes increasingly accessible, European,
Asian and North American nations are taking advantage of new shipping
routes. U.S. Arctic policy calls for a shipping regime that is safe,
secure, and reliable. Alaska and the Nation's coast are protected by
Federal laws such as the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 and State laws. Many
federally required standards are administered by the Coast Guard. For
regulated vessels, these standards are some of the most stringent in
the world. Standards exist for vessel design, equipment, operations,
crew licensing and manning requirements, navigation safety, and spill
liability. Industry can and has voluntarily exceeded these minimum
standards. One of the most important changes was the phasing out of
single hull tankers to double hulls. We are concerned these standards
do not apply to many vessels passing through the Bering Strait and the
Aleutian Islands.
(a) Unregulated vessels in the Aleutians (which the U.S. has been
including in the American Arctic) and Bering Strait are a
threat to that goal. To help mitigate the danger, it is
imperative that the USCG implement and enforce U.S.
regulations for tank and non-tank vessels within U.S.
jurisdiction and aggressively pursue improvements for oil
spill preparedness and response for foreign vessels in
innocent passage through the International Maritime
Organization. Alaska is at the intersection of the
circumpolar shipping route for trade between our Pacific
west coast and the Pacific Rim countries. Alaska is also
the gateway to Arctic shipping through the Bering Sea,
which is arguably the most productive fishery in the world.
Increased presence, improved oil spill preparedness and
response, and establishment of oil spill removal
organizations in remote areas are essential for resource
protection and safe shipping for both the circumpolar and
Arctic shipping routes. Completion of the ongoing risk
assessments for both the circumpolar shipping route through
the Aleutians and the Arctic shipping route through the
Bering Straits is essential.
(b) This past January, the world watched as the Coast Guard Cutter
Healy escorted the Russian tanker Renda with a vitally
important cargo of fuel for residents of Nome. We are
grateful to the selfless crew of the Healy, who increased
an already long deployment and gave up celebrating the
holidays with their families to come to the rescue of iced-
in Alaskans. The thick ice put the Healy's medium-class
ice-breaking capabilities to the test, and the lesson
reaffirmed that America needs heavy, polar class
icebreakers.
(c) Through the Arctic Council, the U.S. has signed an
international agreement on search and rescue in the Arctic.
We are responsible for the lives of those in our sector who
are in danger, and we must be ready to respond.
(d) The U.S. is also participating on the Arctic Council Task Force
for Arctic Marine Oil Pollution Preparedness and Response
to develop an international instrument on Arctic marine oil
pollution preparedness and response with the eight Arctic
nations. This instrument provides a framework for
international collaboration in combating incidents or
threats of marine oil pollution and will be presented at
the next Ministerial meeting of the Arctic Council in 2013.
For this, too, we must be prepared.
(e) The Coast Guard will be on the front lines in following through
on these binding agreements with our Arctic neighbors. We
look forward to commenting upon the Committee on Marine
Transportation Services' report ordered by Congress on
these issues under the Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment
Act of 2010.
4. Lastly, we continue to need appropriate access and platforms for
science in the Arctic. Although the State of Alaska strongly supports
the U.S. Senate's ratification of the UN Convention on Law of the Sea,
there is some concern that ascension to it will make parts of the
Arctic Ocean less accessible for some kinds of science and research. We
need to support long-term monitoring networks and good land and sea
mapping now, to support later U.S. claims in the Arctic.
The State of Alaska stands ready to be a partner with the United
States and USCG in all these efforts. Governor Sean Parnell, in a
letter to U.S. Representative Don Young dated March 15, 2012, said that
while the State will not subsidize Federal missions such as
icebreaking, it can be supportive in other ways, such as financing.
Alaska is also already working with Federal partners on studies for
Arctic ports. We are laying plans for Arctic marine shipping, and
participating in Federal studies and the international agreements
mentioned above. We are a long-standing partner with the Federal
Government in science, and just submitted comprehensive feedback from
State agencies on the Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee
draft 5-year Arctic research plan.
America must be ready for an accessible and developing Arctic. The
rest of the world is not waiting for us as energy exploration,
development, shipping, and tourism grow in this ocean. A Russian think-
tank recently suggested the Arctic Ocean be renamed the Russian Ocean
because they take this opportunity seriously. America has to be serious
about the Arctic. Equipping our Coast Guard is part of rising to the
challenge and benefiting from the new opportunities before us.
Sincerely,
Mead Treadwell,
Lieutenant Governor, State
of Alaska.
CONCLUSION OF HEARING
Senator Landrieu. And the meeting is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:38 a.m., Monday, August 6, the hearing
was concluded, and the subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene
subject to the call of the Chair.]
-