HCR 2-IN-STATE GAS PIPELINE  HCR 3-IN-STATE GAS PIPELINE  HCR 4-IN-STATE GAS PIPELINE  HCR 5-IN-STATE GAS PIPELINE  3:49:39 PM CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI announced the consideration of HCR 2, HCR 3, HCR 4, and HCR 5. He thanked the sponsor for working with his office and Senator McGuire's office on the language and to consolidate the four resolutions into one. REPRESENTATIVE JAY RAMRAS, Alaska State Legislature, said the Senate committee substitute (CS) [to HCR 2] contains language that articulates how to go about building an instate gas pipeline. SENATOR HUGGINS asked if the CS represents the original intent of the four concurrent resolutions. REPRESENTATIVE RAMRAS replied the Senate CS has a little more economy of language than he might care for, but he is reasonably satisfied. 3:52:36 PM CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI said there wasn't any intention to change any intent. Consolidating the resolutions made logistical sense in the interest of moving the concept forward. REPRESENTATIVE RAMRAS said he doesn't want to dilute the expression to the executive branch to make every effort to move this along as expediently as possible. He applauds hiring Harry Noah as coordinator of an instate gas pipeline and appreciates that the first thing he will do is to determine if an instate line is superior to further exploration of Cook Inlet. To that end, a notable change is on page 4, line 17, where the date is changed from November 2010 to June 2011. This is the date by which Mr. Noah wants this finished. The Senate CS dilutes the explicit instructions to the executive branch, but he is satisfied with the compromise. This will create an attainable legacy for the governor. 3:55:28 PM SENATOR FRENCH referenced the whereas clause on page 3, line 16, and asked who is asserting that "the collective demand for natural gas in the Interior and Southcentral is anticipated to expand from 200,000,000 cubic feet a day to approximately 700,000,000 cubic feet a day during the period 2010 to 2025." REPRESENTATIVE RAMRAS replied that came from an Enstar presentation to the House Resources Committee. SENATOR FRENCH referenced the further resolved clause on page 4, line 5, which talks about volume in terms of cubic feet per year and asked what that roughly translates to per day. 3:56:41 PM REPRESENTATIVE RAMRAS replied a 500 mcf per day line translates to about 180 bcf per year. The residential and light commercial use in the Railbelt would be about 60 bcf per year, Agrium is anticipated to be about 60 bcf per year if it comes back on line, and potential expansion from the USDS would be another 60 bcf per year. That would fill the line and provide the lowest tariff for the users. SENATOR FRENCH asked if that was the impetus for selecting 500 mcf per day usage from an instate bullet line. REPRESENTATIVE RAMRAS said yes. SENATOR FRENCH observed that the new June 1, 2011 date for taking action bridges from one administration to the next. He asked the thought process for that selection. 3:58:08 PM REPRESENTATIVE RAMRAS said he struggled with that policy issue. The House maintained that a November 2010 date was critical because of the election cycle and the open season for Denali and TransCanada, but June 1 2011 is the date Harry Noah spoke of. The change was an accommodation to Mr. Noah, but November 1, 2010 is probably more relevant. I would be open to an amendment changing the date back to November 1, 2010, he said. SENATOR FRENCH said he'd leave that suggestion in the hands of the chair. He asked if the administration has provided further input regarding how it will respond to this request. REPRESENTATIVE RAMRAS replied he appreciates that it is easier to move one consolidated resolution through the Legislature, but a benefit of the four distinct resolutions is that they offered an incremental and explicit point of view to the executive branch for building an instate gas pipeline. 4:01:11 PM CO-CHAIR MCGUIRE observed that to up the timeline by nine months might set the administration up for failure. This is the most important thing we can do for Alaskans and these instructions provide direction and continuity if there is a new governor, she said. Should the committee desire, there could be an accompanying letter to echo the Senate support and the incremental and instructive methodology that Representative Ramras envisioned, she added. CO-CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI said he'd be happy to work with her on that. SENATOR HUGGINS said the topic of instate gas generates lots of interest, but it's tricky. The fact that Harry Noah is working on this is good because people think he can make it happen. The essence of the discussion today is that the economics of the bullet line project have to work. What is more, we'll get a good look at Cook Inlet. 4:05:17 PM SENATOR HUGGINS said he heard .5 bcf mentioned, but he's certain that Alaskans will say to move as much gas as it takes to make the pipeline work because all they want is gas that's economical. For that reason he doesn't feel constrained by that number, regardless of what AGIA says. Another thing to keep in mind is that Mr. Noah is also working on statewide distribution, not just gas for those who live in the Railbelt. Then there are the wild cards including gas to liquids and a place for the petrochemical industry along the railbelt. Finally, he agrees that it is important that this vision extends beyond the current governor. This is meaningful to all Alaskans, he said. REPRESENTATIVE RAMRAS said what is not included in this resolution is any mention of the tremendous capability for small ships to move large quantities of LNG to small communities in Southeast, Kodiak and Dillingham. Doug Ward [of Alaska Ship and Dry Dock in Ketchikan] will be making a presentation here next week about the potential for using small ships to deliver LNG to gasify clusters of industrial users in these small communities, he said. PAUL KENDALL, representing himself, said he and the people who think like he does don't want to be subjugated to natural gas and they don't want to pay for it. They want equal funding to develop Cook Inlet, Knik Arm and Turnigan into a world-renowned research site for renewable energy. 4:14:53 PM CO-CHAIR MCGUIRE moved to adopt the Senate committee substitute (CS) for HCR 2. There being no objection, version T was before the committee. CO-CHAIR MCGUIRE moved to report the Senate CS for CSHCR 2 from committee with individual recommendations and attached fiscal note(s). There being no objection, SCS CSHCR 2(RES) moved from the Senate Resources Standing Committee.