The long-struggling, $44 billion Alaska LNG project has landed a private partner that will take over majority ownership of the company that seeks to deliver natural gas from the North Slope to Alaskans and the world.

The Glenfarne Group will also lead development of the project to construction and operation after the board of the Alaska Gasline Development Corp. on Thursday agreed to a binding deal with the company, according to a statement from AGDC, a state agency.

“Glenfarne’s financial, project management, and commercial expertise is well matched to lead this vital project forward,” said Brendan Duval, Glenfarne’s founder. “Alaska LNG will provide desperately needed energy security and natural gas cost savings for Alaskans and give Glenfarne unmatched flexibility to simultaneously serve LNG markets in both Asia and Europe through our three LNG projects.”

The change in ownership is significant in part because the state corporation has run the project on its own for nearly a decade, after the major oil companies that were its original partners backed out in 2016.

Glenfarne, founded in 2011, is a New York company that develops, owns and operates energy and infrastructure projects. The company is the developer, owner and operator of Texas LNG, the most recent U.S. LNG project to fully sell its LNG volumes with a total market value over $60 billion, its founder Brendan Duval said in February.

“Alaska LNG will ensure a brighter future for generations of Alaskans and I look forward to working with Glenfarne as they lead Alaska LNG forward,” said Frank Richards, president of the AGDC.

“Today is a historic day for Alaska,” Gov. Mike Dunleavy said. “Alaska LNG will strengthen the U.S. geostrategic position in the North Pacific, provide vital energy security for our residents, our military bases, our businesses, and our Asian allies, and unlock billions in economic benefit at home and abroad.”

The project has seen renewed interest from Asian companies that might serve as investors or gas buyers, and President Donald Trump has touted the pipeline as a key project he’d like to see built.

Trump said in his speech to Congress this month that his administration is working on a “gigantic” natural gas pipeline, referring to Alaska LNG. The project’s gas exports to Asia could be so large that they could help alleviate trade imbalances.

The state gas line corporation declined to release the contract with Glenfarne.

The project envisions development of a roughly 800-mile pipeline delivering natural gas from the North Slope. The gas would be processed at a treatment plant on the North Slope and liquefied in Nikiski on the Kenai Peninsula, then exported to Asian markets in oceangoing tankers.

Richards told the gasline board on Thursday that the deal calls for Glenfarne to assume 75% equity of 8 Star Alaska, the state agency’s project development company. The state gas line agency will hold the remaining ownership.

The state has the option to invest in individual facilities such as the gas treatment plant, he said.

“We’ve reserved the right for investment, for the state, of up to 25% in any of the subprojects or all,” Richards said. “And that will be an ongoing discussion with the Legislature and the administration on if that is an opportunity they would like to take or not.”

Glenfarne will cover the costs of the engineering and design work that needs to be completed before a final decision to build the project is made. Duval said the money will come from a consortium of private investors, but a federal loan guarantee could help support that effort, he said.

“They will fund and resource the Alaskan LNG project to final investment decision,” Richards said. “This covers the entire Alaska LNG project, and not just the initial phase of the pipeline.”

Duval said it’s possible a final investment decision could be made by the end of this year. LNG deliveries could begin in 2030 or 2031, he said.

It is unclear what investors, if any, would provide the large sums of money for construction of the project.

It’s also unclear where the natural gas would come from. The agency has signed a deal with a small oil and gas explorer in Alaska in an effort to provide gas for the first phase. Great Bear Pantheon, however, currently does not produce oil or gas. There’s no guarantee it will produce gas in Alaska.

Richards said the gas line agency is working on securing gas sales precedent agreements with other producers, including for gas at the Point Thomson and Prudhoe Bay fields.

Richards said the agreement with Glenfarne covers the entire Alaska LNG project, and not just the initial phase of the pipeline. “So gas treatment, pipeline and liquefaction (plant). But the priority is going to be the phase-one pipeline and gas for Alaskans,” Richards said.

The first phase of the project has been estimated to cost $11 billion. It calls for the construction of a 750-mile pipeline to deliver the gas from the North Slope to the Interior and Southcentral Alaska, where electric utilities are looking at importing natural gas as Cook Inlet gas dwindles.

After the first-phase construction, the larger project to export the gas can be built, according to the plan. That portion of the project includes the construction of a liquefaction facility.

Richards said he was calling into the meeting from Asia. He said he was on a trade mission with Glenfarne and Gov. Dunleavy to Asian countries, looking for companies that might commit to buying Alaska’s gas or investing in the project.

Other suitors?

The deal has raised concerns and questions among some lawmakers, including whether the board has fully weighed other potential suitors with interest in taking on the project.

Sen. Jesse Bjorkman, R-Nikiski, spoke to the gas line corporation board after it opened up the meeting to public comments. The board had already emerged from executive session and voted, with no discussion, to authorize the gas line agency to enter the deal with Glenfarne.

Bjorkman said he would have liked to have addressed the board before it made a decision that could have consequences for generations of Alaskans.

He said he other Alaskans have many questions about the deal. He wants to make sure Alaska and the Kenai Peninsula, and the U.S., are in a position to get the most benefit from the project, he said.

“People may wonder now for decades or generations about what other opportunities might be or may have been foregone by decisions made here today,” he said.

Bjorkman said the board should “take some time to consider all options that are on the table.”

“Certainly you all had received communication that there were others who would like to present the board with offers and opportunities, but that has not not happened as of yet, and I think it’s prudent to do that, considering the generational impacts that the decisions made are going to have on on all of Alaskans,” Bjorkman said.

The gas line agency “conducted a public, exhaustive, and multi-year market search for an experienced lead developer,” said Tim Fitzpatrick, a spokesperson for the agency, in a statement on Friday.

“We engaged with numerous parties and evaluated every written and documented proposal submitted during that time, independently and in consultation with advisors such as Goldman Sachs, in a thorough due diligence process,” Fitzpatrick said. “Glenfarne presented a comprehensive project development plan and engaged with AGDC in hundreds of hours of information sharing which culminated in an exclusive development negotiation and term sheet agreement. Once the AGDC-Glenfarne agreement was finalized, numerous other parties stepped forward with new or renewed interest in Alaska LNG. A project of Alaska LNG’s scale will offer numerous opportunities for additional investors and developers to participate.”

Fitpatrick said Glenfarne is not “making a payment to (the gasline corporation) as part of this transaction” to acquire the 75% equity in the project.

But Glenfarne is funding project costs entirely to reach a final investment decision, he said. The gas line corporation has estimated those costs, for the full project, at up to $150 million.

“A completed project will benefit Alaskans in numerous and significant economic, environmental, and other ways,” Fitzpatrick said. “The state economy will benefit from the creation of up to 12,000 construction jobs and 1,000 permanent operations jobs, and the procurement of local goods, services, and materials needed during construction. The state will receive direct benefits including royalties, corporate income taxes, property taxes, and production taxes, as well as indirect benefits through expanded economic activity generated by lower residential, industrial, and government energy costs.”

Sen. Kelly Merrick, R-Chugiak/Eagle River, posted on her office Facebook page that Richards had signed a deal with Glenfarne “BEFORE examining all proposals on the table.”

“This is a complete abdication of his duty to Alaska,” Merrick wrote.

Merrick, in an interview Friday, said she met with an investor who was not with Glenfarne who said they had capital to invest in the project. The investor could cover the gas line corporation’s budget without any use of state dollars, while Alaska would retain 25% ownership of the project, Merrick said.

Merrick declined to name the investor.

Merrick also posted to social media a video of Richards speaking at a legislative hearing in February. In the hearing, Merrick questions Richards about the level of risk Glenfarne is taking on for the project.

Merrick said that the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority in December had moved to provide a $50 million “backstop,” essentially an insurance policy that the state agency could pay to Glenfarne the Phase 1 portion of the project is not built. The state development agency said its backstop commitment could help the project complete the first phase of the project to deliver gas to Alaskans.

Fitpatrick said in an interview on Friday that the gas line corporation at this point has not finalized the negotiations with the development agency over the potential backstop funding.

Duval, with Glenfarne, said in a press conference with reporters late Thursday that the company is moving forward without that agreement in place.

A reporter asked if the agreement is an expectation for the project.

Duval’s answer addressed only a short-term window.

“There’s documents available,” Duval said. “We don’t need it to get going. There’s no need for us to slow down waiting for it.”