Dan Sullivan

I think we certainly have some of the cleanest water, the most pristine environment of any place in the world.

Was there extensive consultation with regard to this rule, particularly how it applies to our unique Alaska circumstances?

One of the concerns I certainly have as Alaska's Senator, but I think a lot of Alaskans have, is what's happening with regard to Federal overreach

I do think--and I don't want to speak for all the witnesses, though--there certainly seems to be broad consensus that this rule has not done much to consider the unique circumstances of Alaska.

But if it did, wouldn't that be the realm of Congress and not the EPA?

I think when you think about specific things that can be done without starting over, if starting over isn't an option, we need to consider how does this impact Alaska.

I really appreciate the great testimony here. The differing views are important views.

I think you're correct in probing that issue, because small business, both here in Alaska and nationwide, is, you know, a significant job creator and a significant, you know, important aspect of our economy.

Even within the Obama administration, there are concerns, significant concerns, that we have not undertaken the proper analysis on how this will impact small communities and small businesses.

The cost of doing business but the time it takes to get permits, which is, in my view, a very significant problem.

The Federal Government certainly can do a better job in reaching out to consult with Alaska Native corporations.

I think that that is one that there are very, very significant differences of opinion on this issue.

I just think this is despicable that we have been left out in the cold on this.

We think the EPA grossly underestimates the costs of the rule.

The EPA should be mandated to consider Alaska's unique circumstances.

Shutting down development will breed a cycle of displacement, which is antithetical to the purpose of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act.

There's many of us who believe that this rulemaking process was a clear example of Executive Order 13132.

So even the State of Alaska, but even the Congressional Research Service seems to be at odds with the administrator of the EPA.

Alaska has opposed the rule and asked for its withdrawal and is one of 34 States in the United States that is opposing the rule.

I think we need to get on the page where we can all come to a consensus, like what it would do and what it wouldn't.

I try to remind the EPA, the administrator and other senior members of the EPA in Washington, DC, that Alaskans love our environment.

So my view is, particularly given what you're talking about, that despite having had the Supreme Court just a year ago reprimand the EPA for taking over with regard to regulatory authority that they did not have, because there was not a…

So, again, just so everybody's clear, for the record: The Connectivity Study, upon which the rule is based, came out several months after the rule was proposed, correct?

Thank you, Mr. President, and thank you for your travel all the way from Nuiqsut for this testimony.

Senator Sullivan, thank you very much for the opportunity to talk here today.