Brief (1)
HB 2268 would provide various incentives for the construction in Kansas of certain electric utility property which is owned or operated by Kansas public utilities. One incentive would expand the application of an accounting treatment which allows into the ratebase any public utility's construction work in progress (CWIP). (Under existing law, construction costs of such facilities may not be included in customers' rates until the facilities or transmission lines are completed and ready to provide service.) The following incentives would be made available to public utilities:
The act would take effect upon publication in the Kansas Register.
Background
HB 2268 is intended to encourage investment in electric generation facilities in Kansas. Together with another bill (HB 2266) which was passed by the House Committee on Utilities, HB 2268 would make incentives available for the development of generation facilities that use coal or that use natural gas for peaking purposes. HB 2266 also would provide incentives for generation facilities that use natural gas as a back up fuel for renewable resource generation.
Although both HB 2268 and HB 2266 share a common objective (more construction of electric generation facilities in Kansas), they resort to different approaches to realize that objective. HB 2268 is targeted to encouraging Kansas public utilities to invest in the construction of rate-based coal-fired generation facilities and natural gas-fired peaking facilities (not baseload facilities) in Kansas. These generating facilities may sell power either on a retail or wholesale basis. In contrast, HB 2266 is targeted to promoting construction of independent power producers (IPPs) which sell wholesale power. An IPP may be totally unaffiliated with a Kansas public utility. Alternatively, a nonregulated subsidiary of a Kansas public utility which constructs IPPs may take advantage of the incentives offered in HB 2266. In either case, IPPs would not be included in a public utility's ratebase.
The introduced version of the bill was supported in concept by spokespersons for: Utilicorp; Kansas City Power & Light Company; Kansas Electric Power Cooperative, Inc.; and Western Resources. The Consumer Counsel of the Citizens' Utility Ratepayer Board opposed the bill. Spokespersons for the Kansas Chapter of the Sierra Club opposed the bill because it would provide incentives to assist in the construction of coal-fired power plants in Kansas.
The House Utilities Committee amended the bill to enable utilities to receive incentives if they use natural gas to generate electricity on a peaking basis at a capacity factor not to exceed 20 percent. The Committee also amended the bill to authorize a ten-year property exemption for pollution control devices. Finally, the Committee amended the bill to require the forfeiture of a property tax exemption if an otherwise qualified peaking facility were to exceed the specified threshold for natural gas capacity over a two-year period.
The amendment of the House Committee of the Whole was technical.
The Senate Committee on Utilities amended the bill to:
1. *Supplemental notes are prepared by the Legislative Research Department and do not express legislative intent. The supplemental note and fiscal note for this bill may be accessed on the Internet at http://www.ink.org/public/legislative/fulltext.cgi