Report 

Submitted to the 

United States Congress 

by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

 

Eleventh Report to Congress on Progress Made in Licensing 

and Constructing the Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline 

 

February 2011 
Eleventh Report to Congress on the Alaska Pipeline 

I. Executive Summary 

This report by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission or 

FERC) is submitted pursuant to section 1810 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct 

2005).1

 Section 1810 of EPAct 2005 requires that the Commission submit to Congress 

semi-annual reports describing the progress made in licensing and constructing an Alaska 

natural gas pipeline and any impediments thereto. 

 

This report provides an update from the Commission’s Tenth Report, submitted on 

August 27, 2010. During the period covered by this report: 1) Denali – The Alaska Gas 

Pipeline LLC’s (Denali) Open Season concluded October 4, 2010, and has stated that 

since that time, it has been negotiating with prospective shippers; 2) TransCanada Alaska 

Company, LLC (TC Alaska) has stated that it continues to negotiate with the shippers 

that bid in its Open Season that concluded July 30, 2010; and 3) the State of Alaska made 

progress addressing its infrastructure needs. 

II. Status Report 

 A. The Commission’s Activities 

The Commission continues to execute its National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) and Natural Gas Act certificate application responsibilities for both the Denali 

and TC Alaska proposals. The Commission staff continues to work under its pre-filing 

process with both Denali and TC Alaska, preparing to initiate an environmental impact 

statement (EIS) on any project that submits a complete application to the Commission. 

As the lead agency for purposes of compliance with the NEPA, the Commission 

staff also continues to coordinate with the federal interagency team to facilitate the early 

work necessary for each agency to participate in the pre-filing process and be better 

prepared to meet their responsibilities on the projects. For example, in December 2010, 

the Commission staff held an agency scoping meeting in Anchorage to provide 

cooperating agency representatives an opportunity to identify resource issues that will 

need to be addressed in the EIS and to provide feedback early in the project review 

process. 2

 

 1

 P.L. 109-58, 119 Stat. 594 (2005), 42 U.S.C § 15801 et seq. 

2

 This is the second such agency scoping meeting the staff has conducted for the 

interagency team. The first was held in Fairbanks, Alaska in October 2008. 
The agency scoping meeting followed a workshop held by TC Alaska to discuss 

its project description and pipeline routing. TC Alaska provided pipeline corridor maps 

for discussion; the participating agencies identified potential routing issues and suggested 

areas of possible impact avoidance and minimization strategies. 

In October 2010, the Commission staff participated in a technical workshop on 

pipeline safety and infrastructure proximity that was sponsored by the U.S. Department 

of Transportation’s Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration and the 

Office of the Federal Coordinator for Alaska Natural Gas Transportation Projects (OFC). 

The workshop was attended by interested federal and state agencies and the project 

sponsors. The objective was to elicit discussion on a variety of safety- and engineeringrelated topics, including pipeline safety regulations and routing considerations. The 

workshop provided an opportunity for the agencies to share information needs, discuss 

concerns related to the projects’ proximity to existing infrastructure, and increase 

agencies’ awareness of safety regulations and industry practices. 

The Commission staff also continued its review of issues surrounding the 

availability of data necessary to include an analysis of subsistence impacts as part of the 

EIS. The staff provided the project sponsors with a list of the subsistence information 

criteria to facilitate their development of complete FERC applications. 

 

 B. Denali’s Proposal 

Denali plans to construct and operate a gas treatment plant (GTP) near Prudhoe 

Bay and a 48-inch-diameter pipeline to transport up to 4.5 billion cubic feet of natural gas 

per day (Bcf/d) from the Alaska North Slope to the Alberta Hub for North American 

consumers. All items related to Denali’s project are available to the public in the FERC’s 

eLibrary under Denali’s pre-filing docket (Docket No. PF08-26-000). 

In the past six-month period, Denali concluded its Open Season and began 

evaluating bids and negotiating with qualified shippers. Denali’s has performed 

continuing work on front-end engineering and design and on outreach activities in Alaska 

and Canada. 

C. TC Alaska’s Proposal 

TC Alaska plans to construct and operate facilities similar to those described for 

Denali, a GTP near Prudhoe Bay and a 48-inch-diameter mainline pipeline that would 

accommodate up to 4.5 Bcf/d of throughput. All items related to TC Alaska’s project are 

available to the public in FERC’s eLibrary under TC Alaska’s pre-filing docket (Docket 

No. PF09-11-000). 

- 2 -
While much of its focus was on reaching agreements with qualified shippers, TC 

Alaska also concluded 2010 field survey work and began incorporating the survey 

findings into its project plans. TC Alaska has stated that it plans to conduct a large 

amount of field survey work in 2011 to support its goal of filing a complete application 

with the Commission in October 2012. TC Alaska also announced that it intends to hold 

its required open house meetings in various communities throughout the project area 

beginning in March 2011. 

 On December 20, 2010, APP contracted with Argonne National Laboratory to 

serve as the Commission’s third-party contractor assisting the staff in preparing the EIS 

for the project. 

D. Results of Open Seasons for Capacity on Alaskan Natural Gas Pipelines 

Denali and TC Alaska held Open Seasons in 2010 for capacity on their planned 

Alaska natural gas pipeline projects. Both companies reported at the end of their 

respective Open Seasons that they had received bids for significant volumes from 

potential shippers. Neither company has provided any details about the bids or 

completed negotiating precedent agreements (PAs) with potential shippers. 

TC Alaska had stated that it intended to announce its executed PAs by December 

31, 2010; however, this self-imposed deadline was not met and the company states that 

negotiations continue. Similarly, Denali did not announce any executed PAs by its selfimposed deadline of February 1, 2011. Both companies state that they are continuing 

commercial discussions with potential shippers and working to resolve conditions on the 

bids. 

E. Other Projects 

In December 2010, the Joint In-State Gasline Development Team and Alaska 

Gasline Development Corporation (AGDC), both State of Alaska entities, submitted a 

report to Governor Sean Parnell regarding the status of work in three areas. First, AGDC 

reported that it is completing economic feasibility and market studies to determine if an 

in-state gas pipeline project is commercially viable and should proceed. The results of 

these studies and analyses are due in March 2011. 

 Second, AGDC reported that it is seeking letters of interest from private pipeline 

construction and operating companies to develop the project. To date, no specific results 

have been announced. Finally, AGDC reported that it was premature for the State to 

draft legislation for the “Alaska Stand Alone Gas Pipeline Project,” but that it intends to 

approach the legislature during the 2011 session with a report and recommendations for 

legislation required to ensure the project moves forward to completion. 

- 3 -
III. Related Federal, State, and Canadian Activities 

A. Operations of the Federal Coordinator 

The OFC, pursuant to Section 106 of ANGPA, continues to coordinate the actions 

of federal agencies regarding Alaska natural gas transportation projects and to provide a 

liaison function to ensure communication with Congress, the State of Alaska, and federal 

U.S. and Canadian agencies. In 2010, the OFC hosted agency workshops on technical 

issues related to the project and plans to continue these in 2011. The OFC meets 

regularly with the federal interagency team and with the Senior Intergovernmental 

Management Team, comprised of the Federal Coordinator and senior government 

officials for the State of Alaska and the Canadian federal government, as well as 

representatives from Denali and the TC Alaska. 

On January 22, 2011, the OFC held a public forum in Anchorage to help Alaskans 

understand the supply-and-demand variables that could affect shippers' decisions on the 

pipeline project. The forum topics were related to different market factors that could 

affect the economic viability of the project. 

B. State of Alaska 

The Commission’s Eighth Report identified long-term infrastructure 

improvements as a potential impediment to constructing an Alaska natural gas pipeline. 

Specifically, infrastructure needs assessments by Denali, TC Alaska, and the Alaska 

Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (DOT&PF) indicated that a large 

number of projects to improve or repair bridges, highways, and ports must be completed 

prior to initiating construction of the project. Since that report, there has been significant 

progress in addressing this need. 

The Alaska DOT&PF has completed the majority of the required modifications to 

the bridges identified by Denali and TC Alaska as critical limiting elements for the 

projects due to insufficient bridge width and height. By 2013, all of the critical bridges 

will be reconstructed. 

The Alaska DOT&PF has also completed work on highways paralleling the 

pipeline route. Some substantial portions of the highway network still need 

improvement, but overall, the most critical needs have been addressed. A key remaining 

issue is the seasonal weight restrictions that are placed on Alaska’s highways requiring 

shippers to reduce the freight loads in each truck and increasing the number of trips. 

Work has begun to upgrade Alaska’s largest port in Anchorage; however, until the 

companies determine their final logistics plan and identify which ports will be heavily 

used, no improvements at other ports of entry are likely. 

- 4 -
- 5 -

C. Developments in Canada 

TransCanada Corporation and Denali Canada – The Alaska Gas Pipeline, Inc. 

completed their Open Seasons in Canada in 2010. Both companies report having 

received multiple bids for significant volumes of natural gas and are negotiating terms 

and conditions with potential shippers, but have provided no details on the bids. 

VI. Conclusion 

During this reporting period, Denali and TC Alaska worked on negotiating PAs 

with potential shippers. Both Denali and TC Alaska set self-imposed deadlines to 

execute PAs; however, these deadlines expired with no announcement from either 

company. Both companies continue to negotiate with prospective shippers. 

TC Alaska has stated that it is intensifying its efforts to finalize its project design 

and compile the information necessary to file a complete application with the 

Commission in October 2012. The company conducted environmental surveys in the 

summer 2010 field season and plans to carry out an extensive field program in 2011. TC 

Alaska also plans to begin holding its required open house meetings in the project area in 

March 2011. Commission staff will attend the open houses to familiarize affected 

stakeholders with the EIS process. 

Denali currently plans to file its application with the Commission in October 2013. 

The company’s technical work activities planned for spring 2011 include continuing 

development of the front-end engineering and design and proceeding with its outreach 

activities.