Legislature(2005 - 2006)HOUSE FINANCE 519
02/28/2006 01:30 PM House FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB380 | |
| SB218 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HB 380 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 218 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 353 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HOUSE BILL NO. 380
An Act relating to the powers and duties of the
commissioner of environmental conservation; relating to
animals, animal products, agricultural products, and
the transportation of animals and animal products;
relating to the employment, appointment, and duties of
a state veterinarian by the commissioner of
environmental conservation; relating to the powers of
the commissioner of natural resources regarding
agricultural products; and providing for an effective
date.
1:47:38 PM
Co-Chair Chenault MOVED to ADOPT work draft #24-LS1469\Y,
Bannister, 2/27/06, as the version of the bill before the
Committee. There being NO OBJECTION, it was adopted.
1:48:18 PM
MICHAEL PAWLOWSKI, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE KEVIN MEYER,
provided an overview of HB 380. The bill is a product
resulting from an interim work group between the Department
of Environmental Conservation, the Department of Fish and
Game, the Department of Natural Resources and the Division
of Agriculture. HB 380 provides a repeal and reenactment of
the powers of the Department of Environmental Conservation
and the statutes that authorize the State veterinarian.
Most of those powers were passed in 1949, prior to statehood
and do not adequately reflect present threats, facing
Alaskans and animals in the State.
Mr. Pawlowski said the primary problem is that the
definition of an "animal", historically was limited to
"livestock"; that made sense in the 1940's and 1950's when
all animals were considered "livestock." The Department
currently has no authority to quarantine an animal if it is
a pet and not livestock. Mr. Pawlowski reiterated that HB
380 reflects cooperative efforts between the above-mentioned
departments. He highlighted changes made in the committee
substitute.
· Page 2, Lines 28-31, speaks to when the Department
adopts regulations, which grant powers regulated in
that section. The commissioner should give substantial
weight to the State standards. Issues arose with
granting authority already existing in statute. The
concern would be that the issue would reopened
regulatory powers. Also, there is concern that
standard regulatory practices, when related to
livestock, can be "messy". The State does not want to
open-the-door for unnecessary shut downs in industry
practices.
1:51:48 PM
· The second change highlights the controversial portions
of the bill in Section 3, the granting of powers to
inspect a premise. The Department of Natural Resources
and the Department of Environmental Conservation govern
that section jointly. The key between the two
departments is what product is being regulated. The
Department of Environmental Conservation has the
oversight of animals and animal products; the
Department of Natural Resources has the oversight of
agriculture products.
In the original bill, the House Resources Committee allowed
the inspection of the premise anytime day or night; the
proposed bill returns the language to hours of a normal
business day and adds: "Anytime that the Commissioner
determines that there is an immediate threat to the health
or safety of an animal or the general public."
1:53:24 PM
Mr. Pawlowski said, those were the main changes, indicating
other minor changes that would be addressed through
testimony and the amendments.
1:53:50 PM
Vice Chair Stoltze referenced Section 4, and asked why
language was specifically included, delegating the
commissioner's powers. Mr. Pawlowski understood that
language related to the State veterinarian and the manner in
which the role of the commissioner and veterinarian
interact. He referenced Page 2, Lines 23-26, designating
that authority and requested the Department answer why the
structure was placed into the bill.
1:55:35 PM
DR. ROBERT GERLACK, ALASKA STATE VETERINARIAN, ANCHORAGE,
testified that the bill was introduced to look at disease
problems existing in Alaska. He spoke about diseases now
existing, which are "crossing the boundaries" between pets
and livestock. It is known that the diseases can be
transmitted not only through the animals but also through
the animal products. Restricting authority to specific
categories of animals would leave both livestock and
wildlife susceptible to health threats. He emphasized
certain diseases would have great impact on society.
Dr. Gerlack listed diseases that could be transmitted to
products; the avian influenza, African swine fever and hoof
and mouth.
1:58:28 PM
Dr. Gerlack explained that the intent of the legislation was
to expand the authority to protect livestock industry and
animals on farms new to the industry as well as addressing
human public health concerns.
2:01:46 PM
Mr. Gerlack offered to answer questions of the Committee.
Vice Chair Stoltze noted Page 4, Section 4, and asked if
that reference was to the State veterinarian. Mr. Gerlack
advised the language would allow the State veterinarian to
be the inspector but in situations, in which an area could
not be attended, there would be designating language for the
appropriate authority to provide the necessary investigation
with trained personnel.
2:02:58 PM
Vice Chair Stoltze supported someone with the appropriate
expertise being given that authority rather than a political
appointee.
2:03:53 PM
SABRINA FERNANDEZ, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), ASSISTANT
ATTORNEY GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF LAW, offered to answer
questions of the Committee.
STEVE MULDER, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), ASSISTANT
ATTORNEY GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF LAW, ANCHORAGE, noted that
he was available for questions.
LOUISA CASTRODALE, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), DIVISION
OF PUBLIC HEALTH, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES,
ANCHORAGE, testified on behalf of Dr. Richard Mandsager,
Director of the Division of Public Health. She noted that
there offices was in full support of the legislation. They
work closely with the State veterinarian; it is essential
for those involved in the human health field to be confident
in animal quarantine and isolation authority.
2:05:50 PM
ROB ARNO, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), ALASKA OUTDOOR
COUNCIL (AOC), MATSU, mentioned that AOC's statewide
membership depends on a wild-food harvest and members are
concerned about the health of that harvest. AOC supports
passage of HB 380.
2:06:57 PM
LARRY DEVILBISS, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), DIRECTOR,
DIVISION OF AGRICULTURE, DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES,
ANCHORAGE, testified in support of the proposed legislation.
He stated that the committee substitute was an improvement
as it clarifies the role of each department.
2:08:20 PM
Vice Chair Stoltze noted that commercial fishermen often
were included in proposals of this nature and asked why they
were not.
2:10:13 PM
KRISTIN RYAN, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH,
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION, advised that the
Department of Environmental Conservation did include fish in
their definition of animal products; however, the Department
of Fish and Game regulates wild fish; no one has the
authority to regulate "domestic" fish. The definition of
agricultural products does not include fish.
Vice Chair Stoltze voiced his frustration.
2:11:30 PM
Representative Kelly asked about available responses to
threats from the avian flu. Mr. Pawlowski understood that
the proposed legislation could address the gaps in authority
where there is no oversight or testing, letting diseases
"slip through the cracks".
Dr. Gerlach added that the intent of HB 380 is to identify
other diseases besides the avian influenza, such as monkey
pokes coming into this country with the import of rats from
Africa. Some rats were intermixed at a pet store and from
that, infection spread to a number of people in the Midwest.
The legislation provides a first step in dealing with
situations that may be problematic. He emphasized that
Alaska cannot always rely on voluntary cooperation.
2:15:15 PM
Vice Chair Stoltze asked if there was any circumstance in
which rodents could be regulated at State fairs. Dr.
Gerlach replied they would be if they carried a disease that
could impact people.
2:15:57 PM
Co-Chair Meyer MOVED to ADOPT Amendment #1, 24-LS1469\Y.1,
Bannister, 2/28/06, which would delete all material on Page
2, Lines 21-22 and would insert:
"(1) Adopt a schedule of fees or charges, and credit
provisions, for services related to animals and animal
products rendered by state veterinarian to farmers and
others at their request, and all the receipts from the
fees and charges shall be transmitted to the
commissioner for deposit in the state treasury:".
Vice Chair Stoltze OBJECTED.
Mr. Pawlowski explained that Amendment #1 addresses concerns
voiced by Representative Holm. The concern was to Page 2,
Lines 21 & 22, determining that the fee authority was too
broad. The proposed language goes back to the original
statute and keeps the fees charged for services related to
animals and animal products, to the farmers and others at
their requests. The State lab does a lot of testing at the
request of individuals and farmers and needs the authority
to charge a fee for services. He advised that the
Department supported the correction.
Vice Chair Stoltze WITHDREW his OBJECTION. There being NO
further OBJECTION, Amendment #1 was adopted.
2:17:40 PM
Co-Chair Meyer MOVED to ADOPT Amendment #2, #24-LS1469\Y.2,
Bannister, 2/28/06. Vice Chair Stoltze OBJECTED.
Mr. Pawlowski recommended that language be deleted on
Amendment #2, Lines 7 & 8, as it was no longer necessary
with passage of Amendment #1. Co-Chair Meyer MOVED to AMEND
#2 as recommended.
2:19:13 PM
Mr. Pawlowski explained that the amendment addresses the
distinction and jurisdiction on animal and animal products
versus agricultural products. Amendment #2 provides
clarifying language, which Representative Holm commented
that it would "tighten it up". The Department of
Environmental Conservation supports the amendment.
2:19:36 PM
Vice Chair Stoltze WITHDREW his OBJECTION. There being NO
further OBJECTION, Amendment #2 was adopted.
2:19:58 PM
Representative Foster MOVED to REPORT CS HB 380 (FIN) out of
Committee with individual recommendations and with zero note
#1 by the Department of Natural Resources. There being NO
OBJECTION, it was so moved.
CS HB 380 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with a "no
recommendation" and with zero note #1 by the Department of
Natural Resources.
2:21:00 PM
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|