Legislature(1999 - 2000)
03/28/2000 02:05 PM House FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE BILL NO. 290
An Act relating to stranded gas pipeline carriers and
to the intrastate regulation by the Regulatory
Commission of Alaska of pipelines and pipeline
facilities of stranded gas pipeline carriers.
Co-Chair Therriault spoke to Amendment #1, 1-LS1269\K.1,
Chenoweth, 3/23/00. [Copy on File]. He noted that the
amendment addressed the rate setting methodology. Previous
testimony from Alaska Regulatory Commission (RCA) explained
the State user position. Co-Chair Therriault did not believe
that establishing a tariff rate would endanger the product.
Co-Chair Therriault WITHDREW Amendment #2, 1-LS1269\K.2.
Co-Chair Therriault MOVED to adopt Amendment #1.
Representative Phillips OBJECTED. She noted that there had
been serious discussion regarding the concern in the House
Oil and Gas Committee. Representative J. Davies emphasized
that the amendment would place the rate making structure
under utilities only.
JIM EASON, REPRESENTATIVE OF ANS LNG SPONSOR GROUP,
ANCHORAGE, stated that there are a number of issues that the
Committee should consider. He suggested to amend the bill
would be premature and counter productive. The issue of a
proposed tariff would be best considered when the facts are
available. Under existing law, both the Pipeline Act and
the Public Utilities Act give the Regulatory Commission the
authority to require what is "reasonable and just". Mr.
Eason argued that the State is three to four years away from
having enough information to determine what it will cost.
That decision is not critical at this time. He pointed out
that this would be the first time in the State's history
that a pipeline project would be required to file a tariff
under the Utility Act even though it would be regulated
under the Alaska Pipeline Act. He recommended there be
further discussion on the matter.
Co-Chair Therriault asked if the language had been included
in the Oil and Gas Committee version of the legislation and
the House Resources Committee removed if it was then. Mr.
Eason acknowledged that was correct.
NAN THOMPSON, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), ALASKA
REGULATORY COMMISSION, ANCHORAGE, referenced the memo
included in member's packets which outlines the excluded
items from the rate:
? Public relations costs;
? Lobbying expenses;
? Charitable contributions;
? Association dues;
? Extraordinary management compensation;
? Research and development costs;
? Acquisition adjustments; and
? Pensions and employee benefits.
She understood that the ANG LNG sponsor group would not want
to limit their options in reserving space. She suggested
that the Committee remember the small percentage of the coal
product which will go to the user. The pipeline is being
constructed mainly for export. Only a very small percentage
of the product will be used in the State. There also exists
a timing question. The issue is what potential can predict
when they could make the decision. The proposed methodology
encourages more in-State use providing a clearer idea of
what the costs will be.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion to adopt Amendment
IN FAVOR: Austerman, J. Davies, Grussendorf, Moses,
Therriault
OPPOSED: Williams, G. Davis, Foster, Phillips
Representative Bunde and Co-Chair Mulder were not present
for the vote.
The MOTION PASSED (5-4).
Representative Foster MOVED to report CS HB 290 (FIN) out of
Committee with individual recommendations and with the
accompanying fiscal notes. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
CS HB 290 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with "no
recommendation" and with a fiscal note by Department of
Community and Regional Affairs and two zero notes by
Department of Natural Resources and Department of Revenue
dated 2/21/00.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|