Legislature(2025 - 2026)GRUENBERG 120
02/11/2025 01:30 PM House ENERGY
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 | |
| Presentation(s): Regulatory Commission of Alaska | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON ENERGY
February 11, 2025
1:41 p.m.
DRAFT
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Ky Holland, Co-Chair
Representative Donna Mears, Co-Chair
Representative Cathy Tilton
Representative George Rauscher
Representative Mia Costello
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Bryce Edgmon
Representative Chuck Kopp
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
PRESENTATION(S): REGULATORY COMMISSION OF ALASKA
- HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
No previous action to record
WITNESS REGISTER
JOHN ESPINDOLA, Chair
Regulatory Commission of Alaska
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Co-presented a PowerPoint regarding the
Regulatory Commission of Alaska and answered committee
questions.
JOHN SPRINGSTEEN, Commissioner
Regulatory Commission of Alaska
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Co-presented a PowerPoint regarding the
Regulatory Commission of Alaska and answered committee
questions.
JULIE VOGLER, Utility Master Analyst
Regulatory Commission of Alaska
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Co-presented a PowerPoint regarding the
Regulatory Commission of Alaska and answered committee
questions.
RICHARD GAZAWAY, Administrative Law Judge
Regulatory Commission of Alaska
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered committee questions during the
presentation.
BECKI ALVEY, Advisory Section Manager
Regulatory Commission of Alaska
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on two upcoming projects.
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:41:21 PM
CO-CHAIR DONNA MEARS called the House Special Committee on
Energy meeting to order at 1:41 p.m. Representatives Holland,
Mears, Tilton, Rauscher, and Costello were present at the call
to order.
^PRESENTATION(S): Regulatory Commission of Alaska
PRESENTATION(S): Regulatory Commission of Alaska
1::47 PM
CO-CHAIR Mears announced that the only order of business would
be a presentation by the Regulatory Commission of Alaska.
1:43:05 PM
JOHN ESPINDOLA, Chair, Regulatory Commission of Alaska (RCA),
co-presented the PowerPoint regarding the Regulatory Commission
of Alaska. He stated that RCA is a quasi-judicial body. He
pointed out its authority on slide 2, which read as follows
[original punctuation provided]:
• AS 42.04 (Regulatory Commission of Alaska)
• AS 42.05 (Alaska Public Utilities Regulatory Act)
• AS 42.06 (Pipeline Act)
• AS 42.08 (In-State Pipeline Contract Carrier)
• AS 42.45 (Rural & Statewide Energy Programs)
1:44:16 PM
JOHN SPRINGSTEEN, Commissioner, Regulatory Commission of Alaska,
co-presented the RCA PowerPoint. He proceeded with slide 3 and
noted that the discussion would be centered on natural gas and
liquified natural gas (LNG). He stated that RCA's jurisdiction
and framework would be defined versus the jurisdiction of other
key agencies, such as the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(FERC), the Department of Natural Resources (DNR), and the
Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (AOGCC). He noted
that independent power producers and state-owned transmission
would be outside the scope of RCA. He continued that RCA has
regulatory authority inside the state over public utilities and
pipelines. This authority has expanded to include natural gas
storage and LNG storage. On slide 4, titled "RCA Jurisdiction
for Electric Utilities," he illustrated some of the specific
areas of focus for RCA.
1:47:55 PM
COMMISSIONER SPRINGSTEEN, in response to a question from
Representative Costello, agreed that RCA would not initiate
actions on behalf of consumers. He explained that the utilities
would present their plans to RCA, and it would either approve or
suspend the plan. If suspended, the plan would be moved to a
docket. He noted that LNG import facilities would be under
FERC. He pointed out that RCA would be involved with reviewing
contracts between LNG importers or producers and utilities in
the state.
COMMISSIONER SPRINGSTEEN, in response to a question from Co-
Chair Holland concerning RCA jurisdiction, deferred to Julie
Vogler.
JULIE VOGLER, Utility Master Analyst, Regulatory Commission of
Alaska, responded that, when approving long-term gas supply
agreements prior to 2010, if RCA found an unjustified rate that
was charged by a utility, it would order a corrected rate. She
continued that since 2010, when approving gas supply agreements,
RCA would rely on AS 42.05.141(d), which read as follows:
(d) When considering whether the approval of a rate or
a gas supply contract proposed by a utility to provide
a reliable supply of gas for a reasonable price is in
the public interest, the commission shall
(1) recognize the public benefits of allowing a
utility to negotiate different pricing mechanisms with
different gas suppliers and to maintain a diversified
portfolio of gas supply contracts to protect customers
from the risks of inadequate supply or excessive cost
that may arise from a single pricing mechanism; and
(2) consider whether a utility could meet its
responsibility to the public in a timely manner and
without undue risk to the public if the commission
fails to approve a rate or a gas supply contract
proposed by the utility.
MS. VOGLER, in response to a follow-up question, clarified that
this statute only applies to gas sales supply agreements, as
seen on slide 4. She explained that when an electric utility
enters into a power purchase agreement, the utility would submit
a tariff filing with RCA for approval. The filing would be the
power purchase agreement, with cost recovery through a cost of
power adjustment. She noted that this would be for an electric
utility, as for a gas utility, it would be a gas-cost
adjustment.
MR. ESPINDOLA, in response to a follow-up question, confirmed
Co-Chair Holland's understanding that in a gas supply agreement
RCA's jurisdiction would be limited, accepting any negotiated
agreement between a producer and a utility; however, in a power
purchase agreement, a tariff filing with proposed rates would be
required. He pointed out that RCA would be able to analyze this
for fairness and request changes, if necessary.
1:54:53 PM
RICHARD GAZAWAY, Administrative Law Judge, Regulatory Commission
of Alaska, responded to a series of questions from
Representative Rauscher. Concerning net metering versus net
billing, he stated that the net metering program is a net
billing program. He explained that net metering is when bill
credits are at the retail rate. He explained that for the net
billing program, customers can have a reduction in their rate up
to the level of consumption, and then the rate reverts to the
power purchase agreement rate. He continued that essentially
utilities are open to proposals up to a certain limit, and this
limit depends on its interconnected network, but usually
utilities are agnostic if it is a renewable resource. He
pointed out that examples of resources that qualify are solar
and wind.
1:57:36 PM
MR. ESPINDOLA pointed out that before the meeting RCA had
received a list of questions from Co-Chair Mears' office. He
stated that the remainder of the slides would address these
questions. He moved to slide 5, titled "What does the RCA see
as its role in supporting affordable energy production in Alaska
for the Railbelt?" He stated that RCA has statutory authority
to regulate public utilities and pipeline carriers unless the
entity is exempt under AS 42.05.711. He stated that this would
protect ratepayers while allowing regulated entities to charge
rates that allow cost recovery and a reasonable rate of return.
He stated that RCA would do everything possible within its
jurisdiction to ensure just, fair, and reasonable rates.
MR. ESPINDOLA noted that RCA does not play a direct role in
driving energy production; however, Senate Bill 123 [passed
during the Thirty-First Alaska State Legislature] expanded RCA's
authority. He noted that this legislation created the Electric
Reliability Organization (ERO), which serves the Railbelt. He
stated that ERO's responsibilities include preparing a resource
plan to evaluate the Railbelt utilities in meeting service
requirements, and it precludes electric utilities from building
large facilities without first obtaining preapproval from RCA.
He continued that RCA plays a role in approving power purchase
agreements between regulated electric entities and independent
power producers, and it calculates Power Cost Equalization
amounts.
2:00:10 PM
COMMISSIONER SPRINGSTEEN moved to slide 6 and slide 7, titled
"What is the RCA's responsibility to managing Alaska's remaining
natural gas resources?" He reiterated that, as a quasi-judicial
body, RCA does not have a direct role in managing natural gas
resources; however, it plays an indirect role by encouraging
energy conservation measures and approving power purchase
agreements. In addition, the RCA has oversight authority over
natural gas storage, and it would approve gas supply contracts
between producers and regulated utilities. He pointed out that
the oversight of the management of natural resources would fall
within the purview of DNR and AOGCC, as both entities employ
engineers with the appropriate background to deal with natural
gas resources.
2:01:23 PM
CO-CHAIR HOLLAND expressed the understanding that DNR manages
the remaining natural gas resources in the state are by using
royalty relief. He questioned RCA's view of royalty relief. He
questioned whether the same shield that allows producers and
buyers to develop their own contracts would protect this.
COMMISSIONER SPRINGSTEEN responded that this is a docketed
matter at RCA, and he is obliged not to discuss it. He stated
that it is public knowledge that there is a best interest
finding for DNR to provide royalty relief. He expressed the
understanding that producers would provide the best rate with
royalty relief.
MR. ESPINDOLA, in response to a follow-up question concerning
the RCA's role in protecting consumers, stated that RCA has no
role in regard to royalty relief.
COMMISSIONER SPRINGSTEEN, in response to a follow-up question
concerning whether royalty relief would benefit the public or
the producer, pointed out that he is one of five commissioners,
and all the commissioners would need to be involved in the
review of the negotiated agreement between the involved parties.
He pointed out these parties are representing their members in
the negotiations, so they would "press" the matter of royalty
relief to benefit their members.
2:05:52 PM
COMMISSIONER SPRINGSTEEN continued to slide 7 and directed
attention to the potential for a pipeline to deliver natural gas
from the North Slope to Southcentral Alaska. He stated that
RCA's role in this would be limited to determining whether the
applicant is technically fit, willing, and able to design,
operate, and maintain the pipeline. He stated that RCA would do
all the necessary reviews, as it has done with other pipelines
in the state. He stated that the legislature has directed the
Alaska Gasline Development Corporation to access whether
applicants have financial and managerial fitness, and whether it
would provide public convenience and necessity; therefore, RCA
would not have a role in these assessments.
COMMISSIONER SPRINGSTEEN continued to slide 8 and slide 9,
titled "In the face of Cook Inlet gas shortages, what is being
done to ensure utilities are meeting their obligations to
consumers?" He stated that RCA calls public meetings with
utilities to ensure utilities are meeting obligations to
consumers. He stated that these meetings would also address any
plans the utilities may have in the event of a natural gas
shortage. He added that RCA has called for presentations
regarding natural gas supplies, as well as presentations on
alternative energies.
COMMISSIONER SPRINGSTEEN noted that Hilcorp announced in 2022
that it would be unable to meet future natural gas demands from
Cook Inlet. In reaction to this, he said the Railbelt utilities
set up a working group to address a path forward, and RCA called
for meetings to address Cook Inlet natural gas storage, as seen
on the slides. He discussed ENSTAR's presentation in June 2023,
which related that demand forecast could not be met beyond the
mid-2030s. He stated that since January 2024, RCA has been
requesting updates from the Railbelt utilities on the
possibility of forced outages. In addition to natural gas
supply updates, RCA has called for presentations on alternative
energies, such as advanced nuclear energy, coal with carbon
capture, and renewable energy. He noted that more updates from
the utilities have been requested.
2:09:59 PM
MS. VOGLER co-presented the RCA PowerPoint and moved to slide 10
to address Railbelt utility projects that have been approved by
RCA. Projects include a 2023 storage expansion agreement
between ENSTAR Natural Gas Company and Cook Inlet Natural Gas
Storage (CINGSA). She stated that this expansion was completed
in 2024. She noted that in 2024, RCA conditionally approved an
application filed by the Alaska Pipeline Company to expand its
service area to connect to a future LNG terminal at Port
MacKinzie. She continued that in 2024 RCA approved a special
contract so ENSTAR could provide gas to Homer Electric.
2:12:18 PM
CO-CHAIR HOLLAND, concerning the Cook Inlet natural gas
shortage, questioned RCA's authority to require utilities to
take specific action, as opposed to just requesting
presentations on the topic.
MR. ESPINDOLA deferred to Mr. Gazaway.
2:13:19 PM
MR. GAZAWAY expressed doubt that he could provide a precise
answer. He stated that the RCA can "generally ? make utilities
do what they can to provide reasonably reliable service." He
explained that when it comes to mandating how electricity is
generated, there are requirements about using renewable energy,
but the composition of the generation portfolio has never been a
requirement by RCA.
CO-CHAIR HOLLAND, concerning affordable energy production,
questioned RCA's understanding of affordable energy. He
questioned any definition, assessment, or analysis concerning
this.
MR. ESPINDOLA responded that on the upcoming slide 15 "just and
reasonable" would be addressed, which would frame this question
and its response.
2:14:59 PM
MR. ESPINDOLA moved to slide 11, titled "What is the RCA's role
in relation to the RTO and RRC?" He mentioned the Railbelt
Transmission Organization (RTO). He paraphrased from the slide,
which read as follows [original punctuation provided]:
• The RCA's role with the Railbelt Reliability
Council:
Certificate the RRC (Docket E-22-001)
Review Tariff Filings (3 AAC 46.320-.430)
Review Integrated Resource Plans (AS 42.05.780(b))
Review RRC Surcharge Filings (3 AAC 46.160 and 4
AAC 46.320-.430)
Review Rule Filings (AS 42.05.762)
Holds an Ex-officio Seat (AS 42.05.762(4)(A))
• The RCA's role with the Railbelt Transmission
Organization:
Certificate the RTO (AS 44.83.700(d)) (Docket U-24-
042)
Review Transmission Cost Recovery Mechanism (AS
44.83.710)
Review Open Access Transmission Tariff (AS
44.83.710)
MR. ESPINDOLA stated that after the passage of House Bill 307
[passed during the Thirty-Third Alaska State Legislature], RCA
opened Docket U-24-026 to investigate the process for
certification of a regional transmission organization. In 2024,
RCA issued an order for RTO to file an application for the
required certificate, which is now pending before RCA. He
stated that a decision on this would be made before June 2025.
After this process is complete, RTO would then submit a
transmission cost recovery mechanism and an open access
transmission tariff for review by RCA.
2:17:14 PM
COMMISSIONER SPRINGSTEEN moved to slide 12, titled "What is the
RCA's responsibility to managing Alaska's remaining natural gas
resources and future development?" He noted that the first part
of the question was addressed [on slide 7], and he reiterated
that RCA is a quasi-judicial body with the role of providing
oversite of tariffs and rates of public utilities, state
pipelines, and some natural gas storage. He stated that the
oversight of the state's natural resources would be under DNR,
while oil and natural gas extraction would be under AOGCC.
Concerning future development, he stated that RCA would promote
energy conservation with the review and approval authority on
certain projects. He stated that this would help displace the
use of natural gas. He directed attention to Ms. Vogler, who
would expand on this topic with the next slide.
2:18:01 PM
MS. VOGLER stated that, other than promoting alternatives to
utility consumption, RCA has limited control to reduce natural
gas usage. In managing the state's remaining natural gas
resources, she pointed out that in 2010 RCA had adopted net
metering regulations, while in 2024 it opened a regulations
docket to consider limiting the aggregate limit of net metering
facilities. She stated that in 2022 RCA had approved a charging
rate for electric vehicles (EVs), which eliminated demand
charges, as this reduced demand on the system. She continued
that RCA has approved cost recovery for contracts of power
purchases with independent power producers (IPPs). She listed
examples of these agreements.
MS. VOGLER pointed out that RCA has pending dockets related to
renewable energy generation, including a petition by Solstice
Energy for a solar farm, with a request from Homer Electric to
purchase this power. She stated that RCA has received an
application from Juneau Hydropower, Inc. to expand its
territory. She stated that because of Senate Bill 152 [passed
during the Thirty-Third Alaska State Legislature] RCA has opened
a regulations docket concerning community energy facilities.
2:20:41 PM
CO-CHAIR MEARS, concerning cases that promote conservation
efforts, questioned whether RCA would open dockets in order to
promote conservation. She questioned whether a rate case would
be a challenge to utilities to come forward on conservation
efforts.
MS. VOGLER explained that a rate case refers to a nonfuel
component of electric rates. Concerning net metering and other
aspects, she stated that RCA would open the regulations on its
own, such as it did with EV charging. She stated that RCA had
done this because of a request from stakeholders. She explained
that power purchase agreements would be filed by the electric
utilities. She noted that the dockets pending before RCA for
review were pursued by the utility.
CO-CHAIR MEARS expressed the understanding that RCA can look at
more than just the cost of service to promote conservation.
MR. ESPINDOLA expressed agreement with Co-Chair Mears, and he
provided an example.
2:23:02 PM
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER expressed the opinion that the state
does not have a gas shortage; rather, it has an availability
problem.
REPRESENTATIVE COSTELLO questioned an "open action transmission
tariff."
MR. ESPINDOLA responded that this is geared to independent power
producers to plug into the Railbelt system through the tariff
process. He deferred to Mr. Gazaway.
MR. GAZAWAY explained that this is a nondiscriminatory tariff
that allows people to access the transmission network on the
same terms, conditions, and rules, as set forth by the
transmission organization as a tariff.
CO-CHAIR HOLLAND expressed the understanding that Docket U-24-
003 would increase the cap to 20 percent for net metering. He
expressed the understanding that [SB 32] would also increase
this cap. He questioned whether the docket and the proposed
legislation would accomplish the same result.
MR. ESPINDOLA expressed the understanding that SB 32 would allow
utilities that are managed by a co-op board to operate under 15
megawatts without RCA approval. In response to a follow-up
question concerning the difference between the proposed
legislation and the docket, he deferred to Mr. Gazaway.
MR. GAZAWAY responded that these are two different things. He
explained that the metered cap would concern generation
installed by customers, and the cap would be the amount that
could be absorbed by the system. Concerning SB 32, he stated
that this is tied into Eligible Renewable Energy Resource rules,
which have large-project preapproval requirements.
CO-CHAIR HOLLAND pointed out the growing number of rate cases,
IPP purchase power agreements, and the diversity of utilities.
He questioned whether RCA currently has the tools needed to work
on the cases.
MR. ESPINDOLA stated that this question would be answered on
slide 14.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER, concerning the same issue, pointed out
that SB 32 could create concerns.
2:28:48 PM
MR. ESPINDOLA moved to slide 14, titled "What statutory changes
might ensure that the RCA takes a more holistic approach?" He
maintained that this topic should be addressed at the upcoming
public meeting, as his colleagues would be present. He stated
that statute requires that the chair of RCA be responsible for
directing the administrative functions of the commission when
carrying out its policies, noting that this should be done in a
public setting. He expressed his intention to address this
topic with all RCA commissioners during the public meeting,
which is scheduled for the following morning. He expressed the
understanding that it would be inappropriate for him to speak to
this topic without the other members of the commission present.
He stated that RCA would respond to the committee in writing
after the meeting tomorrow.
CO-CHAIR HOLLAND requested clarification of RCA's policy versus
statute, as the committee should understand this.
MR. ESPINDOLA responded that RCA is considered a policy
implementer, not a policy creator. He stated that the
legislature and the executive branch are responsible for
creating the policies.
CO-CHAIR HOLLAND expressed confusion, as questions on policies
are being deferred to the public meeting, but the legislature is
responsible for creating policy. He questioned how to bring the
context back to the legislature for discussion, and he described
this as "a circular challenge."
MR. ESPINDOLA stated that if there were specific policy
positions the legislature would like RCA to consider, the
questions would need to be discussed in an open, public setting,
with all the commissioners there.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER expressed the understanding that any
question would need to be fully vetted by all the commissioners.
CO-CHAIR MEARS expressed the understanding that this would be
the beginning of the discussions between RCA, the executive
branch, and the legislature. She noted that this discussion
involves "eleventh-hour" issues with the Cook Inlet gas supply.
She maintained that the gaps in the gas supply need to be
identified and filled. She expressed the opinion that this
needs to be fully discussed, as opposed to a decision coming
unilaterally from the legislative branch. She stated that RCA
seems to be "looking at what's in front of you, and we do need
to be looking further ahead." She expressed her appreciation to
the presenters.
CO-CHAIR HOLLAND expressed the understanding that the following
question would be addressed at RCA's public meeting in the
morning. The question concerned the rules and tools that RCA
has for the integration of gas storage, utility functions, and
the delivery of gas. He commented that in the middle of this
integration process, there would be a new utility structure. He
questioned a holistic approach that could continue reliability
and affordability.
MR. ESPINDOLA responded that this question is the type of
feedback and information RCA is looking for to start the
conversations.
2:35:42 PM
MR. ESPINDOLA moved to slide 15, titled "What statutory supports
does the RCA have to execute its duties?" In the context of
just and reasonable, he directed attention to AS 42.05.141 and
AS 42.06.140. He stated that in order to determine whether
rates are just and reasonable, RCA would review the utility's
proposed annual revenue required earnings, which includes
administrative cost, depreciation, and a fair return on
investments.
CO-CHAIR HOLLAND, concerning allowed expenses, questioned the
definition of "prudent nature." He questioned whether utilities
would be subject to taking action to reduce the allowed
expenses, because expenses could be passed to the consumer.
MS. VOGLER responded that when a utility files a revenue study
to RCA, it is required to submit schedules to support that the
cost of services provided would be "used and useful." In
response to a follow-up question concerning any cost reduction
efforts RCA could take, she stated that this is possible because
utilities could be investing in assets that could reduce the
cost of power. She pointed out that RCA would look at this
because these items would be included in the rate base, of which
the utility could earn a return.
2:38:40 PM
COMMISSIONER SPRINGSTEEN moved to slide 16, titled "What are the
various processes each natural gas project, recently announced,
needs to go through at the RCA?" He noted that the two last
questions of the presentation reflect recent events. He stated
that this slide regards LNG import facilities, which fall under
FERC. He noted that FERC would provide oversight throughout the
operation of these facilities; therefore, they would be outside
of RCA's jurisdiction. He added that when utilities contract
with LNG importers, these contracts would be reviewed for
approval by RCA.
CO-CHAIR HOLLAND questioned whether FERC's oversight would be in
the best interest of the utilities in the state.
COMMISSIONER SPRINGSTEEN responded that, per statute, this would
be under the purview of the legislature.
CO-CHAIR MEARS commented that FERC has responsibility concerning
planning and permitting, and it also has a fiduciary
responsibility. She expressed the understanding that in LNG
storage projects FERC would only be concerned with the planning
and permitting side. She pointed out that there are some things
without regulatory control, such as this fiduciary element.
2:41:52 PM
MR. ESPINDOLA moved to slide 17, titled "What role does the RCA
have in assessing multiple projects which may duplicate
infrastructure and costs to customers?" When two or more public
utilities are competing for identical service, he said RCA has
statutory guidance under AS 42.05.221. He deferred to Mr.
Gazaway.
MR. GAZAWAY stated that if the competition is not in the public
interest, RCA may eliminate the competition. He noted that the
issue was more prevalent in the 1970s, when a framework had been
created. This framework looks at RCA's jurisdiction, public
need, the ability of applicants, and the internal strengths of
the utilities. He added that the external strengths of the
utilities would also be reviewed, which is the interface between
the utility and the public. He noted that other extraneous
elements would be examined, if needed.
CO-CHAIR HOLLAND questioned RCA's approach to overlapping
related projects, such as two LNG import facilities with some
duplication. He referenced a scenario where production capacity
was overbuilt. He questioned how this could be avoided in the
future.
MR. GAZAWAY pointed out the complexity of the question. He
stated that when the framework was created, utilities were not
coming to RCA for large project preapprovals, as they were not
required to do this. He noted that there are times when
duplicate facilities are preferred, as natural gas storage
operations are looking for multiple options for more capacity.
CO-CHAIR MEARS noted that there is one docketed project where
each project might address a different need. She stated that
public information would need to come out to understand this.
She expressed concern that there could be duplicative
infrastructure.
2:48:59 PM
BECKI ALVEY, Advisory Section Manager, Regulatory Commission of
Alaska, stated that in respect to the announcement of the two
projects related to Harvest Alaska and ENSTAR, RCA has not
received a filing from Harvest Alaska. If a filing is made, she
said RCA would evaluate this. In regard to ENSTAR, in January
2025 it filed a proposal to evaluate future gas supplies and
future gas project costs through its gas cost adjustment. This
adjustment is a mechanism that allows gas utilities to recover
gas costs. She stated that RCA has suspended this filing for
further investigation into jurisdiction and cost recovery.
CO-CHAIR MEARS clarified that this is docketed until August
2025.
MR. ESPINDOLA responded that this "timeline is quick." He
stated that there will be a public comment hearing soon, and
this would be to discuss the questions in the docket. He noted
that the filing was suspended, and a docket was opened.
REPRESENTATIVE COSTELLO pointed out the importance of the issue
and the impact to Alaskans. She questioned whether this docket
could be expedited.
MR. ESPINDOLA responded that this would be expedited, as he has
taken personal control of the matter.
2:51:50 PM
MR. ESPINDOLA expressed the importance of RCA fulfilling its
statutory mandates of protecting the public interest. He stated
that RCA strives to ensure that public utilities are solvent and
able to provide safe and adequate services with just and
reasonable rates that ensure suitable returns and conditions.
He stated that RCA conducts public hearings, creating an
accurate record of evidence, and provides access for public
input. This allows RCA to work towards its goal in an open and
transparent manner, which ensures accountability and trust.
2:52:39 PM
The committee took an at-ease from 2:52 p.m. to 2:53 p.m.
2:53:32 PM
CO-CHAIR MEARS noted the amount of information covered during
the meeting, adding that there would be more information in the
future with the opening of dockets. She noted RCA's important
meeting tomorrow. She expressed appreciation that RCA has
multiple commissioners, and the clarity used in the
presentation, as "not everybody is clear on what hat they're
wearing when they speak." She thanked the presenters.
CO-CHAIR MEARS made closing comments.
2:55:26 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Special Committee on Energy meeting was adjourned at 2:55 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| RCA Presentation for HENE 2.11.25_v2.pdf |
HENE 2/11/2025 1:30:00 PM |
Regulatory Commission of Alaska |