Legislature(1995 - 1996)

03/25/1996 08:08 AM RES

Audio Topic
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
               HOUSE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE                              
                         March 25, 1996                                        
                           8:08 a.m.                                           
 MEMBERS PRESENT                                                               
 Representative Joe Green, Co-Chairman                                         
 Representative William K. "Bill" Williams, Co-Chairman                        
 Representative Scott Ogan, Vice Chairman                                      
 Representative Alan Austerman                                                 
 Representative Ramona Barnes                                                  
 Representative Pete Kott                                                      
 Representative Don Long                                                       
 Representative Irene Nicholia                                                 
 MEMBERS ABSENT                                                                
 Representative John Davies                                                    
 COMMITTEE CALENDAR                                                            
 HOUSE BILL NO. 438                                                            
 "An Act relating to the indexing of documents recorded in the state           
 recorder's offices; and providing for an effective date."                     
      MOVED OUT OF COMMITTEE                                                   
 CS FOR SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 24(RES)                               
 Relating to a division of game in the Alaska Department of Fish and           
 Game and to management of game.                                               
     - MOVED OUT OF COMMITTEE                                                  
 SENATE BILL NO. 240                                                           
 "An Act relating to the statewide bonding pool for the reclamation            
 activities imposed on mining operations, and extending the pool's             
 use to surface coal mining projects."                                         
      - MOVED OUT OF COMMITTEE                                                 
 CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 69(RES)                                                
 "An Act relating to hazardous chemicals, hazardous materials, and             
 hazardous waste."                                                             
      - MOVED HCS CSSB 69 (RES) OUT OF COMMITTEE                               
 PREVIOUS ACTION                                                               
 BILL:  HB 438                                                               
 SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) BRICE,Kelly,James                               
 JRN-DATE     JRN-PG            ACTION                                         
 01/22/96      2507    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 01/22/96      2507    (H)   STATE AFFAIRS, RESOURCES                          
 01/31/96      2587    (H)   COSPONSOR(S): KELLY                               
 03/12/96              (H)   STA AT  8:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 03/12/96              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 03/12/96              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 03/12/96      3089    (H)   STA RPT  4DP 2AM                                  
 03/12/96      3089    (H)   DP: JAMES, WILLIS, ROBINSON, IVAN                 
 03/12/96      3089    (H)   AM: PORTER, OGAN                                  
 03/12/96      3090    (H)   2 FISCAL NOTES (DNR)                              
 03/12/96      3100    (H)   COSPONSOR(S): JAMES                               
 03/25/96              (H)   RES AT  8:00 AM CAPITOL 124                       
 BILL:  SCR 24                                                               
 SHORT TITLE: REESTABLISH ADFG DIVISION OF GAME                                
 SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) SHARP,Taylor,Green,Miller,Halford,Frank                
 JRN-DATE     JRN-PG            ACTION                                         
 02/02/96      2278    (S)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 02/02/96      2278    (S)   RESOURCES                                         
 02/14/96              (S)   RES AT  3:30 PM BUTROVICH ROOM 205                
 02/23/96      2510    (S)   RES RPT  CS  4DP 2NR      SAME TITLE              
 02/23/96      2510    (S)   ZERO FISCAL NOTE TO SCR & CS                      
 02/26/96              (S)   RLS AT 12:45 PM FAHRENKMAP RM 203                 
 02/26/96              (S)   MINUTE(RLS)                                       
 03/08/96      2657    (S)   RULES TO CALENDAR AND 1 NR   3/8/96               
 03/08/96      2661    (S)   READ THE SECOND TIME                              
 03/08/96      2661    (S)   RES  CS ADOPTED UNAN CONSENT                      
 03/08/96      2661    (S)   COSPONSORS:  TAYLOR, GREEN, MILLER,               
 03/08/96      2661    (S)   HALFORD, FRANK                                    
 03/08/96      2661    (S)   PASSED Y13 N3 E4                                  
 03/08/96      2661    (S)   DUNCAN  NOTICE OF RECONSIDERATION                 
 03/11/96      2690    (S)   RECONSIDERATION NOT TAKEN UP                      
 03/11/96      2691    (S)   TRANSMITTED TO (H)                                
 03/12/96      3084    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 03/12/96      3084    (H)   RESOURCES                                         
 03/25/96              (H)   RES AT  8:00 AM CAPITOL 124                       
 BILL:  SB 240                                                               
 SHORT TITLE: MINING BONDING POOL                                              
 SPONSOR(S): RESOURCES                                                         
 JRN-DATE     JRN-PG            ACTION                                         
 01/26/96      2222    (S)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 01/26/96      2223    (S)   RESOURCES                                         
 02/05/96              (S)   RES AT  3:30 PM BUTROVICH ROOM 205                
 02/05/96              (S)   MINUTE(RES)                                       
 02/07/96      2323    (S)   RES RPT  6DP                                      
 02/07/96      2323    (S)   ZERO FISCAL NOTE (DNR)                            
 02/09/96              (S)   RLS AT 12:30 PM FAHRENKAMP RM 203                 
 02/12/96              (S)   RLS AT  8:00 AM FAHRENKAMP RM 203                 
 02/12/96              (S)   MINUTE(RLS)                                       
 02/14/96      2427    (S)   RULES RPT 3CAL 2NR    2/14/96                     
 02/14/96      2429    (S)   READ THE SECOND TIME                              
 02/14/96      2429    (S)   ADVANCED TO THIRD READING UNAN CONSENT            
 02/14/96      2429    (S)   READ THE THIRD TIME  SB 240                       
 02/14/96      2429    (S)   PASSED Y19 N- E1                                  
 02/14/96      2432    (S)   TRANSMITTED TO (H)                                
 02/15/96      2769    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 02/15/96      2769    (H)   RESOURCES                                         
 03/25/96              (H)   RES AT  8:00 AM CAPITOL 124                       
 BILL:  SB  69                                                               
 SHORT TITLE: REPORTING OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE                                 
 SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) LEMAN                                                  
 JRN-DATE     JRN-PG            ACTION                                         
 02/06/95       182    (S)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 02/06/95       182    (S)   RESOURCES                                         
 02/22/95              (S)   RES AT  3:30 PM BUTROVICH ROOM 205                
 02/22/95              (S)   MINUTE(RES)                                       
 03/24/95              (S)   RES AT  3:30 PM BUTROVICH ROOM 205                
 03/24/95              (S)   MINUTE(RES)                                       
 03/27/95              (S)   RES AT  3:30 PM BUTROVICH ROOM 205                
 03/27/95              (S)   MINUTE(RES)                                       
 03/30/95       839    (S)   RES RPT  CS  1DP 5NR       SAME TITLE             
 03/30/95       840    (S)   FN TO SB & CS (DPS, DEC)                          
 03/30/95       840    (S)   ZERO FN TO SB & CS (DMVA)                         
 03/30/95       840    (S)   ADDITIONAL REFERRAL TO FIN                        
 02/06/96              (S)   FIN AT  9:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532                
 02/06/96              (S)   MINUTE(FIN)                                       
 02/07/96      2322    (S)   FIN RPT  2DP 5NR (RES)CS                          
 02/07/96      2322    (S)   FN (DPS)                                          
 02/07/96      2322    (S)   ZERO FN (DMVA, S.FIN/DEC)                         
 02/09/96              (S)   RLS AT 12:30 PM FAHRENKAMP RM 203                 
 02/12/96              (S)   RLS AT  8:00 AM FAHRENKAMP RM 203                 
 02/12/96              (S)   MINUTE(RLS)                                       
 02/19/96      2469    (S)   RULES TO CALENDAR  2/19/96                        
 02/19/96      2470    (S)   READ THE SECOND TIME                              
 02/19/96      2470    (S)   RES  CS ADOPTED UNAN CONSENT                      
 02/19/96      2470    (S)   THIRD READING 2/21 CALENDAR                       
 02/21/96      2494    (S)   READ THE THIRD TIME  CSSB 69(RES)                 
 02/21/96      2495    (S)   PASSED Y14 N5 E1                                  
 02/21/96      2495    (S)   ZHAROFF  NOTICE OF RECONSIDERATION                
 02/23/96      2521    (S)   RECON TAKEN UP - IN THIRD READING                 
 02/23/96      2521    (S)   PASSED ON RECONSIDERATION Y18 N- E2               
 02/23/96      2522    (S)   TRANSMITTED TO (H)                                
 02/26/96      2880    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 02/26/96      2880    (H)   RESOURCES, FINANCE                                
 03/25/96              (H)   RES AT  8:00 AM CAPITOL 124                       
 WITNESS REGISTER                                                              
 REPRESENTATIVE TOM BRICE                                                      
 Alaska State Legislature                                                      
 State Capitol, Room 426                                                       
 Juneau, AK  99801                                                             
 Telephone: (907) 465-3466                                                     
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Sponsor of HB 438                                        
 SHARON YOUNG, State Recorder                                                  
 State Recorder's Office                                                       
 Division of Support Services                                                  
 Department of Natural Resources                                               
 3601 C Street, Suite 1180                                                     
 Anchorage, Alaska  99503-5936                                                 
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified on HB 438                                      
 MARY NORDALE, Attorney                                                        
 Birch, Horton, Bittner and Cherot                                             
 Past President, Alaska Miner's Association                                    
 100 Cushman Street, Suite 311                                                 
 Fairbanks, Alaska  99701                                                      
 Telephone:  (907) 452-1999                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified on HB 438                                      
 STEVEN BORELL, Executive Director                                             
 Alaska Miner's Association                                                    
 Telephone:  (907) 276-0347                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified on HB 438 and SB 240                           
 SENATOR BURT SHARP                                                            
 Alaska State Legislature                                                      
 State Capitol, Room 514                                                       
 Juneau, AK  99801                                                             
 Telephone: (907) 465-3004                                                     
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Sponsor of SCR 24                                        
 EDDIE GRASSER, Member                                                         
 Alaska Outdoor Council                                                        
 4506 Robbie Road                                                              
 Juneau, Alaska  99801                                                         
 Telephone:  (907) 463-3830                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in support of SCR 24                           
 GERON BRUCE, Legislative Liaison                                              
 Office of the Commissioner                                                    
 Department of Fish and Game                                                   
 P.O. Box 25526                                                                
 Juneau, Alaska  99811-5526                                                    
 Telephone:  (907) 465-6143                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified on SCR 24                                      
 ANNETTE KREITZER, Legislative Aide                                            
                  for Senator Leman                                            
 Alaska State Legislature                                                      
 State Capitol, Room 115                                                       
 Juneau, AK  99801                                                             
 Telephone: (907) 465-2095                                                     
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified on SB 240 and SB 69                            
 ROBERT B. STILES, President                                                   
 DR Ven Corporation                                                            
 711 H Street, Suite 600                                                       
 Anchorage, Alaska  99501                                                      
 Telephone:  (907) 276-6868                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified on SB 240                                      
 MARIE SANSONE, Assistant Attorney General                                     
 Natural Resources Section                                                     
 Civil Division                                                                
 Department of Law                                                             
 P.O. Box 110300                                                               
 Juneau, Alaska  99811-0300                                                    
 Telephone:  (907)465-3600                                                     
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified on SB 69                                       
 CHRISTOPHER KENNEDY, Assistant Attorney General                               
 Civil Division                                                                
 Department of Law                                                             
 1031 West 4th Avenue, Suite 200                                               
 Anchorage, Alaska  99501-1994                                                 
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified on SB 69                                       
 RITA VENTA                                                                    
 Anchorage Fire Department                                                     
 1301 East 80th Avenue                                                         
 Anchorage, Alaska  99518                                                      
 Telephone:  (907) 267-4924                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified on SB 69                                       
 DENISE L. NEWBOULD                                                            
 P.O. Box 575                                                                  
 Kenai, Alaska  99611                                                          
 Telephone:  (907) 776-3150                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified on SB 69                                       
 ACTION NARRATIVE                                                              
 TAPE 96-41, SIDE A                                                            
 Number 000                                                                    
 CO-CHAIR JOE GREEN called the House Resources Committee meeting to            
 order at 8:08 a.m.  Members present at the call to order were                 
 Representatives Green, Ogan, Austerman, Davies, Kott and Long.  A             
 quorum was present.  This meeting was teleconferenced to Anchorage,           
 Kenai and Fairbanks.                                                          
 CO-CHAIR GREEN announced that the agenda was HB 438, SCR 24, SB 240           
 and SB 69.                                                                    
 HB 438 - RECORDING: INDEX DOCUMENTS BY LOCATION                             
 Number 0048                                                                   
 CO-CHAIR GREEN announced the first item on the agenda was HB 438,             
 an act relating to the indexing of documents recorded in the state            
 recorder's offices; and providing for an effective date.                      
 REPRESENTATIVE TOM BRICE, Sponsor of HB 438, said the bill would              
 require the recorders office to list the recordings not only by               
 grant and grantee, but also by location.  He said this would be               
 helpful in cross referencing information with various programs such           
 as the airborne geophysical survey.                                           
 REPRESENTATIVE BRICE said there were changes to the fiscal notes              
 and said the Recorder's Office fiscal note was decreased to zero.             
 He said some money is required for the Information Resource                   
 Management (IRM) section of the Department of Natural Resources               
 (DNR) for computer reprogramming which will allow location                    
 information to be put into the computers.  He said the fiscal note            
 for the first year is $90,000 comes out of program receipts, not              
 out of the general fund.  He said the Recorder's Office generates             
 more program receipts than it expends.                                        
 Number 0232                                                                   
 CO-CHAIR GREEN said if money is being lost from the general fund,             
 the additional receipts collected from the Recorder's Office,                 
 wouldn't that be shown as (indiscernible due to committee packet on           
 top of the microphone) program receipts rather than a straight zero           
 fiscal note.                                                                  
 Number 0300                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE BRICE said this would not be true with the fiscal              
 note from the Recorder's Office because they have shown a zero                
 fiscal note.  He said, the fiscal note from the IRM relating to               
 computer work will require some money.  He said HB 438 will not               
 create an increase or decrease in burden to the Recorder's Office             
 or an increase in the cost of filing fees.                                    
 CO-CHAIR GREEN asked if this issue had been misunderstood in                  
 Number 0333                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE BRICE said the Recorder's Office had projected a 5             
 percent growth in the Recorder's Office.  He said, after                      
 discussions, the office saw that HB 483 would not cause the natural           
 growth in demand as a result of the bill.  He said it was                     
 determined that the growth would occur with or without HB 483.                
 Number 0382                                                                   
 CO-CHAIR GREEN said after the first year, there is a modest                   
 computer use fee of $10,000.  He asked if the expense the first               
 year involved the associated costs of putting the location index              
 into the past records.                                                        
 Number 0404                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE BRICE said, under HB 438, this process would not be            
 retroactive.  He said the expenses the first year involve                     
 programming costs and additional time in educating people.  He said           
 the continuance costs would involve upgrade of the system.                    
 Number 0465                                                                   
 CO-CHAIR GREEN expressed concern, if HB 438 only went into effect             
 from the effective date of this bill, of whether it would take                
 several years for the benefits of this bill to be utilized.                   
 Number 0485                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE BRICE clarified that this statement was correct. He            
 said the issue could be examined to determine what resources and              
 computer manpower would be needed to add this information into past           
 records.  He said the only method for location retrieval has been             
 through the Cardex system which is manually written and a voluntary           
 service.  He said the state of Alaska has not addressed the need to           
 keep location indexes.                                                        
 Number 0557                                                                   
 CO-CHAIR GREEN asked if it would be possible to retrieve                      
 information if you knew the tract number, and asked if it would be            
 just as easy to retrieve that information as if you knew a persons            
 Number 0590                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE BRICE said the location index would provide the                
 public with an idea of where that information is located.  He said            
 the centralized location will list the page and volume of where to            
 find that information.                                                        
 Number 0667                                                                   
 SHARON YOUNG, State Recorder, State Recorder's Office, Division of            
 Support Services, Department of Natural Resources, testified via              
 teleconference from Anchorage.  She clarified that the location               
 index is something that the Recorder's Office is already doing and            
 has been doing for decades.  She said it a computerized system and            
 operated by a third party contractor, who provides information as             
 a courtesy.  She said when volume levels have increased, this                 
 service has been viewed as less important or less critical than               
 meeting the statutory mandates.  She said the system has developed            
 many gaps and omissions in the form of location indexing.                     
 MS. YOUNG said the grant or grantee index is the official index and           
 is maintained on a daily basis.  She said, over the last year or              
 so, the Recorder's Office has also been maintaining the location              
 index on every reported document.  She said the office is able to             
 do this service within the existing workload levels.                          
 Number 0812                                                                   
 MS. YOUNG referred to the earlier fiscal note and said it assumed             
 that the workload levels would increase and staff would need to               
 increase as well.  She said "that is true, but that is not                    
 something that is a directly related to the fiscal note and that is           
 why we did revise the fiscal note."                                           
 Number 0831                                                                   
 MS. YOUNG referred to the IRM fiscal note regarding the associated            
 computer work with HB 438 and said it is for an intra-departmental            
 system which is also tied to the resource information.  She said              
 this is something that the Recorder's Office does not integrate               
 with at the present time.  She said this ability is necessary for             
 her office, as well as the user group, to be able to utilize the              
 other resources available in the DNR.  She said the fiscal note is            
 separate from the recording system..                                          
 Number 0894                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE PETE KOTT asked for information about the geographic           
 information system which is currently being updated.  He asked if             
 that system will accomplish what the committee is trying to                   
 accomplish in HB 438.                                                         
 Number 0909                                                                   
 MS. YOUNG said the geographic information system, a system                    
 maintained by the department, is a separate data base from the                
 recording index system which is maintained on the mainframe of an             
 independent contractor.  She said these data bases do not integrate           
 information currently.  She said the IRM fiscal note is for the               
 necessary programming for both systems to access information from             
 each other.                                                                   
 Number 0960                                                                   
 MARY NORDALE, Attorney, Birch, Horton, Bittner and Cherot, Past               
 President, Alaska Miner's Association, testified via teleconference           
 from Fairbanks.  She said HB 438 is the result of a series of                 
 meetings that began last spring in cooperation with the Recorder's            
 Office, the Division of Mining and Water Management (DMWM) and the            
 people who maintain the geographic location system.  She said these           
 discussions began as a result of a decrease in the budget for the             
 DMWM.  One of the programs that the DMWM had maintained for a                 
 number of years was the Cardex system, a hand posted system for               
 maintaining geographic information on mining claims.  She said, as            
 the meetings progressed, it was learned that the state land records           
 are not maintained in a modern fashion.  She said the mining                  
 community is concerned that, if the Cardex system is eliminated,              
 there is no way to accumulate the historical information which is             
 a necessary component when developing mines.                                  
 Number 1056                                                                   
 MS. NORDALE said the geographic information system, which the DNR             
 is attempting to install for the maintenance of all land records,             
 is terrific and useful to various industries including mining,                
 forestry, oil and gas, and other resource based industries.  She              
 said this system won't work unless a requirement is put in the                
 statute that states location indexes must be maintained.  She said            
 this mandate would allow easy integration between the Recorder's              
 Office and the Land Records Management system which the DNR is                
 attempting to put into place.                                                 
 Number 1100                                                                   
 MS. NORDALE said discussions also revealed that the third party               
 contractor, who maintains the grantor or grantee (indiscernible),             
 has done a program that does not work with a state laboratory                 
 records.  She said if the legislature enacts HB 438 and grants the            
 DNR the funds to do the programming which would integrate these two           
 systems, the state will get some control over the land and land               
 management systems.  She said HB 438 is essential to resource                 
 industries in the state because it helps retrieve land titles and             
 descriptions.  She concluded by saying that Earl Bipline (ph.)                
 supports her testimony.                                                       
 Number 1178                                                                   
 STEVEN BORELL, Executive Director, Alaska Miner's Association,                
 testified via teleconference offnet.  He said he is speaking for              
 the association and that they support HB 438.  He said the proposed           
 changes would improve the efficiency and flexibility of the data              
 recording system.                                                             
 Co-Chair Williams joined the committee meeting at 8:27 a.m.                   
 MR. BORELL said he sees HB 438 as one way in which the system can             
 be improved.                                                                  
 Number 1269                                                                   
 CO-CHAIR GREEN closed testimony and asked the committee if they had           
 any questions.                                                                
 REPRESENTATIVE KOTT said it appeared that HB 438 was a way in which           
 the state could update the antiquated computer programs.  He then             
 asked if there had been discussions with the Recorder's Office as             
 to why this change could not have been included in their capital              
 budget request rather than having a separate bill which mandates              
 this specific thing.                                                          
 Number 1299                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE BRICE said he could follow up on this question, but            
 said that although the Recorder's Office is already doing the                 
 location information there is nothing that mandates that service.             
 He added that a capital grant could be possible.                              
 Number 1346                                                                   
 MS. YOUNG said the location index is not just a software upgrade              
 problem.  "Two separate data bases and what the IRM fiscal note is            
 addressing is only the information within the department, it is not           
 going to change the structure or in any way affect the recording              
 indexing system that the third party contractor maintains.  What              
 this does is take back up information that the department itself              
 has and attempts to integrate that with other data bases in the               
 department.  So, we are not changing the recording system itself in           
 any way."                                                                     
 Number 1419                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE ALAN AUSTERMAN made a motion to move HB 438 with               
 attached fiscal note and individual recommendations.  Hearing no              
 objections HB 438 was so moved from the House Standing Committee on           
 SCR 24 - REESTABLISH ADFG DIVISION OF GAME                                  
 Number 1482                                                                   
 CO-CHAIR GREEN said the next item on the agenda was CSSCR 24,                 
 relating to a division of game in the Alaska Department of Fish and           
 Game and to management of game.                                               
 SENATOR BERT SHARP, sponsor of CSSCR 24 (RES), read from a sponsor            
 statement, "CSSCR 24 (RES) simply put is a request by the                     
 legislature, to the Governor, to remove the name Division of                  
 Wildlife Conservation (DWC) and replace it with the Division's                
 original name, Division of Game (DG).                                         
 The first whereas notes that, then Governor Cowper, in 1989 renamed           
 the Division of Game, the Division of Wildlife Conservation.                  
 What's in a name you say?  A rose by any other name smells just as            
 sweet you say.  The rose, Division of Game, that everyone could               
 recognize as responsible for the management of games resources, was           
 replaced by a broad array of flowering plants that emits such a               
 range of scents that every "posey" sniffer claims to detect their             
 favorite and demands that their sense of smell is the most accurate           
 and overpowering and should dictate the Division's actions.                   
 Unfortunately, the rose which represents the Division of Game's               
 commitment to the management of game, bases on sound scientific               
 data, has deteriorated to a mangy bramble.  The fragrance from this           
 bramble is now the least detectable element of the swirl of odors             
 emitting from the Division of Wildlife Conservation.  No longer is            
 the scientific management of Alaska's game resources the Division's           
 primary goal.                                                                 
 The goal of achieving and maintaining high sustainable population             
 levels of game animals for personal use harvest and viewing by                
 Alaskans is no longer a commitment of the Division.  No longer is             
 hands on active management of the resource considered their primary           
 Their mission now is more confused and is now being focused on the            
 management of people not of game."  He said the actions of the past           
 years back this statement up.  "They now advocate the need to                 
 manage public opinions as one of their responsibilities, such as              
 their newly proposed `human dimensions' program costing over a                
 quarter of million dollars."  He said there is an extensive public            
 process involved with the Board of Game to change any regulations             
 or establish new regulations which sometimes takes up to five years           
 of public input.  He said there is adequate public process without            
 the Division of Wildlife Conservation involving themselves in                 
 managing public opinion through the use of wildlife funds.                    
 "The fact is that 100 percent of this Divisions's budget is paid              
 for by taxes and fees on hunters, shooters, sportfishing activities           
 and their license fees and associated equipment that these people             
 The name change in 1989 to DIVISION OF WILDLIFE CONSERVATION                  
 encouraged the fragmentation of the Division's mission into many              
 parts, many with diametrically opposed goals.  The Division's                 
 resources have been redirected n many areas toward benefiting non-            
 hunters, even though those people do not contribute to the                    
 Division's budget one dollar.                                                 
 I submit that a name does carry a significant meaning.  Ask those             
 engaged in the commercial fishing industry, would they favor a                
 change of name from the Division of Commercial Fisheries to the               
 Division of Conservation of Marine Life?  I think not.  Let's send            
 this reasonable message to the Governor.  Let's get back to basics,           
 let's manage the resource as a resource for Alaskans, harvestable             
 resource as well as a viable viewing opportunities for all.  Let's            
 re-establish the Division of Game.                                            
 Number 1730                                                                   
 EDDIE GRASSER, Member, Alaska Outdoor Council, was next to testify.           
 He said the council supports CSSCR 24 (RES) for a variety of                  
 reasons.  He said, when the name change occurred, some members                
 supported the change, others reluctantly agreed and others opposed            
 it.  He said the practices of the Division of Wildlife Conservation           
 have lead to a determination that it was bad to change the name.              
 Number 1798                                                                   
 MR. GRASSER said there are a lot of hunters that belong to the                
 council.  He said there is a lot of frustration regarding the                 
 management policies within the DFG.  He said there are game                   
 populations no longer being managed actively by the DFG and the               
 opportunity for human harvest is diminishing.  He said, Unit 13 in            
 the Nelchina Basin, has a high number of moose, although it has               
 decreased from 22,000 to 18,000.  He said only 750 moose have been            
 allowed to be harvested over the past four years.  He said the                
 small harvesting number is because of other species who hunt moose            
 in the area.  He added that the DFG has liberalized the bear                  
 harvest in the basin.  He said, in the McGrath area, there is one             
 wolf for every 12 moose.  He said this situation has lead to a high           
 frustration level due to the lack of management which he said had             
 been formulated from public misconceptions.                                   
 Number 1812                                                                   
 Representative Barnes joined the committee meeting at 8:40 a.m.               
 MR. GRASSER said anti-hunting groups have pushed for the so-called            
 "balance" in the management of wildlife.  He said, while these                
 groups continually call for a balance, they refuse to acknowledge             
 that two-thirds of Alaska is either closed to hunting or is off               
 limits to any type of meaningful state management because this land           
 is owned by the federal government.  He said these groups feel that           
 only a tiny portion of the land is being managed for their use, but           
 added that the federal land is huge and that it is being managed              
 for this group's use.                                                         
 Number 1889                                                                   
 MR. GRASSER said one of the issues that brought the management                
 issue to a head was the Payne bear hunt in McNeil River Game                  
 Refuge.  He said, by the director's own admission, the Division of            
 Wildlife Conservation supported the closure of the bear hunt                  
 because of public perception.  He said this was the wrong thing for           
 the Division of Wildlife Conservation to do as hunting in this area           
 has gone on for many years.  He said the Division of Wildlife                 
 Conservation should have begun a program of public education to               
 demonstrate that viewing and hunting are compatible.  He said as a            
 result of this policy, the frustration of the hunting community has           
 continued to grow.                                                            
 Number 1931                                                                   
 MR. GRASSER said the state needs to recognize that the Division of            
 Wildlife Conservation is fully funded by hunters and trappers.  He            
 said there is dialogue in the papers, et cetera in which anti-                
 hunters argue that their money is not being spent wisely.  He said            
 it is not this group's money, it is the money of the hunters and it           
 should be spent in a better way.                                              
 Number 1946                                                                   
 MR. GRASSER referred to other bills introduced by Senator Sharp               
 which have been labeled "intensive management."  He said it is not            
 "intensive management," but a return to management.  He said a                
 balance has been struck and reiterated the federal land component.            
 Number 1971                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT OGAN asked how many acres are off limits to              
 hunting in Alaska.                                                            
 Number 1979                                                                   
 MR. GRASSER said he believed it was a little over 50 million acres            
 that are completely closed to hunting.                                        
 Representative Nicholia joined the committee meeting at 8:35 a.m.             
 Number 1983                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE OGAN asked if these acres are managed by the federal           
 government which has no management of game policy.                            
 Number 1997                                                                   
 MR. GRASSER concurred and added that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife               
 Service and the National Park Service have moved towards a                    
 biodiversity management scheme which is a "hands off scheme" and              
 does not recognize the human interaction within the natural                   
 Number 2019                                                                   
 GERON BRUCE, Legislative Liaison, Office of the Commissioner,                 
 Department of Fish and Game, was next to testify.  He said there is           
 significance in a name and gave information on the view of the                
 Division and Department on why the present name is appropriate.  He           
 said the responsibility for managing the state's wildlife resources           
 comes from the state's constitution.  In the constitution, it                 
 mandates management of wildlife species for the maximum benefit of            
 all Alaskans.  He said there are 520 wildlife species in Alaska, 70           
 of which are hunted species.  The Division of Wildlife Conservation           
 spends 95 percent of its budget managing these hunted species.  He            
 said the other 4.5 percent goes to the wildlife education program,            
 endangered species program and to the wildlife viewing program.  He           
 said these small programs offer benefits to the hunting community.            
 MR. BRUCE said the wildlife education staff works directly with the           
 teachers in the educational system, grades kindergarten through               
 high school, in developing wildlife curriculum which educates                 
 people about the benefits of wildlife, how to preserve the species            
 and the ethics of hunting and using the wildlife.  During this                
 interaction, the staff discovered information, in the curriculum              
 which was anti-hunting and incorrect.  He said the staff worked               
 with the Department of Education in the Anchorage school system to            
 remove that material from the curriculum and had information                  
 substituted which correctly portrayed the ethics of hunting and how           
 it relates to the conservation ethic that the state supports.                 
 Number 2119                                                                   
 MR. BRUCE said the Endangered Species Program that the Division of            
 Wildlife Conservation oversees has an excellent record.  Since the            
 legislature passed that act, no species in Alaska, that Alaska                
 manages, has been listed on the Endangered Species Act and several            
 species have been removed.                                                    
 Number 2135                                                                   
 MR. BRUCE said, it is the Division of Wildlife Conservation belief,           
 that management of game involves the management of people.  He said           
 this is why Division of Wildlife Conservation has a Board of Game             
 system and intensive public involvement in the regulatory process.            
 He said he believed a lot of the issue was a matter of emphasis and           
 perception.  He said, some people believe that, there should be               
 more emphasis in certain areas as compared to other areas.  He said           
 there is always room for discussion and a difference of opinion on            
 those matters, but the Division of Wildlife Conservation works hard           
 to support hunting.  He said of the 180 employees in Division of              
 Wildlife Conservation, only five work on non-consumptive use                  
 programs.  He said the Division of Wildlife Conservation feels that           
 this is a reasonable balance in line with the state's constitution            
 and the mandate to serve all the people.                                      
 Number 2183                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE RAMONA BARNES asked him to repeat his references to            
 the constitution.                                                             
 Number 2194                                                                   
 MR. BRUCE, "Through the Chair, Representative Barnes, yes, ma'am I            
 did refer to Article 8 of the state constitution which is the ...             
 which talks about the common use, maximizing the uses of wildlife             
 for all of the people subject to preferences among beneficial uses.           
 Which is something that this body and the Board of Game is charged            
 with determining those preferences."                                          
 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES, "since he has (indiscernible )correctly                
 portrayed what the constitution says, subject to preference among             
 beneficial uses.  It does not say anything about subject to                   
 preference among beneficial users, does it?"                                  
 Number 2230                                                                   
 MR. BRUCE, "Through the Chair, Representative Barnes, no the                  
 language is uses."                                                            
 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES, "Thank you."                                           
 Number 2240                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE IRENE NICHOLIA asked what the Division of Wildlife             
 Conservation doing about the wolf problem in McGrath.                         
 Number 2249                                                                   
 MR. BRUCE said the issue of predator control is the most                      
 controversial issue in wildlife management.  He said the Division             
 of Wildlife Conservation and DFG is concerned about the high ratio            
 of wolves to moose in the area and that options are being explored            
 to correct that situation.  He said, if a program of predator                 
 control were chosen, "it would have to go through the Board of Game           
 in the area, approved, and then it would also have to meet the                
 Governor's criteria for predator control program."  He said that              
 staff from the Division of Wildlife Conservation have gone out to             
 the area and said that one of the human dimension efforts was                 
 directed at McGrath to find out what they recommended doing.                  
 Number 2300                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE NICHOLIA asked what the timeline would be on this              
 Number 2302                                                                   
 MR. BRUCE said he could not lay out a specific timetable.  He said            
 he would need to contact the director of the Division, to see if              
 there was a proposed timetable and what it would be.                          
 Number 2313                                                                   
 CO-CHAIR GREEN asked if it would roughly be months or years.                  
 Number 2319                                                                   
 MR. BRUCE said any type of predator control needs to occur during             
 the winter in a period of snow.  He said it would probably not be             
 possible to do anything this year.                                            
 Number 2334                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES, "Mr. Chairman, through the chair, Mr. Bruce,           
 would you tell me who establishes the policy which is implemented             
 for your department?"                                                         
 Number 2344                                                                   
 MR. BRUCE, "Through the chair, Representative Barnes, yes, ma'am,             
 the policies that the Department implements are established by the            
 Legislature through its statutory authority and then through the              
 Board of Game through its regulatory authority."                              
 Number 2356                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES, "What was that statement you made about the            
 Governor, subject to the Governor's policies?"                                
 Number 2359                                                                   
 MR. BRUCE, "Well, the Governor has laid out a criteria that he                
 thinks a predator control must meet in order to be implemented and            
 that is what I was referring to."                                             
 Number 2365                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES, "Mr. Chairman, since the Legislature and               
 only the Legislature, through its statutes, regulations that we               
 promulgate in the form of law that is not to be superseded by the             
 Departments, plus the budget process, can you tell me how the                 
 Governor can override those laws?"                                            
 Number 2380                                                                   
 MR. BRUCE, "Through the chair, Representative Barnes, I don't                 
 believe the Governor is overriding the laws of that the Legislature           
 has passed.  I believe the Governor is using his discretion as the            
 chief executive to direct policy in a way that he thinks is                   
 consistent with the public good and the desires of the Legislature            
 and the Board of Game."                                                       
 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES, "MR. Chairman, that to me, and I have been             
 here a long time, is one of the worst statements that I have ever             
 heard made to this Legislature.  The Governor has no authority                
 whatsoever to establish policy.  He has the authority to carry out            
 what is in the law, he cannot make up the law and he cannot make up           
 his own administrative direction.  And I have known more than one             
 Governor to be sued over that.  And that is a terrible statement              
 you made and Mr. Chairman, I want it off the record verbatim."                
 A discussion ensued about the issue of including this section of              
 the meeting verbatim in the minutes.                                          
 TAPE 96-41, SIDE B                                                            
 Number 0000                                                                   
 CO-CHAIR GREEN referred to the comment about the number of federal            
 lands that are protected and off-limits to hunters, he asked if the           
 state was being overly protective of state lands.                             
 Number 0019                                                                   
 MR. BRUCE said he could provide information on the number of                  
 participants in wildlife viewing.  He said Division of Wildlife               
 Conservation conducted a large effort to try and get feedback from            
 hunters and non-hunters and their uses of wildlife and said that              
 study provided information.  He said there is also information on             
 specific areas where are those activities are very prominent such             
 as McNeill River, Walrus Island, Potter Marsh and Kramer's field.             
 He said, as a general comment, the activity in those areas is quite           
 high and there are many people participating in viewing as well as            
 hunting activities.                                                           
 Number 0060                                                                   
 CO-CHAIR GREEN asked if most of the people are viewing in                     
 established viewing areas as opposed to those hunters who go out              
 into areas that would not be accessed by the average viewer.                  
 Number 0069                                                                   
 MR. BRUCE said one of the growing elements of the visitor industry            
 is guided trips to view wild lands.  He said there are operators in           
 many areas of the state who take people out into remote areas.                
 Number 0095                                                                   
 CO-CHAIR GREEN asked if the name was changed, from Division of                
 Wildlife Conservation to Division of Game, would there be an                  
 adverse affect on people wishing to view wildlife.                            
 Number 0114                                                                   
 MR. BRUCE said this issue is one of perception and message.  He               
 said a name should be used which most accurately describes the                
 broad mission to serve everyone.  He said the Division and the                
 Department will still do their best to serve the multiplicity of              
 uses.  He said most of the expenditures, within the Division of               
 Wildlife Conservation, go to the hunted species.  He then                     
 reiterated that even some of the activities that are not                      
 specifically directed to hunters, can have a beneficial affect by             
 providing correct information to young people regarding the                   
 positive benefits of hunting and countering misinformation.  He               
 said the program, in total, is very supportive of the hunting                 
 community and hunting as a legitimate use of Alaska's wildlife.  He           
 said this policy would not change.                                            
 MR. BRUCE said the issues involving programmatic decisions within             
 the Department relates more to the funding situation.  He said some           
 general fund monies supported a few of these activities, such as              
 the wildlife education program, until very recently.  He said, as             
 general funds are being reduced throughout government and the                 
 funding sources available through the DFG fund and the Federal Aid            
 and Wildlife Restoration Program have increased, there has been a             
 tendency to use those funds in lieu of declining general funds.               
 MR. BRUCE said the Division of Wildlife Conservation will continue            
 with its program under whatever name.  He said the legislature will           
 decide what the perception and the message is that the state wants            
 to present to the public.                                                     
 Number 0204                                                                   
 CO-CHAIR GREEN expressed concern that there was a correlation                 
 between the focus change of the Division of Wildlife Conservation             
 and the change of the name from Division of Game to Division of               
 Wildlife Conservation.  He asked if this question had been                    
 previously asked to the director and asked where he was.                      
 Number 0236                                                                   
 MR. BRUCE said these questions were answered.  He said the director           
 is at the Board of Game meeting.  He said he tried to summarize the           
 same arguments that the director or the deputy director had made in           
 earlier testimony, especially testimony given on the Senate side.             
 Number 0257                                                                   
 CO-CHAIR GREEN asked if the name was changed to Division of Game,             
 if the focus of the Division would change.                                    
 Number 0273                                                                   
 MR. BRUCE said it is a question of perception and people might see            
 things differently.  He said, "I don't think you can really see a             
 significant difference in the way the Division spends its monies."            
 He said the non-hunting provisions within the Division are a small            
 part.  He said most of the effort is directed at the hunted                   
 activities.  He questioned whether the name were changed if it                
 would cause a reduction in the 4.5 percent.  He said there are                
 other factors driving the policy and they have little to do with              
 the name of the Division.                                                     
 Number 0312                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE DON LONG asked if the Board of Game was under the              
 Division of Wildlife Conservation.                                            
 Number 0326                                                                   
 MR. BRUCE said the Board of Game is organized administratively                
 under the Division of Administration and the Commissioner's Office,           
 not under the Division of Wildlife Conservation.  He said the board           
 is semi-autonomous and consists of seven people who are appointed             
 by the Governor and confirmed through the Legislature.  He said the           
 board makes the difficult decisions of how the resources are used             
 among the various competing users and serves as a way to bring the            
 public into the management decisions made by the Division.  He                
 concluded that the board is housed administratively in the                    
 department, but it functions as an independent entity in the                  
 decisions it makes.                                                           
 Number 0373                                                                   
 CO-CHAIR GREEN clarified that Mr. Bruce had not been with the                 
 Division when the name change was made.  He then asked if there had           
 been a change of direction when the name change occurred as alluded           
 to by the sponsor.                                                            
 Number 0388                                                                   
 MR. BRUCE said he had talked with the director, the deputy director           
 and other staff who do not believe that there has been a change of            
 focus.  They believe that the reason the name was changed is                  
 because it more accurately reflected the mission of the Division at           
 that period in time.  He said it was more an alignment of name with           
 function, at that period, rather than the signaling of any change.            
 Number 0422                                                                   
 CO-CHAIR GREEN asked him to confirm this statement in the context             
 of what the sponsor and witnesses believe.                                    
 Number 0426                                                                   
 MR. BRUCE said yes it was true, "with all due respect to those                
 individuals."  He referred to his earlier statement that people               
 perceive things differently.  He said the perception of staff,                
 within the Division, was that the name change did not signal a                
 change of focus.  He said it is hard to measure perception and to             
 determine who is correct.                                                     
 Number 0457                                                                   
 CO-CHAIR GREEN asked if the name were changed to Division of Game             
 if it would merely be a perception change.                                    
 MR. BRUCE said that was correct.                                              
 Number 0463                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE LONG questioned if the name change involved in CSSCR
 24 (RES) would be considered a directive from the Legislature to              
 change direction.                                                             
 Number 0492                                                                   
 MR. BRUCE said it is not that the Division is not interested and              
 responsive to legislative direction, but clarified that CSSCR 24              
 (RES) requests a name change and sends a message about the                    
 Legislature's perception that the program is not orientated towards           
 a certain kind of emphasis.  He said the Division would take the              
 message to heart.  He repeated that the small amount spent towards            
 non-hunting and said before that amount was reduced, the Division             
 would want to meet with the Legislature to make sure that was the             
 desired direction.  He said the resolution is a request, it does              
 require or mandate the Department to do anything.                             
 Number 0556                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES said the Legislature is charged, by the                 
 constitution, to manage the fish and the wildlife in the state of             
 Alaska.  She said the Legislature delegates their authority to                
 carry out the laws they promulgate.  She said the Legislative                 
 Branch promulgate and establishes in the policy to the Board of               
 Game.  She said the board is not the ultimate authority, the                  
 Legislature is.                                                               
 Number 0598                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES made a motion to move CSCSR 24 (RES) with               
 individual recommendations.  Hearing no objections CSSCR 24 (RES)             
 was moved from the House Standing Committee on Resources.                     
 SB 240 - MINING BONDING POOL                                                
 Number 0661                                                                   
 ANNETTE KREITZER, Legislative Aide for Senator Leman and the Senate           
 Resources Committee, testified on SB 240.  She said the difference            
 between SB 240 and HB 439, clarifying that she had not seen the               
 latest version of HB 240, is that the two versions are virtually              
 the same.  She said the exception is that the Chair of the Senate             
 Resources Committee choose not to include the Surface Coal Mining             
 Advisory Commission because of the associated cost and the                    
 likelihood that the issues raised can be addressed by the Alaska              
 Minerals Commission.  She said, upon testimony on the Mining                  
 Bonding Pool in the Senate Resources Committee by the Alaska                  
 Minerals Commission, the commission said they could address those             
 issues.  She said the Senate felt that now was not a good time to             
 introduce a new commission and they felt that the Alaska Mineral              
 Commission could address it.                                                  
 Number 0724                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE KOTT clarified that SB 240 would not include                   
 language allowing the commission and said HB 439 has been stripped            
 of all but the commission and had a zero fiscal note when it was              
 passed out of the House Labor and Commerce Committee last week.               
 Number 0747                                                                   
 MS. KREITZER said the Senate Resources Chair did consider that                
 possibility and made an explicit decision not to include it in SB
 CO-CHAIR GREEN asked if that was because of the fiscal note.                  
 Number 0760                                                                   
 MS. KREITZER said it was excluded because of a fiscal note concern            
 and the fact that the Alaska Mineral's Commission indicated that              
 they considered the work within the realm of their                            
 Number 0785                                                                   
 CO-CHAIR GREEN asked if the Senate Resources Chair realized that a            
 zero fiscal note was possible would he still have concerns about              
 the inclusion of the commission.                                              
 MS. KREITZER said she would have to understand the need for the               
 commission as opposed to the Alaska Mineral's Commission.  She said           
 she was not privy to the testimony of the House Labor and Commerce            
 and asked Representative Kott to explain what occurred.                       
 Number 0812                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE KOTT said, generally, the premise was that a                   
 separate commission was established with a sunset date of two                 
 years.  He said three members would be appointed by the Governor,             
 three members appointed by the President of the Senate and three              
 members appointed by the House Speaker.  The House Labor and                  
 Commerce Committee felt the work that was charged in HB 240 would             
 in fact be done by the committee.  He said the Alaska Mineral's               
 Commission had some opportunity, as the sunset date is several                
 years down the road and the date it would probably be extended                
 whereby this task force or commission would just have two years to            
 accomplish their work.  He said the industry testimony agreed that            
 this commission was needed.                                                   
 Number 0863                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE OGAN said he had concerns about including a                    
 commission in the context of adding another layer of bureaucracy.             
 he said he agreed with SB 240.                                                
 Number 0901                                                                   
 STEVEN BORELL, Executive Director, Alaska Miner's Association,                
 testified via teleconference from Anchorage.  He said the                     
 association supports SB 240.  He said, when the original state                
 reclamation statute was established, coal mining was recognized as            
 something that should be added in the future.  He said, at the                
 time, the sponsor of the reclamation bill, Representative Betty               
 Fahrenkamp, specifically decided not to include coal and left the             
 word, "may" because she did not want to get the whole coal issues             
 in with the reclamation bill.  He said the reclamation bill was an            
 offshoot of several previous pieces of legislation and it was                 
 difficult enough to get a statute in place which met both the needs           
 of reclamation of state lands and have a reasonable bill.  The                
 original bill would have had greater difficulties passing if coal             
 was included.                                                                 
 Number 1003                                                                   
 ROBERT B. STILES, President, DRVen Corporation, President, Alaska             
 Coal Association, was next to testify.  He said his corporation is            
 in strong support of SB 240, as they were in support of HB 240.  He           
 said no Western coal producers has ever defaulted on a reclamation            
 bond.  He added that typical reclamation bonds for surface mining             
 operations are dictated by surface mining statute and is typically            
 on the level of $5,000 to $10,000 an acre and said SB 240 would do            
 nothing to change that.  He said the net effect will, not only                
 increased the asset value of the state bonding pool with the                  
 addition of coal mining, but the income to the bonding pool will              
 also increase.  He said, given the fact that no one has ever                  
 defaulted on a bond, the risk level of the bond will actually                 
 decrease.  He said this is a win-win situation for everyone.                  
 Number 1076                                                                   
 MR. STILES said that SB 240 will assure everyone that bonding is              
 available for, what will typically be, greenfield coal developments           
 in Alaska.  He said greeenfields are atypical of coal developments            
 in the rest of the nation.  He said, usually, coal is developed in            
 areas where an existing infrastructure is already in place.                   
 Number 1104                                                                   
 MR. STILES referred to the question raised by Representative Kott             
 and said that his corporation is in support of the temporary Coal             
 Commission.  He said that particular commission is now present in             
 an alternative bill, CSHB 439 and is important because the funding            
 for the regulatory program, which controls coal surface mining in             
 the state of Alaska, was at some degree of risk.  He said when the            
 Federal Surface Mining bill was enacted, Alaska in its unique                 
 circumstance was not considered.  As a result of that recognition,            
 a special study was conducted, in 1980 by the National Science                
 Foundation, which found that many of the regulations associated               
 with the federal bill are not applicable in Alaska and recommended            
 that Alaska be granted latitude in developing its regulatory                  
 program which governs surface mining in the state.  He said, for              
 unknown reasons or obscure reasons, the regulatory program                    
 developed for the state did not take advantage of the latitude that           
 was offered as a result of this study.                                        
 MR. STILES said one of the missions of this commission, were it to            
 be established, would be to re-examine the regulations in regards             
 to this study along with information that has been developed over             
 the last 15 years in order to recraft and re-evaluate the surface             
 mining regulatory program as it applies in the context of the                 
 state.  He said this requires the commitment of some resources and            
 said the industry is willing to commit the resources on their                 
 behalf to that commission and would support the state doing the               
 Number 1270                                                                   
 CO-CHAIR GREEN referred to the change on page one from "may" to               
 "shall" and asked if an individual who wishes to mine gets to                 
 develop a mine as a result of this language change.  He suggested             
 that this individual might be someone who should have a bond.  He             
 asked if this concern was shared by the industry.                             
 Number 1332                                                                   
 MR. STILES said the concern is the one inch thick regulatory                  
 program.  He said surface coal is unique in the resource industries           
 in that it is the only one with an entire regulatory structure                
 developed for it alone.  He said bonding is one of the hurdles                
 typically associated with the opening of a greenfield coal mine.              
 He said working your way through a very complex regulatory program            
 and permitting process is difficult and cited an example of an                
 application consisting of a 35, three inch, three ring notebooks              
 thick document.  He said this application is a significant document           
 which represents several million dollars.  He said an individual,             
 that gets through the process to the point where he is at the                 
 bonding stage, deserves the mine.                                             
 Number 1429                                                                   
 CO-CHAIR GREEN referred to the fluctuation in coal prices and asked           
 about an influx of miners into areas.  He then asked if only big              
 mining companies would be involved.                                           
 Number 1481                                                                   
 MR. STILES said the bonds, in the state bonding pool, are just like           
 bonds that you would get through regular surety.  The bonds are               
 secured with some hard fast asset.  He said if an operator had a              
 bond called on him, he would never get a surface mining permit                
 anywhere in the country which is a fairly significant deterrent.              
 He said the fact, that the bonds are secured with assets in the               
 state, reduces the risk of a call on the bond pool.  He said the              
 bonds are larger, but the assets which have to be pledged to secure           
 the bonds are larger which creates a balance.                                 
 Number 1551                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE KOTT made a motion to move SB 240 with zero fiscal             
 note and individual recommendations.  Hearing no objections SB 240            
 was moved from the House Standing Committee on Resources.                     
 SB 69 - REPORTING OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE                                    
 Number 1594                                                                   
 CO-CHAIR GREEN said the next item on the agenda was SB69 (RES) an             
 act relating to hazardous chemicals, hazardous materials, and                 
 hazardous waste.                                                              
 MS. KREITZER said CSSB 69 (RES) deals with regulatory reform and              
 can be a confusing bill to look at.  She said this bill has been              
 two years in the making, starting after SB 33 passed the                      
 legislature two years ago.  She said CSSB 69 (RES) is an attempt to           
 get at all these reporting requirements for businesses with regards           
 to hazardous chemicals, materials and waste.                                  
 Number 1664                                                                   
 MS. KREITZER read from the sponsor statement, "As we downsize                 
 government, and make it more user friendly, we have to assess the             
 efficacy of current statues and regulations."  She said that is               
 part of what has been done with CSSB 69 (RES).  She said there is             
 nothing that can be done with the federal requirements and CSSB 69            
 (RES) has focused on state programs to coordinate it with the local           
 reporting requirements that exist.  She said in discussions with              
 the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC), the fire                  
 departments, the state fire marshall, the question addressed was              
 what is nice to know as compared to what information is needed.               
 She said, as government is downsized, information cannot be                   
 requested which is not going to be used.  She said CSSB 69 (RES)              
 tries to get at the heart of what it was, why the laws were passed            
 to begin with and what it was that they were looking at.                      
 Number 1720                                                                   
 MS. KREITZER said the Senate Resources Committee changed CSSB 69              
 (RES) so that if this bill were passed there would be nothing that            
 exists in the law more stringent than the federal reporting                   
 requirements. She referred to Section 1, Title 18, and said AS                
 18.70.90 refers to the state Fire Marshals Placarding Program.  She           
 said this program, established in 1986 or 1987, charged the state             
 fire marshall with going out and putting a placard on every                   
 building outside the municipality of Anchorage to denote what fire            
 hazards or hazardous chemicals were within that building.  Since              
 enactment of that program, 14 facilities outside the municipality             
 of Anchorage, have been placarded by the state Fire Marshall.  She            
 said this is not an effective program, the state fire marshall                
 recognizes that it is not an effective program, and CSSB 69 (RES)             
 deletes this program.  She said in Section 1, where you see AS                
 18.70.090, it deletes the portion on line 11 referring to the state           
 Fire Marshall's Placarding Program.  She said Section 2 does the              
 same thing, it deletes reference to the state Fire Marshals                   
 Placarding Program.                                                           
 Number 1822                                                                   
 MS. KREITZER said there is another placarding program, the                    
 municipal placarding program, which was established in 1968.  This            
 program allowed municipalities to create their own placarding                 
 program for their fire departments.  She said, currently, the                 
 municipality of Anchorage is the only municipality which has the              
 placarding program.  She said discussions were held with the                  
 municipality of Anchorage to find out what would work with them.              
 She said one form would be developed to meet federal, state and               
 local reporting requirements.  Instead of the Division of Fire                
 Prevention creating the program the form would be approved by the             
 Alaska State Emergency Response Commission (SERC.)  She said this             
 commission is made up of nine state departments and seven public              
 members and its mission, under federal law, is to receive reports             
 of hazardous substances.  She said it makes sense for the                     
 commission to receive the reporting forms and to approve it.                  
 Number 1977                                                                   
 Senator Leman joined the meeting, but declined to give testimony.             
 MS. KREITZER said that Senator Leman served on the Anchorage Local            
 Emergency Planning Committee and knows this subject very well.                
 MS. KREITZER said, in Section 3, page two, CSSB 69 (RES) amends the           
 municipal placarding program to "pave the way" for one form which             
 would receive approval from SERC.                                             
 Number 2029                                                                   
 MS. KREITZER said CSSB 69 (RES) makes changes at the state level.             
 She said SERC, or a municipality, is allowed to remove a substance            
 or add a substance.  She said the adding of a substance is under              
 federal law.  She referred to Section 4, lines 25 through 31 and              
 said this was added because the federal government went through a             
 change in what it calls these substances and the language in CSSB
 69 (RES) reflects these changes.  She said the language includes              
 poison gas hazard division number 2.3 and poison 6.1, explosives              
 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3 excluding smokeless gunpowder, blackpowder and              
 ammunition.  She said those exclusions were made because first                
 responders are not stupid and if the sign says it is a gun shop,              
 there is the expectation that there will be gunpowder and that it             
 would not need to be reported.                                                
 Number 2090                                                                   
 MS. KREITZER said the same thing occurs on page three, lines 2 and            
 3, where the language, "consumer commodity of a hazardous material"           
 was deleted. She said this is the "K-Mart" placard, because                   
 consumer commodity is targeted at the department stores where they            
 have substances such as weed killer.  She said the fire department            
 should know that if you are going to a huge department store there            
 would be various chemicals located at that location.  She said this           
 type of placard was not a federal requirement, so it was deleted.             
 Number 2130                                                                   
 MS. KREITZER said hazardous chemicals or hazardous material, other            
 than the one described in Section 1, if handled in a single day of            
 an amount equal to or greater than 10,000 pounds, "this change was            
 made in the Senate Resources Committee and again we are talking               
 about the state placarding program."  She said this brings the                
 municipal placarding program, Anchorage being the only one, into              
 alignment with the federal reporting requirement so that they are             
 not asking for something in excess of the federal requirement.                
 Number 2168                                                                   
 MS. KREITZER said "compressed gases" was deleted in the Senate                
 Resource Committee as it is not a federal requirement.  She said,             
 currently, the municipality does require this to be reported.  Her            
 understanding, upon discussions with the drafting attorney, is that           
 since they went through a public process to add that to their                 
 program this revision in CSSB 69 (RES) will not affect the                    
 municipality of Anchorage's program.  She said anyone who would               
 want to come and start a new program would have to go through a               
 whole public process of adding compressed gases.                              
 Number 2206                                                                   
 MS. KREITZER referred to Section 5, regarding inspections and                 
 penalties, and said it is current law under the municipal                     
 placarding program.  She said it allows municipalities to conduct             
 inspections, establish and impose penalties.  She said CSSB 69                
 (RES) just removes reference to the state Fire Marshall's Program             
 which is being deleted under the bill.                                        
 Number 2228                                                                   
 MS. KREITZER said, "Section 6, the same thing, current law we are             
 just deleting the state Fire Marshall's Placarding Program under              
 Section 6."                                                                   
 Number 2238                                                                   
 MS. KREITZER referred to Section 7, and said the DEC is currently             
 the department that sends out the Tier 2 reporting forms for                  
 hazardous substances.  She said, it makes sense to have DEC hand              
 out the new steam-lined forms, since they are handing out the                 
 current form.  She said the reference to the Division of Fire                 
 Prevention is deleted.                                                        
 Number 2272                                                                   
 MS. KREITZER referred to Section 8, Section 9 and Section 10 and              
 said all of these reporting requirements have had their definition            
 of what a hazardous chemical is was set by various agencies.  She             
 said CSSB 69 (RES) tries to reference all of those chemicals so               
 that on this one form, what you are reporting and the thresholds              
 for reporting are all the same.  She said if you are a business               
 that operates within the municipality of Anchorage or outside the             
 municipality than you must report, under federal law, hazardous               
 chemicals, materials or waste on the one single form provided by              
 the DEC.                                                                      
 Number 2336                                                                   
 MS. KREITZER referred to Section 11, and said it repeals the state            
 Fire Marshall's Placarding Program.  She said those are definition            
 sections under Title 29, which is the municipal placarding program.           
 She said CSSB 69 (RES) is a complicated bill in that it has to                
 reference so many different statutes and sections of federal law.             
 Number 2380                                                                   
 MS. KREITZER said the Department of Law (DOL) has suggested an                
 amendment, located in the committee packet, which explains the                
 settlement of the Toksook Bay case.  She said the DOL feels that              
 CSSB 69 (RES) is an appropriate vehicle for that amendment.                   
 Number 2430                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE OGAN referred to the portion about eliminating the             
 placards for compressed gases and asked if this was an on-sight               
 placard that would be used by emergency responders and for people             
 working around these gases.                                                   
 TAPE 96-42, SIDE A                                                            
 Number 0000                                                                   
 MS. KREITZER said, in discussions with local fire departments from            
 Mat-Su, Kenai, Kodiak and Anchorage, this elimination was the                 
 result.  She said when Title 3 was passed and the state of Alaska             
 created SERC and the local Emergency Planning Committee, the state            
 provided computers to many of these local Emergency Planning                  
 Committees.  These computers are shared with local fire                       
 departments.  She said the local level is working with businesses             
 so that they report compressed gases, and do on-site visits.  She             
 said the fire departments say they are doing well with getting                
 information once the businesses understand why the fire department            
 wants the information.  She said the information is forthcoming,              
 including information that businesses are not required to report.             
 She said the responders have this information on computer.                    
 MS. KREITZER said CSSB 69 (RES) is working towards a goal, outside            
 of this bill, is to get fire departments to a place where police              
 departments are at now.  So that when fire departments arrive at a            
 scene they already know what is there.  She said it is not possible           
 to update a placard on a consistent basis.  She said the placard              
 indicates the whole essence of what is in the building, but don't             
 really tell detailed information about substances in the building.            
 She said moving to a computerized process is probably the best                
 thing for the fire departments to do as well as focusing on the               
 pre-fire planning efforts which would note the compressed gases and           
 other types of things.                                                        
 Number 070                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE OGAN said his background included fire protection in           
 a small, non-profit fire department and said the less organized,              
 volunteer fire departments might not have the resources to do pre-            
 fire planning such as going in and surveying the buildings to                 
 record things.  He expressed concern, regarding the system referred           
 to by Ms. Kreitzer, for these smaller fire departments who don't              
 have the resources to do this system and who might need these on-             
 site placards.                                                                
 Number 0250                                                                   
 MS. KREITZER said that if these smaller departments do not have the           
 time to go and do pre-fire planning surveys, they don't have time             
 to go out and do placards.  She said the State Fire Marshall has              
 only placarded 15 buildings and has no intention of expanding the             
 program and said there will be no additional money from the state             
 to do so.  She said local fire departments should do local training           
 and use those resources to do pre-fire surveys.  She related her              
 experience of living in a small community and said that if she was            
 going to be the first response she would want to know what was in             
 that building before she responded to the emergency.                          
 Number 0328                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES made a motion to adopt Amendment 1 as                   
 proposed by the DOL.                                                          
 CO-CHAIR GREEN requested that the DOL speak to the amendment first.           
 Number 0390                                                                   
 MARIE SANSONE, Assistant Attorney General, Natural Resources                  
 Section, Civil Division, Department of Law, requested that Mr.                
 Kennedy comment on this proposed amendment.                                   
 Number 0424                                                                   
 CHRISTOPHER KENNEDY, Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division,              
 Department of Law, was next to testify.  He said the proposed                 
 Amendment 1 is part of the Administration's response to the lessons           
 learned in the Toksook Bay lawsuit.  He said this was a case in               
 which the state received a school from the Bureau of Indian Affairs           
 (BIA) in 1989.  He said, in 1990, an old fuel pipe gave way which             
 caused a large spill affecting the village water system.  He said             
 the state and the lower TSUK school district were both strictly and           
 jointly liable for damages from that spill.  He said the case has             
 now been settled and there is a contempt judgement against the                
 state for just under $1.3 million, currently being sought in                  
 appropriations by the legislature this session.                               
 MR. KENNEDY said, in response to this experience, both the                    
 Administration and some members of the legislature feel this is an            
 inappropriate arena for strict liability and so the proposed                  
 amendment states that the state would be immune from strict and               
 joint liability for environmental releases at Rural Education                 
 Attendance Area (REAA) school sites.  He said the amendment has a             
 very narrow scope, both the state and school districts remain                 
 liable if they are at fault (indiscernible due to coughing) "at               
 fault and it only applies to damages."  The state and school                  
 district would maintain their responsibilities to clean up any                
 spills that occur.                                                            
 CO-CHAIR GREEN referred to the motion to adopt Amendment 1.                   
 Hearing no objection Amendment 1 was adopted to CSSB 69 (RES) by              
 the House Standing Committee on Resources.                                    
 Number 0620                                                                   
 RITA VENTA, Anchorage Fire Department, testified via teleconference           
 from Anchorage.  She said the Anchorage Fire Department has worked            
 with Ms. Kreitzer for two years trying to put CSSB 69 (RES)                   
 together.  She said Anchorage has its own program of placarding               
 since 1986.  She said CSSB 69 (RES) affects some of those reporting           
 Number 0660                                                                   
 MS. VENTA referred to Section 4, and said that the Anchorage Fire             
 Department requires the reporting of compressed gases within 250              
 feet or more.  She said she believes this language is important to            
 keep in the bill and requested that this language not be deleted.             
 She then referred to Section 9 and Section 10 and asked that the              
 language, "or by a municipality for purposes of its own reporting             
 program", be retained to allow the current program to be                      
 Number 0727                                                                   
 MS. VENTA said that when Section 4 was being explained, she thought           
 existing programs will stay the way they are and new programs will            
 comply with CSSB 69 (RES).  She asked if this was true.                       
 Number 0743                                                                   
 MS. KREITZER referred to Section 4, and said after checking with              
 the drafting attorney the current program as it exists in                     
 Anchorage, because of the public process which it has undergone,              
 will not change or be altered by CSSB 69 (RES).  She said, as a               
 result of this, on page three, lines 10 through 12, the delineation           
 of the language "and compressed gases equal to or more than 200               
 cubic feet" would not impact Anchorage.  She said this language was           
 getting at the difference between federal and state law.  The                 
 feeling of the Senate Resources Committee was that the legislature            
 should not require anything more stringent than the federal law and           
 this is the reason why this language was deleted.  She said this              
 deleted language has no affect on the municipality of Anchorage's             
 Number 0836                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAMS clarified that Ms. Kreitzer would like to             
 leave the language as it is in CSSB 69 (RES).                                 
 MS. KREITZER said "and compressed gases equal to or more than 200             
 cubic feet at standard temperature and pressure" language remain as           
 a deleted phrase on lines 10 through 12, because this is an                   
 addition to the current federal reporting requirements.  She said             
 the state should not be stringent than the federal requirements and           
 that the definition does not affect the Anchorage program.  A new             
 placarding program would have to go through a public process if               
 they want to include anything greater than the federal                        
 CO-CHAIR GREEN clarified that the committee should not correct the            
 Number 0902                                                                   
 MS. KREITZER referred to Sections 9 and 10, the deletion of the               
 phrase, "or by a municipality for purposes of its own reporting               
 program", and said there is some give and take when you try to do             
 stream-lining for regulatory reform and she said this is one of               
 those situations where depending on which side of the fence you are           
 on, it is a give or a take.  She said, if the state allows                    
 municipalities to continue to make changes for the purposes of                
 their own reporting program then the single form cannot be used.              
 She said CSSB 69 (RES) would require that municipalities make                 
 changes within the way that it is set out in the bill, through a              
 public process and in concert with SERC to keep businesses                    
 reporting on only one form.  She said the addition of this phrase             
 runs the risk of CSSB 69 (RES) not being effective.                           
 Number 0956                                                                   
 CO-CHAIR GREEN expressed concern that Anchorage would be different            
 from other areas of the state.                                                
 Number 0973                                                                   
 MS. KREITZER said the EPA recognizes that Anchorage is different              
 and are currently relooking the threshold levels and substances               
 under the Emergency Planning Community Right To Know Act.  She said           
 the laws under the EPA apply to cities such as Los Angeles and                
 Anchorage.  She said the federal requirements are stringent enough            
 for the municipality of Anchorage and said that the municipality of           
 Anchorage is not currently seeking to change or add substances to             
 their program.  She said CSSB 69 (RES) will not change their                  
 program according to how the municipality of Anchorage is operating           
 their program now, but would change any new program.                          
 Number 1025                                                                   
 CO-CHAIR GREEN referred to page three, line six, regarding going              
 from 500 pounds to 10,000 pounds of hazardous chemicals, materials            
 or waste and asked if this was an EPA requirement.                            
 Number 1038                                                                   
 MS. KREITZER said the 10,000 pounds was a federal requirement.  She           
 referred to page two, beginning at line 23, and said this referred            
 to the other substances listed such as flammable solids, gas hazard           
 division number 2.3, and said these are the substances that are               
 extremely hazardous and have their own reporting thresholds.  She             
 said the 10,000 pounds is what the federal government has realized            
 as a safe requirement level.  She referred to two handouts titled,            
 "ARCO SARA Title III, Section III Reporting, February 23, 1995" and           
 "Anchorage Fire Department, Tier 2 Hazardous Material Inventory."             
 DENISE L. NEWBOULD, UNOCAL, testified via teleconference from                 
 Kenai.  She said UNOCAL is a primary operator of oil and gas                  
 extraction in Cook Inlet and operates an ammonia fertilizer plant             
 in Nikiski.  She said in UNOCAL uses a variety of hazardous                   
 chemicals and materials.  She said her company participated in the            
 working committee with Ms. Kreitzer during the past two years                 
 working to reform the reporting requirements for hazardous                    
 chemicals and substances.  She said her company fully supports                
 regulations which protect life and property against fire and other            
 emergency situations.  She said her company recognizes that this              
 need has produced a variety of state, federal and local reporting             
 requirements in a variety of formats and frequencies, assessable              
 chemicals, threshold quantities, storage use and transportation               
 information is required to meet this need.  She said it is                    
 difficult for any company which uses hazardous substances or                  
 produces a hazardous waste to track these various requirements and            
 to comply with them.  She said CSSB 69 (RES) clarifies,                       
 standardizes and stream-lines these recording requirements.  She              
 said this simplifies her company's task to comply with the                    
 regulations and facilitates information exchange and analysis                 
 amongst the regulating entities and the emergency responders.  She            
 said, for this reason, UNOCAL supports CSSB 69 (RES).                         
 Number 1206                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE KOTT clarified that no one from the environmental              
 community wished to testify.                                                  
 Number 1215                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES made a motion to move CSSB 69 (RES) as                  
 amended, with individual recommendations.  Hearing no objection HCS           
 CSSB 69 (RES) was moved from the House Standing Committee on                  
 There being no further business to come before the House Standing             
 Committee on Resources, Co-Chair Green adjourned the meeting at               
 10:02 a.m.                                                                    

Document Name Date/Time Subjects