HOME PAGE SUBSCRIPTIONS, Print Editions, Newsletter PRODUCTS READ THE PETROLEUM NEWS ARCHIVE! ADVERTISING INFORMATION EVENTS PAY HERE

Providing coverage of Alaska and northern Canada's oil and gas industry
October 2018

Vol. 23, No.42 Week of October 21, 2018

AGDC has signed for half of RIK-TAG Prudhoe, Point Thomson gas

Kristen Nelson

Petroleum News

The Alaska Gasline Development Corp. has agreements to enter into definitive gas sales agreements with both BP and ExxonMobil, AGDC Vice President of Commercial and Economics Lieza Wilcox noted at AGDC’s Oct. 11 board meeting. What that means, she said, is that AGDC has signed for more than half of royalty-in-kind and tax-as-gas volumes, giving confidence to buyers in discussions.

Wilcox said they are making good progress in discussions with ConocoPhillips, and while she couldn’t promise the board an announcement date, she said AGDC is in the final stages of negotiating key terms with Conoco.

And discussions with BP and ExxonMobil to paper the more detailed gas sales agreements are progressing, she said, based on terms agreed to with each party in their respective gas sales precedent agreements. The agreement with BP was signed in May, that with ExxonMobil in September.

Estimated volumes

Wilcox shared estimated volumes available for the Alaska LNG Project from Prudhoe Bay and Point Thomson.

The state’s estimated volume from Prudhoe Bay, if the state took its gas as royalty-in value, would be a cumulative 3 trillion cubic feet; if the state took the gas as molecules (royalty-in-kind) - which is the plan if the companies offer to pay tax as molecules (TAG or tax-as-gas) - the state’s cumulative Prudhoe volume would be 6 tcf.

Estimated Prudhoe Bay volumes for the companies are: ExxonMobil are 6.55 tcf for RIK/TAG; for ConocoPhillips 6.49 tcf; for BP 4.74 tcf; and for Chevron 0.2 tcf.

Estimated volumes from Point Thomson, are 1.5 tcf combined RIK/TAG for the state; 2.82 tcf for ExxonMobil; 1.44 tcf for BP; and 0.24 tcf for all others.

The total is an estimated 24 tcf from Prudhoe Bay and 6 tcf from Point Thomson

Wilcox said that as part of its best interest finding process the Department of Natural Resources solicited interest in its royalty-in-kind gas from Prudhoe Bay and Point Thomson. AGDC, she said, responded that it was interested in acquiring all of the state’s natural gas for the project.

Joint development agreement

Wilcox said the parties to the joint development agreement were advancing all agreements. She said a supplemental agreement was signed in September, with a confirmed goal of definitive agreements at the end of the year.

The joint development agreement signed Nov. 9, 2017, in Beijing involved the state, AGDC, China Petrochemical Corp. (known as Sinopec), CIC Capital Corp. and the Bank of China Ltd.

Wilcox said AGDC was negotiating sales and purchase agreements with key parties and discussing regional cooperation with select parties.

Equity offering rollout

AGDC, Goldman Sachs and Baker Botts discussed the equity offering process in early October, Wilcox told the board. She said work is underway on a non-confidential presentation and/or equity book to be provided to potential equity investors and the Legislature in the fourth quarter of 2018 or first quarter of 2016.

She said AGDC would begin the initial road show to introduce the project to potential equity investors with a project overview and said the board would have a package for approval prior to the equity road show outlining equity offer terms, methods for investment and commercial structuring.

More questions

Frank Richards, AGDC senior vice president of program management, reviewed AGDC’s work on its Federal Energy Regulatory Commission application and progress of the environmental impact statement.

He noted that FERC has accelerated the schedule by about a month, with a draft EIS now scheduled for February, a final EIS for November 2019 and a final authorization/record of decision in February 2020.

He characterized the schedule as “very aggressive” and said it is a schedule FERC says it can commit to, and also the only project that was advanced in its schedule.

AGDC received another data request, with 193 items, on Oct. 2. AGDC is drafting responses, Richards said, and expects to have nearly half done by Oct. 22, the date by which it has to respond or say when responses will come. FERC has indicated what it needs for the draft EIS and what for the final EIS.

Richards said AGDC is nearly complete with five earlier data requests.

US v China

AGDC President Keith Meyer told the board that China remains engaged with the Alaska LNG project, but that U.S.-China trade friction creates uncertainty. He said AGDC and the state continue to have regular discussions with Trump administration officials to avoid having Alaska LNG affected by the trade friction.

Gov. Bill Walker said in an Oct. 14 statement that U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin spent a day in Fairbanks learning about Alaska’s resource development potential. Walker said that at Mnuchin’s request there was a briefing on the Alaska LNG Project, led by Meyer.

“In my meetings with Secretary Mnuchin, both in Washington and in Fairbanks, he has expressed strong support for the Alaska LNG Project,” Walker said. “He understands that this is America’s infrastructure project and that it represents a trillion-dollar opportunity. When the Secretary requested this briefing, I selected Fairbanks because of the Pipeline Training Center, which demonstrates what this project will mean for Alaskan workers,” Walker said.

At the Oct. 11 AGDC board meeting Meyer noted that the LNG Canada project led by Shell is moving forward and said in its aggressive pursuit of China, Russia has mentioned Alaska as a potential casualty of the trade war.

Overall, he said, demand is increasing to grow with Asia remaining the largest regional driver and China surpassing Korea for the number two spot.

Not only is demand outpacing previous expectations, but the supply-demand balance has moved up from 2024-25 to 2022, Meyer said.

He reviewed Alaska’s competitive advantages, and said the strategy is to price Alaska LNG as an infrastructure project, rather than an oil alternative.

Meyer said AGDC is developing pricing and contract terms for in-state customers as well as identifying demand and interconnects. For communities not on the pipeline corridor, LNG can be delivered by truck, rail and barge, he said.

This year and next marketing activities will increasingly emphasize in-state marketing for both natural gas and in-state LNG, Meyer said.

- KRISTEN NELSON





‘Alaskans first’ hiring agreement

The Alaska Gasline Development Corp. said Oct. 13 that it agreed to key terms of an “Alaskans first” hiring agreement with local labor organizations, terms of which are captured in a memorandum of understanding signed by the presidents of AGDC, South Central Alaska Building & Trades Council, Fairbanks Building & Trades Council and the Alaska Petroleum Joint Craft Council.

AGDC said the agreement provides the framework to advise engineering, procurement and construction firms regarding negotiations of project labor agreements with local labor organizations.

“Wages will be established in accordance with prevailing wage rates for local public construction contracts,” AGDC said — terms in the agreement include work and rotation schedules, drug and alcohol testing requirements and safety training.

AGDC President Keith Meyer said the agreement reflects intent language adopted in 2014 by the Alaska Legislature which directed AGDC “to prioritize Alaska hiring.” He said the agreement “sets the stage for future project labor agreements.”

“An Alaskans-first agreement guarantees qualified Alaska residents will be first in line to construct and operate the major components of this gasline,” said Alaska AFL-CIO President Vince Beltrami.

AGDC said project labor agreements are frequently used to control costs for major infrastructure and construction projects.

—PETROLEUM NEWS

Kenai Peninsula Borough comments to FERC

The Kenai Peninsula Borough filed comments with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Oct. 11 responding to comments filed by the Matanuska-Susitna Borough on Sept. 14.

The Alaska Gasline Development Corp.’s application to FERC has Nikiski on the Kenai Peninsula as the preferred location for the Alaska LNG Project’s liquefaction and shipping facilities.

The Matanuska-Susitna Borough has argued for a Port MacKenzie location as what it calls the “optimum” site for the liquefaction facility.

In its comments the Kenai Peninsula Borough says Port MacKenzie is not an “optimum” alternative site because it is being developed for other activities, with the Mat-Su Borough marketing the location for those other activities, including the shipment site for timber export and as the terminus of an extension of the Alaska Railroad.

The Kenai Peninsula Borough told FERC that the Nikiski site proposed by AGDC “is not encumbered by timber, rail line or other development,” and is a mile south of the Kenai Liquefied Natural Gas Plant which exported LNG for 46 years.

KPB told FERC the Port MacKenzie site would lengthen the shipping route, result in more ice mitigation, require significant ongoing dredging in the Knik Arm Shoal, result in more whale strikes as it is within the Cook Inlet Beluga Critical Habitat Area 1 and is not significantly different from the Mat-Su Borough’s previously provided option 1 “that Mat-Su Borough has admitted presents significant challenges.”

KPB also said AGDC was given the mandate by the state of Alaska to develop the project, “including the mandate to select a site for the project.” AGDC is owned by and is an instrumentality of the state, making the site selection the preferred location of the state.

The Mat-Su Borough said FERC “should defer to the selection of the Nikiski site by the delegate of the State of Alaska, unless there are clear and overwhelming environmental, social or safety reasons for rejecting the site — which there are not.”

Mat-Su response

The Matanuska-Susitna Borough responded to AGDC Oct. 2 comments on Oct. 16, telling FERC it believes AGDC has not provided FERC staff with the information necessary to do a comparative analysis of the Nikiski and Port MacKenzie sites.

The borough provided a list of information which it believes FERC should require AGDC to provide, arguing that AGDC has not performed “a through examination of the siting and configuration options at Port MacKenzie,” but has only analyzed two sites.

And, the borough told FERC, it first had an opportunity to review AGDC/s analysis of Port MacKenzie after AGDC’s July 13 submission; AGDC, not the borough, is delaying the process by “its continued resistance to performing an adequate analysis of Port MacKenzie as an alternative site for the proposed liquefaction facility.”

—KRISTEN NELSON


Petroleum News - Phone: 1-907 522-9469
[email protected] --- https://www.petroleumnews.com ---
S U B S C R I B E

Copyright Petroleum Newspapers of Alaska, LLC (Petroleum News)(PNA)Š1999-2019 All rights reserved. The content of this article and website may not be copied, replaced, distributed, published, displayed or transferred in any form or by any means except with the prior written permission of Petroleum Newspapers of Alaska, LLC (Petroleum News)(PNA). Copyright infringement is a violation of federal law.