Alaska and Hawaii Auto Dealer Bonds

Written by JoAnn Smith on December 26th, 2013. Posted in Alaska, Bond Types, Commercial Bonds, Hawaii, License and Permit Bonds, Motor Vehicle Bonds, States, Surety Bond Blog

     Alaska auto dealer bonds, Hawaii auto dealer bonds
Alaska and Hawaii are part of the US too!
Alaska and Hawaii are two states with some very specific driving conditions. Outside of the obvious fact that neither of them are within the 48 states in the main part of the country, they also have some obstacles for auto dealers that go beyond the basic auto dealer bond requirements. For Alaska it may be because they have few roads and most of these in remote areas. Hawaii, with its tropical weather, faces other obstacles. Between the two, it isn’t surprising to find out that road conditions probably drive the popularity of four-wheel vehicles in both states. Whether it is getting stuck in the mud of a Hawaiian side road through a tropical forest or finding your vehicle is sliding on a sheet of frozen roadway in tundra territory, an ordinary car just won’t cut it here.  None the less, their requirements differ substantially when it comes to what surety bonds are a part of the licensing requirements for an auto dealership in Alaska or Hawaii.

Alaska Auto Dealer Bonds Requirements

Anyone who is considering starting up an auto dealership in Alaska will need to have their surety bond requirements fulfilled before submitting their paperwork to the DMV. In fact, for a new or used vehicle dealership the dealer or buyer’s agent will need to submit an original and notarized $50,000 auto dealer bond. If the dealership will only be selling motorcycles the bond requirement is only $25,000 but will still need to be original and notarized.

Requirements for Hawaii Auto Dealer Bonds

In Hawaii the auto dealer bond requirements are governed by what is sold in the vehicle dealership. It breaks down into new vehicles, used vehicles and whether the dealership is selling motorcycles or scooters. Just as we have seen in several other states, the auto dealer bond requirements for Hawaii also are broken down by how many vehicles are sold each year. New Motor Vehicle Sales-
  • $200,000 New Motor Vehicle Dealer Bond – When selling 10 or more units
  • $50,000 New Motor Vehicle Dealer Bond – When selling less than 10 units
Used Motor Vehicle Sales-
  • $100,000 Used Motor Vehicle Dealer Bond – When selling 60 or more units
  • $25,000 Used Motor Vehicle Dealer Bond – When selling less than 60 units
Motorcycle or Motor Scooter Sales-

Auto Dealer Bonds Delivered Fast and Easy

Whether you are planning to open an auto dealership, a motorcycle dealership or simply sell a dozen or so used vehicles in the next year, you will need to be sure your auto dealer bonds are in place first. That is when it is handy to have a surety bond provider that can walk you through the process and get you the best possible price. BuySurety has been providing auto dealer bonds to the automotive retail and wholesale industry since 1998. We know the business, keep track of the changes and can provide thorough customer support. Why take chances with your business? Get your auto dealer bonds fast and at a great price today with BuySurety.

Tags: , , , , , ,

Comments Off on Alaska and Hawaii Auto Dealer Bonds

Surety Bonds for Gas and Oil Leases Go Through Changes

Written by JoAnn Smith on June 14th, 2013. Posted in Alabama, Alaska, Latest News, Mississippi, Nevada, New York, Pennsylvania, Reclamation, Mining and Removal Bonds, South Dakota, Surety Bond Blog

     gas and oil exploration surety bonds
*Gas and oil leases need surety bonds*
In the recently completed state legislative sessions, quite a few states have made legislative revisions to how oil and gas lease procedures and their attendant performance bonds are handled. The majority of the bills reflect the growing interest in using hydraulic fracturing as part of the gas and oil extraction process. They also reflect the growing demands of environmental concerns regarding the extraction industry. Many bills involve ensuring reclamation of the surface lands upon plugging of old wells. Links are provided to legislative online reports as well as BuySurety’s surety bond pages for more information on these specific surety bond types.

Alaska Surety Bonds

In Alaska legislature, Senate Bill 96 and House Bill 198 have both been scheduled for a hearing with their respective Resource Committees. Both of these bills will revise current laws for oil and gas leases by providing extensions that are conditional upon the posting of a performance bond.

Alabama Surety Bonds

The Alabama Legislative House introduced House Bill 503 that would allow surface mining operations that own abandoned wells to recover oil from oil sands upon the posting of a reclamation bond. This bond would provide a security that ground surfaces disturbed by the oil sand recovery would be reclaimed per written agreements.

Mississippi Surety Bonds

The House and Senate of the Mississippi Legislature have both adopted a conference report that is the basis for House Bill 1698 regarding oil and gas wells. Operators of horizontally drilled wells and recompletion wells will be required to post a $1 million performance bond at the time that they obtain a permit for the well. The bond will cover compensation for the repair and maintenance of roads damaged by drilling traffic in the county where the wells reside.

 Nevada Surety Bonds

The State of Nevada’s Senate Bill 390 will authorize hydraulic fracturing for gas and oil drilling in the state. As part of the permit process, the Division of Environmental Protection may require a performance bond to ensure that dry or abandoned wells are plugged and that wells causing waste are repaired.

New York Surety Bonds

The New York Senate has introduced Senate Bill 24 and the New York Assembly has introduced Assembly Bill 6365 to regulate the introduction of the hydraulic fracturing method for natural gas drilling. Well operators will be required to furnish a reclamation bond that will be non-recoverable and bankruptcy proof to guarantee the costs of restoring the drilling site. In addition, New York Senate Bill 4028 and Assembly Bill 3634 will establish the requirement of a reclamation bond to cover the costs of addressing contamination of natural gas sites. The bond would be directed by the Department of Environmental Conservation and would be tied to the owner’s or operator’s cleanup and decontamination performance.

Pennsylvania Surety Bonds

The Pennsylvania Senate has introduced SB 780, a bill that will require a surface use agreement between surface owners and the gas or oil well operators. A surety bond for $10,000 per well could be posted for the benefit of the land owner in lieu of the agreement. A blanket bond of $25,000 to cover all well locations, if in a readily payable form, would also be permitted.

South Dakota Surety Bonds

The enactment of South Dakota’s Senate Bill 1 has changed the requirements of the performance bonds currently required for oil and gas wells plugging. The new law increases the bonds for wells less than 5500 feet to $10,000 per well or a blanket bond $30,000. For wells over 5500 feet deep the surety bond has increased to $50,000 with a blanket bond of $100,000.

Tags: , ,

Comments Off on Surety Bonds for Gas and Oil Leases Go Through Changes

Surety Bond Legislative Changes Expected for Extraction Leases in Alaska

Written by JoAnn Smith on May 9th, 2013. Posted in Alaska, Commercial Bonds, Legislation, Surety Bond Blog

     Alaska oil will need surety bonds to renew
Alaska oil will need surety bonds to renew
With bills circulating in both The House and The Senate, Alaska looks like it will have some changes regarding how extractive industries such as oil and gas are being handled in the State of Alaska. Considering that these industries are the prime developers of new income for the state, it isn’t surprising that they are looking at having greater control, along with the revenues, from these industries. Extraction leases for oil and gas that were previously extended automatically will now be subject to approval based on the performance of the sites on leased land. With many of the oil and gas leases in Alaska currently on state lands, procedures for extending these leases are now being rewritten in the Senate. What this means for businesses doing extraction business in oil and gas in Alaska is that they will need to be more accountable to the state if they need to extend their leases being the initial ten year lease.

Alaska Senate Bill 96/ House Bill 198 – Oil and Gas Leases

In addition to the current requirements, any company that wishes to extend their leases for oil and gas exploration and drilling will need to provide a surety performance bond to guarantee their development of the property in accordance to the minimum paying quantities agreed upon for the lease. Prior to this legislative change, leases were renewed automatically every ten years as long as there was revenue being realized from the site. These renewals will now be reviewed for feasibility and revenue development and assessed a performance surety bond that is tied to that expected revenue and taxes for the state. Senate Bill 96 is currently in a hearing with the Senate Finance Committee and is expected to be making the rounds for signatures before the end of May 2013. You can see the current language of this bill and any updates on its progress at this page for Alaska Senate Bill 96. Meanwhile, the House has a similar bill being reviewed by the House Resources Committee. The two bills expect to have some revisions done before the work begins on reconciling the two bills into one acceptable document for signoff.

Tags: ,

Comments Off on Surety Bond Legislative Changes Expected for Extraction Leases in Alaska

Alaska Firm Loses Bid Over Lack of Performance Bond

Written by JoAnn Smith on April 26th, 2013. Posted in Alaska, Performance Bonds, Surety Bond Blog

     performance surety bond needed
Alaska emergency food stock
April 26, 2013 – The State of Alaska is currently without a supply of non-perishable food in case of an emergency due to the rejection of the lone company bidding to be a supplier for the state. The company, Select Medical Product, had submitted a bid to the Alaska Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management in response to an initiative by Alaska’s Governor Sean Parnell. The initiative had recently passed legislative session and would give the state a $4.9 million budget to supply Alaska with a regional emergency stockpile instead of having to rely on out of state food supplies. A critical lack of a surety bond posting was the cause.

Five Year Performance Bond

The company’s bid was rejected because they failed to produce a performance bond as part of their requirements before the posted deadline. This performance bond would need to cover the initial five year period for both supplies and money to be invested in the emergency stockpile of nonperishable food. A spokeperson for the Alaska Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Jeremy Zideck stated that the performance surety bond was needed because the “contract stretched over a five year span, so there could be multiple things that take place that could affect the business.” Since Select Medical Product was the only bidder on the initiative, the lack of a performance bond leaves Alaska without a regional supplier of stockpiled nonperishable food in the case of a regional emergency.

No Local Supplier Available

Although such organizations as The Food Bank of Alaska do have a stockpile of some non-perishable food on hand, it is intended for those who are “food insecure” and not as a region-wide supply in the case of an emergency such as a natural disaster. Because there are no USDA warehouses available in Alaska, this failure to provide an acceptable bid for a supplier of a regional warehouse of non-perishable food in case of emergency due to the inability to produce the required surety bond will leave the state vulnerable in the foreseeable future. The Alaska Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management has stated that they will continue to look for bids to fulfill their mandate to create a food security in the case of any Alaska disaster or emergency situations.

Tags: , , , ,

Comments Off on Alaska Firm Loses Bid Over Lack of Performance Bond

Commercial Surety Bond Legislature Update for 2012 in Alaska

Written by JoAnn Smith on November 9th, 2012. Posted in Alaska, Commercial Bonds, States, Surety Bond Blog

* Alaska Manufactured Home *
  There was only one commercial Alaska surety bond measure that passed the legislature in Alaska during the past session. There were no contract surety bond measures passed during the same legislative sessions. The lone commercial bond issue covers the indemnification of former owners and other secured parties against losses from a defect. See excerpt below for basic information, or follow the link for details and the actual Senate Bill language.

Senate Bill No. 104: Manufactured Homes

The legislative action of Senate Bill 104 deals with owners of manufactured homes and requires them to post a commercial surety bond  that is equal to one and a half times the manufactured homes value.  This bond is posted as an application for certificate of title and indemnifies any former owners, subsequent buyers (and their successors) and secured parties against any losses from a defect or undisclosed security interest on the home if the owner claims the home is not subject to the law regarding this. This will be effective beginning January 1, 2013. To read the actual language of the bill and other circumstances related to this bond issue, please follow our link to the actual bill.  


Comments Off on Commercial Surety Bond Legislature Update for 2012 in Alaska