From: Kaden McArthur kaden@alaskawild.

org
Subject: FW: Oppose Amendment 130 in FY20 Interior and Environment Appropriations Bill
Date: June 18, 2019 at 1:56 PM
To: kaden.mcarthur@gmail.com

From: Kaden McArthur

Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2019 1:56 PM
To: 'corey.solow@mail.house.gov' <corey.solow@mail.house.gov>
Cc: Leah Donahey <leah@alaskawild.org>
Subject: Oppose Amendment 130 in FY20 Interior and Environment Appropriations Bill

Hi Corey,

Thanks for the call today! Really appreciate your boss’s support. As I mentioned on
the call, the Interior Appropriations bill included Arctic Refuge provision (Section
118). Rep. Duncan and Rep. Young have filed Amendment #130 which would strike
Section 118 from the underlying bill. We hope Rep. McEachin will oppose
Amendment #130 and support protecting the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

Section 118 would require a minimum bid amount on what companies must pay to
lease a piece of the Arctic Refuge’s fragile coastal plain. This is an important
provision that would hold Congress accountable for the promises made when Arctic
National Wildlife Refuge leasing was jammed through Congress in an unrelated tax
package. More background on the importance of this provision is included below.

I am happy to respond to any questions you may have regarding the vote in the
next week. I have also cc’d our Legislative Director Leah who would be willing to
answer any questions you or your boss may have.

Thanks
__________________________________________________________________
______________
Top lines:
· The Arctic Refuge Coalition urges your boss to support the Arctic Refuge
Minimum Bids Provision (Section 118).
· This provision would require BLM to set a minimum bid on what companies
must pay to lease part of the Arctic Refuge’s irreplaceable Coastal Plain
for drilling. This minimum bid must be capable of generating the revenues
required by the Tax Act.
· This provision simply holds Congress accountable to the promised federal
revenues of $1 billion dollars from opening the fragile Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge to oil and gas development.
· It is a matter of fiscal responsibility for us to require that any lease sale
generate the revenue promised in the Tax Act. We should not be
sacrificing one of our most treasured public lands to the lowest bidder.
· This billion-dollar claim was used to sell Arctic Refuge leasing to Congress
even though the average Alaska North Slope bid since 2000 is just $31 per
acre, orders of magnitude below the $2,000+ per acre needed to meet
 acre, orders of magnitude below the $2,000+ per acre needed to meet
proposed revenues.
Additional Background on the Minimum Bids Provision (Section 118):
Revenue Projections Were Based on Faulty Assumptions: To generate $2.2 billion
in leasing revenue, with half going to the federal treasury, there are numerous bad
assumptions that Congress made when passing the Tax Act. These include:
· The Value of Potential Arctic Refuge Leases. Since 2000, the average
Alaska North Slope bid on a lease has been $31/acre. If the entirety of the
1.5 million acre Coastal Plain was leased at this rate, the federal treasury
would just receive $25.5 million, less than 3 percent of the Congressional
Budget Office (CBO) estimate.
· The Entirety of the Arctic Refuge Would Never Be Leased. In the past
decade, industry has never bid on more than 42% of leases offered in the
National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska, and often bid on far less, averaging
only 12%. Not only is it implausible that the bid per acre will be high
enough to raise the projected revenue, but it is also unlikely that industry
will lease the entirety of the Arctic Refuge Coastal Plain.
Even with bad assumptions, Arctic Refuge leasing just does not pencil out.

General Background: When the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge was opened to
development in 2017 after four decades of protection, this mandate to drill was
passed under reconciliation legislation that hinged on an assumption that an Arctic
Refuge oil and gas program would generate $2.2 billion in revenue, with $1.1 billion
going to the federal treasury and the other half going to the State of Alaska. Pro-
drilling advocates’ billion-dollar claim was used to sell Arctic Refuge leasing to
Congress even though the average Alaska North Slope bid since 2000 is just $31
per acre, orders of magnitude below the $1,000+ per acre needed to meet
proposed revenues.

The bottom line is that the American people were sold a bill of goods when we were
promised a billion dollars in federal revenue from opening the fragile Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge to development. And what’s worse, these inflated revenue promises
were made under false assurances that any steps toward Arctic Refuge
development would be taken with the utmost care for the land as well as the people
and wildlife that depend on it. Since that time, the administration has been in a mad
rush to lease this wild land, precluding any meaningful analysis of the impact
development will have on local communities and wildlife, and has deprived federal
and climate scientists, the Gwich’in people and the American public the opportunity
to meaningfully contribute.

The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is one of the last true wild places in North
America, home to caribou, polar bears, millions of migratory birds and so much
more. Leasing should never take place on its coastal plain wilderness regardless of
how much revenue is promised. No amount of money can replace this unparalleled
public land, and it certainly cannot replace the way of life of the Gwich’in people
who have relied upon it for a millennium.
 ALASKA
KADEN MCARTHUR
WILDERNESS Legislative Intern
LEAGUE
A N D A F F I L I AT E
ALASKA
WILDERNESS
ACTION

122 C St NW, Ste 240

Washington, DC 20001
Tel: 202-544-5205
Fax: 202-544-5197
www.AlaskaWild.org
www.AlaskaWildAction.org

* Please consider the environment before printing this email.