By AlaskaWatchman.com

Last week, Superior Court Judge Andrew Guidi indicated he will rule that Alaska does not have authority to permit access across its lands to facilitate oil and gas development on the North Slope.

The Alaska Dept. of Natural Resources plans to fight and appeal any final adverse ruling that undermines the state’s constitutional interests in resource development.

The Department of Natural Resources has issued a permit allowing Oil Search Alaska (OSA) to cross the Kuparuk River Unit, operated by Conoco Phillips Alaska, to develop the Pikka Unit. As described in the State’s brief to the court, “the denial of such access implicates the delay of development of millions of barrels of oil and billions of dollars of public revenues.”

“The State of Alaska has a constitutional obligation to maximize the development of our resources,” DNR Commissioner John Boyle said on Nov. 22. “We have to confirm with the Supreme Court that we have the authority to permit access for all developers to ensure we can meet this obligation.”

Once the Superior Court issues the final judgement, Alaska will be able to file its appeal. This is expected to occur in the coming weeks.

Click here to support the Alaska Watchman.

State of Alaska will defend its right to facilitate oil and gas development

Joel Davidson
Joel is Editor-in-Chief of the Alaska Watchman. Joel is an award winning journalist and has been reporting for over 24 years, He is a proud father of 8 children, and lives in Palmer, Alaska.


9 Comments

  • Sally Duncan says:

    You know, sooner or later, I will pray that EVERY SINGLE JUDGE will be replaced by ones who are ruled not only by common sense, but by morality!

  • Dirtydog says:

    Hello All,
    It is very concerning about the SOA position about oil?
    What about GOLD mining as well as other minerals its development requires as much attention as oil. That was the attracting factor for the rush to Alaska. Now the corruption of the State of Alaska is astounding .

  • Diana says:

    Thank you for this information. I was hoping we would fight for our rights to our own natural resources.

    • Homeschoolers Told You so says:

      At some point the judicial system must to come into compliance and subordination of the People. Our fight has just begun…it will take some time to cleanse our government through law and order, but we can do it.

  • Ronald Keel says:

    Why in the hell did we not replace any judges on election day November 5 ? Hey Dunleavy, quit running scared and speak up! Do the damn job Alaska is paying you to do. You have a voice. IF you directed the Alaskan Dept. of Natural Resources to take action legally on this tell us. Maybe some know but many are unaware. Tell us this is so, please. This ultimately lands squarely in the laps of Alaskans who could have voted some of these judges out but instead sent a message that we are fine with their corrupt rulings. We are not. Next time around, because no light is really shed on the judicial branch, we need to just vote every last one of these judges out and start over.

    • Friend of Humanity says:

      Ronald, the People can suggest, or give their opinion, of which judges to keep and which to get rid of, but we don’t have the power to vote them out. A small group (just judges?) decides who should stay, who should go and who gets brought in to this crooked legal system.

  • Keith Dobson says:

    Now is the time push for legislation that codifies into law (without ambiguity) Alaska’s rights to mineral, oil and gas development on state and federal lands and access over both state and federal lands must be granted. Furthermore, such legislation must prohibit any federal agency from exceeding their authority to prevent both access and development of Alaska’s resources in the future. We may not have a majority and mandate to accomplish this again, let’s take action now.

  • Jeff Butler says:

    Wrong a usual Friend. We just completed an election where Alaskans voted on judges. I suspect the point you are trying to make is that it’s all corrupt. It’s not. That a judge rules against something you are for, that is not evidence of corruption. To believe otherwise is simplistic and harmful.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *