State officials brief Senate on North Slope road-access dispute after judge vacated Santos permit

Senator Giesel (Chair of the Senate Resources Committee) opened the Jan. 31 committee meeting by asking the Department of Natural Resources and the Department of Law to explain the state's defense and next steps after a Superior Court judge vacated a land-use permit that had allowed Santos (formerly Oil Search) to use existing roads across the Kuparuk River Unit, operated by ConocoPhillips.

The summary of why this matters: the permit at issue — Miscellaneous Land Use Permit North Slope 22-001 — would have authorized year‑round access for Santos across overlaid gravel roads that ConocoPhillips built and maintains. The Superior Court vacated the permit on Nov. 27, 2024, and the state has appealed to the Alaska Supreme Court; briefing has not yet begun. Department officials told the committee the litigation is pending and that some public and private negotiations over access and fees are ongoing.

“Obviously, this matter is pending appeal in the Supreme Court, so there will be limitations,” Deputy Commissioner John Crowther told the committee, adding the administration must balance protecting the state’s litigation position with minimizing any disruption to construction or operations on the North Slope. He said the state’s “most critical near term interest is that this busy winter season goes forward without any hiccups.”

Assistant Attorney General Mary Hunter Grambling told senators the state and Santos (intervenor) have each filed appeals with the Alaska Supreme Court and that the superior‑court record is still being assembled for the high court. “Briefing has not yet started. It's very early in the case still,” Grambling said, and she noted outstanding motion practice in superior court, including a motion by ConocoPhillips for attorney’s fees that the state has asked be stayed while the appeal proceeds.

Committee members asked officials to summarize how the road network developed and the legal instruments that permitted its construction. Crowther and Grambling said the authorizations vary by segment: some historic construction permits explicitly stated nonexclusive use (Crowther cited a 1982 construction permit) while unit agreements and lease language vary across the expansive North Slope leasehold. Grambling summarized the administrative timeline: a Division of Oil and Gas director’s decision on March 29, 2022, approved the permit; the DNR commissioner issued a decision on Dec. 1, 2022; ConocoPhillips appealed to superior court in August 2023; the superior court vacated the permit on Nov. 27, 2024; and the state filed an appeal to the Alaska Supreme Court later that year.

Senators pressed officials on practical consequences. Crowther said the department believes its authorities and reservations in leases support shared access in many cases, but acknowledged that the superior‑court ruling as written could allow ConocoPhillips to withhold access pending other agreements. “We have commitments from all the parties involved that there would be no action that would have that result,” Crowther said, referring to assurances the construction season would not be disrupted.

Senators also raised commercial and policy options for the future. Committee members asked whether DNR can or should change future lease language to reduce ambiguity, and whether the Legislature should act. Crowther said the department is evaluating clarifying language for future unit agreements and leases but would not recommend retroactive changes to longstanding leases; Grambling said decisions about retroactive or legislative remedies would raise separate legal constraints and would require consultation with the attorney general.

Officials declined to provide exhaustive commercial detail about parties’ negotiations. Crowther and Grambling said there are references in the record to discussions of shared operational costs and contested capital access fees; ConocoPhillips has described annual maintenance costs in court filings as on the order of $10 million to $20 million. ConocoPhillips also moved in superior court for attorney’s fees in the amount the company listed in its brief; the state has asked the superior court to stay any fee briefing while the appeal is pending.

On process and timing, Grambling said the Alaska Supreme Court denied the parties’ motions for an immediate stay on Jan. 14, 2025 (denied without prejudice), and the court’s clerks were expected to receive the superior‑court record by Feb. 3, 2025; an initial briefing order would typically follow within about 30 days of the record being filed.

Senators closed the exchange by reiterating the committee’s interest in maintaining predictable, enforceable terms for development on the North Slope and in preventing duplicate road construction that would enlarge the environmental footprint. Chair Giesel said the committee would watch the appeal and that the department should be prepared to propose clarifying language for future leases if necessary.

The appeal remains pending before the Alaska Supreme Court; private negotiations between ConocoPhillips and Santos over access fees are ongoing and, according to agency officials, could resolve the parties’ operational needs independently of the court's timetable.