Legislature(1995 - 1996)
02/20/1995 08:10 AM House RES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE
February 20, 1995
8:10 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Joe Green, Co-Chairman
Representative Bill Williams, Co-Chairman
Representative Scott Ogan, Vice Chairman
Representative Alan Austerman
Representative John Davies
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Ramona Barnes
Representative Pete Kott
Representative Eileen MacLean
Representative Irene Nicholia
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
*HB 128:"An Act establishing an exemption to the requirement of
obtaining a waste disposal permit for certain activities
that yield water and waste material discharges ancillary
to those activities."
HEARD AND HELD
SJR 6:Relating to federally held property in those states,
including Alaska, admitted to the Union since 1802.
HEARD AND HELD
HB 170:"An Act relating to intensive management of identified
big game prey populations."
SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD
(* First public hearing)
WITNESS REGISTER
JACK PHELPS, Aide
Representative Bill Williams
State Capitol, Room 128
Juneau, AK 99801
Phone: 465-3424
POSITION STATEMENT: Gave Sponsor Statement for HB 128
DEENA HENKINS, Section Chief
Drinking Water & Wastewater Section
Department of Environmental Conservation
410 Willoughby Ave., Ste 105
Juneau, AK 99801
Phone: 465-5300
POSITION STATEMENT: Suggested changes for HB 128
BEVERLY WARD, Representative
ARCO Alaska, Inc.
134 N. Franklin
Juneau, AK 99801
Phone: 586-3680
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported concept of HB 128
JOE AMBROSE, Aide
Senator Robin Taylor
State Capitol, Room 30
Juneau, AK 99801
Phone: 465-3873
POSITION STATEMENT: Gave Sponsor Statement for SJR 6
ACTION NARRATIVE
BILL: HB 128
SHORT TITLE: WASTE DISPOSAL PERMIT EXEMPTION
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) WILLIAMS,Kott,Toohey
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
01/27/95 156 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
01/27/95 156 (H) RESOURCES
01/27/95 163 (H) COSPONSOR(S): KOTT, TOOHEY
02/08/95 271 (H) SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE INTRODUCED-
REFERRALS
02/08/95 271 (H) RES
02/20/95 (H) RES AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 124
BILL: SJR 6
SHORT TITLE: TRANSFER FED. LAND TO POST-1802 STATES
SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) TAYLOR, Halford, Kelly, Sharp, Frank, Green,
Pearce
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
01/16/95 11 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
01/16/95 11 (S) RESOURCES
02/01/95 (S) RES AT 03:30 PM BUTROVICH ROOM 205
02/01/95 (S) MINUTE(RES)
02/03/95 159 (S) RES RPT CS 5DP NEW TITLE
02/03/95 159 (S) ZERO FISCAL NOTE (S.RES)
02/03/95 (S) RLS AT 12:10 PM BELTZ ROOM 211
02/03/95 (S) MINUTE(RLS)
02/06/95 181 (S) RULES TO CALENDAR 2/6/95
02/06/95 183 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME
02/06/95 183 (S) RES CS ADOPTED UNAN CONSENT
02/06/95 183 (S) ADVANCED TO THIRD READING UNAN
CONSENT
02/06/95 183 (S) READ THE THIRD TIME CSSJR 6(RES)
02/06/95 183 (S) COSPONSOR(S): FRANK, GREEN, PEARCE
02/06/95 184 (S) PASSED Y15 N- E4 A1
02/06/95 185 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
02/08/95 263 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
02/08/95 263 (H) RES
02/20/95 (H) RES AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 124
BILL: HB 170
SHORT TITLE: INTENSIVE MANAGEMENT OF GAME
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) KELLY,Toohey
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
02/10/95 301 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
02/10/95 301 (H) RESOURCES
02/20/95 (H) RES AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 124
TAPE 95-21, SIDE A
Number 000
The House Resources Committee was called to order by Co-Chairman
Williams at 8:10 a.m. Members present at the call to order were
Representatives Green, Williams, Ogan, Austerman and Davies.
Members absent were Representatives Barnes, Kott, MacLean and
Nicholia.
CO-CHAIRMAN BILL WILLIAMS announced there is a quorum present.
HRES - 02/20/95
HB 128 - WASTE DISPOSAL PERMIT EXEMPTION
CO-CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS said it was not his intention to move HB 128
out of committee today.
JACK PHELPS, AIDE, REPRESENTATIVE BILL WILLIAMS, PRIME SPONSOR,
stated HB 128 was drafted in response to a recommendation by the
Alaska Minerals Commission in their 1995 report, to address a
statute which, because of its tremendous breadth, had recently
created concern for both the mineral industry and the water well
drillers in Alaska. He said HB 128 provides an exemption for
drilling and incidental wastes that result from certain industrial
activities in the state that hitherto have been treated as minimal
and noncontaminating. He noted because the existing statute
AS 46.03.100 is extremely broad, the department was faced with
moving into a general permit proposal to deal with things hitherto
had been ignored. He stressed the intention of HB 128 is to narrow
that down somewhat and make it more comfortable for the industry
and the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) in terms of
regulating this activity.
MR. PHELPS told committee members there is a proposed committee
substitute in their folders. He noted there are significant
changes between the sponsor substitute and the proposed committee
substitute. He requested that committee members look at page 2 on
the committee substitute near the bottom. He said what is now
Section 3 is drawn from the original section of the original bill.
He explained this section was rewritten based on discussions with
DEC and incorporates changes the department requested to clarify
the bill more carefully. He stressed the intent and the actual
meaning of this section of the bill is not altered by these changes
but is made more clear and evident.
MR. PHELPS explained the other change between the committee
substitute and the previous version of the bill are the additions
of Sections 1 and 2. He said these sections transfer the
permitting authority for a particular type of disposal that takes
place in the oil industry from DEC to the Alaska Oil and Gas
Conservation Commission (AOGCC). He stated this change was
initiated by comments from the AOGCC indicating there was some
preference in both agencies for AOGCC to regulate it because AOGCC
has petroleum engineers on their staff and it seemed more
appropriate for AOGCC to handle it rather than DEC. He noted in
discussions with both agencies, there was an agreement that the
transfer of authority needed to take place. The question was
whether the transfer could be done through a memo of understanding
or in statute, which is an issue the legislature will have to
decide. He pointed out the transfer of that authority is proposed
to be done statutorily in HB 128.
MR. PHELPS stated the new subsection proposed on page 2, lines 13-
17, contains a definition of nonhazardous drilling operation waste.
He said there is concern regarding this definition. He told
committee members there is a memo in their folders from Blair
Wondzell, who is an engineer with AOGCC, which suggests if the
Title 46 definition of nonhazardous waste is placed in this
subsection, it may create difficulties because AOGCC normally
operates under the federal definition for all of their underground
injection control permits. AOGCC requested the committee look at
possibly using federal language rather than state statutory
language.
MR. PHELPS stated he had discussed that request with DEC and
currently in their regulations, under AS 46.03, they bring their
definition under the federal definition. Therefore, it may be
appropriate for the committee to roll some reference of the federal
definition into this section of the bill.
Number 170
REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT OGAN clarified that HB 128 eliminates a
duplication of efforts by DEC and AOGCC.
MR. PHELPS responded there is no dual permitting process at this
time. He said DEC has the authority and has been permitting
disposals. He added the department had contemplated using a
memorandum of understanding to transfer the authority to AOGCC. He
noted AOGCC is currently developing regulations to perform that
permitting. He stated HB 128 would make it clear who was going to
do the permitting so there would not be a possibility of a dual
permitting system and it would clarify who has the authority. He
said it was not his understanding that both agencies wanted to do
the permitting, but rather the permitting needed to be done by the
appropriate agency.
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN clarified AOGCC is better qualified to do the
permitting.
MR. PHELPS replied that would not be the right phrase to use. He
said it is more appropriate to say that the agency who has the
general authority to deal with oil well activities and does have
petroleum engineers on their staff be the permitting agency.
REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN made a MOTION to ADOPT CSSSHB 128(RES).
CO-CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS asked if there were any objections. Hearing
none, the MOTION PASSED.
Number 227
CO-CHAIRMAN GREEN wondered if the AOGCC is already doing this type
of activity currently.
MR. PHELPS stated the AOGCC is the agency that does the permitting
for oil wells. He said DEC is currently permitting for annular
pumping. He explained AOGCC is in the process of developing
regulations under which they would regulate it and the contemplated
move was the memorandum of understanding between DEC and AOGCC
enabling AOGCC to take over that activity. He noted HB 128
proposes that transfer in statute rather than through a memorandum
of understanding.
CO-CHAIRMAN GREEN said the reason he brought that up is because
there is an activity done in an oil well drilling process called
cementing. He asked if that portion of the oil well completion is
governed by AOGCC.
MR. PHELPS responded cementing, which is a form of annular pumping,
is currently regulated under AOGCC.
Number 270
DEENA HENKINS, SECTION CHIEF, DRINKING WATER & WASTEWATER SECTION,
DEC, said she appreciated Mr. Phelps working with the department to
try and clarify the language of the proposed exemptions. She
stated excavation dewatering type processes have been excluded from
subsection (B) on page 3. She said excavation dewatering can
produce a huge amount of muddy water and the department has
regulated those discharges usually with general permits. A lot of
the water coming out of excavations is groundwater.
MS. HENKINS said the department suggests on page 3, line 17 that
"groundwater" be added to the kinds of water being removed from
excavations which are not exempt from permits. Therefore, it would
include groundwater, stormwater, or wastewater run-off. She stated
the other concern expressed to her about the exclusions is that as
the bill is written, drilling wastes can be put on the land without
requiring any permit. The department is concerned that there may
be some drilling additives, particularly in mineral drilling
operations, that possibly could contaminate a shallow aquifer that
might be used as drinking water. She stated the department would
like to further discuss these concerns with Mr. Phelps this week.
Number 322
BEVERLY WARD, REPRESENTATIVE, ARCO ALASKA, stated ARCO fully
supports the concept of AOGCC having the authority to regulate the
annular pumping. However, she said once ARCO looked at the
specific wording of how that is being proposed to be done, they did
have some suggested changes but has not had the chance to work with
the staff on those changes. She felt before the bill is moved from
committee, ARCO will have a chance to work with AOGCC, DEC and
staff to determine the appropriate language.
CO-CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS announced HB 128 would be held.
HRES - 02/20/95
SJR 6 - TRANSFER FEDERAL LAND TO POST-1802 STATES
Number 348
JOE AMBROSE, AIDE, SENATOR ROBIN TAYLOR, PRIME SPONSOR, stated the
Founding Fathers recognized that land was power and that a
centralized federal government with a substantial land base would
eventually overwhelm the states. That is why the original 13
colonies and the next 5 states admitted to the Union were given fee
title to all land within their borders. He said the Constitution
even includes a provision allowing for the donation of land to the
federal government for the creation of the District of Columbia.
The Founders guarded land ownership jealously, writing into the
Constitution's first article, a provision allowing the federal
government to purchase, with the consent of the state legislatures,
land it needed for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dock
yards and other needful buildings.
MR. AMBROSE explained the opening of the West, with its wealth of
resources, led an envious federal government to begin to withhold
for itself large portions of land within the borders of newly
admitted states under the guise of public domain. The result of
this doctrine was the creation of what SJR 6 refers to as land poor
states, admitted to the Union as unequal, federally dominated
entities. He stated SJR 6 calls upon Congress to right this wrong
and release to the states all federal holdings within their
borders. The action proposed by this resolution would make land
use decisions now being decided by the Congress moot and empower
the states to settle those issues on their own. He noted that
copies of the draft of SJR 6 were sent to members of the
congressional delegations from the land poor states as well as to
groups and individuals interested in this issue.
MR. AMBROSE told committee members they had a copy of an article
from the Ketchikan Daily News in their folders. In that article
Representative Don Young was asked directly about SJR 6 and
Representative Young said, "Senator Taylor's resolution is already
being seriously discussed in Washington." He said Senator Taylor
is hoping that SJR 6 will be passed in a timely manner so that
Alaska will be the first of the states to send this message to
Congress.
Number 400
CO-CHAIRMAN GREEN made a MOTION to MOVE SJR 6 out of committee with
accompanying zero fiscal note with individual recommendations.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHN DAVIES OBJECTED for the purpose of discussion.
He said it was his understanding that SJR 6 would not be passed out
today.
CO-CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS said he had announced at the beginning of the
meeting that he did not plan to move HB 128.
CO-CHAIRMAN GREEN WITHDREW his MOTION.
Number 423
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES said if the federal government had not
retained control of some large acreages of land, the national
forest system would not be in place. He added if those lands were
in very small ownership patterns it would be difficult to put
together long term contracts.
MR. AMBROSE responded who is better suited to manage the land
resource, the state or federal government. He said the implication
is the state would not make the same decisions. He stated there is
talk in Congress now of dismantling the U.S. Forest Service because
it is failing to manage the national forests for the intended
purpose, take the productive land and turn it over to the Bureau of
Land Management (BLM), and from there to the states. At the time
of statehood, what land was seeded to the state of Alaska was
seeded in such a way to guarantee a chance to have an economy. He
pointed out that if the decision had gone the other way, the state
would not be paying any royalties to the federal government now on
the North Slope.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES noted the resolution urges the 104th Congress
to transfer to the states, by fee title, all federally controlled
property. He wondered if this includes wilderness areas, parks,
etc.
MR. AMBROSE replied the intent of the resolution is to transfer all
federally held land within the 22 states admitted to the Union
since 1802. He said the resolution also suggests at that point,
anything the federal government feels it needs it could buy from
the states which the Constitution says it must do with the
permission of the legislatures. He noted Congressman Young is
discussing taking the productive land, turning it over to the
states, and making the rest of it into parks.
Number 473
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES wondered if the state was to take over all
the federal lands, including parks and wilderness areas, would the
state be responsible for managing those parklands.
MR. AMBROSE stated that is the intent.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES questioned if there would be a significant
fiscal impact on the state.
MR. AMBROSE replied yes, but by the same token, the federal budget
could be reduced and the state would not have to be sending as much
money in that direction.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES said the money sent in that direction is
primarily through individual income taxes. Therefore, the state
treasury, unless an income tax was enacted to divert that flow to
the state treasury instead of the federal treasury, would not have
adequate resources to manage those lands.
MR. AMBROSE felt that was too speculative to discuss at this point.
Number 485
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES felt there would be a substantial fiscal
impact in connection with SJR 6 and he questioned the zero fiscal
note.
Number 499
CO-CHAIRMAN GREEN suggested, in light of the question raised,
holding the resolution until the next meeting to determine if a
positive fiscal note should be attached.
CO-CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS announced SJR 6 would be held until Wednesday,
February 22.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the House Resources
Committee, Co-Chairman Williams adjourned the meeting at 8:38 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|