Legislature(2023 - 2024)
01/25/2024 10:15 AM House ENE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB227 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 227-ELECTRIC UTILITY LIABILITY
10:17:17 AM
CHAIR RAUSCHER announced that the only 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."
10:18:05 AM
CHAIR RAUSCHER opened public testimony on HB 227.
10:18:33 AM
JASON CUSTER, Vice President, Regulatory and Government Affairs,
testified in support of HB 227. He said that HB 227 helps to
ensure that electric utilities are not held liable for damage
caused by vegetation located outside the legal right-of-way and
therefore outside a utilities' legal control. Alaska Power and
Telephone dutifully maintains its right-of-way and keeps it free
of vegetation. He stated that it is unreasonable to expect
utility companies to be responsible for vegetation outside the
right-of-way because it could significantly increase the cost to
rate payers. He mentioned that the Tongass National Forest has
specific rules regarding tree cutting. He said that Native
corporations and Tribal entities have concerns about having
trees cut down. The public would likely object to the
appearance of extended clearcuts. Burying power lines is a
possibility; however, it is expensive and would increase rates.
In the event of a fire, the Alaska Power and Telephone Company
would face challenges with disaster recovery, and if there were
also liability charges on top of restoring power, the company
would likely go bankrupt, there would be delays to disaster
recovery, and rates would further increase.
10:21:35 AM
CHRISTIAN RATAJ, Senior Regional Vice President, National
Association of Mutual Insurance Companies, testified in
opposition to HB 227. He referred to written testimony
[included in the committee packet] and offered to answer
questions posed during the previous bill hearing. He stated
that HB 227 does not have provisions about risk mitigation,
prevention, or vegetation reduction and management standards.
Most state legislatures are focusing on wildfire prevention. He
said that HB 227 would grant broad unqualified legal liability
immunity for electric utilities in certain situations.
Liability is referred to as negligence. Absolute civil
liability immunity grants a free pass. He noted that businesses
and individuals are more responsible when they have exposure.
10:26:24 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SCHRAGE asked why vegetation outside of the
right-of-way would be a problem.
10:27:20 AM
MR. RATAJ responded that generally if a utility does not have
control over a hazard, then it would not be held responsible.
If the utility was aware of a hazard outside of the easement,
for example a tree that is precariously leaning prior to a
storm, and if the homeowner is not notified, under HB 227 the
utility would not be liable.
10:29:24 AM
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX asked about liability insurance for
homeowners.
CHAIR RAUSCHER asked if Representative Prax seeks to expand the
right-of-way.
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX noted that as a property owner it is his
responsibility to know the risks of trees on his property
regarding their proximity to powerlines.
10:31:16 AM
KERIANN BAKER, Chief Strategy Officer, Homer Electric
Association, an electric utility that maintains 1,500 miles of
above-ground lines, discussed the robust vegetation management
plan which involves touching every portion of the line every 7
years. The right-of-way includes 10 feet on either side of the
lines, and she expressed her concern that trees beyond the
right-of-way are growing much higher and could blow into the
line. She spoke in opposition to the previous testifier,
Christan Ritaj, and said that HB 227 does not provide blanket
immunity to utilities. She described the hazard tree mitigation
program, wherein a property owner can call the utility and grant
permission for the utility to remove a hazardous tree. She
stated that it is the responsibility of the private landowner to
maintain problematic vegetation. She further expressed her
support for HB 227.
10:35:12 AM
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX asked if utilities could put a notice in the
billing statement that explains if tall trees grow just outside
of the right-of-way, the landowner is liable should they fall
within the right-of-way and cause damage or fire.
10:36:06 AM
MS. BAKER responded about annual notices and offered to provide
the committee with a copy. She referred to the Homer Electric
Association's webpage about hazard trees and clearing
information. Homer Electric Association also advertises on the
radio encouraging property owners to call if they have hazard
trees. She stated that the utilities are under no obligation to
police private property.
10:37:08 AM
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX asked if customers complain when branches
are removed that are hanging into the right-of-way.
MS. BAKER responded that tree cutting is unpopular and that the
utility works with vendors for vegetation management and
encourages vendors to buck firewood and clean up the site in a
timely manner.
10:38:17 AM
CHAIR RAUSCHER, after ascertaining that no one else wished to
testify, closed public testimony on HB 227.
10:38:33 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SCHRAGE asked if someone from Legislative Legal
Services is available to provide clarity about conflicting
statements between testifiers.
10:40:04 AM
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX moved to adopt Amendment 1 to HB 227 labeled
33-LS0969\B.1, A. Radford, 1/24/24, which read as follows:
Page 2, lines 2 - 3:
Delete all material and insert:
"(c) This section does not preclude civil
liability for property damage, death, or personal
injury resulting from contact between vegetation and
the utility's facilities if
(1) the vegetation was located entirely
within the boundaries of the utility's real property,
lease, permit, easement, or right-of-way and the
utility did not have, or failed to comply with, a
vegetation management plan; or
(2) the vegetation was located outside the
boundaries of the utility's real property, lease,
permit, easement, or right-of-way and the utility
caused the vegetation to
(A) enter the boundaries of the utility's
real property, lease, permit, easement, or right-of-
way; and
(B) contact the utility's facilities."
Page 2, line 4, following "section,":
Insert "(1)"
Page 2, line 6, following "utility":
Insert ";
(2) "vegetation management plan" means a
document that establishes a procedure by which a
utility will manage vegetation to protect the
reliability and safety of the utility's electric
facilities"
10:40:12 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SCHRAGE objected for purpose of discussion.
10:40:21 AM
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX said that HB 227 as it is currently drafted
grants liability protection for utilities without defining what
is negligible. He opined that utilities are not negligent
because the rights-of-way are too narrow. He sought to fix the
underlying problem and suggested that the House Judiciary
Standing Committee take a closer look at the bill.
10:41:18 AM
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER noted that larger rights-of-way on
smaller lots could potentially be problematic for property
owners.
10:42:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SCHRAGE asked for a description of Amendment 1.
10:42:34 AM
The committee took an at-ease from 10:42 a.m. to 10:44 a.m.
10:44:22 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SCHRAGE stated he has concerns about the impact
of HB 227 and understands that House Judiciary Standing
Committee may be better suited to interpret the bill. He
described his hesitation about moving HB 227 out of committee
due to unanswered legal questions about liability.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER sought the expertise of Andy Leman.
10:45:55 AM
ANDY LEMAN, Counsel, Alaska Power Association, commented on
Amendment 1 and said he had concerns with adding language
regarding a vegetation management plan. He claimed he was
unaware of fires in Alaska that were caused in recent years by
vegetation beside a right-of-way. Utilities are already keenly
aware of the need to manage vegetation in the right-of-way.
10:47:57 AM
CHAIR RAUSCHER offered Mr. Leman the opportunity to comment on
liability.
MR. LEMAN said that HB 227 would provide a clear rule that the
utility is protected in the event of a fire caused by vegetation
outside of the right-of-way. There is still negligence
liability for utilities if the vegetation management plan is not
upheld, or if poles and other equipment are neglected and cause
a fire or other damage. Utilities have lots of incentives and
potential legal liability to encourage the maintenance of their
system and continued right-of-way management.
REPRESENTATIVE MCKAY offered his thoughts regarding the
significant number of miles of right-of-way adjacent to
government land. He noted the challenges of the utility
companies to force governments to maintain their vegetation
adjacent to rights-of-way. He offered his support for the
legislation moving to the House Judiciary Standing Committee.
10:51:57 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SCHRAGE pointed out that major fires cause losses
for everyone. He suggested that a prudent, low-cost measure
could be to notify homeowners of maintenance recommendations for
vegetation adjacent to rights-of-way. He expressed his concerns
with utility negligence.
10:53:54 AM
REPRESENATIVE BAKER disagreed with Representative Schrage and
noted that property owners may opt not to cut down their trees.
He stated his support for HB 227 as it is currently written.
REPRESENTATIVE SCHRAGE agreed that the choice to remove a tree
is the responsibility and legal liability of the homeowner. He
clarified that if utilities are not liable per statute,
utilities may choose not to send out notifications to homeowners
that would have prevented potential damage from vegetation
outside the rights-of-way. He noted the cost to the state and
addressed solutions to prevent wildfires. He emphasized his
concerns with HB 227.
CHAIR RAUSCHER defended HB 227 and emphasized the thousands of
miles of lines that would need to be monitored by utilities. He
noted that utility companies work hard to monitor and inform the
public about potential hazards around powerlines.
REPRESENTATIVE SCHRAGE sought additional clarity from
Legislative Legal Services. He agreed about the impracticality
and expense of maintaining so many miles of power lines. He
speculated that there may be legal precedent for a framework of
what is reasonable for the size and maintenance of rights-of-
ways.
11:00:16 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ARMSTRONG said that Representative Prax' points
bring up the opportunity for a more robust conversation about
changing weather patterns including extreme weather events like
wildfires, heavy snow, and droughts. As weather events change,
she suggested collaboration among stakeholders to prevent
problems like wildfires.
11:01:26 AM
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX stated that there is likely a legal
foundation that could be used to determine parameters of
negligence through collaboration with utilities, insurance
companies, and legislators. He gave a hypothetical mathematical
option for improving the size of rights-of-way.
CHAIR RAUSCHER asked if the issues could be worked out before
moving the bill to the House Judiciary Standing Committee.
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX said because of time constraints, the bill
should be moved out of committee with or without Amendment 1.
11:05:56 AM
The committee took an at-ease from 11:05 a.m. to 11:06 a.m.
11:06:28 AM
CHAIR RAUSCHER asked if the objection to Amendment 1 was
removed.
REPRESENTATIVE SCHRAGE removed his objection to Amendment 1.
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX withdrew Amendment 1.
REPRESENTATIVE MCKAY moved to report HB 227 out of committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal
notes. There being no objection, HB 227 was reported out of the
House Special Committee on Energy.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|