Legislature(1999 - 2000)
04/29/1999 09:09 AM Senate FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SENATE BILL NO. 133
"An Act creating and providing for the Alaska Energy
Conservation Commission and transferring to it the
powers and duties of the Alaska Public Utilities
Commission and the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation
Commission; repealing the Alaska Public Utilities
Commission and the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation
Commission; relating to regulation of waste collection
and disposal; relating to the powers of the chair of
the Alaska Energy Conservation Commission; relating to
the appellate procedures of the Alaska Energy
Conservation Commission; and providing for an
effective date."
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 133(RES)
"An Act creating and providing for the Alaska Energy
Conservation Commission and transferring to it certain
powers and duties of the Alaska Public Utilities
Commission; transferring regulation of pipelines to
the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission;
repealing the Alaska Public Utilities Commission;
relating to regulation of waste collection and
disposal; relating to the powers of the chair of the
Alaska Energy Conservation Commission; relating to the
appellate procedures of the Alaska Energy Conservation
Commission; and providing for an effective date."
Senator DRUE PEARCE was invited to join the committee.
Senator Wilken advised the committee that he had a conflict
of interest regarding this bill. Co-chair Torgerson
advised that the Secretary would note the conflict for the
record.
Senator Pearce continued. She said this bill was an
attempt to streamline government by re-structuring the
Alaska Public Utilities Commission and the Alaska Oil & Gas
Conservation Commission into one commission, the Alaska
Energy Conservation Commission. The combination of both
agencies will improve the long term function, effectiveness
and efficiency of both commissions.
The repeal of the APUC and the creation of the Alaska
Energy conservation Commission will occur effectively July
1, l999. However, the AOGCC will not merge with the APUC
at this time and will require subsequent legislation to do
so. The Legislature will authorize LB&A to work on a
transition report to be delivered to the Governor and the
Legislature on the first day of the second session of the
21st Legislature. The Governor shall appoint one
commissioner from each commission to work with LB&A on the
transition report. The report shall contain
recommendations for re-structuring the two commissions into
one. It is the intent of the Legislature to introduce
legislation during the second session that would combine
the two commissions based on the recommendations of LB&A.
She further said that the AOGCC will physically move to the
same location as the APUC as soon as possible but not later
than July 1, 2000. The two commissions will share record
keeping facilities and clerical staff after that time. She
explained that the Chairman of the AECC shall be paid an
annual salary equal to Range 27, Step C. All other
commissioners shall be paid according to their current pay
status. (Senator Pearce continued reading her sponsor
statement into the record.)
She advised the committee that she has submitted seven
amendments introduced through Co-chair Torgerson. Co-chair
Torgerson said he would rather hear any further testimony
regarding this bill before taking up the amendments.
Amendment #1 dealt with appeals. The commission, however,
would decide whether an appeal could be filed or not.
There were other methods for appeals such as through the
Court.
Senator Adams asked if the panel decision would have to go
back to the full commission. Senator Pearce responded only
in specific and discreet instances.
Amendment #2 would require a management information system.
Amendment #3 would set the term for a member to serve.
Amendment #4 would establish that the commission could
contract for and engage the services of consultants and
experts that the commission deemed necessary.
Amendment #5 would establish a public advocacy section.
This would delineate supervision of staff and also the
director duties.
Amendment #6 would cover the use of a formal hearing being
held before an arbitrator designated for a specific
purpose.
Amendment #7 would allow the commission to adopt
regulations that would establish standards of timeliness
for the types of cases that come before the commission.
Senator Pearce said she did not feel it wise to set too
timely and stringent deadlines. There are always special
cases that emergency regulations could be adopted.
At this point, Senator Pearce commended the hard work of
Pat Carter, her staff.
Co-chair Torgerson asked Senator Green to explain her
amendment #8. Senator Green said it would remove "relating
to regulation of waste collection and disposal". She spoke
with the sponsor who was agreeable to the offering of this
amendment.
Senator Adams asked if communities around the State had the
expertise to regulate their own garbage? Senator Green
responded. She said it would leave all existing measure
regarding garbage as it was according to statute.
Senator Pearce said that it in her days in the House there
was a lot of time spent on "garbage". She felt local
governments should be allowed to deal with their
"timeliness" garbage problems on their own.
Senator Pearce further explained that she has worked very
closely with the Administration regarding this bill. She
said she believed that upon the repeal of the commission
the fiscal note would go away. She said the matter of the
fiscal notes would involve designated receipts.
Senator Adams asked if this would include costs of moving
the office from one into the other. Senator Pearce said
the money for relocation was in SB 134.
GINNY FAY, Legislative Liaison, Office of the Commissioner,
Department of Commerce and Economic Development was invited
to join the committee. She said they basically supported
the bill, however the primary concern was maintaining the
integrity of the services offered by these two commissions.
Other concerns were deregulation of garbage; advocacy of
staff; supporting the change in the authority of the chair.
However, they do think the Governor should appoint the
chair.
She referred to HB 183 and noted they had a preference for
the language regarding "removal" there. Another issue not
quite resolved was the decision of the attorneys to
represent the new commission. It was believed that the
agency should be treated like other agencies and work with
the Attorney General rather than the agency be allowed to
contract out to a private attorney.
Senator Adams asked if that could be made optional and Ms.
Fay said it could be.
Senator Pearce was invited back before the committee. She
explained that it was not their intent for the commission
to hire outside attorneys. It was expected the agency
would use the Attorney General. The commissioners had
suggested that they be allowed to hire their own legal
staff, however this would pose some problems. To further
explain, the "removal" language was the same as AOGCC.
Ms. Fay said they felt the "removal" language of AOGCC was
also better.
Senator Phillips returned to the fiscal note.
(Tape #114, side A switched to side B at log #590.)
Senator Phillips was concerned about a zero note. Senator
Pearce responded. Both agencies would need additional
staff and the amount of work could not be controlled. One
should be happy there was such an increase. She explained
the regulatory cost charge and there would not be any
momentary cost savings.
Senator Phillips further queries. He said it looked to him
that two offices were being moved to one location; he
associated mergers with savings. If the goal is not being
achieved he had other questions. Senator Pearce said it
was difficult to guess the changes and savings until the
merger actually happened.
Co-chair Torgerson asked testimony be kept brief as there
were several left to testify.
ERIC YOULD, ARECA was invited to join the committee. He
said they basically supported the bill. They did question
the compatibility of the two organizations.
(Co-chair Torgerson passed the gavel to Senator Donley at
approximately 10:15 a.m.)
Mr. Yould continued. He said there were some very
important dockets and did not want to see them diluted.
They would also rather see the merged name a little more
basic. Another issue they strongly concurred with was the
inclusion of a strong management information system.
Senator Adams will sponsor the information of proposed
amendments being suggested by the testifier (Eric Yould).
The secretary logged this in as amendment #9 by Senator
Adams.
JUDY BRADY, AOGCC testified via teleconference from
Anchorage. AOGCC was operating fine and she hoped that
the Legislature would deal with the right merger lines
regarding APUC. She related a time when the AOGCC was
going to be placed in the Department of Natural Resources.
She felt the function of the two groups was completely
different from each other. She said the sponsor has not
dealt with the AOGCC expertise correctly. The combination
of the two agencies has not been properly considered.
There were other concerns regarding the transfer of the
pipeline from APUC to AOGCC without a review by LB&A. She
hoped there would be sufficient time for them to comment on
this concern specifically during the legislative process.
Integrity of the companies was important during the change.
Senator Phillips asked that Ms. Brady send her comments in
written form to the committee. She responded that it would
be preferable for them. Senator Phillips said he would
call Ms. Brady and discuss this issue further with her.
MARK WORESTER, ARCO Alaska, testified via teleconference
from Anchorage. He said his testimony was related to
production. ARCO appreciates the recognition in the latest
draft of the bill, however, they do not understand nor
desire the rushing into the combination of the two
commissions without further consideration and study. ARCO
is concerned with the transfer to AOGCC. He said a good
understanding of the functions of AOGCC and APUC should be
considered before any merger. APUC focuses on access and
charges for intrastate shipping. ARCO does not feel there
has been enough time to study merger of pipeline.
TIM COOK, APUC testified via teleconference from Anchorage.
He advised he only wanted to observe. STEVE MULDER via
teleconference from Anchorage was only available for
observation.
DOUGLAS NEELEY, testified from Glennallen. He asked
Senator Green directly regarding "garbage". Co-chair
Torgerson responded that Senator Green's amendment #8 would
leave law and statute regarding "garbage" as is. He said
they are not in a borough, municipality and need some sort
of regulation to protect their area.
(There was brief miscellaneous discussion between Mr. Neely
and the committee.)
SHARON DANIEL, representing Copper Basin Refuse, testified
from Glennallen. She said she supported amendment #8 by
Senator Green. She felt regulations were needed.
Co-chair Torgerson advised he would HOLD the bill in
committee.
(pause on record)
Co-chair Torgerson then called HB 94.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|