Agriculture, Forestry & Economic Development- House

identify yourself for the record, please. Go ahead Lawrence Mele, director of the Gas commission. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It looks like the first one up is House Bill 1412. This regards uh the regulation of pipeline safety uh for the transportation of hazardous liquids or carbon dioxide, and I guess I should say. At the outset that the two bills that I'm running today relate uh. To the transportation and storage of carbon dioxide and in particular in storage, uh, in the ground in certain formations, certain subsurface formations, uh, there is an ongoing project or potential project in South Arkansas that hopes to um Hopes to utilize uh this as a um a new option in terms of storage and uh so. As you can see both these bills are. are relatively uh simple essentially. Um, you know, it's a very short bill that the that action can be taken related to these pipeline facilities, uh, regarding to state certification and administration of the standards and this uh the director can speak more in detail but essentially, uh, we're seeking to have some state regulation and allow the state to administer regulations that would have to still be within the parameters of what federal guidelines are and this is not uncommon, such as in the. oil industry and other things where uh the state takes a lead regulatory role, but still they must be compliant with the parameters set by the federal government, and I'll let the director speak further on the commission already has the pipelines are regulated by DOT, federal DOT under FEMSA. Uh, the pipeline has its material safety Administration. We already have uh regulatory jurisdiction over natural gas. As a primacy from DOT or PEMSO. And we also have primacy for underground natural gas storage. Uh, from FEMA. This is just another component of the federal regulations. that we would adopt And develop rules in-house or in the state. regulate primarily our motivation was for a CO2 pipelines. Because CO2 is regulated by FIMS as a liquid. Uh, so it was projects are developed in Arkansas. You need transport CO2 from the source to a storage facility and you would use inter or interstate pipelines to do that. This would put that jurisdiction under Your own gas commission, utilizing federal regulations. It would just speed up the permitting process to get that done. All right. Any questions about the committee? Anyone in the audience that would like to speak for or against the bill. OK. Would you like to closer your bill? Chairman. I'm closed for my bill and I would move to pass. All right, let's motion do pass. All in favor say aye, opposed? All right. Thank you Mr. Chairman. Thank you committee, uh. If with the chair's permission, uh. I would like to pass over uh well I just lost the agenda here. I'd like to pass over House Bill 1413. I have an amendment that, uh, the department asked for and we're working on getting that put together and hopefully I can bring that back next week and uh if the chair will allow, go ahead and present House Bill 1411. This is, uh, kind of part and parcel of the discussion that we just had this relates uh to the underground storage of carbon dioxide and um. Just to hit the highlights it would allow the oil and gas commission to, as we just discussed, apply for uh primacy as as related to these programs again that would just mean that they can regulate it, they would be the lead regulatory agency still have to operate within the confines of what the federal government allows, um, it would create a program uh to allow for the permitting process to streamline that permitting process, it does require some. application fee and an annual wealth fee, uh, but my understanding is that that's very much consistent with what is already taking place in other areas of law when it comes to uh various types of uh of wells that are depositing uh material subsurface and then creates the carbon dioxide storage trust fund, um. And then a tonnage fee related to the injection of the CO2. So we're essentially trying to set up a structure by which. Uh, the injection and storage of carbon dioxide can be permitted in the state and this is very similar to what we've previously done when whether it comes to uh saltwater uh disposal or any number of other things and I'll turn it over to the director for its primarily current, this. process is currently regulated by US EPA. Uh, there's one project in Arkansas LSB Industries and in El Dorado has applied to do this. Uh, it's been, they've had their per pending with the EPA for. I think a couple years. The EPA is very slow in approving those permits to do this process. Uh, when the state adopts. Um, the necessary regulatory. There are statutory standards to do this, we can apply for primacy. From US EPA and bring that regulatory process in-house within your own gas commission, which will speed up that approval process and allow those industries to undertake this process. And I, and I do think that's a key point just for everybody to understand and I I know I've said this several times, the, the The parameters of that regulation are established by the federal government and so it's not as if the state can necessarily uh create or create the sub. regulations are substandard substandard, um. But it allows the state, the oil and gas commission to take the lead on the regulation which in my experience, uh, those that are involved in the industry, really for everybody, for all our Kansans, it's beneficial because it's an easier way to access they're probably not gonna have as much of a delay time just as the director indicated and uh it's just, it's gonna be a better process but again without sacrificing the regulatory, uh, parameters that are that are already. Jane, you have a question. Uh, yes, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Bengel or Representative Shepherd, I see the, the fee for the permit is not to exceed 50,000. What is the fee for, you said that this would take place of the EPA fee. No, EPA currently does not charge any fees or anything. They just take forever to decide something. OK, all right, so there's no, there's no fee for the EPA. No, it just, you may or may not get your permit through the EPA process, but the fee covers, for example, the $50,000 permit fee. There's an extensive. Computer modeling process required to get this permit rather than a higher step, uh, on, in your own gas commission to do that. Since they only made me a handful of projects. It's much easier to charge that fee then hire consultants to do that for the state. OK. And I see that your 3 and 7 and 10 cent fees for. For One go into the oil and gas commission, one going to the storage fund. And I guess the other one is for, uh, A 10 cent deposit. What, what does that 10 cent deposit injection storage, what does that go to? The 7 cents of the 10 cents goes to uh basically an abandoned. Project fund. OK. Kind of like you do on your oil and gas wells. Under the EPA regulations and under our regulations at some point in time, the industry's relates some reliability. for that project. Uh, and over time 1015, 20 years from now, if something goes wrong, an old well breaks out or something, this fund would cover remediation of that, uh. Of that um Um, uh, problem. Our current project is pending LSB Industries. I believe it is for a frame of reference, they're going to inject in store, I believe, 500,000 tons a year. So that would generate a $50,000. The you both of these funds, OK. And, and you, that's the only person that has an only entity that has an application in right now. We've had other expressed interest, but that's the only one that actually is applied to EPA. OK, thank you, Mr. Chairman. All right. Committee, any other questions? Representative Shepherd, you like clothes for your bill? I'm clothes for my bill, and we move, hang on a minute there. I skipped again. Anybody and they all just lists wish to speak for or against the bill. Now, go ahead. I'm, I'm closed from the bill and I would move to pass. All right, we have a motion do pass. All those in favor say aye. opposed? Would you like to Identify yourself with the committee. Thank you, Mr. Chair, members of the committee. My name is Jeremiah Moore. I represent House District 61, and today I'm happy to be presenting Senate Bill 146 for discussion. uh, this bill takes a existing statute from 1965 regarding landowner liability that the in which these landowners allow. Individuals to come and use their land for recreational activities and also not charge them for those for that use, um, currently, these activities include hunting, fishing, swimming, boating, camping, picnicking, hiking, pleasure driving nature study, water skiing, winter sports, spelunking, and aviation. What this does is it broadens that liability protection to include rock climbing, cycling, mountain biking, horseback riding, paddling, skateboarding, and hoverboarding. This. Bill has been brought to my attention and is a bill from the Office of Outdoor Recreation and Parks Heritage and tourism. Uh, if you have any questions, I'd be happy to take them. Members, any questions? Represented Kozak. Can't let you get by without one. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, uh, I think this is all public land only, is that correct? This is public would be public and private, so I'm just gonna kind of throw a little scenario. So what about deer camp leases or deer leases. So since that's a very valid question, but since that, uh, lease would include a payment. This does not apply to them. OK, that's, I just want to make sure because we do have to have a liability on those lands and so most time the owners carry that as these guys in here that are timber people know except for Lang Jean, he doesn't do that, so. And, and to provide further clarity, this is to encourage the use of private lands for public, for the public consumption. So for instance if there are two, natural areas and sandwiched in between those two natural areas, there is a piece of private property, um, if that landowner were to agree to allow the public to access their property for any number of these circumstances, they would be protected from liability because They're letting the public use it for the public good. Any other questions, committee? Anyone in the audience was to speak for or against the bill. Representative, you're ready to close for your bill? I'm closed for my bill. I motion do pass and I would appreciate a good vote. All right, we have a motion to pass. All those in favor say aye. Opposed Congratulations. All right, I guess we're down to Mr. Meeks, huh? All right, Representative Meeks, would you like to present your bill and introduce yourself? Yeah, it's just not mine. Uh, good morning, committee. Representative Steven Meeks, I do have a uh amendment for y'all, uh, which I hope will be the most difficult part of this. I'll let that get passed. All it does is it adds Senator Stone as the Senate sponsor on the bill. I know, yeah, yeah. I Representative Kozark has moved to Accept the amendment. All those in favor say aye. I suppose Representative makes your All right. Thank you, as amended. All right, thank you, Chairman and committee. So colleagues, this bill was brought to me by GIS and what this bill does is get recently the US Geological Survey updated the coordinate systems that they use for the United States. What this bill does in a nutshell is it brings us into alignment with that code. And, uh, that's essentially it. If anybody has any questions, uh, I do have, uh, folks uh from uh GIS and from the successors here. Everyone is in support of this and agrees that this is a step that we need to take, so, uh, that's the 50,000 ft view version of this bill, if anybody has any questions, I'll be happy to direct them to the experts, any questions? All right, any, let's see, Daniel Phillips. You're here to speak for the amendment. Part of the bill. Yeah, he, he's just here for moral support and answer any questions the committee might have. He's he's from GIS, so. James Montgomery, same same. Darrell Hall, same? All right. Saying no questions. Representative Ms, you're ready to close for your bill? Uh, we're closed for the bill and uh what would be thankful for our due pass as amended.