[1]NOTE:
As provided in LFC policy, this report is intended only for use by the
standing finance committees of the legislature. The Legislative
Finance Committee does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of the information
in this report when used in any other situation.
Only the most recent
FIR version (in HTML & Adobe PDF formats) is available on the Legislative
Website. The Adobe PDF version includes
all attachments, whereas the HTML version does not. Previously issued FIRs and attachments may be obtained from the
LFC’s office in Suite 101 of the State Capitol Building North.
SPONSOR: |
Whitaker |
DATE TYPED: |
02/01/02 |
HB |
423 |
||
SHORT TITLE: |
Additional
Natural Gas Pipeline Systems Study |
SB |
|
||||
|
ANALYST: |
Trujillo |
|||||
APPROPRIATION
Appropriation
Contained |
Estimated
Additional Impact |
Recurring or Non-Rec |
Fund Affected |
||
FY02 |
FY03 |
FY02 |
FY03 |
|
|
$75.0 |
|
|
|
Non-recurring |
General Fund |
(Parenthesis
( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)
Relates
to Appropriation in The General Appropriation Act
LFC Files
Responses Received From:
Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources
Department (EMNRD)
Commissioner of Public Lands (CPL)
Environment Department (ED)
SUMMARY
Synopsis
of Bill
House Bill 423
appropriates $75.0 from the general fund to the legislative council service for
the purpose of providing for a legislative study of the economic feasibility of
additional natural gas pipeline systems.
EMNRD reports the
study is to focus on the economic feasibility of construction of a natural gas
pipeline to transport New Mexico natural gas to "additional"
markets. The study is to include a projection
of production volumes, price and future demand (California and the western
United States), and is to analyze the ability of existing pipelines to meet
future demand. The study is to analyze
the likelihood that a new natural gas pipeline would be built without state
economic incentives and is to suggest other ways the state can assist in the
project and construction funding. The
study is also to focus on environmental and social costs of such a pipeline and
any other issue identified by the committee.
The committee is to receive periodic progress reports and is to forward
the results of the study (with recommendations and comments) to the Governor
and the Legislature by December 15, 2002.
The Public Regulation Commission, the Commissioner of Public Lands,
EMNRD, the ED and every other state and political subdivision are required to cooperate
in the committee's investigation.
Significant
Issues
EMNRD reports in the
past two years large differences have existed between the price at which
natural gas is sold in New Mexico, particularly in the northwest part of the
state, and the price at which the very same gas is sold at the California
border. The difference has exceeded the
cost to transport the gas from New Mexico to the border. During the collapse of the energy markets in
California during the winter of 2000-2001, the differentials were quite
large. The reasons for this phenomenon
have been hotly debated; some blame the differentials on unscrupulous trading
practices, others on the unrestrained market, and others on pipeline capacity
constraints.
The 1996 study
referred to in the bill was conducted by Benjamin Schlesinger & Associates,
who studied modest improvements in the intrastate pipeline infrastructure to
remedy the basis blowouts that occurred in 1995-96. The study found these basis blowouts had been caused by the lack
of physical capacity to move gas east.
EMNRD commissioned a study in 1999 by Lippman Consulting Inc. that
suggested that pipeline capacity was adequate in the long term because expected
production declines would free up additional pipeline capacity. Since 1996, when the earlier report was
prepared and even since 1999 when Mr. Lippman's study was delivered, the
western energy markets have changed dramatically and some of the assumptions
about demand in California (a major market for New Mexico gas) may no longer be
accurate. Further, expected production
declines detailed in the report have not materialized as rapidly as forecast by
Mr. Lippman, and Texas and Mexico have emerged to compete with California for
New Mexico's gas. The effect of other
factors, such as the pipeline from the major Canadian production to Chicago on
competition within California for New Mexico gas, and new pipeline projects
under construction (described in "other substantive issues"), have
not been studied. Updating the previous
study might be very timely.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
The appropriation of
$75.0 contained in this bill is a non-recurring expense to the general fund.
Any unexpended or unencumbered balance remaining at the end of fiscal year 2003 shall revert to the general
fund.
DUPLICATION
HB423 is duplicated by SB369.
OTHER SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES
EMNRD reports numerous projects to increase the
capacity of interstate pipelines into California are under construction,
permitted or planned. Questar's
Southern Trails Pipeline has been approved by Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (FERC). It is a conversion
of an existing crude oil pipeline from San Juan County, New Mexico to Long
Beach; it will serve multiple receipt points in the San Juan Basin and multiple
delivery points in California, and will have a capacity of 120 mcf/d (million
cubic feet per day). El Paso Natural
Gas' "Line 2000" has also been approved by FERC. It also involves conversion of an existing
crude oil pipeline known as Plains All-American Pipeline, and will increase the
capacity of the El Paso system by 230 mcf/d.
FERC approved the project on May 8, 2001 and El Paso is currently
working through regulatory difficulties in Arizona. Williams Field Services has received approval of FERC to almost
double the capacity of its Kern River transmission line, which delivers natural
gas from the Rocky Mountains to Wheeler Ridge, at the California border. The $1 billion expansion is slated for
completion in spring of 2003. Williams
is also considering a direct interconnection to Southern California Gas,
downstream of Wheeler Ridge.
Not presently before FERC, but announced and
planned, are two additional pipelines:
Colorado Interstate Gas Company is planning to construct its Ruby
Pipeline between the Rockies (Wyoming) and Northern California through a
delivery point near Reno. The 30-inch
and 36-inch pipeline is planned to have a capacity of 750 mcf/d and begin
service in 2003. Kinder Morgan Energy
Partners have announced plans to construct a new pipeline, called the Sonoran
Pipeline, from the interconnection of Colorado Interstate Gas and Transwestern
to the Blanco Hub (in New Mexico) and then on to the California/Arizona
border. Later, the pipeline is expected
to expand into California, apparently terminating near San Francisco. The initial capacity is claimed to be
750,000 dth/d (decatherms per day) with capability to increase to 1 million
dth/d should the need arise. This
pipeline is expected to begin service in 2003.
These projects, if completed, should be
considered during the study to assess their impact on New Mexico's interests.
[1]Begin typing on the * in replace mode. Do not add or delete spaces.