Sec. 1041. Designation of Department of Defense Strategic Arctic Ports

2,487 words·~11 min read·/bill/116/s/1790/es/section-1041·

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

Congress makes the following findings: The strategic importance of the Arctic continues to increase as the United States and other countries recognize the military significance of the sea lanes and choke points within the region and understand the potential for power projection from the Arctic into multiple regions. On January 19, 2018, Secretary of Defense James Mattis released the document titled 2018 National Defense Strategy of the United States of America in which the Secretary outlined the reemergence of long-term, strategic competition by countries classified by the National Security Strategy as revisionist powers.

Russia and China have conducted military exercises together in the Arctic, have agreed to connect the Northern Sea Route, claimed by Russia, with China’s Maritime Silk Road, and are working together in developing natural gas resources in the Arctic. The Government of the Russian Federation— has prioritized the development of Arctic capabilities and has made significant investments in military infrastructure in the Arctic, including the creation of a new Arctic Command and the construction or refurbishment of 16 deepwater ports and 14 airfields in the region; has approximately 40 icebreakers as of May 2019, including several nuclear-powered icebreakers, is currently constructing four icebreakers, and is planning to build an additional eight icebreakers; and conducted the largest military exercise since the 1980s, Vostok 2018, which included— 300,000 troops; 1,000 aircraft; 80 ships; 36,000 vehicles; and notably, 3,200 Chinese troops, 30 Chinese rotary and fixed-wing aircraft, and 900 Chinese tanks.

The Government of the People’s Republic of China— released, in January 2018, its new Arctic Strategy, the Polar Silk Road, in which it declares itself as a near-Arctic state , even though its nearest territory to the Arctic is 900 miles away; has publicly stated that it seeks to expand its Belt and Road Initiative to the Arctic region, including current investment in the natural gas fields in the Yamal Peninsula in Russia, rare-earth element mines in Greenland, and the real estate, alternative energy, and fisheries in Iceland; and has shown great interest in expanding its Arctic presence, including through— the operation of research vessels in the region; the recent construction of the Xuelong 2, or Snow Dragon II, the only polar research boat vessel in the world that can break ice while going forward or backward; a freedom of navigation operation in the Aleutian Islands in 2015; and its recent plans to develop a 33,000 ton nuclear-powered icebreaker.

The economic significance of the Arctic continues to grow as countries around the globe begin to understand the potential for maritime transportation through, and economic and trade development in, the region. The Arctic is home to 13 percent of the world’s undiscovered oil, 30 percent of its undiscovered gas, an abundance of uranium, rare earth minerals, gold, diamonds, and millions of square miles of untapped resources, including abundant fisheries. The Bering Strait is experiencing significant increases in international traffic from vessels transiting the Northern Sea Route, increases which are projected to continue if decreases in sea ice coverage continue.

Along a future ice-free Arctic shipping route, a ship sailing from South Korea to Germany would have an average travel time of just 23 days, compared to 34 days via the Suez Canal and 46 days via the Cape of Good Hope. In a speech at the Arctic Forum in September 2011, Russian Federation President Vladimir Putin highlighted the Northern Sea Route as a potential alternative to the Suez Canal and has publicly stated plans to invest $11,400,000,000 along the Northern Sea Route by 2024.

Increases in human, maritime, and resource development activity in the Arctic region are expected to create additional mission requirements for the Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security, given— the strategic focus of the Government of the Russian Federation and the Government of the People's Republic of China on the Arctic; overlapping territorial claims; and the potential for maritime accidents, oil spills, and illegal fishing near the exclusive economic zone of the United States.

The increasing role of the United States in the Arctic has been highlighted in each of the last four National Defense Authorization Acts. Section 1068 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 ( Public Law 114–92 ; 129 Stat. 992) required a new Department of Defense strategy to protect United States national security interests in the Arctic region. Section 1095 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 ( Public Law 114–328 ; 130 Stat. 2438) required the Department of Defense to create criteria to designate a Department of Defense Strategic Arctic Port.

Section 122 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 ( Public Law 115–91 ; 131 Stat. 1310) authorized the procurement of one polar-class heavy icebreaker vessel. Section 151 of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 ( Public Law 115–232 ) authorized the procurement of five additional polar-class icebreaker vessels and expressed that the Coast Guard should— maintain an inventory of not fewer than six polar-class icebreaker vessels; award a contract for the first new polar-class icebreaker not later than fiscal year 2019 and deliver the icebreaker not later than fiscal year 2023; and deliver the second through sixth polar-class icebreakers at a rate of one vessel per year in fiscal years 2025 through 2029.

In January 2017, the Department of Defense released a report entitled Report to Congress on Strategy to Protect United States National Security Interests in the Arctic Region to update the ways and means the Department of Defense intends to use to achieve its objectives as it implements the 2013 National Strategy for the Arctic Region, including— enhancing the capability of United States forces to defend the homeland and exercise sovereignty; strengthening deterrence at home and abroad; preserving freedom of the seas in the Arctic; and evolving the infrastructure and capabilities of the Department in the Arctic consistent with changing conditions and needs.

The United States Coast Guard Arctic Strategic Outlook released in April 2019 states, Demonstrating commitment to operational presence, Canada, Denmark, and Norway have made strategic investments in ice-capable patrol ships charged with national or homeland security missions. [The United States] is the only Arctic State that has not made similar investments in ice-capable surface maritime security assets. This limits the ability of the Coast Guard, and the Nation, to credibly uphold sovereignty or respond to contingencies in the Arctic .

On January 12, 2017, Secretary of Defense James Mattis stated, The Arctic is key strategic terrain … Russia is taking aggressive steps to increase its presence there … I will prioritize the development of an integrated strategy for the Arctic. I believe that our interests and the security of the Arctic would benefit from increasing the focus of the Department of Defense on this region . On January 9, 2019, Secretary of the Air Force Heather Wilson and Chief of Staff of the Air Force General David Goldfein wrote, … the Arctic has become even more important to the nation.

Both a northern approach to the United States, as well as a critical location for projecting American power, its geo-strategic significance is difficult to overstate . On February 26, 2019, General John Hyten, Commander of the United States Strategic Command, stated, In particular, the Arctic is an area that we really need to focus on and really look at investing. That is no longer a buffer zone. We need to be able to operate there. We need to be able to communicate there. We need to have a presence there that we have not invested in in the same way that our adversaries have.

And they see that as a vulnerability from us, whereas it is becoming a strength for them and it is a weakness for us, we need to flip that equation . On February 26, 2019, General Terrence O’Shaughnessy, Commander of the United States Northern Command stated, It has become clear that defense of the homeland depends on our ability to detect and defeat threats operating both in the Arctic and passing through the Arctic. Russia’s fielding of advanced, long-range cruise missiles capable of flying through the northern approaches and striking targets in the United States and Canada has emerged as the dominant military threat in the Arctic. … Meanwhile, China has declared that it is not content to remain a mere observer in the Arctic and has taken action to normalize its naval and commercial presence in the region in order to increase its access to lucrative resources and shipping routes.

I view the Arctic as the front line in the defense of the United States and Canada … . On May 6, 2019, Admiral Karl Schultz, Commandant of the Coast Guard stated, We talk about the Arctic as a competitive space. We’ve seen China, we see Russia investing extensively. China built icebreakers in the time since we updated our strategy. China’s been operating off the Alaskan Arctic for a good part of the last six years on an annual basis. [The Coast Guard is] championing increased capabilities in the Arctic … better communications, better domain awareness … .

I want to see the Arctic remain a peaceful domain. China’s a self-declared Arctic state. They’re not one of the eight Arctic nations, so for me, for the service, its presence equals influence . On May 6, 2019, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo stated that— the Arctic has become an arena for power and for competition , and the United States is entering a new age of strategic engagement in the Arctic, complete with new threats to the Arctic and its real estate, and to all of our interests in that region. ;

Arctic sea lanes could become the 21st century Suez and Panama Canals. ; We’re concerned about Russia’s claim over the international waters of the Northern Sea Route, including its newly announced plans to connect it with China’s Maritime Silk Road. ; In the Northern Sea Route, Moscow already illegally demands other nations request permission to pass, requires Russian maritime pilots to be aboard foreign ships, and threatens to use military force to sink any that fail to comply with their demands. ; there is a pattern of aggressive Russian behavior here in the Arctic and we know Russian territorial ambitions can turn violent ; and we do not want the Arctic Ocean to transform into a new South China Sea, fraught with militarization and competing territorial claims , nor do we want the fragile Arctic environment exposed to the same ecological devastation caused by China’s fishing fleet in the seas off its coast, or unregulated industrial activity in its own country .

On December 6, 2018, Secretary of the Navy Richard Spencer stated, We need to have a strategic Arctic port up in Alaska. We need to be doing FONOPs in the northwest – in the northern passage. … peace through presence with a submarine is a little tough . Meanwhile, the two closest strategic seaports, as designated by the Department of Defense, to the Arctic Circle are the Port of Anchorage and the Port of Tacoma, located approximately 1,500 nautical miles and 2,400 nautical miles away, respectively, and approximately 1,900 nautical miles and 2,800 nautical miles respectively from Barrow, Alaska.

The distance from Bangor, Maine, to Key West, Florida, is approximately 1,450 nautical miles. It is the sense of Congress that— the Arctic is a region of strategic importance to the national security interests of the United States and the Department of Defense must better align its presence, force posture, and capabilities to meet the growing array of challenges in the region; and although much progress has been made to increase awareness of Arctic issues and to promote increased presence in the region, additional measures, including the designation of one or more strategic Arctic ports, are needed to show the commitment of the United States to this emerging strategic choke point of future great power competition.

Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Commanding General of the United States Army Corps of Engineers, the Commandant of the Coast Guard, and the Administrator of the Maritime Administration, shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report evaluating potential sites for one or more strategic ports in the Arctic. Consistent with the updated military strategy for the protection of United States national security interests in the Arctic region set forth in the report required under section 1068 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 ( Public Law 114–92 ; 129 Stat. 992), the report required under paragraph

(1)shall include— an evaluation of the amount of sufficient and suitable space needed to create capacity for port and other necessary infrastructure for at least one of each of type of Navy or Coast Guard vessel, including an Arleigh Burke class destroyer of the Navy, a national security cutter, and a heavy polar ice breaker of the Coast Guard; an evaluation of the amount of sufficient and suitable space needed to create capacity for equipment and fuel storage, technological infrastructure, and civil infrastructure to support military and civilian operations, including— aerospace warning; maritime surface and subsurface warning; maritime control and defense; maritime domain awareness; homeland defense; defense support to civil authorities; humanitarian relief; search and rescue; disaster relief; oil spill response; medical stabilization and evacuation; and meteorological measurements and forecasting; an identification of proximity and road access required to an airport designated as a commercial service airport by the Federal Aviation Administration that is capable of supporting military and civilian aircraft for operations designated in subparagraph (B); a description of the requirements, to include infrastructure and installations, communications, and logistics necessary to improve response effectiveness to support military and civilian operations described in subparagraph (B); an identification of the sites that the Secretary recommends as potential sites for designation as Department of Defense Strategic Arctic Ports; the estimated cost of sufficient construction necessary to initiate and sustain expected operations at such sites; and such other information as the Secretary deems relevant. Not later than 90 days after the date on which the report required under subsection

(c)is submitted, the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Commanding General of the United States Army Corps of Engineers, the Commandant of the Coast Guard, and the Administrator of the Maritime Administration, shall designate one or more ports as Department of Defense Strategic Arctic Ports from the sites identified under subsection (c)(2)(E). Nothing in this section may be construed to authorize any additional appropriations for the Department of Defense for the establishment of any port designated pursuant to this section. In this section, the term Arctic has the meaning given that term in section 112 of the Arctic Research and Policy Act of 1984 ( 15 U.S.C. 4111 ).

Connectionstraces to 5

Traces to 5 documents

public-private-law

U.S. Code