02/15/2022 10:15 AM House ENERGY
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB247 | |
| HB299 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 247 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 299 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON ENERGY
February 15, 2022
10:25 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Calvin Schrage, Chair
Representative Chris Tuck
Representative Matt Claman
Representative Zack Fields
Representative James Kaufman
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Tiffany Zulkosky
Representative George Rauscher
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 247
"An Act relating to the power cost equalization endowment fund."
- HEARD & HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 299
"An Act relating to microreactors."
- HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 247
SHORT TITLE: POWER COST EQUALIZATION FUND
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) THOMPSON
01/18/22 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/7/22
01/18/22 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/18/22 (H) ENE, FIN
02/15/22 (H) ENE AT 10:15 AM ADAMS 519
BILL: HB 299
SHORT TITLE: MICROREACTORS
SPONSOR(s): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR
02/04/22 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/04/22 (H) ENE, RES
02/08/22 (H) ENE AT 10:15 AM ADAMS 519
02/08/22 (H) Heard & Held
02/08/22 (H) MINUTE(ENE)
02/10/22 (H) ENE AT 10:15 AM ADAMS 519
02/10/22 (H) Heard & Held
02/10/22 (H) MINUTE(ENE)
02/15/22 (H) ENE AT 10:15 AM ADAMS 519
WITNESS REGISTER
REPRESENTATIVE STEVE THOMPSON
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: As prime sponsor, provided a brief
introduction to the proposed CS for HB 247, Version I.
TOM WRIGHT, Staff
Representative Steve Thompson
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided an explanation of changes and
answered questions on the proposed CS to HB 247, Version I, on
behalf of Representative Thompson, prime sponsor.
PAUL ROEGE, Executive Director
The Advanced Nuclear and Production Experts Group
Corvallis, Montana
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in support of HB 299.
MARY WOOLLEN, Director of Stakeholder Engagement
Ultra Safe Nuclear Corporation
Minneapolis, Minnesota
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in support of HB 299.
RICHARD THEILMANN, representing self
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in support of HB 299.
TRAVIS MILLION, CEO
Copper Valley Electric Association
Glennallen, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in support of HB 299.
PAMELA MILLER, Executive Director
Alaska Community Action on Toxics
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in opposition to HB 299.
ACTION NARRATIVE
10:25:46 AM
CHAIR CALVIN SCHRAGE called the House Special Committee on
Energy meeting to order at 10:25 a.m. Representatives Tuck,
Claman, Kaufman, and Schrage were present at the call to order.
Representative Fields arrived as the meeting was in progress.
HB 247-POWER COST EQUALIZATION FUND
10:26:17 AM
CHAIR SCHRAGE announced that the first order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 247, "An Act relating to the power cost
equalization endowment fund."
10:26:52 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN moved to adopt the proposed committee
substitute (CS) for HB 247, Version 32-LS1301\I, Marx, 1/26/22,
as a working document.
10:27:03 AM
CHAIR SCHRAGE objected for the purpose of discussion.
10:27:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STEVE THOMPSON, Alaska State Legislature, as
prime sponsor, stated that the proposed CS for HB 247 would help
reduce energy costs for communities receiving funds from the
Power Cost Equalization Program (PCEP). He stated that the
proposed legislation would do two things: it would remove the
$25 million cap for funds going into the Renewable Energy Fund
(REF), and it would add bulk fuel upgrades, which could be
funded through the REF. He expressed the hope that these steps
would reduce the number of PCEP participants. With this goal,
he stated, if renewable energy sources are installed,
communities would no longer require power cost equalization
(PCE), leaving more funds available to be put into the REF.
10:29:01 AM
TOM WRIGHT, Staff, Representative Steve Thompson, Alaska State
Legislature, on behalf of Representative Thompson, prime
sponsor, read the explanation of changes for the proposed CS to
HB 247, Version I, [included in the committee packet], which
read as follows [original punctuation provided]:
Section 1: Removes all references to subsection (e)
which is deleted in the I version within section 2 of
the original bill.
The $30 million to a community or revenue sharing fund
is not changed in the I version. It was relegated to a
lower position in the priorities for use of the PCE
funding in the B draft.
MR. WRIGHT interjected that after discussions with the Alaska
Energy Authority (AEA), Adult Public Assistance, and other
stakeholders, it was decided that the distribution of the PCE
fund earnings would not change in Version I. He continued with
the explanation of changes, which read as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
Version I removes the $25 million cap that is
currently in statute and adds bulk fuel upgrades to
the list of items that can be funded via the Renewable
Energy Fund.
Section 2: The I version deletes all the language
found in Section 2 of the B draft. Version B moved the
priority of the community assistance funding to a
lower priority.
Deletes subsection (f) that required the Alaska Energy
Authority to develop a methodology for prioritizing
Renewable Energy Fund grant applicants. The Authority
already has developed a methodology that is currently
being used to rank projects.
10:30:51 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KAUFMAN requested clarification regarding "bulk
fuel upgrades" in respect to renewable energy.
MR. WRIGHT responded that AEA requested this be included in the
language for the REF. Referencing the deteriorating bulk fuel
systems in communities, he said that some of these systems will
need to be replaced or restored. He explained that the large
capacity systems would allow communities to last through the
winter without relying on a fuel shipment, and buying fuel on a
larger scale would help reduce energy costs.
10:32:00 AM
REPRESENTATIVE THOMPSON, in response to Representative Claman,
confirmed that the bill would have nothing to do with
"sweepability."
10:32:25 AM
CHAIR SCHRAGE removed his objection to the motion to adopt the
proposed CS for HB 247, Version 32-LS1301\I, Marx, 1/26/22, as a
working document. There being no further objection, Version I
was before the committee.
10:32:38 AM
CHAIR SCHRAGE announced HB 247 was held over.
HB 299-MICROREACTORS
10:32:41 AM
CHAIR SCHRAGE announced the final order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 299, "An Act relating to microreactors."
CHAIR SCHRAGE opened public testimony on HB 299.
10:33:09 AM
PAUL ROEGE, Executive Director, The Advanced Nuclear and
Production Experts Group (ANPEG), shared that ANPEG is a public
and private collaboration affiliated with the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology. He stated that the charter exists to
enable a new generation of abundant resilient energy for remote
communities, value-added industries, and state and national
security. He argued that the proposed legislation could move
Alaska into a leadership role for next-generation energy. He
stated that ANPEG is ready to work through the Alaska Center for
Energy and Power to help communities understand opportunities
microreactors offer.
10:34:27 AM
MARY WOOLLEN, Director of Stakeholder Engagement, Ultra Safe
Nuclear Corporation (USNC), stated that USNC has manufactured a
micro modular reactor (MMR) specifically designed for remote
applications which are difficult to support using conventional
or renewable power. She expressed the opinion that this reactor
would be well suited for an application in Alaska, and, because
MMR is an advanced reactor, it would [align] with the proposed
legislation. She expressed excitement that USNC and Copper
Valley Electric Associate (CVEA) are jointly conducting a study
to determine the technical feasibility, social acceptance,
location cost, and operating specifics of deploying a
microreactor in the Copper Valley service area. In the
feasibility study a local Alaskan engineering firm has been
consulted to ensure there is insight into the particular
challenges in Alaska. She stated that, before entering into the
formal permitting process, USNC and CVEA are concurrently
engaging Alaskans by explaining the technology to them and
requesting their input.
MS. WOOLLEN stated that technical analysis is combined with
public engagement to begin the process of earning a "social
license," but to build and operate the reactor, a regulatory
license would be required. If the results of the feasibility
study are favorable and a financial agreement is found with
CVEA, USNC will pursue a regulatory license with the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). She cautioned that the
process is long, expensive, and rigorous, but it would ensure
the nuclear reactor system is safe and well-designed before it
would be sited. She explained that the current law in Alaska
requires legislative preapproval for siting a reactor, and this
creates a risk for any company considering the deployment of an
advanced reactor in the state. If any nuclear reactor is to be
sited in Alaska, she reiterated that it would require a
regulatory license from the NRC and support from local
communities. She said that [the passage of] HB 299 would serve
to open the door for possibilities, but it would not ensure
success. In order for success, UNSC is committed to working
with Alaskans to find solutions that would support a zero-carbon
energy system which is safe, economical, sustainable, and
embraced by the local communities.
10:37:56 AM
RICHARD THEILMANN, representing self, said that he is a "huge
advocate" for having a microreactor in Alaska. Referencing air
pollution problems, he stated that microreactors would produce
heat and electricity "at almost zero risk." He added that there
would be no refueling for 10 or 20 years, and then the
manufacturer would take "the material back out." He said, for
example, the coal-fired Aurora Plant in Fairbanks, which has a
built-in hot water tapping network for the local building, could
be eliminated, reducing the particulates in the air. He stated
if Eielson Air Force Base were to acquire [a microreactor]
another coal plant would be "out of the mix." He argued that
the idea of replacing one coal plant with a microreactor puts
Alaska "on the map" by providing heat and eliminating air
pollution.
10:40:08 AM
TRAVIS MILLION, CEO, Copper Valley Electric Association, stated,
as testimony has indicated, CVEA is considering a feasibility
study to potentially bring an advanced micronuclear reactor to
the area. He stated that over the last couple of decades CVEA
has been searching for a way to resolve wintertime energy needs.
He said the community has nearly 100 percent hydropower from May
to around the end of October, before "hydro assets freeze." He
described the summertime electricity rate as low, or less than
20 cents a kilowatt hour, but the community is "at the whim of
whatever the costs of fossil fuels are in the wintertime." For
example, he said that between December and January of this year
there was a 44 percent increase of fuel costs. He continued
that there is no predictability from month to month, and,
unfortunately, those rates are passed on [to the customers].
Currently residents are paying just over 40 cents a kilowatt
hour in the Copper River Basin and just a small percentage less
in Valdez. To stabilize and reduce energy costs for the winter,
he said CVEA has looked at wind, solar, biomass, tidal, and
other hydro opportunities, but nothing solves the problem. He
indicated that technological advancements with micronuclear
reactors could possibly be the solution, and this is why the
feasibility study is going forward. He provided that each of
Alaska's delegates in Washington D.C. has expressed excitement
about this opportunity. He stated that U.S. Senator Lisa
Murkowski has been very vocal in support of Alaska having one of
the first [microreactor] deployments in the nation.
10:43:01 AM
PAMELA MILLER, Executive Director, Alaska Community Action on
Toxics (ACAT), testified in opposition to HB 299. She argued
that micronuclear reactors are not subject to nuclear reactor
siting and permitting regulations in Alaska, which could result
in reactors being constructed on lands which have not been
designated by the legislature. She offered that ACAT holds the
belief that nuclear reactors are a serious health and safety
concern and provide a false solution for energy needs and the
climate crisis. She expressed the opinion that nuclear power is
destructive throughout its life cycle with uranium mining, the
process of enrichment, and radioactive waste disposal. She
continued that the mining process is done predominately on
Indigenous lands, and waste disposal is an untenable problem.
She stated that NRC determined Oklo Inc., a manufacturer of
micronuclear reactors, has failed to provide sufficient
information concerning potential accidents and safety systems.
She stated that microreactor vendors are pushing to reduce
personnel, such as operators and security officers. She cited a
safety report by the Union of Concerned Scientists which
determined that leaving microreactors without human guards would
be not safe. She argued that none of these reactors have
demonstrated they would be safe enough to function without
operators. She expressed the opinion that even a small nuclear
reactor would contain enough radioactive material to cause
problems. She expressed concern that the primary proponents of
the proposed legislation are representatives from the nuclear
power industry who have a vested interest. She stated that the
state is still addressing the radioactive contamination from the
experimental nuclear reactor at Fort Greely. She opined that
opening the door to nuclear power in Alaska again is unwise and
dangerous.
10:45:25 AM
CHAIR SCHRAGE closed public testimony on HB 299.
[HB 299 was held over.]
10:45:34 AM
The committee took a brief at-ease at 10:45 a.m.
10:46:00 AM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Special Committee on Energy meeting was adjourned at 10:46 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 247 Sponsor Statement (Version I).2.pdf |
HENE 2/15/2022 10:15:00 AM |
HB 247 |
| HB 247 Differences between the B and I Drafts.pdf |
HENE 2/15/2022 10:15:00 AM |
HB 247 |
| HB 247- Ver I CS Draft.pdf |
HENE 2/15/2022 10:15:00 AM HENE 3/3/2022 10:15:00 AM |
HB 247 |
| HB 247 ver B.pdf |
HENE 2/15/2022 10:15:00 AM |
HB 247 |
| HB 247-2021.12.02 REF Presentation.pdf |
HENE 2/15/2022 10:15:00 AM |
HB 247 |
| HB 247-AEA Shovel Ready Projects.pdf |
HENE 2/15/2022 10:15:00 AM |
HB 247 |
| HB 247-FY11-FY23 PCE Expenditures Operating (by Approp).pdf |
HENE 2/15/2022 10:15:00 AM |
HB 247 |
| HB 247-LFD PCE 10-Year Lookback.pdf |
HENE 2/15/2022 10:15:00 AM |
HB 247 |
| HB 247-PCE History.pdf |
HENE 2/15/2022 10:15:00 AM |
HB 247 |
| HB 247-PCE Statutes 2.pdf |
HENE 2/15/2022 10:15:00 AM |
HB 247 |
| HB 247-REF_EvaluationProcess_Overview.pdf |
HENE 2/15/2022 10:15:00 AM |
HB 247 |