Legislature(2009 - 2010)SENATE FINANCE 532
03/29/2010 09:00 AM Senate FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB217 | |
| SB219 | |
| SB284 | |
| SB117 | |
| SB239 | |
| SB243 | |
| SB279 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 217 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 219 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 279 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 284 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 117 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 239 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 243 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| = | SB 305 | ||
SENATE BILL NO. 243
"An Act removing the royalty obligation for geothermal
resources."
9:34:30 AM
MIKE PAWLOWSKI, STAFF, SENATOR LESIL MCGUIRE, SPONSOR,
explained that the bill attempts to find a rational royalty
regime for the development of geothermal resources on state
lands in Alaska. Originally, the bill started out as a
complete negation of all royalty on geothermal. However, in
working with the administration and in the Resources
Committee, understanding was reached that a geothermal
lease still is actually a property right and, therefore,
while geothermal resources themselves are not exportable,
some royalty is necessary to maintain the state's interest
in that the state has issued a lease for the geothermal
resources. There is one major geothermal project currently
being developed on state land.
Mr. Pawlowski related that Section 1 of the bill
establishes a federal royalty rate of 1.75 percent on gross
income for the first ten years, followed by 3.5 percent of
gross income for the following ten years. The goal of the
bill is to find a rational royalty regime that attracts
development and ensures a fair return to the state.
9:36:32 AM
Co-Chair Stedman asked how many geothermal facilities in
the state pay a royalty. Mr. Pawlowski said that there
currently were none. Several projects under development are
not on state land.
Co-Chair Stedman requested an explanation of what
geothermal energy is and what happens after it is
extracted. Mr. Pawlowski understood that geothermal energy
comes from hot rocks in the ground. Water under pressure
flows upwards and drives turbans producing electricity. The
water is re-injected to maintain pressure.
Co-Chair Stedman summarized that it was "hot water" and the
hotter the water, the more value it has. As long as the
water is re-injected into the ground there is no loss of
the resource.
Co-Chair Stedman recalled a discussion about California
where water is not re-injected and there are depletion
issues in reservoirs. Mr. Pawlowski reported that there was
an extensive discussion of this topic with the Department
of Natural Resources and with the Alaska Oil and Gas
Conservation Commission.
9:38:55 AM
Co-Chair Hoffman asked for more information about a
geothermal project in Anchorage. Mr. Pawlowski replied that
it is Ormat Technology's Mt. Spurr Project. Co-Chair
Hoffman asked how much revenue would come to the state in
the first ten years from that project, under this
legislation. Mr. Pawlowski referred to information in the
packets which calculates the revenue over the first 25
years. Co-Chair Hoffman asked what that total would be. Mr.
Pawlowski said it would be $38 million.
Co-Chair Hoffman asked how the tax on natural gas is
calculated. Mr. Pawlowski clarified that the tax on natural
gas in Cook Inlet is calculated as a royalty. The lease of
land for geothermal land is, in effect, a property right,
and a certain amount of royalty is in the state's best
interest, which is why the federal rate of 1.75 percent is
used. Under current law the rate is 10 to 15 percent.
9:40:40 AM
Co-Chair Stedman asked for a definition of "geothermal land
lease" versus "volume of water use". Mr. Pawlowski related
that for a geothermal lease, a specific land area is leased
and the right to develop the geothermal resource is
conferred. He could not explain the volumetric development
of a geothermal resource.
Senator Olson spoke of the modification of the federal rate
and wondered if other geothermal projects would receive the
same break. Mr. Pawlowski referred to Section 2, page 2,
lines 3 - 5, which directs the Commissioner of the
Department of Natural Resources to offer the royalty rates
to any exiting lessee.
Co-Chair Stedman noted two zero fiscal notes, one from the
Department of Revenue and one from the Department of
Natural Resources.
9:42:37 AM
PAUL THOMSEN, DIRECTOR, ORMAT TECHNOLOGY, (via
teleconference), related that his company has leased the
acreage of Mt. Spurr in order to develop the first
commercial geothermal power plant in Alaska. He spoke in
support of the bill. He agreed with bringing the royalty
rate down to the federal level in order to allow the
development to be more competitive and allow a savings to
ratepayers.
Senator Olson asked what the risks to the project are if
the bill does not get passed. Mr. Thomsen explained that
since they do not export and they are operating in a
regulated market, if the royalty rate is high, then a
higher rate will be charged to the utility. He said if rate
is where it is today, it would require the utility to fund
a power purchase price at 14 cents. The project already has
a low rate of return. He maintained that the ratepayers are
looking for a lower range.
Senator Olson asked where else in the United States there
are geothermal projects and what their royalty rates are.
Mr. Thomsen replied that there are power projects in
Hawaii, California, and Nevada. There are also third-party
projects in Wyoming and Utah. Almost all are on federal
lands operated by the Bureau of Land Management and pay
federal royalty rates. California and Hawaii are
exceptions. California has a very high royalty rate of 10
percent, but on a very small project. Western states tend
to have a high state royalty rates.
9:47:18 AM
CATHY FOERSTER, ENGINEERING COMMISSIONER, ALASKA OIL AND
GAS CONSERVATION (AOGCC), (via teleconference), explained
that the royalty portion of the bill does not affect AOGCC.
The part of the bill that does affect AOGCC transfers some,
but not all, authority for the regulation of geothermal
operations from DNR to AOGCC. The authorities transferred
are the authority to regulate drilling and production
operations, the authority to protect correlative rights,
and the authority to prevent physical waste of the
resource. The DNR will retain its authorities over
correlative rights and prevention of waste pertaining to
state lands. These authorities are consistent with AOGCC
oil and gas operations.
Ms. Foerster continued to say that AOGCC already has in
place the expertise to take on these authorities. Most
importantly, AOGCC has experienced drilling engineers who
know what to look for when approving a drilling or well
work permit to ensure safety and good operational
practices, and experienced field inspectors.
Co-Chair Stedman pointed out that the bill before the
committee is Version E, the original bill. He requested
comments on the lease rates.
9:50:05 AM
Ms. Foerster addressed the question about the impact on
geothermal operations if the bill does not pass. She noted
that there would be an additional cost to DNR to hire a
contract for the needed expertise previously described.
Co-Chair Stedman clarified that the bill would be set aside
and brought back later.
9:50:52 AM
KEVIN BANKS, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF OIL AND GAS, DEPARTMENT
OF NATURAL RESOURCES (via teleconference), explained DNR's
involvement and how the bill would affect the department.
He related that DNR has the authority to manage geothermal
lands in Alaska and to take care of safety issues related
to geothermal drilling. The current bill would create a
situation where DNR would be competitive with federal lands
that could be developed for geothermal resources. He
acknowledged that the economics of a geothermal project
differ substantially from an oil and gas project. The
development of a geothermal resource will depend on
establishing fairly long-term contracts with existing
utilities. The price of the electricity sold to in-state
utilities must be competitive with existing sources of
energy.
Mr. Banks thought that Ormat provided an interesting
discussion of the three parts of their economics and costs.
He offered to discuss those if requested.
Mr. Banks noted that there were 16 previous lease sales on
Mt. Spurr. He said there was a proposal to put forth a best
interest finding on a lease sale at Mt. Augustine. He
pointed out that DNR also has oversight at the Naknek
Project.
9:53:59 AM
Mr. Pawlowski thanked the committee for hearing the bill.
SB 243 was HEARD and HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| AHFC Vets Loan Activity.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 217 |
| SB217 AHFC Vets Sec Analysis.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 217 |
| SB 217 Vets Bonds Sponsor Statement.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 217 |
| 00 Sponsor Statement CSSB219.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 219 |
| 04 Summary of Changes_E.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 219 |
| 05 Sectional Analysis.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 219 |
| 06 Alaska Data Graphs.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 219 |
| 07 TBI Scorecard and Dashboard 032009.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 219 |
| 08 Medicaid BrainInjury Program Costs.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 219 |
| 09 StateofAlaska_Services_Congenital_Degenerative_BrainInjury.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 219 |
| 10 Acquired Brain Injury Definition.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 219 |
| 11 Letters of Support.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 219 |
| 13 Summary of Changes_S.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 219 |
| SB 219 Amendment 1.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 219 |
| Explanation of CS SB 279 (S FIN).doc |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 279 |
| SB 279 About the SAFE Act by HUD.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 279 |
| SB 279 Back-Up.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 279 |
| SB 279 Letters of Support.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 279 |
| SB 279 SAFE Mortgage Licensing Act.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 279 |
| SB 279 Sectional Analysis.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 279 |
| SB 279 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 279 |
| SB 279 Talking Points by Lorie Hovanec.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 279 |
| AG Opinion 02.19.10.PDF |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 284 |
| CSSB284(JUD) Sectional Analysis.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 284 |
| Explanation of Changes CSSB284 JUD.doc |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 284 |
| Leg. Legal Opinion 01.25.10.PDF |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 284 |
| Leg. Legal Opinion 03.17.10.PDF |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 284 |
| 00 Sponsor Statement SB 117.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM SFIN 4/2/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 117 |
| 03 SB 117 Summary of Changes.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM SFIN 4/2/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 117 |
| 04 SB 117 Sectional Analysis.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM SFIN 4/2/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 117 |
| 05 Costco Letter SB 117.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM SFIN 4/2/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 117 |
| 07 Elerding Attachment.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM SFIN 4/2/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 117 |
| NCSL Ignition Interlock Device.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM SFIN 4/2/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 239 |
| SB 239 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM SFIN 4/2/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 239 |
| SB 239 Support Letter APOA.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM SFIN 4/2/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 239 |
| Akutan Support Letter.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 243 |
| Changes to SB 243 in Version E.docx |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 243 |
| Geothermal Royalty Rates.docx |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 243 |
| Ormat SB242 and SB243 for Senate Resouce Hearing 11-Mar-10 ver0 (2).pptx |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 242 SB 243 |
| SB 243 Sectional.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 243 |
| USGS Geothermal Packet.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 243 |
| HB 300 Budget Amendments 0326Pkt#1.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
HB 300 |
| HB 300 Buget Amendment Pkt #2 0326.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
HB 300 |
| SB117-Stedman.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM SFIN 4/2/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 117 |
| CS Senate Bill 279--Talking Points (S FIN).pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 279 |
| CS for SB 279 (S FIN).pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 279 |
| CSSB217(FIN)-New DOR-AHFC-3-28-10.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 217 |
| SB 217 Proposed CS Version R SFIN 032910.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 217 |
| SB 219 Proposed CS Version P SFIN 032910.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 219 |
| SB 284 amendment 1 032910.pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 284 |
| SB 279 Amendment 1 032910 .pdf |
SFIN 3/29/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 279 |