Legislature(1993 - 1994)

04/28/1994 09:00 AM STA

Audio Topic
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
txt
                                                                               
             HOUSE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE                            
                         April 28, 1994                                        
                            9:00 a.m.                                          
                                                                               
                                                                               
  MEMBERS PRESENT                                                              
                                                                               
  Representative Al Vezey, Chairman                                            
  Representative Pete Kott, Vice Chairman                                      
  Representative Bettye Davis                                                  
  Representative Gary Davis                                                    
  Representative Harley Olberg                                                 
  Representative Jerry Sanders                                                 
  Representative Fran Ulmer                                                    
                                                                               
                                                                               
  MEMBERS ABSENT                                                               
                                                                               
  None                                                                         
                                                                               
                                                                               
  COMMITTEE CALENDAR                                                           
                                                                               
  SB 349:        "An Act amending Alaska Rule of Criminal                      
                 Procedure 6(r) relating to admissibility of                   
                 hearsay evidence by peace officers before the                 
                 grand jury."                                                  
                                                                               
                 MOVED FROM COMMITTEE WITH DO PASS                             
                 RECOMMENDATIONS                                               
                                                                               
  SB 353:        "An Act amending Alaska Rule of Criminal                      
                 Procedure 24(d) relating to peremptory                        
                 challenges of jurors in felony criminal                       
                 proceedings."                                                 
                                                                               
                 MOVED FROM COMMITTEE WITH DO PASS                             
                 RECOMMENDATIONS                                               
                                                                               
  SB 215:        "An Act relating to oil and hazardous                         
                 substances; redesignating the oil and                         
                 hazardous substance release response fund and                 
                 relating to it; repealing the Citizens'                       
                 Oversight Council on Oil and Other Hazardous                  
                 Substances and the authority in law by which                  
                 marine highway vessels may be designed and                    
                 constructed to aid in oil and hazardous                       
                 substance spill cleanup in state marine water                 
                 using money in the oil and hazardous                          
                 substance release response fund and repealing                 
                 the authority of the Department of                            
                 Environmental Conservation to levy and                        
                 collect fees for review of certain                            
                 submissions related to oil; altering                          
                 requirements applicable to liens for recovery                 
                 of state expenditures related to oil or                       
                 hazardous substances; terminating the nickel-                 
                 per-barrel oil conservation surcharge;                        
                 levying and collecting two new oil                            
                 surcharges; and providing for the suspension                  
                 and reimposition of one of the new                            
                 surcharges."                                                  
                                                                               
                 MOVED OUT OF COMMITTEE WITH NO                                
                 RECOMMENDATIONS                                               
                                                                               
  WITNESS REGISTER                                                             
                                                                               
  MARGOT KNUTH, Assistant Attorney General                                     
  Department of Law                                                            
  P.O. Box 110300                                                              
  Juneau, AK  99811-0300                                                       
  Phone:  465-3428                                                             
  POSITION STATEMENT:  Answered questions on CSSB 353(JUD)                     
                                                                               
  SENATOR MIKE MILLER                                                          
  Alaska State Legislature                                                     
  Alaska State Capitol, Room 423                                               
  Juneau, AK  99811-0460                                                       
  Phone:  465-4976                                                             
  POSITION STATEMENT:  Sponsor of SB 215                                       
                                                                               
  DAVID ROGERS, Special Council on HCSCSSB 215                                 
  Senate Finance Committee                                                     
  P.O. Box 33932                                                               
  Juneau, AK  99803                                                            
  Phone:  586-1107                                                             
  POSITION STATEMENT:  Answered questions on HCSCSSB 215                       
                                                                               
  PREVIOUS ACTION                                                              
                                                                               
  BILL:  SB 349                                                                
  SHORT TITLE: GRAND JURY EVIDENCE BY POLICE OFFICERS                          
  SPONSOR(S): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR                                 
                                                                               
  JRN-DATE     JRN-PG               ACTION                                     
  03/09/94      3109    (S)   READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)                  
  03/09/94      3109    (S)   STATE AFFAIRS, JUDICIARY                         
  03/09/94      3109    (S)   ZERO FNS PUBLISHED (LAW, DPS,                    
                              ADM-2)                                           
  03/09/94      3109    (S)   GOVERNOR'S TRANSMITTAL LETTER                    
  03/14/94      3188    (S)   STA RPT  2DP 1NR                                 
  03/14/94      3188    (S)   PREVIOUS ZERO FNS (ADM-2, DPS,                   
                              LAW)                                             
  03/14/94              (S)   STA AT 9:00 AM BUTROVICH RM 205                  
  03/14/94              (S)   MINUTE(STA)                                      
  03/14/94              (S)   MINUTE(STA)                                      
  03/14/94              (S)   MINUTE(STA)                                      
  03/14/94              (S)   MINUTE(STA)                                      
  03/14/94              (S)   MINUTE(STA)                                      
  03/25/94              (S)   JUD AT 01:30 PM BELTZ ROOM 211                   
  04/12/94              (S)   RLS AT 00:00 AM FAHRENKAMP                       
                              ROOM 203                                         
  04/12/94      3583    (S)   JUD RPT CS 4DP 1NR SAME TITLE                    
  04/12/94      3584    (S)   PREVIOUS ZERO FNS APPLY (ADM-2,                  
                              DPS, LAW                                         
  04/14/94      3666    (S)   RULES TO CALENDAR  4/14/94                       
  04/14/94      3669    (S)   READ THE SECOND TIME                             
  04/14/94      3669    (S)   JUD CS ADOPTED UNAN CONSENT                      
  04/14/94      3669    (S)   ADVANCED TO THIRD READING UNAN                   
                              CONSENT                                          
  04/14/94      3669    (S)   READ THE THIRD TIME  CSSB 349                    
                              (JUD)                                            
  04/14/94      3670    (S)   PASSED Y19 N- E1                                 
  04/14/94      3670    (S)   COURT RULE CHANGE VOTE SAME AS                   
                              PASSAGE                                          
  04/14/94      3690    (S)   TRANSMITTED TO (H)                               
  04/15/94      3459    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)                  
  04/15/94      3459    (H)   STATE AFFAIRS, JUDICIARY                         
  04/22/94      3686    (H)   JUDICIARY REFERRAL WAIVED                        
  04/28/94              (H)   STA AT 09:00 AM CAPITOL 102                      
                                                                               
                                                                               
  BILL:  SB 353                                                                
  SHORT TITLE: PEREMPTORY CHALLENGE OF JURORS                                  
  SPONSOR(S): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR                                 
                                                                               
  JRN-DATE     JRN-PG               ACTION                                     
  03/09/94      3116    (S)   READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)                  
  03/09/94      3116    (S)   STATE AFFAIRS, JUDICIARY                         
  03/09/94      3117    (S)   ZERO FNS PUBLISHED (LAW, DPS,                    
                              ADM-2)                                           
  03/09/94      3117    (S)   GOVERNOR'S TRANSMITTAL LETTER                    
  03/14/94      3189    (S)   STA RPT  2DP 1NR                                 
  03/14/94      3189    (S)   PREVIOUS ZERO FNS (ADM-2, DPS,                   
                              LAW)                                             
  03/14/94              (S)   STA AT 9:00 AM BUTROVICH RM 205                  
  03/14/94              (S)   MINUTE(STA)                                      
  03/14/94              (S)   MINUTE(STA)                                      
  03/14/94              (S)   MINUTE(STA)                                      
  03/25/94              (S)   JUD AT 01:30 PM BELTZ ROOM 211                   
  04/12/94              (S)   RLS AT 00:00 AM FAHRENKAMP                       
                              ROOM 203                                         
  04/12/94      3584    (S)   JUD RPT  CS  2DP 3NR SAME TITLE                  
  04/12/94      3584    (S)   PREVIOUS ZERO FNS APPLY                          
                              (ADM-2,DPS,LAW)                                  
  04/14/94      3666    (S)   RULES TO CALENDAR  4/14/94                       
  04/14/94      3670    (S)   READ THE SECOND TIME                             
  04/14/94      3670    (S)   JUD  CS ADOPTED UNAN CONSENT                     
  04/14/94      3671    (S)   ADVANCED TO THIRD READING UNAN                   
                              CONSENT                                          
  04/14/94      3671    (S)   READ THE THIRD TIME CSSB 353                     
                              (JUD)                                            
  04/14/94      3671    (S)   PASSED Y19 N- E1                                 
  04/14/94      3690    (S)   TRANSMITTED TO (H)                               
  04/15/94      3459    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)                  
  04/15/94      3459    (H)   STATE AFFAIRS, JUDICIARY                         
  04/22/94      3687    (H)   JUDICIARY REFERRAL WAIVED                        
  04/28/94              (H)   STA AT 09:00 AM CAPITOL 102                      
                                                                               
                                                                               
  BILL:  SB 215                                                                
  SHORT TITLE: OIL/HAZARDOUS SUBS. RELEASE RESPONSE FUND                       
  SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) MILLER,Kelly                                          
                                                                               
  JRN-DATE     JRN-PG               ACTION                                     
  05/08/93      2207    (S)   READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)                  
  05/08/93      2207    (S)   RESOURCES, FINANCE                               
  11/19/93              (S)   MINUTE(RES)                                      
  01/19/94              (S)   RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH RM 205                  
  01/19/94              (S)   MINUTE(RES)                                      
  01/25/94              (S)   RES AT 02:00 PM BELTZ ROOM 211                   
  01/26/94              (S)   RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH RM 205                  
  01/27/94              (S)   RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH RM 205                  
  01/31/94              (S)   RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH RM 205                  
  02/03/94              (S)   RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH RM 205                  
  02/07/94              (S)   RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH RM 205                  
  02/07/94              (S)   MINUTE(RES)                                      
  02/11/94              (S)   RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH RM 205                  
  02/16/94              (S)   RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH RM 205                  
  02/16/94              (S)   MINUTE(RES)                                      
  02/22/94              (S)   RES AT 12:00 PM BUTRVICH RM 205                  
  02/22/94              (S)   MINUTE(RES)                                      
  02/28/94      2987    (S)   RES RPT  CS  4DP 2NR  NEW TITLE                  
  02/28/94      2988    (S)   FISCAL NOTE TO SB PUBLISHED                      
                              (DEC)                                            
  02/28/94      2988    (S)   FISCAL NOTE TO CS PUBLISHED                      
                              (DEC)                                            
  03/01/94              (S)   FIN AT 09:00 AM SENATE FIN 518                   
  03/01/94              (S)   MINUTE(FIN)                                      
  03/03/94              (S)   FIN AT 09:00 AM SENATE FIN 518                   
  03/22/94              (S)   FIN AT 09:00 AM SENATE FIN 518                   
  03/25/94              (S)   FIN AT 09:00 AM SENATE FIN 518                   
  04/07/94              (S)   FIN AT 08:00 AM SENATE FIN 518                   
  04/07/94              (S)   FIN AT 05:00 PM SENATE FIN 518                   
  04/08/94      3521    (S)   FIN RPT  CS  5DP 1NR NEW TITLE                   
  04/08/94      3522    (S)   ZERO FN TO SB & CS PUBLISHED                     
                              (DPS)                                            
  04/08/94      3522    (S)   ZERO FN TO CS PUBLISHED (DEC)                    
  04/11/94              (S)   RLS AT 00:00 AM FAHRENKAMP                       
                              ROOM 203                                         
  04/12/94      3587    (S)   ZERO FN TO SB & CS PUBLISHED                     
                              (ADM)                                            
  04/12/94      3587    (S)   ZERO FN TO CS PUBLISHED (REV)                    
  04/12/94      3587    (S)   FN TO SB & CS PUBLISHED (LAW)                    
  04/12/94      3586    (S)   RULES RPT 3CAL 1NR 1DNP 4/12/94                  
  04/12/94      3590    (S)   READ THE SECOND TIME                             
  04/12/94      3590    (S)   FIN CS ADOPTED UNAN CONSENT                      
  04/12/94      3591    (S)   AM NO  1  MOVED BY KERTTULA                      
  04/12/94      3592    (S)   AM NO  1  FAILED  Y9 N11                         
  04/12/94      3592    (S)   AM NO  2  MOVED BY KERTTULA                      
  04/12/94      3592    (S)   AM NO  2  FAILED  Y8 N12                         
  04/12/94      3594    (S)   AM NO  3  MOVED BY LINCOLN                       
  04/12/94      3594    (S)   AM NO  3  FAILED  Y9 N11                         
  04/12/94      3595    (S)   AM NO  4  MOVED BY ADAMS                         
  04/12/94      3595    (S)   AM NO  4  FAILED  Y9 N11                         
  04/12/94      3595    (S)   AM NO  5  MOVED BY ADAMS                         
  04/12/94      3598    (S)   AM NO  5  FAILED  Y9 N11                         
  04/12/94      3599    (S)   AM NO  6  MOVED BY ZHAROFF                       
  04/12/94      3599    (S)   AM NO  6  FAILED  Y10 N10                        
  04/12/94      3599    (S)   AM NO  7  BY ZHAROFF/WITHDRAWN                   
  04/12/94      3599    (S)   MTN TO ADVANCE TO 3RD READING                    
  04/12/94      3600    (S)   ADVANCE MOTION WITHDRAWN                         
  04/12/94      3600    (S)   AM NO  8  MOVED BY MILLER                        
  04/12/94      3600    (S)   AM NO  8  ADOPTED UNAN CONSENT                   
  04/12/94      3601    (S)   AM NO  9  MOVED BY SALO                          
  04/12/94      3601    (S)   AM NO  9  FAILED  Y9 N10 A1                      
  04/12/94      3602    (S)   ADVANCE TO THIRD READING FLD                     
                              Y10 N9 A1                                        
  04/12/94      3602    (S)   THIRD READING 4/13 CALENDAR                      
  04/13/94      3641    (S)   ZERO FN TO CS PUBLISHED(LAW)                     
                              REPLACES #6                                      
  04/13/94      3641    (S)   READ THE THIRD TIME  CSSB
                              215(FIN) AM                                      
  04/13/94      3641    (S)   FAILED PASSAGE Y10 N9 A1                         
  04/13/94      3641    (S)   Miller NOTICE OF                                 
                              RECONSIDERATION                                  
  04/14/94      3672    (S)   RECON TAKEN UP/IN THIRD READING                  
  04/14/94      3673    (S)   PASSED ON RECONSIDERATION Y11                    
                              N8 E1                                            
  04/14/94      3674    (S)   EFFECTIVE DATES FAILED Y13 N6                    
                              E1                                               
  04/14/94      3689    (S)   TRANSMITTED TO (H)                               
  04/15/94      3457    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)                  
  04/15/94      3458    (H)   RESOURCES,STATE AFFAIRS,FINANCE                  
  04/22/94              (H)   RES AT 08:15 AM CAPITOL 124                      
  04/27/94      3751    (H)   RES RPT HCS(RES) 5DP 2DNP 2AM                    
  04/27/94      3751    (H)   DP:HUDSON,BUNDE,MULDER,WILLIAMS                  
  04/27/94      3751    (H)   DP:  JAMES                                       
  04/27/94      3751    (H)   DNP: CARNEY,FINKELSTEIN                          
  04/27/94      3751    (H)   AM:  GREEN, DAVIES                               
  04/27/94      3751    (H)   -FISCAL NOTE (REV) 4/27/94                       
  04/27/94      3751    (H)   -4 ZERO FNS (DPS,LAW,DEC,ADM)                    
                              4/27/94                                          
  04/28/94              (H)   STA AT 09:00 AM CAPITOL 102                      
                                                                               
  ACTION NARRATIVE                                                             
                                                                               
  TAPE 94-51, SIDE A                                                           
  Number 000                                                                   
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN AL VEZEY called the meeting to order at 9:05 a.m.                   
  Members present were REPRESENTATIVE KOTT, G. DAVIS, OLBERG,                  
  B. DAVIS and ULMER.  A quorum was present.                                   
  CSSB 349 - GRAND JURY EVIDENCE BY POLICE OFFICERS                            
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY opened CSSB 349 for discussion.  He noted                     
  House Judiciary Committee had already waived this bill,                      
  therefore State Affairs would be its last committee of                       
  referral.  He believed CSSB 349 was identical to its House                   
  companion bill which had been before the House Education and                 
  Social Services, Judiciary and Finance Committees.  He                       
  stated CSSB 349 proposes to allow police officers to give                    
  hearsay testimony of other police officers they serve with                   
  or supervise.                                                                
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE FRAN ULMER asked if CHAIRMAN VEZEY planned to                 
  allow testimony from the Department of Law.                                  
                                                                               
  (REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS entered at 9:06 a.m.)                                
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY responded no, everyone in the committee, but                  
  REPRESENTATIVE ULMER, heard their testimony previously in                    
  other committees.                                                            
                                                                               
  Number 040                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE ULMER said she would like to have her                         
  question answered because it may lead to an amendment on the                 
  floor.  She wanted to save time.  She noted Department of                    
  Law cannot testify on the floor of the House.                                
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY emphasized the bill had been heard in three                   
  committees in the House.                                                     
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE ULMER reminded this hearing was the last                      
  committee of referral, therefore it would be their last                      
  chance to put the answer to her question on public record.                   
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY asked REPRESENTATIVE ULMER to bring the                       
  question up on the floor.                                                    
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE BETTYE DAVIS said she felt REPRESENTATIVE                     
  ULMER should have the right to ask the question.                             
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY asked if anyone else in the committee desired                 
  to hear testimony.                                                           
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE PETE KOTT mentioned he may be able to answer                  
  the question.                                                                
                                                                               
  Number 080                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE ULMER asked on page 2, line 23, relating to                   
  hearsay evidence, if the evidence had to have been recorded                  
  in order for it to be used by the peace officer before the                   
  grand jury.  Is some sort of record or formal transcript                     
  required.                                                                    
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY answered no.                                                  
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE ULMER further questioned how the testimony or                 
  omission could be proven negligent at some time if records                   
  are not kept at the time of questioning.                                     
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY observed it would be a difficult burden of                    
  proof.  He pointed out most testimony given in court is not                  
  backed up be transcripts or tape recordings, only peoples'                   
  testimony under oath.                                                        
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE ULMER replied a hearsay exception is                          
  different from testimony given in court under oath.  She                     
  noted this is a grand jury proceeding.                                       
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY suggested REPRESENTATIVE ULMER prepare an                     
  amendment and present it on the floor.                                       
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE B. DAVIS asked that the question be answered.                 
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY asked the pleasure of the committee.                          
                                                                               
  Number 145                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE HARLEY OLBERG moved to move CSSB 349(JUD)                     
  from committee with individual recommendations.                              
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE ULMER objected to the motion as a matter of                   
  process.  She stated CHAIRMAN VEZEY could not tell a member                  
  of the committee that they cannot ask the administration a                   
  legitimate question.  She noted Margot Knuth, Department of                  
  Law, was available to answer the question.  She emphasized                   
  having Ms. Knuth's testimony on the record was the only way                  
  for other members of the legislature to know what happens in                 
  CSSB 349.                                                                    
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY asked if REPRESENTATIVE ULMER planned to                      
  appeal the decision of the chair.                                            
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE ULMER answered she objected for the reasons                   
  stated.                                                                      
                                                                               
  Number 175                                                                   
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY asked the committee secretary to call the                     
  roll.                                                                        
                                                                               
                                                                               
  IN FAVOR:      REPRESENTATIVES VEZEY, KOTT, G. DAVIS,                        
                 SANDERS, OLBERG.                                              
  OPPOSED:       REPRESENTATIVES ULMER, B. DAVIS.                              
                                                                               
  MOTION PASSED                                                                
  CSSB 353(JUD) - PEREMPTORY CHALLENGE OF JURORS                               
                                                                               
  Number 180                                                                   
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY opened CSSB 353(JUD) for discussion.  He                      
  observed CSSB 353(JUD) in essence reduces the number of                      
  peremptory challenges from ten to six.  He believed the                      
  companion bill already had gone through Judiciary, and                       
  possibly Finance, because it is was in Rules now.                            
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE ULMER inquired whether or not CSSB 353(JUD)                   
  was similar to how the law was previously in the state of                    
  Alaska.  She assumed at one point there had been an equal                    
  number and it was changed.  If so, why was it changed and                    
  why is it being changed back.                                                
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY answered ten is bigger than six.  From                        
  testimony he has heard, the amount of work required to                       
  select of jury can be reduced.  The amount of jurors called                  
  for a jury hearing can be a smaller number.  A cost savings                  
  method.  The legal history of the change, he said, went too                  
  far back for him to have knowledge of.                                       
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE ULMER questioned if there had been a public                   
  policy reason or rationale for the decision that one side                    
  should have six and the other should have ten.  She said she                 
  would be happy to have Margot Knuth, who was observing,                      
  answer the question.                                                         
                                                                               
  Number 247                                                                   
                                                                               
  MARGOT KNUTH, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF LAW,                 
  answered REPRESENTATIVE ULMER's question.  She stated CSSB
  353(JUD) is raising the number of peremptory challenges to                   
  ten that the state will have, as well as leaving the                         
  defendants number at ten.  She commented the Office of Pubic                 
  Advocacy and the Public Defender's office stated they would                  
  like to see the levels fair.  The change would not be a cost                 
  reducing measure as once believed, but it would level the                    
  playing for the state.  She did not know why the discrepancy                 
  had existed for so many years.  She mentioned when both the                  
  prosecutors and the defense bar now agree that ten each is                   
  the right number, the Governor's office was happy to comply.                 
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE OLBERG asked why not six each to save money.                  
                                                                               
  MS. KNUTH answered six each would save money, but the                        
  defense bar was concerned it would not give them enough                      
  flexibility to pick the jury they want.  The initial House                   
  Bill version was a compromise version of eight preempts for                  
  each side, however, it was amended in the Senate to bring                    
  the number back up to ten.  She pointed out any version with                 
  an equal number is acceptable to the state.                                  
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY clarified there was no cost savings.                          
                                                                               
  MS. KNUTH responded correct, CSSB 353(JUD) is now an                         
  equalizing bill.                                                             
                                                                               
  Number 278                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE KOTT asked if was a national standard.                        
                                                                               
  MS. KNUTH answered there is; however, she could not recall                   
  whether it was eight or ten.  She believed there was eight                   
  on each side at the general level.  They had patterned after                 
  this trend originally.                                                       
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY inquired the number of preempts in the                        
  companion bill currently in Rules.                                           
                                                                               
  MS. KNUTH answered HB 528, with only a Judiciary referral,                   
  reflects six each.  The Senate amended it to bring the state                 
  up to ten.                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE OLBERG noted the final line in the analysis                   
  states allowing both six challenges "may" reduce the cost of                 
  criminal trials.                                                             
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY clarified the state did not care what the                     
  number was as long as there was a level playing field.                       
                                                                               
  MS. KNUTH replied correct.                                                   
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY asked the pleasure of the committee.                          
                                                                               
  Number 317                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE OLBERG moved to pass CSSB 353(JUD) with                       
  individual recommendations.                                                  
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY asked the committee secretary to call the                     
  roll.                                                                        
                                                                               
  IN FAVOR:      REPRESENTATIVES VEZEY, KOTT, ULMER, B. DAVIS,                 
                 G. DAVIS, SANDERS, OLBERG.                                    
                                                                               
  MOTION PASSED                                                                
  HCSCSSB 215(STA) - OIL/HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE RELEASE RESPONSE                  
  FUND                                                                         
                                                                               
  Number 328                                                                   
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY opened HCSCSSB 215(RES) for discussion.  He                   
  noted the committee had before them a proposed State Affairs                 
  committee substitute, version Z.  For discussion purposes,                   
  he asked if there was a motion to adopt the new committee                    
  substitute.                                                                  
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE GARY DAVIS moved to adopt the work draft of                   
  HCSCSSB 215(STA).                                                            
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY, hearing no objection, adopted HCSCSSB
  215(STA), version Z.  He stated this version was identical                   
  to the version which passed the Senate, however, with a few                  
  changes.  He noted Section 3 of the State Affairs version                    
  requires Community & Regional Affairs to return unused                       
  portions of grant money after one year.                                      
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE OLBERG clarified the change was on page 6,                    
  line 5.                                                                      
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE ULMER observed the language "at the direction                 
  of the governor or at the request of the commissioner..."                    
  was being removed, basically making it mandatory.                            
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY responded he was not sure which version of                    
  the committee substitute had made that deletion.                             
                                                                               
  Number 360                                                                   
                                                                               
  SENATOR MIKE MILLER, SPONSOR OF SB 215, addressed the bill.                  
  He pointed out he was before the committee to testify on the                 
  original bill which had passed the Senate and he was not                     
  that familiar with the changes in the committee substitute.                  
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY inquired if the wording "at the direction of                  
  the governor" was removed in the Senate bill, Resources                      
  version.                                                                     
                                                                               
  SENATOR MILLER answered yes.                                                 
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE ULMER commented the removal of this language                  
  appears to mean they do not have the discretion to decide on                 
  a case by case, or year by year basis when it should be                      
  done.  She asked for comments.                                               
                                                                               
  SENATOR MILLER responded he had not seen HCSCSSB 215(STA).                   
  He pointed out there has never been a grant issued under                     
  this section of the law.  He noted or school district had                    
  been added because in some of the rural areas the school                     
  district is really the governing body.                                       
                                                                               
  Number 392                                                                   
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY referred to the next change in Section 4,                     
  page 7, line 12, where the word actual has been inserted                     
  before the word "cost".  This is to clarify what costs are                   
  to be considered.                                                            
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE ULMER asked if this addition had special                      
  meaning.                                                                     
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY answered it was an attempt to clarify what                    
  costs are.  He noted actual cost is a narrower subject than                  
  total cost.                                                                  
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE ULMER clarified CHAIRMAN VEZEY was trying to                  
  narrow the bill to things that can be directly attributable                  
  by an accounting process.  She asked this as opposed to                      
  what.                                                                        
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY replied as opposed to costs that cannot be                    
  compared to an expenditure.                                                  
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE G. DAVIS mentioned this addition may reduce                   
  "in-kind trading" or exchange opportunities.                                 
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY noted costs do not necessarily have to be                     
  cash.                                                                        
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE OLBERG mentioned loss of use.                                 
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY directed to Section 20 for the next change                    
  provided in HCSCSSB 215(STA).  Section 20 deletes response                   
  to "a threatened release" from uses of the response fund.                    
  Section 20 also limits response uses of the prevention                       
  account to larger spills of 2,500 barrels.                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE ULMER clarified the State Affairs version                     
  would read "a release," not "a threatened release" as the                    
  House Resources version reads on page 14, line 26.                           
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY affirmed REPRESENTATIVE ULMER.                                
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE ULMER asked the sponsor to comment.                           
                                                                               
  SENATOR MILLER, for the committee's benefit, said he would                   
  try to reconstruct what happened in the Senate to SB 215.                    
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY mentioned he and the drafters, worked off the                 
  Senate version so it would be easier for the two bodies to                   
  compare their work.                                                          
                                                                               
  Number 458                                                                   
                                                                               
  SENATOR MILLER stated originally they thought they were                      
  passing a nickel surcharge to accumulate $50 million, which                  
  would then go away.  Over a period of time however, other                    
  statutes were added  which had other uses for those moneys.                  
  This meant the state was having a hard time accumulating the                 
  $50 million fund.                                                            
                                                                               
  SENATOR MILLER noted last year REPRESENTATIVE GREEN                          
  introduced legislation similar to SB 215 on the House side.                  
  SB 215 was intended to correct the problems he noticed in                    
  collecting the $50 million fund.  The first concept entailed                 
  $.02 to Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) for                   
  ongoing programs and $.03 to the $50 million fund.  DEC,                     
  however, came back and said they wanted to keep the $.05                     
  whole.                                                                       
                                                                               
  SENATOR MILLER stated Senate Resources decided upon a 2.5                    
  cent split.  Industry was not satisfied with this.  DEC                      
  suggested $.02 for the response side and $.03 for the                        
  prevention side.  He pointed out that once SB 215 reached                    
  Senate Finance, they felt it was a fair piece of legislation                 
  with $.03 going to ongoing DEC programs and $.02 to the $50                  
  million fund.  He commented the other $37 million would be                   
  transferred over to the response side.                                       
                                                                               
  SENATOR MILLER emphasized a lot of work has been done on SB
  215.  He believed it was in a form which the Administration                  
  can and does support.  He felt SB 215 supports the goal of                   
  having ongoing funds, while at the same time providing a $50                 
  million fund available to respond to spills.  He mentioned                   
  some people rely on the billion dollar federal fund which                    
  could function the same; however, this would not benefit and                 
  is not accessible to those in the Interior with the                          
  pipeline.  The federal fund applies to those communities on                  
  the water.                                                                   
                                                                               
  SENATOR MILLER noted the accounting problems DEC had with                    
  the nickel collections.  He felt if proper accounting had                    
  taken place as was intended, the $50 million would already                   
  be in place and the nickel would be gone per their vote in                   
  1989.  He said he viewed SB 215 as adding a $.03 tax back                    
  permanently.                                                                 
                                                                               
  SENATOR MILLER further stated he had not had a chance to                     
  look over HCSCSSB 215(STA) and its ramifications.                            
                                                                               
  Number 506                                                                   
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY commented they had gone considerably beyond                   
  the scope of Section 20, which actually sets up the fund.                    
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE ULMER questioned the change in Section 20,                    
  whereby "threatened release" is deleted.                                     
                                                                               
  SENATOR MILLER responded he supported the version which came                 
  out of the Senate.                                                           
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY answered threatened releases are covered in                   
  the fund created under Section 20, paragraph (2).  The fund                  
  created under Section 20, paragraph (1), had covered them                    
  previously, but in the State Affairs version they are not.                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE ULMER, looking for expertise, questioned the                  
  significance of having "threatened release" in the bill.                     
                                                                               
  Number 532                                                                   
                                                                               
  DAVID ROGERS, SPECIAL COUNCIL ON HCSCSSB 215, SENATE FINANCE                 
  COMMITTEE, answered questions for the committee.  He                         
  believed the definitions for "threatened release" are in                     
  Sections 41 and 42 of HCSCSSB 215(RES).                                      
                                                                               
  SENATOR MILLER noted in the Senate version definitions are                   
  in Section 39.                                                               
                                                                               
  MR. ROGERS pointed out the definitions tighten up an                         
  existing definition in current law of "threatened release."                  
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY clarified the question was "threatened                        
  release" was included in both funds (1) and (2); however,                    
  now it is only in fund (2).  The implication, therefore, is                  
  fund (1) cannot be used for a threatened release.                            
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE ULMER asked if the sponsor supported this.                    
                                                                               
  SENATOR MILLER reiterated he supported the version which                     
  came out of the Senate.                                                      
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE ULMER said she interpreted this to mean                       
  "threatened release" should also be in fund (1).                             
                                                                               
  SENATOR MILLER replied, from his understanding, DEC has not                  
  spent a lot of money on "smaller spills."  He estimated $2-3                 
  million had been spent.  He felt they did a fair job at                      
  spending the money.  He noted there may be times when a                      
  threatened release will need to be considered to keep it                     
  from becoming a large release.                                               
                                                                               
  Number 557                                                                   
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY directed to Section 26 for the next change.                   
  Section 26 also deletes response to a "threatened release"                   
  as a use of the response fund.                                               
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE G. DAVIS clarified there is a spill response                  
  fund and a prevention fund.  An interpretation of a threat                   
  is that it is not a spill and it can be investigated from a                  
  prevention standpoint.                                                       
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY affirmed REPRESENTATIVE G. DAVIS.                             
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE OLBERG suggested everyone in the committee                    
  should read the definition of "threatened release" on page                   
  26 of HCSCSSB 215(STA).                                                      
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE ULMER commented "threatened release" per                      
  REPRESENTATIVE OLBERG's suggestion, makes it sound imminent.                 
  "Threatened" sounds like it may or may not happen.  She                      
  questioned if adequate response to an imminent, as opposed                   
  to "threatened" release, might "raise the anti."  She                        
  inquired if this was the original reason for accessing both                  
  funds.                                                                       
                                                                               
  SENATOR MILLER responded he would rather spend a little on                   
  preventative maintenance rather than a lot on cleanup.  He                   
  noted the factor of immediate access to the funds on the                     
  prevention side.                                                             
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY pointed out imminence carries no time frame.                  
  Certain problems, for example, can be addressed over five                    
  years.                                                                       
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE OLBERG mentioned he did not see anything in                   
  HCSCSSB 215(STA) which would preclude the commissioner from                  
  responding to a circumstance.  He noted response is in the                   
  judgment of the commissioner.  He felt removing "threatened"                 
  tightened the bill up a little bit.                                          
                                                                               
  Number 593                                                                   
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY concurred.                                                    
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY directed to Section 29, page 22, line 6,                      
  whereby the response fund is now limited to spills 2,500                     
  barrels of oil, or larger.  He pointed out this figure gets                  
  out of the normal commercial storage size and into                           
  industrial size storage capacities.                                          
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE ULMER asked the sponsor to comment on the                     
  2,500 barrels of oil threshold.                                              
                                                                               
  SENATOR MILLER responded 2,500 does correspond with the                      
  threshold on the grant side.  He noted there had been                        
  discussion in Senate Resources on this subject and there had                 
  been concerns that even 100 barrels of oil in the Kenai                      
  River in the wrong time of year would be a disaster.                         
  Therefore, this was one of the reasons they did not provide                  
  a limit in the Senate version.  He noted 2,500 barrels has                   
  been established in law on the grant side for some time.                     
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE ULMER clarified if the spill is 2,400 barrels                 
  of oil as opposed to 2,500, the response fund money cannot                   
  be used to clean it up.                                                      
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY affirmed REPRESENTATIVE ULMER.                                
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE ULMER asked what is used to clean it up.                      
  Would the general fund be used.                                              
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY replied he believed there were options                        
  available to the commissioner, other than the response fund.                 
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY reiterated for those people who live along                    
  the pipeline it is very important to have the response fund                  
  readily available.  He stated "2,500 barrels is going to be                  
  a drop in the bucket if we have any major disaster."                         
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE ULMER requested testimony from DEC as to the                  
  range of size of spills and what other sources they have for                 
  the cleanup of spills less than 2,500 barrels.                               
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY mentioned he had seen several statistics on                   
  that matter and he felt if they were all added up, every                     
  spill was in the order of a quarter a gallon.                                
                                                                               
  Number 639                                                                   
                                                                               
  SENATOR MILLER pointed out with the way HCSCSSB 215(STA) is                  
  worded, if the governor declares a disaster emergency they                   
  still may be able to tap the fund.  He was referring to the                  
  bottom of page 21 and top of page 22.                                        
                                                                               
  MR. ROGERS commented it appeared there are two ways to reach                 
  the fund:  1)  By disaster emergency declared by the                         
  Governor with no threshold spillage requirements; and 2) the                 
  2,500 barrel minimum requirement in the nondisaster                          
  emergency scenario.                                                          
                                                                               
  Number 649                                                                   
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY directed to Section 31, whereby reporting                     
  requirements are expanded to include investigating and                       
  evaluating with prevention account monies.  He referred to                   
  page 23, line 4.                                                             
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE ULMER noted the Resources committee version                   
  of Section 31 amended AS 46.08.050(b).  She asked if this                    
  amendment was deleted from the State Affairs version.                        
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY stated he did not believe Section 31 from                     
  either bill were comparable to each other.                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE ULMER referred to page 23, line 28, of                        
  HCSCSSB 215(STA) and noticed it amends AS 46.08.060(b).  She                 
  observed AS 46.08.050(b) was not amended in Section 31.                      
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY explained AS 46.08.050(b) was amended in                      
  Section 30 of HCSCSSB 215(STA), which he believed was                        
  identical to the change in HCSCSSB 215(RES).                                 
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE ULMER assumed HCSCSSB 215(STA), therefore,                    
  picked up another section.                                                   
                                                                               
  SENATOR MILLER commented that from his understanding,                        
  basically just the requirement for the reporting on the                      
  prevention account was also added.  He agreed with the                       
  accounting responsibilities.                                                 
                                                                               
  TAPE 94-51, SIDE B                                                           
  Number 000                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE ULMER asked the sponsor to comment on the                     
  splitting of the fund.  Why put all of the $37 million on                    
  the response side, as opposed to the prevention side.                        
                                                                               
  SENATOR MILLER answered with the 60/40 split if the over                     
  $112 million that has already been collected in nickels is                   
  divided by 40 percent, it is certainly more than $37                         
  million.  Therefore, he felt the nickels that have been                      
  collected have already been split 60/40.                                     
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE ULMER inquired what annual revenues would be                  
  generated for both purposes if collected with a 3-2 split.                   
                                                                               
  SENATOR MILLER answered assuming there is no production                      
  increase, in FY 95 the $.03 would generate $15.6 million and                 
  the $.02 would generate $10.4 million.                                       
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE ULMER asked how this roughly compares to the                  
  current annual expenditures for prevention.                                  
                                                                               
  SENATOR MILLER estimated in the Senate version of the budget                 
  [we] have between $13-14 million for those programs.                         
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE ULMER clarified this covered the total                        
  package.                                                                     
                                                                               
  Number 060                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE ULMER questioned the title because it                         
  discusses marine highway vessels.  She assumed HCSCSSB
  215(STA) was not retroactive, whereby the money appropriated                 
  for the new ferry would not be altered.  She inquired if                     
  there would not be any additional response for future                        
  ferries.                                                                     
                                                                               
  SENATOR MILLER said REPRESENTATIVE ULMER was not totally                     
  correct.  He referred to page 20, lines 24, subparagraph                     
  (E), whereby the fund will "pay all costs incurred to                        
  acquire, repair, or improve an asset having an anticipated                   
  life of more than one year and that is acquired, repaired or                 
  improved as a preparedness measure by which the state may                    
  respond to, recover from, reduce, or eliminate the effects                   
  of a release or threatened release of oil or a hazardous                     
  substance;".  This would allow, for example, a command                       
  center to be put in a ferry.                                                 
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE ULMER inquired if this would include                          
  telecommunications equipment and all other capital assets.                   
                                                                               
  SENATOR MILLER said yes, because the capital asset is what                   
  has the life of more than one year.                                          
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE ULMER questioned if there was a dispute about                 
  telecommunications equipment.                                                
                                                                               
  SENATOR MILLER answered he was not sure, but he believed an                  
  appropriation from 1993 was disputed as to whether they had                  
  the authority under current law to use that money for an                     
  emergency response center.  HCSCSSB 215(STA) clarifies this                  
  account can be used for that purpose.                                        
                                                                               
  MR. ROGERS clarified the money would come out of the                         
  prevention account.                                                          
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY moved to pass HCSCSSB 215(STA) from committee                 
  with individual recommendations.                                             
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE ULMER objected because she had questions for                  
  DEC.                                                                         
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY recognized REPRESENTATIVE ULMER's objection                   
  and asked the committee secretary to call the roll.                          
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE ULMER interjected and implored CHAIRMAN VEZEY                 
  to allow testimony from DEC.  She emphasized the sponsor had                 
  not yet reviewed HCSCSSB 215(STA).                                           
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY called REPRESENTATIVE ULMER out of order.                     
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY asked the committee secretary to call the                     
  roll.                                                                        
                                                                               
  IN FAVOR:      REPRESENTATIVES VEZEY, KOTT, G. DAVIS,                        
                 SANDERS, OLBERG.                                              
  OPPOSED:       REPRESENTATIVES ULMER, B. DAVIS.                              
                                                                               
  MOTION PASSED                                                                
                                                                               
  ADJOURNMENT                                                                  
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN VEZEY, having no further business before the                        
  committee, adjourned the meeting at 9:57 a.m.                                

Document Name Date/Time Subjects