Legislature(2007 - 2008)BARNES 124
03/07/2007 01:00 PM House RESOURCES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Confirmation Hearing: Commissioner, Department of Environmental Conservation - Acting Commissioner Hartig | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE
March 7, 2007
1:02 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Carl Gatto, Co-Chair
Representative Craig Johnson, Co-Chair
Representative Paul Seaton
Representative Peggy Wilson
Representative Bryce Edgmon
Representative David Guttenberg
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Vic Kohring
Representative Bob Roses
Representative Scott Kawasaki
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
CONFIRMATION HEARING(S)
Commissioner, Department of Environmental Conservation
ACTING COMMISSIONER LARRY HARTIG - Anchorage
- CONFIRMATION(S) ADVANCED
PRESENTATION: ALASKA GASLINE PORT AUTHORITY
- PRESENTATION CANCELED
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
No previous action to record
WITNESS REGISTER
ACTING COMMISSIONER HARTIG, Acting Commissioner
Department of Environmental Conservation
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as the appointed commissioner of
the Department of Environmental Conservation.
ACTION NARRATIVE
CO-CHAIR CRAIG JOHNSON called the House Resources Standing
Committee meeting to order at 1:02:28 PM. Representatives
Johnson, Gatto, and Wilson were present at the call to order.
Representatives Seaton, Edgmon, and Guttenberg arrived as the
meeting was in progress.
^CONFIRMATION HEARING: COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION - ACTING COMMISSIONER HARTIG
1:02:40 PM
CO-CHAIR JOHNSON announced that the only order of business would
be the confirmation hearing of the commissioner of the
Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC). Co-Chair
Johnson began the hearing by asking Acting Commissioner Hartig
why he's interested in being the commissioner of DEC.
1:03:08 PM
ACTING COMMISSIONER HARTIG, Acting Commissioner, Department of
Environmental Conservation, related that he hadn't expected this
appointment, but when the opportunity arose there was no problem
deciding to accept the appointment. He explained that for many
years he has worked on environmental issues around the state,
which he has enjoyed. He mentioned that he has also enjoyed
working with the scientists, engineers, and other staff at DEC.
He characterized DEC as an interesting department with an
interesting and rewarding time ahead with the gas pipeline and
other issues on the forefront. Furthermore, Acting Commissioner
Hartig opined that Governor Palin is bringing new ideas to
government, such as open government and government closer to the
people.
1:04:16 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON, referring to Acting Commissioner Hartig's
work experience in environmental and natural resource matters,
inquired as to whether he specialized in any area.
ACTING COMMISSIONER HARTIG related that as an attorney in
private practice in Anchorage for 23 years, he worked on a
variety of environmental issues. He specified that initially in
his private practice he focused on contaminated site issues and
his clients included the Public Employees' Retirement System
(PERS) and Teachers' Retirement System (TRS). He recalled that
he worked on situations that arose after the change in law
requiring businesses to upgrade or close out underground storage
tanks. He further recalled performing a lot of investigative
work regarding whether property was contaminated and how to
allocate responsibility when it was contaminated. However, for
the last 10 years, he said that he has been more focused on
natural resource development in which he assisted those seeking
permits for mines, oil and gas operations, and resource
development and assisted them with environmental compliance.
1:06:18 PM
CO-CHAIR GATTO reminded everyone of the cruise ship tax that
includes a $4 tax for the ocean ranger program, which is
operated under DEC. He inquired as to how that $4 would be used
by DEC. He further inquired as to how the ocean ranger program
will be set up to monitor environmental conditions on the cruise
ships.
ACTING COMMISSIONER HARTIG said that the department has had some
difficulty and has approached the sponsors regarding the clear
goals of the program in order to comply with the law. However,
he said the department isn't sure that the sponsors of the
initiative fully understood the logistical and practical
concerns that would arise when trying to achieve the
initiative's goal and whether the initiative is the best way to
actually achieve the goal. He acknowledged that the legislature
is also reviewing and debating whether there should be
amendments to the initiative. Therefore, he said he has asked
the department to review the initiative, what it requires, and
what DEC can best do to implement the aforementioned when the
first large cruise ships arrive. The department is also
planning to track what the legislature is doing in terms of
amending the initiative and anticipate what may need to be in
place in response. If logistics are an obstacle, he said the
department will do the best it can and provide an explanation as
to why it doesn't have a program that provides everything
specified on the first day. With the aforementioned in mind,
it's difficult to specify how the funds will be used. Acting
Commissioner Hartig stated that it's DEC's intent to implement
the law as fully as possible, once the department is sure of
what the law is.
1:10:01 PM
CO-CHAIR GATTO pointed out that an average ship with 2,000
passengers would generate $8,000/week to implement the ocean
ranger program. He related his understanding that an ocean
ranger needs to be certified by DEC rather than the U.S. Coast
Guard.
MR. HARTIG related his understanding that the initiative
requires a U.S. Coast Guard-certified marine engineer, although
that's not the person who would need to perform the work
contemplated by the initiative. One of the problems is that
[U.S. Coast Guard-certified marine engineers] aren't readily
available in Alaska and aren't necessary to do the specified
job. A U.S. Coast Guard-certified marine engineer is more
experienced and trained on the propulsion system for the boat
versus air emissions. Therefore, using a U.S. Coast Guard-
certified marine engineer would require a fair amount of
training for someone who may not be the best person for the job.
Furthermore, there are logistical concerns with regard to an
ocean ranger's interaction with other people on the boat so that
there is no disruption for the crew or passengers. Moreover,
there are safety concerns.
1:11:56 PM
CO-CHAIR GATTO suggested that Acting Commissioner Hartig put out
a request for proposals (RFP) for an entity that can provide
training and supply the personnel for the specified training.
ACTING COMMISSIONER HARTIG answered that such has been done to a
degree when the department had a consultant, who was a former
DEC employee and U.S. Coast Guard member, review what the
initiative appeared to require and how the logistical concerns
would be addressed. The aforementioned knowledge is necessary
before the department can put out a contract. However, the
department recognizes that the initiative is in flux and could
be amended. If there is no amendment to the initiative, he
opined that it will be an accelerated situation in which people
who could be trained would be placed on the cruise ships
immediately and others would follow.
1:13:29 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG requested that Acting Commissioner
Hartig describe what he believes to be the function and
responsibilities of the ocean rangers.
ACTING COMMISSIONER HARTIG emphasized that the department will
start with what the law is, adding that this position isn't the
creation of DEC. He then related his basic understanding that
the initiative sponsors want there to be a watch dog on the
cruise ships to track what is being done on the cruise ships.
The initiative sponsors are concerned, he opined, that there is
no one really tracking what the cruise ships do while in Alaska
waters; the sponsors want to know that there is compliance with
state environmental laws and provide a manner in which to track
that. The department is attempting to determine the full gamut
of compliance issues and how one person can track all of those.
1:16:21 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked if the department has considered
using "able-bodied seamen" rather than a "marine engineer"
since [the department will provide] training.
ACTING COMMISSIONER HARTIG said that the department doesn't
believe a marine engineer is necessary, and noted his agreement
that there are other qualified people who would be easier to
find and perhaps even less expensive and able to do a better
job. He noted that whether an able-bodied seaman or a marine
engineer is used, a fair amount of training would be required.
1:17:14 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked if any thought has been given to
using an individual other than an individual licensed by the
U.S. Coast Guard.
ACTING COMMISSIONER HARTIG answered, "Not that I'm aware of."
He reiterated that the department would track the requirements
of the initiative or any amendment passed by the legislature.
CO-CHAIR JOHNSON highlighted that the initiative calls for a
licensed Coast Guard marine engineer. However, he remarked that
he wasn't sure such an individual existed.
1:17:48 PM
CO-CHAIR GATTO related his understanding that the U.S. Coast
Guard's main contribution is to ensure that whoever fills the
position is licensed. If the individual is licensed, "the Coast
Guard is now out of it and that person now has an obligation to
you and the rest of us here," he said. Co-Chair Gatto said he
envisioned that person would read dials and record any
discrepancies, which would be brought to the attention of the
environmental engineer on board to certify, verify, or explain.
He asked if such monitoring requires a marine engineer.
ACTING COMMISSIONER HARTIG responded, "I don't believe so." He
noted that the [department] performs inspections throughout the
state of a wide variety of facilities and the department doesn't
have (indisc.) in those instances.
1:19:28 PM
CO-CHAIR GATTO returned to the cost of $8,000 a day. He opined
that it isn't necessary to [monitor] this daily because much of
the information is automatically recorded. Therefore, Co-Chair
Gatto related his belief that this [monitoring] could be
performed for $1,000 a day. He then asked what the $8,000 will
be utilized for and could the program cost more than that a day.
ACTING COMMISSIONER HARTIG said that he doesn't have the exact
figures on the budget, but offered to provide those. He noted
that the [estimates/program] is scaled back from the initial
point at which the [monitoring] had to be performed 24 hours a
day every day. The department doesn't believe that such
monitoring is necessary to verify environmental compliance.
1:21:21 PM
CO-CHAIR GATTO pointed out that the cruise ships will be coming
in a little over two months and are coming [whether the ocean
ranger program is ready or not].
ACTING COMMISSIONER HARTIG said that has been a concern for him,
which has resulted in the department reviewing alternatives. He
reiterated that his instructions to department staff are to
follow the law as closely as possible. The reality, he opined,
is that there won't be an ocean ranger on each boat on the first
day.
1:23:01 PM
CO-CHAIR GATTO asked if there's a definition of a marine
engineer.
CO-CHAIR JOHNSON commented that the initiative requires
something that's relatively undeliverable.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON interjected that there are different
levels of certification of marine engineers. He opined that the
person being licensed is necessary, "but I don't think that we
need the ... Coast Guard licensing of an engineer. But we don't
want to put someone on a vessel in the areas that they're going
to be when the ship is underway that doesn't at least have ...
an able-bodied seaman card ...."
1:25:23 PM
CO-CHAIR GATTO pointed out that the crew on these cruise ships
are typically foreign nationals and will need to work with an
English speaker. He asked if that's a significant issue.
ACTING COMMISSIONER HARTIG said that's a level of detail to
which he can't speak. He reiterated that the department went
out for a contract to try to work out what the logistical
concerns would be.
1:26:13 PM
CO-CHAIR GATTO recalled that after an accidental dumping of
[waste] three years ago he boarded a cruise ship and was taken
through all the procedures. After going through the procedures
required [to dump waste], Co-Chair Gatto opined that the
[dumping] was no accident. He further opined that the ocean
ranger program is important, especially since these are
people/entities who have had convictions. Co-Chair Gatto
specified that this [program] is simply a safeguard for
preventing the contamination of halibut beds and throwing
plastic bags off the back of the boat. The only way to know
that things are being done properly is to put someone on board
to verify it. Co-Chair Gatto said that he would be very wary of
objections stating that people didn't know what they were voting
for because the voters asked for the ocean rangers.
ACTING COMMISSIONER HARTIG noted his appreciation of the input,
and reiterated that the department wants to follow the law and
the initiative.
1:30:16 PM
CO-CHAIR GATTO related his understanding that the department
will spend money before collecting it. Therefore, he inquired
as to how much funding the department has requested.
ACTING COMMISSIONER HARTIG specified that supplemental funding
in the amount of $811,000 has been requested. The supplemental
funding is necessary due to the delay between the time the
department will have to implement the program and actually be
able to collect the funds to pay for it.
CO-CHAIR GATTO estimated that 1 million passengers paying $4
each will result in the collection of $4 million over the course
of the season.
1:31:00 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG reminded the members of the transition
from the Lease Monitoring and Engineering Integrity
Coordinator's Office (LMEICO) to the Petroleum Systems Integrity
Office (PSIO). He inquired as to how Acting Commissioner Hartig
views the department's role with the oil industry and its aging
infrastructure.
ACTING COMMISSIONER HARTIG informed the committee that even
before he was officially on board, he told those at DEC that he
didn't want another pipeline corrosion issue on his watch. The
department is developing a gap analysis in which the in-house
resources of the agency will be used in order to identify any
gaps with regard to regulation with DEC and between DEC and
other agencies. He reminded the committee that the Alaska Oil
and Gas Conservation Commission (AOGCC) regulates up to the
wellhead, then DEC [regulates] the flow lines traveling to the
Trans-Alaska Pipeline System (TAPS), and from there the U.S.
Department of Transportation is in charge. Acting Commissioner
Hartig noted that there was a gap in that the flow lines were
not actually covered, which resulted in DEC creating a package
of regulations that will cover the flow lines and become
effective this fall. He said that he wanted to review the
situation internally and perhaps even bring in a third party
contractor to ensure that there are no gaps and overlap for
risky areas. The department is going through the aforementioned
now. Furthermore, some of the other commissioners are thinking
along the same lines and are [reviewing] whether there are risks
that are present that aren't being addressed that should be of
concern. The effort with the liaison position doesn't dilute
the effort, but rather will take everyone's collective efforts,
put them together, review them collectively as well as
individually and develop a budget that directly addresses what
the [department] will be doing. At this point the department is
building on what it saw and determining what is the most
logical, efficient, and workable system that can be implemented.
1:37:24 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG highlighted that the legislature has a
vested interest to ensure that the gaps are addressed. He
recalled a conversation with Department of Natural Resources
(DNR) in which department staff said that their leases had the
ability to go anywhere that was covered under a lease. In
response to whether that provided DEC with the same authority,
DNR didn't know. Representative Guttenberg questioned who has
authority on the sump after AOGCC leaves.
ACTING COMMISSIONER HARTIG confirmed that the department is
reviewing that issue. With regard to whether DNR's authority
under the lease and DEC's authority are co-extensive, he said
that DEC's authority is broader. He explained that DNR has the
lease arrangement and can include terms in the lease that the
lessee has to meet. Therefore, DNR has that additional leverage
that goes outside its environmental regulations or those of DEC
such that DNR can address any of the concerns brought forth with
the gap/risk analysis in the terms of the lease. Furthermore,
DNR can incorporate DEC's requirements into the lease. He noted
that besides the gap analysis each department would do, the
lessee should have to put forth a plan that says what they plan
to do to deal with this aging infrastructure. Therefore, the
departments can review that together and concerns could be
addressed under the terms of the lease. The aforementioned only
addresses leases on state land. For leases not on state land,
one has to review DEC's authority. Therefore, he opined that
DEC's task is a bit different and perhaps a bit broader than
that of DNR.
1:41:02 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG turned to clean air standards. He
related his understanding that the industry is willing to sell
some of its hybrid cars in states that adopt standards allowing
that. He pointed out that DEC has the ability to adopt
standards allowing the sale of such cars in Alaska. He asked if
Acting Commissioner Hartig has had any discussion on that.
ACTING COMMISSIONER HARTIG replied no, but offered to follow up.
He said he didn't know why the department would stand in the way
of anything that's environmentally beneficial. He mentioned
that one of his [goals] is to do what's available to reduce
pollution.
1:42:18 PM
CO-CHAIR GATTO inquired as to what the standards would say.
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG said the standards would utilize
permissive language.
1:42:55 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked if the department is proceeding with
the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES).
ACTING COMMISSIONER HARTIG related that pursuing primacy from
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is a priority of the
department. Currently, EPA issues the NPDES under the Clean
Water Act in Alaska. Alaska is one of five states that does not
have primacy. The 45 states that have primacy have received the
authority from the EPA to issue the permits, albeit under EPA's
regulations and oversight. Acting Commissioner Hartig explained
that Alaska is pursuing primacy because utilizing local people
could be more responsive to local concerns and perhaps provide
quicker turnaround. He pointed out that permits coming out of
Region 10 in Seattle compete against Oregon, Washington, and
Idaho for prioritization. Furthermore, there were some problems
obtaining modifications to permits since that wasn't a high
priority with EPA. Therefore, there are a variety of pros and
cons to state primacy. However, the state is pursuing primacy
and put forth its draft application July 1, 2006, after which
EPA identified about 199 concerns. There are about two concerns
left. He recalled that EPA brought forward some changes
requiring legislative changes, which is encompassed in HB 149.
The aforementioned legislation uses more technical changes to
place Alaska law in compliance with EPA requirements for a state
to take primacy. He noted that no new permitting requirements
are added, it merely gives the state some of the same authority
the EPA has in Alaska regarding the issuance of NPDES permits.
The department will provide another draft application to EPA
July 1st and the EPA will provide any additional comments by
September 1st. A final application will be provided to EPA,
which will attempt to have a final decision on the state's
application by March 31, 2008. If the decision is favorable,
the state would then have the NPDES program, which would be
phased in over three years. Over that three-year period the
state would work with EPA to put together permits and train
department personnel. At the end of the three-year period the
state should be fully running the program.
1:47:16 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON recalled that permits are backlogged with
EPA because they have Washington and Oregon permits as well. He
related his understanding that Washington and Oregon have
primacy, and surmised that there would still be a backlog if
Alaska takes primacy.
ACTING COMMISSIONER HARTIG clarified that [those EPA staff]
working on permits get pulled in different directions and
permits just aren't a priority for the region. He opined that
it's difficult for a small facility in Alaska to amend a permit
because those require the same process as the original permit.
The aforementioned is problematic, especially when the permit
modification doesn't have direct environmental impacts and other
priorities for staff and funding exist and result in a shifting
of the priorities.
1:49:00 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON related his understanding from DEC that
there would be 20 fewer people working on NPDES permits than
currently. Therefore, he expressed concern that this will slow
the process. He opined that the [permitting process] will cost
money, and therefore more money will have to be collected from
permittees since the [program] will be self-sustaining in
Alaska. Representative Seaton urged Acting Commissioner Hartig
to review the situation carefully in order to ensure that the
former administration's ideas related to streamlining the
process are consistent with the ideas of the new administration.
ACTING COMMISSIONER HARTIG noted his agreement that the state
has to have a program in which everyone has confidence, and thus
corners can't be cut.
1:50:43 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON related his observation that there's no
question that Acting Commissioner Hartig is qualified and has
the integrity and background for the position of commissioner.
However, he highlighted Acting Commissioner Hartig's membership
in professional and community organizations and asked if the
position of commissioner is a very different position.
ACTING COMMISSIONER HARTIG replied yes and no. He noted that he
filled the recreation seat on the Board of Forestry, which he
characterized as a position fairly analogous to what he's doing
now. That board is somewhat unique in that it consists of
representatives from key stakeholders, including environmental,
fishing, biological, Native, recreation, and timber interests.
Furthermore, decisions had to be unanimous less one and thus it
resulted in people working together in a cooperative manner. He
expressed hope that he could bring that to this job. He opined
that if he had a bias he wouldn't take the position.
1:53:52 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG inquired as to Acting Commissioner
Hartig's interest in holding the recreational seat on the Board
of Forestry.
ACTING COMMISSIONER HARTIG related that he has always had a
strong interest in state parks and was a member of various
recreational groups. He noted that he sat on the Chugach State
Park Regional Advisory Board and was head of the Alaska State
Park Foundation.
1:54:29 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON said she was glad to hear Acting
Commissioner Hartig liked how the Board of Forestry was set up
and recalled her time working in such a process that caused
everyone to work together.
1:55:39 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON moved that the committee forward the name
of Larry Hartig to the position of commissioner of the
Department of Environmental Conservation to the full body for
consideration. There being no objection, it was so ordered.
1:56:24 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Resources Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 1:56:26
PM.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|