Legislature(2013 - 2014)BARNES 124
04/10/2014 08:00 AM House ADMINISTRATIVE REGULATION REVIEW
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Water Well Logs | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
ADMINISTRATIVE REGULATION REVIEW COMMITTEE
April 10, 2014
8:03 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Lora Reinbold, Chair
Senator Cathy Giessel, Vice Chair
Representative Mike Hawker
Representative Geran Tarr
Senator Gary Stevens
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Hollis French
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
WATER WELL LOGS
- HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
No previous action to record
WITNESS REGISTER
YASMINE HABASH, Staff
Senator Mike Dunleavy
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Introduced the topic of Alaska's water well
log regulations.
JAMES ARTHUR SQUYRES
Certified Public Accountant
Delta Junction, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in favor of modifying water well
log regulations.
LARRY SWIHART, Owner and Operator
S&S Drilling
Palmer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in favor of modifying water well
log regulations.
TED SCHACHLE,
Alaska Water Well Association
Big Lake, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in favor of modifying water well
log regulations.
DAN BROTHERTON, Operator
Arctic Drilling, Inc.
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in favor of modifying water well
log regulations.
CHUCK ICE
Ice Water Well, Inc.
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified that water well logs are
proprietary.
LEE ICE
Ice Water Well, Inc.
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in favor of modifying water well
log regulations.
JOHN BONACOR
Swan Drilling
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified that drilling companies should not
provide well log information to the state.
JEFF ELLISON, Owner
Blackwell Pump Service and Homer Drilling
Homer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified that water well logs contain
valuable propriety information.
BRANDON FLINN
Tok, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified that water well logs belong to the
landowner.
ALVIN J. BATES
Tok, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified that water well logs belong to the
landowner, and regulations will lead to fees and taxes.
TERRY BRIGNER JR.
Tok, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in favor of modifying water well
log regulations.
CHERISH BRINGER
Tok, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in favor of eliminating the water
well log regulation.
CANDY TROUPE
Snowshoe Motel
Tok, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in favor of modifying water well
log regulations.
CINDY KOESTLER
Tok, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in favor of eliminating the water
well log regulation.
JEFFREY VANZANDT
Tok, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in favor of eliminating the water
well log regulation.
RHONDA VANZANDT
Tok, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in favor of eliminating the water
well log regulation.
ED FOGELS, Deputy Commissioner
Department of Natural Resources (DNR)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Explained the role of DNR in managing state
water resources.
JOHN BAKER, Assistant Attorney General
Natural Resources Section
Department of Law
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions regarding water well log
regulations.
LYNN KENT, Deputy Commissioner
Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions regarding how DEC uses
water well log data.
ACTION NARRATIVE
8:03:26 AM
CHAIR LORA REINBOLD called the Administrative Regulation Review
Committee meeting to order at 8:03 a.m. Senators Geissel and
Stevens and Representatives Hawker and Reinbold were present at
the call to order. Representative Tarr arrived as the meeting
was in progress.
^Water Well Logs
Water Well Logs
8:04:06 AM
CHAIR REINBOLD announced that the only order of business would
be water well log regulations, and the issue was brought to the
committee by Senator Mike Dunleavy.
8:04:23 AM
YASMINE HABASH, Staff, Senator Mike Dunleavy, Alaska State
Legislature, noted that Regulation 11 AAC 93.140 has been in
effect since 1977, and it states that a person who constructs a
well shall file a report within 45 days of completion with both
the property owner and the department. The regulation then
lists several requirements that must be included in the water
well log. She noted that she would like to discuss the last
part of the regulation, which states [original punctuation
provided]:
(g) Information required by (a) of this section is
required for any water well that has been deepened,
modified, or abandoned, and for any water supply well
or water well that is used for monitoring,
observation, or aquifer testing, including a dry or
low-yield water well that is not used.
8:06:23 AM
JAMES ARTHUR SQUYRES, Certified Public Accountant, said he is
opposed to the aforementioned regulation. He told the committee
that he has sailed around the world for over 11 years, visiting
25 countries, and what he saw abroad made him aware that what
makes the United States different is its constitution. "The
oppression and tyranny we have seen abroad is what made me
keenly aware of infringements on our individual rights that are
taking place back here in the United States," he stated. He
said he is a landowner in an unorganized borough in Alaska, and
he is not being paid to make this presentation or for the
research he has done. The well drillers he has lined up to
speak today are an integral part of his presentation. He
proposed that the regulation be eliminated or that "shall" be
changed to "may". He opined that the current regulation
overreaches, creating an onerous and unconstitutional burden on
well drillers and land owners, and it violates Article 1,
Sections 1, 2, 14, and 22 of the Alaska Constitution.
MR. SQUYRES explained that the regulation requires water
drillers to file logs with the Department of Natural Resources
(DNR) and the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC)
after drilling private wells on private property, and it has
been in effect since 1977. He said, "Rural drillers have
instinctively resisted this regulation through nullification,
citing the privacy concerns of individual landowners and their
own proprietary interest in these well logs that contribute to
the economic viability of their entrepreneurial going concerns."
He added that citizens are becoming aware that this is
overreaching, as there no statutory requirement for private well
owners to turn in their water logs, particularly for wells
drawing less than 500 gallons a day and not adversely affecting
others. He said that over 90 percent of Alaska wells fit that
category, and DNR has not been enforcing this regulation,
leading to the "current conflicting status quo." The statute
gives the authority to determine and appropriate water rights to
all who apply, and there are many reasons why someone would want
to race to file for water rights, he said, but some may not want
to file due to unconstitutional elements, and the problem is in
the regulation.
8:11:41 AM
MR. SQUYRES said when he was a practicing CPA he had to value
small, closely held businesses, and there are many ways to
calculate the fair market value of a business. He spoke of the
"good will" factor and that well logs can "confiscate good will"
from rural well drilling businesses. Well owners may be less
interested in filing for water rights if the nearest neighbor is
miles down the road, he said. Landowners can file for water
rights at any time on a first-come, first-served basis.
8:14:14 AM
MR. SQUYRES said the inherent rights in the Alaska Constitution
"has to do with the enjoyment and rewards of their own
industry." Rural well driller logs make drillers vulnerable to
unfair competition from new entrants who do not have to "earn"
the information from working in the field. The information is
on the Internet, he said. Rights have to be exercised, history
has shown, or they will be eroded and trampled by unsympathetic
bureaucracies allowed to run unchecked. He then quoted the
Alaska Constitution: all political power is inherent in the
people; all government originates with the people, is founded on
their will only; and, the right of the people to privacy is
recognized and shall not be infringed.
MR. SQUYRES reiterated that well logs are put on the Internet,
except for those that may have terrorist concerns. It is clear
that well drillers and landowners have an expectation of
privacy, he opined. He spoke of individuals who voluntary give
up rights, and then quoted the constitution: The right of the
people to be secure in their persons, houses and other property,
papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures,
shall not be violated. "Papers" would include well logs that
are paid for by the landowner, he stated. Little thought is
given on how the well logs can be manipulated or searched with
current or future technology that may not even exist; metadata
may fall into the wrong hands, he warned. The people call upon
the legislature to protect citizens from onerous and
overreaching regulations, he said. The constitution says that
fish, wildlife, and waters are reserved for the people for
common use, and no one wants to deny Alaskans a drink of water.
The regulation requires an application for the use of a
significant amount of water, and 500 gallons per day is not
significant, but DNR and DEC say they need every well log to
manage each and every drop of water in this state, "yet the
statute calls for them to appropriate only to those who apply."
This is the problem that leads to the violation of
constitutional rights, he said. When someone files a well log
voluntarily, no rights are violated, but when compelled, rights
are violated. He stated that this could lead to extra costs in
the budget. Enforcement action could lead to expensive legal
cases, draining state coffers. He said, "No mention was made in
the constitution or statute about the onerous and
unconstitutional elements discussed above in regards to this
regulation." He called on the committee to take all action
possible to eliminate this old regulation or to modify it.
8:21:35 AM
CHAIR REINBOLD said he had a very persuasive argument. She
noted that HB 140 is in the Senate, "which does cause an agency
or a commission or a board to identify where the regulation is
promulgated and also to assist the impacts, in aggregate, to the
private sector."
MR. SQUYRES said he has spoken with Senators Bishop and Dunleavy
and Representative Feige, who has been helpful.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR asked if well logs are provided when land is
transferred, and if that is a reason to keep the logs.
MR. SQUYRES opined that a purchaser would want that information.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR asked if the state makes that information
available to a buyer. If the regulations went away, how would
the information be retained?
MR. SQUYRES suggested that the seller would be highly motivated
to provide such information to the bank to facilitate the
transaction. He said things may be different in urban areas,
but applying the regulation to every square inch of the state is
going a bit far.
8:25:31 AM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR surmised that the well information would be
in the hands of the property owner and then made available when
the property is sold.
MR. SQUYRES agreed. The landowner owns the information.
SENATOR STEVENS asked if Mr. Squyres said DNR was not enforcing
the regulations.
MR. SQUYRES opined that it is difficult to go back and clean up
onerous and overreaching regulations, but they are a type of
oppression weighing on the shoulders of landowners, he said. He
understands that DNR is not spending state funds to enforce it.
8:27:47 AM
CHAIR REINBOLD asked him to stay in touch, as she wants to
follow this issue.
LARRY SWIHART, Owner and Operator, S&S Drilling, said he has
worked in the water well industry for over 30 years, and he has
always been opposed to the current well log regulations. There
are proprietary issues, he stated. It is unethical to have to
give to his many competitors information that he has gathered
over his years of hard work building a customer base and
learning drilling conditions in various locations. He said his
competitors could contact his customers and undercut his prices.
He added that when a private property owner hires his company to
drill a water well, it should be the owner's prerogative to
share or not share information. He requested that the
regulation be changed from "will turn in well logs" to "may turn
in well logs." He said this has been a concern for quite some
time, and he is active in water well stakeholder meetings. He
said the stakeholders have been threatened that DNR is going to
start taking active measures against well drillers who do not
turn in logs.
8:32:05 AM
TED SCHACHLE, Alaska Water Well Association, said his parents
came to Alaska in 1954 and started a drilling business with
their 10 children. He said [well logs] are personal information
and belong to [landowners] and not the state. For DNR to force
drillers to turn the information in is wrong, "and it erodes my
rights and the private citizen's rights." His company has
worked hard to develop expertise in certain locales, and by
handing over well logs, a newcomer can look at the logs and
decide where the best places to drill are. Currently, he said,
he only turns in logs for commercial wells, and the private well
logs remain with the property owner. He asked that the
regulation be changed to make it voluntary to submit well logs
to the state.
8:34:57 AM
DAN BROTHERTON, Operator, Arctic Drilling, Inc., said that a
well log belongs to the landowner. He noted that California law
prohibits distributing well completion reports to anyone but the
landowner without the landowner's written consent. That is the
right way to do it, he said.
8:36:33 AM
CHUCK ICE, Ice Water Well, Inc., said his company has been
drilling [water wells] since the 1970s, and well information is
proprietary. He said anyone can come from anywhere "and they
pick up the well logs and just walk in and start drilling and
know what they're getting into." That is his biggest complaint,
he noted.
8:37:16 AM
LEE ICE, Ice Water Well, Inc., said his company has been
involved in drilling for three generations, and he opposes the
regulation requiring him to give away something that somebody
has paid him to obtain. [A well log] is not his information to
give away freely, and he urged a change.
JOHN BONACOR, Swan Drilling, said he is a third generation
driller, and the state should go to the homeowners to get their
private [well log] information.
8:39:36 AM
JEFF ELLISON, Owner, Blackwell Pump Service and Homer Drilling,
said he has been in Homer since 2008 and he also owns Water
Solutions, a water filter distributer, and he is a board member
of Anchor Point Safe Water and a member of the Alaska Water Well
Association. As soon as he arrived in the area, it became
apparent how valuable well water logs are in Alaska,
particularly in rural areas. Drilling in the Lower 48 is very
different, because there is basically one aquifer, he explained,
so well logs are not as important. He purchased Black Well Pump
Service to obtain information, not only the personal knowledge
of a company that has been operating for several years, but the
paperwork as well. "To turn something in that is private like
that, just isn't right," he said. Additionally, gravel and sand
companies can look at the logs to determine the best places to
dig a pit, and they should have to pay for that information.
8:42:42 AM
BRANDON FLINN said that well logs belong to the landowner.
ALVIN J. BATES said that the people of Tok "are pretty stirred
up about this. We're very upset." He said the people know the
law is on books and that is has not been enforced for many
years, but they feel strongly in privacy rights. The average
person in Tok is a private individual, and Mr. Bates does not
know of anyone who uses over 500 gallons [of water] per day.
[The regulations] could very well be the first step to taxes,
fees, and other costs associated with well drilling. In
Colorado, he saw that people were paying $5,000 to $10,000 to
the state just for the right to drill a well. Tok residents are
largely unemployed in the winter, wages are generally low, "and
we cannot afford taxes and fees and various other things, so we
strongly encourage the board to make the changes that [Mr.
Squyres] requested." He added the caveat that Tok residents
"hold all of you responsible for your decisions" and will
consider those who vote to harm the people in the Interior of
Alaska. He added that there is a lot of passion on this issue
in Tok because residents know where this will lead in the
future-"it will lead to taxes; it will lead to fees, and it will
hurt the people of Alaska."
8:46:41 AM
CHAIR REINBOLD said that regulations are promulgated by
departments and boards, not the legislature. The legislature
has very little control, but she is trying to change that with
HB 140. She explained that the departments are the ones who do
these regulations, and most people that she has spoken with have
no idea that that is the case.
MR. BATES stated that people in the Interior have to start
living within their budgets. He said, "We voted against that
bond-that near billion dollar bond that just came through that
put us in the red, which was foolishness. People need to
realize up there in Juneau, we got to start living in our
budget; we can't keep squeezing us in the Interior for ...
pretty soon we'll get to our last dollar; where will we spend
it? On food or on taxes and fees and regulatory issues?"
8:48:57 AM
CHAIR REINBOLD thanked the callers, "because if you want your
government to leave you alone, you can't leave your government
alone."
TERRY BRIGNER JR. noted that the [well log] regulation needs to
be eliminated or changed, as suggested by [Mr. Squyres]. His
primary concern is privacy, and there is a verbal contract
between a well driller and the property owner with implied
privacy. As a business owner, he knows that trust between him
and his clientele is important. To be forced to give out well
logs is a breach of that trust, he said, and it could result in
a business owner going out of business.
8:50:58 AM
CHERISH BRINGER said she and her family are landowners and this
is directly affecting them. She said she does not want her
children to be worried about being taxed out of their land. As
Americans, "we look at our right to freedom." There are many
countries that do not have freedom, "and that's why Alaskans
live here." It is nobody else's business where her well is and
how much of the resource she uses. "That is all up to me," she
opined. The [water well log] regulation is unconstitutional and
should be eliminated.
8:52:41 AM
CANDY TROUPE, Snowshoe Motel, said she is in compliance with
DNR, but believes the regulation should be changed because it is
an infringement upon her rights.
CINDY KOESTLER said [water well log regulations] are an
infringement on her constitutional rights. She said, "We do not
need more people in here trying to run us down. We are trying
to survive in Tok; we pay for these wells to be put in; we are
not going to pay for them to be guarded by any affiliation with
the federal government." She noted that this is an election
year, and the people of Tok are going to do what is best for Tok
and Alaska.
8:54:26 AM
JEFFREY VANZANDT said this law needs to be repealed, because the
Interior is suffering from overregulation. The legislature does
not make these [regulations] but it holds the purse strings to
DNR, and if it cannot stop this, his representative will not get
his vote. He said he paid thousands of dollars to put in his
well, and he expects his information to be private. Over 100
families have left the Tok area in the last two years "because
of overburden and overpriced fuel, wood, and the cost of
living." He said that this is just one more nail in the coffin
for the people who live in rural Alaska. His legislators are
Representative Foster and Senator Olson, and if this is not
repealed, they need not ask him for his vote, he stated.
8:56:32 AM
RHONDA VANZANDT said that the regulation has to be repealed for
the people of Tok. "It is another regulation on top of the
people and we don't want it."
8:58:10 AM
ED FOGELS, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Natural Resources
(DNR), said DNR is mandated to manage the water resources of
state as a common public resource for the good of all the people
of Alaska. His department manages the quantity of water to make
sure that when somebody drills a well that there is plenty of
water to go around, and the Department of Environmental
Conservation (DEC) manages the quality of ground water, he
added. He sees two issues: The first is whether or not the
[water well log] regulation is actually legal, and DNR has
operated under the assumption that it is. In fact, it is rooted
soundly in the constitution and in statute, and a state attorney
is on line if people want more information. The second issue is
whether or not "this is the right thing to do," and that is the
bigger issue he believes. "We need to explain to you why it is
that we desperately need information on the ground water
resources of the state," he stated. It is a tough job to manage
water resources, especially in an area where populations are
growing and demands are increasing. He said he is a private
property owner in Anchorage, and he went through a lot of public
meetings on Sand Lake area water issues where a key to resolving
many debates was the information on the groundwater that was
collected through water well logs. Another question is if DNR
is administering the right process, and he noted that the
regulation is very difficult to enforce, because people are
drilling wells all over the state, and DNR does not have the
resources to chase everyone down, and "we don't intend to that
at this point." Currently, DNR is working with the
stakeholders' group on this issue to see what it is doing right
and what it is doing wrong, and this [water well log] regulation
is at the forefront of those discussions, he explained.
9:01:57 AM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR asked how people are supposed to submit
[logs]; people have said the process is onerous, and she asked
if it could be refined to be more user friendly.
9:02:38 AM
CHAIR REINBOLD asked which statute the regulation comes from.
JOHN BAKER, Assistant Attorney General, Natural Resources
Section, Department of Law, said the statutory basis for the
water well log regulation comes from AS 46.15.010 and AS
46.15.020. The first statute is a broad grant of authority from
the legislature to DNR to determine and adjudicate water rights
in Alaska and its appropriation and distribution. So, he said,
DNR is to determine water rights and their priority for
individuals using more than 500 gallons per day and to quantify
that as a water or property right (and get a priority date).
Additionally, the broader sense of appropriation (defined in
Title 46 as to divert, impound, or withdraw a quantity of water
from any source of water for beneficial use or to reserve it),
includes withdrawing 500 gallons per day or less through a well
without getting water rights. So those uses are to be regulated
by DNR, he said. The second statute requires and empowers DNR
to do what is necessary to carry out the objectives of the
Alaska Water Use Act, he explained. It is a broad grant of
authority, he noted; statutes like this are not going to have
the detail that are contained in regulations. The function of
regulations, as set out under the Alaska Administrative
Procedure Act, is to more specifically implement the statutes in
a way that is reasonably necessary and consistent. He said that
another statute, AS 41.08.020(b)(4), requires DNR to know the
location, quantity, and quality of water resources by aquifer,
which was originally required of the Department of Geological
and Geophysical [Surveys], but by administrative delegation, the
Water Section of DNR implements that requirement.
9:07:19 AM
CHAIR REINBOLD said it is unimaginable how much water is in the
state, and it would take many people to regulate it. Alaskans
are overregulated, and she asked if there is a difference
between public and private property. If a private [landowner]
paid for a well, she asked if the state should pick up the fee
for getting this proprietary information.
MR. BAKER said fees are a policy call for the legislature.
Regarding a legal distinction between private and public
resources, it is a fairly nuanced question. There is a
perception issue here. Under the Alaska Constitution, water is
considered a common use resource, and a well owner on private
property is tapping into a public resource-a common use
resource. The understanding of DNR at the time the regulation
was enacted, was that the collection of this data was a
condition of getting the public resource. The water itself is a
public resource, even if the aquifer is underneath private land,
he explained. The justification for the regulation is to obtain
data necessary to continue to manage the public resource. If
there are concerns about privacy or confidentiality of the data
that is collected, there is another statute, 38.05.035(a)(8)(C),
which allows an individual to request that DNR keep geological,
geophysical, and engineering data confidential. Well log data
is hydrological information and would be considered a subset of
geological data, and the statute provides a mechanism such that
individuals can request that DNR keep the information
confidential. The department does not have to make that
information available to everyone, he explained, but it can
continue to use it to manage the water resource.
9:11:18 AM
CHAIR REINBOLD expressed her belief that there are way too many
laws and lawyers. "These people just want to drink water and to
survive and not have the government on their back," she stated.
[Drillers] do not want their competitors to see data that the
government really does not need to have. It is private land,
but if it is not a big, big city, "don't you see the
constitutional privacy issues for the people?"
MR. BAKER said that privacy depends upon which resource is being
considered. He said he is not aware of an Alaska court finding
a violation of a right to privacy in an analogous situation
where public resource data is requested. The way the law is set
up now, the collection of that data is a condition of being able
to access the resource. "I can't tell the committee that I am
aware of any similar situation where an Alaska court has ever
found that to rise to level of invasion of privacy," he stated.
When there is a valid regulation on the books that puts all
members of the public on notice, just like hunting regulations,
it advises people upfront that if they want to access that
public resource, providing the well log data is a condition of
doing that. He said it is a policy question as to whether that
information is necessary, and DNR and DEC can speak to that.
Again, the aquifer is a public resource, but Title 38 allows a
homeowner and, probably, the well driller to request that the
information be kept confidential and not available to
competitors.
9:14:26 AM
CHAIR REINBOLD said a statute supersedes a regulation and the
constitution supersedes a statute, so these people have valid
concerns. She asked Mr. Baker if he is willing to work with
department to change "shall" to "may".
MR. BAKER said that if a state agency changes a regulation, the
Department of Law will assist as directed by statutory duties,
and whether or not to make that change would be policy question
beyond the scope of his office.
CHAIR REINBOLD said she wants the privately paid-for data
protected and she hopes DNR is willing to work with her.
9:15:27 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER suggested that Mr. Baker meant to
reference AS 38.05.035(a)(9)(c).
MR. BAKER said AS 38.05.035(a)(8)(c) refers to confidentiality
of certain records.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR asked about sharing geologic information,
since drilling on someone's land can impact others.
Additionally, contamination in one well can lead to
contamination in other wells. She asked if that information is
shared with individuals as a way help understand why the
information is necessary. She said she sees it as a way to
protect landowners by preventing them from being impacted by the
activities of someone else. She noted a situation on the
hillside, where people were building homes and there was no
water. It seems like log information is really necessary, and
it is difficult for her to get around that, but she can
appreciate that some people would want to keep their information
private. She suggested that communication about what was
happening underground is a way to protect landowners, and maybe
that could help resolve some of their concerns.
MR. FOGELS agreed with Representative Tarr. That is part of the
discussion in the stakeholder groups. The goal of DNR is not to
regulate, but to make sure that Alaskans have plenty of water to
drink. That is the only reason this is even an issue, he
stated. He said he has personal experience because a large
subdivision was going to be in some of the aquifers next to his
well, and the only reason he felt comfort with the proposed
construction is that he saw good data on the aquifer. "If we
don't have the data, we can't manage this resource properly-it's
as simple as that." He added that there are tools available to
address confidentiality and DNR is willing to work with the
committee to figure out a better way to do business, but the
bottom line is that DNR needs that critical information.
9:19:53 AM
CHAIR REINBOLD said she could agree when there is a limited
amount of water, but in areas where [the quantity of water] is
not an issue, it seems like the government is doing stuff it
does not need to be doing. It is paid for by someone, it is
competitive data, and it completely goes against capitalism,
freedom, and the constitution. At a minimum, the regulation
should become a "may" instead of a "shall," she said.
9:21:28 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER said that water rights are a huge issue in
his district, and one would think there is a lot of water, but
there is not. There are neighborhoods where wells cannot refill
from just running a shower, and it is caused by overbuilding and
increasing density in era prior to these regulations. He said
that around 1983, everyone filed for water rights when a large
golf course was being built, as people were afraid there would
not be enough water in the aquifer for basic residential
purposes. He suggested that there is a checkbox to keep water
data confidential. He said there were those that said they own
the data, it is proprietary, and it is not anyone else's
business, but it is-it is not just the individual landowner, it
is what we are doing to our neighbors. In his district he
believes that the state needs to maintain that information as we
are allocating a scarce resource. "We need to have that
information available as we make these judgments," he added.
9:23:58 AM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR asked if DEC needs the log information to
manage water quality.
9:24:16 AM
LYNN KENT, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Environmental
Conservation, said DEC needs and uses water well log
information. It does not directly regulate private wells, but
DEC regulates onsite septic systems and their distance from
private drinking water wells. A neighbor cannot put in a sewage
system right beside a well that may contaminate it, she
explained. Well logs are used in the contaminated sites arena,
and there are many sites contaminated with oil or hazardous
substances that affect ground water, and DEC relies pretty
heavily on both private and public well logs to determine the
depth to ground water, flow rates, direction of flow, and who
might be at risk of drinking contaminated water. That
information is absolutely critical to protect public health, she
explained. She gave the example of relying on private well logs
to track the sulfolane plume emanating from the North Pole
refinery right now; the data provides initial information on
what wells might be contaminated.
9:26:10 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER noted his personal experience that
validates Ms. Kent's testimony and said his neighbor drilled a
well right next to his septic field. The neighbor had problems
and then the high costs of drilling another well, he stated.
CHAIR REINBOLD said that public testimony will remain open and
she wants to work with DNR on protecting private data. She
questioned how much the government should be involved "way out
in the middle of nowhere" where water is a plentiful resource.
9:28:18 AM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the
Administrative Regulation Review Committee meeting was adjourned
at 9:28 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|