Legislature(2019 - 2020)BARNES 124

03/09/2020 01:00 PM RESOURCES

Note: the audio and video recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.

Download Mp3. <- Right click and save file as
Download Video part 1. <- Right click and save file as

* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
*+ HB 240 REGULATE PFAS USE; FIRE/WATER SAFETY TELECONFERENCED
Heard & Held
-- Testimony <Invitation Only> --
+= HB 151 ELECTRIC RELIABILITY ORGANIZATIONS TELECONFERENCED
<Bill Hearing Canceled>
-- Public Testimony --
+= HB 138 NATIONAL RESOURCE WATER DESIGNATION TELECONFERENCED
Heard & Held
-- Testimony <Invitation Only> --
+ Bills Previously Heard/Scheduled TELECONFERENCED
                    ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE                                                                                  
               HOUSE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE                                                                             
                         March 9, 2020                                                                                          
                           1:04 p.m.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MEMBERS PRESENT                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
Representative John Lincoln, Co-Chair                                                                                           
Representative Geran Tarr, Co-Chair                                                                                             
Representative Grier Hopkins, Vice Chair                                                                                        
Representative Sara Hannan                                                                                                      
Representative Chris Tuck                                                                                                       
Representative Ivy Spohnholz                                                                                                    
Representative Dave Talerico                                                                                                    
Representative George Rauscher                                                                                                  
Representative Sara Rasmussen                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MEMBERS ABSENT                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
All members present                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
COMMITTEE CALENDAR                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
HOUSE BILL NO. 240                                                                                                              
"An Act  relating to pollutants;  relating to  perfluoroalkyl and                                                               
polyfluoroalkyl  substances;  relating  to   the  duties  of  the                                                               
Department  of   Environmental  Conservation;  and   relating  to                                                               
firefighting substances."                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
     - HEARD & HELD                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
HOUSE BILL NO. 138                                                                                                              
"An Act requiring  the designation of state  water as outstanding                                                               
national  resource  water  to  occur   in  statute;  relating  to                                                               
management  of   outstanding  national  resource  water   by  the                                                               
Department of  Environmental Conservation;  and providing  for an                                                               
effective date."                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
     - HEARD & HELD                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
BILL: HB 240                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: REGULATE PFAS USE; FIRE/WATER SAFETY                                                                               
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) HANNAN                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
02/07/20       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
02/07/20       (H)       RES, FIN                                                                                               
03/09/20       (H)       RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
BILL: HB 138                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: NATIONAL RESOURCE WATER DESIGNATION                                                                                
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) KOPP                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
04/17/19       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
04/17/19       (H)       RES, FIN                                                                                               
04/29/19       (H)       RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124                                                                              
04/29/19       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
04/29/19       (H)       MINUTE(RES)                                                                                            
05/03/19       (H)       RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124                                                                              
05/03/19       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
05/03/19       (H)       MINUTE(RES)                                                                                            
02/10/20       (H)       RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124                                                                              
02/10/20       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
02/10/20       (H)       MINUTE(RES)                                                                                            
02/14/20       (H)       RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124                                                                              
02/14/20       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
02/14/20       (H)       MINUTE(RES)                                                                                            
02/17/20       (H)       RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124                                                                              
02/17/20       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
02/17/20       (H)       MINUTE(RES)                                                                                            
02/24/20       (H)       RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124                                                                              
02/24/20       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
02/24/20       (H)       MINUTE(RES)                                                                                            
03/06/20       (H)       RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124                                                                              
03/06/20       (H)       <Bill Hearing Canceled>                                                                                
03/09/20       (H)       RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
WITNESS REGISTER                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
TIMOTHY CLARK, Staff                                                                                                            
Representative Sara Hannan                                                                                                      
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  On behalf of Representative Hannan, sponsor                                                              
of HB 240, answered questions and presented the sectional                                                                       
analysis for the committee substitute for HB 240, Version M.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
ROBERT BILOTT, Attorney                                                                                                         
Taft Stettinius and Hollister                                                                                                   
Cincinnati, Ohio                                                                                                                
POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided testimony during the hearing of HB
240.                                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
KELLY MCLAUGHLIN, Spokesperson                                                                                                  
Gustavus PFAS Action Coalition                                                                                                  
Gustavus, Alaska                                                                                                                
POSITION STATEMENT:   Testified in support during  the hearing of                                                             
HB 240.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE CHUCK KOPP                                                                                                       
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:   Speaking as the  sponsor, provided comments                                                             
and answered questions during the hearing of HB 138.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
TREVER FULTON, Staff                                                                                                            
Representative Chuck Kopp                                                                                                       
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:   On behalf of  Representative Kopp, sponsor,                                                             
answered a question during the hearing of HB 138.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
RANDY BATES, Director                                                                                                           
Division of Water                                                                                                               
Department of Environmental Conservation                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Answered questions  during the hearing of HB
138.                                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MARIE MARX, Attorney                                                                                                            
Legislative Legal Counsel                                                                                                       
Legislative Legal Services                                                                                                      
Legislative Affairs Agency                                                                                                      
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Answered questions  during the hearing of HB
138.                                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
ACTION NARRATIVE                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
1:04:10 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CO-CHAIR  GERAN   TARR  called   the  House   Resources  Standing                                                             
Committee meeting  to order at  1:04 p.m.   Representatives Tuck,                                                               
Hannan,  Talerico,  Rauscher,  Rasmussen, Hopkins,  Lincoln,  and                                                               
Tarr  were  present  at  the   call  to  order.    Representative                                                               
Spohnholz arrived as the meeting was in progress.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
          HB 240-REGULATE PFAS USE; FIRE/WATER SAFETY                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
1:05:31 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CO-CHAIR  TARR announced  the first  order of  business would  be                                                               
HOUSE BILL NO.  240, "An Act relating to  pollutants; relating to                                                               
perfluoroalkyl  and polyfluoroalkyl  substances; relating  to the                                                               
duties  of  the  Department of  Environmental  Conservation;  and                                                               
relating to firefighting substances."                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
1:06:13 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CO-CHAIR LINCOLN moved  to adopt the committee  substitute for HB
240,  labeled  31-LS1509\M, Marx,  3/6/20,  [Version  M], as  the                                                               
working document.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
CO-CHAIR TARR objected for discussion purposes.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  HANNAN explained  the  committee substitute  (CS)                                                               
for HB  240 is  a bill  to address  drinking water  standards for                                                               
water  that   has  been  exposed  to   seven  perfluoroalkyl  and                                                               
polyfluoroalkyl (PFAS)  chemicals.   In Alaska, PFAS  exposure is                                                               
mostly  linked  to  firefighting  foam  that  has  been  used  at                                                               
airports and  in the  the oil  and gas industry.   She  said PFAS                                                               
chemicals can suppress  fire in high intensity fires,  such as an                                                               
oil field  fire, and  also do  not decompose,  thus are  known as                                                               
forever  chemicals; these  characteristics allow  PFAS to  starve                                                               
out the oxygen  in fire but linger in water  in perpetuity.  Over                                                               
the past  40 years, PFAS have  been linked to low  birth weights,                                                               
thyroid disease and cancer; testing  has shown PFAS contamination                                                               
is  in  the  water  table   of  many  Alaska  communities.    The                                                               
Department of Environmental Conservation  (DEC) has declared PFAS                                                               
are hazardous substances and HB  240 establishes the standards by                                                               
which PFAS  would be  regulated; currently,  DEC is  deferring to                                                               
levels  set by  the U.S.  Environmental Protection  Agency (EPA);                                                               
however, EPA  levels do not keep  Alaska's water safe.   The bill                                                               
incorporates  standards developed  by  the  Michigan PFAS  Action                                                               
Response  Team (MPART)  which has  researched PFAS  contamination                                                               
from industry and firefighting foam.   The bill would ensure that                                                               
once a community  is contaminated, the polluter would  pay for an                                                               
alternative source  of drinking water, such  as alternative water                                                               
systems,  extending existing  water  systems,  or new  filtration                                                               
systems; in  addition, the polluter  would have to pay  for three                                                               
years   of   voluntary   blood   testing   for   those   exposed.                                                               
Representative Hannan said  HB 240 would stop the use  of PFAS in                                                               
Alaska, with certain exceptions for  federal agencies and for use                                                               
by the oil and gas industry  as a firefighting foam.  Further, HB
240 holds the  party responsible for igniting a  fire also liable                                                               
for the use  of PFAS firefighting foam, not  the fire department.                                                               
Finally, the  bill requires DEC to  develop a plan to  dispose of                                                               
PFAS  firefighting  foam  and  equipment at  no  cost  to  Alaska                                                               
communities.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
1:13:14 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER questioned why  the levels established by                                                               
EPA are insufficient.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN  said EPA uses  standards that do  not meet                                                               
safe standards for drinking water,  which will be fully explained                                                               
by  forthcoming  expert  testimony.     In  further  response  to                                                               
Representative  Rauscher, she  said a  fire department  that uses                                                               
PFAS foam to respond to an  oil- and gas-fueled fire would not be                                                               
liable for its use; however,  a fire department testing PFAS foam                                                               
would be liable for its use.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  SPOHNHOLZ  asked  why  the  sponsor  incorporated                                                               
levels established by MPART instead of EPA.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN  said the seven compounds  addressed by the                                                               
bill and  identified by MPART  have the most  scientific research                                                               
and conclusive data linking said compounds to disease causation.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   SPOHNHOLZ   restated   her   interest   in   the                                                               
qualifications of MPART.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
1:16:10 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
TIMOTHY CLARK,  Staff, Representative  Sara Hannan,  Alaska State                                                               
Legislature, on  behalf of Representative  Hannan, sponsor  of HB
240, informed  the committee MPART  assembled a working  group of                                                               
experts to  analyze PFAS  studies on the  risks to  health; after                                                               
analysis,  MPART determined  prudent  levels  [for safe  drinking                                                               
water], which are the levels incorporated in the bill.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  SPOHNHOLZ   noted  there   is  new   science  and                                                               
information emerging on this issue  and asked when MPART produced                                                               
its recommendations.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MR. CLARK said MPART's working  group recommendations for maximum                                                               
allowable levels were reported in summer of 2019.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  RASMUSSEN suggested  putting the  PFAS levels  in                                                               
statute  may  set  a  dangerous precedent  because  DEC  has  the                                                               
authority  to   determine  the  levels,   as  evidenced   by  the                                                               
"sulfolane"  case   in  Fairbanks   [State  v.   Williams  Alaska                                                               
Petroleum, Inc., Fairbanks Superior Court, 2020].                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN  said her constituents are  dissatisfied by                                                               
the  actions taken  by  DEC  to treat  and  provide remedies  for                                                               
communities and thus seek to set  in statute levels that are safe                                                               
for drinking water.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  RASMUSSEN asked  whether there  is concern  about                                                               
the amount of  time required to make changes in  statute, when it                                                               
is easier to make changes in regulations.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN was told in  the fall of 2018, Gustavus was                                                               
getting  some resolution  to its  PFAS contamination;  in January                                                               
2019,  other communities  discovering  levels  equal to  Gustavus                                                               
were no longer  qualified for action.  She  explained DEC changed                                                               
from using a cumulative total  of six different compounds to two,                                                               
before remediation.   Without  statutory guidance,  DEC defaulted                                                               
to EPA  levels even  though other  communities suffered  the same                                                               
level of toxicity as Gustavus.   The Department of Transportation                                                               
and Public  Facilities (DOTPF) has been  delivering bottled water                                                               
to  much  of  Gustavus  for  almost  two  years;  however,  other                                                               
communities in the  state have no remedy because  DEC has shifted                                                               
it regulations to align with EPA.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  RASMUSSEN  asked whether  individual  communities                                                               
are prohibited  from establishing  their own [safe  water] levels                                                               
by ordinance or policy.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN  was unsure.   However, she  noted Gustavus                                                               
does not have a community  water system and residents depend upon                                                               
well water.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
1:23:20 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR.  CLARK pointed  out  the  bill would  not  prohibit DEC  from                                                               
setting  minimum allowable  levels  in the  future  should it  be                                                               
necessary  to  do  so.    He  then  paraphrased  from  a  written                                                               
sectional analysis which read [original punctuation provided]:                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
                       Sectional Summary                                                                                        
             CSHB 240 (RES) PFAS in Drinking Water                                                                              
                           Version M                                                                                            
     Sec. 1 of the bill creates several new sections in AS                                                                      
     46.03: Sec. 46.03.340(a):                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
     Directs  the Department  of Environmental  Conservation                                                                    
     to test  drinking water near PFAS  spills. Requires the                                                                    
     department  to  make   sure  anyone  with  contaminated                                                                    
     drinking  water gets  clean drinking  water  and up  to                                                                    
     three  years  of  voluntary   blood  testing  for  PFAS                                                                    
     levels.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
     Sec. 46.03.340(b): Sets  health-based maximum levels of                                                                    
     contamination   in  drinking   water  for   seven  PFAS                                                                    
     chemicals  and maintains  DEC's authority  to set  more                                                                    
     protective thresholds.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     Sec.  46.03.340(c):   Requires  DEC  to  make   sure  a                                                                    
     responder  exposed to  PFAS  contamination  gets up  to                                                                    
     three  years  of  voluntary   blood  testing  for  PFAS                                                                    
     levels.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
     Sec.  46.03.345(a) states  that a  person who  causes a                                                                    
     fire  that results  in the  release of  PFAS-containing                                                                    
     foams  is liable  for the  costs of  providing drinking                                                                    
     water testing  and blood testing under  AS 46.03.340 of                                                                    
     the bill.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
     Sec.  46.03.345(b) states  that persons  who use  PFAS-                                                                    
     containing substances  to extinguish a fire  (i.e. fire                                                                    
     departments) are not liable  for drinking water testing                                                                    
     and blood testing costs.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
     Sec. 46.03.345(c)  states that  the liability  for this                                                                    
     costs  is in  addition to  other liability  existing in                                                                    
     areas  of state  law relevant  to the  release of  PFAS                                                                    
     substances.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
     Sec.  46.03.350(a) exempts  oil &  gas businesses  from                                                                    
     the    prohibition     from    using    PFAS-containing                                                                    
     firefighting  foams  unless   the  state  fire  marshal                                                                    
     publishes  notice  that   an  alternative  firefighting                                                                    
     substance must be used.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
     Sec.  46.03.350(b)  states  that   if  the  state  fire                                                                    
     marshal   determines   that   a  safe   and   effective                                                                    
     alternative  firefighting  substance is  available  for                                                                    
     use by the oil &  gas businesses, the fire marshal must                                                                    
     immediately   publish  notice   that  the   alternative                                                                    
     substance must be used by the industry.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
     Sec. 46.03.350(c): DEC  must take up to  25 gallons per                                                                    
     year   of   PFAS-containing  firefighting   foam   from                                                                    
     Alaskans for disposal.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     Sec.  46.03.350(d): With  the  exception of  oil &  gas                                                                    
     businesses, this subsection prohibits  the use of PFAS-                                                                    
     containing  firefighting substances  by persons  in the                                                                    
     state  unless  the uses  is  required  by federal  law.                                                                    
     (Sec.  5 of  the bill  provides an  effective date  for                                                                    
     this prohibition of October 4, 2021.)                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
     Sec.  46.03.359: Lists  the PFAS  compounds covered  by                                                                    
     this bill and maintains DEC's authority to list more.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
     Sec.   2  of   the  bill   addresses  the   retroactive                                                                    
     applicability of the liability sections of the act.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
     Sec. 3 adds transition  language regarding the adoption                                                                    
     of  regulations  for  implementing   the  act  and  the                                                                    
     effective date of those regulations.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
     Sec. 4 gives an immediate  effective date to sections 2                                                                    
     and 3 of the act.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
     Sec. 5 provides an effective  date of October 4th, 2021                                                                    
     to the prohibition  on the use of PFAS in  section 1 of                                                                    
     the bill.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
     Sec. 6  provides for  an effective  date of  January 1,                                                                    
     2021, except  for those sections  of the  bill provided                                                                    
     an immediate or other effective date.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
1:29:55 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER  asked whether  there is data  on firemen                                                               
exposed to PFAS  who have contracted diseases, or if  the bill is                                                               
directed  to communities  that have  contaminated water  leaching                                                               
into wells.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN deferred to forthcoming expert testimony.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE RASMUSSEN asked why the voluntary blood testing                                                                  
would be administered through DEC instead of the Department of                                                                  
Health and Social Services (DHSS).                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  HANNAN  advised  DEC would  facilitate,  but  not                                                               
necessarily administer,  all of the components  of response, such                                                               
as blood testing, water sampling, or water delivery.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  RASMUSSEN   inquired  as  to  the   criteria  for                                                               
comparing blood tests to baseline samples.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  HANNAN  acknowledged   the  Centers  for  Disease                                                               
Control and Prevention  (CDC) have not set blood  sample risk for                                                               
diseases,  such  as  testicular  cancer,  because  there  are  no                                                               
baseline  blood samples;  however,  in Alaska,  most exposure  to                                                               
PFAS  has   not  been  through  industrial   waste,  but  through                                                               
household  goods  or a  water  system,  so [blood  samples  from]                                                               
Alaskans can provide statistics on waterborne exposure.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
CO-CHAIR  TARR removed  her objection  to adopting  the committee                                                               
substitute  for  HB  240.   There  being  no  further  objection,                                                               
Version M was before the committee.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
1:35:10 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
ROBERT  BILOTT, attorney,  Taft  Stettinius  and Hollister,  gave                                                               
brief  background information.   Through  a legal  case involving                                                               
dead cattle in  West Virginia that were exposed  to chemicals, he                                                               
said  he  learned  about  the existence  of  PFAS  chemicals,  in                                                               
particular, perfluorooctanoic  acid (PFOA), that was  used in the                                                               
manufacture  of  Teflon.    The   class  of  PFAS  chemicals  are                                                               
synthetic and when  found in water, soil, and blood,  they can be                                                               
traced to their source of  manufacture.  After litigation in West                                                               
Virginia and  Ohio, it  is now known  that decades  of toxicology                                                               
studies and  research show what  the chemicals were and  how they                                                               
behaved in the  environment and in humans.  Mr.  Bilott said PFAS                                                               
are  chemicals that  are persistent  in the  environment, in  the                                                               
blood of  humans and  animals, in water,  and in  air, throughout                                                               
the  world.   Also  made  clear in  the  research  was that  PFAS                                                               
chemicals  are toxic,  persistent, bio-accumulative,  and present                                                               
serious threats to public health.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
1:40:07 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. BILOTT said in 2001,  he provided the research information to                                                               
EPA and  requested EPA set  appropriate drinking  water standards                                                               
and  safety   guidelines.    When   the  case  was   settled,  an                                                               
independent panel  of scientists was  selected to study  what the                                                               
chemical  would do  to people  drinking  it in  their water  over                                                               
time.   The study looked at  a group of people  drinking 50 parts                                                               
per  trillion, for  one year  or  more, and  was a  comprehensive                                                               
human health  study involving 69,000  participants.   After seven                                                               
years,  the  panel  linked  PFOA  with  six  different  diseases:                                                               
kidney  cancer, testicular  cancer,  ulcerative colitis,  thyroid                                                               
disease,  pre?clampsia,  and high  cholesterol.    In 2012,  with                                                               
additional  information and  nationwide use  of PFOA  in consumer                                                               
products, EPA  was again asked  to provide a safe  drinking water                                                               
standard, and  EPA began to  require PFAS/PFOA testing  in public                                                               
water  supplies.   In 2013/2014,  data began  to show  - and  the                                                               
outcome  of  three  lawsuits  against   DuPont  De  Nemours  Inc.                                                               
(DuPont),  proved -  that DuPont  caused plaintiffs'  cancer, and                                                               
DuPont had  acted with conscious  disregard of the risk  from the                                                               
chemicals.   Mr. Bilott said  the data also showed  the chemicals                                                               
were  present in  water across  the  country; in  fact, in  2016,                                                               
communities  began to  ask for  the  safe level  of PFAS/PFOA  in                                                               
water and EPA issued a guideline of 70 parts per trillion.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
1:45:18 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR.  BILOTT stressed  the  EPA guideline  is  not an  enforceable                                                               
standard, so communities and water  providers that find PFAS/PFOA                                                               
levels  in  their  water  supplies  are  incurring  the  cost  of                                                               
remediation because it is not  an official government regulation.                                                               
In 2009,  EPA issued its  first action  plan and in  2019 another                                                               
action plan,  to move forward,  was issued,  but there is  not an                                                               
enforceable  federal  standard, thus  states  are  forced to  set                                                               
enforceable standards  to protect their  residents.  He  noted as                                                               
more research  is released, the  concern is focused  on long-term                                                               
exposure;  in fact,  in  1988, DuPont  set  an internal  drinking                                                               
water standard for  PFAS at the detection level  and he cautioned                                                               
safe levels  will continue to  be lowered.   In Michigan,  and at                                                               
the  Agency  for  Toxic Substances  and  Disease  Registry,  U.S.                                                               
Department  of Health  and Human  Services,  standard levels  are                                                               
much lower  than issued by  EPA.  Mr. Bilott  concluded PFAS/PFOA                                                               
are chemicals  that impact everyone, and  more contaminated water                                                               
will be  found, therefore, communities  need a way to  recoup the                                                               
cost of remediation.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
1:50:00 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  TUCK asked  whether  PFAS/PFOA  chemicals can  be                                                               
removed from blood.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
MR. BILOTT said  the chemicals have a long half-life  and stay in                                                               
the body  circulating in the  blood; even  though the use  of the                                                               
chemicals has been phased out years ago, exposure is ongoing.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  TUCK   questioned  whether  DuPont   reduced  its                                                               
liability  by  participating  in  the  scientific  study  of  the                                                               
chemicals.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MR.  BILOTT  said  DuPont  was  conducting  studies  on  animals,                                                               
monitoring the  blood levels of employees,  and conducting health                                                               
studies  of workers.   As  early as  1984, DuPont  was aware  the                                                               
chemicals were in the water;  the drinking water guideline set by                                                               
DuPont was  for the community.   DuPont provided the  funding for                                                               
the aforementioned independent panel,  but was not represented on                                                               
the panel of scientists.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
CO-CHAIR TARR  asked how the chemicals  affect people differently                                                               
and for the cost of research.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
1:55:18 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. BILOTT  said in addition  to the  six diseases linked  by the                                                               
panel, other  health effects have  been found, such  as inhibited                                                               
vaccine response and  inhibited immune systems in  children.  The                                                               
cost of  epidemiology research is incredibly  expensive and other                                                               
states  are using  litigation to  recoup  expenses from  chemical                                                               
manufacturers for  the cost of  testing, sampling,  and providing                                                               
clean water.   In further  response to Co-Chair Tarr,  Mr. Bilott                                                               
reported  in  West  Virginia  $70 million  from  a  class  action                                                               
settlement was used  to collect raw data from  70,000 people, and                                                               
$33 million  to $35 million  was spent to  analyze the data.   He                                                               
cautioned research  on each individual chemical  would be futile;                                                               
the  research should  be applied  to the  class of  chemicals and                                                               
action taken.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK asked whether  research on PFAS/PFOA is known                                                               
by the medical community and by medical laboratories in general.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MR.  BILOTT  acknowledged  the  information  has  not  been  made                                                               
readily available to the medical  community; as part of the legal                                                               
settlement,  a   panel  of   independent  medical   doctors  made                                                               
recommendations  for appropriate  responses to  exposure, and  he                                                               
gave a website  that provides information to  any medical doctor:                                                               
C-8MedicalMonitoringProgram.com.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
1:58:43 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
KELLY  MCLAUGHLIN, Spokesperson,  Gustavus PFAS  Action Coalition                                                               
(GPAC),  informed   the  committee   the  Gustavus   PFAS  Action                                                               
Coalition  was   formed  about  18  months   ago  after  Gustavus                                                               
residents learned  their property was contaminated  and residents                                                               
wanted their  blood and breast  milk tested.   At that  time, DEC                                                               
was hearing public  comment on a regulation package  that set the                                                               
action  level  at  65  parts  per  trillion,  and  GPAC  provided                                                               
comments that  the level  was too high  and recommended  20 parts                                                               
per  trillion;   however,  after  the  change   from  the  Walker                                                               
Administration to  the Dunleavy Administration,  "that regulation                                                               
package  disappeared."   In addition,  the standards  changed; in                                                               
fact,  her neighbors  bought property  that  they understood  was                                                               
"clean" because of the higher  standard of 70 parts per trillion.                                                               
She said  the scope of  the issue  is broad, with  many questions                                                               
unanswered, and urged the committee to  look at the problem.  Her                                                               
organization  is asking  the state  to test  residents' blood  to                                                               
provide  needed data;  to make  changes in  statute to  establish                                                               
regulations;  to  require DOTPF  to  provide  information to  all                                                               
residents living  near airports who may  be drinking contaminated                                                               
water; to support HB 240; to  immediately stop the use of PFAS in                                                               
Alaska,  under  the   existing  Federal  Aviation  Administration                                                               
(FAA), U.S.  Department of Transportation, exception  for Index A                                                               
airports.  She  said Gustavus and other  Alaska communities could                                                               
have been  using sodium bicarbonate firefighting  equipment - and                                                               
thus   avoid  contamination   -  as   these  products   are  used                                                               
effectively throughout the world.   Ms. McLaughlin displayed eggs                                                               
from chickens  raised on her  property that were  contaminated by                                                               
PFAS at a level of 13,000-25,000 parts per trillion.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
2:04:44 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  HOPKINS  surmised  none  of  the  eggs  from  Ms.                                                               
McLaughlin's property  are edible  and asked  about contamination                                                               
in other products grown on properties in Gustavus.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MS. MCLAUGHLIN said  GPAC conducted testing through  a grant from                                                               
Alaska Community  Action on Toxics  (ACAT) and  contamination has                                                               
been found  in other  eggs, kale, and  mint, was  undetectable in                                                               
potatoes, rhubarb,  and mushrooms,  and was  found in  the Salmon                                                               
River.                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
CO-CHAIR  TARR offered  to provide  the committee  a report  from                                                               
ACAT [document not provided].                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
2:07:02 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
[HB 240 was held over.]                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
2:07:12 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
The committee took an at-ease from 2:07 p.m. to 2:11 p.m.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
           HB 138-NATIONAL RESOURCE WATER DESIGNATION                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
2:11:17 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CO-CHAIR  TARR announced  the final  order of  business would  be                                                               
HOUSE BILL  NO. 138, "An  Act requiring the designation  of state                                                               
water  as  outstanding  national   resource  water  to  occur  in                                                               
statute; relating to management  of outstanding national resource                                                               
water  by  the  Department  of  Environmental  Conservation;  and                                                               
providing for an effective date."                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
[Before the  committee was the  committee substitute for  HB 138,                                                               
Version K, adopted as a  working document during the bill hearing                                                               
on 2/10/20.]                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CO-CHAIR  TARR  reviewed  the   committee's  previous  action  on                                                               
Version K, and forthcoming amendments.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
2:13:18 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN moved to adopt  [Amendment 6, K.13, labeled                                                               
31-LS0811\K.13, Marx, 2/20/20, identified  on the audio recording                                                               
as Amendment 5] which read [original punctuation provided]:                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     Page 3, line 4, following "based;":                                                                                        
          Insert "and"                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
     Page 3, lines 7 - 10:                                                                                                      
          Delete all material.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
CO-CHAIR TARR objected for discussion purposes.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  HANNAN  explained  [Amendment  6,  K.13]  removes                                                               
language in Version K on page 3, lines 7-10, which read:                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
          (F) an  analysis of the economic  cost and benefit                                                                    
     of  designating  the   water  as  outstanding  national                                                                    
     resources  water,  including   the  economic  cost  and                                                                    
     benefit  to  communities  and  current  or  foreseeable                                                                    
     projects; and                                                                                                              
       (G) other information required by the commission;                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  HANNAN  said  the   amendment  would  remove  the                                                               
language  that  requires  a   person  nominating  an  outstanding                                                               
national  resource  water  (ONRW)   to  include  a  cost  benefit                                                               
analysis of  the designation, and  other information  required by                                                               
the commission.   She advised  a cost benefit analysis  is likely                                                               
to be  costly and burdensome for  nominators and it is  best left                                                               
to the  commission, or  an affiliated state  agency, to  obtain a                                                               
thorough cost  benefit analysis.   In  addition, the  request for                                                               
other information is too broad.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE RASMUSSEN cautioned  the responsibility to provide                                                               
a cost  benefit analysis  would be an  additional burden  for the                                                               
state; she expressed opposition to the amendment.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
2:15:02 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
The committee took an at-ease from 2:15 p.m. to 2:16 p.m.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
CO-CHAIR  TARR pointed  out  similar issues  are  addressed in  a                                                               
forthcoming amendment labeled, 31-LS0811\K.18, Marx, 2/20/20.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
2:16:58 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE CHUCK KOPP, Alaska  State Legislature, speaking as                                                               
the  sponsor of  HB 138,  said the  amendment would  restrain the                                                               
commission from  asking for more  information beyond  the minimum                                                               
criteria  in the  bill.   He  noted the  drafters  kept the  bill                                                               
simple and straight forward; however,  the commission is balanced                                                               
and  should   not  be   restrained  from   requesting  additional                                                               
information or criteria,  if necessary, to reach a  decision.  In                                                               
addition, a  cost benefit analysis affects  future development in                                                               
the affected community,  such as new roads  and subdivisions, and                                                               
the discussion of these factors  in a cost benefit analysis shows                                                               
the nominator is  aware of economic and growth  activities in the                                                               
affected  area around  the nominated  waterbody.   Representative                                                               
Kopp surmised these are questions  the commission would raise and                                                               
providing a  cost benefit analysis  is not  a high hurdle,  but a                                                               
reasonable hurdle.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
CO-CHAIR TARR  noted certain forthcoming amendments  were drafted                                                               
after discussion with the bill  sponsor that changed the language                                                               
from  explanation,  description,  discussion,  and  analysis,  to                                                               
"general  description,"  which  a  member  of  the  public  could                                                               
provide without professional assistance.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
2:21:01 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  HANNAN  said  placing  a  cost  analysis  in  the                                                               
criteria of ability  to nominate places a burden  on small, rural                                                               
communities  and  entities  that   may  not  have  the  technical                                                               
expertise to  provide a cost  analysis.  She acknowledged  a cost                                                               
benefit  analysis  would  be  an   element  of  the  commission's                                                               
decision  process; however,  it  should not  be  included in  the                                                               
criteria that is required to forward a nomination.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK  read from  a document  identified as  18 AAC                                                               
70.017  [document  not  provided],   which  he  characterized  as                                                               
parallel  to the  language in  the  bill, with  the exception  of                                                               
subparagraph (F)[text previously provided].   He said the goal is                                                               
to facilitate ONRW water designations -  not to hinder them - and                                                               
expressed his support for [Amendment 6, K.13].                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
2:25:04 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
TREVER FULTON,  Staff, on behalf of  Representative Kopp, sponsor                                                               
of HB 138,  suggested the document referred  to by Representative                                                               
Tuck  contains  either  regulations  that have  been  adopted  to                                                               
address discharges  into a  body of water  that has  already been                                                               
designated a Tier 3 water,  or is a draft implementation document                                                               
that  has  been   rescinded  by  the  2018   publication  of  the                                                               
Department   of   Environmental   Conservation   (DEC)   guidance                                                               
memorandum deferring the designation process to the legislature.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK  questioned whether  a cost  benefit analysis                                                               
should be a relevant factor in the designation of Tier 3 water.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
2:27:37 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
The committee took a brief at-ease.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
2:28:46 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
RANDY BATES,  director, Division of  Water, DEC, said he  did not                                                               
find the aforementioned document  in existing regulations thus it                                                               
either could be a draft or has been replaced.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE RASMUSSEN read from  the Alaska State Constitution                                                               
as follows:                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
     The legislature shall provide for the utilization,                                                                         
     development, and conservation of all natural resources                                                                     
     belonging to the State, including land and waters, for                                                                     
     the maximum benefit of its people.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE RASMUSSEN  said a  cost benefit analysis  would be                                                               
required to  determine the cost  to a community of  designating a                                                               
Tier 3  body of water,  which may lead to  a loss of  the benefit                                                               
from a mine, or  to the cost of not designating  a body of water,                                                               
which may lead  to a loss of access to  salmon or other renewable                                                               
resources.  She restated her opposition to the amendment.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
CO-CHAIR  LINCOLN agreed  that  the burden  of  acquiring a  cost                                                               
analysis is  too great for  a nominator,  but said he  prefers to                                                               
support a forthcoming amendment.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  TALERICO expressed  opposition  to the  amendment                                                               
and his interest in forthcoming  amendments.  He said a nominator                                                               
who provided a general description  would include local knowledge                                                               
of the area.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
2:32:43 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ,  speaking as co-maker of  a forthcoming                                                               
amendment, said she supported the  intent of [Amendment 6, K.13],                                                               
but preferred the balance provided by a forthcoming amendment.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  HOPKINS noted  his  concern  about the  objective                                                               
nature  of  the  recommendations  made by  the  commission.    He                                                               
directed attention to  Version K, on page 2,  line 25, subsection                                                               
(e), which  listed seven  factors that are  required to  submit a                                                               
nomination, and agreed  there should be a  general description of                                                               
cost  benefits and  effects on  communities.   He  said he  would                                                               
support a forthcoming amendment.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  HANNAN   withdrew  [Amendment  6,  K.13].     She                                                               
restated a cost benefit analysis  that is required to be provided                                                               
by  the nominator  would place  a  cost benefit  analysis at  the                                                               
wrong point in the nomination process.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
2:36:11 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  SPOHNHOLZ  moved  to adopt  [Amendment  7,  K.18,                                                               
labeled  31-LS0811\K.18, identified  on  the  audio recording  as                                                               
Amendment 10], which read [original punctuation provided]:                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
     Page 3, line 6, following "quality;":                                                                                      
          Insert "and"                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
     Page 3, lines 7 - 17:                                                                                                      
          Delete all material and insert:                                                                                       
               "(F)  a general description of the                                                                               
     foreseeable  impacts   of  designating  the   water  as                                                                    
     outstanding  national  resource  water,  including  any                                                                    
     impacts  on  cultural  and  subsistence  uses  and  any                                                                    
     anticipated costs and benefits to the community;                                                                           
               (2)  by an affirmative vote of a majority of                                                                     
     the members of the commission,                                                                                             
               (A)  make a finding of whether the                                                                               
     nomination complies with the  requirements under (1) of                                                                    
     this subsection; and                                                                                                       
               (B)  within one year after finding a                                                                             
     nomination in  compliance, decide whether  to recommend                                                                    
     the designation  of the nominated water  as outstanding                                                                    
     national resource water;"                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
     Page 4, lines 3 - 7:                                                                                                       
          Delete all material and insert:                                                                                       
          "(f)  Before deciding whether to recommend a                                                                          
     designation  of   a  nominated  water   as  outstanding                                                                    
     national  resource water,  the commission  shall obtain                                                                    
     any additional information  considered necessary by the                                                                    
     commission to  make the  recommendation and  provide an                                                                    
     opportunity  for  public  notice  and  comment  on  the                                                                    
     nomination.    A   member    who   votes    against   a                                                                    
     recommendation approved  by the commission  may provide                                                                    
     a written summary of the member's dissenting opinion."                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     Page 4, line 8:                                                                                                            
          Delete "(e) or (f)"                                                                                                   
          Insert "(e)"                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
CO-CHAIR TARR objected for discussion purposes.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ  explained [Amendment 7,  K.18] provides                                                               
a  compromise position  in the  issue of  the description  of the                                                               
costs and benefits of a Tier  3 water designation.  The amendment                                                               
proposes  a  general description  of  the  foreseeable impacts  -                                                               
including costs  and benefits -  and the impacts on  cultural and                                                               
subsistence  uses,  which are  important  in  Alaska; also,  that                                                               
within  one  year  of  finding   the  nomination  compliant,  the                                                               
commission would issue a decision on the nomination.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  HOPKINS directed  attention to  the amendment  on                                                               
page 2, lines 4-6, which read:                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
     Page 4, line 8:                                                                                                            
          Delete "(e) or (f)"                                                                                                   
          Insert "(e)"                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS  asked whether the deletion  of subsection                                                               
(f)  would  make  the  recommendation a  final  decision  by  the                                                               
commission.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
2:38:11 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
The committee took an at-ease from 2:38 p.m. to 2:40 p.m.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  SPOHNHOLZ explained  on  page 2,  lines 4-6,  the                                                               
amendment contains conforming  changes recommended by Legislative                                                               
Legal Services.                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP  expressed support  for [Amendment  7, K.18].                                                               
He  directed attention  to the  amendment on  page 1,  lines 7-9,                                                               
which read [in part]:                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     including any impacts on cultural and subsistence uses                                                                     
         and any anticipated costs and benefits to the                                                                          
     community;                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP suggested  following "community;" adding "and                                                               
current or foreseeable projects;" in  order to be fully inclusive                                                               
of possible ongoing projects in the area.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
2:43:06 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MARIE  MARX,  attorney,  Legislative Legal  Counsel,  Legislative                                                               
Legal Services,  Legislative Affairs Agency, stated  the deletion                                                               
of   subsection  (f)   is  a   conforming  change   due  to   the                                                               
restructuring of the bill.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS  directed attention  to Version K  on page                                                               
4, lines 8-11,  and asked whether [Amendment 7,  K.18] would make                                                               
any change  to whether the  recommendation by the  commission is,                                                               
or is not, subject to appeal.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MS.  MARX  said the  amendment  would  not make  any  substantive                                                               
change  because the  recommendation or  action of  the commission                                                               
does  not constitute  a  final  agency decision  or  action.   In                                                               
further  response   to  Representative  Hopkins,   she  clarified                                                               
subsection (f) was changed, and is no longer applicable.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK asked whether  water that has been designated                                                               
Tier  3  could  have  changes,   within  a  certain  range,  when                                                               
subjected to the construction of a bridge or a port.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP  advised for Tier  3 water the  baseline data                                                               
must  be intact;  however,  if  there is  an  ongoing project  in                                                               
place,  those  activities can  continue.    For example,  if  the                                                               
construction of an access road  or infrastructure is foreseeable,                                                               
or ongoing,  the cost of  the project  should be included  in the                                                               
discussion of the Tier 3 water designation.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  TUCK recalled  Tier  1 water  does  not have  all                                                               
water  quality standards  met;  Tier 2  water  has water  quality                                                               
standards met; Tier 3 water  requires that the water maintain its                                                               
current status.   He  expressed his  understanding Tier  3 [water                                                               
standards] have no requirement to improve the water quality.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP indicated correct.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
2:49:28 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CO-CHAIR LINCOLN  gave a description  of Mono Lake  in California                                                               
that  is designated  Tier  3, not  because it  is  of high  water                                                               
quality, but because it is rare and unique.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK noted  at Red Dog mine, due  to proper mining                                                               
techniques, the  zinc concentrations  were reduced and  now there                                                               
are trout in "that stream."   He questioned whether improving the                                                               
water quality in water designated Tier 3 would be a violation.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KOPP  said  improving  water  quality  is  not  a                                                               
violation of a Tier 3 water designation.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK asked for more  information on the example in                                                               
California.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CO-CHAIR  LINCOLN said  he assumed  the intent  is for  the water                                                               
quality at Mono Lake to remain unchanged.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MR. BATES stated DEC would only  disallow an activity in a Tier 3                                                               
waterbody that  degrades the current  water quality  standard; he                                                               
said he  would provide an  answer related to projects  that clean                                                               
up water and release water in a better form.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
2:54:22 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER  gave an example  of water that  had many                                                               
sources  of   pollution,  but  the  overall   water  quality  was                                                               
improved,  and  asked whether  a  new  [or increased]  source  of                                                               
pollution would be allowed.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MR. BATES said the existing water  quality would be tested at the                                                               
time a  Tier 3  waterbody was established;  any new  project that                                                               
would  degrade  the  water,  below  the  level  at  the  time  of                                                               
designation, would be disallowed.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KOPP,  in   further  response  to  Representative                                                               
Rauscher, explained a baseline is  established for each pollutant                                                               
individually, so a  higher level of degradation  from an existing                                                               
pollutant would be disallowed.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
There followed  discussion related  to the effects  of activities                                                               
by polluters new to  - or upriver of - Tier  3 waters that create                                                               
mixing zones.   Mr. Bates  was asked  to provide clarity  on this                                                               
issue after further review by DEC staff.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
2:58:29 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN  directed attention  to Version K,  on page                                                               
4, lines 8-11, which read:                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
          (g) A  recommendation or action of  the commission                                                                    
     under (e) or  (f) of the section does  not constitute a                                                                    
     final    agency   decision    or   action,    and   the                                                                    
     recommendation  or action  is  not  subject to  appeal,                                                                    
     including   appeal    or   review   under    AS   44.62                                                                    
     (Administrative Procedure Act).                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  HANNAN  questioned whether  said  [recommendation                                                               
or] action  is not subject  to appeal  because the action  of the                                                               
commission is finalized by legislative process.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MS.  MARX explained  recommendations by  advisory bodies  are not                                                               
generally  subject  to judicial  appeal  or  review, because  the                                                               
recommendations  of  advisory  boards   or  commissions  are  not                                                               
enforceable,  until  the  recommendations are  implemented  by  a                                                               
further  agency,  or legislative  action,  and  therefore do  not                                                               
govern the conduct or the rights of the public.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
3:03:08 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CO-CHAIR TARR withdrew  her objection to [Amendment  7, K.18] and                                                               
there being no further objection, Amendment 7, K.18 was adopted.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
HB 138 was held over.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
3:04:17 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
ADJOURNMENT                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
There being no further business before the committee, the House                                                                 
Resources Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 3:04 p.m.                                                                 

Document Name Date/Time Subjects
HB240 Version A Sponsor Statement 2.28.2020.pdf HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/13/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/16/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 240
HB 240 Version A 2.07.2020.PDF HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/13/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/16/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 240
HB 240 Version A Sectional Summary 2.14.2020.pdf HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/13/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/16/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 240
HB240 ATSDR PFAS Information Sheet 02.13.20.pdf HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/13/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/16/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 240
HB240 EPA PFAS Information Sheet 02.13.20.pdf HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/13/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/16/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 240
HB240 Executive Summary - Michigan Report on PFAS Health Effect 02.13.20.pdf HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/13/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/16/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 240
HB 240 Testimony as of 3.6.20.pdf HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/13/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/16/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 240
HB 138 Sponsor Statement 2.4.2020.pdf HRES 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/14/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/17/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/24/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/13/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 138
HB 138 Draft CS v. K.pdf HRES 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/14/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/17/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/24/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/13/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 138
HB 138 Sectional Analysis v. K 2.4.2020.pdf HRES 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/14/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/17/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/24/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/13/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 138
HB 138 HRES Amendment One - Spohnholz 2.13.20.pdf HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/13/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 138
HB 138 HRES Amendment Two - Tarr 2.20.20.pdf HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/13/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 138
HB 138 HRES Amendment Three - Lincoln 2.20.20.pdf HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/13/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 138
HB 138 HRES Amendment Four - Hannan 2.20.20.pdf HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/13/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 138
HB 138 HRES Amendment Five - Hannan 2.20.20.pdf HRES 2/24/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 138
HB 138 HRES Amendment Six - Hannan 2.20.20.pdf HRES 2/24/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 138
HB 138 HRES Amendment Seven - Hannan 2.20.20.pdf HRES 2/24/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/13/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 138
HB 138 HRES Amendment Eight - Hannan 2.20.20.pdf HRES 2/24/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 138
HB 138 HRES Amendment Nine - Tuck 2.20.20.pdf HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/13/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 138
HB 138 HRES Amendment Ten - Spohnholz and Lincoln 2.20.20.pdf HRES 2/24/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 138
HB 138 HRES Amendment Eleven - Lincoln 2.21.20.pdf HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/13/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 138
HB 138 HRES Amendment Twelve - Lincoln 3.3.20.pdf HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/13/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 138
HB 138 HRES Amendment Thirteen - Tarr 3.5.30.pdf HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 138
HB 138 HRES Amendment Fourteen - Tarr 3.5.20.pdf HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 138
HB138 Supporting Material DEC Final Tier 3 Guidance 4.22.2019.pdf HRES 4/29/2019 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/14/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/17/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/24/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 138
HB138 Supporting Material DEC Tier 3 Water Designation FAQ 4.22.2019.pdf HRES 4/29/2019 1:00:00 PM
HRES 5/3/2019 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/14/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/17/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/24/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 138
HB138 Supporting Document - DEC attachment sent to EPA 3.6.2018.pdf HRES 5/3/2019 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/14/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/17/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 138
HB138 Supporting Document - Legal Opinion re HB 138 and Ballot Initiatives 5.1.19.pdf HRES 5/3/2019 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/14/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/17/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/24/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 138
HB138 Supporting Document - Legal Opinion re DEC Statutory Authority to Designate Tier 3 Waters 5.2.19.pdf HRES 5/3/2019 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/14/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/17/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/24/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 138
HB138 Supporting Document - DEC Summary of Tier 3 Designations 3.2019.pdf HRES 2/14/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/17/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/24/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 138
HB 138 Supporting Document - Tier 3 Nominations.pdf HRES 2/14/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/17/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/24/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 138
HB138 Supporting Document - DEC Letter re Review of Tier 3 in Other States 5.3.19.pdf HRES 2/14/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/17/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/24/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 138
HB138 Supporting Document - DNR Fact Sheet Legislatively Designated Areas 4.22.2019.pdf HRES 2/14/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/17/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/24/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 138
HB 138 Testimony - As of 2.13.20.pdf HRES 2/17/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/24/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 138
HB 138 Testimony - As of 2.17.20.pdf HRES 2/17/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/24/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 138
HB 138 Testimony - As of 2.21.20.pdf HRES 2/24/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 138
HB 138 Testimony - 2.21.20-2.22.20.pdf HRES 2/24/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 138
HB 138 Testimony - 2.23.20 - 3.6.20.pdf HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 138
HB 138 Fiscal Note CSHB138-DNR-MLW-2-17-20.pdf HRES 2/17/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/24/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/13/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 138
HB 138 Fiscal Note CS(RES)-DFG-CO-2-14-20.pdf HRES 2/17/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/24/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/13/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 138
HB 138 Fiscal Note HB138CS(RES)-DEC-WIF-02-16-20.pdf HRES 2/17/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/24/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/13/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 138
HB 138 Supporting Document - Legal Opinion re Person and Resident definitions 2.13.20.pdf HRES 2/17/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 2/24/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 138
HB 240 Draft CS Version M 3.6.20.pdf HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/13/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/16/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 240
HB 240 CSHB24(RES) Version M--Sectional Summary 3.6.2020.pdf HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/13/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/16/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 24
HB 240
HB 240 Explanation of Changes, Ver. A to Ver. M 3.6.2020.pdf HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/13/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/16/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 240
HB 240 Fiscal Note - DPS-FLS 3.5.20.pdf HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/13/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/16/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 240
HB 240 Fiscal Note - DEC-SPAR 3.6.20.pdf HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/13/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/16/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 240
HB 240 Fiscal Note - DEC-EH 3.6.20.pdf HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/13/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/16/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 240
HB 240 Testimony Received as of 3.8.20.pdf HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/13/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 240
HB 138 HRES Conceptual Amendment Fifteen - Tarr 3.9.30.pdf HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 138
HB 138 HRES Conceptual Amendment Sixteen - Tarr 3.9.20.pdf HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM
HB 138