Legislature(2023 - 2024)BARNES 124
01/23/2024 10:15 AM House ENERGY
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB227 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 227 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 227-ELECTRIC UTILITY LIABILITY
10:17:27 AM
CHAIR RAUSCHER announced that the only order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 227 "An Act relating to liability of an
electric utility for contact between vegetation and the
utility's facilities."
10:18:08 AM
RYAN MCKEE, Staff, Representative George Rauscher, presented HB
227 on behalf of Representative Rauscher, prime sponsor. He
provided the sponsor statement [included in the committee
packet], which read as follows [original punctuation provided]:
"An Act relating to liability of an electric utility
for contact between vegetation and the utility's
facilities."
House Bill 227 protects Alaska's electric utilities
and their ratepayers from paying for damage caused by
vegetation that falls from outside an electric
utility's legal right-of-way and contacts a utility's
electric facilities. If HB 227 becomes law, electric
utilities would not be liable for damage caused by
vegetation outside their easements contacting electric
facilities.
For vegetation inside an easement, electric utilities
could still face liability under existing negligence
standards. In cases where the location of vegetation
or the cause of the damage is disputed, a court would
have to determine whether the protection provided by
this bill applies.
This bill does not prevent electric utilities from
being sued. It provides a court with clear direction
on when liability does and does not apply in a
situation where vegetation contacts powerlines or
other electric infrastructure. HB 227 accomplishes
this by:
• making clear in statute that electric utilities may
not be held liable for costs, property damage, death,
or personal injury resulting from contact between
vegetation and the utility's facilities if the
vegetation is located or originated outside the
boundaries of the utility's real property, lease,
permit, easement, or right-of-way.
• HB 227 also makes clear that a utility is not liable
for cutting, girdling, or otherwise injuring or
removing vegetation if part of the trunk of the
vegetation is inside the boundaries of the utility's
real property, lease, permit, easement, or right-of-
way.
Importantly, the bill does not preclude civil
liability if the utility itself causes vegetation to
contact the utilities' facilities.
Alaska's electric utilities diligently maintain their
rights-of-way to prevent damage to powerlines and
other infrastructure. Those electric utilities should
not be held liable for damage caused by vegetation
outside of their legal control.
By passing HB 227, the Legislature will help protect
Alaska utilities and their ratepayers from potential
increases in rates due to a situation that is outside
the control of an electric utility.
MR. MCKEE offered the HB 227 sectional analysis [included in the
committee packet], which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
Section 1: Amends AS 09.65 by adding a new section.
Ensures a utility offering services to the public may
not be held liable for property damage, death, or
personal injury if vegetation outside the utility's
right-of-way falls onto a utility's facilities unless
the utility caused the vegetation to fall. It also
allows a utility to remove vegetation if the trunk
straddles the right of way.
Section 2: Amends the uncodified law of the State of
Alaska. This section outlines that the act will apply
to civil lawsuits against electric utilities filed on
or after the effective date.
CHAIR RAUSCHER said the committee would hear invited testimony.
10:22:25 AM
TRAVIS MILLION, Chief Operating Officer, Golden Valley Electric
Association, testified in favor of HB 227. He said that Golden
Valley Electric serves 36,000 members in the Interior of Alaska
with 3,300 miles of electric lines. He reminded the committee
of a similar bill that was introduced during the previous
legislative session. He said that electric utilities are
granted easements from property owners, which dictates how wide
the right-of-way is for the purpose of equipment installation,
operation, and maintenance. Utilities are not legally
authorized to remove any vegetation located outside of easements
and should not be held liable for damages caused by the
vegetation outside the easement. He emphasized that there is a
lack of cost-effective options for utilities to mitigate risks
without statute. Most utilities in Alaska are cooperatives or
municipalities, and cost burdens would be passed onto member
owners. He urged the committee to pass HB 227 to protect Alaska
electric utilities and their member owners.
10:25:47 AM
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX asked about ensuring robust right-of-way
utility clearing policies.
10:26:06 AM
ANDY LEMAN, General Council, Alaska Power Association, answered
that HB 227 does not protect the utilities. Easements and
rights-of-way remain the responsibility of the utility. He
noted the potential liability of the utility if rights-of-way
and easements are neglected.
10:27:07 AM
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX noted the difficulties involved with
removing hazards across significant miles of rights-of-way and
easements. He told a personal anecdote and expressed that the
root of the problem is not addressed by HB 227. He mentioned
the individual responsibility of property owners to remove fire
hazards on their land and the potential of increased insurance
costs rather than electricity costs.
10:29:07 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ARMSTRONG asked how HB 227 differs from the bill
heard in the previous session and how concerns with the previous
version are addressed in HB 227.
10:29:43 AM
MR. LEMAN answered that the primary difference between the bills
concerned liability standards for vegetation inside the right-
of-way being dependent on whether the utility was following a
vegetation management plan as opposed to leaving it to a common-
law negligence standard. He noted that HB 227 was edited to
include utility responsibility if the vegetation contacted
utility facilities, there would be no protection from liability.
10:31:04 AM
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX asked if there is oversight to ensure a
robust vegetation management plan.
10:31:40 AM
MR. LEMAN expressed that other Alaska utilities take vegetation
management plans seriously. Almost all Alaska utilities are
cooperatives or are municipally owned and are exempt from
regulation by the Regulatory Commission of Alaska because they
are locally owned and govern themselves. He expressed his
confidence that Alaska utilities maintain rights-of-ways and
easements prudently. He suggested inviting utilities to testify
and provide more information about their vegetation management
plans.
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX asked if the power association has spoken
with the Division of Forestry and Fire Protection.
MR. LEMAN noted that discussions about fire response have been
about costs and not about HB 227 specifically.
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX expressed his desire to address forest fire
prevention.
10:35:15 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SCHRAGE asked why the bill is necessary.
MR. LEMAN explained that in the absence of HB 227, if a tree
falls on an electric facility and the tree is outside the right-
of-way, fault for potential fire or damage would be put upon the
utility even though the tree was not considered the
responsibility of the utility.
10:37:02 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SCHRAGE asked if there were any examples where a
court had found a utility liable under similar circumstances to
the hypothetical situation mentioned previously.
MR. LEMAN said there have been no cases in Alaska relating to
these claims. To the best of his knowledge, he explained that
there have been lawsuits, all of which have been settled. He
alluded to fires in the Lower 48 where utilities have been found
liable for fires that started due to vegetation found outside of
right of way. He noted that this is not just a hypothetical
risk.
REPRESENTATIVE SCHRAGE sought to understand why a court would
find a utility liable and asked if there were other factors like
negligence or lack of a well-funded vegetation management plan
that would contribute to liability charges for a utility.
MR. LEMAN explained that HB 227 attempts to clarify uncertainty
in the legal language in situations concerning liability.
10:40:18 AM
CHAIR RAUSCHER expressed his concern about the recent
devastation in Hawaii. He noted Alaska's bark beetle problems,
which lead to dry timber forests and could potentially cause
devastation if wildfires are sparked.
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX asked if the insurance industry could
provide testimony about HB 227 and offered to get in touch.
REPRESENTATIVE SCHRAGE made note of the first House Special
Committee on Energy meeting of the year and expressed his
appreciation for the new committee members and the chair.
10:41:52 AM
CHAIR RAUSCHER provided closing remarks.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| APA Support House Bill 227.pdf |
HENE 1/23/2024 10:15:00 AM |
HB 227 |
| ElectricUtilityLiabilityInfo HB227 White Paper.pdf |
HENE 1/23/2024 10:15:00 AM |
HB 227 |
| HB 227 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HENE 1/23/2024 10:15:00 AM |
HB 227 |
| HB 227 Sectional Analysis.pdf |
HENE 1/23/2024 10:15:00 AM |
HB 227 |