HB 120-DEPT OF LAW: ADVOCACY BEFORE FERC  2:08:46 PM CHAIR CLAMAN announced that the first order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 120, "An Act relating to the Department of Law public advocacy function to participate in matters that come before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission." CHAIR CLAMAN advised that this is the second hearing on the bill and he intends to move HB 120 from committee today. 2:09:22 PM ED SNIFFEN, Chief Statewide Section Supervisor, Regulatory Affairs and Public Advocacy, Department of Law, related that he had provided a short PowerPoint script and it was not his intention to go through the entire script because he had shared most of the information during his previous presentation. He explained that the goal with HB 120 is to add, concerning matters before the Federal Energy Regulation Commission (FERC), the authority of the attorney general under AS 44.23.020(e) in order to recover some of those costs through a regulatory cost charge. 2:10:07 PM MR. SNIFFEN referred to the power point presentation titled "Regulatory Cost Charge for FERC Matters," slide 7, titled "RAPA's 2017 Budget" [Regulatory Affairs and Public Advocacy (RAPA)]. He explained that during his prior presentation he didn't have the actual numbers, and subsequently gathered the information on slide 7. The slide depicts that RAPA's budget for 2017 was $2,333,700, and of that $162,591, or roughly 7 percent, was paid by pipelines. This legislation would allow the division to essentially increase the size of the slice on that slide, not necessarily increase the size of the pie, he explained. The budget was under its cap by only $40,690, so the pie can't really grow any bigger. In the event more money was added to RAPA's functions before FERC, the slice related to pipelines might get a little bigger, and the utility slice would get a little smaller, but the total amount would not really change. MR. SNIFFEN referred to slide 9, titled "How would HB 120 impact consumers?" and explained that it was an example using RAPA's current data. In the event RAPA wanted to increase that slice by $100,000, for example, to the pipeline regulatory cost charge (RCC), would increase the surcharge under the RCC to pipelines by about .041 percent. He explained that this would mean on a $10,000 bill, the pipeline customers would pay an additional $4.10, which demonstrates the magnitude of what this bill would do, and he pointed out that the magnitude is pretty small. CHAIR CLAMAN advised that public testimony on HB 120 was previously closed. 2:13:01 PM CHAIR CLAMAN noted that this effort gives the Department of Law (DOL) more in-house opportunity to manage some of the state's affairs. He said he is optimistic that the efforts to be staffed, with the necessary expertise to manage these matters, would come along with this additional authority. 2:13:25 PM REPRESENTATIVE FANSLER moved to report HB 120, Version 30- GH1875\A, out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection, HB 120 moved from the House Judiciary Standing Committee.