Legislature(1995 - 1996)
03/22/1995 03:25 PM House L&C
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE LABOR & COMMERCE STANDING COMMITTEE
March 22, 1995
3:25 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Pete Kott, Chairman
Representative Norman Rokeberg, Vice Chairman
Representative Kim Elton
Representative Gene Kubina
Representative Brian Porter
Representative Beverly Masek
Representative Jerry Sanders
MEMBERS ABSENT
None
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
Confirmation Hearing: Ray Smith to the Alaska
Labor Relations Board
HJR 23: Relating to the North Pacific Fishery Management
Council's inshore/offshore allocations and the
Western Alaska Community Development Quota
Program.
PASSED OUT OF COMMITTEE
*HB 60: "An Act relating to impairment rating guides used in
evaluation of certain workers' compensation claims."
PASSED OUT OF COMMITTEE
*HB 224: "An Act relating to the state plumbing code."
HEARD AND HELD
(* First public hearing)
WITNESS REGISTER
RAY SMITH, Business Representative; and
Financial Secretary
Painter's Union
4020 Dale Street, No. 1
Anchorage, AK 99517
Telephone: (907) 279-3556
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions regarding his
confirmation to the Alaska Labor Relations
Board
REPRESENTATIVE ALAN AUSTERMAN
Alaska State Legislature
State Capitol Building, Room 434
Juneau, AK 99801-1182
Telephone: (907) 465-2487
POSITION STATEMENT: Prime sponsor HJR 23
KIM METCALFE HELMAR, Special Assistant
to the Commissioner
Department of Community & Regional Affairs
P.O. Box 112100
Juneau, AK 99811-2100
Telephone: (907) 465-2948
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HJR 23
REPRESENTATIVE IVAN IVAN
Alaska State Legislature
State Capitol Building, Room 503
Juneau, AK 99801-1182
Telephone: (907) 465-4942
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HJR 23
ELIZABETH ROBERTS, House Researcher
to Representative Bettye Davis
Alaska State Legislature
State Capitol Building, Room 430
Juneau, AK 99801-1182
Telephone: (907) 456-3875
POSITION STATEMENT: Prime sponsor of HB 60
PAUL GROSSI, Director,
Division of Worker's Compensation
Department of Labor
P.O. Box 25512
Juneau, AK 99811-5512
Telephone: (907) 465-2797
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 60
REPRESENTATIVE VIC KOHRING
Alaska State Legislature
State Capitol, Room 428
Juneau, AK 99801-1182
Telephone: (907) 465-2186
POSITION STATEMENT: Prime sponsor of HB 224
ROBERT MINCH
Alaska Design Professional Council
P.O. Box 20857
Juneau, AK 99802
Telephone: (907) 586-1321
POSITION STATEMENT; Testified in support of HB 224
DWIGHT PERKINS, Special Assistant
to the Commissioner
Department of Labor
P.O. Box 21149
Juneau, AK 99802-1149
Telephone: (907) 465-2700
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 60
REPRESENTATIVE JEANNETTE JAMES
Alaska State Legislature
State Capitol Building, Room 102
Juneau, AK 99801-1182
Telephone: (907) 465-3743
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 224
MARK BLACKWELL
1210 O'Conner Road
Fairbanks, AK 99709
Telephone: (907) 452-3293
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 224
DAN PORTWINE, Portwine Plumbing & Heating
1500 Alaska Way
Fairbanks, AK 99709
Telephone: (907) 479-3046
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HB 224
MICHAEL HIRT, Owner,
Comfort Mechanical
P.O. Box 81863
Fairbanks, AK 99708
Telephone: (907) 479-3771
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HB 224
LEONARD KIMBALL, Building Official
City of Kodiak
P.O. Box 1397
Kodiak, AK 99615
Telephone: (907) 486-8070
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HB 224
JOHN BUTLER, Johns Heating
P.O. Box 2610
Kodiak, AK 99615
Telephone: (907) 486-3706
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HB 224
TOM STREIFEL, Streifel Plumbing & Heating
P.O. BOX 2070
Kodiak, AK 99615
Telephone: (907) 486-3794
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HB 224
LEE HOLMES
2710 Scarbrough Drive
Anchorage, AK 99504
Telephone: (907) 333-5735
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 224
LEE DESPAIN
P.O. Box 73246
Fairbanks, AK 99707
Telephone: (907) 479-4062
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 224
STEVE SHUTTLEWORTH, Building Official
City of Fairbanks
2588 Riverview Drive
Fairbanks, AK 997078
Telephone: (907) 479-4279
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HB 224
LARRY LONG, Plumbing Inspector
City of Fairbanks
326 Baranof Street
Fairbanks, AK 99701
Telephone: (907) 459-6724
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HB 224
BILL SAGER, President
Chandler Plumbing & Heating
129 Minnie Street
Fairbanks, AK 99701
Telephone: (907) 456-5282
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HB 224
REPRESENTATIVE GENE THERRIAULT
Alaska State Legislature
State Capitol Building, Room 421
Juneau, AK 99801-1182
Telephone: (907) 465-4797
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 224
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HJR 23
SHORT TITLE: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FISHING QUOTAS
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) AUSTERMAN,Ivan,Foster,Finkelstein
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
01/25/95 129 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
01/25/95 129 (H) FSH, LABOR AND COMMERCE
01/30/95 180 (H) COSPONSOR(S): FINKELSTEIN
02/08/95 (H) FSH AT 05:00 PM CAPITOL 124
02/08/95 (H) MINUTE(FSH)
03/08/95 (H) FSH AT 05:00 PM CAPITOL 124
03/08/95 (H) MINUTE(FSH)
03/09/95 675 (H) FSH RPT CS(FSH) NEW TITLE 4DP
03/09/95 676 (H) DP: G.DAVIS, OGAN, ELTON, AUSTERMAN
03/09/95 676 (H) ZERO FISCAL NOTE (F&G)
03/22/95 (H) L&C AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 17
BILL: HB 60
SHORT TITLE: IMPAIRMENT RATING GUIDES FOR WORKERS COMP
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) B.DAVIS
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
01/06/95 36 (H) PREFILE RELEASED
01/16/95 36 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
01/16/95 36 (H) L&C, HES, FIN
03/22/95 (H) L&C AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 17
BILL: HB 224
SHORT TITLE: STATE PLUMBING CODE
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) KOHRING,Green
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
03/03/95 564 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
03/03/95 564 (H) LABOR & COMMERCE
03/22/95 (H) L&C AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 17
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 95-22, SIDE A
Number 000
The House Labor & Commerce Committee meeting was called to order
by Chairman Pete Kott at 3:25 p.m. Members present at the call
to order were Representatives Kott, Kubina, Elton and Masek.
Members absent were Representatives Sanders, Rokeberg and Porter.
CHAIRMAN PETE KOTT stated there were three matters to come before
the committee, including the confirmation hearing for the Alaska
Labor Relations Agency. Chairman Kott stated for the record that
Representative Sanders had joined the meeting directly after the
call to order.
CONFIRMATION HEARING - RAY SMITH, ALASKA LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked Mr. Smith to clarify a memo the committee had
received stating he was being confirmed to the Alaska Labor
Relations Agency.
Number 046
RAYMOND SMITH testified via teleconference that he was being
appointed to the Alaska Labor Relations Board. He stated he had
returned to Alaska in 1976, but had missed the pipeline. He has
been involved in labor most of his life. In Oregon, he had been
a garbage man, and upon returning to Alaska became involved in
the Painters Union and is a glazier by trade. He has served on
the Executive Board and has taught classes. Six years ago, he
was elected Business Representative and Financial Secretary for
the union. He has tried to entrench himself in labor issues
throughout the state. He is also President of Electric Alaska
Building and Construction Trades Council. He feels the Alaska
Labor Relations Board is very important, and he told the
committee he would serve impartially and successfully. He said
he would strive to fulfill his duties.
CHAIRMAN KOTT stated there are six members appointed to the board
by the Governor. Two have backgrounds in management, two in
labor, and two are from the general public. He pointed out that
Mr. Smith would be filling one of the seats from the labor
aspect.
MR. SMITH responded this was correct; he was replacing Daryll
Smith from the plumbers.
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked for clarification that his appointment date
was March 6 with an expiration date of June 30. Chairman Kott
also asked whether Mr. Smith was only being appointed for a three
month period.
MR. SMITH responded this was the same information he had
received.
Number 108
REPRESENTATIVE MASEK asked if this position is usually a two or a
four-year term.
CHAIRMAN KOTT said the Boards and Commissions handbook indicated
the term is three years. He added Mr. Smith may only be filling
the remaining portion of one of the other member's terms.
Number 121
REPRESENTATIVE GENE KUBINA stated that someone from the
department was presently checking on why this appointment was
only for three months.
CHAIRMAN KOTT reiterated that unless there was an error in the
paperwork, Mr. Smith would be filling the remaining portion of
another member's term.
MR. SMITH added he believed the term to be three years and that
he, in fact, would be filling Daryll Smith's remaining term. He
said the term expires in 1995. He would be interested in
continuing to serve after this term expires.
Number 136
REPRESENTATIVE KUBINA asked if one had to wait until the term
expired before someone else could be appointed.
CHAIRMAN KOTT stated that in this situation, it would be odd to
appoint someone for six months because they'd be back in Juneau
to reexamine the appointment. He asked if there were any further
questions for Mr. Smith.
REPRESENTATIVE KUBINA suggested they set this aside until someone
from the department got back to them regarding the length of the
term.
CHAIRMAN KOTT concurred they would hold this over until a
determination had been made that the confirmation dates were
correct. He said this should be by the end of the day, and he
thanked Mr. Smith for his testimony.
REPRESENTATIVE KIM ELTON asked to confirm Mr. Smith's telephone
number so the committee staff could let him know the disposition.
MR. SMITH stated his work number was 279-3556.
HJR 23 - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FISHING QUOTAS
Number 184
CHAIRMAN KOTT said the next matter before the committee was HJR
23, sponsored by Representative Alan Austerman.
Number 191
REPRESENTATIVE ALAN AUSTERMAN, PRIME SPONSOR OF HJR 23, stated
the committee had before them a copy of the CS and he would like
to read the following statement for the record:
"HJR 23 asks the North Pacific Fishery Management Council to
reauthorize the inshore/offshore allocations and the
Community Development Quota (CDQ) program before they expire
at the end of this year.
"The inshore/offshore allocation stipulates that 35 percent
of the pollock in the Bering Sea and 100 percent of the
pollock in the Gulf of Alaska be brought ashore to
processing facilities. The CDQ program developed a
partnership between Western Alaska communities and the
multimillion-dollar Bering Sea groundfish industry. The
economic successes of these programs are crucial to the
small communities throughout Western and Southwest Alaska.
"Extending the inshore/offshore allocation, and the pollock
CDQ program, will preserve stability in the groundfish
industry during the period required for the Council to
develop a comprehensive rationalization plan. The
inshore/offshore allocation and pollock CDQS were initially
passed to serve as a bridge to comprehensive
rationalization. It has taken the Council longer than
anticipated to accomplish their goal of the comprehensive
rationalization plan."
REPRESENTATIVE AUSTERMAN said the inshore/offshore issue was very
vital to the coastal communities in the Gulf of Alaska and in the
Bering Sea. He said 90 percent of the Pacific cod catch was
being brought ashore in addition to 100 percent of pollock to be
processed in the Gulf of Alaska. He explained this was the
reason for the CDQ program, to create jobs for Alaskans. He
commented that he wasn't familiar with the total history of how
the CDQ program was eventually tied in with the inshore/offshore
issue but acknowledged it was an intricate part of that issue.
He pointed out that if this program goes by the wayside,
processing will again return offshore and many jobs will be lost,
not only in the coastal communities but also in places like
Anchorage that have a large influx of seafood processing jobs.
He stated a representative from the Department of Community &
Regional Affairs, who administers the program, and a
representative from the Department of Fish & Game would answer
any questions the committee might have.
CHAIRMAN KOTT stated for the record that Representatives Rokeberg
and Porter had joined the meeting at 3:35 p.m.
Number 249
REPRESENTATIVE KUBINA commented that the $1.4 billion paid to the
fish harvesters was a huge amount.
REPRESENTATIVE AUSTERMAN noted these were groundfish off the
coast of Alaska. He said close to 80 percent of the poundage
landed off the coast of Alaska, including salmon, are groundfish.
This is in comparison to the overall catch of seafood products.
Number 262
REPRESENTATIVE KUBINA asked if line 13 on page 1, which states
the CDQ program sets aside 7.5 percent of the quota for the
communities, was correct.
REPRESENTATIVE AUSTERMAN answered it was.
REPRESENTATIVE KUBINA asked if there was a way to increase this
percentage.
Number 268
REPRESENTATIVE AUSTERMAN responded there had been discussion on
this and he would defer any technical questions to the
department. He added there was also an effort to include other
products in the CDQ program, but at this time, the resolution
addresses only the pollock issue. He explained the system is set
up so that, in the Bering Sea, the 7.5 percent comes off the top
of the total allowable catch. The remaining allowable catch is
divided by the 35 percent that comes onshore in addition to the
7.5 percent. He said that 65 percent of the remaining fish is
processed offshore by the large processors.
Number 282
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked if the three departments involved in
monitoring the CDQ program are the Department of Fish & Game, the
Department of Commerce, and the Department of Community &
Regional Affairs.
REPRESENTATIVE AUSTERMAN replied this was correct, and there
would be someone from C&RA joining them at the table.
CHAIRMAN KOTT pointed out that backup materials indicate the
United Fisherman of Alaska (UFA) do not support expansion of the
CDQ program to fisheries in the Gulf Alaska. He asked if the CDQ
program was currently in the Gulf, and if they are talking about
expanding the program.
REPRESENTATIVE AUSTERMAN responded there aren't any CDQ programs
in the Gulf of Alaska, and based upon the dynamics of the Gulf,
he doubts there ever would be. He explained if there were a CDQ
program in the Gulf, it could include some communities on the
California coast. He said they never expect a CDQ program in the
Gulf of Alaska, and this is what they are talking about when
referring to expansion. They don't want it expanded. He added
that 100 percent of the pollock in the Gulf of Alaska is
allocated to shoreside plants.
CHAIRMAN KOTT, referring to a letter from UFA, asked
Representative Austerman to clarify the last paragraph which
states, "Therefore, UFA endorses reauthorization of the existing
CDQ program in the Bering Sea pollock sea fishery in existing
inshore/offshore programs for both the Bering Sea and the Gulf of
Alaska."
Number 295
REPRESENTATIVE AUSTERMAN explained that in the Gulf of Alaska
there is no CDQ program. However, 100 percent of the pollock
catch is allocated to shoreside processing. If catcher
processors come up from the Lower 48, they must bring their catch
onshore to be processed. He reiterated that 90 percent of the
Pacific cod in the Gulf is processed onshore. He said in the
Bering Sea, there is an allocation of inshore/offshore in the CDQ
program. He said because of the lack of infrastructure, Western
Alaska coastal communities don't have the ability to go out and
catch this product; it is all being caught off their shores, but
there is no way for them to capitalize on it. He said this
allows them to have an allocation for fish they can resell to
processors. This also generates revenue for the community. He
acknowledged comments had been made that this resembled a social
program, but without this program the product would, most likely,
go to Seattle and would not benefit Alaska.
Number 341
KIM METCALFE-HELMAR, SPECIAL ASSISTANT, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY &
REGIONAL AFFAIRS, reiterated that the Department of Community &
Regional Affairs, the Department of Fish & Game, and the
Department of Commerce are involved in regulating the CDQ program
on a state level. The National Marine Fisheries Service is the
regulator on the federal level. She gave the following brief
history on the CDQ program: The CDQ program was approved by the
North Pacific Fisheries Management Council in December 1992. The
program allocated 7.5 percent of the total allowable catch of the
Bering Sea pollock to 56 Alaska villages located within 50 miles
of the Bering Sea Coast. The communities participating in the
program range from the Seward Peninsula continuing to the
Southwestern Aleutian community of Atka. There are also
communities on the Pribilof Islands, St. Lawrence Island and
Diomede Island. She said the CDQ program was a unique
opportunity to bring jobs to regions traditionally having few
employment opportunities. The program allowed access to the
fishery that the residents of the regions would otherwise not
have been able to afford. She stated the data gathered in the
1990 census showed that 25 percent of the people in the region
were below the poverty level, and only 49 percent of the adults
held jobs.
MS. METCALFE-HELMAR continued that the CDQ program was fashioned
to allow the CDQ communities to harvest their allocation on an
annual basis. It allowed them to fish their quota whenever they
chose. The groups contracted with private sector seafood
companies to ensure that the pollock would be harvested and
processed in an economically efficient manner. She said the
partners offer the CDQ groups various training, employment and
educational opportunities on vessels or at shoreside processing
plants. She cited data from a draft report the Department of
Community & Regional Affairs is currently working on: The CDQ
group areas had an average of a 16 percent unemployment rate. Of
the people employed, the largest number, at 26 percent, were
employed by the school district. Only 2 percent of the
population at the time, held fishery-related jobs. The per
capita annual family income for CDQ communities averages $10,000
per year, and the average income per household according to the
1990 census was $36,479 per year. She said in 1993, the six CDQ
groups reported wages totaling $2.5 million. In 1994, they
reported wages of $5.2 million. The number of CDQ jobs in 1993
totaled 173; in 1994, the jobs totaled 387. Wages earned by CDQ
employees averaged $14,500 in 1993, and $13,300 in 1994, although
some 4th quarter earnings had not been reported at that time.
She continued that the reauthorization of the inshore/offshore
allocations in the CDQ program had the wholehearted support of
the Knowles Administration. The Administration believes this is
a great example of a program that encompasses the
Administration's stated goals of public/private partnerships and
job creations, and therefore, the Administration would ask the
committee to support this resolution.
Number 392
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked what the net result would be if the North
Pacific Fishery Management Council was not reauthorized.
MS. METCALFE-HELMAR responded there were many programs still in
the beginning stages that were started in late 1992. The
villages involved are just now starting on these projects. She
said one of the villages is sending students to the Seward
Vocational Center to learn how to build aluminum boats. Those
students will go back with that skill, and the boats will go back
to the community.
Number 405
REPRESENTATIVE KUBINA asked if the outlook was good for the
reauthorization.
MS. METCALFE-HELMAR replied at this time the prognosis was good.
REPRESENTATIVE AUSTERMAN commented that he was not sure how
closely tied the inshore/offshore issue was with the CDQ program.
He said the inshore/offshore issue of bringing the product to
shore for processing was a hard fought battle that had gone all
the way to Washington, D.C. a number of times. He said without
that allocation, the bulk of the product would be going South.
He said it was imperative for the coastal communities to not lose
any allocation for the product coming ashore.
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked Representative Ivan to join the members at
the table.
Number 427
REPRESENTATIVE IVAN IVAN, ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE, stated he
represents some of the communities in the Coastal Village
Cooperative area for the group of CDQ villages in the Lower
Yukon. He said the six groups involved in the program are given
the opportunity to participate in the offshore pollock fishing
operation that they partner with established industries. He said
the proceeds are invested by each CDQ group, depending on the
strengths and weaknesses of their economic situation. He
commented that across the board contributions are made to
scholarship programs and individual job training. He concluded
by saying the program was a foot-hold, and an extension would
provide an opportunity for ongoing, established fisheries in the
Western communities. They also are trying to prevent ongoing
limited entry permits. For example, in Bristol Bay these groups
partner with local established communities and are part of the
infrastructure.
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked if there were any questions for
Representative Ivan or anyone else wishing to testify. Hearing
none, he closed public testimony.
Number 460
REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN PORTER made a motion to move CSHJR 23(FSH)
from committee with individual recommendations and attached
fiscal notes.
CHAIRMAN KOTT stated there was a motion to move CSHJR 23(FSH) out
of committee with individual recommendations. He asked if there
were objections. Hearing none, the motion passed.
HB 60 - IMPAIRMENT RATING GUIDES FOR WORKERS CO
CHAIRMAN KOTT stated the next order of business was HB 60.
Number 418
ELIZABETH ROBERTS, HOUSE RESEARCHER TO REPRESENTATIVE BETTYE
DAVIS, ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE, PRIME SPONSOR OF HB 60, stated
this was a very friendly bill. She said the Department of Labor,
the Division of Worker's Compensation and the American Medical
Association (AMA) all support the bill. She said HB 60 deals
with an existing statute that says the Division of Worker's
Compensation has to use a 1986 AMA impairment guide. Since 1986,
they have had two revised editions and a 200-page supplement.
Since then, they have come up with many more diseases. She
explained if a disease or injury is not included in the book,
then it has not been rated, in which case the injured worker
would not qualify for any compensation. She said the AMA
recognizes the shortcomings of the new book, the 4th edition, and
they recommend the supplement, "Understanding the AMA Guides," be
used in conjunction with it. She explained the bill mandates the
use of the newest revised edition and supplemental material. She
added it carries a zero fiscal note.
CHAIRMAN KOTT observed the Prime Sponsor of the bill,
Representative Bettye Davis, had joined the meeting.
Number 498
REPRESENTATIVE BETTYE DAVIS stated this legislation could garnish
bipartisan support. She said it was important for people to use
this guide, to have the most up-to-date information. She said it
is supported by the AMA, as well as the Department of Labor. She
thanked the committee and hoped they would move it in a timely
manner.
Number 506
REPRESENTATIVE NORMAN ROKEBERG asked what the industry's opinion
of the bill was.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS responded that they support it.
Number 516
PAUL GROSSI, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF WORKER'S COMPENSATION, stated
the department supports the bill. He said the 1980 amendments
require that AMA guides be used in rating physical and mental
problems. He explained the problem is that every time there is a
change in the guides there must be regulatory changes. To keep
current they must go through the regulatory hearing process.
This bill simplifies that process and makes it automatic. He
noted this had been tried previously, a few years back, by
regulation, but the division was told by the Department of Law
that a statutory change would be required. He reiterated the
department supports the bill because it streamlines the
regulatory process.
CHAIRMAN KOTT commented it would seem that the department would
use the most current information available.
MR. GROSSI pointed out the department was told by the Department
of Law this was too vague and regulatory change was required. He
said they were currently using the 3rd edition; however, the 4th
edition is out, and they would probably hold regulatory hearings
this summer to become current. He added, by the time the
regulation gets signed in, there may be another change in the
guide and they would be behind again. This is the problem
they're facing.
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked if the department had a copy of the 4th
edition in their possession.
Number 531
MR. GROSSI responded that they had it in their possession, but
could not use it.
Number 544
REPRESENTATIVE KUBINA commented this would be a cheaper way to do
it and there would most likely be a zero fiscal note because the
regulatory hearings would not be mandated.
MR. GROSSI agreed, but said they usually would combine it with
other regulatory hearings. And, in fact, if there happened to be
no other reason to hold a regulatory hearing, it could be they
would have to pay the transportation costs for the board members
just to change the regulations.
Number 551
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER asked if anyone else would be testifying on
HB 60.
Number 564
CHAIRMAN KOTT answered that no one else had signed up to testify.
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER commented that he had seen these types of
discussions that everyone agreed on go too far. He would
entertain a motion.
Number 569
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked what the insurance industry's
position on the bill was.
MR. GROSSI said he assumed they would support it, as it was the
most current and accurate scientific body of knowledge for rating
injured workers.
CHAIRMAN KOTT closed public testimony on HB 60.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG noted that he had spoken to
representatives from the Alaska National Insurance Company and
they said it was okay with them.
Number 574
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER made the motion to move HB 60 from
committee with individual recommendations and a zero fiscal note.
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked if there were objections. Hearing none, the
motion passed.
HB 224 - STATE PLUMBING CODE
Number 581
CHAIRMAN KOTT said they would now hear from the Prime Sponsor of
HB 224.
REPRESENTATIVE VIC KOHRING, PRIME SPONSOR OF HB 224, pointed out
there was a zero fiscal note accompanying the bill. The basic
intent of the bill was to give the Department of Law the
authority to adopt and amend the Uniform Plumbing Code (UPC). He
said it does not make any changes to the existing code or adopt a
new version of code. It simply changes the process by which the
code is adopted. HB 224 has been supported by various labor
unions and plumbing contractors, as well as engineering firms.
The Department of Labor would administer the code in a more
timely manner. He said this was a safety issue as far as setting
minimum safety standards of plumbing installations. Because the
UPC code is so technical, it would make more sense for the
Department of Labor to be the administrator. He concluded by
saying the Plumbing Code was the last code that still required
legislative approval. He respectfully requested the committee's
consideration of the bill.
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked if there were any questions for the prime
sponsor.
Number 619
ROBERT MINCH, ALASKA DESIGN SPECIALTY COUNCIL, testified they
were in favor of the bill. He said it would go a long way in
cleaning up the process of adopting regulations covering the
construction and design industries. He encouraged them to pass
this from committee, and he added he would answer any questions.
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked if there were questions. He then called
Dwight Perkins to the table.
Number 626
DWIGHT PERKINS, SPECIAL ASSISTANT, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, testified
the department supports HB 224 with a technical change. On page
2, line 3 through line 9, beginning with, "unless changed by the
department", under C & D of the section, he said they found lines
3 through 9 redundant. This is addressed in the 1991 Plumbing
Code which the state is currently using. This particular
language came about when they were under the previous code which
did not address the Federal Clean Water Standard Act regarding
lead in water. This is federally mandated; therefore, this
language has to apply. He said it is addressed in two separate
sections of the 1991 Plumbing Code. He reiterated that the
department supports the bill.
Number 641
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked Mr. Perkins to briefly describe the
process for the adoption of the plumbing code in the state.
Number 648
MR. PERKINS responded that currently the (indiscernible).
TAPE 95-22, SIDE B
Number 000
MR. PERKINS continued, saying the plumbing code is adopted by
statute. The Department of Labor does not have the authority, by
regulation, to adopt new codes as they become effective. The
most recent code became effective on June 12, 1991. HB 224 would
allow the department to hold public hearings for contractors and
design professionals to have the opportunity to either add to, or
delete from the plumbing code.
Number 034
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked if any mechanical engineers were on
staff at the Department of Labor.
Number 038
MR. PERKINS answered that two of the inspectors are plumbers, and
the chief engineer is an electrician.
Number 050
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked if this was coincidental or
required by statute.
MR. PERKINS responded he wasn't familiar with the job
descriptions.
Number 055
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked who wrote the regulations.
MR. PERKINS stated the mechanical section of the Department of
Labor would write those regulation.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked if mechanical engineers were part
of that.
MR. PERKINS responded he was not sure if they were licensed to do
mechanical engineering within the state.
Number 065
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked if they hold public hearings in
order to adopt local amendments to the codes.
Number 070
MR. PERKINS said that was correct.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked if, historically, this was what the
legislature has done.
MR. PERKINS replied that, historically, amendments had been
proposed in regards to other plumbing codes. Those amendments
never were adopted, and the codes were adopted as originally
written. He said, "Alaska is a different place, and in some
instances things don't work the way they should, but the
department and the users of the code would have the opportunity
to make amendments, where needed, to alleviate problems."
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked if the legislature has ever made
amendments to the code.
MR. PERKINS said in a past life, he had been a lobbyist who was
involved with trying to make amendments to the code. He said
because of the lack of understanding of the technical portion of
the code, the legislature did not feel they were enough of an
informed body to take what he said as gospel.
Number 098
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked Mr. Perkins to explain the difference between
a single and double wall heat exchanger.
Number 105
MR. PERKINS replied that primarily in areas where oil fired
domestic boilers are used, there is a heat exchanger submersed
inside the boiler that protects potable water. He explained that
propylene glycol is added to the system. If the heat exchanger
should rust out, the water in which it is immersed would leak
into the potable water system. He said with a double wall
exchanger you would have that extra protection.
Number 139
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked what the department's position would be on
retaining the single wall heat exchanger.
Number 141
MR. PERKINS stated the department recognizes the need for looking
into this section of the code to amend it and allow single wall
exchangers in certain areas. He said, "until they have the
authority to make regulatory changes, they are at a loss to do
so, and the inspectors are following what they can by the code,
and the code says one thing, and until they are given the
regulatory to make those changes their hands are tied."
REPRESENTATIVE KUBINA interpreted that as saying the department
doesn't want to put exceptions into the law. They want the
ability to write the regulations themselves.
Number 164
MR. PERKINS stated they would fine tune the codes to Alaska's
needs, and in this instance, with heat exchangers, they do see a
need for change.
Number 170
REPRESENTATIVE KUBINA asked if the department didn't want to
write those changes into law.
MR. PERKINS responded no. They feel the contractors and plumbers
should sit down with the Department of Labor and hammer out their
differences so the results would be in the best interest of the
state.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said the state presently (indisc.)
electrical codes and national codes that had been adopted. He
asked if this was a similar regulatory plan on a three year
cycle, or do they only make local amendments if there is public
input.
Number 184
MR. PERKINS explained that the public is notified through
newspapers and public advertisements that the department will be
adopting the next version of the code, along with any suggested
changes. He said the public process is followed so any changes
to the code will be heard at locations throughout the state.
Number 198
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked if the drafting attorneys made the
ultimate decision. He commented that even though there is public
input, it doesn't always mean those interests are followed.
Number 202
MR. PERKINS said with the exception of the Elevator Code, this is
the last construction code yet to be adopted by regulation. He
pointed out the Electrical Code was adopted last year, and the
department now has the authority to adopt regulations for that
code. The department does not view this legislation as
adversarial to the users of the code, but as a streamlining
process. The public would have the opportunity to be involved in
adopting codes and making amendments.
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked Representative Rokeberg to hold his questions
as they had many more people to testify. He asked Representative
Jeannette James to join them at the table.
Number 225
REPRESENTATIVE JEANNETTE JAMES voiced her concerns about HB 224.
She stated that the Department of Labor should not be given
"carte blanche" authority to write regulations. She pointed out
that when the department had been given specific points to work
with in the past, the regulations still haven't always come out
as they should. In that regard, she disputes the bill. However,
if the bill is to move forward, it should be amended. She
recognized that the Department of Labor said they would address
the concerns some people have with single wall heat exchangers.
However, from past experience, the people in her district are not
satisfied this will, in fact, happen. The legislature is lazy to
have spun off the opportunity to make law by giving it to the
Administration. When it comes to codes directly affecting
Alaska, there is a policy decision. When it comes to making
policy, the policies ought to be made by elected officials of the
legislature. If the legislature gives the authority to the
Department of Labor, it would be totally derelict in its duty.
She said the department should be implementing the statutes as
the legislature imposes them.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES continued that with single wall heat
exchangers, there generally isn't any potable water in the
system. Propylene glycol is a nontoxic fluid and not a problem.
She added they have also been hearing from the people that "when
you write regulations and make us dance this other dance that we
haven't been dancing, please tell us and figure out how much it
will cost to dance the other dance." She asked if the cost and
benefit would be balanced. As the current bill is written,
coupled with existing law, home owners wouldn't have the means to
have single wall heat exchangers.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES offered an amendment to HB 224 to address
the concerns of people being affected physically and financially
by the legislation. "This amendment would allow that in single
wall construction, if the heat transfer medium is water and
either propylene glycol or other essential nontoxic fluids,
having a toxicity rating of Class One, or class of one as listed
in Clinical Toxicology of Commercial Products, Fifth Edition, and
the pressure of the heat transfer medium is limited to a maximum
of 30 pounds per square inch by an approved safety relief valve.
And the heat exchanger is permanently and (indisc.) labeled with
instructions concerning Sections 1 and 2 of this section." She
said the rest of the three-page amendment is legal drafting that
"permits this to happen and continue happening."
Number 313
CHAIRMAN KOTT opened testimony on the teleconference line.
Number 318
MARK BLACKWELL, PLUMBING CONTRACTOR, testified via teleconference
on HB 224. He read the following statement: "I would like to
address the current fact-finding committee on the proposed
inclusion of HB 224, and the impact of not including the 10.03 K
amendment the city of Fairbanks adopted January 1, 1993. I
specifically would like to address the use of single wall heat
exchangers, common component of domestic water systems in use for
80 years. The multiple thousands of systems are in daily use
around Fairbanks and many millions of these systems are used
worldwide on a daily basis. The single wall domestic heat
exchanger coil remains the industry standard in terms of
application and affordability to the end user, namely you and I,
in our residences, apartment buildings, even in commercial
buildings. I know of no verifiable deaths or illness directly
attributable to its use in Fairbanks due to a compromised or
failed coil. The cost benefit equation, far outweighs any life
safety issues that may remotely arise with its continued use. I,
therefore, urge the committee to consider the 10.03 K amendment
which carries the prudent thinking of not only people in
Fairbanks, but also manufacturers, engineers and contractors
worldwide."
Number 355
DAN PORTWINE, PORTWINE PLUMBING & HEATING, testified from
Fairbanks via teleconference on HB 244. He urged the committee
not to pass HB 224 without the 10.03 K amendment. The single
wall coil should be fully acceptable for heating domestic hot
water under most circumstances. The vast majority of boilers in
the Fairbanks area have single wall coils in use. He has been in
the plumbing business in Fairbanks for 21 years. In that time,
he has experienced three leaking coils. All three coils were
new, but had manufacturers defects which were discovered upon
installation. He has never experienced any health hazards caused
by the single wall coil. (Indisc.) under normal circumstances
the domestic side of the coil, which operates at a higher
pressure than the boiler enclosed side, will flow into the
boiler, over pressure the boiler and turn the pressure release
valve on the boiler (indisc.--mumbling). He said requiring
nontoxic glycol in water as the heating fluid should adequately
address the safety issue. He stated requiring double wall coils
would place unreasonable hardships on home and property owners.
Double wall coils are available for normal boilers. Tank-type
water heaters with double wall boilers are very expensive and
inefficient. Operating electric or gas hot water heaters in
Fairbanks is very expensive. The oil fired water heaters are
expensive to purchase and install. His basic concern is a
product that has been in use for 80 to 100 years does not warrant
the expense and hardships placed on the citizens of this state.
The Department of Labor has been aware of this problem.
Number 382
MICHAEL HIRT, OWNER, COMFORT MECHANICAL testified via
teleconference that on February 24, 1995, he received a long
distance phone call from the acting Chief Mechanical Inspector,
Gerard Mankel, for the state. Mr. Mankel referred to a single
wall coil that Mr. Hirt had installed at the Alaska Veterinary
Clinic, 410 Trainer Gate Rd., Fairbanks. Mr. Mankel asked if he
intended to change the system in order to comply with the 1991
Uniform Plumbing Code Section 1003 K. He informed Mr. Mankel
that at the time the job was bid and designed, the 1979 UPC was
enforced with the state. The 1988 UPC was enforced by the city,
and did not include language referring to single wall coils. He
told Mr. Mankel the project was built within the city of
Fairbanks and was subject to the administration authority of the
City Building Department. The city of Fairbanks, during
construction of this project, adopted the 1991 UPC at
approximately the same time the state did. However, the city of
Fairbanks chose to amend and clarify the code language to the
city ordinance so it would be consistent with the UPC's intent.
He stated that he, in good faith, paid for a permit with the city
and expected the city to be the administrative authority to
follow. He told Mr. Mankel he had no intention of changing
anything at the present time. They also spoke of other
interpretations of the ASME Code. Recent misinterpretation by
state officials has caused thousands of dollars of expense to
interior owners, only to find the officials had misinterpreted
its intent. He then asked if Mr. Mankel agreed with the city
ordinance in allowing single wall coils in cases where potable
water was on both sides of the coil. He said Mr. Mankel's
response was that he only enforces the state statutes, he doesn't
try to interpret them.
MR. HIRT stated he would like to see HB 224 amended by having the
heat exchanger amendment and also that the administrative
authority be defined as being the most local authority. For
example, a city would be more local than a borough. Depending on
building demand, they would have a part or full-time official on
the payroll to administer the UPC, within its defined boundaries.
This is essential for proper application of the code. The
Department of Labor would interpret things as they see fit.
Number 420
LEONARD KIMBALL, BUILDING OFFICIAL FOR THE CITY OF KODIAK AND THE
KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH, testified via teleconference that single
wall coil heat exchangers had been in use for many years in
Kodiak without any serious cost connection problems. The 1991
edition of the UPC out ruled these systems in spite of the fact
they had done very well with oil fired burners. Much of the
United States still allows for this system. Natural gas is not
available in Kodiak, and they feel the UPC is unfairly impacting
their community. In 1991, the Kodiak Code Review Committee, made
up of contractors and citizens, recommended an exception to the
code allowing the continued use of single wall heat exchangers.
He said the City Council and Kodiak Island Borough Assembly,
after holding public hearings, unanimously approved the
exception. He said that by refusing to accept tried and tested
material, still approved in many parts of the country, and
tolerating requirements that are excessive, permits the code to
provide basic minimal provision necessary for (indisc.), the UPC
code is straying from its stated purpose to provide minimum
requirements and standards for the protection of public health,
safety, and welfare. He closed by asking the committee to
support the amendment allowing the continued use of single wall
heat exchangers as proposed by the city of Fairbanks, the city of
Kodiak, and the Kodiak Island Borough.
Number 447
JOHN BUTLER, JOHN'S HEATING SERVICE IN KODIAK, testified via
teleconference that if HB 224 is initiated, he would like to see
the amendment to the single wall coil. In the last 20 years they
haven't had any problems with people being poisoned from backflow
or anything resulting from failure of the coil. These added
costs would be passed on to the consumer. The officials in
Kodiak are capable of making the right decision for these codes.
Number 460
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER asked if double wall exchangers would take
more energy to produce the same amount of heat for the water.
MR. BUTLER stated it would take 30 to 40 percent more energy to
produce the same amount of hot water with the double walled coil,
as opposed to the single wall coil.
Number 468
TOM STREIFEL, STREIFEL PLUMBING & HEATING testified via
teleconference that it is not often that so many plumbers get
together and agree they don't want to make money. He stated
they could charge more for the double wall coils but they just
don't work. They are building systems so people can afford them.
This would cut efficiency. The "feds" are already mandating a
limit to the number of BTUs that can be put into a house. When
they have to figure heat loss, and they go over the limit by 10
percent, if they must use double wall coils, they won't get the
numbers to work.
Number 481
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked what the standard life span of a single wall
coil was.
Number 489
MR. BUTLER answered he had been doing heating work for the past
20 years and there are a lot of single wall coils in existence
that preexist the 1964 tidal wave.
Number 490
LEE HOLMES, LICENSED MECHANICAL ENGINEER, RSA ENGINEERING, past
president of Alaska Special Design Council, and Charter member of
Alaska Chapter of the International Association of Plumbing &
Mechanical Officials, testified via teleconference in support of
HB 224. He stated it had taken 12 years to upgrade the Plumbing
Code this last time. He believes the professionals who deal with
codes on a daily basis should have the authority to come up with
the amendments and adopt the code in a timely manner. He has sat
on the municipality of Anchorage Code Review Committee since
1988, working to pass amendments needed to modify the code to
meet local requirements unique to Anchorage. There has been
misleading information and misunderstandings. Amtrol makes both
single and double wall heat exchangers that are hooked up to
boilers as a separate item. The double wall heat exchanger is
$8.00 cheaper. In 1991, when the code went into effect, it
caught many manufacturers off guard. Over the past three years,
they have caught up and actually exceeded the number of double
wall exchangers originally anticipated. In talking with a
manufacturer's representative recently, 90 percent of the heat
exchangers he sells, dealing with potable water, are double wall
exchangers. The 10 percent of single wall exchangers that are
sold are for steam and potable water on both side systems. He
expounded on the flagging of boilers and the use of propylene
glycol. He stated that propylene glycol is toxic, the same as
alcohol is toxic. It is not as toxic as ethylene glycol. There
are various grades of propylene glycol. The type listed by
Representative James is not what you would purchase if you went
to (indisc.) and asked them for premixed propylene glycol. He
stated propylene glycol is corrosive to piping. Therefore,
inhibitors are added to prevent corrosion. These inhibitors are
not classified as nontoxic. He said in bush communities, when a
boiler goes down and it is refilled, you are just as likely to
get Prestone installed into the system. In remote areas where
home owners have modified systems or extremely corrosive water,
unlike Fairbanks or Kodiak, (indisc.). Another misunderstanding
was that the exchangers are less efficient, using 30 to 40
percent more energy. The Amtrol double wall heat exchanger water
heater that works as a zone off of the boiler, takes no more
energy to create the same amount of hot water than a single wall
unit. He said double wall side arm heaters, which fit right into
the boilers, do not create as much hot water as single wall
heaters, but they do not draw any more energy to heat that water.
He concluded if an amendment is needed, it should be adopted by
the Department of Labor when they go through the amendment
process. He does not feel there is uniform consensus throughout
the industry. He knew of no engineer who would support single
wall heat exchangers over double wall exchangers due to the
ethics and personal liability involved. He feels that they
should not be tied into technology based 15 to 20 years ago when
the industry itself is changing to support the double wall heat
exchangers.
Number 560
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked if the Anchorage Code Review was
like the Board Examiner of Appeals for the municipality of
Anchorage.
MR. HOLMES responded when new codes come out, they go to the
professional and construction communities and ask individuals to
sit on the committee to go through the code and make
recommendations for amendments. He said there are separate
committees for Fire, Mechanical, Structural, Plumbing and the
Uniform Building Codes.
Number 568
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked if, after the recommendations those
go to the assembly, or to the Board of Examiner Review.
MR. HOLMES answered they go out for public comment; then
eventually, they go to the assembly to be adopted by resolution.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked if you could have additional public
hearings after issuing a first draft.
MR. HOLMES stated this was correct.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG continued it then goes to the assembly
for approval, at which time a citizen can make a complaint or ask
for further amendments.
MR. HOLMES said this was correct.
CHAIRMAN KOTT invited Representative Gene Therriault to sit at
the table.
LEE DESPAIN, DESPAIN PLUMBING & HEATING, testified via
teleconference, that he had been in the plumbing business for 40
years. He stated Mr. Holmes commented on the double wall heat
exchanger costing $8.00 less than the single exchanger. However,
he forgot to say the installation alone would cost between $1000
to $1500 extra, because you're not able to use the coil that
comes in most boilers they install in Fairbanks. Mr. Holmes also
commented he knew of no engineers who would opt to install the
single wall exchangers over the double wall exchangers. Mr.
Despain said it was his understanding the Code Review Commission
has mechanical engineers on it and that the commission
unanimously supported the use of single wall coils, as long as
they are installed with the provision that the city of Fairbanks
has for those applications.
MR. DESPAIN continued by reading a prepared statement: "It
appears to me that the Department of Labor is making a run for
power. You legislators can ill afford to delegate your
responsibility for maintenance of the current applicable codes to
the Department of Labor. These codes affect every resident in
this state with no exceptions either directly or indirectly. If
you feel I've overstated my position, please feel free -- how
much of the population of Alaska, regardless of age, creed, color
or national origin or religion, does not use water. There are
several other codes in this legislation that also apply to
Alaskans, in addition to the Plumbing Code. This legislation
will establish the Department of Labor as the Internal Revenue
Service of plumbing and other codes, Alaska-style. If an appeal
is necessary after this piece of legislation, a person can go see
the next higher Department of Labor person. It sounds like DOL
justice to me, or is that IRS justice? I can hardly wait to see
how much money the Department of Labor can leverage from the
legislature if this ill-conceived piece of legislation is
approved. Please, legislators, keep these codes within your
jurisdiction and abolish this ill-conceived piece of legislation,
HB 224."
MR. DESPAIN stated there are presently exemptions to the code
existing under state statute concerning code compliance. He
asked if this legislation would still allow for those exemptions,
which concern municipalities and some small rural communities.
Number 618
MR. PERKINS responded they amend the administrative sections of
the codes. He didn't feel this would be a problem.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG pointed out he was asking if there is an
exemption from the codes when you have a code in a municipality?
MR. DESPAIN asked if that exemption disappears with this piece of
legislation.
MR. PERKINS apologized for misunderstanding the questions, and he
added, "When exemptions are applied for and the department feels
they are in the best interest, then they are granted."
MR. PERKINS clarified there are existing exceptions to the
legislation allowing codes to be processed in Juneau at this
time. Those exemptions are for municipalities and certain rural
communities. His question whether these exemptions still apply
"when DOL is made God instead of the state legislature?" Will
they still be in effect?
MR. PERKINS responded he didn't know why they wouldn't be.
MR. DESPAIN reiterated there seemed to be poor information being
disseminated with regard to the double wall coil. His concern is
that the double wall coil issue is insignificant in comparison
with establishing the Department of Labor as the group
(indisc.--end of tape)
TAPE 95-23, SIDE A,
Number 000
MR. DESPAIN continued that they should continue to let the
legislature do what they have been doing for years.
Number 004
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked if they were to enact this
legislation, whether the new Plumbing Code, as administered by
the Department of Labor, would be superior to the municipal codes
in Anchorage, Fairbanks and elsewhere.
MR. PERKINS stated at this time, the state's UPC is a minimum
standard. It says the municipalities may make the codes more
stringent, but not less stringent.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked if this was for all codes.
MR. PERKINS stated he was only referring to the Plumbing Code.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked if the state had adopted the
Uniform Building Code.
MR. PERKINS answered that to his knowledge, yes.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG queried whether they couldn't be less
stringent than the UPC.
MR. PERKINS said he could only refer to the Plumbing Code right
now. The municipalities can be more stringent than the 1991
code, but not less stringent.
Number 059
STEVE SHUTTLEWORTH, BUILDING OFFICIAL, CITY OF FAIRBANKS,
testified via teleconference. He commented they had only
received notice of the teleconference the day prior, and would
have appreciated more notice. He said the city has several
concerns regarding HB 224. The city of Fairbanks recognizes that
HB 224 was initiated by the Alaska Professional Design Council,
not the Department of Labor. The city of Fairbanks also
recognizes that the purpose of the bill is to adopt the state
plumbing code by regulation. They do not feel they will receive
a "fair shake" from the Department of Labor regarding the actual
regulatory process. The city of Fairbanks has received little
cooperation from the DOL. He pointed out that on page 2, line
11, the bill acknowledges only one code. He said there are
several nationally recognized plumbing codes that should be
considered. This code is the only code that prohibits single
wall coils. He said that on page 3, lines 17 and 18, the
language is inappropriate. He quoted, "best interest of the
state," and then asked, what about the people, cities, and
accountability? The current language suggests an agenda which
recommends revision or deletion of lines 17 and 18, as noted. He
referred the committee to page 17 in the handbook of the State
Constitution. He asked why HB 224 was only referred to one
committee, bypassing State Affairs. He said the city of
Fairbanks would consider supporting HB 224, provided the
Fairbanks and Kodak amendment is included. He asked the
committee not to underestimate the city of Fairbanks' commitment
to the passage of this amendment. This issue affects his office
every day. The collective wisdom regarding plumbing and single
wall coils has been, or is, vested with the Department of Labor;
nor is it vested in communities with natural gas. There has been
a concern that if they accept this amendment, what about all the
others? Isn't this the governmental process? In summary, he
stated the single wall coil issue will not go away. In
Fairbanks, they have a genuine problem with the currently overly
restrictive double wall heat exchanger state requirement. If the
proposed Fairbanks and Kodiak amendment is not adopted, they will
work diligently for the defeat of HB 224.
CHAIRMAN KOTT thanked him for his testimony and assured him that
the state was under new management. The committee does not
arbitrarily teleconference every Labor & Commerce Committee
meeting. The request came late from either the bill sponsor or a
member of the public. In response to being the only committee of
referral, he assured Mr. Shuttleworth that the Labor & Commerce
Committee would thoroughly evaluate HB 224. He asked Mr.
Shuttleworth for his phone number.
MR. SHUTTLEWORTH stated that it was 459-6725.
LARRY LONG, PLUMBING INSPECTOR FOR THE CITY OF FAIRBANKS,
testified via teleconference. He commented that Mr. Shuttleworth
was his supervisor. He said: "This limiting, even the
consideration of any other plumbing code except the UPC, we all
know where that comes from." He said they should consider the
best code for the state of Alaska, not one that is a private
vested interest. He commented on what Mr. Despain had said in
regards to changing the transfer of power by the legislature. It
creates another IRS, EPA, and a totally out of control
administration. He said he could not believe anyone could think
the single wall/double wall coil is a safety hazard. He was in
much more danger driving to the teleconference than he ever would
be drinking water from a single wall boiler. He reiterated that
the Department of Labor is not a pleasant subject in Fairbanks.
He does not trust anything anyone says from the department.
Number 226
BILL SAGER, CHANDLER PLUMBING & HEATING, testified via
teleconference. He said the ability of any department to be able
to change or adopt codes administratively is not in the best
interest of the state. He concurred with previous speakers
regarding the double wall coil requirements as being unnecessary.
He urged that the requirement of the double wall coil be deleted
from whichever code is adopted.
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked if there was anyone else wishing to testify.
Hearing none, he closed public testimony and asked Representative
Therriault to join them.
REPRESENTATIVE GENE THERRIAULT stated his staff had been in
contact with a number of people in Fairbanks and that a few
people were upset with the sponsor of the bill. He said
Representative Kohring had no ulterior motive in introducing the
bill; that he was a fellow member on the House Finance Committee,
and they could work these problems out.
Number 250
CHAIRMAN KOTT stated they had heard much testimony in the past
hours, along with feeling much heat. He said they have learned a
lot and understand the issues related to HB 224. He said that
these issues are substantial and need to be addressed in a
subcommittee. He appointed Representative Rokeberg as chair,
along with Representative Elton and himself.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the House Labor &
Commerce Committee, Chairman Kott adjourned the meeting at 5:20
p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|