Legislature(2009 - 2010)BARNES 124
04/08/2009 01:00 PM House RESOURCES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB210 | |
| HB162 | |
| HJR25 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HJR 25 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 210 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 162 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | HCR 12 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE
April 8, 2009
1:04 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Craig Johnson, Co-Chair
Representative Mark Neuman, Co-Chair
Representative Bryce Edgmon
Representative Kurt Olson
Representative Paul Seaton
Representative Peggy Wilson
Representative David Guttenberg
Representative Scott Kawasaki
Representative Chris Tuck
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 210
"An Act designating Kinzarof Lagoon as part of the Izembek State
Game Refuge; authorizing a land exchange with the federal
government in which state land adjacent to the Izembek National
Wildlife Refuge and within the Alaska Peninsula National
Wildlife Refuge is exchanged for federal land to serve as a road
corridor through the Izembek National Wildlife Refuge and
federal land located on Sitkinak Island; and providing for an
effective date."
- MOVED CSHB 210(RES) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 162
"An Act establishing the Southeast State Forest and relating to
the Southeast State Forest; and providing for an effective
date."
- MOVED HB 162 OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 25
Urging the United States Congress to classify hydroelectric
power as a renewable and alternative energy source.
- MOVED CSHJR 25(ENE) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 12
Requesting that the governor and the attorney general review and
reevaluate the license issued to TransCanada Alaska Company,
LLC, and Foothills Pipe Lines Ltd., jointly as licensee, under
the Alaska Gasline Inducement Act to determine whether the
project proposed by the licensee sufficiently maximizes the
benefits to the people of the state and merits continuing the
license, taking into consideration economic changes affecting
project financing, the availability of liquefied natural gas and
natural gas from nonconventional sources, the state's risk of
paying treble damages associated with an in- state gas pipeline,
and the expected budget deficit; and requesting that the
governor and the attorney general report the outcome of the
review and reevaluation within six months.
- BILL HEARING CANCELED
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 210
SHORT TITLE: IZEMBEK STATE GAME REFUGE LAND EXCHANGE
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) EDGMON
04/01/09 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/01/09 (H) RES
04/08/09 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
BILL: HB 162
SHORT TITLE: SOUTHEAST STATE FOREST
SPONSOR(s): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR
03/02/09 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/02/09 (H) RES, FIN
04/08/09 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
BILL: HJR 25
SHORT TITLE: HYDROELECTRIC POWER; RENEWABLE ENERGY
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) THOMAS
03/13/09 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/13/09 (H) ENE, RES
03/24/09 (H) ENE AT 3:00 PM BARNES 124
03/24/09 (H) Moved CSHJR 25(ENE) Out of Committee
03/24/09 (H) MINUTE(ENE)
03/25/09 (H) ENE RPT CS(ENE) 5DP
03/25/09 (H) DP: RAMRAS, DAHLSTROM, TUCK, JOHANSEN,
MILLETT
04/08/09 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
WITNESS REGISTER
Timothy Clark, Staff
Representative Bryce Edgmon
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing on HB 210, explained the
sponsor's reason for offering Amendment 1.
DICK MYLIUS, Director
Division of Mining, Land and Water
Department of Natural Resources
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing on HB 210, answered
questions,
STANLEY MACK, Mayor
Aleutians East Borough
Sand Point, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HB 210.
ERNEST WEISS, Mayor
City of King Cove
King Cove, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HB 210.
DELLA TRUMBLE
King Cove Corporation
King Cove, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HB 210.
RANDALL HAGENSTEIN, Executive Director
Alaska Chapter, The Nature Conservancy
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Suggested an enhancement to HB 210.
GARY HENNIGH, City Administrator
City of King Cove
King Cove, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HB 210.
MARTHA WELBOURN-FREEMAN, Forest Resources Program Manager
Division of Forestry
Department of Natural Resources
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HB 162.
KACI SCHROEDER-HOTCH, Staff
Representative Bill Thomas
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented the sponsor statement on behalf
of Representative Thomas.
TIM MCLEOD, President and General Manager
Alaska Electric Light and Power
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HJR 25.
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:04:36 PM
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN called the House Resources Standing Committee
meeting to order at 1:04 p.m. Representatives Neuman, Kawasaki,
Edgmon, Seaton, Wilson, and Tuck were present at the call to
order. Representatives Olson, Guttenberg, and Johnson arrived
as the meeting was in progress.
HB 210-IZEMBEK STATE GAME REFUGE LAND EXCHANGE
1:06:27 PM
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN announced that the first order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 210, "An Act designating Kinzarof Lagoon as
part of the Izembek State Game Refuge; authorizing a land
exchange with the federal government in which state land
adjacent to the Izembek National Wildlife Refuge and within the
Alaska Peninsula National Wildlife Refuge is exchanged for
federal land to serve as a road corridor through the Izembek
National Wildlife Refuge and federal land located on Sitkinak
Island; and providing for an effective date."
1:06:38 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON, sponsor of HB 210, paraphrased from the
following written sponsor statement [original punctuation
provided]:
On March 30th President Obama signed the Omnibus
Public Lands Management Act of 2009. This act includes
Congressional approval for a land exchange between the
State of Alaska and the federal government to allow a
single-lane, unpaved road through the Izembek National
Wildlife Refuge, connecting the village of King Cove
to the Cold Bay airport.
HB 210 will grant state authorization for that
exchange.
However, it is important to note that at the federal
level there are still two major processes that need to
be completed before this transaction is final. These
are the completion of an environmental impact
statement and a finding by the Secretary of the
Interior determining that the land exchange is in the
public interest.
HB 210 therefore does more than execute at state level
the transaction endorsed by Congress; it also provides
compelling evidence to the Secretary of the Interior
that the State of Alaska approves of this agreement to
establish dependable access for King Cove residents to
the Cold Bay airport primarily for health and safety
purposes.
In the agreement, the State will transfer
approximately 43,000 acres of land in the Alaska
Peninsula National Wildlife Refuge to the federal
government in exchange for approximately 206 acres for
the road corridor. The legislation also agrees to the
receipt of 1600 acres of federal land located on
Sitkinak Island to the State and provides for the
designation of Kinzarof Lagoon as part of the Izembek
State Game Refuge.
The residents of King Cove and Aleutians East Borough
have strived toward this goal for more than a decade.
The King Cove Corporation has agreed to provide
approximately 19,000 acres of its ANCSA land to the
federal government, at no cost, as part of this
exchange. The Alaska Department of Natural Resources
supports the transaction. Senator Murkowski,
Congressman Young, and former Senator Stevens have
championed this endeavor at the federal level over
many years. Senator Begich also backs the plan.
It is now the State of Alaska's role to take this next
important step. I respectfully ask for your support in
concluding this agreement while also sending an
important message to the Secretary of the Interior
that Alaska endorses this exchange and all that it
entails for the improved safety and quality of life
for citizens in Southwestern Alaska.
1:09:30 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON called attention to the maps included in
the committee packets. He explained that the parcels labeled
one and two are the 43,000 acres of state land that would be
transferred to the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service to become part
of the Izembek National Wildlife Refuge. He further explained
that to the left of where it says "hovercraft site" on the map
is a tidal area that would also be transferred to the federal
government because of its habitat importance to birds.
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON noted that HB 210 has a zero fiscal note
and an immediate effective date. He also pointed out that if
the federal government stumbles and does not complete the land
exchange, HB 210 provides that all of the aforementioned actions
would become null and void and land ownership would be returned
to what it is today.
1:12:38 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON inquired whether parcels three, four, and
five on the map would also be added to the refuge in exchange
for the road corridor.
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON replied that these parcels are part of the
overall exchange package but are not addressed by HB 210 because
there is no need to have the state involved in the land
transaction. For example, parcels four and five, totaling about
10,000 acres and belonging to the King Cove Corporation, would
become part of the Izembek National Wildlife Refuge, but the
transaction is between the corporation and the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service.
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN announced that there is a video on this issue
available for people to watch.
1:15:08 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON moved to adopt Amendment 1, which read
[original punctuation provided]:
Page 5, Lines 8 and 9:
Delete: "constructing a single-lane road"
Insert: "a corridor for the construction and
operation of a road"
Page 5, line 9:
After "Cold Bay, Alaska,"
Insert: "in accordance with the Omnibus Public
th
Land Management Act of 2009, H.R. 146, 111 Cong.
(2009) (enacted),"
Thus, page 5, lines 8 and 9, would read:
within the Izembek National Wildlife Refuge for the
purpose of a corridor for the construction and
operation of a road between the communities of King
Cove and Cold Bay, Alaska, in accordance with the
Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009, H.R. 146,
th
111 Cong. (2009) (enacted), described as follows:
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI objected.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON objected for discussion purposes.
1:15:21 PM
Timothy Clark, Staff, Representative Bryce Edgmon, Alaska State
Legislature, explained that Amendment 1 is a conforming
amendment that would make the language in HB 210 track more
closely with federal act which clarifies that the state receives
a corridor that allows the construction and operation of a road.
This would remove any ambiguity, he said.
1:16:11 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG asked whether a description of the
road is defined anywhere, given that the difference between
constructing a single lane road and a corridor is considerable.
MR. CLARK answered that a decision on where the road is actually
located will be partly determined on the federal level by the
environmental impact statement (EIS). He said the federal act
details the features that will be allowed, such as corridor
width and safety pullouts, and Amendment 1 is therefore
generalized to some extent. In further response to
Representative Guttenberg, Mr. Clark reiterated that the road
features are detailed in the federal act.
1:17:57 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI inquired whether a copy of the federal
act is available.
MR. CLARK said he would provide a photocopy.
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI asked Mr. Dick Mylius for further
explanation of why Amendment 1 is necessary.
DICK MYLIUS, Director, Division of Mining, Land and Water,
Department of Natural Resources, responded that he does not have
the amendment before him, but he does have testimony that
elaborates on why the legislation is needed.
1:19:23 PM
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN requested Mr. Mylius to present his testimony
and address the federal act in relation to Representative
Kawasaki's question.
MR. MYLIUS stated that under AS 38.50 the Department of Natural
Resources (DNR) is responsible for conducting land exchanges.
There are two reasons why HB 210 is before the committee, he
continued. First, Alaska's statutes allow the department to do
land exchanges if they are equal appraised value; however, the
department does not believe this to be an equal exchange and
therefore needs the legislature's approval. Second, a provision
in the proposed exchange would add certain state-owned tidelands
and submerged lands to the Izembek State Game Refuge, which is
part of the deal that the department negotiated with the federal
government.
1:20:37 PM
MR. MYLIUS explained that several years ago the Aleutians East
Borough, City of King Cove, and King Cove Village Corporation
requested the governor's office and DNR to pursue a land
exchange to enable construction of the road because the current
situation of using a hovercraft does not provide a safe,
economical, long-term solution to King Cove's access needs. The
exchange before the committee was developed through discussions
between the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, DNR, and the
corporation, city, and borough. It was recognized that both
state and federal legislation would be needed, but the biggest
hurdle was getting approval through the U.S. Congress. The land
exchange was originally separate legislation introduced in 2007
by Senator [Lisa] Murkowski and Representative Young. Governor
Palin wrote letters in support of the legislation and the state
testified in support of the bill before the U.S. House Committee
on Natural Resources. In late 2008, the land exchange bill was
rolled into the federal omnibus bill which was passed by
Congress and then signed by President Obama in March [2009].
1:22:06 PM
MR. MYLIUS further explained:
In putting together the exchange it was clear that
because of the unique wildlife and wilderness values
of the refuge that were being crossed by the road, a
simple fair market value land exchange would not
adequately address the wilderness values, the public's
concern over those values, as well as the public
safety concerns of residents of King Cove and Cold
Bay. And as a result what we have is an unequal value
land exchange that requires your approval. In terms
of the parcels of land ... that require approval, the
state is proposing to acquire 206 acres in the road
corridor and 1600 acres of land on Sitkinak Island, an
island located south of Kodiak, which ... is primarily
state land and borough land, but has a federal
inholding which is what the ... legislation would
allow us to acquire through the exchange.
1:22:45 PM
MR. MYLIUS said there are also some Native corporation lands
that would be part of the package going to the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, but these do not need the legislature's
approval. The state would be trading to the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service about two townships of land that are on the
flanks of Pavlof Volcano adjacent to the wildlife refuge and
which have high wildlife values, particularly for caribou and
brown bear. Additions to the state game refuge are also being
proposed, he continued. These additions are lands in the
Kinzarof Lagoon area at the head of Cold Bay which have resource
values similar to Izembek Lagoon, including valuable eelgrass
beds that are critical to waterfowl that migrate through the
area and live in the area.
MR. MYLIUS specified that the two actions the legislature is
being asked to approve are the unequal-value land exchange where
the two townships of state land would be traded to get the road
corridor and land on Sitkinak Island, and the designation of
about 4,000 acres of state land as part of the Izembek State
Game Refuge.
1:24:05 PM
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN reminded members that Amendment 1 is before the
committee.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON understood that inserting "a corridor for
the construction and operation of a road" would allow for
turnouts and passing which would not violate the federal
standards of a single lane road.
MR. MYLIUS agreed, saying the department understands that
Amendment 1 does not conflict with the federal requirement that
it be a one-lane road.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON withdrew his objection to Amendment 1.
[Representative Kawasaki's objection was treated as withdrawn.]
There being no further objection, Amendment 1 was passed.
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN opened public testimony.
1:26:22 PM
STANLEY MACK, Mayor, Aleutians East Borough, pointed out that
one of his primary responsibilities as mayor is to help improve
the quality of life for the 2700 residents of the Aleutians East
Borough, and safe and dependable transportation access is one of
the most important of these qualities. He supported HB 210 and
thanked the state for its steadfast support and assistance with
the land exchange so that a single lane road can be constructed
to connect the village of King Cove with the Cold Bay airport.
MAYOR MACK stated that having been born and raised in King Cove,
he has firsthand knowledge of the difficulties of getting to
Cold Bay. He explained that King Cove's hope for access to the
Cold Bay airport was dashed 35 years ago when a portion of the
Izembek National Wildlife Refuge between the two communities was
declared Wilderness without consultation with the indigenous
residents. He said this proposed land exchange provides
optimism that a road link can now occur after decades of long,
hard work.
1:28:49 PM
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN inquired whether people's lives are on the line
if HB 210 is not passed this year.
MAYOR MACK replied, "Every day." He explained that the airport
in King Cove cannot be improved safety-wise because it is
subject to high prevailing winds from the northwest and
southeast. A local carrier, Peninsula Airways, has a standing
order that no planes can come in when winds are above 35 miles
per hour. When this happens the only other option is to take a
boat to Cold Bay which is a very uncomfortable trip in such
weather. He said that while working in Cold Bay he once watched
a medivac in a 110-foot crab boat that could not make it to the
dock in Cold Bay because of weather conditions and the patient
was unable to be evacuated until the next day. Eleven
fatalities have occurred en route by plane to Cold Bay, plus
many that never made it out of King Cove because of the weather
conditions.
1:32:10 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI asked how many people live in King Cove
and Cold Bay.
MAYOR MACK responded that Cold Bay varies from time to time
because it is a transient community, but right now there are
about 60 people. He said he believes there are about 800-900
permanent residents in King Cove with an increase to 1500 or
more during the cannery season.
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI inquired why the triangular-shaped area
[North Creek Unit] adjacent to parcels one and two is not
included as part of the exchange.
MAYOR MACK answered that he does not know but the state would
know.
1:33:45 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI asked whether any people lived in the
[North Creek Unit].
MAYOR MACK replied no, the area is perfect wilderness. However,
he continued, that is not the case further east because the
military was there and created a network of roads throughout the
wilderness and the refuge. In further response, he clarified
that by "further east" he meant parcels one and two.
1:34:36 PM
CO-CHAIR JOHNSON inquired as to how much land is being traded
for the road.
MAYOR MACK responded that he thinks the total amount is about
64,000 acres. In further response, he clarified that the state
is trading 22,498 acres in parcel one and 22,498 acres in parcel
two for a total of about 44,000 acres, and the rest is coming
from the King Cove Corporation.
1:35:37 PM
CO-CHAIR JOHNSON commented that "someone is getting a really
good deal."
MAYOR MACK agreed.
CO-CHAIR JOHNSON further commented that King Cove Corporation
and the state are making a tremendous sacrifice for public
safety and such a lopsided trade is a travesty.
MAYOR MACK concurred. He said Mr. Dale Hall of the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service was a very strong negotiator. He explained
that parcel three [Mortensen's Lagoon] was the crown jewel and
the turning point in getting the federal government to accept
the land exchange for the road corridor. The corporation had to
do whatever it took to make this happen.
CO-CHAIR JOHNSON clarified that he is not opposing what Mr. Mack
has done and is applauding him for the sacrifice being made for
the citizens of his community.
1:38:02 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON added that when the Alaska National
Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) passed in 1980, it was
envisioned that there would be transportation routes at some
point in time. He agreed with Co-Chair Johnson that the state
and King Cove Corporation are paying an extremely high price for
a sliver of land through a refuge area that already has
approximately 35 miles of existing roads from the World War II
era. Active hunting and transport are already taking place in a
good part of the refuge, he added.
MAYOR MACK agreed.
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN asked whether Mr. Mack felt the state worked
with him in a cooperative manner.
MAYOR MACK responded that he took office as mayor seven years
ago and this was a prior, ongoing issue. He understood that
when U.S. Senator Frank Murkowski became governor, he contacted
people in King Cove and told them more work needed to be done to
get the issue accomplished.
1:40:59 PM
CO-CHAIR JOHNSON stated that if this were not a life and safety
issue, he would fight the lopsidedness and unfairness of the
exchange. He said he does not want this to be misconstrued as
any concession on the part of the state in giving up state
rights in regard to right-of-ways.
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN agreed and proffered that there was some
question as to whether DNR listens to the needs of state
residents, but that this would be addressed on another day.
1:42:42 PM
ERNEST WEISS, Mayor, City of King Cove, stated that there is a
major problem with safe and predictable transportation access
between his community and the Cold Bay airport, which is served
daily from Anchorage. He said he supports HB 210 in part to
help solve his community's access problem to the Cold Bay
airport. During his 25 years of living in King Cove he has
witnessed the fear and frustration that results from not having
a safe, dependable, and predictable means to get to the Cold Bay
airport. He explained that in about 30-40 percent of the times
he has tried to get to the Cold Bay airport, he has either not
gotten there or not arrived in a timely or routine manner. On
behalf of King Cove's 800 residents, he thanked the State of
Alaska for its continuing support on this issue.
[Co-Chair Neuman passed the gavel to Co-Chair Johnson.]
1:44:53 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK inquired how long the land-swap negotiations
have been going on.
MAYOR WEISS replied that "Round One" ended in compromise
legislation in 1998 in which the solution was the hovercraft
that does not work. After that, Frank Murkowski, as both U.S.
senator and governor, worked with the two townships and it has
been ongoing ever since. The Department of Natural Resources
has been very cooperative, he continued, and the State of Alaska
has been very helpful under Governor Murkowski and Governor
Palin.
[Co-Chair Johnson returned the gavel to Co-Chair Neuman.]
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON commented that he has had the challenge of
travelling this area and it can be a terrifying flight.
CO-CHAIR JOHNSON asked where opposition to the exchange has come
from.
MAYOR WEISS answered that this proposed road would go through
designated Wilderness and opposition has come from environmental
groups that believe the road will disrupt the flight patterns of
Black Brandt. "We believe that is not true," he said.
1:47:21 PM
DELLA TRUMBLE, King Cove Corporation, noted that she is not at
the hearing in person because she was unable to get out of King
Cove last Friday. She introduced the numerous people present in
the room with her: representatives from the King Cove
Corporation and King Cove City Council, as well as elders and
others from the community. She said she has been working on
this issue for over 25 years and will not quit until there is a
safe road link to the Cold Bay airport. Ms. Trumble supported
HB 210. Having lived in King Cove since birth, she said she
knows firsthand about the challenges in reaching the Cold Bay
airport due to weather and the precarious location of the King
Cove airstrip, a situation that has brought countless times of
misery and hardship to residents.
MS. TRUMBLE stated that giving up approximately 20 percent of
King Cove Corporation's aboriginal lands to the federal
government was a very difficult decision, but it was reluctantly
accepted as the price for having a modest road to the Cold Bay
airport through the Izembek refuge. She said the federal
government and others have ignored the fact that her Aleut
ancestors have lived in this area for 4,000 years, long before
the refuge even had a name. However, she continued, it is time
to move forward into the future and road access to the Cold Bay
airport will greatly enhance personal safety and quality of
life.
1:51:32 PM
RANDALL HAGENSTEIN, Executive Director, Alaska Chapter, The
Nature Conservancy, pointed out that the refuge area is a
globally important wetland complex that is recognized by its
codification as a federal wildlife refuge and a state game
refuge. He said there are a number of small state-owned
properties within Izembek Lagoon, Morzhovoi Bay, and Bechevin
Bay with high value for waterfowl that were inadvertently left
out of the original bill that created the state game refuge.
Addition of these lands to the state game refuge would not bring
HB 210 out of compliance with the federal omnibus bill and would
not require a change in land ownership, he continued. This
would create a stronger conservation component to the bill and
would improve the protection of globally significant waterfowl
habitat.
1:53:37 PM
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN understood that Mr. Hagenstein would like to add
more land in addition to the land that is already being
exchanged.
MR. HAGENSTEIN responded that his suggestion would not require
any change in land ownership as it is existing state land that
would remain state land. The land would just be moved into
management under the state game refuge.
1:54:00 PM
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN surmised that under laws governing refuge
management this would prevent development and other uses by
community members.
MR. HAGENSTEIN explained that these areas are already being
managed for fish and wildlife under the current state management
plan, and this management would just be codified by including
these lands in the state game refuge.
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON recounted that this issue has been batted
back and forth with no action taken throughout his 20 years of
working in the legislature. By any measure it is a lopsided
transaction, he continued. Given that the people of these
communities have spent all these years trying to make
construction of this road happen, he cannot support changing HB
210, he said.
1:56:17 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI requested Mr. Hagenstein to point out
where these areas are on a map.
MR. HAGENSTEIN walked to the large map posted on the wall and
pointed out the areas.
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI asked Mr. Hagenstein to describe the
areas in parcels one and two. He also requested a description
of the North Creek Unit, located west of parcels one and two,
and asked why it was not included in the exchange.
MR. HAGENSTEIN answered that he does not know why the [North
Creek Unit] was left out of the exchange as he was not involved
with that. He said he has flown over the area and guesses it is
general upland tundra pockmarked with lakes and wetlands, which
is good bear and caribou habitat.
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN stated that the King Cove city administrator has
flown to Juneau for this hearing and will be able to answer
Representative Kawasaki's question.
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI inquired whether Mr. Hagenstein believes
this exchange is a fair trade given the unequal land values.
MR. HAGENSTEIN replied that the habitat values are very
different and the land designation is different in those two
areas, and politics being the art of the possible suggests that
sometimes that sort of transaction needs to take place to meet
the art of the possible.
2:00:57 PM
GARY HENNIGH, City Administrator, City of King Cove, noted that
he has been King Cove's city administrator for about 20 years.
He said Mayor Mack correctly described parcels one and two, the
original tracts that the state put on the table to start the
process. There is no human habitation there now and never will
be, he continued, except for the military intrusion during World
War II. The areas meet the textbook definition of wilderness
where man passes through but has no business of staying.
MR. HENNIGH noted that over the past few years Mayor Mack, Mayor
Weiss, Ms. Trumble, and he have spent half their lives in
Washington, DC, putting together this deal. What was given up
is unfair, he said, but it is the political price for something
that should never have been taken away in the first place. The
Alaska Delegation, Governor Murkowski, and Governor Palin have
helped over the past 10 years to further the cause of making
life a little bit easier for the 800 residents of King Cove by
having this access to the Cold Bay airport. This is the right
thing for the people of King Cove, the federal government, and
the King Cove Corporation, he stressed, and it is the right
thing for the State of Alaska to endorse despite the inequity.
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN commented that it is frustrating to have
congressional members from other states figuring out what is
best for Alaskan communities like King Cove.
2:04:36 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK asked whether Mr. Hennigh could answer
Representative Kawasaki's question about why the [North Creek
Unit] was left out of the exchange.
MR. HENNIGH said he does not recollect why that particular
parcel of land was not part of the original offer, but that Mr.
Mylius might know. Upon becoming governor, Frank Murkowski told
the city, borough, and corporation that he was going to revisit
the issue by having the state put together a land proposal to
take to the U.S. Department of the Interior. [Parcels one and
two] constituted the proposal that Governor Murkowski brought
forward in 2003 or 2004. During discussions on this proposal,
the [North Creek Unit] never came up as an issue. Mr. Hennigh
added that it is all special land because it is wilderness, but
that he is not personally aware of anything so special about the
[North Creek Unit] that it could not have been part of this deal
had someone wanted it to be part of the deal.
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN announced that maps will be e-mailed to members.
2:06:49 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI understood that the North Creek Unit is
uninhabited and has no recreational cabins.
MR. HENNIGH shook his head in agreement.
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI said his preference would be to have a
contiguous area added to the refuge by including the [North
Creek Unit] in the exchange.
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON offered his belief that the land is
already in protected status. He said the member's question
could be turned around by asking why it is not 20,000 or 10,000
acres instead of 43,000. He pointed out that most of the land
is mountainous, uninhabitable, and inaccessible even with a
four-wheeler.
MR. HENNIGH agreed that there is no human habitation in the
[North Creek Unit]. He suggested that Mr. Mylius be allowed to
address this question.
2:10:15 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI reiterated his question to Mr. Mylius
regarding parcels one and two and the North Creek Unit to the
west of them that was not included in the exchange.
MR. MYLIEUS replied that the [North Creek Unit] belongs to the
Alaska Peninsula National Wildlife Refuge. The area immediately
east of the two parcels is also Alaska Peninsula National
Wildlife Refuge, he said, and one of the reasons the two
townships were picked is because they are surrounded on three
sides by refuge lands.
2:11:41 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI surmised that the two townships are
state-owned lands.
MR. MYLIEUS responded correct.
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI asked whether any studies were done on
the value of those lands and whether they have oil or gas since
that would make the state wish it had kept those lands.
MR. MYLIEUS answered that no specific studies were done, but
there were consultations with his division's mining folks, the
Division of Geological & Geophysical Surveys, the Division of
Oil & Gas, and the Alaska Department of Fish & Game, and no
values were identified. Potential offshore oil and gas basins
dip very quickly offshore just north of this area, he explained,
and no one ever bid on this parcel when it was offered in
several previous sales. He related that, according to
geologists, interest in oil and gas is on the lands further to
the north because the geology of parcels one and two is not
conducive to oil and gas.
2:13:37 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI, in regard to Mr. Hagenstein's
suggestion to include other state lands, asked whether it would
be better to have those areas be contiguous within the refuge.
MR. MYLIEUS said he has not seen the specific areas that The
Nature Conservancy is requesting, but he does know there are
some lands that in the past the Alaska Department of Fish & Game
has expressed interest in for adding to the refuge. However, he
continued, those were not part of the division's discussions
with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, so the commitment in
terms of the land exchange and dealing with the federal
government was just to add Kinzarof Lagoon to the Izembek
National Wildlife Refuge. Other parcels that may be
housekeeping measures that need to get done at some point in the
future were not part of the discussions.
2:14:55 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI reiterated his question about whether
Mr. Mylius would prefer to have the lands suggested by Mr.
Hagenstein be part of the contiguous refuge as opposed to parcel
one.
MR. MYLIEUS responded that he thinks the lands Representative
Kawasaki is talking about are already state lands that are just
not in the state game refuge. He said the parcels are in
Izembek Lagoon itself and are such relatively small tracts that
he cannot envision any uses that would be incompatible with
either the state game refuge or the federal wildlife refuge.
CO-CHAIR JOHNSON opined that there are certain groups that would
like to have a continuous park stretching over the state from
Ketchikan to Barrow and it offends him to even talk about giving
up more state land.
2:16:34 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK understood that the North Creek Unit and the
Pavlof Unit are part of the Alaska Peninsula National Wildlife
Refuge, but that the two tracts in between are not part of the
national wildlife refuge.
MR. MYLIEUS answered correct, the two tracts in between are
state-owned lands that stick into the [Alaska Peninsula]
National Wildlife Refuge. The North Creek and Pavlof units are
not designated Wilderness, he specified, but they are part of
the [Alaska Peninsula] National Wildlife Refuge. To the
southwest is part of the Izembek National Wildlife Refuge which
is designated Wilderness.
2:17:38 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON pointed out that before the committee is a
deal that has been negotiated between the state and the federal
government to secure life and safety issues for a community.
Some of these other issues are about changing state land from
one designation to another designation of state land, which has
nothing to do with the negotiated deal. He urged that these two
issues be dealt with separately.
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN agreed. He closed public testimony on HB 210.
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI stated that he is not a "greenie" and
does not mean to offend the co-chairman from Anchorage.
However, he continued, it just seems practical to get the best
possible deal for state lands that are managed like state game
refuge but are not part of the game refuge. He urged that this
be considered whether as part of HB 210 or another act. He
asked whether the land north of tract one is state land.
MR. MYLIEUS replied yes.
2:21:28 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON agreed with Representative Seaton. There
may be a legitimate need for what Representative Kawasaki is
suggesting in regard to designated status, he said, but it
should be taken up as a separate issue. The bill before the
committee is the end product of 20 years of fighting by the
community of King Cove.
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI said he will object if HB 210 is moved
out of committee because he did not receive the information
until recently and the maps until earlier this afternoon.
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN responded that HB 210 has been noticed for more
than a week.
2:23:18 PM
CO-CHAIR JOHNSON moved to report HB 210, as amended, out of
committee with any individual recommendations and the attached
[zero] fiscal note.
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI objected.
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Wilson, Olson,
Seaton, Edgmon, Guttenberg, Tuck, Neuman, and Johnson voted in
favor of reporting HB 210 out of committee. Representative
Kawasaki voted against it. Therefore, HB 210 was reported out
of the House Resources Standing Committee by a vote of 8-1.
The committee took an at-ease from 2:24 P.M. to 2:27 P.M.
HB 162-SOUTHEAST STATE FOREST
2:27:42 PM
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN announced that the next order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 162, "An Act establishing the Southeast State
Forest and relating to the Southeast State Forest; and providing
for an effective date."
2:27:55 PM
MARTHA WELBOURN-FREEMAN, Forest Resources Program Manager,
Division of Forestry, Department of Natural Resources, spoke in
support of HB 162 by paraphrasing from the following prepared
statement [with some grammatical editing]:
I. Introduction. Thank you Mr. Chairman and members
of the Committee. My name is Marty Freeman, and I am
the Forest Resources Program Manager for the DNR
Division of Forestry.
II. Background and purpose
I am pleased to speak in support of HB 162. This bill
is part of the state's effort to ensure that local
timber processing continues to be a piece of the
economy in Southeast Alaska. The majority of timber
in [southern Southeast] is on federal land, but
federal timber sales have declined drastically. Local
mills now depend heavily on state timber for survival.
Demand for southeast timber for wood energy is also
increasing, further raising the importance of securing
a timber base in this region.
The State Forest proposal is built on the land use
designations in the [Prince of Wales Island] and
[Central Southeast] Area Plans. DNR manages
approximately 156,000 acres of land in these planning
areas. About 31% of that land -- 49,000 acres - is
presently part of the state timber base, and managed
for a combination of timber production and other
public uses. However, there is no assurance that
these lands will remain in state ownership and
continue to be available for harvesting in the future.
HB 162 helps secure a long-term wood supply from state
land by designating approximately half of the timber
base -25,000 acres (16%)-- as the Southeast State
Forest, retaining it in state ownership for timber
harvesting and multiple use management.
One of the benefits of a State Forest designation is
that it provides the secure land tenure necessary to
support pre-commercial thinning of second-growth
timber. Thinning increases the harvestable timber
volume per acre, shortens rotations between harvests,
and benefits wildlife habitat. There is broad support
for shifting timber harvesting in SE Alaska from old
growth to second-growth stands where feasible. We
can accelerate the shift to second-growth harvesting
and increase timber volume on state land by thinning
these stands. However, thinning is a long-term
investment, and is only justified if the land will
continue to be available for forest management.
Legislatively designating a State Forest would ensure
that some land will remain available for long-term
forest management.
The proposed Southeast State Forest consists of 20
parcels that are classified as "General Use" land on
Prince of Wales, Tuxekan, Kosciusko, Heceta, Revilla,
and Gravina islands, and on the mainland at Crittenden
Creek. A regional overview map and maps of the
individual parcels are in the Committee's briefing
packet. The Division of Forestry worked with the
Division of Mining, Land, and Water Management to
identify and exclude lands that are priorities for the
state land disposal program.
The Southeast State Forest would be managed as part of
the State Forest System under AS 41.17.200-.230. In
addition to timber management, State Forests are open
for multiple uses, including wildlife habitat and
harvest, mining, transportation, recreation and
tourism. State Forest lands would be managed
consistent with the management intent under the
current Prince of Wales Island and Central Southeast
area plans. Changes to management intent would
require public and interagency review through adoption
of a State Forest Management Plan under AS 41.17.230.
Municipal Entitlements. One of the other demands on
state land in [southern Southeast] is to fulfill land
entitlements for new municipalities. To avoid
conflicts with the Wrangell Borough entitlement, the
Southeast State Forest bill specifies that the new
Wrangell Borough may select State Forest land within
the borough boundary. The Wrangell borough boundary
encompasses three parcels in the proposed state forest
(Crittenden Creek and Bradfield Canal East and West).
If additional municipalities are incorporated before
June 30, 2019, lands that were vacant, unappropriated,
unreserved land before establishment of the State
Forest would be included in the calculation of the
municipal entitlement acreage, but may not be
selected.
Broad support. DNR has briefed many statewide groups
and entities across Southeast Alaska about this
proposal, including the SE Conference, local
governments, and the diverse groups participating in
the Tongass Futures Roundtable. We have received
letters in support of the bill from the Southeast
Conference, the City of Coffman Cove, the Resource
Development Council, and the Alaska Forest
Association. In addition, the state Board of Forestry
passed a unanimous resolution in support of this bill.
The Board includes representatives of the timber and
fishing industries, Native corporations, mining,
environmental, and recreational organizations, a
professional forester, and a fish and wildlife
biologist. Finally, the companion bill, SB 127 passed
out of the Senate Community and Regional Affairs
Committee without opposition.
2:32:32 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI asked whether anyone else would be
testifying on HB 162.
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN replied that no one else was signed up to
testify.
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON surmised that the impetus for HB 162 is to
allow for harvesting old-growth trees.
MS. WELBOURN-FREEMAN responded that the division wants to make
sure that harvesting can continue. The concern is making sure
the division has the long-term ability to manage by thinning the
second-growth timber to increase the productivity and provide
habitat benefits, and to continue harvesting old-growth timber
which will support timber processors in southern Southeast
Alaska.
2:33:49 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON inquired whether there has been opposition
to HB 162.
MS. WELBOURN-FREEMAN answered that there has been no opposition
to this point. She said she has met with representatives from
the Southeast Alaska Conservation Council (SEACC) who asked
whether multiple use would be allowed in this area. The
legislation, she continued, makes it very clear that multiple
use occurs on state forests and restricting other uses would
require a finding of incompatibility.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON commented that this is very important for
her region because of the difficulty in getting timber from
federal lands for a long period of time as there is no guarantee
of supply. However, she said, the state is willing to work with
people in order to have a year-round, careful harvest. In
response to Co-Chair Neuman, Representative Wilson noted that
over the past several years the timber industry has come to a
standstill and the sawmill in Wrangell shut down last October.
She said people have had to move away and the economy of
Wrangell has been greatly impacted.
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN thanked Representative Wilson for her work on
this issue.
2:36:39 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI asked whether designating these lands as
state forest is compatible with the intent of multiple-use land.
MS. WELBOURN-FREEMAN replied that these lands are very clearly
multiple-use lands. The statute, which is part of the state
Forest Practices Act, has standards for the state forest system
that say the primary purpose is to have active timber management
while allowing for other uses. The statute also says that when
undertaking a state forest management plan, other uses, such as
habitat, recreation, and mining, must be specifically allowed.
The plan must have a finding of incompatibility in order to
restrict the other uses.
2:37:45 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI inquired whether it is the state or the
businesses wanting to log that suggest which lands to harvest.
MS. WELBOURN-FREEMAN explained that the starting point is the
area plan which is part of the regional land-use plan for DNR
lands. She said DNR manages about 156,000 acres in this area
and that here is an extensive public and inter-agency process to
identify the main uses of those lands. Of that 156,000 acres,
about 49,000 were designated for this mix of timber and other
multiple uses and those lands are the current timber base. The
Division of Forestry needed some security for its investment in
thinning and second-growth management, so it reviewed the 49,000
acres with the Division of Mining, Land and Water to identify
which of these lands could be kept in long-term state ownership
without adverse impacts on the state land disposal program.
This review arrived at the 25,000-acre package.
2:39:14 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI asked whether mining is considered a
multiple use.
MS. WELBOURN-FREEMAN responded yes, mining is part of the list
of things that are specifically recognized as multiple uses
within state forests.
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI inquired whether a state forest
designation would hamper the ability to do mining or
transportation routes in addition to timber harvest.
MS. WELBOURN-FREEMAN answered no, transportation routes are
specifically provided for under state statutes and mining is
listed as a use that is protected unless there is a specific
finding of incompatibility. That finding must be for a specific
site and a specific time period.
2:40:31 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI asked whether fishing, recreation, or
commercial tourism near state forest land would be considered
incompatible.
MS. WELBOURN-FREEMAN responded that tourism and recreation are
two of the multiple uses specifically allowed in the state
forest statutes.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON inquired whether state forest designation
would diminish, prohibit, or restrict the use of logging roads
after they are no longer used for logging.
MS. WELBOURN-FREEMAN replied that there is nothing in state
forest statute or HB 162 that would restrict those types of
uses. The division would have to make a decision for each road
as to whether to continue its maintenance or to pull out the
culverts and bridges, but the use of the road would continue to
be open.
2:42:24 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK asked which uses get eliminated when an area
is designated as state forest.
MS. WELBOURN-FREEMAN answered that the main change is that the
land is committed to stay in state ownership in perpetuity and
would therefore not be available for land sales. Mining is
allowed within a state forest, she added.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK inquired whether, along with the timber
harvest, there is any guarantee that there will be processing
jobs for Alaskans in order to help the local economy.
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN interjected that it is called the economies of
scale to make more land available for harvesting timber.
MS. WELBOURN-FREEMAN responded that there are some restrictions
due to interstate commerce clauses on what can be required.
However, she continued, the division tailors its sales to the
local market because that is its niche. With rare exceptions,
such as the clearing of utility right-of-ways where the timber
has been allowed to be exported, the timber from these sales
goes to local mills.
2:44:21 PM
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN noted that this same question was asked at a
forestry presentation last week and all the mills have all the
access to ensure that they have all they can get.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON added that when the economy is as bad as
it is, each area wants to make as many jobs as possible for
local people; thus, each town is promoting this.
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN closed public testimony on HB 162.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON said it is important to have long-term
management for state forests without the worry of land
disposals. He offered his appreciation for HB 162.
2:45:55 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON moved to report HB 162 out of committee
with any individual recommendations and the attached zero fiscal
note.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK objected, saying he would like some intent
language stating that the timber harvesting is for the purposes
of providing jobs and building the local economy.
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN noted that HB 162 will be going to the House
Finance Committee, then the House floor, and then to the Senate
side.
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI agreed with Representative Tuck. He
suggested putting the language under Section 2 as a conceptual
amendment.
The committee took an at-ease from 2:48 P.M. to 2:49 P.M.
2:49:14 PM
CO-CHAIR JOHNSON offered his belief that the public record of
this meeting makes it clear that the intent is to provide jobs
and putting such language into the bill would be duplicative.
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON agreed with Representative Wilson's
comments and noted that DNR has a multiple-use policy. He said
he therefore believes that intent language is unnecessary.
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN reminded members that the motion on the table is
to report HB 162 from committee.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK withdrew his objection. There being no
further objection, HB 162 was reported from the House Resources
Standing Committee.
The committee took an at-ease from 2:51 P.M. to 2:52 P.M.
HJR 25-HYDROELECTRIC POWER; RENEWABLE ENERGY
2:52:11 PM
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN announced that the final order of business would
be HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 25, Urging the United States
Congress to classify hydroelectric power as a renewable and
alternative energy source. [Before the committee was CSHB
25(ENE).]
2:52:31 PM
KACI SCHROEDER-HOTCH, Staff, Representative Bill Thomas, Alaska
State Legislature, in response to Co-Chair Neuman, clarified
that the bill version before the committee is labeled 26-
LS0740\S (Version S). She paraphrased from the following
written sponsor statement [original punctuation provided]:
One of the most readily available sources of renewable
energy in Alaska is hydroelectric power. Alaska has a
vast amount of high elevation lakes and run-of-the-
river systems which have the potential, in many areas,
to completely displace diesel generated power with
little to no environmental impact. Hydroelectric power
is so abundant in Alaska that most areas of the state
can make use of it in some form or another.
With such a plentiful source of non-diesel generated
power, it is unfortunate that the Federal Government
does not have a working definition of renewable or
alternative that includes hydroelectric power. This
effectively cuts hydroelectric power projects off from
many potential sources of federal funding, and
therefore, hinders Alaska's efforts to displace diesel
generated power.
HJR 25 asks Congress to develop a working definition
of renewable and alternative which includes hydropower
so that reliable renewable energy policy can be
developed, and valuable projects receive adequate
support.
I urge your support of HJR 25.
2:53:28 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI asked what the federal government
considers hydroelectric power to be if not renewable or
alternative.
MS. SCHROEDER-HOTCH responded, "Not renewable." In further
response, she said hydroelectric is considered a means of power
that is not renewable under federal law.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON understood that to qualify for renewable
grants the power source must be classified as renewable;
therefore, the problem is that grants for hydroelectric power
cannot be applied for.
MS. SCHROEDER-HOTCH answered correct.
2:54:51 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI inquired whether this classification for
hydroelectric power would include wave generation, tidal, and
everything in between.
MS. SCHROEDER-HOTCH replied that the resolution does not
delineate, it only says hydroelectric. "So, that would include
dams, run-of-the-river, everything," she continued.
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON added that the irony is that 8.4 percent
of all power in the U.S. is renewable, and of the 8.4 percent,
6.2 percent comes from hydroelectric. He supported moving the
resolution out of committee.
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN opened public testimony.
2:56:19 PM
TIM MCLEOD, President and General Manager, Alaska Electric Light
and Power, stated that he has worked with Jodi Mitchell of
Inside Passage Electric Association on developing energy
solutions for Southeast Alaska. Because Ms. Mitchell had a
meeting conflict, he conveyed the Inside Passage Electric
Association's support for HJR 25. He stated that hydroelectric
is a renewable, environmentally friendly resource, but that it
was deliberately excluded from the list by the federal
government. He said Alaska Electric Light and Power supports
HJR 25. Juneau has been served by hydropower since 1893, he
continued, and there is no reason to believe that the current
hydro units will not still be running in another 100 years from
now.
MR. MCLEOD noted that there is tremendous potential for hydro
projects throughout the state, of which he personally knows of
12 good projects that could be developed. However, there is a
lack of funding through the federal government because of
hydropower's nonrenewable classification. He expressed his
concern that communities served by hydropower could experience
further penalties because they will be unable to meet renewable
energy portfolio standards that the federal government imposes
in the future, despite Southeast Alaska having some of the
greenest, cleanest energy in the world. It is important to get
this resolution passed this session, he said.
2:59:18 PM
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN assured Mr. McLeod that the legislature will be
doing so.
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI agreed. He noted that when he thinks of
renewable energy he thinks of solar panels first, wind second,
and hydroelectric dams third. He said he therefore remains
confused as to why hydroelectric is not classified as renewable.
MR. MCLEOD responded that the federal government has just not
classified hydroelectric as renewable energy for funding
purposes or tax credit purposes. He said he believes it was
deliberately not classified as renewable because of issues with
some of the dams that have been constructed.
3:00:20 PM
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN pointed out that the resolution asks that
hydroelectric be considered renewable and alternative.
MR. MCLEOD, in reference to Representative Kawasaki's list of
three renewable energy sources, said he would put hydroelectric
power as number one because it would take dozens and dozens of
wind generators in a very windy area to match the Snettisham
project alone.
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN closed public testimony.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK said he will be offering an amendment on the
floor and will work with the sponsor in this regard.
CO-CHAIR JOHNSON moved to report CSHJR 25(ENE) out of committee
with any individual recommendations and the attached zero fiscal
note. There being no objection, CSHJR 25(ENE) was reported from
the House Resources Standing Committee.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Resources Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 3:02 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|