02/15/2007 08:00 AM House COMMUNITY & REGIONAL AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB56 | |
| HB101 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 56 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 101 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE COMMUNITY AND REGIONAL AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
February 15, 2007
8:06 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Anna Fairclough, Co-Chair
Representative Gabrielle LeDoux, Co-Chair
Representative Nancy Dahlstrom
Representative Mark Neuman
Representative Kurt Olson
Representative Sharon Cissna
Representative Woodie Salmon
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 56
"An Act establishing the Hydrogen Energy Partnership in the
Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic Development;
requiring the commissioner of commerce, community, and economic
development to seek public and private funding for the
partnership; providing for the contingent repeal of an effective
date; and providing for an effective date."
- HEARD AND HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 101
"An Act relating to uniform traffic laws."
- HEARD AND HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 56
SHORT TITLE: HYDROGEN ENERGY RESEARCH PROGRAM
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) CRAWFORD, DOLL
01/16/07 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/5/07
01/16/07 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/16/07 (H) CRA, RES, FIN
02/15/07 (H) CRA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 124
BILL: HB 101
SHORT TITLE: UNIFORM TRAFFIC LAWS
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) GATTO
01/16/07 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/16/07 (H) CRA
02/15/07 (H) CRA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 124
WITNESS REGISTER
REPRESENTATIVE HARRY CRAWFORD
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Spoke as the sponsor of HB 56.
SARA FISHER-GOAD, Deputy Director
Project Development/Operations
Alaska Energy Authority
Department of Commerce, Community, & Economic Development
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Related that the department has no position
on HB 56, but offered a few suggestions.
DAVID LOCKHART, Geothermal Energy Manager
Alaska Energy Authority
Department of Commerce, Community, & Economic Development
(No address provided)
POSITION STATEMENT: During hearing of HB 56, answered
questions.
BILL LEIGHTY
Alaska Applied Science, Inc.;
Vice President, Leighty Foundation
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During hearing of HB 56, related his
knowledge of hydrogen and its use with alternative energy
sources.
PAT PITNEY, Associate Vice President
University of Alaska - Fairbanks
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in favor of HB 56.
ONA BRAUSE, Staff
to Representative Harry Crawford
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During hearing of HB 56, answered
questions.
REPRESENTATIVE CARL GATTO
Alaska State Legislature,
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Spoke as the sponsor of HB 101.
RODNEY DIAL, Lieutenant
Deputy Commander
A Detachment
Department of Public Safety
Ketchikan, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 101.
CODY RICE, Staff
to Representative Carl Gatto
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During hearing of HB 101, answered
questions.
JOHN MCCONNAUGHY, Deputy Anchorage Municipal Attorney
Municipality of Anchorage
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During hearing of HB 101, expressed
concerns with the current language of [AS 28.35.030(r)].
ACTION NARRATIVE
CO-CHAIR GABRIELLE LEDOUX called the House Community and
Regional Affairs Standing Committee meeting to order at 8:06:07
AM. Representatives LeDoux, Fairclough, Neuman, and Olson were
present at the call to order. Representatives Dahlstrom,
Cissna, and Salmon arrived as the meeting was in progress.
HB 56-HYDROGEN ENERGY RESEARCH PROGRAM
8:06:41 AM
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX announced that the first order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 56, "An Act establishing the Hydrogen Energy
Partnership in the Department of Commerce, Community, and
Economic Development; requiring the commissioner of commerce,
community, and economic development to seek public and private
funding for the partnership; providing for the contingent repeal
of an effective date; and providing for an effective date."
8:06:52 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HARRY CRAWFORD, Alaska State Legislature,
sponsor, reviewed the history of HB 56 as it's the fifth time
such legislation has been introduced. In fact, the legislation
has passed the House twice. Although Alaska is a leader of
energy production, these are fossil fuels that are declining.
Therefore, [the state] needs to develop renewable resources and
develop a method by which the energy it creates can be stored
[and shipped]. This legislation establishes an entity by which
grants can be utilized to research the use of hydrogen as a
shipping and storage medium. Representative Crawford
highlighted that this won't cost the state since it's to be
funded by grants. Several years ago Chugach Electric and others
came to him, he related, and expressed interest in [alternative
energy possibilities] but pointed out the need for an entity to
which the grants could go. This legislation was modeled after a
similar entity in Hawaii, which is moving ahead with its
program.
8:12:06 AM
REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN inquired as to the difficulty with passing
this legislation.
REPRESENTATIVE CRAWFORD said that he hasn't ever heard any
serious opposition. The only change in this legislation from
prior years is that the funds will go directly to the Alaska
Energy Authority (AEA) in an attempt to make the situation more
convenient for AEA.
8:13:15 AM
CO-CHAIR FAIRCLOUGH pointed out the two money fiscal notes that
reflect one-time expenses after which the grant would then take
over.
REPRESENTATIVE CRAWFORD pointed out that fiscal notes show
program receipts rather than general funds. Therefore, the
fiscal notes reflect that there isn't a cost to the state. In
response to Co-Chair LeDoux, Representative Crawford related his
understanding that money for the fiscal notes will come from the
grants.
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX inquired as to how one would obtain grants prior
to establishing the entity to which the grants would go. She
opined that it would seem that there would need to be funds to
set up the entity.
REPRESENTATIVE CRAWFORD related that the idea is to build on
work that has been done by the University of Alaska. The hope
is to obtain a grant from Chugach Electric, although the
management of Chugach Electric has changed since the original
offer to help. However, without a structure, he said he
guaranteed that the research wouldn't happen.
8:15:56 AM
CO-CHAIR FAIRCLOUGH referred to page 3, line 12, paragraph (45)
of HB 56, which says: "provide staff support for the hydrogen
energy partnership established under AS 41.98.190, and the
University of Alaska shall provide assistance to the
commissioner on request." However, the university's fiscal note
is zero.
8:16:49 AM
REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN inquired as to how the Department of
Commerce, Community, & Economic Development (DCCED) feels about
HB 56.
REPRESENTATIVE CRAWFORD deferred to DCCED staff on line.
8:17:36 AM
SARA FISHER-GOAD, Deputy Director, Project
Development/Operations, Alaska Energy Authority (AEA),
Department of Commerce, Community, & Economic Development, said
that at this point DCCED has no position on HB 56. However, the
department anticipates that there will be some private sources
to start the program in order to provide minimal staff support
to pursue federal funding. Ms. Fisher-Goad explained that there
are two fiscal notes, one from AEA and one from the Alaska
Industrial Development & Export Authority (AIDEA), because AEA
doesn't have staff. The program would be an AEA program, and
therefore she recommended that the sponsor amend the legislation
such that the program is an AS 42.45 versus "a Commerce
program." The aforementioned would clarify that it's an AEA
initiative rather than a DCCED initiative. With regard to the
university's fiscal note, Ms. Fisher-Goad related her
understanding that the university won't provide staff support
under Section 3 of the legislation unless funding is received.
Only Section 4, which would seek federal and private sources to
fund the cost of establishing and operating this partnership,
takes effect immediately.
8:19:31 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA asked if there is a need for this
legislation. She also questioned whether it's problematic for
the state to supply inexpensive energy sources to all of Alaska.
Furthermore, she questioned whether it's the state's
responsibility to be concerned about whether the state has
energy sources.
REPRESENTATIVE CRAWFORD related that currently a couple hundred
billion dollars is being spent in Iraq, which can be partially
attributed to the fact that the Mideast has lots of fossil fuel.
Fossil fuel, a finite resource, is on the decline. However,
there is renewable energy that isn't finite. There needs to be
a way to transport and store this energy. Representative
Crawford opined that there is a great need for legislation such
as HB 56 in order to head off future problems, although it's not
a magic bullet.
8:23:02 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA asked if there is any documentation of an
unmet need in the state.
REPRESENTATIVE CRAWFORD pointed out that $180 million was placed
in power cost equalization (PCE) last year because the cost of
fuel in Western Alaska is so expensive. This legislation offers
a way in which cheaper energy could be provided to Western
Alaska, statewide, and nationwide. He then turned to the Akutan
project where a geothermal plant could be utilized to turn sea
water into hydrogen to create energy. He also mentioned the
Fire Island wind possibility, but acknowledged the need to have
base load power sources and the need for storing wind power.
Representative Crawford opined that there is a large need
worldwide and Alaska should be a leader in this new technology.
8:26:29 AM
REPRESENTATIVE OLSON inquired as to whether Representative
Crawford sees the greatest demand for the generation of power or
transportation.
REPRESENTATIVE CRAWFORD answered that it would be the generation
of power at this point as there are problems with the
transportation aspect.
REPRESENTATIVE OLSON opined that he can't foresee hydrogen being
a factor in Alaska for 50-100 years because of the size of
Alaska and its population density. He related his understanding
that test stations are being done in Washington, D.C. However,
the vehicles are expensive and have a low mileage radius.
Therefore, using hydrogen for power generation purposes would be
appropriate for Alaska.
8:28:47 AM
MS. FISHER-GOAD reiterated that AEA is coordinating with the
department regarding that this legislation would be an AEA
initiative. The AEA would seek private sources in order to
provide some support to help solicit additional federal dollars
to move forward. She then pointed out that on page 3, paragraph
(3), and related that the market evaluation would be for export
and sales as well as the feasibility and production. The
aforementioned would be reviewed in order to determine how a
hydrogen program would fit in Alaska. She then highlighted the
Institute of Social and Economic Research's (ISER) report titled
"Village Wind Diesel Hydrogen Report."
8:30:37 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA related that she has heard an enormous
need for energy and local jobs throughout the state. She asked
if Ms. Fisher-Goad could identify sources of information
regarding how alternative energy such as hydrogen energy could
help local communities.
MS. FISHER-GOAD deferred to Mr. Lockhart.
8:31:56 AM
DAVID LOCKHART, Geothermal Energy Manager, Alaska Energy
Authority (AEA), Department of Commerce, Community, & Economic
Development, specified that AEA has performed essentially no
work analyzing hydrogen as a means of storing energy. However,
the sponsor's point as to the importance of being able to store
energy produced from alternative energy sources are of interest
to AEA. Currently, AEA is analyzing a potential wind energy
project in Unalakleet as part of a powerhouse development. That
project is reviewing battery and fly-wheel storage.
Furthermore, there is a tremendous resource at Akutan with
geothermal possibilities and the use if hydrogen as well as
aluminum smelting.
8:34:17 AM
BILL LEIGHTY, Alaska Applied Science, Inc.; Vice President,
Leighty Foundation, related that he has spent most of the last
six years co-authoring studies regarding the problem of large-
scale stranded renewable energy resources. He then used his
demonstrator to illustrate the limitations and opportunities
with regard to hydrogen use for Alaska. Mr. Leighty informed
the committee that Alaska has abundant resources of the mineral
zeolite, which has an affinity for hydrogen. Therefore,
powdered zeolite might provide the ability to store a larger
quantity of hydrogen at a lower cost and pressure. The
aforementioned would be an ideal research project for Alaska if
the resources to do so could be attracted. Mr. Leighty said
that he didn't know whether the [creation of the Hydrogen Energy
Partnership] would necessarily attract funds to the state as
there is much competition. He highlighted that hydrogen is a
carrier rather than a source of energy. However, once hydrogen
is made, something useful can be done with it. Ideally, the
hydrogen could be stored at a large enough scale to provide a
firm energy source year round. If all the wind energy could be
harvested in the Great Plains and firm it on an annual scale,
there would be enough energy to run the entire U.S.
MR. LEIGHTY, with regard to the Alaska opportunity, turned the
committee's attention to a paper from the World Energy Congress
in Sydney in 2004, which advocates building an international
renewable hydrogen transmission demonstration facility to
demonstrate that hydrogen could be produced from diverse
renewable sources, place it in a pipeline, and deliver it to a
community. He then related that the Japanese are interested in
building a natural gas pipeline with hydrogen-capable pipe and
as the gas is depleted, it would be replaced with hydrogen. The
aforementioned illustrates the level of international interest
in the concept. The question is whether hydrogen can be
produced from stranded renewables at a large scale, firm it, and
deliver it to market in order to have a firm supply of carbon
emission free energy from renewable sources. He opined that
it's doable, although much research and development would be
required with the culmination of demonstration projects to prove
that it can be done and at what cost it can be done. Mr.
Leighty pointed out that he has suggested changes to the
language of HB 56 to make it more consistent with what hydrogen
is and isn't as hydrogen should never be referred to as an
energy source.
REPRESENTATIVE CRAWFORD said that Mr. Leighty's suggested
language changes can be made. He mentioned that the drafter of
the legislation is in the same situation as most, in that he/she
doesn't know the proper terms of this matter. In response to
Co-Chair LeDoux, he offered to provide [Mr. Leighty's
suggestions] to the committee.
MR. LEIGHTY continued by informing the committee that the
primary challenge with exporting hydrogen is that it has very
low energy density by volume as it's only one-third the volume
of natural gas. Therefore, larger pipelines or much higher
pressure tanks must be used to move it around. However, he
pointed out that once hydrogen is made, other useful chemicals
can be made, particularly liquid chemicals. Liquid chemicals,
such as ammonia, NH can be transported economically over very
3,
large distances through either pipelines or bulk carriers.
Furthermore, the internal combustion energy can be run on
ammonia. Alaska, he opined, could become a major exporter of
ammonia for agricultural fuel, transportation fuel, and
electricity generation if there was a way of making hydrogen
from renewable energy sources and then synthesizing it into
ammonia. At this point, almost all the world's ammonia is made
from natural gas. Mr. Leighty highlighted that the major oil
and gas companies are interested in hydrogen. In fact, Shell
has a hydrogen unit and BP has BP Alternative Energy, for which
hydrogen is a major part of its activity. Moreover, refineries
are large consumers of hydrogen as they deal with the
increasingly "sour grades" of crude and for desulfurizing
gasoline and diesel. Mr. Leighty suggested that the large oil
and gas companies might be the sources of funding for research
and development projects.
8:46:55 AM
REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN inquired as to how a partnership with
private industry can [perform this research] better than private
industry, with its money, alone.
MR. LEIGHTY opined that the goal is to pay attention to the
possibilities and opportunities in Alaska sooner.
8:48:02 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA commented that she has heard discussions
relating that Alaska is losing a lot [of ground on the research
front] in terms of the money and attention research attracts.
Therefore, she inquired as to the possibilities if the
University of Alaska becomes a leader in attracting research
funds to the state.
MR. LEIGHTY echoed his earlier comment that there's a lot of
competition for the few federal dollars that are available for
this. Therefore, the focus should be on Alaska's unique
qualities, such as its island communities where hydrogen could
be stored at an annual scale or Alaska's stranded renewable
resources that could possibly be converted to something that
could be economically exported.
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA inquired as to whether university
officials have been contacted regarding this legislation.
REPRESENTATIVE CRAWFORD recalled when he first started this
effort when he talked with the university. This [legislation
proposes] a model that has worked time and again on various
projects and brings private entities together to partner with
other entities. Representative Crawford opined, "If we want to
move ahead and have the kind of future that we all envision ...
with jobs and a vibrant economy, then we're going to have to do
some things differently and this is one way to help to shape the
future that we want to see."
8:52:27 AM
MR. LEIGHTY mentioned that he has a DVD with several of his
conference presentations and lectures that he could share with
the committee.
8:53:15 AM
PAT PITNEY, Associate Vice President, University of Alaska -
Fairbanks (UAF), characterized [UAF's] commitment to energy
research as a growing priority in its overall competitive
research effort. This is an area in which the state has
significant strength in terms of resources. This partnership
provides the opportunity to create the dialogue and place Alaska
in a more competitive position for energy research that exists
or which will add value to the state in the future in terms of
lower energy [costs] and additional export capacity. Therefore,
the university is in favor of this partnership agreement, which
compliments the overall competitive research budget increment
from the Board of Regents. Ms. Pitney opined that as a state,
alternative energy sources are critical to a successful future
and one must remember that such takes years to develop and
perfect.
8:55:43 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA asked if there are any examples in which
focus on such research has benefited the university and the
state.
MS. PITNEY informed the committee of a fuel cell research
project in which small transportation devices are looked at for
energy. She offered to provide the committee with further
examples of research focusing on energy. She highlighted that
the U.S. and its current leadership are talking about
alternative energy sources, which is a growing field for federal
and private research. Therefore, positioning the state to have
an infrastructure and dialogue with regard to the opportunities
and the ways in which the state could incent private industry to
look to Alaska is important.
8:57:57 AM
CO-CHAIR FAIRCLOUGH turned attention to the university's zero
fiscal note.
MS. PITNEY explained that the fiscal note relates to getting the
partnership started. As projects start that would require
resources, there would be the need to request funding. She
highlighted that energy is one of the university's competitive
research priorities, and therefore it's stated as one of the
areas for increase in the university's budget request.
CO-CHAIR FAIRCLOUGH then referred to page 3, line 12, which
relates that DCCED shall provide support staff for this proposed
partnership. Co-Chair Fairclough related that she is generally
supportive of moving HB 56. However, she expressed concerned
that a fiscal note is missing because someone will have to
"provide staff" to start the grant process. Therefore, she
asked if the sponsor is assuring the committee that the private
sector will step forward and there won't be any burden on DCCED
or should a fiscal note be requested.
REPRESENTATIVE CRAWFORD said he can't provide any solid
guarantee. However, he reiterated that when he started this
effort Chugach Electric said it would support this to get it
started, but the management has since changed. He expressed
hope that this proposed partnership could be made to work
because without some sort of entity for grants to be deposited,
the research won't happen. This legislation provides a
framework, he said.
CO-CHAIR FAIRCLOUGH reiterated her belief that support staff
will be needed during the grant writing process. If the intent
is for that to be provided and funded by the private sector, she
said she would sign the report "Do Pass" with that on the
record. However, if this is going to be an issue for the
university, then there is the need to understand and acknowledge
that some contribution is required upfront.
REPRESENTATIVE CRAWFORD recalled that over the last four years
he has tried hard to make this happen.
MS. PITNEY interjected her opinion that the place this
partnership should reside is AEA or DCCED, rather than the
university which would provide the expertise in research.
9:05:00 AM
CO-CHAIR FAIRCLOUGH inquired as to whether the legislation
introduced on this matter in past years has had a fiscal note
for support staff.
9:05:37 AM
ONA BRAUSE, Staff to Representative Harry Crawford, Alaska State
Legislature, answered that the fiscal notes for previous
legislation regarding this proposed partnership were zero as
well. She then pointed out that the fiscal analysis from AEA
outlines that the fiscal note is for a development specialist to
come in with money from the AEA receipts to establish the
creation of the group. The university has a zero fiscal note
because any money put out through the university program will be
done through grants the [partnership] acquires once it's
organized and it applies for the grants or the private money.
Therefore, the university isn't required to provide staff if the
funds aren't acquired.
9:06:49 AM
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX opined that in order to start this partnership,
there has to be real money.
REPRESENTATIVE CRAWFORD noted his agreement. Again, he reminded
the committee that at one time Chugach Electric had been
interested in this, but perhaps another entity will have to be
sought [for startup funds]. He then reiterated that without a
structure and entity for the grants or funds to reside, the
research won't go forward. He highlighted that if grants aren't
obtained, then the provisions are repealed.
9:08:15 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CRAWFORD, in response to Representative Cissna,
said that entities such as Chugach Electric aren't going to
offer grants if there isn't a structure in place to receive the
grants.
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA surmised then that the partnership is
merely a placeholder.
9:10:05 AM
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX, upon determining there were no further
questions for the sponsor or anyone else who wished to testify,
closed public testimony.
9:10:39 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SALMON inquired as to the size of facility that
would generate 500 kilowatts (kW) of power by a demonstrator of
the type Mr. Leighty presented.
MR. LEIGHTY explained that in order to generate 500 kW of
electric energy, at least 500 kW of wind power must be
available, for example. He acknowledged that the wind power is
only available part of the time and a wind generator operates at
about a 40 percent capacity factor. Therefore, about four times
of 500 kW of wind generation would be necessary and the
electrolyzer that converts the electric energy to hydrogen at
500 kW is about the size of a Volkswagen Bug. The associated
equipment is about two more Volkswagen Bugs. The capital cost
is about $500 per kW. If the goal is to make an island village
system work with a reliable firm source of energy year round,
the hydrogen has to be stored. He then pointed out that to
covert the hydrogen into electric energy, the internal
combustion engine runs fine on hydrogen. The full-scale
components of these do exist, although there isn't mass
production of them, he stated.
9:14:43 AM
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX announced that HB 56 would be held over.
HB 101-UNIFORM TRAFFIC LAWS
9:15:14 AM
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX announced that the final order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 101, "An Act relating to uniform traffic
laws."
The committee took an at-ease from 9:15 a.m. to 9:22 a.m.
9:22:11 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CARL GATTO, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor,
explained that ignition interlock law was a way to get drunk
drivers from getting in the car. However, the Municipality of
Anchorage (MOA) doesn't want to enforce it and thus HB 101 would
address that by inserting language "or enforce" to AS
28.01.010(a). This change would specify that the uniform
traffic laws apply statewide and municipalities don't have the
right to exempt themselves from the uniform traffic laws. He
then referred to the October 30, 2006, memorandum from
Legislative Legal and Research Services, which relates: "The
legislature has provided the traffic laws of the state shall be
uniform throughout the state and shall apply within all
municipalities of the state." Therefore, municipalities aren't
allowed to not enforce the uniform traffic laws.
9:27:27 AM
CO-CHAIR FAIRCLOUGH opined that MOA is relating in the
aforementioned memorandum that the court has upheld its need not
to comply. Therefore, she questioned whether this proposed
language change really makes it clear to the court system that
the municipality needs to comply. She related her guess that
perhaps the municipality believes it has a liability if it
complied with this traffic law. She noted her agreement that
it's irrelevant whether the municipality wants to comply or not.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO opined that he would think MOA would be
worried about not enforcing this law based on the thought that
the municipality could be sued by a person who was injured by a
drunk driver driving with a previous driving under the influence
conviction and should have been required to have an interlock
device.
CO-CHAIR FAIRCLOUGH asked if there is any documentation from the
court case or the opinion relating why the language was
determined to be such that MOA doesn't have to comply with this
law.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO deferred to Mr. Luckhaupt, Legislative
Legal and Research Services.
9:30:34 AM
REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM inquired as to whether anyone from MOA
or the Anchorage Police Department is available to discuss the
situation.
9:32:29 AM
RODNEY DIAL, Lieutenant, Deputy Commander, A Detachment,
Department of Public Safety (DPS), said that he isn't privy to
why Anchorage [law enforcement] isn't willing to enforce this
law. However, Lieutenant Dial said that DPS understands the
intent of this legislation and supports passage as a means to
ensure consistency in the application of traffic law throughout
the state. Lieutenant Dial related that DPS does see a problem
with regard to local municipalities interpreting laws in a
manner inconsistent with the intent of the original law. He
opined that he could only speculate that MOA viewed the original
law as an unfunded mandate and decided to opt-out of its
enforcement.
9:33:30 AM
REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM mentioned that she didn't have a fiscal
note, and therefore she called upon the sponsor to comment.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO deferred to his staff.
9:34:15 AM
CODY RICE, Staff to Representative Carl Gatto, Alaska State
Legislature, informed the committee that MOA's deputy attorney,
John McConnaughy, believes that the law was onerous and
confusing and that MOA could choose not to adopt municipal code,
and therefore not enforce these specific provisions. However,
that's not the case as the organized and unorganized areas of
the state have to have traffic code that's consistent with state
law. This legislation proposes a simple language change to make
the aforementioned extremely clear.
9:36:14 AM
CO-CHAIR FAIRCLOUGH said she still wasn't clear why MOA isn't
enforcing the law. Co-Chair Fairclough related her agreement
that MOA should enforce the law, but she said she wasn't sure
how two words will change the situation. She opined that it
would be most relevant to contact MOA regarding what it feels is
inconsistent in the message of the legislature through this law.
She then expressed concern that no representatives from MOA are
available today to discuss the situation.
9:37:27 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO informed the committee that he has surmised
that the difficulties of having a vendor of these ignition
interlock devices in Southcentral has complicated MOA's ability,
as a condition of sentencing, to order the installation of an
ignition interlock device. The situation becomes more
complicated for areas outside of the area where the
vendor/technician is located.
MR. RICE said that there is at least one vendor in the state and
two to three others who are permitted, but aren't operating
because of the low volume. The low volume is attributable to
the fact that the largest community in the state is choosing not
to enforce the current law.
9:40:43 AM
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX opined that currently, with no law change
required, MOA is required to enforce this traffic law.
Therefore, she questioned why the language change in HB 101 will
change the situation. She emphasized the need to do something
that will actually solve the problem.
MR. RICE related his belief that the proposed language in HB 101
makes it clearer. Furthermore, HB 101 makes it clear that
choosing not to adopt municipal code consistent with new state
law and maintaining the old law isn't consistent with statute.
With respect to MOA's position, Mr. Rice said that in
conversations with Mr. McConnaughy he understands that MOA feels
that the language of the original law isn't how it would've
preferred the language be drafted. Therefore, MOA made a
conscious decision not to enact municipal code consistent with
state law.
9:43:08 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA questioned whether the cost of each of
these ignition interlock devices could be viewed as an unfunded
mandate.
MR. RICE pointed out that the cost of the devices is borne by
the offender. The cost, he related, averages approximately $3
per day. In cases of need, the cost can be deducted from the
fines assessed by the court.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO explained that as a condition of sentencing
the offender is fined $2,000 with $300 relieved to be utilized
to obtain the ignition interlock device. Therefore, there would
be no additional cost for obtaining the device.
9:44:41 AM
REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN expressed difficulty with the state
telling communities what to do regardless of the communities'
thoughts or situation. He further expressed concern with regard
to smaller municipalities who can't afford to enforce this law
and asked if his understanding that some smaller municipalities
can opt-out of this law is correct.
MR. RICE clarified that the uniform traffic law is to be
implemented statewide. However, he acknowledged under state law
that in communities "with traffic volumes of less than 499 cars
a day for individuals who have had not had six points or more
removed from their license within the last five years" can be
exempted from insurance requirements. Therefore, although there
are variances across the state, they are consistent with state
law. This legislation, HB 101, attempts to reach compliance and
consistency, he said.
9:49:38 AM
JOHN MCCONNAUGHY, Deputy Anchorage Municipal Attorney,
Municipality of Anchorage, confirmed that MOA isn't requiring an
ignition interlock device when there is a violation of the
municipal ordinance. The current law has been interpreted by
Anchorage judges to specifically require a violation of state
law AS 28.35.030(r).
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX asked if those are written decisions by the
state court.
MR. MCCONNAUGHY said he didn't know.
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX then asked if MOA would enforce the state law if
HB 101 passes or would MOA argue that it still wouldn't be
required to enforce it because people are being charged under a
municipal ordinance.
MR. MCCONNAUGHY said that municipal ordinances are already
required by law to be consistent with state law. He deferred to
the courts regarding whether they would consider the particular
language of the statute as something that would be required to
be incorporated into a municipal ordinance and further how the
law would have to be enforced. Mr. McConnaughy clarified that
the municipality isn't opposed to the use of ignition interlock
devices or unwilling to require them.
9:53:40 AM
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX questioned what it will take for MOA to start
requiring the use of ignition interlock devices.
MR. MCCONNAUGHY opined that there are some difficulties with the
current language of [AS 28.35.030(r)] that would likely create
legal problems for MOA or any other entity enforcing it. In
further response to Co-Chair LeDoux, the provision's language:
"if it's to be determined by the trier of fact" is troubling
because normally "the trier of fact" refers to the jury.
Therefore, the provisions assume that the jury will make a
determination that the breath test result was at least .16
percent or more or .24 percent or more. However, that's
problematic because the breath test submitted to a jury isn't
upon which the jury actually rules. Rather, the jury makes a
determination as to whether an individual is under the influence
of an intoxicating beverage. There are a couple of different
definitions of "under the influence," which are found in
subsections (a)(1) and (2) of [AS 28.35.030]. Those are
considered to be theories of intoxication. Under case law, the
jury doesn't have to reach the result and conclude beyond a
reasonable a doubt that the result is over .16 or .24; but
rather that under one of the two theories that the defendant is
intoxicated. Furthermore, the jury doesn't have to come to a
unanimous decision on that particular determination. Mr.
McConnaughy summarized that the statute seems inconsistent with
the way the law works.
9:58:01 AM
MR. MCCONNAUGHY, in response to Co-Chair LeDoux, agreed to
provide written remarks on this matter. He then related his
belief that [the ignition interlock device requirement] be
imposed as a requirement when someone receives his/her license
back by the Division of Motor Vehicles.
9:59:08 AM
MR. RICE maintained that the issue at hand is the refusal of MOA
to address existing statute. He then related that the sponsor
would be happy to work on making the statutes more amenable to
MOA. In the meantime, however, the problem of who has the
authority to choose when to enforce and not to enforce state law
[must be addressed].
9:59:45 AM
REPRESENTATIVE OLSON related his understanding that HB 101 has
been introduced for one month and MOA hasn't provided comment on
the legislation.
MR. RICE replied yes, adding his recollection that when the
original ignition interlock legislation was passed, MOA didn't
provide comments either.
10:00:09 AM
CO-CHAIR FAIRCLOUGH asked if the sponsor would join herself and
Co-Chair LeDoux to generate a letter to the Anchorage Assembly
that the administration of Anchorage is choosing not to enforce
state law.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO agreed to do so.
[HB 101 was held over.]
10:00:28 AM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Community and Regional Affairs Standing Committee meeting was
adjourned at 10:00:38 AM.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|