03/06/2024 01:00 PM House JUDICIARY
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Confirmation Hearing(s): Alaska State Commission for Human Rights | |
| HB227 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 338 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 227 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE
March 6, 2024
1:19 p.m.
DRAFT
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Sarah Vance, Chair
Representative Jamie Allard, Vice Chair
Representative Ben Carpenter
Representative Craig Johnson
Representative Jesse Sumner
Representative Andrew Gray
Representative Cliff Groh
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
CONFIRMATION HEARING(S)
Alaska state commission for human rights
William Craig - Sitka
- CONFIRMATION(S) ADVANCED
HOUSE BILL NO. 227
"An Act relating to liability of an electric utility for contact
between vegetation and the utility's facilities."
- HEARD & HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 338
"An Act relating to physician liability for gender transition
procedures performed on minors; and providing for an effective
date."
- BILL HEARING CANCELED
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 227
SHORT TITLE: ELECTRIC UTILITY LIABILITY
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) RAUSCHER
01/16/24 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/8/24
01/16/24 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/16/24 (H) ENE, JUD
01/23/24 (H) ENE AT 10:15 AM BARNES 124
01/23/24 (H) Heard & Held
01/23/24 (H) MINUTE(ENE)
01/25/24 (H) ENE AT 10:15 AM BARNES 124
01/25/24 (H) Moved HB 227 Out of Committee
01/25/24 (H) MINUTE(ENE)
01/26/24 (H) ENE RPT 4DP 3AM
01/26/24 (H) DP: BAKER, MCKAY, WRIGHT, RAUSCHER
01/26/24 (H) AM: SCHRAGE, ARMSTRONG, PRAX
03/06/24 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
WITNESS REGISTER
WILLIAM CRAIG, Appointee
Alaska State Commission for Human Rights
Sitka, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as appointee to the Alaska State
Commission for Human Rights.
REPRESENTATIVE GEORGE RAUSCHER
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 227, as the prime sponsor.
RYAN MCKEE, Staff
Representative George Rauscher
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented the sectional analysis for HB
227, on behalf of Representative Rauscher, prime sponsor.
KERIANN BAKER, Chief Strategy Officer
Homer Electric Association
Homer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Gave invited testimony during the hearing
on HB 227.
ANDY LEMAN, General Counsel
Alaska Power Association
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on HB
227.
HEATHER O'CLARAY, Statewide Right-of-Way Chief
Department of Transportation & Public Facilities
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on HB
227.
ALLISON RADFORD, Attorney
Legislative Legal Services
Legislative Affairs Agency
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on HB
227.
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:19:47 PM
CHAIR VANCE called the House Judiciary Standing Committee
meeting to order at 1:19 p.m. Representatives Sumner, Groh, and
Vance were present at the call to order. Representatives
Carpenter, C. Johnson, Gray, and Allard arrived as the meeting
was in progress.
^CONFIRMATION HEARING(S): Alaska State Commission for Human
Rights
CONFIRMATION HEARING(S): Alaska State Commission for Human
Rights
1:20:30 PM
CHAIR VANCE announced that the first order of business would be
a confirmation hearing for the Alaska State Commission for Human
Rights.
1:20:56 PM
WILLIAM CRAIG, Appointee, Alaska State Commission for Human
Rights (ASCHR), informed the committee that he had served on
ASCHR for five years and chaired one year. In addition, he
served the blind and deaf community for the past three years
advocating for legislative reform at state and federal levels.
1:22:09 PM
CHAIR VANCE asked Mr. Craig to speak to his passions.
MR. CRAIG said as a legally blind person himself, he is
passionate about issues in the blind and deaf community. He
noted that his wife is also deaf. He said he would like to see
reform of educational standards for blind children in Alaska.
1:23:55 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER asked whether the committee had been
provided with Mr. Craig's resume.
CHAIR VANCE explained that Mr. Craig did not upload his resume
because he was facing connectivity issues.
MR. CRAIG said he had an older resume from his initial ASCHR
application that should be in the state's computer systems.
1:26:11 PM
CHAIR VANCE opened public testimony on Mr. Craig's appointment.
After ascertaining that no one wished to testify, she closed
public testimony.
1:26:48 PM
CHAIR VANCE moved to advance the confirmations of William Craig,
appointee to the Alaska State Commission for Human Rights, to
the joint session of the House and Senate for consideration.
There being no objection, the confirmations were advanced. She
reminded members that signing the reports regarding appointment
to boards and commissions in no way reflects individual members'
approval of disapproval of the appointees, and that the
nominations are merely forwarded to the full legislature for
confirmation or rejection.
1:27:13 PM
The committee took an at-ease from 1:27 p.m. to 1:31 p.m.
HB 227-ELECTRIC UTILITY LIABILITY
1:31:06 PM
CHAIR VANCE announced that the final order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 227, "An Act relating to liability of an electric
utility for contact between vegetation and the utility's
facilities."
1:31:25 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GEORGE RAUSCHER, Alaska State Legislature, prime
sponsor, presented HB 227. He shared the sponsor statement
[included in the committee packet], which read as follows
[original punctuation provided]:
House Bill 227 protects Alaska's electric utilities
and their ratepayers from paying for damage caused by
vegetation that falls from outside an electric
utility's legal right-of-way and contacts a utility's
electric facilities.
If HB 227 becomes law, electric utilities would not be
liable for damage caused by vegetation outside their
easements contacting electric facilities. For
vegetation inside an easement, electric utilities
could still face liability under existing negligence
standards. In cases where the location of vegetation
or the cause of the damage is disputed, a court would
have to determine whether the protection provided by
this bill applies.
This bill does not prevent electric utilities from
being sued. It provides a court with clear direction
on when liability does and does not apply in a
situation where vegetation contacts powerlines or
other electric infrastructure. HB 227 accomplishes
this by:
.notdef making clear in statute that electric utilities may
not be held liable for costs, property damage, death,
or personal injury resulting from contact between
vegetation and the utility's facilities if the
vegetation is located or originated outside the
boundaries of the utility's real property, lease,
permit, easement, or right-of-way.
.notdef HB 227 also makes clear that a utility is not liable
for cutting, girdling, or otherwise injuring or
removing vegetation if part of the trunk of the
vegetation is inside the boundaries of the utility's
real property, lease, permit, easement, or right-of-
way.
Importantly, the bill does not preclude civil
liability if the utility itself causes vegetation to
contact the utilities' facilities.
Alaska's electric utilities diligently maintain their
rights-of-way to prevent damage to powerlines and
other infrastructure. Those electric utilities should
not be held liable for damage caused by vegetation
outside of their
legal control.
By passing HB 227, the Legislature will help protect
Alaska utilities and their ratepayers from potential
increases in rates due to a situation that is outside
the control of an electric utility.
1:34:58 PM
RYAN MCKEE, Staff, Representative George Rauscher, Alaska State
Legislature, on behalf of Representative Rauscher, prime sponsor
of HB 227, presented sectional analysis [included in the
committee packet], which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
Section 1: Amends AS 09.65 by adding a new section.
Ensures a utility offering services to the public may
not be held liable for property damage, death, or
personal injury if vegetation outside the utility's
right-of-way falls onto a utility's facilities unless
the utility caused the vegetation to fall. It also
allows a utility to remove vegetation if the trunk
straddles the right of way.
Section 2: Amends the uncodified law of the State of
Alaska. This section outlines that the act will apply
to civil lawsuits against electric utilities filed on
or after the effective date.
1:36:19 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD asked, "How far are we looking at
vegetation from being away from anything that the utilities
[are] required to clear?"
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER said there are several different widths
on both sides of the utility line.
1:37:16 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD surmised that it would depend on where the
utility structures are located. She referenced the [2023 Hawaii
wildfires] in Maui, which, she said, were started by a utility
line collapse. She asked whether the utility company would be
protected in a similar scenario or whether the individuals who
lost their homes would be made whole.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER remarked, "I don't know all the facts on
Hawaii." He shared his understanding that if a utility line in
the right of way did indeed start the fire, there would be a
liability to the utility company. He noted that the bill would
not absolve utilities from all liability. The provision would
ensure that utilities are accountable for their own actions and
encourages them to take necessary precautions for events like
Hawaii.
1:39:33 PM
KERIANN BAKER, Chief Strategy Officer, Homer Electric
Association (HEA), gave invited testimony during the hearing on
HB 227. She stated that the bill is narrowly tailored to codify
what's understood to be existing law related to property,
property damage, and negligence. She provided anecdotal
examples involving HEA, noting that most of the rights-of-way
are 10 feet on each side. She clarified that the bill would
protect utilities, like HEA, from being held liable if a
person's unmaintained property damaged HEA's lines. She added
that HEA is careful about entering private property to clear its
lines. If a hazard tree is found to be endangering the
utility's line, it is taken down but not removed to avoid
passing additional costs onto members. She shared statistics on
outages and said the goal is to provide reliable service in a
responsible manner. She explained that if HEA were negligent in
maintaining its property and caused damages, the company would
be liable. She stated that the bill would provide a very
narrowly codified exemption for private property that causes
damage to a utility.
1:44:32 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SUMNER asked whether a tree rooted entirely on
private property could be taken down.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER deferred to Ms. Baker.
1:45:46 PM
MS. BAKER explained that if a tree were on private property
outside of the right of way, HEA would talk to the property
owner. She discussed the hazard tree program that allows
citizens to report dangerous trees to be inspected and removed
if given the permission to do so.
1:47:01 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SUMNER said by his reading of the bill, the
utility company could cut down any part of the trunk that is in
the easement.
CHAIR VANCE highlighted page 1, line 11 of the bill, indicating
that there would be an exemption for [cutting down] a limb if
the trunk originated outside of the boundaries.
REPRESENTATIVE SUMNER directed attention to subsection (b) on
page 1, lines 13-14, which outlines a separate exemption.
1:48:19 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRAY asked how many times Alaska utility
companies had been held liable for vegetation on private
property that fell or blew into the utilities. He sought to
quantify the size of the problem in Alaska.
1:49:02 PM
ANDY LEMAN, General Counsel, Alaska Power Association (APA),
said he was familiar with at least two lawsuits brought against
Alaska utilities.
REPRESENTATIVE GRAY asked how many states had implanted this
policy.
MR. LEMAN shared his belief that no other state had passed a
bill like HB 227. He noted Alaska's uniquely challenging
service conditions due to the vast and sparsely populated
service areas. Additionally unique is the fact that almost all
the state's electric utilities are community owned. He said the
bill would be an opportunity for Alaska to be a leader.
REPRESENTATIVE GRAY referenced a previous version of the
legislation, House Bill 29, and asked how feasible it would be
to reduce risk by moving all underground power lines.
MR. LEMAN explained that constructing underground lines is
dramatically more expensive than overhead lines. He said it
would not be a practical solution in rural areas.
1:52:16 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRAY asked whether immunity could be provided to
utilities for trespassing near the right of way to cut down
vegetation.
MR. LEMAN said that would be problematic, as utilities already
face challenges when they have the legal right to operate within
their easements.
CHAIR VANCE questioned the cost of liabilities and settlements
and whether those costs are transferred to rate payers.
MS. BAKER said outages are a reliability issue and stressed that
utilities want the power to remain on. She shared a personal
anecdote in which a tree was accidentally taken down on private
property. She opined that the property owner should be
maintaining the property to prevent the cost of inspections and
removals from being passed on to members.
1:57:38 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GROH questioned the legality of a utility line
breaking and contacting vegetation outside the right of way,
which causes a fire.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER deferred the question.
MR. LEMAN said the intent of the bill is to protect the utility
that's maintaining its right of way from vegetation outside the
right of way, as opposed to protecting from something going
wrong with the utility system.
CHAIR VANCE asked Ms. O'Claray to respond to Representative
Groh's question.
2:01:00 PM
HEATHER O'CLARAY, Statewide Right-of-Way Chief, Department of
Transportation & Public Facilities (DOT&PF), directed the
question to Legislative Legal Services.
2:01:31 PM
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER directed attention to subsection (c) on
page 2 of the bill, which clarifies that civil liability would
not be precluded if a utility causes vegetation to contact the
utility's facilities.
REPRESENTATIVE GROH asked whether it would make sense to include
provisions providing for a vegetation management plan or an
auditor survey of vegetation to be conducted by the utility in
question.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER opined that prescribing a specific plan
for all utility companies would be unfathomable.
MS. BAKER assured the committee that HEA has a vegetation
management plan that is not random. She cautioned against
making a utility the party that monitors private property, as
property owners are responsible for maintenance. She reiterated
that the high cost of such a proposal would be passed on to rate
payers and suggested that if the committee were to go down that
road, funds should be allocated to allow that job to be done.
2:07:46 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER pointed out that the bill is written in
the negative, making it difficult to understand. He asked
whether the property owner is currently liable for damages
caused be hazard trees that exist outside the right of way that
may come into contact with utility lines or equipment.
2:09:20 PM
The committee took a brief at-ease.
2:10:39 PM
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER clarified that the bill speaks to what
goes on inside the right of way and does not address the
liability of homeowners, state property, or federal property
outside the right of way.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER said he would like to hear from
Legislative Legal Services.
2:12:26 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD expressed concern about subsection (b) on
page 1, line 13 of the bill. In addition, she opined that an
audit would be fiscally unreasonable and an intrusion on
Alaskans' privacy.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER shared his understanding that the
trunk's location is what matters, not the branches.
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD said she was more concerned about the
roots, as she had seen roots destroy entire foundations and
homes.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER said, "I think if we have to dig the
ground up to find out who actually owns this tree or not, it's
kind of defeating the purpose."
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER perceived the statute to be erring on
the side of the property owner. He said property rights would
be given "the first call" on a tree encroaching the right of
way.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER asked whether property owners have
legal liability for damages caused by trees existing outside the
right of way that may come into contact with utility lines.
2:18:26 PM
ALLISON RADFORD, Attorney, Legislative Legal Services,
Legislative Affairs Agency (LAA), offered to follow up with the
requested information.
MS. BAKER explained that if a tree trunk was located outside the
right of way, but the limbs were encroaching on the right of
way, HEA would remove all limbs passing the plane of the
easement. She reiterated that the utility company does not
perform vegetation management on private property because all
costs would be passed on to members.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER asked whether a property owner is
currently liable for a tree on his/her property that falls into
utility lines and starts a fire.
MS. RADFORD offered to follow up with the requested information.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER asked whether the bill would provide a
pathway for a property owner to be held liable for damages
caused by hazard trees.
2:22:29 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SUMNER asserted that the bill would clarify that
utilities are not liable for trees outside the right of way. He
added that existing liability conditions for trees inside the
right of way or property owners of trees outside the right of
way would not change.
REPRESENTATIVE GROH agreed with Representative Sumner.
2:24:09 PM
REPRESENTATIVE C. JOHNSON pointed out that "right of way" and
"easement" were being used interchangeably. He asked for the
legal definition of both terms.
MS. O'CLARAY deferred to Legislative Legal Services.
MS. RADFORD said the bill is silent on that.
MR. LEMAN stated that the terms are used interchangeably. He
claimed that "right of way" is associated with the right to
cross a piece of property, while "easement" is the right to do
something on another's piece of property other than cross it.
He explained that both terms allow utilities to maintain lines
on property that they do not own title to.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER agreed that "right of way" and
"easement" are used interchangeably.
REPRESENTATIVE C. JOHNSON said he was still unclear on the
delineation.
2:31:51 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRAY posed a hypothetical scenario and said he
wanted to make homeowners aware that that they would be held
liable "if a whole city burns down."
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER reiterated that the bill would not
impose liability onto anyone. Instead, it would make clear that
utilities could not be held responsible for something that
originated outside the right of way.
REPRESENTATIVE GRAY shared his belief that utility companies are
more of an expert on hazardous vegetation.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER agreed, adding that utilities already
[share their expertise] with property owners.
2:36:01 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER asked whether subsection (b) suggests
that utilities are prevented from removing a tree that is
partially in the right of way.
MS. BAKER said if a tree is straddling the line, HEA will
usually clear it. She shared an example, reiterating that
utilities need permission to clear anything outside the right of
way.
2:39:32 PM
REPRESENTATIVE C. JOHNSON shared his belief that this stemmed
from a California ruling that held a utility company responsible
for starting a fire due to fallen lines, which resulted in the
utility filing for bankruptcy. He perceived the bill as an
attempt to indemnify utilities in Alaska against catastrophic
events or malfeasance. He said he was not prepared to let
anyone off the hook.
MR. MCKEE answered no, this did not stem from that event. He
clarified that the legislation would ensure that utilities are
not held liable for damages caused by something outside their
property.
2:43:23 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD asked whether the purpose of the bill is
to prevent lawsuits in the future and "put it back on the
homeowners."
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER cited beetle-kill trees as one of the
main reason's for the bill. He reiterated that property owners
would still have the same liabilities whether or not the bill
were to pass. If anything, the bill would give power companies
the right to cut down trees with branches hanging in the way of
a power line. As long as utilities are keeping their equipment
up to date and their rights of way clear, he said the bill would
say "they did their job."
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD said she read the bill differently than
the bill sponsor and expressed concern for the homeowners.
2:49:04 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER said his understanding of the word
"liable" had shifted after reading the language. He stated that
the bill would clarify that utilities cannot be sued for damages
caused by trees outside the right of way or removing a tree that
is partially or completely inside the right of way.
MS. RADFORD confirmed that Representative Carpenter's
understanding is correct.
CHAIR VANCE asked whether the bill would remove any criminal
liability from the utility.
MS. RADFORD said the bill does not address that question.
2:50:34 PM
REPRESENTATIVE suggested there should be an "act of god clause"
to cover certain incidents, such as those caused by high wind.
CHAIR VANCE asked who owns the utility companies in Alaska.
MR. LEMAN said most Alaskans receive electric utility service
through member-owned cooperatives; other electric utilities are
municipally owned. He noted that there are a handful of
investor-owned utilities as well.
CHAIR VANCE reminded the committee that if member-owned
utilities tried to shirk their duties, the cost would fall on
rate payers. She said legally, there is a different landscape
to consider.
2:54:23 PM
REPRESENTATIVE C. JOHNSON requested that someone from the
Division of Insurance come before the committee to address the
bill's impact on homeowners' insurance.
2:55:10 PM
CHAIR VANCE announced that HB 227 would be held over.
2:55:48 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Judiciary Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 2:55 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 227 - Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HJUD 3/6/2024 1:00:00 PM |
HB 227 |
| HB 227 - v.A.pdf |
HJUD 3/6/2024 1:00:00 PM |
HB 227 |
| HB 227 - Sectional Analysis.pdf |
HJUD 3/6/2024 1:00:00 PM |
HB 227 |
| HB 227 - Fiscal Note (01-20-24).pdf |
HJUD 3/6/2024 1:00:00 PM |
HB 227 |
| HB 227 - Electric Utility Liability Info White Paper.pdf |
HJUD 3/6/2024 1:00:00 PM |
HB 227 |
| HB 227 - APA Support.pdf |
HJUD 3/6/2024 1:00:00 PM |
HB 227 |
| William Craig Human Rights App_Redacted.pdf |
HJUD 3/6/2024 1:00:00 PM |
|
| Rebecca Carrillo Human Rights App_Redacted.pdf |
HJUD 3/6/2024 1:00:00 PM |
|
| Rebecca Carrillo Human Rights Resume_Redacted.pdf |
HJUD 3/6/2024 1:00:00 PM |