Governor moves to dismiss French; dispute over authority of AOGCC?
 Click here to go to the full PDF version of this issue, with any maps, photos or other artwork that appears in
some of the articles.
Kristen Nelson Petroleum News
Much is still unknown about the hearing on Gov. Mike Dunleavy’s move to oust Hollis French, the current chair of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission.
It was a three-day “public” hearing which began Feb. 6, but only the third day appears to have been reported, after Alaska Public Media obtained a Jan. 17 letter from Dunleavy to French listing “potential grounds for your removal from office for cause.” “For cause” is the only way an AOGCC commissioner can be removed.
The first two days of the hearing, although it was public, flew under the radar of any public notice. As the defendant, French had the right to ask the state to issue a public notice, but he did not.
Coverage of the third day of the hearing by Alaska Public Media’s Energy Desk relates that French ascribed his problems to differences with the other two commissioners, Cathy Forester and Dan Seamount, on the extent of the commission’s authority.
French said the disagreement over the breadth of the commission’s authority began in 2017 when there was a natural gas leak in Cook Inlet from a line owned by Hilcorp Alaska. French thought the commission should assert authority; the other two commissioners disagreed.
The commission’s focus is on preventing waste.
Its mission statement, from the commission website, reads: “To protect the public interest in exploration and development of Alaska’s valuable oil, gas, and geothermal resources through the application of conservation practices designed to ensure greater ultimate recovery and the protection of health, safety, fresh ground waters and the rights of all owners to recover their share of the resource.”
The website describes the commission’s activities as: “The Commission oversees oil and gas drilling, development and production, reservoir depletion and metering operations on all lands subject to the state’s police powers.”
State statute says, “the commission may regulate … for conservation purposes and, to the extent not in conflict with regulation by the Department of Labor and Workforce Development or the Department of Environmental Conservation, for public health and safety purposes,” and then lists: drilling, producing and plugging of wells; perforating, fracture stimulation and chemical treatment of wells; spacing of wells; disposal of salt water, nonpotable water and oil field wastes; contamination or waste of underground water; quantity and rate of production of oil and gas from a well or property; and underground injection of gas for purposes of storage.
The venting issue Disagreement between the commissioners about the role of the commission became public after it was petitioned last year by Kate Troll to hold a hearing to bar all non-emergency venting and flaring. The petition said the commission’s existing policies call for minimizing waste but said ending North Slope and Cook Inlet venting and flaring of methane would be “a meaningful step in reducing harmful greenhouse gas emissions.” (See stories in Jan. 6 and Jan. 27 issues of Petroleum News.)
The commission regulates flaring and requires reporting of all flaring events in excess of one hour with penalties if it is determined that waste has occurred.
At a Dec. 18 hearing Foerster said she was hearing a lot of questions and said perhaps a hearing wasn’t the appropriate format, since commissioners do not answer questions in hearings; she suggested that some of the concerns aired could be addressed by a meeting with the commission’s technical staff.
At the end of the hearing French said the commission would take the matter under advisement and if two of the three commissioners agree “we can go forward.”
A Jan. 18 order on the hearing, signed by Foerster and Seamount, said witnesses at the hearing “were open about their root concern, the reason the hearing was requested, which is climate change. They acknowledged, and the AOGCC reiterated at the hearing, that while the AOGCC regulates to prevent waste, it has no authority to act regarding that subject matter.” The order said no specific example or claim of waste was raised at the hearing and said testimony and questions at the hearing “appeared to stem from a general lack of familiarity with how the AOGCC addresses issues related to venting and flaring,” and said the commission’s technical staff were available to meet and answer questions.
French issued a separate document - he had not signed the order - with answers to questions raised at the hearing and said, “it is perfectly appropriate for citizens to ask questions of their public servants, and it is not unreasonable for them to expect answers.”
Cause Under state statute, “The governor may remove a commissioner from office for cause including but not limited to incompetence, neglect of duty or misconduct in office.”
The governor’s letter lists five “potential grounds” for removing French from office: “Chronic, unexcused absenteeism”; “Browbeating fellow commissioners”; “Publicly undermining the work of the AOGCC”; “Security breaches”; and “Failure to perform routine AOGCC work.”
A decision from the hearing is expected by Feb. 18, at which point the Department of Law told Petroleum News that the decision and information from the hearing would be available.
- KRISTEN NELSON
| 