Joint Subcommittee Hearing: Charting the Arctic: Security, Economic, and Resource Opportunities

The House Committee on Foreign Affairs held a joint subcommittee hearing “Charting the Arctic: Security, Economic, and Resource Opportunities” where the committee explored how the State Department, Defense Department, and Department of Homeland Security are cooperating and coordinating to support U.S. interests in the far north.

Chairman Duncan Rohrabacher (R-CA) gave his opening statement, stating that one year ago, the Europe Eurasia subcommittee held its first hearing on the Arctic. Since then, when the US adopted chairmanship of the Arctic Council, congressional interested in the Arctic has increased, and elected representatives from the lower 48 have recognized the advantage of pursuing interests in the Arctic

The purpose of this hearing is not to debate science, the fact remains that the Arctic is in stark contrast to the Antarctic and is more accessible than it has been. The purpose of this hearing is to ask what we are currently doing with the Arctic and what do we want to do with the Arctic.

Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-FL), the Ranking Member, stated the Arctic has become the new geopolitically relevant region. From a geopolitical perspective, a number of nations are scrambling to be the first mover in this territory. He stated he would encourage cooperation between all members.

Rep. John Duncan Jr. (R-TN), chairman of the National Security Subcommittee, stated they need to examine the Arctic, a region that is often overlooked and misunderstood. Joint exercises with allies in the region would help countries prepare for disasters that may befall travelers or workers in the North.

In the near future cruises will explore the coastline of Alaska and Canada, so it is imperative that the US and Canada are both prepared to navigate the harsh landscape in the event of an emergency. Other Arctic nations participate in these kinds of exercises already occupying the land in the Arctic.

It is clear that the Arctic is not a one dimensional environment – there are economic, human, infrastructure, and security concerns in the region – yet the Obama administration is only focusing on climate change. The Obama administration’s decision to eliminate opportunities for drilling rights by terminating auctions is a disservice to our national interests.

The Arctic is of immense strategic interest for the US, we need to make sure we are using the platform of the chairmanship of the Arctic Council and our own tools of power to advance US national interests, and support our allies and friends with similar interests in the common area.

Rep. Albio Sires (D-NJ) stated trade routes can be shortened and money can be saved by taking advantage of opening routes in the Arctic. But the melting ice also poses security concerns. As Russia races to control the Arctic, we must remain vigilant. The administration’s selection of Rear Admiral Robert Papp as the senior Arctic official is an encouraging sign of increased engagement in the region.

Rep. Don Young (R-AK) gave his opening statement. Alaska feels like the ugly debutant, and it is Congress’ responsibility to look at the total picture that Alaska represents. He stated that he doesn’t believe Alaska should be spokes child of climate change, and we need to look at how to simultaneously compete and work with Arctic nations. He added that Russia wants to ‘claim’ the Arctic, along with China.

There has to be a specific Arctic policy, and the indigenous people need to be heard. The discussion of this hearing should bring out where we are going to be in 1 month, 2 months, 1 year, and 10 years in the Arctic. We don’t want Russia and China to take over Alaska, the potential to improve the Arctic needs to be done with a concrete plan.

In his testimony, Admiral Robert Papp stated that Arctic engagement takes place primarily through the Arctic Council. His full written testimony can be found here. The chairmanship theme echoes the belief that all states must work together, embrace the opportunities it presents, and face the challenges that need to be dealt with.

A significant accomplishment to date has been the GLACIER conference, although not an Arctic Council event, it emphasized of the goals of the council. Adm Papp stated we also cannot ignore that the US’s Arctic efforts are taking place during a difficult time with Russia, as right now it is a pivotal point in history as the region is undergoing rapid changes. The main challenge is charting a course for this region.

He then detailed the Arctic and National Security. Russia’s annexation of Crimea, its aggression with Ukraine, and its efforts to intimidate its neighbors are affront the rules-based international system and put at risk peace that we and our allies have worked so hard to achieve in Europe.

The international community’s disagreements with Russia caused by Moscow’s actions have complicated efforts in the Arctic. Fortunately, we have worked with Russia on Arctic issues during past political crises and are maintaining activities with Russia related to protecting the Arctic environment, ensuring maritime safety, including search and rescue, and law enforcement. We also continue to work with Russia in multilateral fora, including under the auspices of the Arctic Council, and our other Arctic allies are following similar policies.

Adm. Papp then stated that we cannot and will not continue to ignore Russian aggression even as Arctic cooperation continues. The US is in lockstep with the EU and Norway on sanctions that target Russia’s ability to develop resources in its Arctic waters, among other things.

Simultaneously, we continue to work with Russia and our global partners on issues such as those in the Arctic. The federal interagency community is committed to the challenge of charting a course toward a sustainable future in the Arctic and working within capacities to improve the future of the Arctic region.

Adm. Papp also spoke of international governance. He stated that international cooperation takes place through multiple forums – the Arctic Council, International Maritime Organization, and the Arctic Coast Guard Forum. Each of those serves a purpose to advance specific priorities and affords opportunities to engage with appropriate delegations.

“No other international body in the world is doing work of such high caliber on the issues we face in the Arctic, which is why the council is so important to the U.S.,” Adm. Papp stated.

We are prioritizing emergency response by convening exercises under the auspices of the Agreement on Cooperation on Aeronautical and Maritime Search and Rescue in the Arctic and the Agreement on Cooperation on Marine Oil Pollution Preparedness and Response in the Arctic to examine the coordination of emergency response capabilities of the Arctic States in conjunction with local communities.

He then spoke of some of the Arctic Council’s initiatives. He stated the Arctic Council is cognizant of how changes in the Arctic have created significant challenges and opportunities for every Arctic nation, especially for our own American citizens in Alaska. The warming climate threatens the traditional ways of life of Arctic residents and risks disrupting ecosystem balance. During the U.S. Chairmanship, we are striving to bring tangible benefits to communities across the Arctic.

Preventing suicide, especially among youth, is one of the most pressing public health imperatives in the Arctic today. Assessing progress on suicide prevention is a challenging task anywhere – but especially in the Arctic, where communities are small and often geographically distant from health care providers and other resources. The Arctic Council’s continued work on suicide intervention aims to aid health workers to better serve the needs of their communities, while helping policymakers to measure progress, identify challenges and scale up interventions.

There are also major disparities in water and sewer access in Arctic communities. Access rates in parts of Alaska are similar to those found in the contiguous 48 states in the 1950’s. The Arctic Council is supporting innovative efforts to devise decentralized, Arctic-friendly solutions to address the lack of access to water and sanitation, a major driver of infectious diseases, especially those related to hygiene, and which are also a drag on economic development. The concept of One Health is promoted by the Arctic Council. It argues that human health is unavoidably linked to the health of animals and ecosystems.

Energy diversification and clean energy access is also priority of the US chairmanship. This prioritizes local capacity to build a set of clean energy champions within Arctic communities and sharing policies and technical best practices.

The U.S. has also initiated a circumpolar telecommunications assessment of the infrastructure necessary to support the ever-increasing human activity throughout the Arctic region. “Building telecommunications infrastructure across the Arctic is critical for addressing the growing communication needs of Arctic communities as well as supporting navigation demands, economic development activities, search and rescue operations, and environmental and humanitarian emergencies,” Adm Papp stated.

The Arctic Council is also developing a circumpolar plan to prevent, detect, and manage invasive species, as growth in shipping and development activities in the region increases the risk of introduction. There is an immediate opportunity—already largely lost in many other regions of the world—to proactively build resilience to the risks posed by invasive species. The development of an enhanced digital elevation model of the Arctic, will provide better baseline mapping information, both for scientific endeavors and to national security needs as Arctic activities continue to increase.

The Arctic Council is moving to fully implement the Framework for Action on Enhanced Black Carbon and Methane Emissions, which includes the development of national black carbon and methane emission inventories, national reporting on domestic mitigation efforts, and greater international cooperation on reducing these dangerous pollutants. We have also invited Observer States in the Arctic Council to join us in this effort because these pollutants are global in origin. Our cooperation is particularly timely in the run-up to the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in December, when the United States will join nations around the world to push for joint action on climate change.

Adm. Papp then spoke about Arctic fisheries, and that the Arctic Council is making significant progress toward a long-standing US objective of preventing unregulated fishing from starting in the high-seas portion of the central Arctic Ocean.

Although there are currently no commercial fisheries of consequence in the high-seas area of the Arctic Ocean, it is reasonable to expect that with diminishing sea ice and the possible migration of species, commercial fisheries are possible in the foreseeable future.

Additionally, he reminded the audience that in 2009, the US took the precautionary step of prohibiting commercial fishing in its own exclusive economic zone (EEZ) north of the Bering Strait until there is a better scientific foundation for a sound fisheries management regime. He added that other Arctic opportunities have taken similar steps, most recently Canada.

In July 2015, the United States and the other four nations with EEZs that surround this high seas area signed the Declaration Concerning the Prevention of Unregulated High Seas Fishing in the Central Arctic Ocean.

In the Declaration, which is non-binding, the five nations committed not to authorize their own vessels to engage in fishing in the high-seas area until there is an effective international mechanism in place to manage such fishing in accordance with modern standards. They also committed to establish a joint program of scientific research aimed at improving our understanding of the ecosystems of this area.

The Declaration also acknowledges the interest of other States’ in this topic and looks forward to working with them in a broader process to develop measures consistent with the Declaration that would include commitments from all interested States.

With that in mind, the US has invited representatives from the original five States and China, Japan, South Korea, Iceland and the European Union, to a new set of negotiations with the goal of transforming the non-binding declaration into a binding agreement. The State of Alaska, the Alaska Native Community, the Alaska-based fishing industry, and the environmental community all support this objective. This new set of negotiations is expected to start in Washington, DC in early December.

Adm. Papp then discussed the extended continental shelf (ECS) and maritime boundaries. When the US and other Arctic States attempt to define their continental shelf in the Arctic Ocean, it is sometimes described as a “race for resources” or “competing for territorial claims,” but Adm. Papp stated these are inaccurate and unhelpful hyperboles.

The underlying issue of delimiting maritime boundaries where the ECS may overlap with one or more neighboring states is what is the extent, or outer limit, of a country’s ECS, and how do neighboring countries divide when their ECS overlap.

He stated that despite what the media presents, there is no race for resources or land grab in the Arctic. The Arctic coastal states are proceeding in an orderly manner to define their continental shelf limits according to the provisions set out in the United Nation’s Law of the Sea (LOS) Convention.

Last year the Office of Ocean and Polar Affairs at the Department of State established the ECS Project Office at a NOAA facility in Boulder, Colorado. This office is dedicated to completing the data analysis and documentation necessary to establish the limits of the US’s ECS in the Arctic and for other US ECS areas, such as the Bering Sea, Atlantic Ocean, and the Gulf of Mexico.

While the United States has a significant amount of ECS in the Arctic, as a non-party to the LOS Convention, the US is at a disadvantage relative to the other Arctic Ocean coastal States. Those States are parties to the Convention, and are well along the path to obtaining legal certainty and international recognition of their Arctic ECS.

Becoming a Party to the Law of the Sea Convention would help the US maximize international recognition and legal certainty regarding the outer limits of the US continental shelf, including off the coast of Alaska, where our ECS is likely to extend out to more than 600 nautical miles. US accession is a matter of geo-strategic importance in the Arctic (where all other Arctic nations, including Russia, are Parties). The Administration remains committed to acceding to the LOS Convention.

The US has two maritime boundaries in the Arctic, one with Canada and one with Russia. The US and the Soviet Union signed a maritime boundary agreement in 1990 that is only provisionally in force. Russia has respected this maritime boundary, and has not defined an ECS on the US side of the boundary.

Canada and the US have yet to agree to a maritime boundary that would divide their overlapping ECS. This has been made a key objective for implementation of the US’s National Strategy for the Arctic Region, and in the interim, the US and Canada has manage mutually beneficial data to define respective ECS areas.

In his testimony, US Coast Guard Vice Admiral Charles Michel highlighted the lack of infrastructure in the Arctic region and reaffirmed the Coast Guard’s desire for 2 new icebreakers.

He stated that the Coast Guard uses mobile command and control platforms including large cutters and ocean-going ice-strengthened buoy tenders, as well as seasonal air and communications capabilities to execute these missions across more than 950,000 square miles of ocean off the Alaskan coast.

Since 2008, the Coast Guard has conducted operations in the Arctic Region to assess its capabilities and mission requirements as maritime activity and environmental conditions permit. These operations have included establishing small, temporary Forward Operating Locations along the North Slope to test the Coast Guard’s capabilities with boats, helicopters, and personnel.

Each year from April to November the Coast Guard flies aerial sorties to evaluate activities in the region. The Coast Guard will continue to deploy a suite of Coast Guard cutters to test equipment, train crews, and increase our awareness of Arctic activity.

He then described how the Coast Guard supports the Arctic Executive Steering Committee (AESC). The Coast Guard is the lead agency responsible for coordinating 7 activities associated with the National Strategy for the Arctic Region and its Implementation Plan:

Enhance Arctic Domain Awareness;
Sustain Federal Capability to Conduct Maritime Operations in Ice-Covered Waters;
Improve Hazardous Material Spill Prevention, Containment, and Response;
Promote Arctic Oil Pollution Preparedness, Prevention, and Response Internationally;
Enhance Arctic Search and Rescue
Expedite International Maritime Organization Polar Code Development and Adoption; and
Promote Arctic Waterways Management.

After, Adm Michel elaborated on how the Coast Guard supports the Arctic Council. Through the Interagency Coordinating Council on Oil Pollution Research, it is working with stakeholders to address critical research and development needs and capabilities for pollution response and oil spill prevention in the Arctic environment.

The Coast Guard is also a key participant in the Emergency Prevention, Preparedness and Response (EPPR) workgroup, and helps develop, implement, and sustain Arctic-wide prevention and response strategies. This past September the EPPR workgroup coordinated and hosted an Arctic Council oil spill workshop to test the oil pollution agreement, and will help lead a live exercise in 2016.

The Coast Guard is a key sponsor of various contingency response agreements and exercises, including coordinating the Agreement on Cooperation on Aeronautical and Maritime Search and Rescue in the Arctic.

The US government also conducted an International Arctic Search and Rescue Exercise, ARCTIC ZEPHYR from October 19-22, 2015 in Anchorage, Alaska to test the agreement in practice. Its focus was on the coordination of response capabilities of the Arctic Nations, local governments, private sector, and indigenous communities to a mass search and rescue operation in the Arctic Region.

The DHS is working with the Administration to support the President’s announced intention to accelerate the acquisition of a replacement heavy polar icebreaker and begin planning for the construction of additional icebreakers.

“The ability to operate year round – safely and reliably – means having heavy icebreakers. Year round access is vital to our nation’s security and economic interests,” he stated. “I can personally attest that these regions are remote, hostile, and unforgiving. Distance are vast, weather is a constant factor, ice conditions are dynamic and infrastructure is almost non-existent.”

“Operations in both polar regions demand detailed and deliberate planning supported by specialized, reliable and unique equipment, and they often demand close coordination with federal, state, local, academic, industry and indigenous community stakeholders,” he added.

He then outlined the initiatives the Coast Guard has planned to pursue their strategic objectives to improve awareness, modernize governance, and broaden partnerships: broadening Arctic Shield Operations, establishing an Arctic Coast Guard Forum, promote waterways management, and their engagement with Russia.

Broaden Arctic Shield Operations

He stated that Arctic Shield 2015 is currently focused on Western Alaska and the Bering Strait with a three pronged operation consisting of outreach, operations, and assessment of capabilities.

He added that they continue with mutually beneficial engagement with Alaska Native tribes which has made Coast Guard operations safer and more successful. The Arctic Waterways Safety Committee works in close coordination with Alaska Native subsistence activities to ensure de-confliction of activities during open water operations.

As a part of Arctic Shield operations in 2015, a temporary, forward-operating location in Dead horse was established.

The national security cutter WAESCHE and high endurance cutter MUNRO operated in the Chuckchi and Bering Seas, conducting maritime patrols and stationing response capabilities during drilling operations.

The Coast Guard has partnered with NOAA and other agencies to conduct mapping operations, and to coordinate mass casualty prevention and response plans at all levels of government

The Coast Guard is also working with the Department of Defense (DOD) to advance maritime domain awareness by testing numerous types of technologies and capabilities for use in the Arctic, including communication systems and unmanned vehicles.

Establish an Arctic Coast Guard Forum (ACGF)

This forum is modeled after the successful North Pacific Coast Guard Forum, where all eight Arctic nations discuss coordination of exercises, strengthen relationships, and share best practices. Complimentary to the Arctic Council, the chairmanship of the ACGF will reside with the country holding rotating chair of the Arctic Council.

The first ever “Heads of Arctic Coast Guards” meeting took place on October 28-30, 2015, and the participating nations approved the Terms of Reference and released the Joint Statement.

Promote Waterways Management

The Coast Guard is employing their Waterways Analysis and Management System Port Access Route Study (PARS) methodologies to assess vessel traffic density and determine if a need exists for improved aids to navigation and other safety requirements. A thorough Bering Strait PARS with input from other Arctic nations will provide valuable recommendations for the International Maritime Organization (IMO).

The Coast Guard is also involved in a Department of Interior-led Permitting in Alaska to synchronize the efforts of Federal agencies responsible for overseeing the safe and responsible development of Alaska’s onshore and offshore energy development projects in Alaska.

Engagement with Russia

Engagement with Russia is a key feature of effective environmental response in the Arctic. It is in the interests of US national security for the US Coast Guard to maintain open lines of communication with its Russian counterparts to ensure effective cross-border search and rescue operations, maritime law enforcement, and pollution response.

“Operating in ice-impacted waters is challenging, requiring specialized infrastructure and equipment, plus well-trained personnel, to achieve successful outcomes. The Coast Guard will continue to tailor operations and prioritize future collaborative efforts to match risk trends, maximize stewardship of resources, and assess out-year needs to ensure it can serve the nation’s interest in the Arctic. This strategy is consistent with our Service’s approach to performing its maritime safety, security, and stewardship missions.”

Rear Admiral Timothy C Gallaudet testified on the Navy’s ongoing and future activities in the Arctic, as the US Navy must be ready to operate in all the world’s oceans, including the Arctic. The Navy’s current posture in the Arctic is appropriate to address existing defense requirements given the risk of conflict in the Arctic region is low. This is primarily through the use of undersea and air assets. In the event that the requirements might change, the Navy must be ready to operate in this changing environment.

The recently revised Cooperative Strategy for 21st Century Sea power builds on the heritage and complementary capabilities of the Navy-Marine-Coast Guard team to advance the prosperity and guarantee the security of the nation. The Sea Services will continually evaluate Arctic access and presence requirements improve maritime domain awareness, and pursue cooperation with Arctic partners to enhance the maritime safety and security of the region.

The Navy will continue to develop strong, cooperative partnerships with the Coast Guard, in addition to other interagency and international Arctic region stakeholders, to address the emerging opportunities and challenges caused by the seasonal opening of the Arctic Ocean waters.

Specifically, the Navy will continue to take deliberate steps to develop Arctic expertise through exercises, scientific missions, and personnel exchanges that provide sailors with opportunities to learn best practices.

The Navy will limit surface ship operations to periods of projected peak activity associated with open water conditions. Even during open water operations, weather and ocean factors, including sea ice, must be considered when conducting operational risk assessments.

The Navy will emphasize low-cost, long-lead time activities to match capability and capacity to future demands and will continue to study and make informed decisions on operating requirements and procedures for personnel, ships, and aircraft with interagency partners and allies.

Through ongoing exercises, such as the Navy’s biennial Ice Exercise, or ICEX, and associated Scientific Ice Expeditions, as well as research and transits through the region by Navy submarines, aircraft and surface vessels, the Navy will continue to learn more about the evolving operating environment.

The Office of the Oceanographer of the Navy and Office of Naval Research’s Marginal Ice Zone Research Initiative is an example of the types of programs designed to develop new technologies and gather observations using a mix of autonomous sensors and platforms allowing Navy-funded scientists to investigate ice-ocean atmosphere dynamics to characterize the physical processes that govern season evolution in ice cover.

These observations are critical to enabling improvements in numerical predictions of polar operational environments. Understanding the importance of partnerships and addressing common concerns, the Navy is partnering with the Defense Research and Development Canada on an acoustic propagation project to better understand surface losses due to interactions with ice cover, acoustic fluctuations, and ambient noise in open water during summer in the marginal ice zone.

Through the implementation of the National Fleet Plan and our respective Arctic strategies, Navy and Coast Guard are identifying opportunities to increase commonality and interoperability to better enable the two components to operate together in support of mutual homeland security and national defense missions.

Maritime security and international naval cooperation have always been critical components of U.S. Arctic policy. With indigenous populations spread over a vast expanse, the severe climate and rich natural resources of the Arctic are both a challenge and opportunity. The Navy’s approach underscores the need to strengthen our cooperative partnerships with interagency partners, especially the U.S. Coast Guard and international Arctic stakeholders.

The committee members were then given the opportunity to ask the witnesses questions.

Chairman Duncan asked if unmanned technologies can be used for Arctic exploration. He also asked the witnesses about some of the challenges the Arctic environment may present to using technology for exploration.

In response, Adm. Gallaudet stated that the Navy has been working with the Office of Naval Research to conduct experiments and exercises in the Arctic with autonomous systems, specifically autonomous sensing systems like unmanned underwater vehicles and drifting floats and profilers. These will be demonstrated in their ice exercise in March 2016.

Adm. Gallaudet then elaborated on some of the challenges operating in this region poses: sea ice imposes challenges on sensors, but the Navy continues to practice and experiment to learn how to address those challenges. The challenging Arctic environment has need for unmanned systems to address the dull, dirty, and dangerous work there that unmanned systems are designed to handle.

Duncan then asked Adm. Gallaudet about the accuracy of the sea ice measurements taken from satellites in space compared to those taken on the ground.

Adm. Gallaudet responded that the Navy trusts the measurements taken from space, and that they are currently deployed with the Canadian Synthetic Aperture Radar Satellite (SAR satellite) as a part of the mission of the Naval and National Ice Center (NNIC) which provides operational predictions of ice movements for operating forces in the region. This is an international collaborative effort with the US Coast Guard and their Canadian allies. The NNIC will be used in a prominent way for the ice exercise in March 2016 to best locate the ice camp where the 2 submarines will surface.

Duncan then asked if there was a measurement of error between measurements from space and from the surface.

Adm. Gallaudet responded there is uncertainty, but in any region, it is best to use a suite of technology that works together in a complimentary way to get the optimal characterization of a physical environment.

Duncan then asked Adm. Papp about China’s incursion into South China Sea, and how this violates international law in the South China Sea. He asked if China’s actions elsewhere have made the Arctic Council consider revoking China’s observer status on the Arctic Council.

Adm. Papp responded that the U.S. responded to China’s actions in the South China Sea by taking a strong stand against China’s illegal proclamations. But, related the Arctic Council, we hope that the Arctic remains a place where communication with China as an observer can continue. But, it could be one area the U.S. could use in response to China’s actions elsewhere in the future.

Duncan stated that right now, the Arctic is low threat environment, but asked if the Navy has the ability to operate in the Arctic if the needed to.

Adm. Gallaudet responded that the Navy has the ability to operate in the Arctic given current requirements. Specifically, the submarine forces area huge need for unmanned systems to address the dull, dirty, and dangerous work there that unmanned systems are designed to handle.

Duncan then asked Adm. Gallaudet about the accuracy of the sea ice measurements taken from satellites in space compared to those taken on the ground.

Duncan then asked if there was a measurement of error between measurements from space and from the surface.

Duncan stated that right now, the Arctic is low threat environment, but asked if the Navy has the ability to operate in the Arctic if the needed to.

Adm. Gallaudet responded that the Navy has the ability to operate in the Arctic given current requirements. Specifically, the submarine forces are well equipped to operate in the Arctic – SEAWOLF has just gone on a venture in the Arctic. The Navy’s Arctic Roadmap is designed to look at future requirements of the Navy to ensure that we continue to build capacity if there is a need for increased naval operations in the Arctic.

Ranking Member Meeks asked questions about the environment. He cited a recent US Geological survey that claimed 50% of US coastline is at risk of being impacted by sea level rise. He asked about the options available for the populations that face imminent danger from sea level rise.

Adm. Papp responded that there already are villages being impacted by sea level rise. Villages off the Coast of Kivalina, Alaska need to be relocated to a higher ground.

Rep. Meeks then stated that the Arctic Council seems to be an excellent forum to promote cooperation, but what does the recent push for militarizing the Arctic say about this?

Adm. Papp stated that it is concerning that this is something we spend a lot of time observing, but it needs to be understood that what we see is a country (Russia) is developing its waterway, not militarizing its waterway. Russia is taking reasonable actions to have the proper infrastructure in place for future human activity.

Rep. Young asked each witness to give their view about where Alaska should be in terms of infrastructure. He reminded the witnesses of the administration’s decision to shut down the potential for drilling leases off of Alaska, in complete disregard of the private investment of the local communities. He brought up whether it should be the Congress that is setting up where Alaska should be in the next 10 years.

Rep. Sires asked if the size of Russia’s icebreaker fleet says anything about Russia’s military goals in the Arctic.

Adm. Papp stated that culturally, the Arctic is a part of Russia. Half of their coastline is in the Arctic, so it is logical that the country has devoted a lot of its funds to building Arctic infrastructure.

Adm. Gallaudet added that Russia has not made any attempts to violate international sea laws in the Arctic. He agrees with Adm. Papp’s comment that the Russian Navy is very open about its intentions in the Arctic.

Adm. Michel said that Coast Guard had five heavy icebreakers when he first joined the service. Since then, we have allowed that to atrophy into one icebreaker that is over 40 years old. Given this, the Coast Guard cannot guarantee global year round areas to the areas the US has sovereign accessibility.

Rep. Yoho (R-FL) asked about how detrimental Congress’ failure of approving a budget in a timely manner has been a barrier to the Coast Guard’s ability to achieve what it wants in the Arctic.

Adm. Papp responded that as a former Chief of Staff, this almost doubles the workload, because you need to prepare for multiple contingencies. It is very frustrating for people having to continue doing their job without the approval of a government budget guaranteed they will be getting paid for the work that they are doing. He explained that even if their budget is approved last minute, you still need to prepare for the potential of everything shutting down.

Rep. Rohrabacher stated that budget issues are a bigger problem than weather issues. Congress is borrowing money, and China is buying our debt, so we really need to focus on the essential economic element of this problem. Perhaps, to maximize the benefit of the Arctic region, we should impose user fee tax on those that are continually harvesting fish or extracting minerals, oil, or gas. If there is a lot of revenue being generated from their activity in the region, which is dependent on our rescues to keep their businesses afloat, then the Coast Guard and other search and rescue organizations should get a payment from them.

Adm. Gallaudet stated that imposing user fees requires legislative authority.

Rep. Rohrabacher stated that maybe there could be certain areas of high risk to define that additional user fees could be imposed given the risk associated of operating in certain regions and resources the Coast Guard would have to use to perform a search and rescue mission if anything were to potentially go wrong.