Legislature(2021 - 2022)SENATE FINANCE 532
03/01/2021 09:00 AM Senate FINANCE
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Aidea – Update on Projects, Investments and Cash Flow | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE
March 1, 2021
9:04 a.m.
9:04:30 AM
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Bishop called the Senate Finance Committee meeting
to order at 9:04 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Click Bishop, Co-Chair
Senator Bert Stedman, Co-Chair
Senator Lyman Hoffman
Senator Donny Olson (via teleconference)
Senator Bill Wielechowski (via teleconference)
Senator David Wilson
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Natasha von Imhof
PRESENT VIA TELECONFERENCE
Alan Weitzner, Executive Director, Alaska Industrial
Development and Export Authority, Department of Commerce,
Community and Economic Development.
SUMMARY
AIDEA UPDATE ON PROJECTS, INVESTMENTS AND CASH FLOW
ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY UPDATE ON ASSETS, PROJECTS,
GRANTS & LOANS
Co-Chair Bishop thanked Co-Chair Stedman for filling in
while he was absent the previous week.
9:06:17 AM
AT EASE
9:06:27 AM
RECONVENED
^AIDEA UPDATE ON PROJECTS, INVESTMENTS and CASH FLOW
9:06:38 AM
ALAN WEITZNER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ALASKA INDUSTRIAL
DEVELOPMENT AND EXPORT AUTHORITY, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE,
COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (via teleconference),
discussed the presentation "AIDEA PROJECTS, INVESTMENTS and
CASH FLOW UPDATE" (copy on file). He thanked the committee
and noted that the presentation was in response to a
request from committee staff to address updates to
projects, investments, and cash flow as well as three
natural resource development projects. He highlighted that
the presentation worked in coordination with a letter the
Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority (AIDEA)
provided to the legislature dated January 8, 2021 (copy on
file), which was a statutorily required annual review of
assets of the organization.
9:08:26 AM
Mr. Weitzner spoke to slide 1, "AIDEA'S MISSION":
To promote, develop, and advance economic growth and
diversification in Alaska by providing various means
of financing and investment.
AIDEA OVERVIEW
• Investing in Alaskans since 1967
• Alaska's Development Finance Authority
• Financially Self-Sustaining Public Corporation
(no GF by statute AS 44.88.190(b))
• $439.7 million in Dividends to Alaska since 1997
• Directed over $3 billion into economic
development in Alaska
Mr. Weitzner highlighted that AIDEA was tasked with
encouraging the diversification of the state's economy and
promoting the creation and retention of jobs. He recounted
that AIDEA was initially created to provide tax exempt
financing through the Conduit Revenue Bond Program (CRBP).
The initial capitalization of AIDEA started with a loan
program through the Department of Revenue (DOR) and a total
appropriation $309 million. Since that time, AIDEA had
provided more back to the general fund than its initial
capitalization.
Mr. Weitzner showed slide 2, "AIDEA AS 44.88":
WITHIN AS 44.88.010(a)(10)
It is in the public interest to promote the prosperity
and general welfare of all citizens of the state by:
(A) stimulating commercial and industrial growth and
expansion by encouraging an increase of private
investment by banks, investment houses, insurance
companies, and other financial institutions, including
pension and retirement funds, to help satisfy the need
for economic expansion;
(B) encouraging the production of raw materials and
goods for export, the expansion of exports and raw
materials and goods?;
(C) creating the Alaska Industrial Development and
Export Authority with the powers necessary to
accomplish the objectives stated in this paragraph,
including the power to issue taxable and tax-exempt
bonds, to acquire ownership interests in projects, and
to provide development project financing?
Mr. Weitzner thought a review of the associated statutes
might illustrate how and why AIDEA was organized. He
summarized that AIDEA's principal role in economic
development was to specifically work with private sector
investment to coordinate and be a partner to deliver job
growth and economic benefits for Alaskans.
9:12:35 AM
Mr. Weitzner looked at slide 3, "PROGRAMS + PROJECTS":
• Conduit Revenue Bond Program
• Loan Participation Program
• Development Project Finance
• Sustainable Energy Transmission and Supply (SETS)
• Arctic Infrastructure Development Fund (AIDF)
• Small Business Economic Development Revolving Loan
Fund
• Rural Development Initiative Loan Fund
• Business Export Assistance Program
Development Project Finance:
• Delong Mountain Transportation System
• Skagway Ore Terminal
• FedEx Aircraft MRO Hangar
• Snettisham Hydroelectric Facility
• Alaska Ship & Drydock, Ketchikan
• Camp Denali Readiness Center (JBER)
• Mustang Holdings LLC
• Interior Energy Project
• Blue Crest Energy Drilling Rig Loan
• AK SHIP Vessel Repair Finance Program
• Duck Point Development II (Icy Strait Point)
• HEX Cook Inlet, LLC
• Ambler Access Project
• West Susitna Access Road Project
• Section 1002 Area Leases
Mr. Weitzner noted that the slide gave detail on AIDEA's
programs and projects. He noted that AIDEA had been helping
with economic development in the healthcare sector through
CRBP, which had been helped with rural and Alaska Native
healthcare access in the state. He specified that the
previous year AIDEA had issued over $200 million in conduit
revenue bonds that were directly tied to health sector
investments. He generalized that all of AIDEA's programs
had been impacted in some form by the COVID-19 emergency.
He thought Alaska had been more broadly impacted than some
other states.
Mr. Weitzner pointed out that AIDEA had implemented
emergency programs to address impacts of the pandemic that
were not shown on the slide. The programs were to address
economic impacts. He asserted the AIDEA had been on the
front of the statewide response to the pandemic since the
governor's declaration of emergency. The AIDEA Board had
implemented emergency regulations and programs, one of
which was adapted into the AK Cares Program with the
Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development,
which had provided over $282 million in grant funding to a
little over 5700 small businesses throughout the state.
Mr. Weitzner detailed that AIDEA had adapted the Business
Export Assistance Program provide guarantees to Alaska's
banks and credit unions for extended credit to existing
borrowers. He continued that AIDEA also had provided
support to businesses impacted by the pandemic in a loan
participation program. He recounted that AIDEA accomplished
its mission by acting as a secondary market for financial
institutions by purchasing loan participation by providing
guarantees on bank-originated loans. Since 1992, AIDEA had
funded over $1.2 billion under the loan participation
program which had supported over 9,600 construction jobs
and over 9,800 permanent jobs within Alaska's economy,
principally supporting the commercial real estate
development sector. He specified that the loan portfolio
was currently $451.6 million at the close of FY 20. He
cited that AIDEA had received over 80 loan modification
requests on loans that amounted to about $193 million,
which was approximately 44 percent of the entire loan
portfolio.
Mr. Weitzner continued to address slide 3. He noted that
the Arctic Infrastructure Development Fund (AIDF) was
recently funded with the improvements for development
funding on the Ambler Access Project as well as funds
dedicated to signing oil and gas leases. He discussed the
Sustainable Energy Transmission and Supply Fund, originally
capitalized by the legislature for $145 million in 2013.
The funds had been principally invested into the Interior
Gas Utility.
Co-Chair Bishop asked if Mr. Weitzner had indicated that
AIDEA had done 80 loan modifications.
Mr. Weitzner affirmed that AIDEA had done over 80 loan
modifications under the Loan Participation Program.
Co-Chair Bishop asked if the total dollar amount was around
$193 million for the loan modifications.
Mr. Weitzner affirmed that the modifications affected the
principal balance of loans totaling $193 million.
9:18:10 AM
Co-Chair Stedman asked for more detail on the loan
modifications. He wondered how many might be in arrears. He
asked about the significance of any arrears and the status
of loans that were current or not.
Mr. Weitzner relayed that there were modification
agreements with the underlying financial institutions for
the majority of loans with modification. In most cases,
loans were not in arrears and parties were paying interest
on a current basis. The parties had received modification
or relief on principal payments, which had been extended
toward the end of the loan. He noted there were two
modifications that were in arrears and currently
outstanding. The two proposed modifications were awaiting
review. The total amount of the two loans was less than $10
million.
Co-Chair Stedman asked for updates on the Mustang Holdings
LLC and the Blue Crest Energy drilling, which were both in
a sector that had been challenged from multiple directions.
Mr. Weitzner affirmed that the projects had been
challenged. He addressed BlueCrest Energy, which had
received a modification for principal deferment in March
2020. The company had been performing and paying interest
each month as required and was current. He continued that
AIDEA was considering a request to extend the deferment,
which would be considered at AIDEA's upcoming board
meeting. He identified that BlueCrest had been challenged
by the low price of oil.
Mr. Weitzner addressed Mustang Holdings LLC. He recounted
that in November 2019, AIDEA had accelerated the loan to
Brooks Range Petroleum Corporation and had been in a
negotiating phase with the originally working interest
owners on the loan. In the early part of 2020, the
approvals for extending the loan did not get closed due to
a decline in investment of necessary capital for the
development of the project. Since that time, AIDEA had been
working with several other major creditors in looking to
reorganize the underlying exposure and get to a plan of
development for the field. Ultimately AIDEA concluded that
it needed to expedite ownership and control of the
underlying lease assets and surface assets to better
restructure the loan. In May, AIDEA had entered into a non-
judicial foreclosure process, which was concluded in
September. Since the conclusion, AIDEA had been working
with creditors under AIDEA's ownership of the lease and
surface assets through Mustang Holdings LLC. He concluded
that AIDEA was looking at a plan of development to
restructure the $70 million of investment with creditors.
9:23:09 AM
Co-Chair Stedman thought Mr. Weitzner indicated that
BlueCrest Energy was paying only interest on its loan. He
asked about payments on previous expenditures applicable to
the particular loan. He recalled that the state owed about
$730 million in credits. He thought there was about $60
million in the budget for the current year's payment. He
asked about the significant relationship between the
credits and the asset held by AIDEA.
Mr. Weitzner offered to provide further information via
AIDEA Board memos issued regarding the modifications. He
detailed that the original loan was structured in 2015
based on a capital structure which included $150 million in
assumed oil tax credit reimbursements to the investors.
When the oil tax credit program was halted, it had
dramatically changed the investment profile. He noted that
BlueCrest Energy had provided during testimony that it had
continued to develop the Cosmopolitan Field and had
continued to use the rig which AIDEA financed for field
development. Further, BlueCrest Energy was currently
looking at how the oil and natural gas recovery from the
well development was able to repay AIDEA and continue on a
plan of further development for the Cosmopolitan Field.
Mr. Weitzner summarized that there had been a significant
impact the original plan of development of the Cosmopolitan
Field, as well as the ability to repay AIDEA for what it
financed on the drill rig itself. He added that AIDEA was
working with the company on how the plan of development
could advance.
Senator Hoffman asked if both projects being discussed had
always been loans or if in the past they were considered as
investments.
Mr. Weitzner relayed that the BlueCrest Energy loan had
always been a loan, with direct financing and construction
of the drill rig used for field development. The Mustang
Holdings LLC investment by AIDEA had gone through different
phases. The investment was originally for road development
in 2012 with direct investment by AIDEA. The project also
focused on an early production facility under an ownership
model by AIDEA. The investment had been restructured in
2018. The road and early production facility were
restructured in 2018, also following a reduction in the
amount of oil tax credits that the industrial group would
receive from the Mustang Field development. The term sheet
was put into place when the loan agreements were signed May
2019.
Senator Hoffman asked about the board's involvement in the
developments Mr. Weitzner had described.
Mr. Weitzner informed that the board had approved the form
of investment either in direct investment or its
restructuring to a loan. In each case the board had passed
resolutions for the form of the investment.
9:28:43 AM
Senator Hoffman asked if the administration had taken any
action on the matter without the board's direction.
Mr. Weitzner did not know if he could fully answer Senator
Hoffman's question. He affirmed that for any action for
AIDEA to undertake would require the resolution of AIDEA's
Board of Directors. He could not address whether there had
been other involvement prior to 2018.
Co-Chair Stedman thought due to the sensitivity of the
response, the information should be in writing.
Mr. Weitzner relayed that there were memos that could
highlight the process, and he was happy to share the
information with the committee.
Mr. Weitzner discussed slide 4, "PROJECTS + ASSETS," which
showed a state map depicting the loan program participation
and project financing. He thought the slide highlighted
that AIDEA's projects impact broadly across the state and
that AIDEA was fulfilling its mission of economic growth.
He asserted that much of the economic development and jobs
supported by AIDEA's programs and project financing had
resulted from the responsible development of natural
resources and economic diversification. He asserted that
AIDEA acted as a catalyst for the economic development in
Alaska's communities. He furthered that public funding from
taxes on commercial real estate development,
infrastructure, and natural resource development had
significantly contributed to communities' economic security
and provided ongoing revenue for local services such as
schools, health clinics, and utilities.
Mr. Weitzner addressed slide 5, "PROJECT INVESTMENTS":
Facilitate Investment in Alaska's Industrial Sectors
Partnership with Public + Private Capital
Patient, Long-Term Capital
Direct Investment as Owner/Partner/Lender
Feasible Economic Structures, No Subsidies
* Total amount invested or committed in development
projects held by AIDEA as of FYE 2020, includes only
AIDEA funds and AIDEA proceeds from bonds issued.
Mr. Weitzner referenced a modified pie chart on the slide
that showed the historical investment of $612.4 million in
Alaska. He highlighted that through AIDEA's mission and
reinvestment of capital, the authority did not structure or
provide subsidies for the projects. Rather, the projects
were based upon economic pro forma and effective viable
business plans.
9:32:45 AM
Mr. Weitzner reviewed slide 6, "FINANCIAL SUMMARY FY2020":
STATEMENT OF NET POSITION ($000S)
Cash Balance (incl. Restricted) $90,516
Programs:
COVID-19 Emergency Programs 168,910
Enterprise Development Account 456,889
Development Project Finance:
Revolving Fund - Projects 194,223
Revolving Fund - Capital Assets 141,531
SETS 143,760
AIDF 35,000
Other Assets 16,399
Capital Reserves Securities 398,895
Total Assets $1,646,123
Less: Liabilities & Deferred ($226,650)
Net Position$1,419,473
Mr. Weitzner noted that the slide was a financial summary
for AIDEA that summarized the balance sheet, net operating
position and statutory net income that was provided at the
request of the chair. He continued that AIDEA's financial
statement was also provided via AS 44.88.205 and AS
44.88.210. He had summarized the financial information to
identify AIDEA's principal programs and the program's
current capitalization.
Mr. Weitzner explained that AIDEA's capital reserves were
the accumulated returns from previous investments and was
what was kept available for future investments in economic
development projects in the state. The reserves were also
available to support any bonding program and supported cash
flows for the organization. He highlighted that within the
revolving fund and the capital assets, there was $141.5
million, principally made of managed assets that did not
principally produce cash flow. He listed the Snettisham
Hydro Project and the Alaska Ship and Dry Dock, which were
important for economic development but did not return
capital. He noted that in the projects, $70 million was for
Mustang Holdings LLC, which also was not currently
returning cash flow to AIDEA.
Mr. Weitzner addressed the table on slide 6 entitled
"STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENSES & CHANGES IN NET POSITION
($000S)." He discussed operating revenues and expenses. He
recounted that he had looked to remove some of the impact
from emergency programs, which were principally funding
from funding through the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and
Economic Security (CARES) Act. He pointed out differences
between 2018, 2019, and 2020; and made note of unrealized
gains and losses from capital reserves included in the
operating revenues. Because of recent interest there was
unrealized gains.
Mr. Weitzner continued to address slide 6, and explained
that operating income represented the net effect after
expenses and also included unrealized capital gains. He
explained that the numbers showed that AIDEA had been
consistent in producing between $33 million and $35 million
in statutory net income each year, from which the AIDEA
dividend was declared. Under existing statute, the board
was required to declare a dividend from 25 percent to 50
percent of the year's statutory net income, and was payable
in two years following the production of the income. With
$34.6 million recognized in the current year, AIDEA's board
had declared a $17.3 million dividend to the general fund
for the FY 22 budget.
9:38:33 AM
Co-Chair Bishop noted that Senator Wielechowski had been
trying to get in the queue for a question, but there had
been technical difficulties.
Senator Wielechowski asked for a list of AIDEA investments
from 2011 to 2021, including loan amounts, duration,
location, purpose, and return.
Mr. Weitzner stated that the information was possible to
get. He referenced AIDEA's provided financial statements
and relayed that he could also provide a list of AIDEA's
current portfolio under the Loan Participation Program,
which was not specifically delineated in the financial
statements.
Senator Wielechowski reiterated his request for loan
amounts and investments. He asked if AIDEA had adopted a
policy and procedure for public involvement.
Mr. Weitzner asked if Senator Wielechowski was referencing
public involvement regarding individual projects.
Senator Wielechowski clarified that he was asking about the
opportunity for public notice and public testimony
regarding any AIDEA decision.
Mr. Weitzner relayed that AIDEA was required by statute to
obtain support from local communities, which was usually
accomplished by specific resolutions by local assemblies or
boroughs, as well as letters of support. He continued that
AIDEA also had public board meetings in review of any
investment decision, and any investment decision undertaken
was subject to a resolution of the board. During board
meetings there was a public comment period.
Senator Wilson asked about AIDEA's debt in terms of an oil
tax bond. He asked for an update regarding AIDEA's position
on the amount of debt.
Mr. Weitzner asked if the question was relating to Mustang
Holdings LLC.
Senator Wilson answered "no."
Co-Chair Bishop asked if Senator Wilson wanted to know how
much was owed to AIDEA in the form of oil tax credit
payments.
Senator Wilson answered in the affirmative and asked if
AIDEA was ready to write off the amount to see cash flow or
hold dividends to pay credits off.
Mr. Weitzner stated that AIDEA currently held a note that
was originally issued by DOR to Mustang Operating Center 1
(MOC 1) under the original structure for the Mustang
development loan, which was acquired May 2019. He
elaborated that AIDEA currently held receipt authority
under ownership interest in MOC 1, which it foreclosed on
in September 2020, and there were currently payment
obligations under the tax credits of roughly $16.2 million.
He shared that AIDEA believed the credits would be paid
through revenues received by the state.
9:43:39 AM
Mr. Weitzner referenced slide 7, "BONDING CAPACITY":
• AIDEA's bonding capacity is subject to determination
by external credit rating agencies and their
evaluation of AIDEA's credit standing.
• Prior to 2019, AIDEA held long-term credit ratings
of AA+ by S&P and Aa3 by Moody's, based in large
part to AIDEA's capital reserves in place and the
state's statutory dividend program.
• In 2019, Moody's downgraded AIDEA's Revolving Fund
bonds to A2 referencing "the Revolving Fund bonds'
exposure to actions the state may take as it seeks
to adopt a revenue model less dependent on North
Slope oil production."
• AIDEA's capacity to provide financing opportunities
is directly related to the asset base available to
support those investments.
The legislature expressed its intent in enacting the
statutory dividend program that "the financial
integrity of the [Authority] remain secure so that the
Authority can continue to fulfill its vital economic
development mission for the state" (see sec. 1, ch.11
SLA 1996).
Mr. Weitzner wanted to highlight that since the Development
Project Financing Program was initiated in the mid-1980s,
AIDEA had issued a little over $415 million of long-term
bonds to finance projects within the state. The bonds were
principally general obligation (GO) bonds and did not carry
the moral obligation of the state and were issued solely on
AIDEA's credit standing. He detailed that AIDEA's bonding
capacity was ultimately determined by external credit
rating agencies. Prior to 2019, AIDEA had a credit rating
of AA-plus. The basis for the high rating was AIDEA's
capital reserves, projects, and the state's dividend. In
2019, Moody's downgraded AIDEA's rating due to the
revolving fund bonds exposure to actions the state may have
taken as it sought a revenue model less dependent upon
North Slope oil production.
Mr. Weiztner continued to discuss slide 7. He explained
that AIDEA's capacity to provide financing opportunities
was directly related to its asset base. He continued that
AIDEA did not have GO bonds outstanding, although it had
Snettisham power revenue bonds that had a current balance
of $54.6 million. the authority also retained bonding
authorization through the legislature for several potential
development projects. He discussed project funding such as
the Skagway Terminal. He shared that it was unclear if the
bonding capacity would be used in the near term. Currently
AIDEA was reviewing ways to provide capitalization in its
loan programs, particularly the Loan Participation Program.
He noted that AIDEA had identified that there was an
opportunity to issue a collateralized loan obligation for
an asset-backed security, which would represent a recycling
of some of the invested capital into the program. The
authority was actively engaging (subject to board approval)
in looking at working with external capital providers to
provide other sources of capital for AIDEA to fulfill its
mission from the state.
Co-Chair Stedman understood that Mr. Weitzner was asserting
that AIDEA was in a good financial position. He mentioned
the state's structural deficit and subsequent downgrade in
credit rating and wondered if the situation affected the
cost of borrowing for AIDEA.
Mr. Weitzner affirmed that the state's rating directly
impacted the cost of AIDEA's borrowing, which ultimately
impacted the viability of the project investment. He
assured that the financial stability and credit standing of
AIDEA had been strong. He reiterated that AIDEA had been
impacted by COVID-19 across its programs. He noted the
additional cash flow impact of programs that had been
deferred, which would affect AIDEA's ability to secure
external capital financing. He thought there was a changing
environment.
Co-Chair Stedman summarized that as the state went further
down its current financial road and possibly using funds
from the Earnings Reserve Account it would not help AIDEA
and would increase its cost of capital.
Mr. Weitzner thought Co-Chair Stedman had made a good
summary.
9:50:32 AM
AT EASE
9:51:23 AM
RECONVENED
Co-Chair Bishop thought Mr. Weitzner's presentation was
important and wanted to continue and postpone the other
item on the agenda.
Senator Wilson mentioned Co-Chair Stedman's question and
bonding capacity. He asked if the credit downgrade by
Moody's was related to the administration's decision to
borrow funding from AIDEA to pay off another account.
Mr. Weitzner relayed that Moody's had raised the issue of
the state's budget. He highlighted that any addressing of
AIDEA's capital reserves had not been supported by the
governor. A $2 million appropriation was approved for the
Northwest Arctic Borough in support of a school project
that did have an impact and had accessed reserved outside
the dividend statute. He noted that AIDEA had a credit
standing that was established with its capital reserves,
which were there for future investments and economic
development projects.
Mr. Weitzner noted that AIDEA currently had a project
pipeline in place of economic development projects that
would have an investment level in excess of $1 billion. He
thought there was a lot of opportunity for utilization of
the reserves and returns to recycle for future project
investment.
Mr. Weitzner showed slide 8, "RESPONSIBLE RESOURCE
DEVELOPMENT - ACCESS TO ALASKA'S ABUNDANT NATURAL RESOURCES
FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT."
Mr. Weitzner discussed slide 9, "1002 AREA LEASE SALE":
PROJECT OVERVIEW
• Section 1002 Area designated for future development
of its resource potential under ANILCA
• AIDEA Resolution G20-31 authorizing up to $20
million in the first year under BLM's Section 1002
Area Oil & Gas Lease Sale
• Bids submitted on 11 tracts ($19,236,345 in 1stYear)
• AIDEA highest bidder in 9 of 11 tracts bid
• Leases signed on 7 of the 9 tracts for an initial 10
year rights of use subject to lease stipulations
• Potential to add 1.4 million barrels per day to
Alaska's oil production through TAPS
TIMELINE
Jan. 20, 2021 - President Biden announces moratorium
on all oil and gas leasing activities in ANWR.
Jan. 19, 2021 - Bureau of Land Management announces
official leaseholders; AIDEA holds 7 tracts.
Jan. 6, 2021 - Bureau of Land Management opens
submitted sealed bids; AIDEA is the successful bidder
of 9 of 11 tracts.
Dec. 31, 2020 - Deadline to submit qualified bids on
leases.
Dec. 7, 2020 - Bureau of Land Management posts
Detailed Statement of Sale.
Aug. 17, 2020 - Record of Decision (ROD) reached.
Dec. 22, 2017 - President Trump signs the Tax Cuts and
Jobs Act, which includes authorization for responsible
development in 1002 Area of ANWR.
Dec. 2, 1980 - President Carter signs Alaska National
Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA)
Mr. Weitzner highlighted that through Alaska's constitution
at least 25 percent of all mineral lease rentals,
royalties, royalty sale proceeds, federal mineral revenue,
sharing payments, and bonuses received by the state were
placed in the Permanent Fund. He shared that AIDEA viewed
natural resource development within the state as critical
for the state's economic development. He asserted that
AIDEA was increasingly being limited in access to the
resources. He reiterated that much of the economic
development and jobs supported across communities had
resulted from responsible development of Alaska's mining
and oil and gas resources, which had led to public funding
and public services.
9:56:02 AM
Mr. Weitzner discussed the Section 1002 lease sale. He
explained that Section 1002 was designated for future
resource development under the Alaska National Interest
Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA). He continued that AIDEA
passed a resolution authoring the organization to commit
$20 million in the first year under the Bureau of Land
Management's oil and gas lease sale. He recounted that
AIDEA had submitted 11 bids for tracts, ultimately
committing about $19.2 million. He continued that AIDEA had
been the high bidder on 9 of the 11 tracts, and ultimately
closed on 7 of the 9 tracts. He referenced a forthcoming
map that would show areas that were closed upon. He shared
that AIDEA had an initial ten-year right of use, subject to
the lease stipulations, and ultimately saw potential to add
1.4 million barrels per day to the state's oil production
through the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System (TAPS) and other
infrastructure on the North Slope. He noted that AIDEA
provided a timeline to decide how the project would
progress. He noted that the state's right to access its
natural resources was codified within ANILCA.
Mr. Weitzer moved to slide 10, "1002 AREA LEASE SALE":
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL
HOW MUCH OIL IS ESTIMATED TO BE IN THE 1002 AREA?
• The U.S. Geological Survey estimates this area
contains 10.4 billion barrels of technically
recoverable oil.
ECONOMIC BENEFITS FOR STATE OF ALASKA
• Public funding from taxes contributing to economic
security within the local communities on the North
Slope, providing revenue to fund local services,
schools, health clinics, housing, emergency
response, water and wastewater, heat and electric
utilities, and countless essential services.
• Fixed royalty of 16.67% established, half of which
goes to the State.
• Half of all proceeds earned through the Section 1002
Area Oil & Gas Lease Sale are shared with the State
of Alaska.
ESTIMATED JOB CREATION FROM DEVELOPMENT OF THE 1002
AREA
• 55,000 130,000 jobs are expected to be created,
according to the House Committee on Natural
Resources.
ESTIMATED REVENUE GENERATED BY DEVELOPMENT OF THE 1002
AREA
• Estimated up to $50 billion in future royalties,
according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget
Office.
Mr. Weitzner noted that the U.S. Geological Survey also
linked to oil available in Alaska Native lands accessed by
the Kaktovik Inupiat Corporation. He highlighted that the
total area in Section 1002 was 1.56 million acres, which
was defined under ANILA for its potential for exploration
development and transport of oil and gas. Of the 19-
million-acre Alaska National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR),
Section 1002 was not designated as a wilderness area.
Within the 1.56 acres, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM)
had defined a maximum of 2,000 aggregate acres to be
available for surface development, which signified .01
percent of the limited Section 1002 area. He highlighted
that the focus from BLM and the state had been based on
responsible resource development coexisting with
conservation.
Mr. Weitzner continued to discuss development of Section
1002. He thought responsible resource development had
historically been achieved on the North Slope, and he
highlighted that there was no reason to believe that the
case would not be the same in accessing resources for
Section 1002. He noted that AIDEA fully supported HJR 12,
which urged the United States Department of the Interior,
BLM, to honor the recent lease sales and proceed with
permitting in ANWR. He discussed estimated job creation and
revenue from development of the 1002 area, including 25
percent of the state's potential revenue would be
contributed to the Permanent Fund.
10:00:57 AM
Mr. Weitzner continued to address slide 10. He mentioned
that Alaska Native communities on the North Slope actively
supported development within the 1002 area and anticipated
job creation.
Co-Chair Bishop referenced the $10.4 billion barrels of
"technically" recoverable oil as listed on the slide. He
asked if AIDEA had discussed what might be economically
recoverable.
Mr. Weitzner relayed that analysis indicated that there was
7.3 billion barrels of economically recoverable oil in the
1002 area. He continued that the technical recovery from
the Alaska Native land access was added the amount.
10:02:34 AM
Co-Chair Stedman thought the area in question was half the
size of Prudhoe Bay, and there was sufficient potential for
the state. He asked for Mr. Weitzner to elaborate on the
royalty split. He wondered if the 1002 area was under the
same royalty criteria as the Natural Petroleum Reserve-
Alaska (NPRA).
Mr. Weitzner explained that through the 2017 Tax Act (in
which the U.S. Congress approved the oil and gas sale
program for BLM to initiate and do initial environmental
review) there was a required 50 percent split between the
state and the federal government on any royalties, sale
proceeds received from development in Section 1002. The
arrangement was different than that under the NPRA, and
very different from the state's own development in Prudhoe
Bay.
Senator Wielechowski asked what sort of discussions AIDEA
had with producers and global banks regarding ANWR. He
wondered if any entity had expressed interest in
development.
Mr. Weitzner suggested it was too early to provide feedback
on potential interest AIDEA had received, specifically
because the authority had not been actively promoting co-
investment thus far. He reminded that there was a
moratorium in place, and AIDEA was currently working on
updating the geotechnical studies within the tracts that
were under lease in order to get information for strategic
discussions with private sector oil and gas company
investors that could be potential partners.
Co-Chair Stedman asked if Mr. Weitzner had indicated that
AIDEA would be running 3-dimensional seismic studies to
delineate the value of potential tracts that may or may not
have in order to make decisions about going forward with
partnerships to develop the resource or dispose of the
tracts.
Mr. Weitzner answered in the affirmative and shared that
AIDEA was looking at the full requirements for filing a
plan with the BLM, and updating the geotechnical studies in
order to have defined boundaries on the resource in order
to have a more advanced discussion with potential partners
for co-investment in field development.
10:06:28 AM
Mr. Weitzner referenced slide 11, "Coastal Plain 2021 Lease
Sale Results," which showed a map of Alaska's northern
coast depicting tracts available for bid, tracts
unavailable for leasing, or tracts excluded from Public Law
115-97 or outside the Bureau of Land Management's oil and
gas leasing authority. He highlighted that the tracts
marked in clue were the nine tracts that AIDEA acquired
under the BLM oil and gas lease sale. He continued that
AIDEA had also bid upon tract 25 and tract 29. He noted
that AIDEA closed and signed leases with BLM on tracts 24,
30, 31, 27, 26, 16, and 17; but did not close or sign
leases on tracts 23 and 22. He explained that AIDEA had
identified the priority tracts and wanted to responsibly
develop the area as well as work within the stipulations of
BLM with the 3 square miles of surface structure that could
be implemented. He asserted that AIDEA was very cognizant
of the potential development footprint and wanted to
recognize the conservation with BLM's leases.
Co-Chair Stedman asked if Mr. Weitzner to discuss Knick Arm
Services and Regenerate Alaska. He asked about horizontal
drilling and whether the state could go to the east in
Section 1002 if it was decided not to go forward with the
surface tracts.
Mr. Weitzner stated that Regenerate Alaska, Inc. was a
current investor in leases in the state, which he believed
to have been acquired by an Australian-based company. He
did not have a great deal of information on Knick Arm
Services and was not aware of the extent of its investments
in the state. He addressed horizontal drilling and relayed
that to the extent that the underlying reserves could be
monetized, then AIDEA would be able to access the
resources. He cited that AIDEA would have to file the
development of plan with the state and BLM. Beyond the
eastern portion, AIDEA could work with the Kaktovik Inupiat
Corporation, which was actively looking to develop its
resources. Ultimately AIDEA would work with the corporation
on how to transport resources to TAPS, and he thought there
were solutions in the state to accommodate.
10:11:03 AM
Co-Chair Bishop asked if AIDEA had lost the current year's
field season to do a chute.
Mr. Weitzner thought the season was more limited, and AIDEA
was actively looking at filing a plan with BLM. He thought
it was fair to say that the year's planning needed to be in
place in order to do the full extent of a geotechnical
study. He reminded that AIDEA had a ten-year lease with BLM
and thought there was sufficient time to file a plan and
complete the studies.
Mr. Weitzner showed slide 12, "CESS PROJECT," which showed
a map of the Ambler Access Project. The project had been
codified within ANILCA, and AIDEA had worked on it since
2013. The initial project development was initiated by the
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (DOT) in
2009, to start defining access from the Dalton Highway to
the Ambler Mining District. The full project crossed
private, state, and federally owned land to access the
Ambler Mining District for broader development for the
state through the mining interests.
Senator Wielechowski understood that the Tanana Chiefs
Conference (TCC) and Doyon, Limited had opposed or
challenged the Ambler Road project. He asked what AIDEA was
proposing to do in the case that Doyon refused to allow
purchase of a road right-of-way.
Mr. Weitzner was only aware of legal challenges that had
been filed by TCC, which had filed suit on the BLM's record
of decision. He was not aware of any action taken by Doyon.
He explained that AIDEA was actively engaging with Doyon on
how to address the private land ownership as well as with
Nana Corporation. He continued that AIDEA was also in
discussion regarding rights of way with the state, which
was an additional landowner of over 124 miles. He mentioned
a milestone pertaining to the federal land ownership, and
that the topic would be addressed on a later slide.
10:14:42 AM
Senator Wielechowski understood that there was an extensive
cost-benefit analysis done on the Red Dog Mine Road. He
asked if such a study would be done prior to the Ambler
Access Project.
Mr. Weitzner relayed that there had been an ongoing cost-
benefit analysis of the access road. There was a current
development agreement between AIDEA and Ambler Metals,
under which each party was contributing $35 million to the
road development, which was in a feasibility study. He
thought a final investment decision would be reached at the
end of the study, at a maximum at the end of December 2024.
The full cost-benefit analysis was an ongoing process that
would ultimately lead to an investment decision by AIDEA
and Ambler Metals.
Senator Wielechowski understood that the $35 million in
spending was from the Arctic Infrastructure Development
Fund (AIDF), which put a cap of $20 million on loans,
beyond which required legislative approval.
Mr. Weitzner understood that bonding authority at $25
million was subject to AS 44.88.172, which AIDF was not
under. He thought the other element to understand was that
AIDEA was the owner of the road, and the investment was in
the form of ownership, which was allowed under AIDF loans.
He wanted to make the distinction that individual loans
were subject to limitations, but the funds in question were
not an advance of loans by AIDEA to an independently owned
project company.
Co-Chair Bishop asked if AIDEA was intending to create a
scenario like the DeLong Mountain Road.
Mr. Weitzner affirmed that AIDEA was looking to create the
economic developments through the Ambler Road, such as the
DeLong Mountain Road had for the Red Dog Mine. He thought
the Ambler Road was slightly different. He described that
the Red Dog Mine Road had been a 52-mile road with storage
capacity and port facilities for the Red Dog Mine. He
asserted that the Ambler Road would ultimately provide
long-term access and development of all the mines within
the district, not just individual specific mines.
Co-Chair Bishop understood the difference between the road
projects and had worked the DeLong Mountain Road project.
10:19:03 AM
Senator Olson assumed that AIDEA would perform a cost-
benefit analysis for the Ambler Access Project similar to
that of the road for the Red Dog Mine.
Mr. Weitzner explained that AIDEA was in the process of
doing so while doing the feasibility study for the
proceeding three years, prior to taking a final investment
decision on the road.
Senator Olson referenced an AIDEA board meeting on February
10, 2021; at which it was stated that the cost of the pre-
development work would be paid 50 percent by AIDEA and 50
percent by Ambler Metals. He wondered if Ambler Metals
would be getting a credit for the $35 million pre-
development contribution when the tolls for the road began
being paid.
Mr. Weitzner answered in the affirmative. Under the
development agreement that AIDEA signed with Ambler Metals,
which had been publicly attached to the board agenda, each
party was contributing up to $35 million for the current
budget on the final feasibility phase for the road project.
Ambler Metals would not be an owner of the road. In return
for the $35 million in development capital, Ambler Metals
would receive credit on the initial toll structure that
would be put in place for the utilization of the road. The
credit would be based on volume and projected use. He
wanted to clarify that the form of the agreement and credit
had not been finalized, and the structure would be defined
with the decision on the final structure of the road.
Senator Hoffman observed that a portion of the road would
go through the gates of ANWR. He asked how many miles would
be involved, and what permits would be needed. He asked if
Mr. Weitzner saw the issue as a major obstacle in the
project.
Mr. Weitzner thought that the number of miles through the
refuge would be 26 miles which would be administered by the
National Park Service (NPS). He continued that AIDEA had a
50-year right-of-way permit that had been signed with the
NPS, which was also eligible to be extended for an
additional 50 years.
10:22:55 AM
Mr. Weitzner looked at slide 13, "AMBLER ACCESS PROJECT":
PROJECT BACKGROUND
• Access to Ambler Mining District defined within
ANILCA.
• FY20 final EIS / FY21 Joint ROD from BLM/NPS.
• $35M for AIDEA's Arctic Infrastructure Development
Fund, matched by Ambler Metals LLC for Final
Feasibility.
• Development Agreement with Ambler Metals
coordinating the timeline between the Arctic Mine
feasibility and Ambler Access Road feasibility by
latest December 2024.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY
ROAD CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATIONS
• 360 direct jobs for road construction on an annual
average
• Up to 81 direct annual jobs for road operations and
maintenance over the life of the road
MINES CONSTRUCTION
• 2,777 direct jobs for mine construction; $286M in
wages annually
• 2,034 additional indirect and induced jobs; $108M in
wages annually
MINING OPERATIONS
• 495 direct jobs; $72M in wages annually
• 3,436 additional indirect and induced jobs; $228M in
wages annually
GOVERNMENT REVENUES (LIFE OF ALL FOUR MINES)
• $393M in mining license tax revenues to the State
• $524M in corporate income taxes to the State
• $214M in production royalties to the State
• $13M in claim rents to the State
• $193M in payments to local governments
Mr. Weitzner identified that the primary foci of the Ambler
Access Project were the jobs created and the revenues for
the state created by mine development. He shared that AIDEA
had worked with the University of Alaska Fairbanks in doing
an initial study on the potential project benefits from the
mines and the road.
Co-Chair Bishop asked about the 2021 planned field work and
observed that there was an aggressive schedule, and
wondered how negotiations were proceeding with Doyon.
Mr. Weitzner informed that AIDEA had initiated a term sheet
with Doyon for land access permit rights. He anticipated
reaching a formal agreement within the next month, which
would provide access for three years. He added that AIDEA
needed to engage Nana on the same terms. He anticipated a
robust field season for the year, and the work was being
coordinated with private landowners and the Department of
Natural Resources (DNR) for the rights of way.
Mr. Weitzner discussed slide 14, "KEY ELEMENTS + ISSUES IN
FINAL FEASIBILITY":
• 200+ mile new road in remote Alaska
• Design components
o 29 bridge crossings
o Predominant permafrost across corridor
o Materials site with 12 million cubic yards of
fill
o At least 40 fish passage sites
o Subsistence concern considerations
• Crossing Approval from five landowners
• ANILCA and NEPA requirements
• 26 permits and authorizations
• Federal laws: CWA, NHPA, MSFCMA, ESA, MBTA, BGEPA,
WSRA, RHA
• Multiple mines in exploration
• Coordinating with stakeholders (many hundreds of miles
apart from each other)
Mr. Weitzner thought slide 14 intended to highlight that
the Ambler Access Project was not an easy development. He
mentioned the primary issue of coordinating the project for
subsistence concerns. He used the example of the Red Dog
Mine transportation system and thought the proposed Ambler
road was a more complex undertaking that needed to take
into account all the communities' subsistence concerns.
10:26:26 AM
Co-Chair Stedman was curious about construction of the
Ambler Access Project. He asked about who would be doing
the actual construction of the road.
Mr. Weitzner reiterated that AIDEA would be the owner of
the road and would be engaging the contractors that would
do the construction of the road. He added that AIDEA was
working with a project manager seconded through DOT, who
had extensive experience with complex road structure in the
Arctic environment. He relayed that AIDEA would engage with
contractors to manage and control construction. Operation
of the road would be contracted to different operators
through AIDEA's administration.
Co-Chair Stedman thought the project would be the biggest
road project since the Dalton Highway. He was curious about
the 40 fish passage sites listed on slide 14, and the
species of fish that were in the area.
Co-Chair Bishop replied, "Arctic grayling."
Mr. Weitzner explained that the fish passage sites
reflected the stipulations from the environmental review
and the joint record of decision with the National Park
Service and the BLM. He continued that AIDEA was looking to
comply with permit requirements put in place for the five-
year initial rights of way.
Co-Chair Stedman asked what kind of fish were in the
rivers. He asked if there were species of salmon that were
in the rivers.
Co-Chair Bishop thought the Department of Fish and Game
(DFG) could specify species of fish. He doubted that any
salmon got that far up the river, but thought there could
be Arctic grayling, Arctic char, whitefish, northern pike,
and some trout. He affirmed that his staff would work with
DFG to get the information.
Mr. Weitzner stated he would provide detail within the
record of decision about which fish had been identified. He
wanted to defer to what was specifically required by the
permit.
Co-Chair Bishop acknowledged that it was very early in the
process but wanted to emphasize the importance of using
Alaska hire and utilizing local contractors. He knew that
there would be agreements with Native corporations and
local tribes and wanted to ensure local hire was executed
to the fullest extent. He asked if there was a rough
estimate of the cost per mile of the proposed road.
Mr. Weitzner stated that there was an estimated $2,000 per
mile cost for the 210.6-mile road. The cost was due to
issues with waterways and bridging. The current estimate
for the road's capital costs was a little over $500
million.
Co-Chair Bishop asked for the cost of the road to be
restated.
Mr. Weitzner corrected that the estimated cost of the road
was $2 million per mile.
10:31:37 AM
Co-Chair Stedman asked if the project would be under Davis
Bacon wages.
Mr. Weitzman stated that the project would not explicitly
be under Davis Bacon, and AIDEA was not seeking federal
funds to finance part of the road. He continued that AIDEA
was looking for private sector investors. He did not
anticipate a requirement for federal funds that would have
Davis Bacon wage requirements. He thought it was possible
that AIDEA would work with some union groups that would
work on portions of the road through a contract process.
Co-Chair Stedman understood that state funds also fell
under Davis Bacon wage requirements. He asked for a
clarification on the eventuality of coming under Davis
Bacon wage requirements.
Mr. Weitzman agreed to provide further information. He
clarified that the road itself was independent from the
mine development and was an industrial access road.
Co-Chair Bishop commented that there was precedent from the
DeLong Mountain Road regarding Davis Bacon.
Mr. Weitzner addressed slide 15, "WEST SUSITNA ACCESS ROAD
PROJECT":
PROJECT BACKGROUND
• 2014 Roads to Resources Program DOT&PF Study
• Pre-development feasibility stage of planning for a
multi-use public access road leading to resource
development opportunities that will diversify the
state and borough economy and lead to job creation.
• Partnership between AIDEA, the Matanuska-Susitna
Borough (MSB) and industry partners.
The proposed route is approx. 100 miles long, from the
west end of Ayrshire Road to near the confluence of
the Talachulitna and Skwentna Rivers. Near the Happy
River crossing, the route would diverge away from the
Donlin Gold gas pipeline route and continue west to a
point of tie-in with existing mineral exploration
roads.
Mr. Weitzner explained that the West Susitna Access Road
Project was a follow-on to the 2014 Roads to Resources
Program, which was originally a DOT study. The project
would ultimately link to Port Mackenzie. The project had
support and input from the Matanuska-Susitna Borough.
10:35:32 AM
Mr. Weitzner reviewed slide 16, "PHASE 2 STUDY + SCHEDULE":
We have concluded Phase 2, which included two
objectives:
1. Advance preliminary engineering enough that
preliminary opinions of probable capital costs can be
developed for economic decision making.
2. Conduct wetland mapping and fieldwork to position
the project for developing a Clean Water Act Section
404 permit application, if the project moves forward.
2020
JUNE - MSB Assembly approved participation in
Memorandum of Understanding
AUGUST - Executed funding, Notice to Proceed issued,
project begins
SEPTEMBER - Wetland mapping and fieldwork completed
2021
MARCH - Phase 2 study completed
Co-Chair Stedman looked back to slide 15. He asked for
clarification about the proposed construction plan for the
West Susitna Access Road Project.
Mr. Weitzner informed that AIDEA was the principal partner
in the project from the state side. He continued that DOT
had done the initial studies in 2014 on available routes
within the Mat-Su Borough. He continued that AIDEA had
taken updated the study with the Phase I and Phase II
analyses in order to define an optimal route. Additionally,
AIDEA would need to continue working with the state as a
principal landowner. There would also be private landowners
along the route that needed to be engaged. The slide showed
pre-feasibility planning in order to get to a National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) permit application.
Co-Chair Stedman had seen a substantial pricing difference
between corporate transportation, DNR, and through AIDEA.
He was curious about the construction cost of the projects,
and thought it was clear there was a huge cost difference
between DNR and DOT. He thought DOT was much more expensive
and cumbersome to work with. He thought if the model
worked, perhaps it should be replicated in other areas of
the state.
Co-Chair Bishop thoguht Co-Chair Stedman had offered a
comment rather than a question.
10:39:27 AM
Mr. Weitzner followed up on Co-Chair Stedman's remarks. He
explained that AIDEA's approach in working with the borough
and private industry partners was to expedite the process
to receive initial permits while taking the full analysis
of conservation, environmental concerns, and stakeholder
engagement. He thought the process prepared the project for
how the road would be financed. He mentioned AIDEA's role
in the state. He thought there was a benefit to having
external capital as a partner, in ways of having quicker
project development.
Mr. Weitzner addressed slide 17, "POTENTIAL NEXT STEPS FOR
PHASE 3":
• Conduct baseline environmental studies:
• Cultural and historical resources, fish, wildlife,
etc.
• Perform additional field work as required
• Identify mitigation and avoidance opportunities
• Advance engineering to the 10% 15% design level
• Identify and explore alternative routes
• Conduct Port MacKenzie feasibility analysis and
potential future development plans
Q1 2021 - Phase 3 discussion and scope development
Q2 2021 - Phase 3 approvals from MSB Assembly and
AIDEA Board
Q3 2021 - Phase 3 execution
Q4 2021 - Phase 3 completion
Mr. Weitzner mentioned the Environmental Impact Statement
submission and application and thought any road development
would need to have NEPA approval. He looked towards having
a filing being prepared in the first quarter of 2022.
Co-Chair Bishop asked about the industry partners AIDEA was
working with.
Mr. Weitzner informed that AIDEA was specifically working
with Nova Minerals and Gull Mining Corporation, which had
leases within the Yentna Mining District. During Phase 1,
there was additional support from parties that were
interested in the transportation project, with leases south
of Skwentna.
10:42:51 AM
Co-Chair Stedman asked if railway had been reviewed as an
option. He cited that rail had less environmental impacts.
He asked more detail on the question of road versus rail.
Mr. Weitzner relayed that the option of rail had been
considered during the phase 1 study, and AIDEA had elected
to go forward on phase 2 without rail. He asserted that not
all users would benefit from rail and the industrial
access, which was coordinated for larger volume users. Rail
would limit public access, which was a requirement of the
Mat-Su Borough. While rail was able to accommodate higher
volumes, it was at a higher cost.
Senator Hoffman went back to slide 1 and referenced AIDEA's
mission and economic growth and diversification of Alaska's
economy. He knew that Donlin Creek in his region was
proceeding with a project. He asked Mr. Weitzner to comment
on why the region was not pursuing working with AIDEA on a
large mine.
Mr. Weitzner stated AIDEA had conversations with Donlin
Gold regarding development and utility infrastructure
needs. He understood that Donlin had not made decisions on
how to address gas supply and other energy development to
power the mine. He noted that AIDEA was in ongoing
conversation as to how to best serve Donlin.
Co-Chair Bishop discussed the agenda for the following day.
ADJOURNMENT
10:46:48 AM
The meeting was adjourned at 10:46 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| 022521 AEA Presentation for Senate Finance Committee.pdf |
SFIN 3/1/2021 9:00:00 AM |
AEA |
| 022521 AIDEA Presentation for Senate Finance Committee.pdf |
SFIN 3/1/2021 9:00:00 AM |
AIDEA |
| 030121 AIDEA Excess Capital Letter 1.8.2021 Signed.pdf |
SFIN 3/1/2021 9:00:00 AM |
AIDEA |