Legislature(2019 - 2020)SENATE FINANCE 532
03/03/2020 09:00 AM Senate FINANCE
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB123 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | SB 123 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE
March 3, 2020
9:01 a.m.
9:01:37 AM
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair von Imhof called the Senate Finance Committee
meeting to order at 9:01 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Natasha von Imhof, Co-Chair
Senator Bert Stedman, Co-Chair
Senator Click Bishop
Senator Lyman Hoffman
Senator Donny Olson
Senator Bill Wielechowski
Senator David Wilson
MEMBERS ABSENT
None
ALSO PRESENT
Senator John Coghill, Sponsor; Rena Miller, Staff, Senator
Cathy Giessel; Senator Cathy Giessel; Representative Grier
Hopkins.
PRESENT VIA TELECONFERENCE
Antony Scott, Commissioner, Regulatory Commission of
Alaska; Julie Estey, Director of External Affairs,
Matanuska Electric Association, Representative
Organizational Development Committee, Palmer; Jeff Warner,
Municipal Light and Power, Anchorage; Chris Rose, Renewable
Energy Alaska Project, Palmer; Brian Hickey, Chief
Operating Officer, Chugach Electric Association, Big Sky,
Montana.
SUMMARY
SB 123 ELECTRIC RELIABILITY ORGANIZATIONS
SB 123 was HEARD and HELD in committee for
further consideration.
SENATE BILL NO. 123
"An Act relating to the regulation of electric
utilities and electric reliability organizations; and
providing for an effective date."
9:03:08 AM
SENATOR JOHN COGHILL, SPONSOR, introduced the legislation.
9:09:09 AM
RENA MILLER, STAFF, SENATOR CATHY GIESSEL, introduced
herself, and stated that she was working with the sponsor
on the legislation. She discussed, "SB 123: Electric
Reliability Organizations" (copy on file).
Ms. Miller looked at slide 2, "Context for SB 123":
? 2014: Legislature asked RCA to evaluate the Railbelt
network
? 2015: RCA delivered findings/recommendations to
Legislature
? 2020: RCA delivered progress report to Legislature
? SB 123 / HB 151 electric reliability organizations
(EROs)
Overall goal: Cooperation to improve reliability,
security, and efficiencies - resulting in long-term
savings to ratepayers
Ms. Miller pointed to slide 3, "SB 123 -Bill components":
?Participation (42.05.760 (a); 42.05.772)
?How an ERO forms (42.05.760 (b-f))
?Framework of an ERO (42.05.762)
?ERO responsibilities (42.05.765; 42.05.767;
42.05.770; 42.05.775; 42.05.780)
?How the RCA will process ERO activities
?Compliance and enforcement
?Project pre-approval (42.05.785)
Ms. Miller discussed slide 4, "Participation in ERO":
?Interconnected networks must have an ERO (some
exceptions)
?Public utilities in the network must participate in
the ERO
?All users, owners, operators in the network must
comply with reliability standards set by the ERO
?Railbelt primary need; legislation has general
applicability
?'Release valves' to accommodate future
9:15:07 AM
Senator Hoffman queried the reason for the requirement for
the RCA to act when a facility wanted to acquire a waiver.
He suggested that language be included for an "opt in."
Ms. Miller clarified the question.
Senator Hoffman recalled that a required ERO would allow
for the RCA to exempt them from that process. He wondered
why there was not an attempt to reverse that effort to
allow for a utility to participate in the ERO.
Ms. Miller replied that the RCA felt that it was important
when different utilities may have different positions on
whether the entities should be working together. She felt
that the benefit came from applying network-wide, so
everyone has compliance.
Senator Hoffman felt that it should be a public policy
decision, so RCA should not be making that policy decision.
Senator Bishop wondered who participated in the ERO.
Ms. Miller replied that within the Railbelt network, those
entities would be subject to that standard.
Senator Bishop wondered whether those communities that had
their own power or were not connected to the grid would be
a part of the standard.
Senator Coghill replied that they would not be a part of
it. He explained that the standard applied to the
interconnected utilities.
9:20:13 AM
Senator Wilson surmised that there were six utilities,
which could possibly be reduced to five utilities.
Ms. Miller replied that those were the six public utilities
on the Railbelt network. She noted that there were other
power providers that fed into the network that would be
subject to the standards set by the ERO.
Senator Wilson requested a list of those providers.
Ms. Miller agreed to provide that information.
Senator Wilson wondered whether there was a kilowatt per
hour minimum.
Ms. Miller replied that there was no minimum kilowatt
production standard. She stressed that it was about uniform
standard and security of the entire grid.
Senator Wielechowski wondered how this might affect a
smaller company to provide renewable energy sources.
Ms. Miller replied that there was support from independent
power producers. She stressed that those business would
need to comply with the ERO standards.
Senator Wielechowski responded that the more dominant
utilities might not be supported of smaller organizations
coming online.
Ms. Miller remarked that the bill required that the
governing board of an ERO have a very specific make up of
members. She stressed that it was designed to be an entity
that was not only made up of the specific major six
utilities.
Co-Chair von Imhof stressed that there were high costs due
to unfettered capital projects built on the Railbelt. She
noted that the larger companies had a specific constituency
representing specific boundaries. She felt that the bill
would create streamlined operations over approximately 500
miles in the event of a natural disaster for backup
transmission. She did not believe that it would keep the
small alternative energy providers out of the market,
rather it would do the opposite, because it would control
the cost of the specific members in the specific
boundaries.
Ms. Miller looked at slide 5, "Forming an ERO":
?Interested players form an organization
?Organization applies to the RCA
?RCA evaluates, certifies the organization as the ERO
?One ERO per network
?If no one applies, RCA shall form an ERO
9:30:46 AM
Ms. Miller highlighted slide 6, "ERO framework":
?Required structure in SB 123:
?Governed by independent or balanced board, or a
combination
?Open, inclusive processes
?Balancing interests
?Abilities to develop standards, integrated
resource plans
?Applicant will build on that structure
?Per RCA regulations for SB 123
Senator Hoffman wondered whether there was a structure for
the board representative of the existing utilities.
Ms. Miller looked at page 3 of the bill, which said that
the governing board needed to have the ex-officio members,
and must be formed as an independent balanced stakeholder,
or a combination board.
Senator Hoffman surmised that it would depend on the entity
that submitted its ERO plan, and would be ultimately
applied by the RCA.
Ms. Miller replied in the affirmative.
Ms. Miller discussed slide 7, "ERO responsibilities":
?RCA delegates certain work to the ERO
?RCA maintains oversight, authority, assigns tasks to
ERO
?Bottom-up approach from the network players who know
best
?ERO sets and enforces reliability standards
?ERO develops integrated resource plan
Ms. Miller addressed slide 8, "Responsibilities, cont.":
?Reliability standards for the network
?Subject to RCA approval
?ERO to enforce standards, RCA back-up
?ERO or RCA can penalize violations
?Conflict resolution
9:36:54 AM
Senator Coghill remarked that the issue was related to a
balance of authority. He stressed that there was a question
of how much authority would be granted to RCA.
Senator Hoffman requested the requirements and the
membership of the current RCA board.
Ms. Miller agreed to provide that information.
Ms. Miller continued to discuss slide 8:
?Integrated resource planning for the network
?How to meet needs at greatest value, consistent
with public interest
?Subject to RCA approval
?Items in an approved plan are 'necessary'
Senator Bishop wondered whether the section provided buy-in
from the independent power providers.
Ms. Miller replied that it was a provision that was brought
by one of the utilities supported by the group, and was
heavily endorsed by the independent power providers.
9:42:01 AM
Ms. Miller pointed to slide 9, "Project pre-approval":
?For large new generation and transmission
?Protects utilities and ratepayers
?Certifies necessity and cost-effectiveness
?Presumption for projects in an integrated resource
plan
?Some exemptions
9:45:46 AM
Ms. Miller noted a Letter of Intent (copy on file). She
explained that the letter navigated some challenging
terrain.
Senator Hoffman looked at slide 11, which said that there
were six utilities and other participants. He wondered
whether the six utilities were part of the organization,
and the rest contemplated by the legislation ex-officio.
Ms. Miller replied that the legislation did not require
participation by any particular entity.
Senator Bishop wondered whether the program had
similarities with the North American Energies Reliability
Council groups in the Lower 48.
Senator Coghill replied in the affirmative, but it fit into
Alaska's needs. He explained that it gave new authority to
a reliability organization and to RCA.
9:51:03 AM
ANTONY SCOTT, COMMISSIONER, REGULATORY COMMISSION OF ALASKA
(via teleconference), (RCA) discussed the presentation, "SB
123" (copy on file). He looked at slide 2, "RCA's Purpose":
? Effectively competitive markets produce economically
efficient outcomes that generally reflect the "public
interest
? Public utilities are "natural monopolies" that are
not, and cannot generally be, subject to effective
competition (it is a technology issue)
? RCA's statutes are intended to enable us to ensure
that prices, quality, and other terms of service
reflect the results of a would result if the market
were fully, effectively competitive
? Big stakes: Railbelt consumers spent more than $880
million in 2018
9:55:54 AM
Commissioner Scott highlighted slide 3, "How We Got Here":
? In 2014 the Legislature directed the RCA to
investigate:
"whether creating an independent system operator
or similar structure for electrical utilities in
the Railbelt area is the best option for
effective and efficient electrical transmission"
? In 2015 RCA made Findings and Recommendations to the
Legislature
? Just before this session Chairman Pickett updated
the Legislature on progress to date towards the RCA's
original recommendations
o Letter was unanimously endorsed and reflects
the views of the Commission
? SB 123 is an outgrowth of learnings and progress to
date
? Commission has twice unanimously voted to support SB
123
Commissioner Scott addressed slide 4, "RCA's 2015
Findings":
? Balkanized Railbelt ownership across six utilities
creates inefficiencies
o Insufficient coordination across utilities
results in inconsistent, inadequate, and
unenforceable electric reliability standards
o Insufficient integration between utilities
curtails ability to ensure that planning and
construction of new generation and transmission
assets within one service territory is optimal
for the system as a whole
o Interconnected transmission infrastructure
benefits everyone, but there is not a good
business model to ensure cost recovery
o Insufficient coordination and integration
across utilities hinders ability to maximize
efficient operation of existing generators to
meet load
10:01:51 AM
Commissioner Scott addressed slide 5, "Regulatory
Commission of Alaska 2015 Recommendations":
? Need consistent and enforceable operating and
reliability standards
? Need an independent transmission company to own,
finance and operate a single transmission tariff
(facilitates economic dispatch, ensures adequate and
efficient transmission infrastructure)
? Clarify RCA's authority to require integrated
resource planning, and large project preapproval
("siting authority"), to ensure major new
infrastructure is most efficient for the benefit of
all
? Need new institutions to provide for security
constrained economic dispatch (most efficient
generators run regardless of ownership
? Allow time for voluntary efforts to succeed
Commissioner Scott addressed slide 6, "Progress to Date":
?Voluntary efforts have laid the groundwork for
institutional reform
o Greater understanding among all the parties of
issues, barriers, and potential solutions to the
suite of issues the RCA described
o Railbelt utilities reached consensus in 2018 to
form an electric reliability organization that
includes non-utility stakeholder members
? Voluntary efforts have not resulted in institutional
reform
o Although the two sets of Railbelt reliability
standards were reconciled, enforcement mechanisms
are lacking, and areas of concern remain.
o Efforts to form an independent transmission
company have failed
o Progress on an Anchorage based "tight pool",
let alone Railbelt wide security constrained
merit order dispatch, have stalled
10:05:39 AM
Commissioner Scott highlighted slide 7, "SB 123: Cements
and ensures progress":
Utility MOU in 2018 contemplated role for RCA that
was not possible
? SB 123 enables the MOU's intent by enhancing
RCA jurisdiction, consistent with RCA's 2015 and
2020 recommendations
? Bill substantially modeled on Federal
legislation
? Substantively addresses:
o Consistent and enforceable reliability
standards
o Integrated resources planning to identify
optimal new infrastructure needs
o Requires RCA preapproval for large
infrastructure projects
o Provides a pathway towards solving the
'business model' problem for new
transmission, and would improve prospects
for economic dispatch
Commissioner Scott pointed to slide 8, "SB 123: Ensures
Institutional Reform":
? Defines the ERO as a public utility, subject to RCA
regulation
? Provides definitive timetable for the RCA to
designate an applicant to be an ERO, which would:
o Develop reliability standards to be considered
by the Commission
o Enforce reliability standards, subject to
appeal to the Commission
o Draft Integrated Resource Plans to be
considered by the Commission
? If an ERO has not applied for designation SB 123
gives the RCA power to form one, consistent with
regulations that it will promulgate
o Backstop to ensure timely and certain progress
10:10:33 AM
Commissioner Scott looked at slide 9, "SB 123: Incentives
for Collaborative Efforts":
? The RCA would not delegate authority to the ERO for
reliability and planning.
? The RCA would instead assign most of this work to
the ERO and would generally follow the EROs lead, but:
? RCA could impose remedy in the event of inaction,
insufficient progress, disputes, or insufficient
attention to the public interest.
? Imposition of project preapproval requirements, with
presumption of necessity for projects consistent with
an IRP, creates incentives to participate in and take
seriously the planning process.
Commissioner Scott looked at slide 10, "SB 123 Builds on
and Meshes with Utility Act":
? Reliability standards would be filed as tariffs for
approval, which trigger (among other things):
o Nondiscrimination requirements
o Public notice requirements
o Timeline for action requirements
o A process for the commission to further
investigate and adjudicate contentious issues if
necessary
? The overwhelming majority of tariff filings made
with the commission are summarily approved after
public notice and without investigation, 45 days after
filing.
? Timelines and processes for IRP and large project
preapproval are also clearly defined, consistent with
existing commission practice.
Commissioner Scott replied to some questions from the
committee members.
10:16:48 AM
Commissioner Scott addressed a question from Senator
Wielechowski about independent power producers. He
explained that the bill would normalize the grid, and
should not affect the independent power producers.
Commissioner Scott replied to a question from Senator
Wilson about whether the program would affect individual
homeowners who may have rooftop solar. He stated that it
would not affect those individuals. He stressed that the
ERO would set standards for the market participants on the
system.
10:21:57 AM
JULIE ESTEY, DIRECTOR OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS, MATANUSKA
ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION, REPRESENTATIVE ORGANIZATIONAL
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, PALMER (via teleconference),
discussed, "Railbelt Reliability Council and Enabling
Legislation, Senate Finance Committee, March 3, 2020" (copy
on file). She addressed slide 2, "Presentation Outline":
?What are we trying to accomplish?
?Progress to date
?The Railbelt Reliability Council (RCC)
?Next steps for the RRC
?Our request of the legislature
?Thoughts on SB123 and HB151
Ms. Estey pointed to slide 3, "What is the Railbelt
Electric System?" She stated that the slide showed the map
of the electric system, which was an 800 megawatt load. She
said it was the largest interconnected system in the state.
She shared that it was a series of interconnected grids
that had hurdles in implementation. She felt that there
were things that could be done to better function as an
interconnected system. She stated that there was 4300 miles
of line, so decisions were done with respect for the
numbers of miles, cost, and electric levels.
10:26:34 AM
Ms. Estey highlighted slide 4, "What Problems Are We Trying
to Solve?"
?Address the June 2015 Letter from the Regulatory
Commission of Alaska (RCA) to the Alaska State
Legislature.
?Identify and tackle reliability needs of the system,
including cybersecurity threats.
?Plan and execute future infrastructure projects that
benefit the system.
?Develop a mechanism to equitably allocate costs for
improvements that create system benefits.
?Prepare for the changing needs of the utility
industry, including integration of new technology and
other generators.
?Maintain each individual utility's ability to address
specific local needs as appropriate.
10:30:34 AM
Ms. Estey pointed to slide 5, "Progress - Consistent
Railbelt Reliability Standards":
In 2014 the Intertie Management Committee (IMC)
adopted open access rules for the Alaska Intertie
In April 2018, the Railbelt electric utilities and
Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) filed consensus Railbelt
Reliability Standards with the Regulatory Commission
of Alaska (RCA)
Compliance with reliability standards is mandated no
later than one year after the Electric Reliability
Organization (ERO) is established, until then
compliance is voluntary
Ms. Etsey highlighted slide 6, "Progress - Coordinated
Cyber Security Rules":
All utilities engaged a nationally recognized
cybersecurity consultant and developed cyber security
standards that went into effect January 1, 2020,
starting a 3-year compliance clock.
Utilities are currently conducting internal cyber
security audits to identify gaps between the current
practices and the new standards.
The Railbelt Cyber Security Working Group (RCWG),
comprising IT subject matter experts from the six
Railbelt utilities and Doyon Utilities, meets monthly
to execute standards implementation.
Ms. Etsey spoke about reserves and how much power to have
on reserve. She replied to a previous question.
Accountability was voluntary at present. She mentioned
cyber security. The working group was working together to
find solutions together.
10:34:41 AM
Ms. Etsey looked at slide 7, "Progress - Power Pool
Development":
A tight power pool is a contractual structure that
pools generation resources and loads to facilitate
economic dispatch for efficiency and cost savings.
Chugach, ML and P and MEA drafted preliminary dispatch
protocols, financial settlement procedures, and other
processes. GVEA and HEA have been engaged in this
development.
Power pool development process was put on hold due to
the Chugach/ML and P acquisition, expected to achieve
approximately 75 percent of anticipated pool savings.
Utilities will return to power pool discussions after
the Chugach/ML and P acquisition docket has been
adjudicated.
Ms. Etsey pointed to slide 8, "Railbelt Reliability Council
- ODT Process":
An Organizational Development Team (ODT), comprised of
representatives from the six Railbelt utilities, was
established to begin building the RRC.
The ODT's focus was to develop consensus among
utilities and other stakeholders in forming an
Implementation Committee that would develop
foundational documents and stand up the RRC.
The ODT representatives met with utility and non-
utility stakeholders, including the RCA, AEA, REAP,
AkPIRG, IPPs, and others.
On December 18, 2019, six Railbelt utilities signed
the MOU for the creation of the RRC.
The signed MOU was filed with the RCA on December 20,
2019.
Ms. Etsey talked about meeting with all of the stakeholders
and an MOA was renegotiated and all 60 members signed the
agreement. She talked about acting differently by coming to
the table with all vulnerabilities and things began to
change.
10:40:07 AM
Co-Chair von Imhof reminded Ms. Etsey of the time
limitation of the hearing.
Ms. Etsey discussed slide 9, "Railbelt Reliability Council
- Signed MOU":
The RRC will be an applicant for the role of ERO with
a balanced utility/non-utility board focused on
accomplishing the following tasks:
1. Establish, administer, and enforce reliability
standards
2. Develop, adopt, and administer open access
rules, system cost allocation procedures, and
interconnection protocols
3. Develop and adopt an Integrated Resource Plan
(IRP) for the entire Railbelt electric system
4. Perform a definitive cost benefit analysis of
Railbelt wide or regional security constrained
economic dispatch.
Ms. Etsey highlighted slide 10, "Railbelt Reliability
Council Governance":
Initially, the RRC will be governed by a twelve member
Board with the CEO providing a tie breaking vote.
? 6 Railbelt utilities
? Alaska Energy Authority
? 2 Independent Power Producers
? 1 organization advocating for consumer
interests
? 2 independent, non-affiliated members
? RCA and RAPA will hold non-voting, ex officio
seats on the Board
? The RRC will hire a CEO and staff
Ms. Etsey addressed slide 11, "Why is the Railbelt
Reliability Council Important?"
Regulatory compact (contractual commitment) with the
State of Alaska.
Commitment that the utilities will be bound by the
decisions of the RRC.
Commitment of the utilities to support statutory
language to provide the RCA authority to regulate the
RRC as described in the MOU.
Commitment of the utilities to be inclusive of a
variety of perspectives in decisions relating to the
Railbelt bulk electric system.
Commitment of the utilities to participate with one
another and non-utility stakeholders to achieve
benefits for ratepayers across the Railbelt region.
Ms. Etsey reported the next steps on slide 12, "Next Steps
for the RRC - Timeline":
January 2 Feb 1 Thirty day public notice for
applications to fill the non-utility seats
January 17 Utility, AEA, RCA and RAPA delegates named
February 17 All other non-utility applications due
?March 20 IPP seats selected by Alaska
Independent Power
Producer Association
?March 25 (est.) Firm retained to conduct review
of applications
?May 11 Consumer advocacy seat selected
?May 15 Independent, unaffiliated seats selected
?May 30 Implementation Committee Kick off
?December 2020 Complete foundational documents
and stand up the organization
10:43:47 AM
Ms. Etsey highlighted slide 13, "The Railbelt utilities
support SB 123 as enabling legislation":
Establish a statutory framework for the RRC to operate
under the RCA's regulatory authority.
Provide a mechanism to enforce consistent reliability,
facility and cyber security standards developed by the
RRC.
Authorize the RRC to execute a robust, transparent
Integrated Resource Planning process and support
resulting outcomes.
Provide for RCA pre-approval of projects that are
consistent with the Integrated Resource Plan and/or
reliability standards.
Allow the RRC time to accomplish its goals but provide
discrete timelines.
Ms. Etsey emphasized that the group supported the
legislation. She revisited the benefits of the bill as
listed on the slide. She provided closing comments and
asked the committee to support the passage of the bill. She
hoped that the project would stay focused on a positive
solution.
10:46:02 AM
Co-Chair von Imhof OPENED Public Testimony.
10:46:33 AM
JEFF WARNER, MUNICIPAL LIGHT AND POWER, ANCHORAGE (via
teleconference), spoke in support of the bill. The bill
would provide liability. He thanked the committee
10:47:27 AM
CHRIS ROSE, RENEWABLE ENERGY ALASKA PROJECT, PALMER (via
teleconference), spoke in support of SB 123. He had
submitted written testimony to the committee.
10:48:02 AM
BRIAN HICKEY, CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER, CHUGACH ELECTRIC
ASSOCIATION, BIG SKY, MONTANA (via teleconference),
supported the legislation. The cooperative believed the
bill would be beneficial. He concluded his testimony.
10:49:08 AM
Co-Chair von Imhof CLOSED Public Testimony.
Senator Wilson asked about one of the fiscal notes that
appeared to be zero, because he thought there would be an
associated cost.
Co-Chair von Imhof would take up the issue at a later time.
She reviewed the agenda for the following day. She
indicated the committee would be taking up amendments for
the supplemental bill.
SB 123 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
ADJOURNMENT
10:50:33 AM
The meeting was adjourned at 10:50 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB 123 Sponsor Statement 2.25.2020.pdf |
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM SFIN 3/3/2020 9:00:00 AM |
SB 123 |
| SB 123 Sectional Analysis v.O 2.25.2020.pdf |
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM SFIN 3/3/2020 9:00:00 AM |
SB 123 |
| SB 123 Explanation of Changes v. O.pdf |
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM SFIN 3/3/2020 9:00:00 AM |
SB 123 |
| SB 123 - RCA Presentation 3.3.20.pdf |
SFIN 3/3/2020 9:00:00 AM |
SB 123 |
| SB 123 - RCA Letter to Leg 1-17-2020 Appendix D.pdf |
SFIN 3/3/2020 9:00:00 AM |
SB 123 |
| SB 123 - RCA Letter to Leg 1-17-2020 Appendix B.pdf |
SFIN 3/3/2020 9:00:00 AM |
SB 123 |
| SB 123 - RCA Letter to Leg 1-17-2020 Appendix C.pdf |
SFIN 3/3/2020 9:00:00 AM |
SB 123 |
| SB 123 - RCA Letter to Leg 1-17-2020 Appendix A.pdf |
SFIN 3/3/2020 9:00:00 AM |
SB 123 |
| SB123-Capital Appropriation to RCA in SB 119 2014 Session.pdf |
SFIN 3/3/2020 9:00:00 AM SRBE 1/24/2020 3:30:00 PM |
SB 119 SB 123 |
| SB123-RCA Recommedations to Legislature June 30 2015.pdf |
SFIN 3/3/2020 9:00:00 AM SRBE 1/24/2020 3:30:00 PM |
SB 123 |
| SB123-Railbelt Reliability Council Letter of Filing to RCA of MOU Dec 20 2019.pdf |
SFIN 3/3/2020 9:00:00 AM SRBE 1/24/2020 3:30:00 PM |
SB 123 |
| SB123-RCA Letter to Leg 1-17-2020.pdf |
SFIN 3/3/2020 9:00:00 AM |
SB 123 |
| SB 123 - Acronyms 2.29.2020.pdf |
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM SFIN 3/3/2020 9:00:00 AM |
SB 123 |
| SB 123 REAP Public Testimony.pdf |
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM SFIN 3/3/2020 9:00:00 AM |
SB 123 |
| SB 123 Sponsor Presentation 3.3.2020.pdf |
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM SFIN 3/3/2020 9:00:00 AM |
SB 123 |
| SB 123 Presentation RRC ODT 3.3.20.pdf |
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM SFIN 3/3/2020 9:00:00 AM |
SB 123 |
| SB 123 Public Testimony AKPIRG.pdf |
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM SFIN 3/3/2020 9:00:00 AM |
SB 123 |
| SB 123 - Public Testimony - Laing.pdf |
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM SFIN 3/3/2020 9:00:00 AM |
SB 123 |
| SB 123 AIPPA RRC presentation 1-29-20.pdf |
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM SFIN 3/3/2020 9:00:00 AM |
SB 123 |
| SB 123 Intent Statement 2.24.2020.pdf |
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM SFIN 3/3/2020 9:00:00 AM |
SB 123 |
| SB 123 - Response to S FIN questions 3.6.2020.pdf |
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM SFIN 3/3/2020 9:00:00 AM |
SB 123 |