Legislature(2017 - 2018)GRUENBERG 120
03/28/2018 01:00 PM House JUDICIARY
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 | |
| HB75 | |
| SB93 | |
| HB367 | |
| HB75 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | SB 93 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 367 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 75 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 367-NATIVE CORP. LIABILITY FOR CONTAMINATION
1:59:19 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN announced that the next order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 367, "An Act relating to the liability of a
Native corporation for the release or threatened release of
hazardous substances present on certain lands."
1:59:45 PM
HANS RODVICK, Staff, Representative Charisse Millett, Alaska
State Legislature, advised that HB 367 deals with issues going
back to the 1971 Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA).
At that time, he explained, as those lands were beginning to be
conveyed to Native Corporations throughout the state, folks
realized that portions of certain conveyed lands contained
contamination prior to that conveyance. These issues began to
be discussed by the Alaska Native communities in 1990s. In
1998, the United States Congress directed the Secretary of the
Interior [Donald P. Hodel] to review the issue and report. That
report found that approximately 650 sites were known to have
been conveyed to Alaska Native Corporations under ANCSA, except
the outcome of that report "didn't produce much, other than it
surveyed the issue well, but no action was really taken."
Approximately one decade went by and in 2014, the United States
Congress mandated that the United States Department of the
Interior update that inventory of contaminated lands. He
explained that in 2016, the United States Department of the
Interior completed its report and found that 500-plus sites
required remediation and cleanup in order to truly resolve the
issue. The largest party of those pre-transferred contaminated
lands was found to be the United States Department of Defense.
Subsequent to the 2016 report, he advised, and work with
organizations, such as the Alaska Native Village Corporation
Association (ANVCA) drafted this bill and also a bill at the
federal level. He explained that HB 367 will not solve the
problem of cleaning up the lands, but it will help bring Alaska
Native Corporations into a place where they are able to actually
begin addressing these matters. Essentially, the intent is to
remove liability from the Alaska Native Corporations which were
transferred contaminated lands and, he stressed that the Alaska
Native Corporations were unaware of those contaminations during
the process of the conveyance of lands. The issue, he
explained, is that under current state law, the Alaska Native
Corporations would be liable for the cleanup, cost, and damages
that may arise from those contaminated lands of which is
addressed in this legislation to remove that level of liability.
2:03:05 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX offered sympathy for this issue and asked
why it is strictly limited to Alaska Native Corporation lands.
She noted that Alaska has strict liability laws wherein someone
can be completely innocent when something was conveyed to them,
and they had absolutely no idea it was contaminated. In the
event this legislature addresses this issue for one category of
folks, she suggested possibly revisiting the entire law.
MR. RODVICK described the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act
(ANCSA) as a monumental piece of legislation in Alaska's history
that involved 44 million acres of conveyed lands. He pointed
out that it is not just the Alaska Native Corporations who are
affected with contaminated lands, many of the villages and
smaller corporations that, under the current liability state
statutes, "could be honestly decimated" if found liable and had
to deal with the contamination. Possibly, he offered, there is
a conversation to be had in looking at other parties who are
responsible for contamination, but the scope of this bill
focuses on the Alaska Native Corporations.
2:04:48 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked how it would work under this bill
if, for instance, an Alaska Native Corporation received conveyed
land through ANCSA and it then conveyed some of that land to a
second party, and that party found that the land was
contaminated. She asked whether this legislation would also
immunize the second party.
MR. RODVICK related that he would have to get back to the
committee with legal opinions in terms of Alaska Native
Corporations passing on conveyed lands, selling lands, or
conveying it to other parties, if that second party would be
relieved from liability. The intent of this legislation, he
explained, is to focus on the corporations with contamination on
their lands because those corporations want to help remediate
these environmental disasters so they can move forward with
their communities with responsible resource development or the
use of their lands.
2:06:12 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX commented that she would like to receive
an answer to her question.
2:06:19 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked when the last land grant was
conveyed under ANCSA.
MR. RODVICK answered that he would have to research that
question.
2:06:35 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN referred to the conveyance of the last
land grant and asked whether there are any circumstances where
an Alaska Native Corporation or someone else would be in
possession, control, or have some administrative
responsibilities over the land, prior to it formally,
officially, and legally, granted to them. He opined that if
that is the case, rather than having the immunization start or
the trigger begin when the land was granted, possibly a more
appropriate trigger would be when the person received the land
grant and came to possess or control or administer or manage the
land.
MR. RODVICK opined that the process of conveying lands under
ANCSA is ongoing because there is still land that has not been
fully conveyed to the Alaska Native Corporations by particular
parties. In terms of the word "grant" versus "convey," that
issue was discussed in the House Resources Standing Committee,
and he asked Representative Eastman whether that is what he is
considering in terms of the actual timeframe for the removal of
liability.
2:08:06 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN referred to [Section 3, AS 46.03.822(n),
page 3, line 1, which read as follows:
substance was present on the land at the time the land
was granted.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN clarified that he was asking whether the
last three words of the bill, "land was granted," are
appropriate and meet the intent of this legislation. He
commented that if this only deals with "at the time the land was
granted" and there is still land that has not yet been granted,
"maybe it's not right to absolve someone of responsibility
because they haven't been granted the land yet, if they are the
ones who may already be aware or maybe contributed to some type
of contaminants or something like that." In the event those
folks are responsible in some manner, he said, he did not know
whether what "we are trying to do" is remove them from liability
simply because they have not yet been granted the land.
MR. RODVICK answered that it comes back to the difference
between the definitions of "grant" and "convey." The lands were
granted to the Alaska Native Corporations under ANCSA, but they
have not yet been conveyed. He pointed out that those granted
lands containing contamination before being actually conveyed
are the lands this legislation addresses in removing liability,
and the sponsor's office worked in conjunction with the Alaska
Native Village Corporation Association when crafting this
legislation, he said.
2:09:52 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN opened invited testimony on HB 367.
2:10:16 PM
HALLIE BISSETT, Executive Director, Alaska Native Village
Corporation Association (ANVCA), described her background, and
advised that she has served on the board of directors for Cook
Inlet Region Incorporated since 2010 and she is clearly aware of
the various contaminated lands. She described that one bit of
contaminated land is located between the two major population
centers of the Municipality of Anchorage and the Mat-Su, with
Camp Mohawk in Eklutna that is currently contaminating Cook
Inlet with Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs). This is a real
problem "right in our backyard" she described, and it cannot be
ignored any longer. On 12/18/1971, the United States Congress
passed the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) into law
and agreed to convey to 12 Alaska Native Regional Corporations
and more than 200 village corporations, 44 million acres of
land. To be clear, she expressed, the Alaska Native people gave
up 88 percent of their traditional lands through ANCSA. The
United States Congress directed that the United States
Department of the Interior oversee the transfer of these lands
(coughing) late 1980s it was realized that the transfer was of
contaminated lands. The Alaska Native people did not know those
lands were contaminated and the federal government did not hand
over the documentation "letting us know what was out there.
And, what is out there? We're talking about arsenic, unexploded
ordinances, PCBs, among many other things."
2:12:14 PM
MS. BISSET, in response to Representative LeDoux's question as
to why this legislation is limited to ANCSA, opined that it is
limited to ANCSA "for the very fact that we gave up 88 percent
of our traditional lands" in exchange for this settlement. The
Alaska Native people were supposed to receive economically
viable lands in exchange, and not lands that they were legally
liable to cleanup. She stressed that a huge disservice was done
to the Alaska Native people over these many years and this
legislation is trying to remedy the situation by putting the
legal liability shield in place to complete the inventory of the
total sites out there. As was noted in the report, she offered,
there are approximately 650 sites currently, but there are about
100 more sites that need to be evaluated to determine the exact
condition of the land. She commented that if these events had
taken place 20-30 times, she might think it was a mistake, but
this has happened over 900 times. Therefore, something must be
done about this and she offered that some of the effects of the
contaminations as follows: people living on one side of the
river are dying of a certain type of cancer and the people
living on the other side of the river are not dying of this
cancer; people are hanging glow-in-the-dark fish at their fish
camps; and the people living in Unalakleet believe they are
getting Parkinson's Disease from all of the PCBs being dumped
into their water. This is a very real problem that needs to be
cleaned up, the report identifies 94 "orphan sites," an orphan
site means there is no intention to clean up the contamination.
She stressed that the Alaska Native Village Corporation
Association (ANVCA) would like to put the liability shield in
place and begin cleaning up these lands.
2:14:02 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked how this bill assists in the clean
up of contaminated lands because it absolves liability, at least
in some situations, from corporations. He noted that he was
unsure how that would help the owners of the land to cleaning up
the contaminations, and asked that, if anything, doesn't it make
it so the Alaska Native Corporations do not have to clean it up
because the contamination is not their fault.
MS. BISSETT responded that because the Alaska Native
Corporations are potentially responsible parties, they are
unable to apply for, for EPA ground fill development grants, for
example, which is one of the reasons for this legislation. This
bill lifts the liability problem in order to receive access to
federal funds for cleanup, she advised.
2:15:17 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN opened public on HB 367. After ascertaining that
no one wished to testify, closed public testimony on HB 367.
[HB 367 was held over.]