Legislature(2001 - 2002)
05/03/2002 01:10 PM House RES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 529-PERMIT EXEMPTION FOR MUNITIONS USE [Contains discussion of SB 356, the companion bill] CO-CHAIR MASEK announced that the first order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 529, "An Act exempting the use of munitions in certain areas from a waste disposal permit requirement of the Department of Environmental Conservation." Number 0189 REPRESENTATIVE FATE moved to adopt the proposed committee substitute (CS), version 22-LS1752\C, Lauterbach, 5/3/02, as the work draft. There being no objection, Version C was before the committee. Number 0218 RYNNIEVA MOSS, Staff to Representative John Coghill, Alaska State Legislature, testified on behalf of the House State Affairs Standing Committee, which Representative Coghill chairs. Ms. Moss explained that on April 12, 2002, a group of people filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Army, the U.S. Department of Defense, and Donald Rumsfeld in his official capacity as U.S. Secretary of Defense,. She explained that the [second count] of the lawsuit states that the U.S. Army and the U.S. Department of Defense have violated, and continue to violate, AS 46.03.100(a). She maintained that this piece of legislation does not change anything in statute, and she said DEC [the Department of Environmental Conservation], in negotiations with the Army, has confirmed that the department has never interpreted this law any differently than the way the legislation asks it to be applied. MS. MOSS said [AS 46.03.100] does not apply to firing or other uses of munitions in training activities conducted on active ranges, including active ranges operated by the U.S. Department of Defense or U.S. military agencies. She mentioned that this issue is currently being dealt with on the federal level by Congress, and she said this legislation is needed because the [second count] of this lawsuit is based on the premise that the Army has violated this law, and that is not the case. Number 0490 The committee took an at-ease from 1:15 p.m. to 1:17 p.m. CO-CHAIR MASEK noted that public testimony was taken on this issue during the House Resources Standing Committee's 04/26/02 meeting on SB 356 am. Number 0538 REPRESENTATIVE STEVENS asked if all applicable military training activities are included in this bill. MS. MOSS replied, "Probably not." She said chemical warfare and so forth are covered under other sections of AS 46.03; this bill deals specifically with AS 46.03.100 because this is the section that has been challenged by the court case. Number 0613 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN indicated U.S. Coast Guard and Air Force offshore activities do not need to be included in the bill. Number 0633 REPRESENTATIVE KAPSNER mentioned the lawsuit, and she asked if retroactive [language] needed to be included in the bill. MS. MOSS said there is no need for retroactive language because this bill would only affect future training. Number 0689 REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA asked if this bill would interfere with DEC's ability to take care of contaminants found on the site. MS. MOSS stated that AS 46.03 deals with contamination and contamination cleanup, and this bill is specific to the statute that is being challenged by the court case that says the Army is required to obtain a permit prior to participating in training activities involving the firing of munitions. She indicated the bill doesn't address existing or future contamination. REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA asked if the bill only addresses permitting. MS. MOSS said yes; it is a permitting issue. Number 0815 STEVE CLEARY, Development Director, Alaska Public Interest Research Group (AkPIRG); Organizer, Citizens Opposed to Defense Experimentation (CODE), testified. Mr. Cleary urged the committee to oppose HB 529. He said no agency should be above the law, particularly one responsible for six "Superfund" [Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA)] sites in Alaska that pose grave public health and safety hazards to Alaska and the wildlife that many people depend on. He suggested that legislation should not be used to [affect the outcome] of a lawsuit that is currently before the courts, that people deserve a fair hearing in court, and that legislation shouldn't be crafted specific to one lawsuit. MR. CLEARY said in regard to military practice, people get hurt in practice and are being hurt now. He said thousands of waterfowl have died at the Eagle River Flats, the same waterfowl that hunters shoot and eat. He said it is unknown what damage this might cause hunters through being poisoned by white phosphorus, and this bill would allow that to continue in the future. He said this is why it's bad legislation. Mr. Cleary explained that when an entity applies to DEC for a disposal permit, it is passed on to several other departments. He said it is a smart policy that shows the broad effects that disposal permits can have in protecting Alaskans, the state's fish and game, natural resources, economic development, and health and social services. He said every other agency, business, or person must get a permit and so should the U.S. Department of Defense and other military entities. An exemption, he said, is not necessary for the protection of national security, but the law is required for protection of the state and for local security from the harm and health effects of these munitions and other disposed-of products. Number 1025 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN suggested that military activity has been going on for 60 years [in this area], and he suggested that enough time had passed to determine whether this activity was going to harm waterfowl. Number 1077 TOM CHAPPLE, Director, Division of Air and Water Quality, Department of Environmental Conservation, testified. Mr. Chapple noted that the department had submitted written testimony that reiterated what he had said about this issue during the House Resources Standing Committee's 04/26/02 meeting on SB 356 am, and he would not repeat those comments. Mr. Chapple, in response to a question presented by Representative Kerttula, said if there were to be any pollution emanating from the site now, the department would have the authority and would work with the Army to try to correct it. He talked about the issue that came up with the white phosphorus problem and how the department worked with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Army to develop a record of decision, which culminated in the actions that would be taken to resolve the issue. He clarified that nothing in this legislation is intended to or would change DEC's responsibilities relative to addressing contamination, whether it happened while the site was active or after it closed. Number 1203 PAMELA MILLER, Biologist and Director, Alaska Community Action on Toxics (ACAT), testified. Ms. Miller noted that ACAT is a co-plaintiff in the lawsuit in question. She said she felt it was important to clarify some of the reasons that this litigation was brought forth, and the fact that it was brought forth as a last resort after the U.S. Army failed to address ACAT's legitimate concerns. She said she has been a part of the restoration advisory board for Fort Richardson for five years, and she has brought this issue publicly and in formal comments to Fort Richardson repeatedly, but has felt that her concerns have not been addressed. She said this lawsuit is designed to prevent further harm to the wildlife and human health in the Eagle River Flats, and to try to get the U.S. Army to clean up a very serious problem of more than 10,000 unexploded munitions that present a safety hazard and a toxicological hazard. She suggested that it has been proven repeatedly, on ranges throughout this country, that these [materials] cause harm to wildlife and human health, and she said the evidence of that harm is presented in written testimony, which she had submitted. MS. MILLER suggested that the U.S. Department of Defense should be required to comply with the same set of state and federal laws that any business, industry, or individual is required to meet. She said in seeking the required permits, ACAT doesn't think this is presenting any dangerous confrontation to national security. Ms. Miller talked about the importance of the U.S. Department of Defense in protecting the health and safety of the people "at home," and the importance for the military to be able to conduct training activities. She suggested it is not a threat to national security to require the military to get the permits that are being sought through this litigation. Ms. Miller said it is an attempt to hold the defendants accountable for the considerable harm they have created in a very important salt marsh estuary on Cook Inlet. Number 1483 REPRESENTATIVE KAPSNER said the Yukon-Kuskokwim Health Corporation (YKHC) has been doing research on the blood composition of Native people, especially women in the [Bethel] region, where a large number of people use the land's resources for food. She said the testimony that Ms. Miller provided is pretty alarming, and that the YKHC study of that area indicated that the lead count in pregnant women is "through the roof." Representative Kapsner said this is creating some serious concerns in the Bethel region, because according to new evidence, the effects of a high lead count during pregnancy can produce the same effect in children as Fetal Alcohol Syndrome (FAS). She turned attention to the chemicals listed on page 2 of Ms. Miller's written testimony, and she asked if the effects of those chemicals, particularly on children, have been researched and documented. She said the lead found in Bethel's pregnant women had been traced back to Mexican lead-shot, and she suggested that migratory birds are bringing traces of lead back to Alaska. MS. MILLER said the thousands of waterfowl deaths were shown to be a direct result of the white phosphorus contamination. She said this contamination continues to be the cause of thousands of waterfowl deaths per year, and she suggested that there haven't been adequate studies done to address the full range of environmental and health effects from other contaminants that are known to be associated with munitions. She said it is known that these types of contaminants have created very serious ground and surface water contamination on other bases throughout the country, which is why the lawsuit is seeking for the Army to address the contamination from the white phosphorus, because it is known the heavy metals contained in certain chemicals are associated with the propellants and explosives used on the Eagle River Flats. Number 1617 REPRESENTATIVE KAPSNER asked what white phosphorus does to humans. MR. CHAPPLE noted he is not fully capable of answering the question. He said there is an immediate reaction with waterfowl because phosphorus oxidizes rapidly when exposed to air; the phosphorus is buried in the soil during the explosions and then released into the soil or the water when a duck submerges its head to feed. He said current practices on the range are that no ordnances is exploded or trials are done during the summer season when birds are around. All activity is limited to the winter season when the flats are frozen, he said, which eliminates a lot of that sequence of events for burying the white phosphorus into the soil or water. Number 1710 LINDA FEILER testified. She said as a citizen of this country, she finds it a crime that she must speak against the military, and that if she believed the state laws were stupid, she wouldn't be here. She suggested it is unfair for anyone to be exempt from the laws that have been so carefully put into place for the health and welfare of the country. Ms. Feiler said she feels very strongly that [Alaska's] wetlands and water purity are paramount to the health of the state's people and its fisheries. She said it is her hope that the military is not here to harm [the land] but rather to defend [it]. She said she was in agreement with Ms. Miller's testimony, and she urged the committee not to support HB 529. Number 1785 SUSAN SCHRADER, Alaska Conservation Voters (ACV), testified. Ms. Schrader said ACV is concerned that without the oversight that is provided by a permit system, the military's activities at artillery ranges such as Eagle River Flats will continue to cause the degradation of water quality in wildlife habitats throughout the state. She suggested that 130 Department of Defense Superfund waste sites exist throughout the country, and 6 of those sites are located in Alaska. Ms. Schrader said she thinks it speaks quite clearly to the fact that the federal government realizes, and has acknowledged, that these sites are heavily contaminated. She noted that Fort Richardson is a Superfund site, and while recognizing the need for a well- trained military, she said efforts to protect national security should also [include] protecting the nation's environment and public health. MS. SCHRADER suggested that no agency should be above the law and granted the freedom to pollute. She said in her mind, the concept of homeland security should encompass the right to be secure in the knowledge that the air and water are free of toxins. She said her understanding is that because of inadequate staffing, financial resources, and the need to prioritize, [DEC] does not require permits for civilian or military rifle ranges. Ms. Schrader said regardless of the resources that preclude them from instituting a permit program for these activities, the fact remains that rifle ranges and artillery ranges are very likely sources of significant contamination, which can be seen at the Eagle River Flats and at a small rifle range in Juneau. She suggested that in order to comply with its mission to protect Alaskans' health, DEC should be given the funding that's necessary to carry out an efficient permit program to provide oversight for these activities. Simply because DEC doesn't have enough money or enough staff, it does not mean that the pollution is not there, she stated. MS. SCHRADER suggested that all Alaskans should be concerned that the white phosphorus contamination at the flats was detected by the Army, and not by the state agency that is mandated to protect Alaska's environmental health, and she thought it should be something of quite embarrassment. She said without a permitting program, there is no way for DEC to have the ability to do the type of oversight, monitoring, or verification that is needed to protect the state's water and air quality. Ms. Schrader said for that reason, she thought the committee should oppose the bill. Number 1975 BOB SHAVELSON, Executive Director, Cook Inlet Keeper, reported that Cook Inlet Keeper is currently a co-plaintiff in the litigation, [and is] trying to bring some accountability to the bombing range in Eagle River Flats. He said it is this litigation that's largely propelled the military to come before the legislature at this time. He said he thought it was important to recognize that the U.S. Supreme Court, in a ruling, said rightly that no man is above the law. Mr. Shavelson suggested this is because the U.S. is a nation of people from whom all the powers of corporations, government, and the military flow; that's the very essence of the constitutional democracy, and wars are fought to protect it. He suggested it is important to recognize that in a democracy, information is the currency, and when something that sounds simplistic like a permitting scheme is stripped away, information is removed from citizens, legislators, and agencies, who are therefore unable to make good decisions. That is a mistake, he suggested. MR. SHAVELSON said Alaska is littered with contaminated military sites, and the devastation brought to the environment and to workers can be seen out at Amchitka. He said he clearly recognizes the need for a strong national security, but he thought that because the U.S. is the richest, most powerful nation on the planet, without a peer, it can defend national security and protect the resources that support the economy, people, and way of life. Mr. Shavelson said it doesn't have to be an either/or [situation], and that he resents the fact that "we're always cast into this dichotomy where we have to choose one or the other." He suggested that the U.S. has the technology, money, and sophistication to do it right. He said in looking at an aerial photo of the Eagle River Flats, he was reminded of the network of veins and arteries in the human body. He said he thought that analogy is appropriate because the Eagle River Flats is the "lifeblood" of the fisheries in Cook Inlet. MR. SHAVELSON said the complex ecological exchanges that occur - the need for nutrition and habitat - are the very system that sustains the fisheries in Cook Inlet and supports the commercial, recreational, and subsistence users throughout the many communities in Cook Inlet. He said he hoped committee members with a concern for Cook Inlet fisheries, the communities, and the people it supports, would recognize that this [bill] is a step in the wrong direction. Mr. Shavelson suggested that the military has a budget that surpasses the gross domestic product (GDP) of all the Russian states combined, and it recently asked for an increase in its budget that is more than the military budgets of all other militarized nations combined. He remarked, "We're not talking about an inability to do this for some type of financial constraint; it's a policy issue." Number 2177 CO-CHAIR MASEK temporarily suspended the hearing on HB 529 to address other items of business.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|