Legislature(2009 - 2010)HOUSE FINANCE 519

03/22/2010 01:30 PM FINANCE


Download Mp3. <- Right click and save file as

* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ HB 314 WORKERS' COMPENSATION TELECONFERENCED
Moved CSHB 314(FIN) Out of Committee
+ HB 346 WORKERS' COMPENSATION ADVISORY BOARD TELECONFERENCED
Heard & Held
+ Bills Previously Heard/Scheduled TELECONFERENCED
+= HB 369 IN-STATE PIPELINE MANAGER/TEAM/COMMITTEE TELECONFERENCED
Heard & Held
HOUSE BILL NO. 369                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
"An Act  relating to an  in-state natural gas  pipeline, the                                                                    
office of in-state gasline project manager, the Joint In-                                                                       
State  Gasline Development  Team, and  the In-State  Gasline                                                                    
Steering Committee; and providing for an effective date."                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
2:51:47 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
Vice-Chair Thomas  MOVED to ADOPT  CS for HB 369  (FIN), 26-                                                                    
LS1527\C, Cook, 3/18/10, as a working draft.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Stoltze OBJECTED                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
TOM   WRIGHT,    STAFF,   REPRESENTATIVE    MIKE   CHENAULT,                                                                    
highlighted  the  changes in  the  CS  described in  the  CS                                                                    
Sectional Analysis (copy on file).                                                                                              
      "An Act relating to an  in-state natural gas pipeline,                                                                    
     the office  of in-state  gas line project  manager, the                                                                    
     Joint In-State Gasline  Development Team; requiring the                                                                    
     development of  an in-state natural gas  pipeline plan,                                                                    
     to be  delivered to  the legislature  by July  1, 2011,                                                                    
     that provides  for a  gas line  that is  operational by                                                                    
     December  31,   2015;  directing  the   Joint  In-State                                                                    
     Gasline  Development  Team to  assume  responsibilities                                                                    
     under sec.  19, ch.  14, SLA 2009;  requiring expedited                                                                    
     review  and  action  by   state  agencies  or  entities                                                                    
     relating to the in-state  natural gas pipeline project;                                                                    
     and providing for an effective date."                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Mr. Wright  noted the change to  the title of the  bill. The                                                                    
title  was tightened  up  to  differentiate the  legislation                                                                    
from other  bills dealing with  natural gas  development. He                                                                    
continued with the sectional.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
      Section 1:   Adds a new chapter,  Chapter 34: In-State                                                                    
     natural Gas Pipeline, to AS 38, Public Land.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
     Sec.  38.34.010.  In-state  gas line  project  manager.                                                                    
     (a) Creates  the position of in-state  gas line project                                                                    
     manager within  the governor's  Office.   This position                                                                    
     will   continue  until   one   year  after   commercial                                                                    
     operation of the in-state  natural gas pipeline begins.                                                                    
     (b)  The   Governor  appoints  an  individual   to  the                                                                    
     position of  an in-state  gas line  manager and  may be                                                                    
     removed  at the  Governor's  discretion. (c)  Describes                                                                    
     the duties of the in-state gas line project manager.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
      Sec. 38.34.020.  Expedited review and action  by state                                                                    
     agencies or entities. (a) States  that any state agency                                                                    
     or entity conducting and taking  action relating to the                                                                    
     in-state  gas line  shall be  expedited.   (b) A  state                                                                    
     agency  or  entity  may  not  include  in  any  project                                                                    
     certificate,   right   of    way,   permit   or   other                                                                    
     authorization issued to a licensee  a term or condition                                                                    
     that is  not required  by law  if the  in-state project                                                                    
     manager determines the term  or condition would prevent                                                                    
     or  impair the  expeditious construction  and operation                                                                    
     or expansion  of the  in-state gas line.   (c)  A state                                                                    
     agency  or  entity may  not,  unless  required by  law,                                                                    
     amend  or  abrogate  any  certificate,  right  of  way,                                                                    
     permit or  other authorization issued to  a licensee if                                                                    
     the  project   manager  determines  the   action  would                                                                    
     prevent  or  impair  the expeditious  construction  and                                                                    
     operation or expansion of the in-state gas line.                                                                           
     In Section 1 Sec.38.34.020.,  The word entity was added                                                                    
     to  "review   and  action   by  state   agencies".  The                                                                    
     inclusion allows  for involvement  of entities  such as                                                                    
     ANGDA (Alaska Natural Gas Development Authority).                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
     Sec.  38.34.030.  Joint  In-state  Gasline  Development                                                                    
     Team.    (a)  Establishes the  Joint  In-State  Gasline                                                                    
     Development Team  in the Governor's  Office.   The team                                                                    
     consists  of  the  commissioner of  the  Department  of                                                                    
     Transportation and  Public Facilities or  designee, the                                                                    
     chief   executive  officer   of  the   Alaska  Railroad                                                                    
     Corporation  or designee,  the chief  executive officer                                                                    
     of the  Alaska Natural  Gas Development  Authority, the                                                                    
     in-state  gas  line  project   manager  and  the  chief                                                                    
     executive  officer   of  the  Alaska   Housing  Finance                                                                    
     Corporation.   (b)  Names  the  Alaska Housing  Finance                                                                    
     Corporation's chief  executive officer  as chair.   (c)                                                                    
     Allows the  development team to hire  staff, enter into                                                                    
     contracts and  exercise other powers  to carry  out its                                                                    
     functions.                                                                                                                 
     The  chief  executive  Officer of  the  Alaska  Housing                                                                    
     Finance  Corporation was  added as  a fifth  member and                                                                    
     chair to  the Joint  In-state Gasline  Development Team                                                                    
     in Sec.38.34.030.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
Mr. Wright explained that Dan Fauske, (CEO/Executive                                                                            
Director, Alaska Housing Finance Corporation, Department of                                                                     
Revenue) would bring his finance and leadership experience                                                                      
to the team.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
2:55:31 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Stoltze interjected that he believed in the value                                                                      
of having a Development Team member who is familiar with                                                                        
the legislative and budget process.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
Mr. Wright elaborated further.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
     Sec. 38.34.040.   Duties of the Development  Team.  (a)                                                                    
     Ensure a  project plan  for the  development of  an in-                                                                    
     state  gas  line  is completed  and  delivered  to  the                                                                    
     legislature by  July 1,  2011.   The project  plan must                                                                    
     specify and  document how an  in-state gas line  can be                                                                    
     designed,  financed, constructed  and made  operational                                                                    
     by December 31, 2015.    (b) The Joint In-State Gasline                                                                    
     Development Team  is to assume all  executive authority                                                                    
     over and  managerial responsibility for  all activities                                                                    
     enumerated under  sec. 19, ch. 14,  SLA 2009, including                                                                    
     work previously  completed, work  in process,  and work                                                                    
     for which  money has  been encumbered  but that  is not                                                                    
     completed  on the  effective date  of this  subsection.                                                                    
     (c) Describes  specific plans that  are to  be included                                                                    
     within the project  plan for an in-state  gas line that                                                                    
     will serve  Fairbanks, the south central  region of the                                                                    
     state,  and  other  communities  whenever  practicable,                                                                    
     connecting with or enhancing  the existing gas pipeline                                                                    
     system,   and  reaching   to   tidewater.     (d)   The                                                                    
     development  team's  work  product  is  to  include  an                                                                    
     analysis of  alternative possible  routes and  select a                                                                    
     route   that   is   consistent   with   the   following                                                                    
     requirements:  (1) is  the  most  economical, (2)  will                                                                    
     provide  gas to  residents  at a  reasonable cost,  (3)                                                                    
     allows  for  connecting   lines  to  serve  industrial,                                                                    
     residential  and  utility  customers along  the  entire                                                                    
     route and  in other  regions of the  state that  can be                                                                    
     served at  commercially feasible rates, (4)  uses state                                                                    
     land and existing state highway  and railroad rights of                                                                    
     way to  the maximum extent feasible,  (5) uses existing                                                                    
     highway  and railroad  bridges,  gravel pits  equipment                                                                    
     yards  and maintenance  facilities  and other  existing                                                                    
     facilities   and  resources   to  the   maximum  extent                                                                    
     feasible. (e) With the  intent that any project-related                                                                    
     assets acquired or developed  be available for transfer                                                                    
     or  sale  to  the  entity best  able  to  complete  the                                                                    
     project,  the  development team  is  to:  (1)   prepare                                                                    
     plans  and designs  necessary for  the construction  of                                                                    
     the  in-state gas  line; (2)  coordinate with  entities                                                                    
     qualified to build,  own and operate the  gas line; (3)                                                                    
     identify, apply for and  obtain rights-of-way and other                                                                    
     permits  for the  project route;  (4)  work with  other                                                                    
     entities to  promote gas supply and  purchase contracts                                                                    
     required  for the  project to  be commercially  viable;                                                                    
     (5)   prepare  cost   estimates  for   project  design,                                                                    
     construction and  operation to determine  the project's                                                                    
     feasibility and  the projected cost  of natural  gas to                                                                    
     consumers; (6) coordinate with and  use, to the fullest                                                                    
     extent, possible existing work  by other state agencies                                                                    
     and  entities before  contracting for  new reports  and                                                                    
     research   and  analysis;   (7)  determine   regulatory                                                                    
     authority  over the  pipeline project  and perform  any                                                                    
     necessary  compliance  requirements; (8)  identify  and                                                                    
     apply for,  or support  extension of,  existing permits                                                                    
     for  export  of  Alaska  natural  gas  if  that  export                                                                    
     improves project  economics and  will reduce  the price                                                                    
     of natural gas  to in-state consumers.   (f) Any rights                                                                    
     to  a gas  line  corridor obtained  by  a state  agency                                                                    
     under eminent  domain may be  transferred to  a private                                                                    
     entity.  (g)  Describes the various aspects  of the in-                                                                    
     state  gas  line  project   the  development  team  may                                                                    
     consider.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
     Sec.38.34.040, changes  the July 1, 2011  deadline from                                                                    
     construction   ready  to   a  completed   project  plan                                                                    
     delivered to the legislature. He  added that the change                                                                    
     accommodated   concerns   raised   by   the   impending                                                                    
     deadline.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
Mr.  Wright  also pointed  out  that  in subsection(c)  "the                                                                    
south  central region"  includes Valdez.  He read  the final                                                                    
change  in  Sec.38.34.060.  Subsection  b  that  dealt  with                                                                    
conflicts of interest.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
3:00:22 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
     Sec.  38.34.060.  Conflicts  of  interest.   (a)  If  a                                                                    
     member  of  the  Development  Team  acquires,  owns  or                                                                    
     controls a direct or indirect  interest in property, an                                                                    
     organization or business that might  be affected by the                                                                    
     in-state  gas  line  project  or  other  matters  under                                                                    
     consideration   by    the   Development    Team   shall                                                                    
     immediately  disclose the  interest to  the Development                                                                    
     Team.   This disclosure  is part  of the  public record                                                                    
     and  shall be  included  in the  minutes  of the  first                                                                    
     meeting  of   the  Development  Team  held   after  the                                                                    
     disclosure.  (b) Members  of the  development team  are                                                                    
     subject to  AS 39.50  (Public Official  Disclosure) and                                                                    
     AS 39.52 (Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act).                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
Representative Gara  referred to  page 4, line  8 of  the CS                                                                    
that calls  for analysis  of "alternative  possible routes".                                                                    
He  explained that  alternatives  might not  be routes.  The                                                                    
alternatives could include  importation of liquefied natural                                                                    
gas or Cook Inlet gas subsidies.  He asked the sponsor if he                                                                    
would change  the language  to reflect  other possibilities.                                                                    
Representative   Chenault  wanted   time  to   consider  the                                                                    
request.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Representative Gara understood the goal  to be ready to move                                                                    
forward but wanted to avoid spending money unnecessarily.                                                                       
He  did  not want  to  see  gas pipeline  engineering  plans                                                                    
discarded. On  page 4  line, 23 he  requested to  insert the                                                                    
word "preliminary", that  would read, "prepare [preliminary]                                                                    
plans and  designs for construction of  the in-state natural                                                                    
gas line project." Representative  Chenault argued that even                                                                    
though he  dislikes wasting money  the state should  pay for                                                                    
whatever plans are necessary to determine costs.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
3:04:17 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Representative  Gara  referred  to   line  27,  of  the  CS,                                                                    
regarding obtaining  right-of-ways. He wondered if  it was a                                                                    
waste of  money to  obtain right-of-ways  that might  not be                                                                    
used.  Representative Chenault  believed that  in order  for                                                                    
the project  to move  forward the state  will need  to spend                                                                    
money up  front to develop right-of-ways.  He felt resolving                                                                    
right-of-way issues  was essential to promoting  the project                                                                    
to a private entity.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair  Stoltze WITHDREW  his  OBJECTION.  There being  NO                                                                    
OBJECTION, it was  so ordered. The CS for HB  369 (FIN), 26-                                                                    
LS1527\C, Cook, 3/18/10CS was adopted.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
3:06:29 PM          RECESS                                                                                                    
3:07:45 PM          RECONVENED                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
Representative   Chenault  recalled   Representative  Gara's                                                                    
request to change  the language in the CS on  page 4, line 8                                                                    
to delete the word "routes". He  stated that he did not want                                                                    
to  change the  language.  He felt  that although  liquefied                                                                    
natural gas imports might become  a stop gap measure, HB 369                                                                    
was written  specifically, to develop an  in-state gas line.                                                                    
Representative Gara  announced that he supported  leaving HB
369 as a pipeline bill but  pointed out that on Page 4, line                                                                    
8 of the CS the  language called for analyzing alternatives.                                                                    
He felt  that leaving the  word routes narrowed  analysis of                                                                    
all options. He  wanted the state to be free  to analyze any                                                                    
cheaper alternatives.  Representative Chenault  offered that                                                                    
there  are a  number  of options  being  evaluated by  other                                                                    
sources.  His specific  bill dealt  with the  development of                                                                    
in-state  gas pipeline  routes not  alternative options.  He                                                                    
felt that all  of the options will be evaluated  once all of                                                                    
the information and cost analysis is gathered.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair   Hawker  interjected   that  Speaker   Chennault's                                                                    
intention was to present legislation  to promote an in-state                                                                    
gas  line not  liquefied  natural  gas importation.  Speaker                                                                    
Chenault affirmed.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
3:11:44 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Representative Doogan asked if  the pipeline project will be                                                                    
limited  in size  by  AGIA.  Representative Chenault  stated                                                                    
that  the  project would  not  be  limited  to the  500  bcf                                                                    
(billion  cubic feet)  specified  by AGIA  depending on  the                                                                    
state's involvement.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
Representative Gara referred  to page 4, lines 23  and 27 of                                                                    
the CS.  He asked  the sponsor to  consider adding  the word                                                                    
"preliminary"  before  plans on  line  23.  On line  27,  he                                                                    
requested  adding  "applying"  for   and  omit  "and  obtain                                                                    
rights-of-way  and".   He  stated  that  he   offered  these                                                                    
conceptual  amendments  as  cost saving  measures  to  limit                                                                    
ineffectual   effort   by   the  state.   Speaker   Chenault                                                                    
reiterated that it is imperative  to have the rights-of-ways                                                                    
in  place in  order to  transfer or  sell the  project to  a                                                                    
private entity. He read the following:                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
     Page  4,  lines  20-21,  "With   the  intent  that  any                                                                    
     project-related   assets  acquired   or  developed   be                                                                    
     available for transfer or sale  to the entity best able                                                                    
     to complete the project…"                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
Speaker  Chenault stressed  that if  the state  must own  or                                                                    
control right-of-ways  to support project completion  it was                                                                    
a valuable use of state funds.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Hawker  interjected that there are  not mandates in                                                                    
HB 369. He emphasized that  the bill only requires a project                                                                    
plan be  delivered to the legislature  by July 1, 2011.   He                                                                    
cautioned  that  prescribing  limits to  a  dynamic  process                                                                    
could hurt the outcome of the project.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
3:16:49 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Mr. Wright  explained that any private  entity interested in                                                                    
the feasibility of the project will do its own analysis.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Representative Austerman asked if  the bill allows the state                                                                    
to  build  and  own  the  pipeline  and  lease  it  out  for                                                                    
operation.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Representative Chenault asserted that  he would not want the                                                                    
state  to   build  the  in-state   gas  line.   However  the                                                                    
legislation does  not preclude the state  from participating                                                                    
in any form.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Representative Fairclough  referred to page 5,  lines 12-13,                                                                    
that allows for a state  agency to transfer any acquired gas                                                                    
line corridor  rights to a  private entity. She  wondered if                                                                    
that  was   a  normal  process  for   state.  Representative                                                                    
Chenault stated he did not know the answer.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Hawker  added that  the language  was added  at the                                                                    
request  of  the  Department of  Transportation  and  Public                                                                    
Facilities to clarify the department's ability to do so.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
3:20:51 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
FRANK  RICHARDS,  DEPUTY  COMMISSIONER,  HIGHWAYS  &  PUBLIC                                                                    
FACILITIES,   DEPARTMENT   OF  TRANSPORTATION   AND   PUBLIC                                                                    
FACILITIES,   explained   that   the  state   is   currently                                                                    
prohibited  to  transfer land  obtained  by  a state  agency                                                                    
through eminent domain to a private entity.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
Representative  Fairclough  referred to  Sec.38.34.050  that                                                                    
dealt   with   confidentiality.   She  observed   that   the                                                                    
development   team   will   have  access   to   confidential                                                                    
information and  pointed out that  the bill would add  a new                                                                    
layer  of  access  by   someone  other  than  commissioners.                                                                    
Representative Chenault read lines 30-31 of Sec.38.34.050.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
     "Confidential information received by the development                                                                      
     team shall be kept confidential."                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair  Hawker  closed  public testimony.  He  called  for                                                                    
discussion of  the fiscal  notes. He  referenced the  new FN                                                                    
(OOG)  dated  3/12/2010 (copy  on  file)  and noted  it  was                                                                    
indeterminate.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
Bob Swenson,  Manager, In-State  Gasline Project,  Office of                                                                    
the Governor; relayed that the  fiscal note was outdated and                                                                    
no longer applied to the CS version of the legislation.                                                                         
Co-Chair   Hawker  asked   if   the   updated  fiscal   note                                                                    
information was available. Mr. Swenson stated it was.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
Representative  Kelly  pointed   out  that  the  legislature                                                                    
previously  approved the  Governor's  requests for  in-state                                                                    
pipeline  development   funds.  He  requested   Mr.  Swenson                                                                    
delineate the expenditure of the  funds as it relates to the                                                                    
current project.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Hawker  elaborated that  the Governor  requested an                                                                    
additional  $6.5 million  dollars in  this year's  operating                                                                    
budget for  in-state gas line  development. He  informed the                                                                    
committee  that  a fiscal  note  for  the legislation  would                                                                    
incorporate  the  appropriation  request. He  requested  Mr.                                                                    
Swenson provide  a recap of the  overall fiscal requirements                                                                    
to move the project forward under the authority of HB 369.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Mr.   Swenson   summarized   the   projected   fiscal   note                                                                    
expenditures.  He stated  that the  fiscal note  total is  $                                                                    
8,000,053.  Incorporated in  that total  is $  1,000,095 for                                                                    
personal  services.  He  highlighted  the  positions  deemed                                                                    
necessary due to the accelerated  timeline for completion of                                                                    
the  project  plan.  He  listed  them  as  follows:  project                                                                    
manager,    engineering    manager,   commercial    manager,                                                                    
legislative  liaison/public  outreach officer,  finance  and                                                                    
budget   analyst,  schedule   coordinator,  and   finally  a                                                                    
technical writer.  He added that $6.8  million was requested                                                                    
for contractual services. He  noted the contractual services                                                                    
request was  similar to the entire  operating budget request                                                                    
of  6.5  million with  the  additional  amount intended  for                                                                    
market analysis. He expounded  that the contractual services                                                                    
request  was   divided  into  four  components.   The  first                                                                    
component  was completion  of  environmental and  permitting                                                                    
activities  and state  and  federal right-of-way  approvals.                                                                    
That includes  all of the  different issues involved  in the                                                                    
permitting process. The second  component of the request was                                                                    
project  management  and  engineering  data  acquisition  to                                                                    
further refine the engineering design.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
3:31:24 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
The  third  component  was refinement  of  cost  of  service                                                                    
estimates and  tariff modeling.  The component  was expanded                                                                    
to incorporate  both possible  routes. The  fourth component                                                                    
consisted  of a  complete documentation  of pipeline  assets                                                                    
for commercial offering.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Hawker wondered if the  mandates could be completed                                                                    
in one  year for  the additional approximately  $1.2 million                                                                    
over the  Governor's original  operating budget  request. He                                                                    
noted  the additional  funds were  for personal  services to                                                                    
get the work  done. Mr. Swenson stated that  was correct. He                                                                    
offered that in  reference to the fiscal note  the years out                                                                    
from FY  2011 remain  indeterminate dependent  upon outcomes                                                                    
of the plan. Co-Chair Hawker robustly concurred.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
Representative  Austerman  asked  if   it  was  possible  to                                                                    
project  the expenditures  for the  out  years. Mr.  Swenson                                                                    
voiced that the  "what if" scenario is  incredibly broad and                                                                    
depends on what part of the  project the state is willing to                                                                    
undertake. He believed it would be impossible at this time.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
3:35:25 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair  Hawker  asked  that  in reference  to  the  fiscal                                                                    
notes, if  the mission of  the bill is essentially  the same                                                                    
as the intent directive from  the legislature except for the                                                                    
accelerated  timeline  and   creation  of  clear  management                                                                    
hierarchy  and authority.  Mr. Swenson  affirmed. He  stated                                                                    
the accelerated  timeline was  worrying. The  assurance that                                                                    
an in-state  gas pipeline operational  by December  31, 2015                                                                    
was of  particular concern. The  permitting process  was out                                                                    
of  the  state's  control  and difficult  to  submit  to  an                                                                    
aggressive timeline.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
Mr. Swenson  shared that another  issue is  optimization. He                                                                    
explained that  the earliest phase  of a massive  project is                                                                    
the  most important  and affects  the costs  of the  project                                                                    
over  time. Significant  optimization effort  must be  taken                                                                    
early  on in  a  project to  save money  in  the long  term.                                                                    
Optimization  is  not  always conducive  to  an  accelerated                                                                    
timeline. He  stated that these  issues should  be addressed                                                                    
before moving forward.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Hawker  agreed. He commented  that in terms  of the                                                                    
fiscal  note it  was  basically the  same  project that  the                                                                    
administration   had  all   ready   been   working  on.   He                                                                    
ascertained  that  there  was coordination  of  fiscal  note                                                                    
preparation  with  the  other departments  involved  in  the                                                                    
project.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Representative Kelly  asked how the role  of project manager                                                                    
would interact  with the Development  Team. Mr.  Swenson was                                                                    
not certain  how the  management structure  was going  to be                                                                    
set up.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
3:44:53 PM          RECESS                                                                                                    
3:51:39 PM          RECONVENED                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
Representative Fairclough  referenced page  5, lines  12 and                                                                    
13 of the CS regarding eminent domain.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
Representative  Fairclough  wondered what  transferring  gas                                                                    
line  corridor  rights to  a  private  entity means  to  the                                                                    
state. She asked if the  state could recover those rights if                                                                    
necessary. Mr.  Richards understood  that the  contract with                                                                    
the private  entity developer  would provide  a construction                                                                    
right-of-way  and contain  a  reverter  clause. He  revealed                                                                    
that  when  construction  is  completed  the  property  will                                                                    
revert  back to  state ownership.  Representative Fairclough                                                                    
asked  if  the  contract language  adequately  protects  the                                                                    
states  interest. Mr.  Richards answered  that the  contract                                                                    
reverts  the property  rights back  to the  state even  in a                                                                    
scenario that  the project is not  completed. Representative                                                                    
Fairclough wondered if the state's  interest is protected if                                                                    
the private entity sells their  assets to another party. Mr.                                                                    
Richards did not know the answer.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
HB  369  was  HEARD  and   HELD  in  Committee  for  further                                                                    
consideration.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                

Document Name Date/Time Subjects
07 HB314 Letter AK Spine Institute 2-2-10[1].pdf HFIN 3/22/2010 1:30:00 PM
HB 314
08 HB314 Letter NFIB 1-31-10[1].pdf HFIN 3/22/2010 1:30:00 PM
HB 314
09 HB314 NCCI AK Medical Cost Comparison[1].pdf HFIN 3/22/2010 1:30:00 PM
HB 314
10 HB314 NCCI AK vs Countrywide Medical Cost per Case[1].pdf HFIN 3/22/2010 1:30:00 PM
HB 314
11 HB314 NCCI All States Medical Cost Comparison[1].pdf HFIN 3/22/2010 1:30:00 PM
HB 314
12 HB314 Letter ASMA 1-1-10[1].pdf HFIN 3/22/2010 1:30:00 PM
HB 314
13 HB314 Suggested changes ASMA 1-1-10[1].pdf HFIN 3/22/2010 1:30:00 PM
HB 314
14 HB314 Workers' Compensation Premium Rate Ranking cy 2008[1].pdf HFIN 3/22/2010 1:30:00 PM
HB 314
14 HB314 Workers' Compensation Premium Rate Ranking cy 2008[1].pdf HFIN 3/22/2010 1:30:00 PM
HB 314
15 HB314 8 AAC 45 082 Medical Treatment[1].pdf HFIN 3/22/2010 1:30:00 PM
HB 314
CSHB314 Amendment R.1.pdf HFIN 3/22/2010 1:30:00 PM
HB 314
HB314 Letter Accident-Injury Center 2-4-10.pdf HFIN 3/22/2010 1:30:00 PM
HB 314
HB314 Letter McNamara 2-3-10.pdf HFIN 3/22/2010 1:30:00 PM
HB 314
HB314 Sectional Analysis ver R.pdf HFIN 3/22/2010 1:30:00 PM
HB 314
HB314 Sponsor Statement ver R.pdf HFIN 3/22/2010 1:30:00 PM
HB 314
HB314 Summary of Changes ver A to ver R.pdf HFIN 3/22/2010 1:30:00 PM
HB 314
CSHB346 Sponsor Statement ver E.pdf HFIN 3/22/2010 1:30:00 PM
HB 346
HB346 LETTERS.pdf HFIN 3/22/2010 1:30:00 PM
HB 346
HB346 Sectional Analysis ver E.pdf HFIN 3/22/2010 1:30:00 PM
HB 346
HB346 summary of changes ver R to ver E.pdf HFIN 3/22/2010 1:30:00 PM
HB 346
HNBL HawkerStoltze HB346 3-19-10.pdf HFIN 3/22/2010 1:30:00 PM
HB 346
CS WORK DRAFT HB 369 26-LSI527 C version.pdf HFIN 3/22/2010 1:30:00 PM
HB 369
Sectional Analysis_FIN, version C HB 369.pdf HFIN 3/22/2010 1:30:00 PM
HB369CS(RES)-DEC-CO-3-16-10NEW.pdf HFIN 3/22/2010 1:30:00 PM
HB 369
HB369(RES)-DNR-SPCO-03-16-10NEW.pdf HFIN 3/22/2010 1:30:00 PM
HB 369
CSHB369(RES)-DNR-MLW-03-16-10NEW.pdf HFIN 3/22/2010 1:30:00 PM
HB 369