Legislature(1999 - 2000)
05/03/1999 03:23 PM House L&C
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 183 - ALASKA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION [Contains discussion relevant to SB 133.] Number 0623 CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG announced the committee's next order of business is HB 183, "An Act relating to the powers and duties of the chair of the Alaska Public Utilities Commission; relating to membership on the Alaska Public Utilities Commission; and relating to the annual report of the Alaska Public Utilities Commission." CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG indicated that the committee would be working off Version I of HB 183. He announced that Amendment 3 was adopted at the last meeting and Amendment 1 which was amended is back before the committee. He asked if Amendment 1 was amended by deleting the 60 days. JANET SEITZ, Legislative Assistant for Representative Rokeberg, Alaska State Legislature, pointed out that the action was to delete lines 12 through 14 on Amendment I.1, which if left in would have deleted the 60 and inserted the 30, which refer to the days within which the commission shall enter its order. CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG asked if it was left at 30. MS. SEITZ replied that it was left at 60. CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG indicated that the committee still has before it Amendment 1, which is amended and deletes the 30 and retains the 60. He noted that Representative Murkowski has an additional amendment to Amendment 1. The following is Amendment 1, labeled 1-LS0764\I.1, Cramer, 4/28/99, as amended by the committee on 4/28/99, which reads: Amendment 1, labeled 1-LS0764\I.1, Cramer, 4/28/99, as amended by the committee on 4/28/99, read: Page 1, line 5, following ";": Insert "relating to timely action by the Alaska Public Utilities Commission;" Page 3, line 26: Delete "a new subsection" Insert "new subsections" Page 3, lines 28 - 30: Delete ", the chair of the commission shall promptly fix a date for hearing when a hearing is appropriate. The hearing shall be without undue delay. The" Insert "for which a hearing is clearly warranted, the chair of the commission shall assign a priority rating to the issue and promptly fix a date for hearing. The hearing shall be expedited in accordance with the priority rating. Regardless of the priority rating, a" Page 4, following line 2: Insert a new subsection to read: "(c) Unless to do so would violate the due process rights of a party, the commission shall ensure that its dockets are closed in a timely fashion and not delayed due to inaction, complexity of issues, or another reason. Failure of a commission member to comply with this subsection constitutes grounds for removal from the commission under AS 42.05.035. The chair of the commission may dismiss a commission employee for failure to comply with this subsection." Number 0675 REPRESENTATIVE MURKOWSKI recommended that they delete the language in new subsection (c) of the above amendment following the word "inaction". Therefore, subsection (c) would read, "the commission shall ensure that its dockets are closed in a timely fashion and not delayed due to inaction." She also wanted to entertain a discussion on whether to delete the language, "Failure of a commission member to comply with this subsection constitutes grounds for removal from the commission under AS 42.05.035. The chair of the commission may dismiss a commission employee for failure to comply with this subsection." CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG wondered if Representative Murkowski's amendment to the amendment had been adopted. Number 0744 REPRESENTATIVE MURKOWSKI indicated that her amendment had not been adopted. She stated that her amendment to the amendment is to eliminate the remainder of the language after the word, "inaction", on line 19 of the printed amendment. CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG wondered if the remainder of the language was possibly an amendment to the amendment. REPRESENTATIVE MURKOWSKI said that the amendment to the amendment is a period after the word, "inaction", in the new subsection (c). CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG clarified that the amendment to the amendment is to delete the language, "complexity of issues, or another reason." He asked if there was any objection to the second amendment to the amendment. There being no objection, the second amendment to the amendment was adopted. Number 0783 REPRESENTATIVE MURKOWSKI noted that there was discussion on the language, "Failure of a commission member to comply with this subsection constitutes grounds for removal from the commission under AS 42.05.035. The chair of the commission may dismiss a commission employee for failure to comply with this subsection." She indicated that after making the amendment to the amendment she doesn't have as much problem with the additional language. CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG referred to a memorandum from Teresa Cramer, Legislative Counsel, dated April 28, 1999, that speaks to certain internalized sanctions within the commission. Ms. Cramer developed the one patterned after the salary warrant, where a judge's salary could be withheld until an opinion was issued. Number 0844 REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS inquired as to how a commissioner would be delayed by inaction. REPRESENTATIVE MURKOWSKI referred to HB 183, version I, under "Removal of commissioners", it states, "The governor may remove a commissioner from office only for cause, including incompetence, neglect of duty, or misconduct in office." She indicated that she changed her mind and would like to delete the last two sentences of the amendment. CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG referred to the last sentence which states, "The chair of the commission may dismiss a commission employee for failure to comply with this subsection." He pointed out there is a difference between commission members and commission employees. REPRESENTATIVE MURKOWSKI agreed, and noted that commission employees aren't addressed. Number 0938 REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO indicated that the commission employees would already be responsible for following the direction of their supervisors. CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG commented that it is almost redundant. REPRESENTATIVE MURKOWSKI agreed with Representative Halcro. CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG asked whether Representative Murkowski wanted to move the third amendment to the amendment. REPRESENTATIVE MURKOWSKI made a motion to adopt the third amendment to the amendment and delete, "Failure of a commission member to comply with this subsection constitutes grounds for removal from the commission under AS 42.05.035. The chair of the commission may dismiss a commission employee for failure to comply with this subsection." REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO objected for a question. He asked, "So, by removing this, we still leave intact, of course, the underpinnings of the removal of commissioners, correct?" CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG replied yes. REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO removed his objection. CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG wondered whether there was any reason that the first sentence coudn't be removed. REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO stated that the second sentence, "The chair of the commission may dismiss a commission employee for failure to comply with this subsection," is redundant. Number 1059 CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG stated that there being no further objection, the third amendment to the amendment was adopted. CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG referred to the language on lines 17 through 19 of the printed amendment which states, "Unless to do so would violate the due process rights of a party, the commission shall ensure that its dockets are closed in a timely fashion and not delayed due to inaction complexity of issues, or another reason." All the language seems superfluous. He recommended a fourth amendment to the amendment, which would delete the whole paragraph, "Unless to do so would violate the due process rights of a party, the commission shall ensure that its dockets are closed in a timely fashion and not delayed due to inaction complexity of issues, or another reason. Failure of a commission member to comply with this subsection constitutes grounds for removal from the commission under AS 42.05.035. The chair of the commission may dismiss a commission employee for failure to comply with this subsection." There being no objection, the fourth amendment to the amendment was adopted. Number 1139 REPRESENTATIVE MURKOWSKI informed the committee that she spoke with Mr. Zobel and had asked him if he thought the priority issue was reasonable. Mr. Zobel said it is already done informally in the commission and in his opinion, the language is not a problem and is perhaps helpful. REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS made a motion to adopt Amendment I.1 as amended, which read: Page 1, line 5, following ";": Insert "relating to timely action by the Alaska Public Utilities Commission;" Page 3, line 26: Delete "a new subsection" Insert "new subsections" Page 3, lines 28-30: Delete ", the chair of the commission shall promptly fix a date for hearing when a hearing is appropriate. The hearing shall be held without undue delay. The" Insert "for which a hearing is clearly warranted, the chair of the commission shall assign a priority rating to the issue and promptly fix a date for hearing. The hearing shall be expedited in accordance with the priority rating. Regardless of the priority rating, a" CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG asked if there was any objection. There being none, Amendment I.1 as amended was adopted. He referred to an amendment offered by Mr. Zobel in a memorandum dated May 3, 1999. He indicated that the committee has decided to hold the amendment in abeyance. Chairman Rokeberg announced his intention to hold HB 183 over until the next meeting. Number 1404 CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG asked Representative Halcro if Amendment H.8 is consistent with SB 133 and the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (AOGCC) methodology. REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO said that Amendment H.8 is consistant with SB 133. He reminded the committee that Amendment H.8 was held to get an opinion from Legislative Legal as to whether it is constitutional. He indicated that it is constitutional. The commission can elect a commissioner and then the governor would need to approve the election. The corrected amended does need to be amended to reflect the direction set forth by Legislative Legal. He made a motion to adopt amendment H.8, which read: Page 1, line 8, following "(b) The" delete "governor shall designate one member of the commission as chair. The chair shall serve as chair for a term of four years, but may be appointed for successive terms." and insert "commission shall select one member of the commission to serve as chair for a term of two years. A commissioner may be elected to successive terms as chair of the commission." REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS objected for the purpose of discussion. REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO stated that he has his own language that could be inserted to satisfy the legal need. He made a conceptual amendment to the amendment, "line 4, after the period after 'years' would insert, 'the governor shall approve the commission's selection as chair'." JONATHON LACK, Legislative Assistant for Representative Halcro, stated that it could be worded in the reverse, which would make it, "the governor may reject the commission's selection as chair." CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG pointed out that would give the governor veto power over the chair; he asked if that was the intent? REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO changed the conceptual amendment to read, "the governor may reject the commission's selection of chair." CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG asked if there was any objection. There being none, Amendment H.8 as amended was adopted. REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS requested clarification on whether the governor appoints the commissioners. REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO clarified that the governor appoints the commissioners, the commissioners elect a chair and then the governor has the option of rejecting the chair. Number 1714 LARRY MARKLEY, Alaska Rural Electric Cooperative Association (ARECA), wondered if the committee is going to consider any adjustment or amendment to the bill that would allow for Regulatory Cost Changes (RCC) proportionate to the type of cases the commission undertakes. For instance, if it's three-quarter electric and one-quarter telephone would it ... CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG interjected that the chair is not rejecting the concept, it's just that there isn't satisfactory language. REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO wondered if SB 133 reflected the proposed amendments to regulatory cost charges (RCCs). Number 1798 MR. MARKLEY responded that it moves toward what the industry is looking for. CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG interjected that it was for minimum modification, but not with that language. MR. MARKLEY indicated that he would be happy to submit a simplified amendment. CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG expressed the need to have a committee substitute before there is any more confusion, and to take up any additional amendments at the next meeting.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|