The next big test for either of the proposed big gas pipeline projects is the so-called “open season,” expected to be conducted next year.

The battle to define the natural gas open season as a success or failure in the public mind has already started, along with the political season.

“Open season” is the term that refers to the period in which companies that control natural gas have the option of making firm commitments to pay to ship that gas on a proposed pipeline.

Those commitments, worth tens of billions of dollars, are to be the basis for getting companies to loan money to finance a project.

It appears the companies won’t make binding commitments to ship gas during the open season. There might be conditional commitments, however, framed with enough wiggle room that they can’t be taken to the bank.

Critics argue that conditions — which would require concessions and/or negotiations with the state and other companies — will mean the open season can be described as a failure.

An open season with conditional commitments can hardly be advertised as a success because the companies won’t be promising to pay to ship gas.

The administration argues that a “failed” open season is one in which the companies boycott the process and refuse to make any pledge and that any conditional commitments constitute success.

The only way to reasonably judge success, failure or semi-success is to analyze the conditions, which could range from easy to impossible.

When the Legislature and former Gov. Sarah Palin made their deal with TransCanada, there was little talk that the commitments likely in 2010 would be “conditional.” However, the Parnell administration and TransCanada are now saying that conditional commitments are the norm.

The scope of those conditions won’t be known until next year, but they might include an insistence on getting a long-term tax deal with the state, as well as a host of provisions concerning how the companies interact with each other.

Bill Walker, a Republican challenging Parnell in the primary, said the conditions will mean a failed open season.

Walker, who lives in Anchorage, supports a gas line to Valdez and is the general counsel for Alaska Gas Line Port Authority.

He argues the shale gas boom in North America has removed all economic arguments for building a gas line into Canada and that Alaska should be looking to export its gas and get out of AGIA.

As others have said, he believes TransCanada has every reason to string this out past the first open season.

“After the failed initial open season, the state is required to pay 90 percent of the costs for subsequent open seasons,” he says.

The Parnell administration, in a report Oct. 31, said the pipeline project is on schedule to wrap up an open season by July 31. The administration rejects the notion that shale gas has destroyed the economics for a pipeline through Canada.

In this battle about whether the open season will be viewed by the public as a success or failure, the details of the conditional commitments are all important.

Walker said in an interview at the News-Miner that TransCanada officials told the Alaska Municipal League the proposals might be finished by the end of July but they won’t be released to the public until late next year, after the election.

Walker contends that is too long to wait. I agree. The information from TransCanada needs to be made public next summer.

We should not go through an entire gubernatorial and legislative campaign with nothing but speculation about the facts underlying any claims of success or failure.

Like it or not, the open season is part of the political season.