Legislature(2023 - 2024)BUTROVICH 205
04/28/2023 03:30 PM Senate RESOURCES
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 | |
| SB82 | |
| Area M Overview | |
| SB48 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 48 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | SB 82 | TELECONFERENCED | |
SB 48-CARBON OFFSET PROGRAM ON STATE LAND
4:06:12 PM
CO-CHAIR GIESSEL reconvened the meeting and announced the
consideration of SENATE BILL NO. 48 "An Act authorizing the
Department of Natural Resources to lease land for carbon
management purposes; establishing a carbon offset program for
state land; authorizing the sale of carbon offset credits; and
providing for an effective date."
She noted there was a committee substitute for the committee to
consider.
4:06:34 PM
CO-CHAIR BISHOP moved to adopt the committee substitute (CS) for
SB 48, work order 33-GS1372\B, as the working document.
4:06:45 PM
CO-CHAIR GIESSEL objected for an explanation of the changes.
4:06:52 PM
JULIA O'CONNOR, Staff, Senator Cathy Giessel, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, presented the explanation of
changes between version A and version B for SB 48.
The Committee Substitute adopts the following changes:
1. Technical drafting changes were made throughout
the bill to conform to the Legislative Drafting
Manual.
2. The effective date was expanded to cover the
entire bill (page 9, line 17).
CO-CHAIR GIESSEL explained that the CS does not change the
content of the governor's bill; it was redrafted to comport to
Legislative Legal Services' drafting format.
4:07:42 PM
CO-CHAIR GIESSEL removed her objection and the CS was adopted.
4:08:02 PM
CO-CHAIR GIESSEL moved to adopt Amendment 1, work order 33-
GS1372\B.10.
33-GS1372\B.10
Dunmire
4/27/23
AMENDMENT 1
OFFERED IN THE SENATE BY SENATOR GIESSEL
TO: CSSB 48(RES), Draft Version "B"
Page 3, line 30, through page 4, line 1:
Delete all material and insert:
"(f) Compensation for a lease under this section
(1) shall be designed to maximize the return to
the state and be a form of compensation provided under
AS 38.05.073(m);
(2) shall be separately accounted for under
AS 37.05.142; and
(3) may be used by the legislature to make
appropriations to the department to carry out the purposes
of this section."
Page 4, line 6, following "state.":
Insert "The findings must include
(1) reasonably foreseeable effects that a
project may have on the state or local economy; and
(2) anticipated annual revenue that the lease
will yield to the state.
(i) State land used for carbon management purposes
must, to the extent practicable, remain open to the public
for access, hunting, fishing, and other generally allowed
uses as determined by the department."
Reletter the following subsection accordingly.
Page 8, line 22, following "(4)":
Insert "if applicable,"
Page 9, line 2:
Delete "nontimber"
Insert "other [NONTIMBER]"
4:08:11 PM
CO-CHAIR BISHOP objected for purposes of discussion.
4:08:17 PM
CO-CHAIR GIESSEL explained that Amendment 1 combines four
amendments the House Resources Committee added to the House
companion bill. She deferred to Rena Miller to explain the
amendment.
4:08:48 PM
RENA MILLER, Special Assistant to the Commissioner, Department
of Natural Resources (DNR), Anchorage, Alaska, reviewed
Amendment 1 for SB 48 on behalf of the administration. She
highlighted the following.
Page 3, line 30 of version B - The Division of Mining Land and
Water is given receipt authority for the carbon leasing program.
The revenue generated from the leases will be used to supplant
general funds to pay for the new position.
Page 1, line 10 of the amendment - Two findings are added to the
Best Interest Finding required for a leasing program under the
carbon offset bill.
Page 4, line [4] of version B- The findings must consider
reasonably foreseeable effects that the project will have on the
state and local economy and the anticipated revenue that the
annual lease would provide to the state. State land under lease
for carbon management purposes must, to the extent practicable,
allow public access for general uses as determined by the
department.
4:11:17 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked what the term "to the extent practicable"
means in the current draft of the bill.
MS. MILLER explained that there's a policy statement that the
land will remain open to public access, but the phrase gives the
division some leeway so the leasing activity can actually occur.
4:11:51 PM
CO-CHAIR BISHOP commented that "to the extent practicable" is a
favorite term in the department.
4:12:04 PM
SENATOR DUNBAR commented that it had been a challenge when the
committee asked DNR a question only to receive the response that
it's a Department of Revenue (DOR) question. He asked which
department would determine the anticipated revenue to the state
from the leases. His reading is that some oil companies could
write down some of their oil production tax expenses. He asked
if it was the net yield to the state. He also asked if the focus
was on the lease and that the revenues lost elsewhere were being
ignored.
MS. MILLER replied that DNR will determine the lease revenue to
the state. To the second question, she offered her understanding
that an amendment was forthcoming to address lease expenditures
to offset other tax liabilities.
SENATOR DUNBAR said he'd repeat the question if and when the
amendment is offered.
MS. MILLER added that AS 43.55 is the oil and gas production
tax, which is administered by the Department of Revenue (DOR).
SENATOR DUNBAR commented that the short answer is that DNR will
focus on administering the leases and the impacts to DOR won't
be part of DNR's calculation.
MS. MILLER said that's correct; the compensation received for a
lease related to carbon management is under DNR's jurisdiction.
All oil and gas production taxes an entity owes is under DOR's
jurisdiction.
4:15:17 PM
MS. MILLER continued to discuss Amendment 1.
Page 8, line [22-23] of the bill - Adds a carbon offset project
undertaken by DNR to Sec. 41.17.210 Management of state forests.
The House Resources Committee felt this was important, so the
amendment adds the term "if applicable,".
Page 9, line 2 of the bill - The term "nontimber" is removed
from Sec. 12. AS 41.17.230(a) relating to a forest management
plan in recognition that a carbon offset project is timber
related.
4:17:11 PM
SENATOR CLAMAN referenced the four criteria under AS 41.17.220.
Management of state forests. He asked how those four factors
were weighted.
MS. MILLER deferred the question to the state forester, Helge
Eng.
4:17:53 PM
HELGE ENG, Ph.D., State Forester and Director, Division of
Forestry and Fire Protection, Department of Natural Resources
(DNR), Anchorage, Alaska, said the four criteria are equal in
priority.
SENATOR CLAMAN commented that he found it interesting that the
sustained yield principle is given equal weight as the other
three factors.
MS. MILLER clarified that they're given equal weight when
undertaking management activities, but each criterion is based
on the others to a certain degree. Sustained yield is discussed
in the constitution, the statutes reflect what's in the
constitution, and the management plan is formed under statute.
SENATOR CLAMAN opined that if the constitution requires
sustained yield, then that should be given the greatest weight
if there's ever a conflict among the criteria.
MS. MILLER said there's interaction between them but she
believes that Chris Orman would confirm that in any situation
the constitution is the overriding law of the land.
CO-CHAIR GIESSEL asked Mr. Orman to respond to Senator Claman's
question.
4:19:55 PM
CHRISTOPHER ORMAN, Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division,
Natural Resources Section, Department of Law, Juneau, Alaska,
said yes, the sustained yield principle is a constitutional
requirement, but this chapter, which is referring to the
provisions in AS 41.17 pursuant to state forests, will be driven
by the constitutional and statutory provisions. A forest
management plan will be similarly driven. How a carbon project
would be undertaken by DNR in that context, would also need to
comply with those provisions. He continued that the sustained
yield principle will carry a lot of weight in the analysis
because it's part of provisions 2, 3, and 4. He agreed with
Senator Claman that the sustained yield principle carries weight
because it's addressed in the constitution. The way it's infused
into the other provisions bolsters the weight of the sustained
yield principle in that context.
4:22:03 PM
SENATOR KAUFMAN asked Ms. Miller to go through the requirements
to adequately survey to ensure a more valuable resource isn't
trapped.
MS. MILLER stated that mining has a primacy so DNR is not able
to choose anything above that mineral estate. If there is a
highly prospective mineral resource that could be of potential
interest in the future, that area wouldn't be enrolled in a
carbon offset project. The provision that provides the
opportunity to allow for some surface disturbance accommodates
something that might come up during the course of a 40 year
commitment for a state project. The key is to ensure there's no
dipping below the baseline stock of the carbon project and that
more is always growing than is harvested or removed for some
purpose. She noted that the larger the project the easier it
becomes to accommodate the removal of carbon from the landscape,
but there are also ways to do that within a smaller project
without looking to DNR's mandate to develop all resources for
that benefit.
4:25:54 PM
CO-CHAIR BISHOP removed his objection.
CO-CHAIR GIESSEL found no further objection and Amendment 1 was
adopted.
4:26:31 PM
CO-CHAIR GIESSEL held SB 48 in committee for future
consideration.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB 48 CS WORKDRAFT Version B 04.26.23.pdf |
SRES 4/28/2023 3:30:00 PM |
SB 48 |
| SB 82 Public Testimony through 04.27.23.pdf |
SRES 4/28/2023 3:30:00 PM |
SB 82 |
| Presentation Dept. of Fish and Game Area M Overview 04.28.23.pdf |
SRES 4/28/2023 3:30:00 PM |
|
| SB 48 Explanation of Changes Ver. A to Ver. B 04.28.23.pdf |
SRES 4/28/2023 3:30:00 PM |
SB 48 |
| SB 48 Public Testimony 4.21.23 thru 4.27.23.pdf |
SRES 4/28/2023 3:30:00 PM |
SB 48 |
| SB 48 Amendment #1.pdf |
SRES 4/28/2023 3:30:00 PM |
SB 48 |
| ADFG Response to SRES Area M Overview on 04.28.23.pdf |
SRES 4/28/2023 3:30:00 PM |