6 1 2 3 4 5 6 to increase its exports of oil to the United States during the period of time before a corridor is in operation, (5) the possible ownership and financing of the Canadian sector of a corridor, (6) any other results of the negotiations which he may deem relevant. 7 SEC. 6. (a) As soon as practicable following the date of 8 the enactment of this Act, but in no event later than ten days 9 thereafter, the Director is authorized and directed to under10 take a study of the feasibility of alternatives for a corridor for 11 the delivery of North Slope oil and natural gas insofar as 12 such a corridor 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 (1) affects the national interest and welfare of the United States, including (A) effects on national security, (B) effects on consumers, (C) effects on American balance of payments. (2) poses environmental risks along the length of its route. (b) For purposes of this study, the Secretary of State 21 is authorized and requested to periodically inform the Direc22 tor of the progress and substances of the negotiations author 23 ized by section 5 of this Act. 24 (c) The study of the Foundation may be adopted by the 25 Secretary of the Interior as an Environmental Impact State 7 ment (in accordance with section 102 of the National En2 vironmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332)), or as 3 a part of any such statement, for the purpose of recommend4 ing appropriate Federal action to permit the extraction and 5 transmission of North Slope Alaskan oil and natural gas 6 through a corridor. 7 (d) On or before the expiration of two hundred and 8 seventy days after passage of this Act, the Director shall sub9 mit to the Secretary of the Interior and the Interior Com10 mittees of the House and Senate the Foundation's study, to11 gether with findings and conclusions based thereon. 12 SEC. 7. (a) In conducting such study, the Director is 13 authorized to enter into contracts and other agreements with 14 such persons, institutions, or agencies as he may determine 15 necessary and appropriate to carry out the purposes of this 16 section. 17 (b) The Director is authorized to secure from any de18 partment, agency, or instrumentality of the Federal Govern19 ment any information he deems necessary to carry out his 20 functions under this Act. Upon request of the Director, the 21 head of any Federal department, agency, or instrumentality 22 is authorized (1) to furnish the Director such information as 23 may be necessary for carrying out his functions to the extent 24 it is available to or procurable by such department, agency, or instrumentality, and (2) to detail to temporary duty with 25 8 1 the Director, on a reimbursable basis, such personnel, within 2 his administrative jurisdiction, as the Director requests, each 3 such detail to be without loss of seniority, pay, or other 4 employee status. 5 SEC. 8. (a) Notwithstanding the provisions of this or 6 any other law, no rights-of-way over, upon, or through the 7 Federal lands shall be granted, issued, or renewed for any 8 delivery system to transport the oil and natural gas resources 9 of the North Slope area of the State of Alaska to other 10 States in the United States or any foreign nation until the 11 completion of the negotiations provided for in section 5 of 12 this Act, and the Foundation study provided for in section 6 13 of this Act, and until and unless the Congress has enacted 14 legislation specifically authorizing such rights-of-way. 15 (b) The Secretary of the Interior, within three hundred 16 and thirty days of the date of enactment of this Act, shall 17 submit to the Committees on the Interior of the House and 18 Senate his recommendation as to the most desirable route for 19 transmission of North Slope Alaska oil and natural gas to the 20 other States of the United States. 21 SEC. 9. The Congress recognizes its responsibility to act 22 expeditiously to facilitate the development and transmission 23 of the oil and natural gas resources of the North Slope area of 24 Alaska to the other States of the United States by authorizing 25 necessary rights-of-way, upon receiving the results of the 9 1 negotiations provided for in section 5 of this Act, the results 2 of the Foundation study provided for in section 6 of this Act, 3 and the recommendations of the Secretary of the Interior 4 pursuant to section 8 (b) of this Act. 5 6 SEC. 10. There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of this 7 Act. Chairman JACKSON. Senator Fannin, do you have a statment? STATEMENT OF HON. PAUL J. FANNIN, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF ARIZONA As we begin hearings on the transport of oil from Alaska's North Slope to the lower 48 States, I would like to voice my full support for construction of a trans-Alaska pipeline. As I see it, the following arguments make it clear that the Alaskan route now under consideration is the best available alternative for supplying oil to U.S. markets. First, based on an intensive study of the Alaskan route and on the best information available about Canada, a Canadian route would not be superior from an environmental point of view. Because such a route would be about four times as long as the proposed transAlaska pipeline, it would affect more wilderness, disrupt more wildlife habitat, cross almost twice as much permafrost, necessitate use of three or four times as much gravel that has to be dug from the earth, and-obviously-use about four times as much land. Environmental risks involved in the Alaska route can be guarded against by assuring that the pipeline is constructed so as to withstand severe earthquakes and that operation of the maritime leg be made safer than any other maritime oil transport system now in operation. Those involved in its construction and operation have expressed a willingness to comply with just such specifications. Second, it is clear that from the viewpoint of our national interest the trans-Alaskan route is economically preferable. The question here is not only whether Canada is willing to have a pipeline built through its territory, but also whether the conditions the Government of Canada has specified for any pipeline through Canada are acceptable in light of U.S. national interests. Those specifications require that (1) a majority of the equity interest in the line would have to be Canadian; (2) the management would have to be Canadian; (3) at least 50 percent of the capacity of the line would have to be reserved for the transportation of Canadianowned oil to primarily Canadian-not U.S.-markets; and (4) at all times preference would have to be given to Canadian-owned and controlled groups during construction of the project. One would be hard put to justify taking on such terms when we have the alternative of a pipeline through Alaska that will be built by American labor and will deliver its full capacity of American-owned oil to our markets. Third, it is evident that a trans-Alaska pipeline would be built much more quickly than a trans-Canadian line. The companies who own the North Slope oil have not indicated a desire to build through Canada. Furthermore, before an application for a Canadian route could be approved, a number of time-consuming steps involving detailed environmental and engineering efforts, finalization of financial arrangements, preparation of impact statements and acquisition of permits would be necessary. Moreover, specific arrangements between the United States and Canadian Governments would have to be negotiated. In light of both |