[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 58 (Wednesday, April 11, 2007)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4382-S4383]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Ms. MURKOWSKI (for herself and Mr. Stevens):
  S. 1089. A bill to amend the Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline Act to allow 
the Federal Coordinator for Alaska Natural Gas Transportation Projects 
to hire employees more efficiently, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
  Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation 
that should allow the entity we created just 2\1/2\ years ago to 
oversee and expedite construction of a gas line to bring Alaska's huge 
reserves of natural gas to markets in the lower 48 States to work 
better and function more smoothly and quickly.
  I, and Senator Ted Stevens who is co-sponsoring this legislation, are 
introducing this bill in an effort to help speed the full functioning 
of the Office of Pipeline Coordinator, the entity that we created in 
fall 2004 to oversee the permitting, design and then construction of an 
Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline project, intended to bring Alaska's 
reserves of gas to a Nation in need of additional natural gas supplies.
  In 2004 we passed two sets of provisions. The first in that year's 
Military Construction Appropriations Act, H.R. 4837, P.L. 108-324/15 
U.S.C. 720, set up an Office of Federal Pipeline Coordinator to oversee 
the 15 Federal agencies that will have a role to play in construction 
and financing of a pipeline system. The bill also set up a streamlined 
permitting and expedited court review process to limit unnecessary 
delays in the project--and hopefully prevent costly delays from driving 
up the project's price. That bill also included an $18 billion Federal 
loan guarantee. The second of that year's pipeline related bills, the 
FSC-ETI Act (H.R. 4520/P.L. 108-357) provided the Federal financial 
incentives expected to be needed to aid financing of the project. They 
included a tax credit for the cost of the pipe in Alaska and a tax 
credit for the cost of construction of an Alaskan North Slope gas 
conditioning plant. The two credits were believed to produce about 
three-quarters of a billion dollars of benefit to the project.
  The project itself involves building a system, either an overland 
pipeline through Canada or a pipeline through Alaska leading to a 
natural gas liquefication facility at tidewater in Alaska, to move gas 
to markets in the lower 48 States. Alaska has 35 trillion cubic feet of 
known gas in the Prudhoe Bay oil field and likely holds another 150 to 
200 trillion cubic feet of gas both on and offshore in northern Alaska. 
Getting that gas to market would help to meet a likely gas shortage in 
the lower 48 States within a decade, helping to keep the United States 
from becoming even more dependent on imported LNG from foreign 
suppliers.
  Currently Alaska's new Governor is in the process of calling for 
proposals from gas producers, pipeline companies and others interested 
in building the project, one currently estimated to cost between $30 
billion and about half that amount--depending on whether the line 
through Canada or an LNG project is deemed most economic.
  Congress last year funded the creation of the Federal Coordinator's 
office to begin the process of bringing Federal and State agencies 
together to oversee the permitting, design, and construction of a 
pipeline. The Office of the Federal Coordinator was funded for fiscal 
year 2007 initially with a $403,000 transfer of funds from the 
Department of Energy, with perhaps another $450,000 to $500,000 soon to 
be transferred. A coordinator, Alaskan former State Senate President 
Drue Pearce, was also named, confirmed and is now at work, and the 
office has reached an agreement with all of the 15 Federal agencies it 
will oversee on how a pipeline is to be permitted.
  The Bush administration has proposed $2.3 million in its fiscal year 
2008 budget request to better fund the Coordinator's Office. But 
development of the office has shown three problems that need corrective 
action by Congress, the first immediately.
  First, the 2004 act made the Coordinator follow Federal personnel 
law, specifically Title 5 that is a slow and cumbersome personnel 
process. This bill grants a waiver to Title 5 hiring procedures so that 
the Federal Coordinator can hire and fire her staff, based on their 
competence. That should cut the time needed to staff the office with 
experts in pipeline construction by 6 to 9 months. Given how important 
it is that the agency has specialists quickly to assist the State of 
Alaska in its efforts to select a pipeline builder, passing legislation 
to speed the hiring of Office staff is vital.
  The waiver, also is common practice for smaller Federal agencies as a 
host of agencies, from the Election Assistance Commission to the 
Vietnam Education Foundation, enjoy the hiring waiver.
  Second, the bill gives the coordinator the ability to establish 
reasonable permit filing and service fees and charges to defray the 
cost of regulating and the oversight of any pipeline project. While the 
proposed budget may pay for a half dozen to a dozen employees, nearly 
400 were employed in oversight of construction of the Trans-Alaska Oil 
Pipeline, some 30 years ago. The bill copies the structure that is 
currently employed by the Bureau of Land Management's oil and gas 
leasing division, FLP&MA Section 304, so that it follows a known 
process in allowing the Federal Coordinator to set and collect fees.

  Third, the bill in its Section 2 clarifies part of the original 2004 
act's Section 107. That section set up an expedited review process so 
that any suit concerning the pipeline under its enabling legislation or 
concerning its compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act 
would go first to the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit. All 
cases would have to be filed within 60 days of an action and the court 
would have to ``expedite'' decisions on all such cases. This action 
simply also adds that suits stemming from the pipeline's permitting or 
construction that relates to the Administrative Procedures Act, the 
Endangered Species Act, and the National Historic Preservation Act, 
besides NEPA, would also go to the D.C. Circuit for expedited review. 
It clearly follows the original intent of the 2004 act, but does not 
limit litigation unfairly.
  The goal of this legislation, if it can be approved quickly by this 
Congress, would be to help the Pipeline Coordinator staff her office 
more quickly and then to provide the office the possibility of a more 
readily available source of funding, should a pipeline applicant move 
to proceed: The bill also will clarify the legal process for review of 
a pipeline, helping to speed the project and reduce the chances for 
cost overruns in construction of potentially the largest private 
capital construction project in the world's history.
  This is a vital project. It has the ability to move from 4.5 to 6 
billion cubic feet of gas a day, about 5 percent of the Nation's total 
gas needs in 2018--the first year the pipeline could go into service, 
if a final overland project was selected and proposed within the next 
year. It would likely produce about a third of that initially, if an 
LNG project was selected to be built.
  This should not be a controversial measure. It should have no 
nonappropriated costs involved in carrying out its provisions. Section 
2 of the bill will save the Nation untold millions of dollars in 
overseeing permitting and construction of a pipeline, once a firm 
project is selected. Some will say that the bill is not needed since 
the State of Alaska has yet to reach final agreement with Alaska North 
Slope gas producers on a firm agreement to build a line. I would argue, 
however, that this bill needs to pass now to provide additional 
assistance to help the State

[[Page S4383]]

hammer out such an agreement and so the regulatory process is clearly 
in place, once such an agreement is reached. The Coordinator's Office 
is already involved in a host of discussions and actions relating to a 
pipeline and the pace is likely to quicken in coming months, provided 
the office has the expertise it needs to provide technical information 
to further a project.
  I hope the Senate and the Congress will review and approve this bill 
quickly.
  The Alaska gas line project is too important for this Nation's energy 
future, for our energy security, for our national security and for our 
balance of payments deficit for it to be delayed needlessly. These 
changes will likely speed the process of proceeding with a pipeline.
                                 ______