A month after the Biden administration canceled oil and gas leases in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge that were issued in the waning days of the Trump administration, the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority (AIDEA) has challenged the decision with a lawsuit.
The suit, which has the backing of Republican Gov. Mike Dunleavy and the three members of Alaska’s Congressional Delegation, calls the decision to cancel the leases politically motivated and accuses the feds of violating federal laws and regulations.
“(The Department of Interior’s) decision to terminate the leases was inadequately reasoned, unsupported by facts, and a pretext for DOI’s real goal of never allowing drilling in the Coastal Plan to occur,” argues the suit, which was filed in
The suit argues the state should have had opportunities to challenge the decision to cancel the leases, adding that the state should have been able to maintain the leases as long as they complied with whatever heightened operating rules the feds would ultimately require.
“Alaskans must advocate for our rights, and I cannot think of a better day than Alaska Day
to stand united for our ability to explore and develop our natural resources from the
critical minerals we need for our clean energy transition to the domestic oil and gas we
need to get us there,” said Representative Mary Peltola in a prepared statement accompanying the AIDEA announcement.
The 2021 lease sale was mandated by an amendment to Trump’s tax bill championed by Alaska’s Congressional Delegation. However, after decades of fighting to open the region to drilling, the sale was widely considered a flop, with the state-owned AIDEA being the primary buyer outside small private companies. The private companies have already abandoned their leases, facing interminable delays and lawsuits.
After taking office, the Biden administration put an immediate hold on the leases and ultimately canceled the leases in early September. The Biden administration has argued that the Trump administration failed to follow the law and regulations when preparing for the lease sale, accusing a handful of political appointees of papering over career scientists’ concerns about the environmental impacts of drilling in ANWR.
Much of that was detailed in a report by Politico, which noted that the slapdash nature of the original lease sale would open it up to challenges and cool industry interest in what was already seen as a risky endeavor. Per that article:
A rushed and incomplete review poses a hazard not just to the environment, but to the companies that want to develop it: The less thorough the review, the less they can protect themselves against future legal risk associated with their drilling operations. More sophisticated and experienced companies have even been known to ask federal agencies to spend more time on an impact statement if they have concerns that the agency might be overlooking something of consequence. Asked about the draft environmental impact statement for leasing in the coastal plain, an Interior official with experience working in Alaska said, “Unless there are some significant changes made, our feeling is it’s going to be very susceptible to litigation.”
Matt Acuña Buxton is a long-time political reporter who has written for the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner and The Midnight Sun political blog. He also authors the daily politics newsletter, The Alaska Memo, and can frequently be found live-tweeting public meetings on Twitter.
