Legislature(2009 - 2010)HOUSE FINANCE 519
04/06/2010 01:30 PM House FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB168 | |
| HCR22 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HCR 22 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 168 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE
April 6, 2010
1:40 p.m.
1:40:06 PM
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Stoltze called the House Finance Committee meeting
to order at 1:40 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Mike Hawker, Co-Chair
Representative Bill Stoltze, Co-Chair
Representative Bill Thomas Jr., Vice-Chair
Representative Allan Austerman
Representative Mike Doogan
Representative Neal Foster
Representative Les Gara
Representative Reggie Joule
Representative Mike Kelly
Representative Woodie Salmon
MEMBERS ABSENT
None.
ALSO PRESENT
Senator John Coghill; Elizabeth Hensley, Staff
Representative Joule; Christine Hess, Staff, Representative
Joule; Larry Hartig, Commissioner, Department of
Environmental Conservation; Andy Mack, Special Assistant
Government and External Affairs, North Slope Borough;
Tracey Foster, Executive Director, Alaska House New York
PRESENT VIA TELECONFERENCE
Representative Anna Fairclough; Bill Noll, Anchorage; Mead
Treadwell, Chair, the Arctic Research Commission; Tom
Okleasik, Northwest Arctic Borough
SUMMARY
HB 168 TRAUMA CARE CENTERS/FUND
CS HB 168(FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee
with no recommendation and with new fiscal
note from the Department of Health and
Social Services and previously published
zero fiscal note: FN2 (REV)
HCR 22 ALASKA NORTHERN WATERS TASK FORCE
CS HCR 22 (CRA) was HEARD and HELD in
Committee for further consideration.
1:40:13 PM
HOUSE BILL NO. 168
"An Act relating to state certification and
designation of trauma centers; creating the
uncompensated trauma care fund to offset uncompensated
trauma care provided at certified and designated
trauma centers; and providing for an effective date."
1:40:56 PM
Co-Chair Stoltze noted that public testimony had been
closed. He solicited amendments to the bill.
1:41:11 PM
Co-Chair Stoltze observed the new fiscal note.
CO-CHAIR MIKE HAWKER explained that the legislation was
ineffective without the associated funding. He relayed that
upon first introduction, the bill had be accompanied by
request for an appropriation of $5 million. A parallel bill
had moved through the Senate, which also had a $5 million
fiscal note attached to it. Discussions had concluded that
if the bill were to pass, an appropriation would be needed
in order to fund the legislation. He thought that the cost
associated with the legislation would become a long term
operating budget item. The fiscal note reflected a request
of $5 million in FY 11 operating budget, all future years
were indeterminate. The funding source was 50 percent
federal receipts, and 50 percent general funds, based on
the understanding that at those levels there would be
disproportionate hospital share authority available under
Medicaid.
Co-Chair Stoltze agreed that the fiscal note reflected
significant fiscal impact.
1:46:02 PM
Representative Austerman expressed appreciation for the
candid discussion concerning increasing the cost of the
operating budget.
1:46:58 PM
Representative Austerman understood the need for the trauma
centers, but he felt that placing an emphasis on trauma
prevention would be more beneficial. He thought that adding
more troopers along highways to arrest drunk drivers would
save lives, preventing the need for increased trauma
centers. He thought that trauma prevention should be
addressed as well.
Representative Foster cited Page 1, Line 14:
(b) The fund consists of money appropriated to it by
the legislature, including donations, recoveries of or
reimbursements for awards made from activities under this
chapter.
Representative Foster asked if the fund would need to be
replenished from year-to-year, and by how much. He said if
each year 25 percent of the fund was being spent, the
entire appropriation would be spent in four to five years.
1:49:48 PM
SENATOR JOHN COGHILL, SPONSOR, answered that he did not
know. The general area of cost was known due looking at
similar programs in other states. He said that there were
federal grants and local programs that could be willing to
contribute. He directed attention to Tab 4 of the "Trauma
Care in Alaska: Creating a Trauma Care Fund" book. In order
for Trauma Level 2 status to be achieved, alcohol screening
and brief intervention was necessary. He argued that this
would create a system that had an intervention component
that would provide for teachable moments in people's lives.
He agreed that safety issues on the road should be
examined.
1:52:46 PM
Co-Chair Hawker reminded the committee that the legislative
proposal had been discussed for over two years. He
expressed concern that the proposal was expensive to create
and maintain, and could force the state back into deficit
spending. However, he felt that the proposal was
compelling, and believed that the importance of immediate
trauma treatment regardless of the location of the accident
should be a priority. He agreed that a stronger state
trooper presence along the Seward Highway could be helpful.
He stated that the goal should be to build the resources
within the state to care for the "innocent victims of
stupidity". He offered that Alaska was a high risk state,
and that simply living here posed a higher risk than living
in other states. He announced support for the legislation
and acknowledged the fiscal note associated with the bill.
He believed that there was a greater good served by moving
the bill forward despite continuing fiscal concerns. He
felt that the public understood that the programs would
continue for only as long as there was money available to
fund them. He recognized that passing the bill would
inevitably create financial trauma for the state in the
future.
1:56:52 PM
Representative Kelly expressed concern that the state would
be accepting liability for trauma victims, and that the
legislation imposed the responsibility of health care on
the state. He agreed with the concept of the bill, but
harbored deep concern for the financial responsibility.
1:59:47 PM
Representative Salmon disagreed. He believed that the state
needed to begin improvements in the area of trauma
response. He argued that lives in rural Alaska could be
saved by establishing trauma centers closer to villages to
assist in the "golden hour". In emergency medicine, the
"golden hour" refers to the time period lasting from a few
minutes to several hours following traumatic injury being
sustained by a casualty, during which there is the highest
likelihood that prompt medical treatment will prevent
death.
2:01:17 PM
Vice-Chair Thomas MOVED to report CS HB 168(FIN) out of
Committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal note. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
CS HB 168(FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with no
recommendation and with new fiscal note from the Department
of Health and Social Services and previously published zero
fiscal note: FN2 (REV)
2:01:49 PM AT EASE
2:14:44 PM RECONVENED
HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 22
Establishing and relating to the Alaska Northern
Waters Task Force.
2:15:34 PM
REPRESENTATIVE REGGIE JOULE presented an overview of the
bill. The resolution would bring the members of the
legislature, along with the affected Northern communities,
into the national discussion about the possible
opportunities that lay in Alaskan Northern Waters. He
informed the committee that he would offer an amendment
later in the meeting.
2:20:47 PM
ELIZABETH HENSLEY, STAFF REPRESENTATIVE JOULE, explained
that under passage of the amendment; the task force would
be comprised of 12 members appointed by the senate
president that would represent communities along the
Bering, Chukchi, or Beaufort Seas. There would be three
representatives from the same areas, and seven members,
appointed jointly by the speaker of the house and senate
president, representing the executive branch of Alaska
State Government. Other members included; the mayors of the
North Slope Borough, the Northwest Arctic Borough, the City
of Nome, and the City of Unalaska. The United States Coast
Guard and a member of a federal agency with a significant
role in addressing Northern waters issues would also be
represented. The task force would hold seven meetings total
in the communities that were expected to directly feel the
impacts of increased Arctic activity; Nome, Kotzebue,
Barrow, and Unalaska. Meetings would also be held in
Anchorage. The taskforce would present its findings to the
legislature in January 2012. Due to the opening of the
Arctic sea ice, activity had increased significantly.
Recent warming trends had resulted in the depletion of
Arctic perennial sea ice by nine percent per decade. The
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) had
observed that the ice would continue to deplete at an
increasingly accelerated rate.
2:23:02 PM
Co-Chair Stoltze suggested that the language pertaining to
appointments by the speaker of the house and the senate
president be further clarified. He added that committees
were often made up of an odd number of people in order to
avoid deadlock with full membership votes.
CHRISTINE HESS, CHIEF OF STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE JOULE,
explained that on several occasions the state had had a
taskforce comprised of an odd number of members. She said
that this time it happened to be an even number. She hoped
that people would be able to work together successfully to
appoint members to the taskforce.
2:25:03 PM
Co-Chair Hawker offered that it was always challenging to
establish a working taskforce during an election year,
particularly, if the taskforce was going to be active
beyond the election cycle. He thought that there were
technical concerns of succession and appointment that
should be examined.
2:26:24 PM
Vice-Chair Thomas thought that the resolution could have
benefited from input from a member of the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Association (NOAH), or other knowledgeable
fisheries professional. He wondered if the fiscal note was
a work draft.
Ms. Hess replied that the fiscal note was a work draft that
listed the potential attendees of future hearings in the
Northern communities. She explained that there was a bit of
guess work involved in drawing up a fiscal note based on
the fact that the taskforce was currently a hypothetical
taskforce.
Representative Thomas asked if the unmentioned groups were
broadly identified on Page 3, 17:
(3) identify and coordinate efforts of mutual concern
for federal, state, and local agencies, as well as
international interests in the creation of the commission;
Ms. Hess replied yes.
2:28:31 PM
Representative Kelly expressed concern with the composition
of the taskforce. He believed that the parties that should
be represented in Arctic discussions were broader than the
resolution called for. He opined that a member of the
general public was not listed an appointed member. He felt
that the ownership and interest in the Arctic was more far-
reaching than was reflected in the proposed taskforce
membership.
Representative Austerman remembered his earlier involvement
in conversations concerning the Arctic. He stated that in
the past it was understood that the federal government
would eventually establish a commission that would deal
with Arctic issues. He revealed that he had been nervous at
the prospect of congress dictating what might occur in the
Arctic. He said that it had been obvious for over a decade
that the waters were warming, the fish were moving north
and the state was not responding. He said the Coast Guard
and the Navy were in discussions about the future of the
arctic and that Alaska had not been involved in those
conversations. He asserted that Alaska needed a taskforce
that would examine how the state should be involved in the
discussions. He understood that the initial recommendation
was that the federal government should put together a
commission for the northern waters using the North Pacific
Fisheries Management Council as a model. He expressed
concern that the model worked well for managing fish, but
that the council was chosen by the governor, who
subsequently drove policy established by the council. He
held that policy should be set by the legislature and that
the federal government should not solely dictate decisions
concerning northern waters.
2:34:49 PM
Co-Chair Stoltze agreed that if the White House was
appointing the commission organizations such as; the Center
for Biodiversity, Greenpeace, World Wildlife Fund, and
Oceana would be at the top of the member list, leaving
little room for Alaskan representation.
Ms. Hensley informed the committee that the White House has
created two taskforces that had been holding hearings in
Alaska. She shared that the Interagency Ocean Policy
Taskforce, the Climate Change Adaptation Taskforce, and
approximately 30 other federal agencies were looking at the
Arctic, making now an appropriate time for the state to get
involved.
2:36:15 PM
Representative Foster pointed out to the committee that it
was important that representatives from the state be
involved in discussions at every level. He thought that the
commission could be the "go to" entity for the state in
discussions on northern waters.
Representative Joule expressed excitement at the level of
interest members of the legislature displayed when
discussing taskforce membership. He shared that the idea
for the taskforce had been born out of the recognition that
there was not collective Alaskan representation in current
Arctic waters discussions. He credited the offices of
Representative Austerman and Representative Foster for
brining the issue to his attention. He hoped that knowledge
could be drawn from various interest groups that would
inform the policy proposed by a taskforce of this nature.
2:39:43 PM
LARRY HARTIG, COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSERVATION, informed the committee that he chaired the
governor's Sub-Cabinet on Climate Change, as well as being
a member of the Sub-Cabinets on Rural and Natural
Resources. He expressed appreciation that Arctic issues
were being discussed in committee, and believed that the
key issues had been highlighted by Representative Joule.
Currently, there had been a lot of discussions throughout
the state surrounding Arctic issues. He believed a
successful taskforce on the issue would be comprised of
groups operating at all levels; international, national and
statewide, respectively; the Arctic Council, the Arctic
Policy Group, and key state agencies handling day-to-day
issues. He added that there were jurisdictional boundaries,
national and international, that would need to be wholly
understood. There could be limits to federal participation
in a taskforce of this kind. He explained that there were 8
Arctic Nations that were members of the Arctic Council. The
council was an intergovernmental forum, intended to promote
cooperation, coordination, and interaction among the Arctic
states. There were ministers from each member group that
attended the meetings on a bi-annual basis. Senior Arctic
officials met every 6 months. Six working groups worked on
different research areas and reported back to the body. The
decisions of the Arctic Council were non-binding, rather,
the council provided research and analysis that helped to
inform Arctic issues. The governor's office sent a
representative to each of the ministerial, and most of the
senior Arctic meetings, to represent Alaska's interests,
and to track the activities of the council. The Arctic
Policy Group (APG) helped to frame the Alaska state
policies that were brought before the council. The APG,
comprised of federal agencies, looked at land and natural
resource management issues, environmental protection, human
health, transportation and other policies relevant to the
Arctic. The state participated in the APG meetings.
2:45:26 PM
Commissioner Hartig said that an ad-hock working group of
the state met bi-monthly, and was chaired by a
representative from the governor's D.C. office. The group
met to determine the issues that would be brought to the
APG meetings, to help influence discussions at the Arctic
Council. The working group participated with native
organizations, university representatives, private sector
groups, non-governmental organizations, and federal
agencies in Alaska. He stated that there was significant
activity happening at the state level. The Coast Guard and
the Canadian Coast Guard just completed a joint spill drill
exercise. Representatives of the North Slope Borough and
village communities also participated. Ship traffic through
the Bering Strait to the Arctic was an issue that would be
addressed in the near future. Discussions with the U.S.
Geological Service had occurred concerning the Arctic
Landscape Quad Cooperation Group, which would assess land
management, and the formation of a science center to study
climate change. He reiterated that if a new group were to
be formed, the work of the many existing groups would need
to be respected, and that the work should be done within
the recognized forums. He mentioned that the federal
agencies were limited by the Federal Advisory Committee
Act.
Co-Chair Hawker understood that the state should proceed
with caution concerning other agencies on the federal and
international level. Commissioner Hartig agreed. He stated
that the taskforce proposed could be very beneficial, but
the existing structures could not be ignored.
Co-Chair Hawker understood that the formation of the group
could be valuable, but possible conflicts with existing
groups should be considered. Commissioner Hartig agreed
that the state should be cognizant of jurisdictional
boundaries.
2:51:01 PM
Representative Austerman assumed that a representative from
the state was present during international policy decision
discussions with the U.S. State Department. Commissioner
Hartig responded that the Arctic Council does research and
analysis of potential policy, but did not sit directly in
on international negotiations. The state participated in
the Arctic Council meetings through the governor's office.
Representative Austerman recommended that the state be
become more involved. He said that he had not seen a report
from the department, or the governor's office, detailing
what was being done concerning Arctic issues. Commissioner
Hartig responded the department's activities could be
researched on the DEC website.
Representative Austerman asked if the creation of the
taskforce could serve to foster broader communication
concerning Arctic issues. Commissioner Hartig responded in
the affirmative. He felt that the group could identify gaps
where there would be an opportunity for further state
involvement, particularly on the international level.
2:54:15 PM
Representative Gara believed that the taskforce was
necessary to provide information to the legislature in
order to create state policy.
Commissioner Hartig responded that the taskforce could have
communication value when working with local communities and
the legislature. He pointed out to the committee that the
main concern for the department could be found on Page 3,
Line 13-14 of the bill, which stated that taskforce would
provide an assessment to facilitate the creation of a
"state and federal commission responsible for overseeing
the development of state and federal northern ocean
waters". He believed that conflict with existing groups
over the "overseeing" of waters could arise.
2:57:05 PM
Representative Salmon supported the bill, but thought that
the selection of the board was narrowly focused. He though
the problem was statewide and should have statewide
representation.
Vice-Chair Thomas asked if cruise ships, commercial
fishermen, oil tankers, or other users of the Arctic, were
represented in any of the existing groups.
Commissioner Hartig responded that the Arctic Council had
work groups that included people looking at specific marine
issues, including marine traffic. The state would be
working with the Coast Guard to draft the risk assessment
associated with the traffic. International governance
mechanisms for traffic, not subject to U.S. laws would be
examined. At the state level marine industries would be
included in discussions. He stressed that talks pertaining
to the issue were purely conceptual at this time.
Vice-Chair Thomas understood the importance that the people
involved to the talks be educated about issues specific to
the different communities and regions of the state.
3:00:35 PM
Representative Doogan requested clarification as to the
state's role in regard to Arctic issues. Commissioner
Hartig replied that at the base level, DEC handled the day-
to-day business. Specifically to the Arctic the department
was discussing future additional ship traffic in the
Arctic. The department worked closely with the Coast Guard
in the area of marine traffic safety, and to enhance
prevention and the ability to respond to emergencies.
Currently, an Aleutian Island marine transportation risk
assessment was being conducted and the information gathered
could be applied to other northern areas. He said that the
discussions were at the preliminary stage and that funding
had yet to be procured for future studies.
Commissioner Hartig continued. The Arctic Council was
looking at containments that enter into the Arctic in the
ecosystem. An international conference in the fall would
continue discussions of a monitoring plan to identify and
track contaminates entering the state from international
sources. The currents and wind patterns into the Arctic
make it vulnerable to contaminates. Lastly, climate change
issues recommendations had been the result of a year-long
work group process. He stated he would need to check with
other departments to gain knowledge of their particular
initiatives.
Representative Doogan asked if there was anyone in the
state who was coordinating a response to climate change
issues.
Commissioner Hartig responded that the governor's Sub-
Cabinet on Climate Change included the commissioners of
DNR, DF&G, and the Department of Commerce.
Representative Doogan thought that the formation of the
proposed taskforce would be necessary to bring all the
departments involved in Arctic issues to one table.
Commissioner Hartig asserted that he had been speaking
solely to the issue of climate change.
3:07:43 PM
Representative Austerman questioned if any commissioners
were involved in discussions of a deep water port in
northern waters.
Commissioner Hartig replied that DOT&P/F had taken the lead
on the issue and was working with the Corps of Engineers
and the Denali Commission. In 2009, the Corps of Engineers
had finished a report on deep water ports, from which a
more detailed look would be drawn.
Representative Austerman referred to Page 3, Line 13, of
the legislation. He asked if the department was concerned
about the legislature coordinating with the federal
government.
Commissioner Hartig stated that the concern was that a
federal agency would sit on a taskforce that was comprised
of mostly non-federal members, and would be subject to
federal laws that would limit them from making decisions or
recommendations.
3:09:50 PM
ANDY MACK, SPECIAL ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT AND EXTERNAL
AFFAIRS, NORTH SLOPE BOROUGH, urged support foe the bill.
He testified that was imperative that the state be involved
in discussions concerning Alaskan northern waters. He
shared that the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) had
been tasked with putting together recommendations on ocean
policy for the United States, which included the Arctic,
for the White House. Representatives from the North Slope
Borough, during visits to Washington D.C., noted that there
was an interest in Arctic waters that dwarfed any federal
interest in the eastern seaboard or the Gulf of Mexico. He
believed that national policy was being crafted and that
the state should not miss the opportunity to engage in the
discussions. The Arctic Council currently received
information from the Protection of the Arctic Marine
Environment (PAME) working group on the Arctic marine
shipping assessment, which was setting out policy that
would aid in establishing the shipping policies for the
international community. The state had not been heavily
involved in the drafting of the policy which could have
substantial implications for Alaska residents in the
future. The Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment
working group had also established the Arctic oil and gas
guidelines; a finished document that had been, or was soon
to be adopted by the arctic council. He concluded that if
the state did not get involved, decisions concerning Arctic
waters would be made without an Alaskan voice.
3:15:06 PM
BILL NOLL, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference), supported
the legislation. He echoed the previous testimony. He
shared that in March 2010 he attended a meeting in New York
City on the subject of receding sea ice at the Council on
Foreign Relations. He testified that there was a very
strong international interest across the northern
hemisphere that was paying attention to activity in the
Arctic, and was eager to engage in talks with Alaska. The
meeting highlighted Norway's desire for bi-lateral
discussions with interested Alaskan parties. Norway's
interest in Alaska has been long term, particularly in the
fishing industry. He thought that the new fiscal note would
fund local meetings, but would not be enough for creating a
new commission between the state and the federal
government.
3:20:04 PM
Representative Foster solicited suggestions from Mr. Noll
for improving the fiscal note numbers.
Mr. Noll responded that he did not have a number in mind,
but felt that the numbers need to be higher. He imagined
that the note would need to be doubled, and then examined
by an economist.
3:23:28 PM
Representative Kelly asked if there was any basis for
concern with the proposed commission's broad membership
base.
Mr. Noll believed that the composition was perfectly suited
for gathering local opinion and informing the public.
However, he believed that members of the Anchorage and
Fairbanks business communities should be involved for
reasons of commerce. He suggested that the military should
also be involved. He said that as far as an awareness
campaign, the commission was well staffed.
3:26:20 PM
MEAD TREADWELL, CHAIR, THE ARCTIC RESEARCH COMMISSION (via
teleconference), testified that the state had a
responsibility to inform the federal government of the
challenges and opportunities of an accessible Arctic. The
federal government has an Arctic policy due largely to the
information provided by the state. On the issue of
shipping, the policy called for a regime that ensured that
shipping was safe, secure, and reliable. The commission had
been working to educate the United States and the world of
the opportunities in the Arctic. As a citizen of Alaska he
believed that the taskforce should exist to protect state
interests. He relayed that the creation of the taskforce
called for the creation of a state and federal co-
management of Arctic shipping. He stressed the importance
that the state be involved in northern water issues
pertaining to search and rescue. He informed the committee
that as a result of the Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment,
the International Maritime Organization (IMO) had met in
London to set a mandatory code for ships operating in
Arctic waters. The code could raise the cost of shipping
goods to rural Alaska, but would also increase the safety
of tour boats. The federal government was also in the
process of revising the state's boundaries by making a
claim under the law of the sea, and resolving boundary
disputes with Canada. Ship noise and its relation to
subsistence was also an issue being examined. There were
many rules being made that the task force would make state
government more aware of. He continued that the State of
Alaska played a major role in port discussions. He believed
that Alaska should take the lead when approaching
international markets.
3:35:27 PM
TRACEY FOSTER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ALASKA HOUSE NEW YORK,
testified in support of the legislation. She informed the
committee that the Alaska House New York is a non-profit
organization working to connect Alaska to the rest of the
world. Arctic policy issues had been a main theme of
outreach for the organization. The organization had met
with the Council on Foreign Relations, four times in the
last two years, and had invited experts on the issue to the
Alaska House to discuss the latest details. She said that
there was a great for the creation of a taskforce, and
significant opportunity for the state into the future. She
believed that the issue, as one of policy, was complicated.
She revealed that there was frustration on the senate floor
at the federal level concerning what should be done in
Arctic waters. She thought that the state had an
opportunity to get ahead of the issue, and that there was a
high level of interest on the national level as to the
states position on the Arctic. She warned that without a
solid fiscal note, there was not enough weight to get
representative from the state to travel to the
international discussions. She urged serious consideration
of adding more heft to the travel budget in preparation for
travel to where decisions were made.
3:38:30 PM
Co-Chair Stoltze solicited further public testimony.
3:39:47 PM
TOM OKLEASIK, PLANNING DIRECTOR NORTHWEST ARCTIC BOROUGH,
KOTZEBUE (via teleconference), voiced support of the bill.
He informed the committee that the Inupiaq people were the
first group to report climate change and changing climate
conditions, including ice conditions, as well as reporting
different international interests in the Arctic,
particularly marine accessibility and the exploration and
exploitation of natural resources both on-shore and off-
shore. He encouraged the taskforce to use existing Arctic
bodies; the joint North Slope Borough and Northwest Arctic
Borough Planning Commissions, and the Arctic Economic
Development Summit. He urged the involvement of the
corporations of NANA, the Arctic Slope Regional
Corporation, and the Bering Strait Native Corporation.
3:42:46 PM
Co-Chair Stoltze closed public testimony.
Representative Joule thanked the committee.
HCR 22 was HEARD and HELD in Committee for further
consideration
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 3:45 PM