President Bush took steps to jump-start stalled negotiations on the omnibus energy bill at a White House meeting with Republican and Democratic leaders Wednesday.

The president also designated Vice President Dick Cheney to “mediate” the ongoing dispute between Chairman Bill Thomas (R-CA) of the House Ways and Means Committee and Chairman Charles Grassley (R-IA) of the Senate Finance Committee. The two lawmakers have been at war over a number of energy tax items, particularly tax credits for ethanol producers. The feud has held up the measure in conference committee, and has led to speculation that an energy bill may not make it out of Congress this year.

By sending Cheney to Capitol Hill, the Bush administration wants to “demonstrate that it is committed to getting the energy bill done,” said a legislative expert in the natural gas industry. “It’s important to send this message out right now.” The president is expected to keep the focus on energy in a speech to be given at a plant in Columbus, OH, Thursday.

In the meantime, Sen. Pete Domenici (R-NM), the chief conference negotiator, doesn’t plan to schedule another conference vote on the bill until the tax package is completed, a Republican aide said.

Republican conferee Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) earlier this week said he expected the impasse over energy-related tax issues to end soon, clearing the way for national energy legislation to be passed by Congress and signed into law within the next month.

The feuding tax writers are “close to resolution” of items in the $16 billion tax package that have stalled the bill, and top Senate and House negotiators have agreed to settle the outstanding policy issues “very quickly” once the tax items are cleared away, Barton said at a conference sponsored by Charles Schwab Capital Markets in Washington, DC, Tuesday.

While the bill will authorize the construction of an Alaska natural gas pipeline, it’s unlikely it will offer price guarantees for gas produced in Alaska and transported over the proposed line, he noted.

“The largest privately capitalized corporations in the world are saying that with market prices of $5 per Mcf…it’s too risky [to build an Alaska line] unless we give them a price guarantee. I don’t buy that,” said Barton, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce subcommittee on energy and air quality.

“I don’t think we’re going to have some price guarantees on the Alaska pipeline,” he said, although he noted there was “still some debate” occurring on the issue. The Senate backs price supports, but House conferees and the Bush administration are dead-set against them.

Barton indicated that awarding price guarantees to Alaska producers would be at odds with a key underlying proposition in the energy bill that “markets are better than mandates.”

The legislation will authorize other financial incentives — tax credits and loan guarantee — for the proposed 3,600-mile pipeline that would transport gas from Alaska’s North Slope to the Lower 48 states, he said. While Alaska producers welcome the other incentives, they point out that the price supports are the key.

Alaska producers ConocoPhillips and BP have lobbied hard for the price guarantees. Without them, ConocoPhillips has said publicly that it will withdraw its support for the construction of the $20 billion line.

Producers want a 52 cents/MMBtu tax credit in the event Alaska gas prices fall below $1.35/MMBtu at the wellhead (excluding transportation and processing costs). This effectively would create a floor price of $1.35/MMBtu at the well for gas transported over the proposed Alaska gas line, providing producers with a “penny-for-penny” credit up to a maximum of 52 cents if wellhead prices dip below the established floor.

©Copyright 2003 Intelligence Press Inc. All rights reserved. The preceding news report may not be republished or redistributed, in whole or in part, in any form, without prior written consent of Intelligence Press, Inc.