Legislature(2005 - 2006)CAPITOL 124

05/06/2005 01:00 PM RESOURCES

Download Mp3. <- Right click and save file as

Audio Topic
01:06:12 PM Start
01:07:23 PM SB102
02:36:47 PM Adjourn
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
-- Recessed to 9:30 am Saturday 5/7/05 --
Scheduled But Not Heard
Heard & Held
+ Bills Previously Heard/Scheduled TELECONFERENCED
SB 102-COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS                                                                                            
CO-CHAIR  SAMUELS  announced that  the  first  order of  business                                                               
would  be  SENATE BILL  NO.  102  "An  Act relating  to  district                                                               
coastal  management  programs;  and providing  for  an  effective                                                               
CO-CHAIR  RAMRAS  moved  to  adopt  HCS  CSSB  102,  labeled  24-                                                               
LS0491\U,  Bullock,  5/5/5 as  a  work  draft.   There  being  no                                                               
objection, it was so ordered.                                                                                                   
The committee took an at-ease from 1:06:51 to 1:07:23 PM.                                                                     
MELANIE  LESH,  Staff  to  Senator  Gary  Stevens,  Alaska  State                                                               
Legislature, said Senator Stevens supports  the "C" version of SB
102 that  was reported out  of the  Senate, which was  amended on                                                               
the Senate floor as the  compromise.  Senator Gary Stevens hasn't                                                               
had a chance to look at the current work draft, she said.                                                                       
The committee took an at-ease from 1:09:10 PM  to 1:09:24 p.m.                                                                
JOE  BALASH,  Staff  to  Senator  Gene  Therriault,  and  to  the                                                               
Legislative Budget  and Audit committee, explained  the committee                                                               
substitute  (CS) to  SB  102.   He said  Sections  1-13 clean  up                                                               
language  to fit  with the  sunset  provisions in  the bill,  and                                                               
Section 14  adds a legislative  program audit in the  year before                                                               
the  Alaska Coastal  Management Program  (ACMP) sunsets  in 2011.                                                               
He said "may"  changes to "shall" in Section 15,  "with regard to                                                               
local coastal  districts duplicating, restating  or incorporating                                                               
by reference state or federal statutes."                                                                                        
CO-CHAIR SAMUELS said it was a "may not" to a "shall not".                                                                      
MR. BALASH  said, "Section  16 extends the  life of  the existing                                                               
local  district plans  against  which consistency  determinations                                                               
are going to  be rendered through the transition  phase, and that                                                               
runs out through March 1, 2007."   Section 17 extends to March 1,                                                               
2006 the  deadline for  the submission of  the new  local revised                                                               
district plans.   He stated that the  intent is to open  up a gap                                                               
between the  date of  final federal approval  on the  state's new                                                               
standards and  the submission  of the local  district plans.   He                                                               
said there have  been complaints that the rules  are changing, so                                                               
there will be a two-month window  so the local districts can know                                                               
what the final  federally approved standards are.   Section 18 is                                                               
the repeal section,  he noted.  Section  19 automatically repeals                                                               
and declares  as null and  void any provision within  an existing                                                               
local district  plan that has  adopted by reference any  state or                                                               
federal standards  or statutes.   "It also goes into  those local                                                               
district plans which  address any matter regulated  by DEC; those                                                               
provisions within the  local plans are declared null  and void as                                                               
1:14:08 PM                                                                                                                    
MR. BALASH  said the bill puts  a time limit on  DNR's completion                                                               
of a  review of the ABC  list, and it  sets out a list  of things                                                               
the review  must include.    Section 20 was requested  by DNR and                                                               
it  contains   a  declaration  that   DNR  may   adopt  emergency                                                               
regulations.    Section  21  sets the  date  the  existing  state                                                               
standards expire,  which presupposes  that the new  standards are                                                               
approved by the  Office of Ocean and  Coastal Resource Management                                                               
(OCRM) by December  31.  Section 22 is the  effective date of the                                                               
repeal section, which is July 1, 2011.                                                                                          
1:16:14 PM                                                                                                                    
MR. BALASH said there will be  a transition phase until the first                                                               
quarter of 2007.   It will run for four  years before sunsetting,                                                               
and there  will have been an  audit in the last  year, he stated.                                                               
The legislature can reauthorized the  program, "much like they do                                                               
at  the  federal level."    "The  difference between  the  sunset                                                               
clause that the  Senate passed and the one before  you is that if                                                               
OCRM fails to approve the  revised plan--the new state standards-                                                               
-if they  fail to approve  by January  1, 2006, then  the program                                                               
sunset takes effect March 1, 2006," he explained.                                                                               
1:18:20 PM                                                                                                                    
CO-CHAIR RAMRAS asked about  the contentious relationship between                                                               
OCRM and DNR.                                                                                                                   
MR. BALASH said the wide chasm  between the two has narrowed down                                                               
to four issues.  He said  OCRM can approve the state's program by                                                               
the end of  the year.  "But it's a  six-month extension, and that                                                               
is it."                                                                                                                         
1:20:26 PM                                                                                                                    
CO-CHAIR RAMRAS asked if the governor is supportive of the CS.                                                                  
MR. BALASH said he doesn't speak for the governor, but, yes.                                                                    
1:21:08 PM                                                                                                                    
CO-CHAIR RAMRAS asked who benefits from this CS.                                                                                
MR. BALASH said  everyone will, "because we will  get through the                                                               
end of this  year, and when we come back  to Juneau next session,                                                               
we'll either  have federal approval  of the new  state standards,                                                               
and be able to continue on  getting the local districts to revise                                                               
their plans,  get those plans  reviewed at the state  and federal                                                               
levels, and operational by 2007, or at least early 2007."                                                                       
1:21:52 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  SEATON asked  if Mr.  Balash is  giving assurance                                                               
that  the  federal   government  will  meet  a   timeline  on  an                                                               
Environmental Impact  Statement (EIS)  and the standards  will be                                                               
approved by January 1.                                                                                                          
MR.  BALASH said  state officials  have received  assurances from                                                               
the federal agencies that the EIS  can be completed by that time.                                                               
"Getting them  started on it  is ...  the big problem  we've been                                                               
faced with and why we're in this ... lock-box."                                                                                 
1:22:59 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON  said he would like  to hear from DNR.   He                                                               
noted that  he has been involved  in EISs and finds  they can get                                                               
held up.  The legislature may be  out of the loop, and he said he                                                               
will be  making a motion to  change the January date  to March 1,                                                               
which will  give the legislature  45 days after the  beginning of                                                               
the session to act if it wants.                                                                                                 
1:25:01 PM                                                                                                                    
CO-CHAIR SAMUELS said the March 1 date  is on page 14, and "if we                                                               
don't have a deadline, then no deadline will ever be followed."                                                                 
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON clarified  that he is speaking  of the date                                                               
in Section 21, page 13, line 30.                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE OLSON  said the  sponsor just saw  the CS,  and he                                                               
asked where it came from.                                                                                                       
CO-CHAIR SAMUELS said he worked on it.                                                                                          
REPRESENTATIVE OLSON  asked about public testimony,  and said his                                                               
borough has  not seen this, and  he is concerned about  the speed                                                               
of the bill.                                                                                                                    
CO-CHAIR SAMUELS  said the committee  is about to  hear testimony                                                               
from 20 people.                                                                                                                 
1:26:26 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON  noted that DNR  already has the  option of                                                               
emergency regulations.                                                                                                          
MR.  BALASH  said DNR  does  have  the authority  under  existing                                                               
statutes to  issue emergency regulations, but  DNR requested that                                                               
the emergency regulations provision be added.                                                                                   
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked if this  is a legislative declaration                                                               
of an emergency.                                                                                                                
MR. BALASH said,   "I do believe  we're going to save  a piece of                                                               
1:28:18 PM                                                                                                                    
GARY   WILLIAMS,  Coastal   Zone  Coordinator,   Kenai  Peninsula                                                               
Borough, Soldotna,  said he supports  the time extension,  and he                                                               
particularly  appreciates the  provision  that  starts the  clock                                                               
after the conclusion  the negotiations between DNR and  OCRM.  He                                                               
added that  programs should be able  to survive an audit,  but he                                                               
does not  know "why  there's a  rush to pile  abuse on  the ACMP,                                                               
further abuse,  including language  to sunset  the program.   The                                                               
ACMP is  arguably one  of the  best programs the  state has  in a                                                               
role  of expediting  project reviews,  and  I think  by the  mere                                                               
participation  of the  27  coastal districts  and  the fact  that                                                               
their  local   governments  provide  matching  money   for  their                                                               
programs, and some  in excess of the match  requirement, offers a                                                               
strong vote  of confidence  in the efficacy  of the  Coastal Zone                                                               
Management  program  on the  local  level."    He added  that  by                                                               
offering the sunset language the  legislature is saying the input                                                               
of local  districts is  suspect.   He is  bewildered of  how "the                                                               
positive contribution  of the  ACMP and  local input  on activity                                                               
that affects every  Alaskan in coastal districts  became a matter                                                               
of such concern  that the legislature seeks to  place the program                                                               
on probationary status."                                                                                                        
CO-CHAIR SAMUELS said  he put in the sunset  provision because he                                                               
thinks  the   legislature  should   constantly  review   all  its                                                               
programs, and it wasn't meant to "poke a stick" at the ACMP.                                                                    
MARLENE  CAMPBELL,   Coordinator,  Coastal   Management  Program,                                                               
Sitka, said  the ACMP program  in the  City and Borough  of Sitka                                                               
has been  in effect since 1981  and gives Sitka a  strong seat at                                                               
the table  for management decisions.   She said the  extension is                                                               
appreciated because  of the legal determinations  of the revision                                                               
language, to sort out what  will be required, especially in terms                                                               
of  impacts  to  federal  lands.   But  instead  of  just  simply                                                               
extending  the deadline,  other provisions  have been  added that                                                               
muddy the  waters and complicate  the revisions, she noted.   She                                                               
said Sitka  has attempted, in  good faith, to revise  its coastal                                                               
program.  She said  it put a great deal of  effort and money into                                                               
it,  but it  is frustrated  with  the continuing  changes in  the                                                               
requirements that the districts must  meet.  She suggested taking                                                               
out   the  extraneous   requirements,  including   the  emergency                                                               
regulations and sunset language.                                                                                                
1:35:25 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON  asked about  the assurance that  OCRM will                                                               
approve the final regulations by January 2006.                                                                                  
RANDY BATES,  Deputy Director, Office  of Project  Management and                                                               
Permitting, Department of Natural  Resources (DNR), said it isn't                                                               
in writing,  but the state  is moving rapidly  toward preliminary                                                               
approval  of the  coastal management  program  by the  OCRM.   He                                                               
expects preliminary  approval this July,  and then the  state can                                                               
continue  to spend  the money  from the  federal grant,  which is                                                               
$2.6 million for this coming fiscal year.  He continued:                                                                        
     The  surety that  we have  that they  will finish  NEPA                                                                    
     within that  timeframe, is a handshake--we  worked with                                                                    
     the  leadership  back  at  [the  National  Oceanic  and                                                                    
     Atmospheric   Administration]   to   make   sure   they                                                                    
     understood  we have  a very  short  timeframe and  that                                                                    
     they have all  the information they need to  be able to                                                                    
     conduct  the  NEPA review  and  issue  their record  of                                                                    
     decision  within  that  timeframe.   In  addition,  and                                                                    
     what's more  important is  that they  realize--and this                                                                    
     is  federal  law--preliminary  approval  cannot  extend                                                                    
     beyond a  six-month period  of time.   So we  know that                                                                    
     they will  be working  to make sure  that Alaska  has a                                                                    
     program  approved and  that if  they have  not finished                                                                    
     their work  by January 1, the  six-month timeframe, the                                                                    
     state loses  its ability to continue  to expend federal                                                                    
     monies.   They  also realize  that our  state standards                                                                    
     with this  extension provision force  the state  into a                                                                    
     position of  losing the ability to  conduct consistency                                                                    
     reviews on federally permitted activities.                                                                                 
1:39:03 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  SEATON asked  what  happens if  approval comes  a                                                               
month later or earlier.                                                                                                         
MR. BATES said a letter from  OCRM detailed the final changes the                                                               
state had  to make to  secure federal approval--there are  just a                                                               
handful.   The state  has regulations out  for review  right now,                                                               
and once DNR  is done with those, it will  package them, he said.                                                               
With that  information, OCRM  will be  able to  offer preliminary                                                               
approval, he stated.                                                                                                            
1:40:21 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked about losing federal grant money.                                                                   
MR. BATES  said coastal  management in Alaska  is as  valuable to                                                               
the federal government as it is to the state.                                                                                   
REPRESENTATIVE  LEDOUX  asked  what  if  OCRM  doesn't  meet  the                                                               
MR. BATES  said that the CS  clarifies that if OCRM  does not get                                                               
to approval  by January the  repeal takes  effect as of  March 1.                                                               
"Therefore, if OCRM has not  finished their work, the state, with                                                               
the voluntary  coastal management program, has  decided we're not                                                               
going to continue this program--that's what this CS does."                                                                      
CO-CHAIR SAMUELS said, "We will be  back in session, so we've put                                                               
a deadline  to the feds, a  very realistic deadline, and  we said                                                               
if you don't do this there  will be consequences.  However, we've                                                               
got until March 1 to rethink it."                                                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX  asked what  consequences there will  be to                                                               
the federal government.                                                                                                         
MR. BATES said, "That would be a question for the feds."                                                                        
1:43:26 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON said he wants  the legislature to have time                                                               
to deal  with a pending repeal,  so he offered to  move Amendment                                                               
1, as follows:                                                                                                                  
     Page 13, line 30, after "effect"                                                                                           
     Delete "January"                                                                                                           
     Insert "March"                                                                                                             
There being no objection, Amendment 1 carried.                                                                                  
REPRESENTATIVE  SEATON questioned  the  language  "or any  matter                                                               
regulated  by DEC"  on page  12,  Section 19.   He  asked how  to                                                               
define "any matter".                                                                                                            
1:45:56 PM                                                                                                                    
MR.  BATES said  that  line  was put  in  by  the Senate  Finance                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked why the language was there.                                                                         
MR. BATES told Representative Seaton to  ask a Senator why it was                                                               
in the bill,  but he said subsection (a) of  Section 19 "requires                                                               
any coastal  district enforceable  policy that is  a restatement,                                                               
duplication, or  contrary provision of existing  state or federal                                                               
law--that those become  null and void."  He stated  that DNR will                                                               
run into  a problem when the  new state standards go  into effect                                                               
on the day OCRM approves the  coastal program.  He said, "Many of                                                               
the  coastal  districts  have  incorporated,  by  reference,  our                                                               
current state standards  or state or federal law  that is already                                                               
managed  or implemented  by a  different agency.   And  what this                                                               
provision, I  believe, does is render  those null and void  as of                                                               
the signing of this legislation if it so moves that direction."                                                                 
1:48:01 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON  asked if  this create  a hole  between the                                                               
time the law is signed and when the new standards are in place.                                                                 
CO-CHAIR  SAMUELS said,  "The transition  is hugely  problematic.                                                               
The new  plans can't conflict with  the state law, but  right now                                                               
we're currently still having conflicts."                                                                                        
1:48:47 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  SEATON said  this null  and void  takes place  as                                                               
soon as the  bill is signed, and he asked  if the state standards                                                               
are all in effect now.                                                                                                          
CO-CHAIR  SAMUELS said  it  only  effects the  ones  that are  in                                                               
conflict or duplicating current regulations.                                                                                    
1:49:18 PM                                                                                                                    
MR. BATES said, "The bottom  line is are the resources protected?                                                               
and the answer is, yes.   If districts have duplicative laws, who                                                               
has deference?   The answer is the agency that  has the authority                                                               
has the  responsibility to implement  those laws.  And  it should                                                               
not be a  question of, can the districts  or district enforceable                                                               
policies second guess how that agency  does it.  This cleans that                                                               
situation  up.    And  it  is  actually  the  way  we  have  been                                                               
implementing House Bill 191."                                                                                                   
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked if all  of the state standards are in                                                               
effect now.                                                                                                                     
MR.  BATES  said yes.    "Districts  have incorporated  those  by                                                               
reference;  they  should  not be  maintained  in  those  district                                                               
enforceable policies.   Nor should  the provisions of  DEC, since                                                               
in HB  191, DEC  was carved  out.  The  issuance of  their permit                                                               
constitutes constituency with the ACMP."                                                                                        
1:50:58 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON  said he  hoped this  will not  require the                                                               
district to  do rewrites if it  is already required.   He said he                                                               
wants to  make sure the districts  can keep their focus,  so they                                                               
don't have to make revisions.   "Is it correct they don't have to                                                               
take any action based on this?"                                                                                                 
MR. BATES said  that is correct; it is unrelated  to the planning                                                               
revisions that the districts are doing right now.                                                                               
1:51:56 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  SEATON  asked if  "any  matter  regulated by  the                                                               
department" is the same as  any matter that requires the issuance                                                               
of a permit, certification, approval, or other authorization.                                                                   
MR.  BATES  said that  is  a  legal  question,  and it  would  be                                                               
reckless for  him to answer it.   "Districts are unable  to draft                                                               
enforceable  policy related  to those  areas where  DEC regulates                                                               
anyway under  the coastal program."   It is rendered moot  by the                                                               
fact  that  they can't  write  policies  regarding air  or  water                                                               
quality issues, he stated.                                                                                                      
1:52:54 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO  asked, "What  happens if  the state  is not                                                               
allowed to spend federal money?  Do you terminate employees?"                                                                   
MR. BATES said  this is a legal  issue that he can't  answer.  He                                                               
added that the  state standards sunset on January  1, and without                                                               
state   standards,  the   state  is   unable  to   implement  the                                                               
consistency reviews, and it runs afoul of its own program.                                                                      
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO asked what happens to employees.                                                                           
MR. BATES said there are two  timeframes to give the authority to                                                               
the legislature to  get back into coastal management  even if the                                                               
standards have gone off the books.   "I assume it is a little bit                                                               
premature to decide what happens to our employees."                                                                             
1:54:58 PM                                                                                                                    
ANDREW DEVALPINE, Director, Bristol  Bay Coastal Resource Service                                                               
Area,  Dillingham,  said the  resource  district  is larger  than                                                               
Vermont.    He thanked  the  committee  for the  legislation  and                                                               
favors  the extension  to March.   He  said the  sunset provision                                                               
seems  gratuitous  because  there  is  already  a  provision  for                                                               
reviewing the  program.  Section 19  (b) would be best  left out,                                                               
he said, because it will confound things.                                                                                       
1:57:29 PM                                                                                                                    
MARV   SMITH,  Community   Development   Coordinator,  Lake   and                                                               
Peninsula  Borough, King  Salmon,  said he  supported the  senate                                                               
version  of  the bill,  and  the  new amendments  are  confusing,                                                               
conciliatory, and controversial.   The borough supports the March                                                               
extension, but  does not support Section  19 (a), as it  would be                                                               
very confusing  for districts  and add  work for  DNR staff.   He                                                               
said the borough  is "totally opposed" to (b),  requiring the ABC                                                               
list to  be done immediately.   Looking at  the ABC list  will be                                                               
very  time consuming,  and it  is  not the  appropriate time,  he                                                               
opined.   The borough  "certainly does  not support"  the review.                                                               
Everyone is working diligently trying  to get the plans done, but                                                               
the extensions are needed, he concluded.                                                                                        
2:00:45 PM                                                                                                                    
THEDE  TOBISH,  Coastal  District  Coordinator,  Anchorage,  said                                                               
Anchorage is excited  to redo its plan and the  time extension to                                                               
March is perfect.  He said  he is concerned with complications of                                                               
recent  amendments.   Section  22,  the  sunset provision,  seems                                                               
extraneous  and  provides   undue  pressure,  possibly  requiring                                                               
additional staff and funding.   He said Anchorage doesn't support                                                               
Section 19  (b), because it may  be impossible to revise  the ABC                                                               
list in  the timeframe.  "We  urge you to carefully  consider any                                                               
last minute  amendments, especially those that  might not reflect                                                               
what should be a broader dialogue."                                                                                             
2:02:48 PM                                                                                                                    
TOM  LOHMAN,  Environmental   Specialist,  North  Slope  Borough,                                                               
Barrow, said  he supports  what has been  said by  other district                                                               
representatives.   The North Slope  Borough strongly  opposes the                                                               
sunset  provision, he  said, and  it is  premised on  an outright                                                               
falsehood that  the districts have  abused their power  under the                                                               
program.   "No one has  ever come  forward with examples  of good                                                               
projects that have  been rejected or significantly  delayed by an                                                               
ACMP consistency  review."  He said  an attempt was made  "six or                                                               
seven  years ago  to do  away with  the ACMP,  and as  ammunition                                                               
there  was  a  list  of  reportedly  delayed  projects  that  was                                                               
offered, and upon  staff investigation it was shown  that none of                                                               
the claims  were valid."   He added  that no district  has abused                                                               
its power.  More than  250 communities are represented by coastal                                                               
districts, and they don't need  the threat of non-reauthorization                                                               
to keep  them in line.   He said he  opposes the ABC  list review                                                               
timeline.   He noted that  DNR is  already short staffed,  and it                                                               
faces a substantial challenge reviewing  the 27 revised plans and                                                               
conducting the day to day work of the program.                                                                                  
MR. LOHMAN said he guessed that  the inclusion of North Slope oil                                                               
and gas  activities on the  list was done  by the Alaska  Oil and                                                               
Gas  Association  (AOGA).   There  are  significant  definitional                                                               
problems, and  moving quickly  on something  that requires  an in                                                               
depth  dialogue  with  the  districts   is  risky.    Terms  like                                                               
"adjacent to" are  rife with controversy and  problems, he noted.                                                               
He  said  his  district  opposes  Section  22;  "I  think  it  is                                                               
unreasonable  to risk  losing the  entire state  program if  OCRM                                                               
cannot  complete  the  EIS  process within  ...  seven  or  eight                                                               
months."   He said  losing the  program means  the loss  of local                                                               
control.   "If you  want to  talk about  a state's  rights issue,                                                               
that's   a  state's   rights  issue,   not  the   way  its   been                                                               
characterized by  the administration.   There's no  other program                                                               
where the federal  government yields to the state ...  and for us                                                               
to  lose  that  would be  a  huge  loss  to  Alaska and  the  250                                                               
communities that the coastal program covers."                                                                                   
MR. LOHMAN  said there are significant  misrepresentations.  "The                                                               
reason we are at  this point at this late hour  is not solely the                                                               
fault  of  OCRM  ...  but   DNR  has  to  acknowledge  that  [it]                                                               
repeatedly  gave  conflicting  interpretations  of  its  proposed                                                               
regulations  and   unclear  guidance  regarding   the  districts'                                                               
ability  to craft  enforceable policies."   He  noted that  there                                                               
have  been  allegations of  district  foot  dragging.   "That  is                                                               
absolutely untrue,"  he said.   "We don't like the  direction the                                                               
state  has  taken  this  program,   of  course,  it  reduces  any                                                               
meaningful role in  many areas."  He asked for  a clean bill with                                                               
an extension.                                                                                                                   
2:08:04 PM                                                                                                                    
JOHN  OSCAR,  Program  Director,  Ceñaliulriit  Coastal  Resource                                                               
Service Area,  said there  are 38 Yupik  villages in  the service                                                               
area,  and  many are  remote.    "This is  an  open  plea to  the                                                               
legislature,"   he  said.     He   agrees  with   other  district                                                               
representatives who  have spoken.   There are developments  on SB
102 that he is gravely concerned  about.  He said last year House                                                               
Bill 191 removed ... land,  air, and water quality standards, and                                                               
all  references  to   mining.    "We  have   been  dissected  and                                                               
dissected, looking  for an illness  that is not there,"  he said.                                                               
Section 19  will declare null and  void any policy that  seems to                                                               
address statewide  standards.  It  leaves no room to  breathe, he                                                               
declared.   Regarding subsistence, DNR  said a district  may only                                                               
write a  policy that "allows  or disallows", and comments  on its                                                               
draft district plan said "none  of the three subsistence policies                                                               
would  be allowed  because they  do not  flow from  the statewide                                                               
standards."   The policies would  become null and void,  and this                                                               
is "Catch 22"  he said.  "You basically cannot  submit any policy                                                               
relating  to  subsistence protection."    Mr.  Oscar named  three                                                               
responses  from DNR  when subsistence  policies were  included in                                                               
the local  plan: 1.  The maintenance of  subsistence use  area is                                                               
adequately addressed under the state  standard, and therefore the                                                               
policy  is   not  allowed.     2.  Access  does  not   flow  from                                                               
11AAC112270, therefore this  policy is not approvable.   3. Level                                                               
of need does  not flow from 11AAC112270, therefore  the policy is                                                               
not allowed.                                                                                                                    
MR.  OSCAR  said Section  20  gives  DNR  more power  to  dictate                                                               
against  the  people  of  Alaska,  with no  idea  of  what  those                                                               
emergency regulations  would be.   He said he is  concerned about                                                               
the sunset clause.                                                                                                              
2:12:29 PM                                                                                                                    
MR. OSCAR said he supports  the extensions, and he concluded that                                                               
removing the ACMP would remove local rights.                                                                                    
2:13:14 PM                                                                                                                    
MORRIS  NASSUK,  Bering  Strait Coastal  Resource  Service  Area,                                                               
Koyuk, said the  district supports the extension  of the deadline                                                               
for  submitting revised  coastal  plans, and  opposes the  sunset                                                               
provision.  "This program has worked  well for Alaska for over 25                                                               
years," he noted.                                                                                                               
2:14:27 PM                                                                                                                    
JUDY BRADY,  Executive Director,  Alaska Oil and  Gas Association                                                               
(AOGA),  said  AOGA  was opposing  extensions  that  the  coastal                                                               
districts wanted, not  because they are not doing  their job, but                                                               
because she  doesn't want OCRM  to dictate  to Alaska.   She said                                                               
the governor wrote  a letter saying it was a  state program.  She                                                               
said AOGA  is supporting--with some concern--the  extensions this                                                               
bill allows.  She said she  would object to an extension based on                                                               
the time  of action,  because it  "puts the  ball in  the federal                                                               
court."  A  map of Alaska shows  a lot of federal  land, "and the                                                               
rest of it is state land  and Native Corporation land."  She said                                                               
ACMP  was  intended  to  be  a state  program,  and  the  federal                                                               
government comes to  Alaska every three to four years  to see how                                                               
the state is doing.  "It's not  their program," she said.  If the                                                               
legislature is giving  extensions, "we would support  an end date                                                               
that  the program  would  go away  unless  the legislature  takes                                                               
other action."  She said OCRM  will not and cannot let the Alaska                                                               
ACMP  program go  away because  it  is one  of the  stars in  the                                                               
coastal  management  program.    It  would  have  huge  political                                                               
repercussions,  she said.   "Those  of  you who  have read  their                                                               
responses to the state, you  can't hardly get through a paragraph                                                               
without   saying,  what?   what?"     She   said   the  tone   is                                                               
"condescending"  and  "in-your-face."    She  said  the  industry                                                               
looked at what might happen if  the program goes away, and a date                                                               
is the  only thing that will  keep OCRM on deadline,  or else "it                                                               
will just go on and on."                                                                                                        
2:19:39 PM                                                                                                                    
MS.  BRADY  said  there  is   a  no-man's-land  between  existing                                                               
enforceable  policies  and  new  ones.    Randy  Bates  and  Bill                                                               
Jeffress are working diligently so  things don't get stopped, she                                                               
said.  She  expressed a danger of third-party  suits, which would                                                               
make ACMP  a nightmare.  She  noted that a person  from OCRM said                                                               
"this is  more of  a federal  program than  a state  program, and                                                               
your legislature doesn't understand."   She said the industry has                                                               
been asking for a  review of the ABC list for ten  years.  An ice                                                               
road is  on the "B" list,  she explained.  "What  we were looking                                                               
for was  to extend  ... the  "B" list ...  these are  some things                                                               
we're interested in,"  she said, but "whether you want  to have a                                                               
list in your statute or not, is up to you," she offered.                                                                        
2:23:54 PM                                                                                                                    
MS. BRADY  said she believes  that House Bill 191  made important                                                               
changes in  the coastal program,  and they didn't take  away from                                                               
the  coastal  districts.    The   legislation  just  forbade  the                                                               
districts from  duplicating other laws.   "Now when they  make an                                                               
enforceable policy  that's specific  to their  area, and  that is                                                               
not covered  by federal or state  law, that's what it  should be,                                                               
it  should  be  something  so   special  and  so--that  it's  not                                                               
covered."  She said, "Frankly, over  that past 30 years the state                                                               
and  federal government  have passed  so many  environmental laws                                                               
trying to protect the coastal  resources, that there's probably--                                                               
we expected  there wouldn't be  many enforceable policies."   The                                                               
coastal  districts have  the  same power  as  the legislature  on                                                               
state  land and  for activities  on federal  land that  require a                                                               
federal permit,  she stated.   She added  that every  activity on                                                               
the North Slope  requires a federal permit, so the  powers of the                                                               
coastal district  are very  extensive.   She concluded  that AOGA                                                               
supports the amendments.                                                                                                        
2:26:25 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  SEATON  asked  why  AOGA  opposes  the  districts                                                               
having their rewrites  tied to the approval by OCRM  of the state                                                               
standards, so they know the conditions.                                                                                         
2:28:27 PM                                                                                                                    
MS. BRADY said AOGA is assuming  that OCRM will approve the state                                                               
standards because they  have done so for every other  state.  "In                                                               
our  minds the  state  standards are--unless  OCRM  is just  flat                                                               
lying--are  going to  be approved  as presented.   I  think there                                                               
were four  areas of change that  we are in the  middle of getting                                                               
public comment on right now."                                                                                                   
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON said  Ms. Brady has more  confidence in the                                                               
federal government than he does.                                                                                                
MS. BRADY said, "I have absolutely no confidence."                                                                              
2:29:41 PM                                                                                                                    
JEAN  WOODS, Matanuska-Susitna,  said  there has  been no  public                                                               
input yet  on the  Mat-Su Borough  draft plan,  and she  wants an                                                               
extension of the deadline.   She read from Chapter 6, Enforceable                                                               
Policies: "There is no state  standard for recreation or tourism.                                                               
It is also important to note  that the state standard for coastal                                                               
development  and coastal  access  are limited  to marine  coastal                                                               
water,  therefore neither  is applicable  to  rivers, lakes,  and                                                               
streams."   She  added that  at  a recent  assembly meeting,  the                                                               
administration  tried  to  designate  the  coastal  zone  in  the                                                               
Matanuska-Susitna  area without  any public  comment.   She asked                                                               
for an extension of the deadline to allow for public input.                                                                     
2:31:01 PM                                                                                                                    
NOEL WOODS, Matanuska-Susitna, said  he appreciates the effort to                                                               
bring ACMP in  line with statewide public expectation.   He added                                                               
that Matanuska-Susitna sportsmen are  interested in public use of                                                               
public lands.                                                                                                                   
2:31:44 PM                                                                                                                    
MR.  BALASH  said he  failed  to  speak  on  behalf of  his  boss                                                               
[Senator Therriault]  on why he pushed  for the sunset date.   He                                                               
said over  the last eight  years the  senator has gotten  to know                                                               
about the program  through the DNR budget and has  become the one                                                               
person  who knows  the ACMP  process.   It is  difficult to  sort                                                               
through the  information of different  viewpoints, he said.   The                                                               
benefit  of the  legislative audit  is a  thorough and  objective                                                               
review because  of who is doing  it, and there will  be access to                                                               
quantifiable data.  Senator Therriault  insists on the sunset and                                                               
audit provisions, he said.                                                                                                      
2:35:04 PM                                                                                                                    
MR.  BALASH said  in 2002,  local districts  were given  specific                                                               
direction to  remove references of  any statute or  regulation of                                                               
the state or another federal agency,  and they did not.  In 2003,                                                               
the  commissioner  at  DNR  was  given  powers  to  delete  those                                                               
adoptions by reference, and DNR has  not done that.  "It would be                                                               
fair to say that  my boss is seeking to make a  point ... that it                                                               
needs to be done."                                                                                                              

Document Name Date/Time Subjects