Legislature(2003 - 2004)
05/10/2004 11:20 AM House FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SENATE BILL NO. 392
An Act relating to the expenses of investigation,
hearing, or public advocacy before the Regulatory
Commission of Alaska, to calculation of the regulatory
cost charge for public utilities and pipeline carriers
to include the Department of Law's costs of its public
advocacy function, to inspection of certain books and
records by the attorney general when participating as a
party in a matter before the Regulatory Commission of
Alaska; and providing for an effective date.
DANIEL PATRICK OTIERNEY, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL,
REGULATORY AFFAIRS, DEPARTMENT OF LAW, stated that last
year's Executive Order (EO) 111 transferred the
responsibility for advocacy on behalf of the public in
utility matters before the Regulatory Commission of Alaska
(RCA) from the RCA to the attorney general, and established
the public advocacy function within the Department of Law.
As a result, the RCA personnel, historically responsible for
public advocacy, now acts under the authority and direction
of the Department. The bill completes the prior transfer of
authority by providing for execution aspects.
SB 392 clarifies that regulatory cost charge receipts (not
general fund) would continue to pay for the general costs of
public advocacy now administered by the Department, just as
the receipts historically paid for public advocacy costs
when the function was performed by RCA personnel.
The bill also adjusts the regulatory cost charge ceiling and
creates two, distinct percentages of total regulatory cost
charge receipts to separately fund the RCA and the
Department public advocacy function in order to provide each
entity with budgetary independence from the other.
Mr. Otierney advised that SB 392 would provide the
Department qualified access to utility or pipeline carrier
records similar to that afforded the RCA's former public
advocacy staff to maintain efficient and economical access
to information where the RCA has determined that
comprehensive review. Also, the bill clarifies that State
agencies are exempt from paying the allocated costs of RCA
proceedings to which the State agency is a party because
there is no net fiscal benefit to the State.
Representative Stoltze thought that the request should have
been included in the Department of Law's operating budget
request. Mr. Otierney disagreed that the request was
misplaced.
Co-Chair Harris asked if Mr. Otierney's job was "on the line
if the bill did not pass". Mr. Otierney stated it was not.
The funding source for public advocacy had already been
transferred and currently is from regulatory cost charge
receipts. In that scenario, the Department of Law's public
advocacy function is in RDU within the RCA budget and funded
from regulatory cost charge receipts. The bill provides the
appropriate independence of the budget for that function.
He added, there would be no change in the source of funding.
Co-Chair Harris inquired why the issue had not been
submitted in the Department of Law's budget. Mr. Otierney
understood that it was not a function funded out of the
general fund but rather a regulatory cost-charge.
Co-Chair Harris referenced Mr. Otierney's statement that the
request was "off-budget", pointing out that there are no
"off-budget" requests. All funds are receipts for services
and are taken into consideration. Mr. Otierney indicated
that he did not take issue to that and that he is the
"substantive guy" with the responsibility to implement the
advocacy function.
Co-Chair Harris noted that he supports the bill.
Representative Foster MOVED to report SB 392 out of
Committee with individual recommendations and with the
accompanying fiscal note. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
SB 392 was reported out of Committee with "no
recommendation" and with fiscal note #3 by the Department of
Law.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|