Goldsmith Reviews Oil Tax Study: Institute of Social and Economic Research
Report Courtesy of Katie Bender
Scott Goldsmith (NGP Photo) presented his interpretation of a recent ISER report on the More Alaska Production Act (SB21) to a packed house Thursday morning at the Resource Development Council’s (RDC) Breakfast meeting (Video link here). Goldsmith, introduced by RDC's Leonard Horst, (NGP Photo) outlined his presentation by covering four main points from his research.
- The so-called $2 billion “giveaway” this year under SB21 does not exist.
- Without enhanced production, future tax revenues could be higher under SB21 than ACES if recent price and cost trends continue.
- Under reasonable future market conditions, a modest increase in investment and oil production would create more state revenues under SB21 than ACES.
- New money into the oil patch creates long lasting jobs and increased consumer purchasing power.
Critics of SB21 have stated that the new tax structure is a $2.1 billion giveaway to the oil companies. Goldsmith illustrated that the revenue loss was mainly due to the $1.29 billion reduction in production tax revenue. The shift to the new tax structure accounted for only 4 percent of the lost revenue. The $90 million difference from ACES to SB21 is nowhere close to the $2.1 billion difference in the expected oil revenue for fiscal year 2014.
The tax liability under SB21 is sensitive to both oil prices and lease costs. This will allow for higher tax revenue even without enhanced production. The price of oil has stabilized over the past couple of years and Goldsmith noted that analysts do not see much upward movement from the current price.
Even a small investment in new oil production will create more state revenue under SB21 than it did under ACES. New investment will not only generate new revenue, it will create additional employment. This includes direct jobs in the oil industry and indirect jobs that help individuals and families throughout the state.
The opportunity for increased production is here in Alaska. There are opportunities to develop marginal fields under SB21 and if the size of the revenue pie is increased, the state and its citizens win.
To watch Goldsmith’s presentation, visithttp://www.akrdc.org/membership/events/breakfast/1314/050114.html
The full report is available athttp://iser.uaa.alaska.edu/Publications/webnote/2014_05_01_WebNote17WhereD
RDC Event Photos (High Resolution Versions Here):
Leonard Horst, Marc Langland, Scott Goldsmith, Rick Rogers (above left); John Norman and Tony Knowles (above right)
Photos: Marc Langland (L); Scott Jepsen with Tony Knowles (R); and, middle photo: Knowles (l) with Scott Goldsmith and Langland (R)
4-22-14 Deadline TODAY For NPR Project Comment - Dan Fauske Briefs Sitka Chamber On Alaska Gas Project
Calgary Herald by Dan Healing. Oilsands company reports 13,400 barrels per day in Q1. Calgary Herald by Deborah Yedlin. Will there ever be an end to the largely uninformed commentary and analysis about the oilsands and the evils of the Keystone XL pipeline? ... former U.S. president Jimmy Carter, ..., sent Barack Obama a letter urging rejection of the project.
|See comment of one of our readers, submitted today!|
Today is the last day to show support for ConocoPhillips' Moose's Tooth draft, supplemental environmental impact statement regarding Unit 1 (GMT1) oil and gas development project in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska (NPR-A). Please take a moment to comment TODAY before COB. Thanks to the Resource Development Council for Alaska, here's how.... (Photo with apologies to the book and, in recompense, this link. -dh)
Register now, before it's too late, for the May 29, 2014 Alaska Oil & Gas Association Annual Luncheon featuring Jack Gerard, President and CEO of the American Petroleum Institute.
APRN by Robert Woolsey. ("Gas will never replace oil, from a revenue viewpoint.")
Alaska Dispatch by Suzanna Cauldwell.
The natural gas of Cook Inlet does a lot for the hundreds of thousands of Alaskans who live in Southcentral.
With an oversupply of natural gas in the country, Alaska is exploring the construction of a relatively small, low-pressure gasline within the state’s borders – while still holding out hope for a much larger project should prices improve.
Dan Fauske (NGP Photo) is the president of the Alaska Gasline Development Corporation – or AGDC. He spoke to Sitka’s Chamber of Commerce last week about when and where Alaskans may see gas. (More here, including audio....)
Our friend, Pedro van Meurs (NGP Photo-L, with author), reminds us that the course, "World Fiscal Systems for Unconventional Oil & Gas" is still accepting registrations for the June program.
"The course", van Meurs says, "will deal with International and North American fiscal systems for shale oil and shale gas, coal bed methane, oil shales and oil sands."
We understand that the software used during the course simulates the economics of the unconventional systems of Algeria, Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada (various provinces), China, Colombia, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Morocco, Poland, South Africa, Spain, Turkey, UK and the United States (various states). Participants will be able to keep this advanced software. (Here is the detailed agenda.)
Comment of reader, Mary Ann Pease (NGP Photo), in support of Moose's Tooth Development:
Dear Ms. Psarianos,
I am writing to you today in support of the Proposed Greater Mooses Tooth Oil and Gas Development - Alternative A in NPR-A!
This project brings long term Economic Benefits for Alaskans. Alaska and this nation needs an increase in production (Peak production from GMT1 is estimated at 30,000 BOPD), which would help offset our declining North Slope production.
As with many sustainable economic development opportunities- Development would provide benefits to local, state, and national economies through jobs creation during construction and operations, tax revenues, royalties, and new US sourced resources to help meet U.S. domestic energy demand.
I also support from environmental safety perspective (as proposed in Alternative A, GMT1), the gravel road connection to the main Alpine facilities. The road is necessary to ensure that the operator can respond to any environmental and safety issues in an adequate and timely manner.
It is also relevant to note that Environmental /Subsistence Issues are minimized with a road.
Finally, the time for action is now! This Project Was Previously Approved! We do not need any more delayed actions by the Federal Government to adversely impact economic development opportunities to Alaska.
Mary Ann Pease, Owner, MAP Consulting
The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) held public hearings in March to gather comments on the proposed Greater Mooses Tooth Unit 1 (GMT1) oil and gas development project in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska (NPR-A). Hearings were held in Anchorage, Fairbanks and in the NPRA villages.
The BLM released a Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (DSEIS) for the proposed project last month, launching a public comment period, which ends on Tuesday, April 22. In July 2013, ConocoPhillips, Alaska, Inc. (CPAI) submitted an application to construct a drill site, pipelines, road and other facilities to support development of petroleum resources within the Greater Mooses Tooth (GMT) Unit.
The project is approximately 14 miles west of the CPAI-operated Alpine field. The GMT1 drill site would be operated and maintained by Alpine staff and supported by existing Alpine infrastructure. The project would include construction of an 11.8-acre drill pad, an 8-mile access road, above-ground elevated pipelines, and an electric power line connecting the GMT1 drill pad to CPAI’s CD-5 drill pad currently under development. The GMT1 pad would have a capacity for up to 33 production wells, including several injection wells, and be located on a federal oil and gas lease previously issued by BLM.
The project proposes to access federal oil and gas resources, as well as resources owned by the Arctic Slope Regional Corporation and Kuukpik Corporation. The proposed development was originally analyzed in the BLM’s 2004 Alpine Satellite Development Plan (ASDP) (then referred to as CD6), and is also subject to the 2012 NPR-A Integrated Activity Plan (IAP).
The BLM has prepared a draft supplement to the ASDP to evaluate any relevant new circumstances and information which have arisen since 2004. The draft plan is available on the BLM website at http://www.blm.gov/ak/GMTU1.
RDC has submitted comments in support of Alternative A, view full letter at http://www.akrdc.org/alerts/
RDC members are encouraged to submit written comments by April 22nd. Public comments can be submitted by any of the following methods:
Fax: (907) 271- 3933
Mail: GMT1 Draft SEIS Comments, Attn.: Bridget Psarianos, 222 West 7th Avenue, Stop #13, Anchorage, Alaska 99513.
Points to consider in your comments:
- Peak production from GMT1 is estimated at 30,000 barrels of oil per day and would help offset declining North Slope production.
- Development would provide benefits to local, state, and national economies through local hire for jobs created during construction and operations, tax revenues, royalties, and new resources to help meet U.S. domestic energy demand.
- Development will also provide significant economic benefit to Alaska Natives on the North Slope as well as throughout the state through direct payment of royalties and revenue sharing among the Alaska Native Regional Corporations.
Alternative A is the Preferred Alternative
Road Needed for Emergency Spill and Safety Response
- As proposed in Alternative A, GMT1 will include a gravel road connection to the main Alpine facilities. The road is necessary to insure that the operator can respond to any environmental and safety issues in an adequate and timely manner. Alternative D, the aircraft and ice road access alternative, would not allow adequate access (on bad weather days, there would be no access) to emergency response resources and creates significant environmental and safety risk.
Environmental/Subsistence Issues are minimized with a road
- CPAI’s proposed project, Alternative A, has been modified to reduce environmental impacts and lower the overall footprint. In support of subsistence resources and access, the proposed project drill site location was moved out of the Fish Creek buffer to provide additional protection to this area. Road access will avoid the need for air traffic to the drill site, which is the number one complaint of subsistence hunters. Additionally, the project will be subject to various lease stipulations and the new Best Management Practices Adopted by BLM in 2013.
- The overall gravel footprint of Alternative A is the smallest of all the options. Alternative D has a larger gravel footprint than Alternative A because of the need to construct an airstrip and a larger gravel pad to accommodate more production equipment and a camp.
- Alternative A has the lowest estimated emissions because it requires the least amount of new infrastructure and eliminates the need for airplane support.
This Project Was Previously Approved
- The currently proposed GMT1 project (formerly CD6) is essentially the same as that approved for permitting in the 2004 ASDP Record of Decision.
- A review of new data and information shows there are no appreciable changes in the physical, biological, or social resources associated with the project study area. New data includes multi-year studies on hydrology, birds, and caribou.
Comment Deadline: Tuesday, April 22, 2014
Alaska Dispatch. The Alaska Legislature endorsed Gov. Sean Parnell’s gas pipeline negotiations Sunday, approving plans to spend close to $100 million in the short term and agreeing to collect future taxes in the form of a share of the natural gas, instead of in cash.
Northrim Bank and its President, Joseph Beedle (NGP Photo), hosted a packed house economic briefing yesterday at the Dena'ina Convention Center in Anchorage featuring Economists Mark Edwards and Bill Conerly. We'll have more for readers by Monday. -dh
Opportunity For Alaskans In Canada?
Petroleum News: British Columbia Premier Christy Clark, supported by a delegation of top cabinet ministers and petroleum leaders, has persuaded the Canadian government to declare that the LNG sector is a potential “nation-builder” which could create 100,000 jobs.
Although the accord signed in Ottawa earlier in April is non-binding, it includes a commitment to promote the active use of temporary foreign workers, TFW, which could ease one of the deepest concerns among investors in the industry.
CBC News. Comment: The Northwest Territories government hopes to bury a high speed, 1,100 km fiber-optic cable from Fort Simpson to Inuvik.
It proposes using the Mackenzie Valley Pipeline route and much of the pipeline filing data to justify a light, environmental review.
What is the practical difference between cleared rights of way, using the same real estate, for a buried gas pipeline or fiber cable? We are sure that this question will arise during the permitting process and that the answer will not be very satisfying to Inuvik citizens, small businesses and aboriginal corporations that, for two generations, fought for and failed to have approved the routing for a Mackenzie Valley Gas Pipeline.
Countless hopes, dreams, and lives of every NWT and YT resident were affected by the loss of the pipelines' opportunities--one way or another.
Hopefully, an easier permitting process awaits a buried cable using the same right of way.
Perhaps the lessons of gas pipeline failure and fiber-optic cable success will not be lost on more logical, future decision makers. -dh
The Publisher and the Professor Opine: You Decide!
Reader Comment: A highly accomplished university professor, a friend for over 20 years, sent this comment in response to the above editorial on Alaska's underfunded pension program, which we are delighted to bring to you below, along with a response.
Dave: As usual a sound analysis of the underfunded pension liability.
However, I read that you suggest that we return various spending or taxing to the Median levels of other states. That point is where 50% of the states would lie above and 50% below.
Would those states above the median in spending and taxing be obviously thwarting business growth and profit? I doubt it.
Stability is probably the key in my mind. Also, corporate America charges us more or it cost us more to acquire those goods and services. Kids who depend of “welfare” to eat, go to school on a bus, or get health care don’t eat 50% of the meal, ride halfway there or only get kinda well. And if our “bureaucracy” is more expensive, I am not surprised.
I wonder if you checked to see how much higher engineers, doctors, accountants, oil execs, etc. earn compared to those in “median states”. I suspect they would howl in indignation if you suggested that they all get less.
But your analysis of the problems created by the underfunded pension liability is well stated and I wish we had more leaders in our legislature who understood the realities of our financial system as well as you.
(Note: I don’t think we pay our bureaucracy enough. We ask someone making $100k to negotiate with and regulate industries and executives making millions, with staffers and lawyers making outrageous salaries as well. And maybe if we paid the Legislators more, we could find some independent minds who could work in everyone’s best interest, including the oil industry.)
Harbour's response to the Good Professor's comment above.
We appreciate the good professor's two observations: his compliment for our view on the underfunded pension liability of the state; and, his thoughtful comment on why the remedies to Alaska's unsustainable budget which we offered are, in his opinion, wrong.
This is why we followed our recommendations for solving Alaska's fiscal challenges, with the further acknowledgement that, "Of course, there are as many suggestions as there are people with opinions."
Professor B. did not offer his own suggestions for solving Alaska's fiscal challenges; he only attacked our recommendations.
His further comment was that Alaska should spend more money on executive salaries so that those who "negotiate with and regulate" industry could, presumably, more ably do so.
The beauty of a oil & gas lease sale is that the private market produces for Alaska the highest value for a natural resource that the market will pay. The highest.
Most of our current investment climate problems occur as a result of changing the rules of the game for investors after a lease sale has taken place. Politicians are tempted to greed once they see that an investor is profiting from a lease sale bid that he had first put at risk. They are tempted to relieve the investor of the profit "reward" earned by the lease sale investment, subsequent exploration, capital investment and development (i.e. because the investor is 'greedy, makes outrageous salaries, etc.'). The point of investor success is where the good Professor would hire high priced bureaucrats to extract even more from investors than their own due diligence had determined valid at the time of the lease sale.
This is why we have always held that Alaska should spend within its means -- so that the temptation to change the rules for investors is not exacerbated by a desperate need for cash to cover undisciplined spending.
If Alaska, as we have editorialized, becomes a state where "a deal is a deal", then decision makers will spend and tax with prudence and restraint. Life will be simpler. The need to demonize investors will diminish as will the temptation to discriminate against them. Since lawmakers won't tolerate rule changes after investor commitments have been made, there will be no need for a new cadre of highly compensated bureaucrats to "negotiate and regulate" in ways that extract more from investors than they themselves thought prudent when investment decisions were made.
The good professor argues for 'stability' for government beneficiaries. While beneficiaries of taxpayers (i.e. including educators) will always want the guarantee of stable taxpayer income, it is easy to forget that those who risk their own money tend to invest more and more confidently when they work in a 'stable' tax and regulatory climate.
We appreciate reader comments, especially from those who are highly educated and thoughtful about the issues -- and, especially when they disagree with us. It gives us a chance to reevaluate our own logic and conclusions.
In this case, we emerge from the additional thought and dialog more convinced than ever that Alaska's real secret to a bountiful future is learning to treat investors as we wish to be treated when we are considering a personal investment.
Hold a lease sale for natural resources to VOLUNTARILY extract the highest value from investors that a competitive bidding process will yield. Then, try to MINIMALLY interfere with -- and even safeguard -- the metrics upon which an investor based the lease sale bid, for the life of the project.
It is the Golden Rule applied in a different way than we normally do ... but the principle is the same. And it is that principle that will most likely lead to sufficient investor confidence for a multi-billion dollar gas pipeline investment to be made.
That is why, for years, industry has told the state and its residents that big investments require assurance of "Fiscal Clarity".
Rejection of the Golden Rule of treating others as we would wish to be treated can only lead to a life of misery and greed...and a lower likelihood of significant investments.
Can anyone dispute that this enduring principle applies to states as well as it does to families and individuals? -dh
Our friend, Pedro van Meurs (NGP Photo) will host his special sequence of three fiscal oil and gas courses to be held in Amsterdam:
- June 4 – 6: The Advanced Course in Fiscal Systems for Unconventional Oil and Gas. The course deals with unconventional projects in North America and worldwide, including spreadsheet based economic analysis of a wide variety of applicable fiscal systems.
- June 9 – 13: The world famous regular course in World Fiscal Systems for Oil and Gas, providing a comprehensive overview of fiscal systems related to leases, licenses, concessions, PSCs and risk service contracts based on our student spreadsheet for conventional oil and gas.
- June 16 – 20: The Advanced Course in PSCs, with detailed spreadsheet based economic analysis and discussion of all twelve different PSCs types and styles. The final two days of the course deal with legal aspects.
According to van Meurs, "The total sequence of three courses presents an unusual opportunity to learn about every aspect of oil and gas fiscal systems in the world and receive comprehensive and in-depth training in the details of economic and fiscal analysis and negotiation. Participants receive a discount of 10% for participating in 2 courses and 20% for participating in all three."
For more information about van Meurs' courses, click here.
Remember this announcement, 5 years ago today? ANCHORAGE, April 8, 2008 - BP [NYSE: BP] and ConocoPhillips [NYSE: COP] today announced they have combined resources to start Denali - The Alaska Gas Pipeline. The pipeline will move approximately four billion cubic feet of natural gas per day to markets, and will be the largest private sector construction project ever built in North America. The project combines the financial strength, arctic experience and technical resources of two of the most capable and experienced companies in the world.
|Globe & Mail. The U.S. Energy Information Administration reported last week that Canadian oil exports to the United States are the highest in at least four decades.|
Today, Congressman Doc Hastings' (NGP Photo) House Natural Resources Committee held a Full Committee legislative hearing on four straightforward bills to update the Endangered Species Act (ESA) for the 21st century and improve species recovery. This effort works in the favor of Alaska's and America's economy without diminishing reasonable support for protecting truly endangered species. -dh
Does Alaska's Pension Liability Threaten Gas Pipeline Viability?
Alaska spends more than it takes in. To that extent must investors worry about when -- and not if -- the next tax proposal will creep over the horizon toward THEM.
Below is the link to an Op-Ed wherein mayors (i.e. whose own retirements are at risk with underfunded pension liabilities) urge lawmakers to support the Governor's proposal to reduce the $12 billion unfunded pension liability by $3 billion.
|Today's Juneau Empire Op-Ed. See long-time Alaskan utility and natural resource expert, Bill Corbus' (NGP Photo) related opinion. -dh|
To do that, lawmakers will have to remove $3 billion from state savings accounts at a time when their deficit spending level requires use of depleting savings.
Oil production from Prudhoe Bay is declining, upon which 90% of state spending is based. Oil revenue could continue its dramatic, annual production decline putting more reliance on savings accounts to balance an unsustainable state budget.
|See Alyeska Pipeline Service Company President Tom Barrett's (NGP photo) response to yesterday's Alaska state revenue forecast. We believe that better than projected production decline rates are due to the passage a year ago of SB 21, which reformed Alaska's oil production tax. -dh|
Paying off the entire pension liability is impossible since Alaska doesn't have $12 billion in total savings available. (4-10-14 Note: See "Understanding Alaska's Budget". Some might say we have over $20 billion in savings available; but since political reality prevents expenditure of most of these sources for "government pension fund liabilities," they should not all be considered available.)
Gas pipeline investors have to be wondering, "If I commit to a portion of a $40 - 60 billion gas pipeline/LNG export project and the state continues running out of money, how safe is my investment from predatory tax policy?"
Alaska has a track record of taxing for more than it needs to operate and, to add insult to injury, taxing the oil industry retroactively. It has built the highest cost per capita bureaucracy in the nation. Now, in the face of rising costs and diminished revenues it is urging oil companies to invest in a mega gas pipeline project so that revenue from that project a decade from now can fund the state's spending appetite.
Link to our reports and commentary on LNG competition, here.
Energy advisor, Keith Kohl, says in his communique today that, " Like us, Canada's National Energy Board has approved seven LNG export license applications — but unlike us, the first project slated to start tapping the Asian LNG markets as early as next year."
Meanwhile, dozens of pending LNG export projects in the the US and Canada are all romancing the same Asian energy consumers. Experienced observers know that profit margins will likely be thinner than they hope for. Asian utility managers are not stupid. They will want the lowest possible "ship or pay" cost for LNG energy in return for their own "take or pay", long-term financial commitments. (Some good, Lower 48 researchers are excited about Alaska's prospects, but may not be fully aware of investor concerns or competitive pressures from other export projects that we have covered in these pages. -dh)
The LNG project that offers the lowest, competitive price to an Asian utility in return for a 20-year, firm contract, cannot afford to risk company solvency on "assurances" that Alaska will not create new energy taxes out of thin air and even apply them retroactively--thus altering project metrics and risk. The risk that the contracted delivery price of LNG to an Asian market could be lower than the cost of delivering the LNG -- under a "ship or pay" arrangement, may be an unacceptable risk to a responsible investor.
So the final question that any gas pipeline investor might be asking now is, "Can Alaska assure my company that today's gas pipeline investment is safe from future tax increases when unfunded pension liabilities, run-away budgets and diminishing oil production pose a dreadful danger in spite of any politician's soothing assurances and best intentions?"
As our friend, utility manager Joe Griffith (NGP Photo), has often said, "Hope is not a strategy." We all hope for conditions that will enable sustainable budgets and projects to supply both the jobs and the financial resources of the future. But hope alone will not achieve that goal.
What then is an answer to this Gordian knot of intertwining politics and energy policy? Cut public spending to be consistent with income. Cut welfare/entitlement spending to be consistent with median welfare spending of all other states. Business taxes should not exceed median of business taxes in other states. Institute new taxes only on new investment, not on prior investment. Never tax retroactively. Cut tax and regulatory burdens to essential and responsible needs. Avoid state investment into private sector projects--which always involves politicians risking "Other Peoples' Money". Of course, there are as many suggestions as there are people with opinions.
So is some combination of these and other responsible remedies too difficult?
If workable solutions are "too difficult" they will not be undertaken and undisciplined, unsustainable economic policies will ultimately result in involuntary compliance with economic realities.
Parents warn children that this is called, "learning the hard way".
Fairbanks News Miner, by Mayors John Eberhart, Luke Hopkins and Bryce Ward.
Gov. Sean Parnell’s budget includes a $3 billion line item to reduce the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) and Teachers Retirement System (TRS) unfunded liability, which is about $12 billion. The mayors of Alaska, through the Alaska Conference of Mayors and the Alaska Municipal League, fully support the governor’s initiative to stop the can from being kicked down the road.
The state has attempted to make inroads in regard to this huge liability, but so far hasn’t had success. Every year the deficit has increased. The governor has stepped forward to address this issue in a responsible way.
Comment: Yesterday, April 7, 2014 the Alaska Department of Revenue issued its Spring 2014 Revenue Forecast. We believe it provides a brighter outlook for a future, sustainable economy, if decision makers continue to support the sort of tax reform to which the increased production may be largely attributed. But for future years, a sustainable economy based almost entirely on the back of one industry needs serious, objective attention and problem solving.
Note that the forecast includes improved North Slope production and projects a lower decline than has been anticipated. The following is from the office of Alyeska Pipeline Service Company President Tom Barrett (NGP Photo). -dh
Barrett issued the following statement this morning:
“The Department of Revenue’s forecast is great news for TAPS. This much needed upward shift in throughput is critical, because moving less oil through TAPS creates significant challenges for the men and women who work to keep the pipeline operating safely and reliably. Every barrel in TAPS counts and the prospect of thousands of additional barrels moving down the line is welcome news.”
“We understand that Alaska depends on us to safely deliver the oil that funds so many state services. That’s why Alyeska and the TAPS Owners have aggressively pursued solutions to declining flow. But, as I have often said, ‘the best and most direct solution for TAPS is more oil.’”
“I applaud the Governor and the Legislature for fostering an environment that encourages more development. The forecast reflects that the investments being made by the producers should pay off soon for Alaska. That’s good news for TAPS and for everyone in the state.”
More information about the challenges of declining throughput is available at http://www.alyeska-pipe.com/TAPS/PipelineOperations/LowFlowOperations
About Alyeska Pipeline
For more than 36 years, Alyeska has operated the 800-mile Trans Alaska Pipeline System (TAPS), safely moving oil from Prudhoe Bay on the North Slope of Alaska south to the Port of Valdez, the northernmost ice-free port in the United States. The pipeline traverses three mountain ranges, permafrost regions and 34 major rivers and streams. Alyeska personnel work in Anchorage, Fairbanks and Valdez and at pump stations and response facilities all along the pipeline. They also operate the Ship Escort/Response Vessel System (SERVS) for Prince William Sound. Alyeska was created to construct, operate, and maintain TAPS for owner companies which today are BP Pipelines (Alaska), ConocoPhillips Transportation Alaska, ExxonMobil Pipeline Company and Unocal Pipeline Company