Legislature(2017 - 2018)GRUENBERG 120
04/08/2017 08:30 AM House STATE AFFAIRS
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 | |
| HB74 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 74 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 74-DRIVER'S LICENSE & ID CARDS & REAL ID ACT
8:35:50 AM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that the only order of business
would be HOUSE BILL NO. 74, "An Act relating to the
implementation of the federal REAL ID Act of 2005; and relating
to issuance of identification cards and driver's licenses; and
providing for an effective date." [Before the committee,
adopted as a work draft during the 4/4/17, 5:40 p.m., meeting,
was the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HB 74, Version
30-GH1781\J, Martin, 4/4/17, hereafter referred to as "Version
J".]
8:36:54 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX moved to adopt Amendment 1, [labeled 30-
GH1781\J.1, Martin, 4/6/17], which read:
Page 1, following line 11:
Insert a new bill section to read:
"* Sec. 2. AS 18.65.310(b) is amended to read:
(b) A person may obtain an identification card
provided for in (a) of this section by applying to the
department on forms and in the manner prescribed by
the department. The department shall include on the
application for an identification card a requirement
that the applicant indicate
(1) that the applicant understands the
options for identification cards available at the time
of issuance; and
(2) the type of identification card that the
applicant selects."
Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.
Page 2, lines 22 - 25:
Delete "The application must require that an
applicant indicate that the applicant understands the
options for identification cards available at the time
of issuance and indicate the identification card that
the applicant selects."
Page 5, lines 20 - 23:
Delete "The application must require that an
applicant indicate that the applicant understands the
options for drivers' licenses available at the time of
issuance and indicate the driver's license that the
applicant selects."
Page 6, following line 16:
Insert a new bill section to read:
"* Sec. 7. AS 28.15.061(b) is amended to read:
(b) An application under (a) of this section
must
(1) contain the applicant's full legal
name, date and place of birth, sex, and mailing and
residence addresses;
(2) state whether the applicant has been
previously licensed in the past 10 years as a driver
and, if so, when and by what jurisdiction;
(3) state whether any previous driver's
license issued to the applicant has ever been
suspended or revoked or whether an application for a
driver's license has ever been refused and, if so, the
date of and reason for the suspension, revocation, or
refusal;
(4) contain the applicant's social security
number; the requirement of this paragraph only applies
to an applicant who has been issued a social security
number; [AND]
(5) contain other information that the
department may reasonably require to determine the
applicant's identity, competency, and eligibility; and
(6) require that the applicant indicate
(A) that the applicant understands the
options for drivers' licenses available at the time of
issuance; and
(B) the type of driver's license that the
applicant selects."
Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.
Page 9, line 11:
Delete "Sections 12 and 13"
Insert "Sections 14 and 15"
Page 9, line 12:
Delete "sec. 14"
Insert "sec. 16"
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS objected for the purpose of discussion.
8:37:24 AM
STEPHANIE GILARDI, Staff, Representative Jonathan Kreiss-
Tomkins, Alaska State Legislature, on behalf of Representative
Kreiss-Tomkins, prime sponsor of HB 74, explained that Version J
states that the application for an identification (ID) card must
include information differentiating the compliant ID card from
the noncompliant ID card; however, it does not place a duty on
the Department of Administration (DOA) to include that
information on the application. She asserted that Legislative
Legal and Research Services recommended that Version J be
amended to place that duty on DOA.
8:38:26 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH asked if under Amendment 1, the application
would clearly inform the applicant that the ID card for which
he/she is applying would only permit the person to drive but not
allow access to federal facilities or plane travel.
MS. GILARDI responded, that is correct. She added that
Amendment 1 also states that it is the duty of DOA to provide
that information.
8:39:06 AM
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK expressed his belief that it would be
erroneous to convey information that a person would not be
permitted to fly without a REAL ID. He emphasized that his
previous testimony [during the 4/4/17 committee meeting] clearly
indicated that a person can fly without a REAL ID. He referred
to upcoming testimony by Edward Hasbrouck [The Identity Project
(IDP)], which Representative Tuck asserted would reveal that
airport signs about IDs required for travel are erroneous; court
documents uphold this position as well as admissions from the
Transportation Security Administration (TSA). He maintained
that he does not want people to fear that they will be unable to
travel unless they have a REAL ID card.
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL offered his understanding that once REAL ID
is enacted, Alaskans will be required to have a federally
recognized ID. He asked, "Isn't that the purpose of what we're
doing?"
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS asked that comments and questions be
limited to Amendment 1.
8:40:39 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KNOPP inquired as to the type of documentation
that would be required of a new applicant for the compliant ID
versus the noncompliant ID.
8:41:15 AM
LESLIE RIDLE, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Administration
(DOA), answered that DOA will draft regulations according to the
legislation that is passed. She stated that DOA will be very
clear with its customers; it always attempts to provide as much
information as possible to its customers; it doesn't want people
to be confused or get the wrong ID for what they need; and it
wants to give people every option available. She confirmed that
she currently is unable to provide that information.
REPRESENTATIVE KNOPP asked what documents currently are needed
to obtain a driver's license.
MS. RIDLE relayed that the list of IDs that may be used to
verify identification will not change under Version J; they are
birth certificate, proof of Social Security number (SSN), and
passport. She added that the regulations about the information
to be provided applicants regarding the two IDs will be new.
REPRESENTATIVE KNOPP asked if there are additional documents
required under Version J, or if the same documents are required,
but the verification process is different.
MS. RIDLE replied, "Exactly." She said they are the same
documents; nothing new will be required; and DOA will check the
documents more thoroughly under Version J.
8:43:25 AM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS removed his objection to the motion to
adopt Amendment 1. There being no further objection, Amendment
1 was adopted.
8:43:48 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX moved to adopt Amendment 2, [labeled 30-
GH1781\J.2, Martin, 4/6/17], which read:
Page 4, line 21:
Delete ", including the American Association of
Motor Vehicle Administrators,"
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS objected for the purpose of discussion.
8:44:08 AM
MS. GILARDI stated that Amendment 2 deletes the specific mention
of the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators
(AAMVA). She maintained that this revision was proposed by
Legislative Legal and Research Services. Since Section 4,
subsection (c), on page 4 of Version J states "If the department
conveys, distributes, or communicates data to be used in a
database, index, pointer system, or any other system managed by
an entity other than the department", the specific mention of
AAMVA is unnecessary; AMVAA is covered under the reference to
"an entity other than the department".
8:45:22 AM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS removed his objection to the motion to
adopt Amendment 2.
8:45:35 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KNOPP objected to the motion to adopt Amendment
2. He explained his objection: because the Alaska Division of
Motor Vehicles (DMV) is a member of AAMVA, it is possible that
AAMVA may not be considered "an entity other than the
department" at some point in the future. He added that there is
no harm to leaving the mention of AAMVA in Version J.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK concurred that it is appropriate to leave
the mention of AAMVA in this subsection. He stated that AAMVA
is the only organization through which a DMV can be REAL ID
compliant; and only AAMVA's contractor, [the State Pointer
Exchange Services (SPEXS)], can do the work. He maintained that
Version J, as is, still would allow for any other organization
that is in the position of mining data of civilians to have
access.
8:46:59 AM
REID MAGDANZ, Staff, Representative Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins,
Alaska State Legislature, on behalf of Representative Kreiss-
Tomkins, prime sponsor of HB 74, reiterated that Legislative
Legal and Research Services indicated that the reference to
AAMVA was unnecessary; however, the adoption of Amendment 2
would have no effect on the proposed legislation.
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH concluded that regarding the adoption of
Amendment 2, there would be no significant impact either way.
8:48:38 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX offered that her interpretation of the
language in subsection (c) is that if data is shared with AAMVA,
then AAMVA is excluded from the entities with which the specific
data points listed - images of faces, images of documents, or
images of signatures - may be shared.
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH agreed and suggested that as written,
Version J states that DOA may not convey images of faces,
documents, or signatures to AAMVA.
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL offered that the inclusion of AAMVA in the
subsection is a reassurance; it states that those three data
points are not "going anywhere," including to AAMVA. He
suggested that if the interpretation is questionable, then AAMVA
should be deleted.
8:51:12 AM
MICHAEL STANKER, Assistant Attorney General, Labor and State
Affairs Section, Civil Division (Anchorage), Department of Law
(DOL), stated that his interpretation of Section 4, subsection
(c), on page 4 of Version J is that if DOA conveys data to an
entity to comply with the REAL ID Act, it cannot convey images
of faces, images of documents, or images of signatures. He
offered that the deletion of the mention of AAMVA in that
subsection was a drafting concern brought forth by Legislative
Legal and Research Services; the DOL does not have a position on
the inclusion of AAMVA in that subsection.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK suggested that the committee hear from
Legislative Legal and Research Services staff concerning
Amendment 2, since it came from that agency.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX expressed that she supports deleting AAMVA
in the subsection, or if left in, it should be put after the
word "entity".
REPRESENTATIVE KNOPP maintained that Section 4, in its entirety,
states exactly what is intended: line 11 mentions prohibition
on data sharing and what DOA may not convey; line 16, subsection
(b), states that DOA may convey, distribute, or communicate the
data except as restricted in [subsection] (c) of this section;
subsection (c) defines what data cannot be shared. It states
that AAMVA is included among the organizations with which
certain data cannot be shared.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS explained that the motion on the table is
to adopt Amendment 2, which would delete specific mention of
AAMVA [in subsection (c) of Section 4].
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Wool and Kreiss-
Tomkins voted in favor of Amendment 2. Representatives Knopp,
LeDoux, Birch, Johnson, and Tuck voted against it. Therefore,
Amendment 1 failed by a vote of 2-5.
8:56:16 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX moved to adopt Amendment 4, [labeled 30-
GH1781\J.6, Martin, 4/6/17], which read:
Page 5, line 10:
Delete "identification card"
Insert "driver's license"
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS objected for the purpose of discussion.
8:56:32 AM
MS. GILARDI explained that Amendment 4 would delete an erroneous
reference to an "identification card" in Section 4 - a section
devoted only to driver's licenses - and insert "driver's
license".
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK asked for clarification on the effect of
Amendment 4.
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL commented that the state issues driver's
licenses and ID cards for non-drivers. He asked for
confirmation that under Version J, the state would issue both
driver's licenses and ID cards that are REAL ID compliant.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS confirmed that was correct.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked if there is a section in Version J
that addresses the destruction of information after renewal of
an ID card.
MR. MAGDANZ explained that ID cards are discussed in Title 18 of
the Alaska Statutes, and driver's licenses are discussed in
Title 28 of Alaska Statutes; therefore, Version J was drafted to
amend two separate titles to provide the option for both a REAL
ID compliant ID and a REAL ID compliant driver's license. He
maintained that for that reason much of the language is included
twice in the proposed legislation. He stated that Amendment 4
addresses a drafting error in which "identification card" was
used in the title [Title 28] referring to driver's licenses.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS suggested that Amendment 4 is a conforming
amendment to align the language of Version J with the title that
is referenced.
MR. MAGDANZ responded, that is correct; in Version J there is a
mention of "identification cards" in Title 28, and Title 28
refers to driver's licenses.
9:00:29 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX pointed out that the "twin" to page 5,
line 10, is page 2, line 12.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS confirmed her assessment. He removed his
objection to the motion to adopt Amendment 4. There being no
further objection, Amendment 4 was adopted.
9:04:09 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH expressed the importance of finding out
with assurance if in the future, the Transportation Security
Administration (TSA) will require a REAL ID card.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS responded that he will attempt to provide
written testimony or resources to address that question.
9:06:05 AM
DAN LOWDEN, Captain, Deputy Commander, Division of Alaska State
Troopers (AST), Department of Public Safety (DPA), stated that
DPS uses the DMV images in a variety of ways to perform its
duties: to create "wanted" posters; to create missing person
fliers; to assist in identifying unidentified deceased persons;
to create photograph (photo) lineups for witnesses to identify
suspects; and to identify drivers not presenting a driver's
license by matching personal information with photos on file.
He mentioned that another concern for law enforcement is record
reconciliation: determining if someone has more than one
record. He relayed that these photos are also used to prevent
identity theft: if an ID is lost or stolen, someone could alter
the ID by putting his/her own photograph on it and not be
apprehended, if there is no record left of that ID. He asserted
that identity theft is growing at an alarming rate, and recovery
from identity theft is extremely difficult. If someone has
his/her identity stolen and [historical] documents are not
maintained, it would be very hard for the person with the stolen
identity to establish that his/her identity was stolen and the
picture falsified.
9:10:50 AM
MARLA THOMPSON, Director, Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV),
Department of Administration (DOA), stated that DMV has been
retaining photos in its current system since about 2005, which
is when the improvements in cameras and technology made it
possible. She said the photos must be retained for 15 years.
She asserted that record security is of great concern to DMV;
there are policies and procedures about shredding records on
site; and nothing is out of DMV's "eyesight."
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS asked, "What is practice and what is
current law in terms of how long those images are retained?"
MS. THOMPSON replied that photos are retained with the actual
record, and the supporting documents for an application are
retained. Retention has been executed with the use of
microfiche and microfilm in the past but now is achieved with
electronic scans. She said that the retention of the actual
photo with the actual record is currently set at 15 years.
9:13:07 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH asked what the requirements are for taking
photos at DMV: the capability of the camera; the size of the
image; if glasses are worn by the applicant; or any other
special requirements of image capture.
MS. THOMPSON said that the camera is nothing special; it is very
big; it operates with a flash; and the picture of the individual
is taken against a blue screen. One may wear glasses if that is
his/her restriction. She relayed that she does not know the
photo size but could find out; photo size may change as
technology improves.
9:14:59 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked if under HB 74, the photo for a REAL
ID would be like photos used at major international airports,
such as Heathrow International Airport. She expressed her
understanding that a scan is taken of travelers moving from one
section of the airport to another.
MS. THOMPSON stated that she cannot speak to that scenario. She
said there would be two types of photos required [with REAL ID]:
one is a low technology (tech) webcam photo to accompany an
application; the second photo is taken at the end of the process
after the information is verified. The webcam photo may be used
for the ID, instead of the second photo taken.
9:16:33 AM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS posed the question [asked during the 4/6/17
committee meeting] of whether a temporary ID card can be used to
access a [military] base, if a person has applied for a REAL ID
and is waiting to receive it in the mail.
9:17: AM
BRIAN DUFFY, Director, Administrative Services Division,
Department of Military & Veterans' Affairs (DMVA), offered his
understanding that for one-time access, the military
installation would accept a temporary card; however, for
recurring access and to be able to get a Defense Biometric
Identification System (DBIDS) card for a one-year term, the
temporary ID card would be insufficient.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked if a person with a temporary card
would be able to access the military base for the week to ten
days he/she were waiting to receive the REAL ID in the mail.
MR. DUFFY reiterated that for one-time access - that is, one
entry, one exit - the temporary card would be sufficient.
Beyond that, the individual would need to obtain a DBIDS card,
and to obtain that card, one would need a REAL ID compliant form
of ID.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked if someone with a job on base, such
as with the school district or a construction firm, who was in
the process of obtaining a REAL ID card but needed to work on
base during the ten days while waiting for the card, would be
allowed only one time on base with a temporary card.
MR. DUFFY stated that after June 6, a REAL ID compliant form of
ID will be required to obtain the longer-term access card - the
DBIDS card; the DBIDS card would allow someone on base with no
other ID. He said that he would consult with the [military]
installation leaders once more on that question.
9:20:00 AM
MS. RIDLE offered that a person who works on base all the time
can get a card that lasts for a year; therefore, he/she can get
that card with his/her REAL ID. She said that if someone's REAL
ID is to expire, he/she can renew the ID and keep the expiring
one while waiting for the new one. She maintained that with a
passport, one needs to mail in the passport to renew it;
therefore, he/she is without one for six to eight weeks.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX stated that she was under the impression
that a new worker, needing to access base but lacking a REAL ID
card, could apply that day at DMV and obtain a REAL ID card.
She offered that testimony indicates that if a person has a job
lasting more than one day, he/she would not be able to continue
work until the REAL ID card arrived in the mail.
MS. RIDLE clarified that if HB 74 passes, Alaska will be granted
a waiver for at least two years to allow people time to obtain
REAL IDs or passports.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX countered that people have known for a
while that REAL ID "is coming" and her belief is that people
will still procrastinate given a later deadline. She mentioned
that she thought one of the benefits of REAL ID would be that
someone could apply for REAL ID and get on base the same day.
MS. RIDLE relayed that it will take DOA at least a year to
implement REAL ID, and that is the purpose of the waiver.
9:23:24 AM
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL acknowledged that under an extension, 2020
would be the deadline requiring REAL IDs for access to a
military facility or for airplane travel. He mentioned that Mr.
Duffy said that one would need a REAL ID compliant card to
access base, and one could get a DBIDS card. He clarified that
Representative LeDoux is asking if a temporary card would be as
compliant as a permanent REAL ID card to access base or get on
an airplane during the ten-day to two-week interim he/she is
waiting for a REAL ID card to come in the mail. He asked if
someone, who has been in the Bush for several years, comes to
town and has a flight out the next morning will be able to get
on the airplane with the temporary ID card from DMV.
MS. RIDLE responded that Mr. Duffy was referring to a one-time
access to base for work. A person who is working on base and
who comes and goes continuously, can get a card that lasts a
year.
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL responded that he understands that a person
who works on base all the time can get a DBIDS card. He offered
that a person with a REAL ID card would be able to do that as
well. He asked if base commanders will accept the temporary
REAL ID while the person is waiting for the permanent REAL ID.
MR. DUFFY stated that he would check with the installation
leaders to find out if a temporary ID card would be sufficient
during the interim [waiting] period and report back to the
committee.
9:27:11 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX stated that by a certain date, a REAL ID
would be required to travel by airplane; Alaska can get a waiver
if HB 74 passes. She asked what happens at an airport in a
state without a waiver, if someone needs to fly back to Alaska.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS offered that at any airport, including the
one in Juneau, there is a sign outside TSA declaring that if
someone has a driver's license from any of the following [named]
states at a certain [named] date, he/she will not be able to use
that state's driver's license at the TSA checkpoint. He
maintained that since federal standards apply across states, if
Alaska gets a waiver, Alaska driver's licenses will not appear
on that list of unacceptable IDs regardless of the state from
which the person is traveling.
MS. RIDLE answered that is correct.
9:30:07 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON referred to "grants to states" in the
REAL ID Act of 2005 and asked if Alaska has received any funds
from the federal government to implement REAL ID or upgrade its
equipment.
MS. THOMPSON replied that there were grants for the printers to
print the driver's licenses and the REAL IDs, but no REAL ID
grants for DMV. She mentioned that DMV received two grants to
pay for the work - one from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration (FMCSA) and one from the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA). She stated that she would find out if
there were any other grants.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON referred to the REAL ID Act, which
mentions grants from the federal government to implement REAL
ID. She asked to receive a written list of the funds received
for implementation.
MS. THOMPSON agreed to provide that information in writing.
9:34:59 AM
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK asserted that all airlines are considered
"common carriers," and a common carrier has a legal duty to
transport anyone who is willing to pay the airplane fare. He
maintained that there are no requirements for an ID for airplane
travel. He asked that Representative Kreiss-Tomkins, while
contacting the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS),
request clarification on how that policy will be changed for
future travel.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS offered to confer with Representative Tuck
to ensure the correct question is asked of DHS and the needed
information is obtained.
9:35:53 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KNOPP asked Ms. Thompson to include with the
grant information any binding language and state obligations
under the grants. He asked Ms. Ridle to provide him with
information regarding the length of time it would take to verify
documents submitted with the application for REAL ID. He also
mentioned that he was not aware of the two-year waiver and the
[deadline] date associated with it; he said he thought Alaska
had an [earlier] "drop dead" date.
MS. RIDLE replied that Alaska would only receive a waiver if HB
74 passes; if the proposed legislation does not pass during the
current legislative session, Alaska will lose its waiver on June
6.
9:37:39 AM
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK asked, "What needs to be in the bill to be
compliant for the waiver?" He maintained that there must be a
list of requirements.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS stated that through conversations with all
the agencies involved, he has learned that "compliance" is
determined by whether the state conforms to DHS regulations and
the authorizing REAL ID Act; and a state's compliance is
required for a waiver.
MS. RIDLE concurred.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK asked that the committee receive that list
of requirements so that Alaska can do the bare minimum to
comply. He maintained that he does not support submitting the
last five digits of SSNs, and that requirement is not included
in the REAL ID Act. He suggested that Alaska do the bare
minimum to get the waiver, then make changes through AAMVA so
that it does not have to submit data that is not required by the
Act.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS stated that his office has consulted the
body of regulations under the REAL ID Act as well as the
authorizing law itself and will share it with the committee. In
response to Representative Tuck, he stated that he did not know
if DHS staff would make themselves available to testify, but he
would ask.
9:41:01 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX commented that she would be surprised if
there wasn't at least a memo from the U.S. Department of Justice
(DOJ) outlining exactly what is necessary to comply with the
REAL ID Act. She referred to state legalization of marijuana
and the Cole memorandum [drafted by former U.S. Attorney General
James M. Cole in 2013 giving prosecutors and law enforcement
guidelines on marijuana law enforcement]. She said that in this
memo, the Attorney General specified DOJ's focus in determining
enforcement priorities with respect to marijuana. She asked,
"Isn't there something like that with respect to the REAL ID?"
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS expressed his belief that REAL ID
compliance is adjudicated on case-by-case, state-by-state basis.
A state's authorizing legislation is adjudicated by whether
through that legislation, the state is or is not compliant.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX added that "adjudication" suggests that
there is a legal case regarding a state's compliance.
MR. STANKER responded that he is not aware of any such
adjudicatory documents regarding minimum compliance. He
asserted that minimum compliance with the REAL ID Act is
explained in the 6 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 37 -
the body of regulations implementing the Act. He said that
having read them many times, it is his opinion that they don't
create a "floor" or a "ceiling," but a standard; to issue
compliant driver's licenses and IDs, a state must comply with
that standard.
9:44:28 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH suggested consulting the U.S. Army and the
U.S. Airforce, because their [ID] document requirements may
differ from those of the [military] bases.
[HB 74 was held over.]