newsminer.com

Don’t people read my stories?

Sen. Charlie Huggins brought up the Mogel memo on TransCanada’s application at today’s floor session as if it was hot news. Actually, Sen. Gene Therriault mentioned it on the floor last week, and I wrote a story about it this weekend.

Anyway, the memo was written by a lawyer hired by the Legislative Budget and Audit Committee, William Mogel, and examines the question of whether TransCanada’s application actually should have been rejected under AGIA because of “conditions” and “contingencies” in it.

Huggins’ didn’t say he wanted the application thrown out, but stressed the need not to “misstep” as lawmakers moved ahead.

“It begs the question of let’s look at where we’re going,” he said.

Therriault responded by suggesting the memo was a “conclusion looking for justification” and saying he’d like to see the Senate Judiciary Committee (on which he sits) get a chance to review the legal issues.

The issues largely boil down to the meaning of a few words. AGIA prohibits applicants from requiring the state to make other changes (like gas taxes). TransCanada said it “expects” the state to do what it can to entice gas shippers. But is that a requirement or a suggestion?

I’m not a lawyer, but I’ve read the memo and heard the administration’s response, so here’s a look at the points Huggins raised.

1. State changes to the upstream fiscal terms. Already explained.

2. Proposal to use federal government as “bridge shipper” and loan guarantee to fund cost overruns. The state says these are “creative ideas” rather than requirements.

3. Refusal to turn over project information the company has already acquired. The state says that’s OK under AGIA. None of the state’s $500 million incentive paid for it, so the state can’t demand it.

4. Conditions placed on moving ahead with construction of the pipeline. The state says that’s fine, and that AGIA is focused on getting to an open season and FERC certification.

Huggins read aloud Mogel’s conclusion — that TransCanada’s asking for state intervention to settle upstream terms “is not different from the relief long sought by the three major producers.” I’ll let the state answer that one itself.

The memo is available at LB&A’s Web site under Gasline Proposals, along with one about TransCanada’s potential $9 billion liability.