01/30/2008 03:30 PM Senate RESOURCES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SCR13 | |
| Presentation: Gasline Update - Pat Galvin, Department of Revenue, and Tom Irwin, Department of Natural Resources | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | SCR 13 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE
January 30, 2008
3:35 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Charlie Huggins, Chair
Senator Bert Stedman, Vice Chair
Senator Lyda Green
Senator Lesil McGuire
Senator Gary Stevens
Senator Bill Wielechowski
Senator Thomas Wagoner (via teleconference)
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
OTHER LEGISLATORS PRESENT
Senator Joe Thomas
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 13
Urging the governor to direct the attorney general to file an
amicus curiae brief with the United States Supreme Court in the
case of Parker v. District of Columbia, supporting the
individual right to keep and bear arms under the Second
Amendment to the United States Constitution.
MOVED CSSCR 13(RES) OUT OF COMMITTEE
Presentation: Gasline Update
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SCR 13
SHORT TITLE: AMICUS BRIEF REGARDING RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) GREEN
01/16/08 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/19/08 (S) RES REFERRAL ADDED
01/30/08 (S) RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
WITNESS REGISTER
EDDIE GRASSER, Staff
to Senate and House Majority
Alaska State Legislature
Alaska State Capitol
Juneau, AK 99801-1182
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented SCR 13 on behalf of Senator
Green, sponsor.
PATRICK GALVIN, Commissioner
Department of Revenue
PO Box 110400
Juneau, AK 99811-0400
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented update on the gas pipeline and
the Alaska Gasline Inducement Act (AGIA).
TOM IRWIN, Commissioner
Department of Natural Resources
400 Willoughby Avenue
Juneau, AK 99801-1724
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented update on the gas pipeline and
AGIA.
ACTION NARRATIVE
CHAIR CHARLIE HUGGINS called the Senate Resources Standing
Committee meeting to order at 3:35:44 PM. Present at the call
to order were Senators Stedman, Green, McGuire, Stevens,
Wielechowski, and Chair Huggins. Senator Wagoner (via
teleconference) joined the meeting shortly thereafter. Also in
attendance was Senator Thomas.
SCR 13-AMICUS BRIEF REGARDING RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS
3:36:46 PM
CHAIR HUGGINS announced SCR 13 to be up for consideration. In
committee packets was a proposed committee substitute (CS),
Version E, labeled 25-LS1327\E, Luckhaupt, 1/24/08.
EDDIE GRASSER, Staff to Senate and House Majority, Alaska State
Legislature, presented the resolution on behalf of Senator
Green, sponsor. He explained that it requests the governor to
file an amicus brief on behalf of the State of Alaska and its
citizens to help protect Second Amendment rights in the case
known as District of Columbia v. Heller, which came out of the
Fifth District Court, District of Columbia (D.C.).
CHAIR HUGGINS asked whether this is just joining with and
supporting the right to bear arms.
MR. GRASSER said it also came to their attention that the
governor is acting on this and has given direction to the
attorney general. They're in negotiations with the State of
Texas, which is gathering signatures from several states to file
the amicus brief. To his understanding, the State of Alaska
will sign that.
SENATOR GREEN referred members to the written sponsor statement,
saying the supreme court agreed last November to hear the case,
oral arguments are in early March, and the ruling will be in
June. Thus this resolution should move quickly.
SENATOR STEVENS requested background on the Heller case.
MR. GRASSER replied it was brought by citizens of Washington,
D.C., who asserted their Second Amendment rights were being
infringed upon by a city ordinance that bans owning handguns.
The first part argues that the Second Amendment is an individual
right being abrogated by the ordinance. The second part relates
to their ability to initiate their right to life and self-
defense with respect to this ban. He referred members to the
packet, saying in 1994 Alaskan voters overwhelmingly approved an
amendment to the Alaska constitution which clarified that the
right to keep and bear arms is an individual right.
3:40:26 PM
SENATOR STEVENS moved to adopt the proposed CS for SCR 13,
Version E, labeled 25-LS1327\E, Luckhaupt, 1/24/08. There being
no objection, Version E was before the committee.
CHAIR HUGGINS asked whether anyone else wished to testify; there
was no response.
SENATOR GREEN moved to report CSSCR 13, Version E, from
committee with individual recommendations. There being no
objection, CSSCR 13(RES) was reported from the Senate Resources
Standing Committee.
The committee took an at-ease from 3:41:29 PM to 3:43:24 PM.
^Presentation: Gasline Update - Pat Galvin, Department of
Revenue, and Tom Irwin, Department of Natural Resources
Presentation: Gasline Update
CHAIR HUGGINS invited Commissioner Galvin of the Department of
Revenue (DOR) and Commissioner Irwin of the Department of
Natural Resources (DNR) to present an update on the gas
pipeline. He noted a letter in packets, dated today, states the
desire to continue an accelerated education of the legislature,
working in conjunction with the administration on the issue of a
gas tax regime. Equally important is that it be sooner rather
than later between now and potentially 2009, when that regime
will be set in statute. He emphasized being proactive and
cooperative in sharing information.
3:46:16 PM
PATRICK GALVIN, Commissioner, Department of Revenue, began with
background on the Alaska Gasline Inducement Act (AGIA), showing
a PowerPoint slide presentation titled "Gasline Update and
Overview"; a hardcopy version was provided. He noted several
slides were shown a year ago when AGIA was presented to the
legislature. He showed a slide labeled "AGIA Principles" that
had the following points:
- Get project built, quickly
- Open North Slope gas basin
- Open and competitive process
- Low tariffs
- Gas for Alaska
- Jobs for Alaska
- Reduce uncertainties for Producers
COMMISSIONER GALVIN elaborated, saying the intent is to acquire
information and move forward in the permitting and development
process. Low tariffs will result in higher net backs, providing
better value for the producers/leaseholders and a more
attractive project. The availability of low-priced gas for
Alaskans relates to having the lowest transportation costs. And
to move the project to fruition, uncertainties need to be
reduced so the producers have an opportunity to commit gas to
the pipeline. The administration believes removing those
uncertainties is the best way for the state to drive this
forward and have a project in Alaska's interests.
3:48:25 PM
COMMISSIONER GALVIN told members AGIA is a commercial vehicle
that promotes a competitive playing field. It gives an open
opportunity for different pipeline proponents to come forward
with proposals. It will result in a pipeline on Alaska's terms
with respect to open access, an open North Slope basin, and low
tariffs. The state's decision-making process as to which
project to support and so forth will be transparent, as will the
inducements - the amount of value the state will put into that
process. Thus the public can understand what is happening.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN noted AGIA uses competitive bidding rather
than private negotiation. He highlighted the competition
inherent in setting a deadline and telling bidders to bring
their best proposal forward, with the expectation that they'll
bring forward a proposal that meets Alaska's interests. To
resolve uncertainties and move the project ahead, valuable
inducements are included in the application process.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN surmised without those inducements, there
wouldn't be competition and the opportunity for folks to come
into the game. It comes back to being able to say this pipeline
serves Alaska's long-term interests, creating an open,
competitive North Slope basin so explorers that find gas will be
able to get it to market on commercially reasonable terms. This
is in contrast to saying Alaska wants any pipeline at any cost.
3:50:26 PM
COMMISSIONER GALVIN said the "must haves" in AGIA focus on
aspects vital to the state: 1) moving the pipeline forward
quickly; 2) getting through the development; 3) having an open-
access pipeline to create a competitive North Slope oil and gas
industry; 4) having jobs and careers not only in developing the
pipeline, but also in the exploration and development of oil and
gas that will take place with an open-access pipeline on the
North Slope; and 5) ultimately having gas for Alaskans.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN continued with the slides, highlighting open
access and the question of what the tariff will be. As
discussed last year, there are debt-equity ratios and the
concept of having the state's contribution reduce the tariff.
He also mentioned providing the opportunity for creative problem
solving related to cost overruns, noting other competitive
aspects will create a pipeline that attracts the commitments of
gas initially and also will attract exploration and development.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN addressed the process, saying the bids are
submitted; those are made public and the public comments on
them; and then they're evaluated, with that evaluation becoming
public as well. Ultimately, the decision of the commissioners
as to whether issuing a license is in the best interest of the
state is fully transparent; thus the public can understand the
applications, the evaluation, and the finding and justification
for the decision. If the commissioners intend to issue a
license, it comes back to the legislature for final approval;
the legislature has 60 days to make that decision.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN said the AGIA inducements are up front,
quantifiable, and capped. The $500 million matching
contribution compares favorably with the amount of value
discussed in the previous negotiations with the producers as to
how much additional value the state would have to put in to try
to secure a sense of forward movement. The AGIA inducement
package doesn't have risks associated with the state taking on
capacity and marketing requirements or other risks that are
unquantifiable and otherwise hidden from public evaluation.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN explained that right now they're evaluating
the TransCanada application. There will be a 60-day comment
period. With AGIA, there is a flexible process because the
administration isn't certain how many applications will be
received. If there are several, criteria will be used to grade
them against each other; if there is only one, it still must
maximize the benefits to the people of Alaska and merit the
award of a license. That evaluation is happening right now.
Ultimately, there will be legislative review.
3:55:26 PM
COMMISSIONER GALVIN noted November 30 was the application
deadline. Five applications were received. He showed a slide
on this, with the following points:
- AEnergia
- 4 Bcfd pipeline
- Alaska Gasline Port Authority
- LNG Project (2.7 Bcfd)
- Alaska Natural Gas Development Authority
- Spur Line to Southcentral Alaska
- Little Susitna Construction Company
- LNG Project (4 Bcfd) with gas going to China
- TransCanada
- 4 Bcfd pipeline to Alberta
COMMISSIONER GALVIN elaborated. He described AEnergia as a
small outfit that proposed an overland pipeline to the Canadian
border; a catalyst to generate partners with North Slope
producers and the state to move the pipeline ahead, it would
rely on someone else to do the pipeline beyond the border. The
Alaska Gasline Port Authority ("Port Authority") proposed a
liquefied natural gas (LNG) project; a variety of pipe sizes
were included, but ultimately it would be a 2.7 billion cubic
feet a day (Bcfd) LNG project out of Valdez. The Alaska Natural
Gas Development Authority (ANGDA) proposed a spur line to
Southcentral Alaska connecting to an overland route to Canada -
he mentioned Glennallen or Delta - or, if there is an LNG
project, connecting at Glennallen and bringing it into the
Southcentral region.
3:57:07 PM
CHAIR HUGGINS asked how ANGDA is funded and whether it's the
Alaskan government applying to the Alaskan government.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN replied it was a citizen initiative. There
is a board appointed by the governor. It is funded by the
state; DOR carries its budget and passes it through. So ANGDA
is a state entity. Turning to Little Susitna Construction
Company, he said this Alaskan outfit teamed up with the Chinese
Sinopec and some of its subsidiaries, proposing a large-capacity
LNG project. The bulk of the gas would already be assigned and
sold to Sinopec. It would be purchased at the wellhead and
owned by Sinopec as it went through the line and to China.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN noted TransCanada also submitted an overland
route, a 4.5 Bcfd pipeline to Alberta. Its application says if
difficulties are encountered with Canadian permitting or getting
sufficient capacity commitments for that size line, it would
commit to delivering gas to Valdez through a pipeline if a
customer wants such a project; there was no technical
engineering information provided about the latter.
3:59:23 PM
COMMISSIONER GALVIN turned to the timeline since November 30,
showing a slide with the following points:
December 11-18: Letters to each applicant requesting
clarifications on their application
January 4: Completeness Decisions Made
- TransCanada is determined complete
January 10: Request for Reconsideration submitted by
the Port Authority
January 30: Request for Reconsideration Denied
- Commitment to evaluate LNG project options as part
of the AGIA evaluation process
COMMISSIONER GALVIN explained that under AGIA, the applications
remained confidential throughout the process of clarifying
information. On January 4 the completeness determinations were
released, and TransCanada was the one found complete. Although
the Port Authority's request for reconsideration was looked at
closely, just today a decision was made to deny it. He added
that there is a public commitment to evaluate LNG as an option
in comparison to the TransCanada application.
4:00:47 PM
CHAIR HUGGINS asked if this keeps the door open for the Port
Authority.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN answered he believes that is an accurate
depiction. There is an obligation to Alaskans to ensure if a
licensed project goes forward, there isn't a better alternative
out there. Thus the commitment is to pull together the LNG
options to see whether LNG is a better way to go. If that is
the case and a license to TransCanada isn't recommended, then
there needs to be another step to evaluate how to move forward
with an LNG project; he surmised at that point the Port
Authority would still be an alternative.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN, in response to Senator Wielechowski,
explained that it would be different from either the Sinopec or
Port Authority proposal. The evaluation team has a lot of
expertise on LNG and engineering of pipeline projects.
Different potential sizes and options can be built in. As
envisioned, at least a couple of different options would be
looked at to find the best potential LNG project in comparison
to the TransCanada project, not isolated to just what was
submitted by either Sinopec or the Port Authority.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked: If it is determined that LNG is a
better option, what happens then?
COMMISSIONER GALVIN surmised in that case it would be incumbent
on the administration to identify a way to move forward with
LNG. He also surmised AGIA would allow putting out another
request for applications (RFA) specific to LNG. However, the
actual path hadn't been identified yet.
4:03:53 PM
CHAIR HUGGINS expressed concern. First, something had been
called nonconforming and off the table, and now the
administration will compare courses of action including
TransCanada. He surmised flexibility is being sought in AGIA
that doesn't exist.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN replied that the administration isn't
suggesting there's flexibility in AGIA. Rather, a possible
license for TransCanada must be evaluated against LNG - not the
Port Authority or Sinopec or another specific applicant - as a
separate alternative with regard to economics and likelihood of
success. Otherwise, the administration would have to come
before the legislature without having looked at the LNG
alternatives because none of the applicants had complied.
CHAIR HUGGINS alluded to the fact that this slide says
"Commitment to evaluate LNG project options as part of the AGIA
evaluation process" right under January 30 where it says
"Request for Reconsideration Denied." He expressed concern
about what this implies.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN replied that the aforementioned placement
was because the commitment was made today, but it isn't tied to
the Port Authority at all. He emphasized that with AGIA,
everything is public. The Port Authority application is
available on the Internet. The evaluation will have to be
presented. It will be separate from the Port Authority.
4:06:37 PM
CHAIR HUGGINS asked to whom the commitment has been made, as
noted on the slide.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN indicated it is to Alaskans from the
administration.
CHAIR HUGGINS said that made him feel better, since the slide
gives a different impression.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN reiterated that the evaluation would be the
TransCanada application versus LNG. For the former, it must be
determined that the application sufficiently maximizes the
state's interests. That is being done in comparison with LNG.
There likely will be multiple scenarios to ensure they've
captured the gamut of options. It will become part of the
public record. They won't be looking at whether LNG maximizes
Alaska's interests. Rather, the issue will be whether
TransCanada sufficiently does so. If the answer is no, AGIA
says the commissioners can decide that no project deserves an
application; in that case, there will be an option to go forward
with another RFA or to seek another course of action.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN acknowledged it raises a question. He said
a lot will be learned about LNG between now and then. The team
of experts will provide the administration and Alaskans with
their take on this issue, which has faced the state for a couple
of decades. One purpose of AGIA was to have the ultimate
evaluation of which course of action to take at this point.
Much more will be known later about the level of interest and
the best course of action.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said he personally appreciates that
evaluation, since many of his constituents have said they want
an LNG line or an all-Alaska line. If nothing else, it's good
for the public trust to look at that. There is a constitutional
obligation to get the maximum value for the resources. He
asked: If LNG proves to be of maximum value, is there any room
under TransCanada's application to go forward with LNG?
COMMISSIONER GALVIN responded that they have to take
TransCanada's application as presented. If LNG is identified as
the preferred alternative, they have to be fair to all
participants and to the process. In response to Chair Huggins,
he indicated the evaluation would look at the benefits of
projects that involve Canada in general, beyond the question of
LNG versus TransCanada.
4:12:45 PM
CHAIR HUGGINS asked under what provision the request for
reconsideration and the reconsideration had occurred. He gave
his understanding that this element doesn't exist in AGIA.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN agreed, indicating the time lag between the
request and the decision was from working with the Department of
Law (DOL) on that issue. The conclusion from DOL was that the
agency heads have an inherent ability to reconsider any decision
they make, regardless of whether it is in statute. Many
statutes don't mention reconsideration. So although AGIA
precluded the right to appeal the decision outside of the
administrative process into the judicial process, the right to a
reconsideration wasn't precluded.
4:13:56 PM
CHAIR HUGGINS again referred to the wording on the slide,
requesting confirmation that there wasn't any special
communications to the Port Authority about how the state is
going forward with that course of action.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN said no. The letter to the Port Authority
is publicly available on the website, to his belief. He said
the timing was such that the clarification on the treatment of
LNG was made both to the Port Authority and - via a letter dated
today from the governor, also on the website - to former
Governor Hickel and the background group that had asked the same
question. He reiterated that it was juxtaposed on the slide.
4:14:44 PM
COMMISSIONER GALVIN showed a slide labeled "What is Next?" that
had the following points:
February 18-28: Planned Townhall meeting throughout
Alaska
March 6: Comment deadline
Spring 2008
- Complete the Evaluation and Issue Finding
- If Intending to Award License, then provide notice
to the legislature to start 60-day approval period
COMMISSIONER GALVIN clarified that the townhall-style meetings
aren't being done with TransCanada; they're being done by the
state, as evaluators of the application, to solicit public
comment. They won't be in the style of a public hearing, taking
testimony. Rather, they are designed to answer questions and
provide information.
CHAIR HUGGINS suggested it is important for legislators to know
who will be conducting those meetings with their constituents.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN agreed to distribute that as soon as it is
finalized. He said March 6 is the public comment deadline.
Following that, there will be a decision by the two
commissioners and a finding will be issued. If the decision is
the intent to award a license, that will be provided to the
legislature for final approval within 60 days.
CHAIR HUGGINS noted the slide says "Spring 2008." He asked what
the target date is.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN answered that they've been working with the
evaluation team. Things have been fluid. For example, on
January 4 the applicant was identified, but there has been
continual feedback from the evaluation team as to the scope of
the work. Having the LNG evaluation adds a contingency. The
team has made it clear that it will take some time after the
March 6 deadline to complete its evaluation, but how much time
depends on the nature and complexity of the issues raised by the
comments. It could be three weeks to three months. The comment
period is still open, and issues may be raised that aren't
anticipated. They cannot commit to a particular date now, but
will strive to keep the legislature informed.
4:19:05 PM
CHAIR HUGGINS invited Senator Joe Thomas to the committee table,
noting he'd been present throughout the meeting.
4:19:36 PM
COMMISSIONER GALVIN turned to a proposal by ConocoPhillips,
showing a slide with the following points:
Invitation to Negotiate Upstream "Fiscal Framework"
- Does not include any requested upstream fiscal terms
- Agreement on upstream terms a pre-condition to any
additional advancement of the project
Reflects, but does not meet, AGIA open-access
requirements
- Few commitments, many contingencies
COMMISSIONER GALVIN elaborated. He described ConocoPhillips'
alternative as an invitation to negotiate fiscal terms as a
prerequisite to forward movement or any fieldwork.
ConocoPhillips didn't provide any particular terms for what it
is pursuing. In addition, the company reflected but didn't
attempt to meet the AGIA "must haves" for open access in
particular. The alternative identifies those and provides a
variation, but there are few commitments and many contingencies.
There isn't really a proposal with the same meaning as used in
AGIA. Rather, it is an alternative.
CHAIR HUGGINS said he increasingly feels it is smart for
pipeline companies to build pipelines; it's also smart to have
involvement with those that have the gas, to ensure the gas is
there. As for a fiscal framework, he recalled last October and
November terms weren't negotiated; it was just done. He
suggested that the legislature similarly decree the terms for
gas, with consideration of its bearing on the gas pipeline.
4:23:28 PM
TOM IRWIN, Commissioner, Department of Natural Resources,
responded that they envision the following: If TransCanada is
recommended and the legislature chooses to approve TransCanada
as the applicant, they'll start to define the project, route,
permitting, and steps to narrow the uncertainties. Then
everyone will understand much more of the economics and what is
or isn't needed upstream. He surmised everyone will become
wiser through this process.
CHAIR HUGGINS said this isn't unlike the process for gas,
looking at different parameters and courses of action as well as
reducing uncertainty through the process. ConocoPhillips will
get a chance along with every other player, as happened in
October and November when everyone came forward and had a say.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN replied if there is a need to provide a
fiscal framework with certainty, it would be done through a
public discussion. The state would say what it is willing to
put up, similar to the discussion last year in the context of
AGIA and whether the 10-year certainty on taxes and royalties is
the appropriate one. Gas taxes will be looked at when more is
known about the economics of the pipeline and gas development.
As for the ConocoPhillips alternative, the administration is
saying if ConocoPhillips wants to begin that public dialogue, it
needs to provide something publicly as a starting point. Just
saying "have a fiscal framework" isn't sufficient.
CHAIR HUGGINS suggested no matter what company it is, the
legislature can go through a process and set terms for a course
of action that moves forward, rather than waiting for somebody
else to do something.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN clarified that it hasn't yet been decided
whether something needs to be changed.
4:29:57 PM
COMMISSIONER GALVIN showed the final slide, "AGIA Summary," with
the following points:
- Get project built, quickly
Significant cost of delay
Need timelines, benchmarks
- Open North Slope gas basin
Mandatory Expansion
Rolled in tariffs
- Open and competitive process
Evaluation criteria
- Low tariffs
State Contribution
Debt to equity ratio
- Gas for Alaska
Distance sensitive rates
- Jobs for Alaska
Training program
- Increase Predictability for Producers
COMMISSIONER GALVIN emphasized getting the project through the
development phase; having a pipeline that works for Alaska and
opens up the North Slope basin; having a process whereby the
public can have confidence and that results in low tariffs and
value back to the state and the leaseholders; having gas and
jobs for Alaskans; and, ultimately, moving this forward and
reducing uncertainties for the producers so they'll commit their
gas to this line.
4:30:50 PM
SENATOR STEDMAN said this was a positive presentation, but the
gas isn't assured with AGIA. This is a process, with the hope
of getting gas to market sooner rather than later. He asked
about risk the state may face if the AGIA license is issued and
if TransCanada has a failed open season and then it goes through
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) process for a
certificate, with the state paying up to $500 million,
90 percent, as well as the impact on the timeframe if the state
must litigate and force a sale of gas to fill the line.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN replied nothing has changed from the
representations a year ago. As it moves through the AGIA
timeline, with the TransCanada application in the public realm,
the implications remain the same. There is an open season. If
it is unsuccessful, the question is what happens then. Under
AGIA, with the commitments made by TransCanada, it will continue
to move through the FERC permitting process. The state will
identify barriers to getting gas commitments, with the full
understanding of the economics and terms of that open season and
a much better understanding of what current leaseholders have
identified as barriers to making commitments. At that time, a
decision can be made on the best course of action.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN surmised the administration wouldn't
consider litigation as the first order of business. Other
things could be looked at to attract those commitments. It will
depend on information available then as to how much risk truly
is associated with making those commitments, given the project
economics. A collective risk assessment will be made regarding
what the state's role should be. Also, as TransCanada said in
its application, a possible alternative to look at is whether
the federal government should have a role as a "bridge shipper."
The state will be in a much stronger position once there is a
licensee with a project in the regulatory process that is
identifying the economics.
4:35:12 PM
SENATOR STEDMAN noted the committee hadn't had the opportunity
to review the TransCanada proposal yet. He highlighted getting
a better understanding of the company's position. He said there
seems to be some hesitation about going beyond a failed open
season to ensure a successful one, which everyone wants.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN replied TransCanada's testimony last year
crystallized that it wouldn't be interested in voluntarily going
past an unsuccessful open season, which would require dedicating
resources. That provides a healthy situation for the state,
however, which wants TransCanada to be motivated to do
everything possible to have a successful initial open season;
the testimony indicated TransCanada wants to do that.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN added that TransCanada recognized it's in
the state's interest to move the project forward. Competition
associated with AGIA caused the company to accept that required
level of commitment. So the state is better off if that occurs,
and the state is in a better position now that people know a
failed open season won't stop the project. He said the
administration feels positive about where things are right now
and the opportunities that will present themselves through the
AGIA process.
SENATOR STEDMAN requested future analysis and conversation about
mitigating potential risks that the state faces in issuing a
license under AGIA, having a failed open season, going to the
certificate, expending the $500 million, and facing treble
damages if the state wants to terminate it, all with the
assumption that there may be a competing project heading towards
a FERC certificate. He asked: At what point does the state get
to the position of no return and thus is exposed to treble
damages and $500 million in sunk costs?
SENATOR STEDMAN recalled that a recent ConocoPhillips
presentation indicated the company is very interested in
starting the process to perhaps build its own gas pipeline
outside of AGIA. He asked: At what point does the state have
an exposure that would create an uncomfortable position for the
state, and how does the state mitigate that and get out of it?
4:40:30 PM
COMMISSIONER GALVIN responded that he'd taken away a different
impression from the ConocoPhillips discussion, that absent
agreement on a fiscal framework up front, the company wouldn't
move forward with an application to FERC. He indicated it is up
to the state as to whether that possibility becomes a real risk.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN also said public discussion of the treble
damages has been a bit misleading. People say it exposes the
state to $1.5 billion. But if one does the math on the
TransCanada application, the most extreme case - if it goes to
the open season and the state continues to contribute at the
higher percentage rate - could result in perhaps $640 million to
get to the FERC certificate; the state would have contributed
roughly $450 million. Treble damages only apply to the
TransCanada outlay. So it would only be three times that
amount, not three times the whole $500 million.
4:42:21 PM
COMMISSIONER IRWIN highlighted two big risks for the state. The
first is trying to plan for the future without knowing the costs
and value, including inherent value to Alaskans. The heart of
AGIA is protecting the open basin and having an open pipeline,
exploration, and expandability. But the state needs to know the
numbers to make sound decisions; AGIA moves things clearly along
that path. The second risk is a failed open season. If the
state didn't drive past that, it would certainly invite a failed
open season because the process would stop and it would be back
to "How much do we have to give till we get a gasline?" Driving
past an open season and having information will provide real
knowledge, from which sound decisions will be made collectively.
4:43:45 PM
CHAIR HUGGINS recommended reviewing a January 23 memo from
Mr. Mogel with respect to TransCanada that is on the website.
It indicates some things the company won't do, such as
engineering and that the state would own it.
COMMISSIONER IRWIN indicated the administration takes the
evaluation seriously. For the completion, over 100 people
worked on this in technical, commercial, and legal teams.
"Without exception, we were told all 20 complied," he said,
noting he hadn't yet read the memo but it was provided to some
of the legal experts. He indicated the administration will
communicate clearly with the legislature on it.
CHAIR HUGGINS requested that the legislature also be privy to
any opinions from consultants or the attorney general. That
way, everyone has the same information, whatever the source.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN expressed appreciation for that. He noted
Mr. Mogel had provided two or three memos; the one cited goes to
whether TransCanada complied with AGIA and whether its
application was appropriately found to be complete. The process
is in the evaluation phase now, so evaluation questions will
arise; it's likely that most will wait until the state comes
forward with an actual finding, which will be fully thought out.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN said the question of completeness has
already been addressed, and he believes the related memo
requires close attention, since it calls into question the
decision already made. Noting he has reviewed the memo,
Commissioner Galvin opined that it reflects a basic
misunderstanding of the TransCanada application and the AGIA
statute. A response document is nearly complete from the
administration's team and will be made public within a day or
two. The administration takes seriously the question of whether
its decision on completeness was appropriate. He surmised that
those who review these two documents will recognize that
Mr. Mogel has misunderstood the law.
4:47:42 PM
COMMISSIONER IRWIN emphasized that the administration's three
independent teams - technical, commercial, and legal -
unequivocally say there was full completion. Expressing comfort
with that decision, he indicated the administration would
respond to any types of questions or comments on that.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI returned to concern about a failed open
season. He said when he looks from a layperson's perspective,
he sees that Drue Pearce says there is heavy demand for natural
gas in the Lower 48; the federal government is behind this in an
unprecedented way, to where an almost cabinet-level position has
been established to expedite it; there is an $18 billion loan
guarantee; and financial analyses have been done and will be
done in the future. Thus it seems everyone would have to be
missing something for there to be a failed open season. He
asked: Will you be looking at the likelihood of success in the
open season when you perform this evaluation?
COMMISSIONER GALVIN affirmed that, saying it is a large part of
the evaluation. Included in the RFA, and embedded in the AGIA
criteria as well, was the question of whether TransCanada has
done what it can to create the greatest likelihood of success,
including the initial open season. Some discussion involving
things TransCanada mentioned in its application, associated with
the loan guarantees being used to cover potential cost overruns,
will also be looked at closely to understand the company's idea
that it is an additional attractant to an open season because it
creates more certainty for those making commitments.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN said the administration has expressed
confidence all along that when this gets to the open season -
assuming it is a proven economic project - the producers, as
reasonable commercial players, will commit their gas. It can't
be guaranteed, though, so the contingency is built in that if
there is an unsuccessful open season, the project will be moved
ahead because something may still need to be addressed.
4:51:42 PM
COMMISSIONER IRWIN added that last week he, Commissioner Galvin,
and Marty Rutherford of DNR talked to various folks in
Washington, D.C. They hear the huge demand for energy. Because
of global warming, they believe Alaska has the right energy at
the right time. Demand is rising. The price is rising.
Consumers in the Lower 48 say the gas can't get there soon
enough. There are even more encouraging indicators than when
AGIA was passed a year ago. Highlighting the state's good
position, he opined that the state is dealing with reasonable,
highly qualified companies across the board that will protect
their own value; as conditions change, they'll want to make real
money. There will be real dollars to show what that value is.
SENATOR GREEN requested a definition of bridge shipper.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN deferred that, saying in the context of
TransCanada's application he doesn't know what the company means
by it. The administration is waiting for its experts to explain
how it fits into the tariff rate. In general, though, the
concept of a backstop shipper or an entity that comes in as an
insurance policy can take a number of forms.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN gave examples. There might be a commitment
to take the later years and take the risk of geologic discovery,
with the commitments only being for "x" period of time and
they'll cover the remaining period in order to get financing.
Or they may say there is "x" amount of capacity already
committed and so much unfilled capacity, and they might agree to
make those commitments so that by the time the valve is turned
and gas is being shipped, if there isn't gas going through,
they'll make payments in lieu of that.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN added he didn't know whether TransCanada had
included it in the application, rather than just putting the
concept forward. It wasn't a requirement or a condition for the
application. TransCanada simply said if it gets to the point of
an unsuccessful open season, this is something the state and
TransCanada may want to talk to the federal government about.
But TransCanada hasn't said it won't go to FERC unless it
happens or that the future of the project depends on it.
4:55:36 PM
COMMISSIONER IRWIN mentioned talk about "conditional" and
"bridge shipper." He explained that when the administration put
out the RFA, there were clear "must haves." They tried to think
outside the box with respect to what else might be necessary to
solve other problems that arise. The RFA solicited proposals,
and those that didn't unconditionally meet the qualifications
weren't accepted. But also, as is common practice, bidders were
encouraged to think outside the box as to what they might need
or problems they saw. "We wanted to be wise about it," he said.
COMMISSIONER IRWIN noted TransCanada's materials say, on
numerous pages, that the company accepts requirements
unconditionally, but also recommend that if there is a
particular problem, maybe the state and the company ought to do
a particular thing. Those weren't conditions placed on the
"must haves." The legal team is getting an answer to some of
these issues, as Commissioner Galvin had mentioned. He surmised
legislators would ask TransCanada these types of questions.
SENATOR GREEN recalled discussions that it is the risk taker
that ensures there is a backstop and there are commitments. She
said this is totally out of the box. In addition, she recalled
conversations about a gas tax being in place before all this
starts, and a recent conversation involving her, Chair Huggins,
and TransCanada in which it was stated "no customers, no
contract." She expressed concern that the state continues to
say this can't be done until something is in place. She then
requested a definition of the final point on the "AGIA
Principles" slide: "Reduce uncertainties for Producers."
COMMISSIONER GALVIN replied that this references how to increase
the likelihood of a successful open season. When the producers
talk about the implications of making a gas commitment to this
project, they reference things such as price commodity risk,
whether there will be completion of the project, cost overrun
risk, the ultimate project cost, regulatory risk, and design
risk. Right now, those are fairly significant. A project
proponent or somebody asked to commit at an open season will ask
how to better manage those risks. One identified aspect is the
fiscal risk related to changes in the state system.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN noted the companies are willing to accept a
certain amount of risk and have stated so. How much certainty
they need with respect to the state fiscal picture is in
context, juxtaposed with all other risks. The administration is
suggesting this: If some other risks can be eliminated, then
the amount the state is expected to provide through the fiscal
system becomes less important. He added, "With AGIA, we drive
through the design risk, the regulatory risk, a lot of the cost
risks." He said the mechanism proposed by TransCanada is a way
of reducing overall risk so there's less emphasis on the state
fiscal aspect. That creates an opportunity to move the project
ahead without the same demands that the state faces today.
5:03:18 PM
CHAIR HUGGINS asked about elements to reduce risk, timing, and
the plan to do that. He recalled that ConocoPhillips conveyed
willingness to index the commitment timeframe to the certainty
timeframe, which was new to him. Also new was that the tax rate
wasn't necessarily the main concern; rather, it was the overall
regime, the system. He interpreted this as potentially major
movement in somebody coming forward and putting something on the
table as part of the discussion.
COMMISSIONER IRWIN agreed it was an interesting discussion from
ConocoPhillips, but asked what "regime" means. Does it mean
going back to arbitration versus using the judicial system? He
said if the state could convince the companies that have gas to
define what is needed, that is critical and would help greatly.
CHAIR HUGGINS gave his interpretation of a regime: The
administration brings forth a bill for gas taxes and the
legislature sets the taxes. He reiterated that he isn't
interested in negotiating with the companies and isn't asking
the administration to do so. Instead, he thinks a solution can
be arrived at to move this forward for Alaska.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN said Chair Huggins had hit upon an
interesting dynamic. ConocoPhillips had provided a different
description of what they were asking for, clarifying that
1) they're looking at the length of time commensurate with the
length of the commitment and 2) the regime rather than the rate
itself is the concern. If it would be a net-based tax that
includes these deductions, the rate may change. He said he
didn't know.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN added it's one thing for the state to
propose a solution and another for the companies saying there
are problems and barriers. There is one description of that in
the stranded gas contract. Also, ExxonMobil last year said the
package needs to be comprehensive, including taxes on oil, gas,
property, corporate income, and so on, for 35-45 years. For the
state to just decide doesn't solve the problem. If the intent
is to find something that works collectively, that the public
will buy into, the administration needs more information about
what is needed to overcome this.
CHAIR HUGGINS proposed doing it with a bill, hearing testimony
and so on. Then the legislature would take that information and
create some degree of certainty. Voicing confidence that it can
be done correctly, he again suggested proactively triggering
this and doing it, rather than waiting for someone else.
COMMISSIONER IRWIN responded that for an AGIA applicant who
wins, the administration wants to get the legislature its
forward-looking information and intelligence information in that
scenario. Being able to predict the cost and value will help
the legislature determine what to go after.
CHAIR HUGGINS suggested the administration should already have
the elements, since the administration would be providing
assumptions on cost factors and so forth. He surmised the
information would be available by spring of 2008 when the
recommendations - or lack thereof - are brought forward.
5:10:37 PM
SENATOR STEDMAN returned to the loan guarantees, cost overruns,
and issues relating to bridge shippers, saying those modify what
is currently place. He suggested the necessity of better
understanding Alberta's need for Alaskan gas. He voiced concern
about the potential requirement for anyone - in this case,
TransCanada - to access the loan guarantee if issues disqualify
it. If a guarantee is required or needed, it would be a huge
miscalculation if a license were issued without knowing the
guarantee was obtainable and it later turned out it wasn't.
SENATOR STEDMAN asked the commissioners to help members sort
through those issues. For instance, do the Alberta oil sands
need a third of Alaska's gas or all of it, or none? While a
huge energy demand is ramping up there, the energy source hasn't
been determined. He said there is a concern with the loan
guarantees being for the continental U.S. if the gas doesn't get
there in sufficient quantity to qualify.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN agreed that if the finding recommends
issuing a license, the state will have to demonstrate that it
has done the due diligence on the underpinnings of this project,
including loan guarantees and related qualifications. Noting he
and Commissioner Irwin had been to Washington, D.C., several
times for discussions with the U.S. Department of Energy and
those responsible for the existing loan guarantees, he
highlighted making sure those folks are providing input so this
doesn't end up outside the realm of what is available. That
will be part of the administration's evaluation and finding, and
ultimately it will go to the legislature for its decision.
SENATOR STEDMAN gave his understanding that it would require
congressional action to modify the loan guarantees with respect
to bridge shipping, cost overruns, and non-U.S. termination
points. He asked how that would play into the analysis.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN suggested that first the question will be
whether it requires such a statutory change. The context of
each situation will need to be separated out. The bridge
shipper issue is an alternative path, not part of the course
that the state requires the companies to follow. Whether it is
available immediately, is possible, or is impossible might not
be relevant to whether to issue a license. The heart of the
question is that a gas line has been proposed that goes to
Alberta.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN recalled asking the U.S. Department of
Energy if there might be an eligibility issue because the line
connects to the Alberta Hub, since they'd heard any molecule
consumed in Canada won't be eligible for the loan guarantee; the
U.S. Department of Energy discounted that as an issue, however,
since there is an integrated natural gas system. The gas that
hits Alberta is said to be traded eight times a day. Whether
one particular molecule of Alaskan gas ends up in Washington
State, the Midwest, or in Canada, nobody could ever say. It
will go to wherever the price is being paid under the contracts.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN said each of these issues is of concern, and
the administration has an obligation to evaluate them. If it
requires an Act of Congress to make this work, that will have to
be seriously considered in terms of the likelihood of success.
5:16:48 PM
SENATOR STEDMAN urged caution. He clarified that he wasn't
referring to loss of a molecule of two, but 50 or 75 percent of
the volume, a substantial redirection of gas into Alberta rather
than the continental U.S. When he was in Alberta, it was
implied that vast amounts of energy are needed to get to the oil
sands and oil there, and there's interest in moving it to south
Texas to the refineries. He suggested this could be worked on
in the next few months. Cautioning against coming up with a
scenario that doesn't actually exist, he reminded members that
for the original PPT legislation there were many months spent in
committee meetings and special sessions, and yet a fundamental
error was made that had to be corrected later.
COMMISSIONER IRWIN opined that the line into Canada is a good
situation because the administration predicts lines will be low
there. There are gas volumes that can fill those lines. Yes,
there is a need for energy relating to the tar sands. Along
with what they'd heard from the U.S. Department of Energy, there
is a desire to have the producers commit gas. Once it's in the
line, the state doesn't want to tell them where they can or
cannot drop it off. The producers are good at commercial deals,
long-term sales, spot sales, and so on. The desire is to allow
them to put their gas where it maximizes sales. So this ties
into the discussion also.
5:20:03 PM
CHAIR HUGGINS, correcting a previous statement he'd made with
respect to AGIA, voiced support for taking as much time as
needed to get it right, since the stakes are important. He
noted only one application had conformed to AGIA, and British
Gas (BG) and MidAmerican hadn't come forward. He surmised if
capable companies hadn't submitted conforming bids, they hadn't
wanted to. He asked what surprises there'd been.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN noted when the session ended last year and
the bill was signed, there was a blind solicitation sent out so
companies knew the opportunity, even though it was felt to be a
long shot. Players in the pipeline game are known: the Port
Authority, MidAmerican, TransCanada, and the producers. The
biggest surprise was the amount of interest from entities that
work with BG. Whereas last year BG testified that it didn't
intend to participate, BG spent a lot of money putting together
something but then ultimately decided not to apply.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN said another surprise was receiving the
Sinopec-related materials from Little Susitna Construction
Company, clearly put together by an outfit that knew what it was
doing. He highlighted a cultural difference in how business is
done, noting a lot of negotiating room was left and the company
perhaps didn't know the state would hold to the fact that it was
final and unconditional.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN recalled speculation last year about whether
AGIA was written for MidAmerican; he said the administration
clarified that it wasn't written for any company, which was
borne out by the process. The hope was for a lot of jockeying
for position and public posturing; he surmised the companies
also acted behind the scenes.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN told members that although there is a
perception that this was a noncompetitive process because
TransCanada has an application entering the evaluation phase,
nothing could be further from the truth. Although reluctant to
make the required commitments under AGIA, TransCanada
nonetheless chose to take on significant commitments to the
state. He opined that the primary driver was competition.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN said competition would have changed
companies' behavior until November 30, when they had to give
their best pitch. After that, they were locked in and the state
just had to decide. Competition includes not just those
companies that submitted an application, but also those expected
to. He surmised TransCanada acted as it did because of the
belief that others would submit applications, although some
decided at the last minute not to. It benefited the state.
Getting companies to meet the state's demands because of
competition is what AGIA is about. He indicated the
administration has said all it needs is one good application.
TransCanada's meets all the demands.
5:27:49 PM
CHAIR HUGGINS referred to letters to the administration from
MidAmerican and BG. He asked whether the administration had
talked to MidAmerican about the following paragraph:
Given the extensive nature of the ongoing criminal
investigations, recent related performance issues in
Alaska and elsewhere by one of our major producers,
ongoing litigation regarding natural gas leases with
producers, and the current projected complications and
heavy industrial construction industry, we would
respectfully suggest that an alternative way forward
to considered.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN replied they'd asked but hadn't received an
answer they fully understood; he suggested asking Mr. Sokol. He
surmised this referenced the fact that MidAmerican wasn't
participating. He noted that to complete the paragraph thought,
it said an alternative path would be partnering with ...
CHAIR HUGGINS finished the idea, noting it is the U.S.
government with a proven, nonconflicted project development
partner, whoever that is.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN said he hadn't understood that reference
either, although he'd asked.
COMMISSIONER IRWIN added that the aforementioned letter is
intriguing. It isn't known what went on behind the scenes. The
surprise was that the company clearly and publicly said it would
participate but then something changed that. Nor does the
administration know yet whether it has the right applicant,
because it still needs to do the evaluation. But it is an
incredibly good applicant to evaluate.
5:30:59 PM
CHAIR HUGGINS asked when the decision to evaluate LNG was made.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN replied the final decision was made in the
last 24 hours, after deciding what to do with the Port Authority
application.
COMMISSIONER IRWIN added that it took a long time because it was
such a critical decision.
CHAIR HUGGINS commended the decision, suggesting it should have
been done months earlier and as part of the approach for AGIA.
He noted that business people frequently ask whether there are
substantive talks with ConocoPhillips and whether the governor
is part of it.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN answered that there are continual
discussions between the administration and ConocoPhillips. The
public manifestation is the proposal and response. The response
to the governor is indicative of the types of discussions in
terms of the framework for the best way to move forward to reach
the mutual goals. Currently, there is a different viewpoint as
to how to move forward, but it doesn't diminish that there are
significant mutual goals. The discussion needs to continue to
ensure an opportunity isn't missed when that presents itself.
CHAIR HUGGINS asked who the liaison is between the
administration's gas team and various players.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN replied Marty Rutherford of DNR is the lead
on the gasline project.
CHAIR HUGGINS asked whether she is the one talking to them.
COMMISSIONER IRWIN clarified that there's a difference between
talking and negotiating. He didn't know of an instance when a
discussion was refused by either party. They continue to hear
"certainty" and continue to ask what it means, but there hasn't
been clarity on either side, and they want to understand the
ramifications. Both sides have been courteous and willing to
talk to each other.
CHAIR HUGGINS asked whom they are dealing with at
ConocoPhillips.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN noted the appropriate person to communicate
something depends on the issue. He mentioned Governor Palin
along with Jim Mulva of ConocoPhillips, and he alluded to DNR's
Marty Rutherford along with Brian Wenzel and Wendy King of
ConocoPhillips. Within DOR, he said Kevin Mitchell, Jon
Iversen, and Marcia Davis go back and forth over various things.
It happens continually and in a variety of ways at each level.
CHAIR HUGGINS asked if they are communicating with the other
producers.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN answered that in the regular course of
business there is communication all the time. With regard to
the gas pipeline, the administration is going forward with AGIA.
ConocoPhillips has suggested talking about an alternative, so
that is being discussed. But the other companies haven't
requested much regarding gasline issues, so there has been
nothing to respond about and no reason to reach out to them.
5:36:55 PM
COMMISSIONER IRWIN added that despite what is sometimes heard,
it's not true that they can't get along. He mentioned work done
by ConocoPhillips, Marathon, ENSTAR, and the state with respect
to recommendations on the LNG facility, saying there was
tremendous progress by all parties. Opportunities can be had.
SENATOR GREEN asked if conversations were pleasant between the
administration and the producers.
COMMISSIONER IRWIN replied in every one he'd been in, there was
courtesy on both sides.
SENATOR GREEN suggested that should extend to letter writing in
the future.
SENATOR McGUIRE requested modeling on how other jurisdictions
treat gas taxes and provide incentives through a tax structure.
She surmised the administration is waiting to see if there is a
licensee, but agreed with Chair Huggins that the ultimate issue
of a gas tax needs to be addressed. She reminded members that
during the Murkowski Administration the issues became so
intertwined that progress couldn't be made on either end.
5:39:29 PM
COMMISSIONER GALVIN said they clearly recognize that. Their
effort has been to recognize the difference between upstream and
midstream issues and to keep those distinct, though recognizing
the interplay. With respect to Senator McGuire's first request,
he agreed to provide what information the administration has.
He referred to testimony by Marcia Davis.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN, in response to Senator Stedman, clarified
that the administration's communication with the companies isn't
through the media. Communications take place in meetings and
phone conversations, and one can see the types of discussions by
looking at letters between the parties.
SENATOR STEDMAN noted the governor's rejection letter to
ConocoPhillips was addressed to James Mulva, the company's chief
executive officer (CEO) in Houston, Texas, but the response
letter came from Jim Bowles, president of ConocoPhillips Alaska.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN said the ConocoPhillips alternative was
delivered to Governor Palin in a meeting between her and
James Mulva in the form of a letter from Mr. Mulva to her. So
her response was back to him. ConocoPhillips' decision to send
a letter from Mr. Bowles was its own decision.
5:43:01 PM
CHAIR HUGGINS wrapped up by saying communication is a mutual
responsibility. Indicating Sharon Long is this committee's
liaison for the gas pipeline, he said the committee would like a
corresponding liaison from the administration. He also
requested that the administration push information to the
committee so there is an open flow to the legislature, as he
indicated would similarly occur with information from the
legislative consultants to the administration.
5:44:27 PM
SENATOR GREEN asked if any provision encourages a consortium or
partnership from this point forward or a way to start that
conversation or push it along; she said it didn't require an
immediate answer. She surmised in the end there wouldn't be
just one company.
COMMISSIONER GALVIN concurred, noting provisions in AGIA
specifically allow the addition of more parties. He expressed
encouragement and said it reflects well on TransCanada that its
application indicated it was leaving room for additional equity
owners. It is an opportunity for the administration to look for
opportunities to "move people together."
SENATOR GREEN asked: Is it appropriate for the state to be in
that role, or is the desire to let the attraction work on its
own, for instance?
COMMISSIONER IRWIN replied he believes it will happen. There
are good companies. But right now, the administration needs to
be careful to not compromise its position during the evaluation.
SENATOR GREEN indicated TransCanada had made it clear that there
is a wall and no communication in that respect. She noted
people ask why everyone can't get along and get together.
5:47:21 PM
COMMISSIONER IRWIN, in response to Chair Huggins, said the
administration will be available to Chambers of Commerce, Rotary
members, and others who want to hear these presentations and ask
questions. This is in addition to the scheduled town meetings.
CHAIR HUGGINS thanked the commissioners.
There being no further business to come before the committee,
Chair Huggins adjourned the Senate Resources Standing Committee
meeting at 5:48:25 PM.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|