Provide comments on the AKLNG Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement
Comment deadline was August 15, 2022 


The Department of Energy (DOE) recently issued the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) for the proposed Alaska LNG Project. The Draft SEIS was completed in response to a Sierra Club petition following the final EIS and Record of Decision (ROD) issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and which was adopted by DOE and other federal agencies in 2020 approving the project. The DOE Draft SEIS examines the potential upstream environmental effects associated with incremental natural gas production on Alaska’s North Slope and analyzes the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions over the full life cycle of the project. The Draft SEIS is a 416-page document, plus 500 pages in supporting appendices and supplements FERC’s comprehensive EIS (more than 5,000 pages) adopted in 2020. 


The Alaska LNG Project is a project to pipe North Slope gas 807 miles to a natural gas liquefaction plant and marine terminal in Nikiski, on the Kenai Peninsula. In 2020, DOE adopted the Final EIS and ROD prepared by FERC with the assistance of nine other federal regulatory agencies, including the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service, Environmental Protection Agency, National Marine Fisheries Service, Army Corps of Engineers and Bureau of Land Management.

Action Requested:

RDC members are encouraged to submit written comments in support of the project. The comment period deadline is Monday, August 15, 2022.

Submit Comments:

Comments can be submitted online at All comments should include the project’s docket number: DOE-HQ-2022-0019-0001. 

In addition, Alaska Gasline Development Corporation (AGDC) has developed on online tool to help facilitate individual comments. The tool prompts users to select various topics of interest (energy security, air quality, etc.) and provides fully editable text for a comment letter. Please visit to submit comments.

Points to consider in your comments: 

  • The SEIS validates previous federal authorizations of the project and the supplemental analysis concludes GHG emissions would not increase compared to a “no action” alternative and would have lower GHG emissions compared to LNG from other sources, such as the U.S. Gulf Coast.
  • The Prudhoe Bay Unit (PBU) and Point Thomson Unit (PTU) have sufficient gas to supply the project for the 30-year term of the export license.
  • None of the impacts were ranked Significant or Adverse across the 19 resource categories analyzed by DOE.
  • Exporting LNG from the North Slope of Alaska would not increase GHG emissions in comparison to ‘business as usual’ production on the North Slope. 
  • Alaska LNG will have lower GHG emissions than Gulf Coast LNG, because of the shorter distance to Asian markets and because it is associated gas (already produced with oil).
  • In Alaska, the project would also reduce GHG emissions through the use of natural gas. Through potential sales, it would also help reduce GHG emissions and provide clean energy to a significant portion of the total world population. 
  • The construction of a gas pipeline would supply Alaskans with clean energy and improve air quality.
  • The project would provide Alaskans and Alaska companies with new economic opportunities.
  • The DOE and FERC previously found that with the implementation of best management practices, impacts on wildlife would not be significant, and would be mitigated.
  • An estimated 29,100 construction jobs would be created by the project with peak employment during the project’s fourth year at 7,620 jobs. 
  • Approximately 980 operation jobs in the Kenai Peninsula Borough, the Municipality of Anchorage and the North Slope Borough would help spur local and statewide economic activity with total annual wages of at least $385 million. 
  • Connection to the Interior Gas Utility would provide assurance of a long-term, economic energy supply for Fairbanks and North Pole residents, and both commercial and industrial users.
  • Smaller communities along the pipeline route could benefit through affordable, reliable natural gas to residential, commercial, and industrial users.
  • Interconnection of the main gas pipeline to the existing Southcentral pipeline infrastructure/network would provide assurance of long-term, economic energy supplies for residential, commercial and industrial users.
  • The additional in-state natural gas could support new resource development projects in need of affordable energy. 
  • The transportation of project-related supplies from the Port of Seward to Fairbanks would benefit the economy. 
  • Ports in Southcentral Alaska – Seward, Whittier, Anchorage, Beluga, and Nikiski – would see increased revenues and new jobs as the primary points of entry for offloading equipment and materials. 
  • This project has been extensively studied, previously approved and the supplemental analysis regarding GHG life cycle analysis is positive for the project, including findings that GHG emissions would not increase or be lower than other sources of LNG.

Comment deadline was August 15, 2022