02/21/2012 08:00 AM House STATE AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB304 | |
| HB254 | |
| HJR34 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 304 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HJR 34 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 254 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
February 21, 2012
8:06 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Bob Lynn, Chair
Representative Wes Keller, Vice Chair
Representative Paul Seaton
Representative Peggy Wilson
Representative Max Gruenberg
Representative Pete Petersen
Representative Kyle Johansen
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 304
"An Act relating to the membership of the Alaska Fire Standards
Council."
- MOVED HB 304 OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 254
"An Act establishing the Alaska Native Language Preservation and
Advisory Council and relating to the preservation, restoration,
and revitalization of Alaska Native languages."
- MOVED CSHB 254(STA) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 34
Urging the United States Congress to fund all the facilities and
vessels necessary for the United States Coast Guard to fulfill
its Arctic missions, including icebreakers and an Arctic Coast
Guard base.
- MOVED CSHJR 34(STA) OUT OF COMMITTEE
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 304
SHORT TITLE: ALASKA FIRE STANDARDS COUNCIL
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) JOHNSON
01/30/12 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/30/12 (H) STA, FIN
02/21/12 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
BILL: HB 254
SHORT TITLE: ALASKA NATIVE LANGUAGE COUNCIL
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) DICK, MUNOZ
01/17/12 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/6/12
01/17/12 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/17/12 (H) STA, FIN
02/16/12 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
02/16/12 (H) Heard & Held
02/16/12 (H) MINUTE(STA)
02/21/12 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
BILL: HJR 34
SHORT TITLE: COAST GUARD ICEBREAKERS & ARCTIC BASE
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) HERRON
02/03/12 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/03/12 (H) MLV, STA
02/16/12 (H) MLV AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
02/16/12 (H) Moved CSHJR 34(MLV) Out of Committee
02/16/12 (H) MINUTE(MLV)
02/17/12 (H) MLV RPT CS(MLV) 4DP
02/17/12 (H) DP: MILLER, LYNN, CISSNA, THOMPSON
02/21/12 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
WITNESS REGISTER
REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG JOHNSON
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: As sponsor, introduced HB 304.
ERIN SHINE, Staff
Representative Craig Johnson
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 304 on behalf of
Representative Johnson, sponsor.
JEFF TUCKER, Fire Chief
North Star Volunteer Fire Department (NSVFD); Past President
Alaska Fire Chiefs Association (AFCA)
North Pole, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 304.
TOM WESCOTT, President
Alaska Professional Fire Fighters Association (AKPFFA),
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 304.
GORDON DESCUTNER, Executive Director
Alaska Fire Standards Council
Department of Public Safety
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on HB
304.
ANNETTE KREITZER, Staff
Representative Alan Dick
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on HB
254 on behalf of Representative Dick, joint prime sponsor.
REPRESENTATIVE BOB HERRON
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HJR 34 as sponsor.
ADMIRAL JEFFREY GARRETT (Retired)
Seattle, Washington
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the hearing on HJR 34.
ACTION NARRATIVE
8:06:00 AM
CHAIR BOB LYNN called the House State Affairs Standing Committee
meeting to order at 8:06 a.m. Representatives Keller, Seaton,
P. Wilson, Petersen, and Lynn were present at the call to order.
Representatives Johansen and Gruenberg arrived as the meeting
was in progress.
HB 304-ALASKA FIRE STANDARDS COUNCIL
8:06:30 AM
CHAIR LYNN announced that the first order of business was HOUSE
BILL NO. 304, "An Act relating to the membership of the Alaska
Fire Standards Council."
8:06:47 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG JOHNSON, Alaska State Legislature, as
sponsor, introduced HB 304. He deferred to his staff to present
the proposed legislation.
8:07:46 AM
ERIN SHINE, Staff, Representative Craig Johnson, Alaska State
Legislature, presented HB 304 on behalf of Representative
Johnson, sponsor. She noted that the sponsor statement in the
committee packet shows two changes [to the membership of the
Alaska Fire Standards Council (AFSC)], and she explained that
there is a third change that did not make it into the sponsor
statement in time for the bill hearing. She said the proposed
legislation would make the following three changes relating to
AFSC: designate an existing seat to a member of the Alaska
Professional Fire Fighters Association (AKPFFA); add a seat for
a member of the Alaska Fire Chiefs Association (AFCA); and
reclassify the existing seat for the Alaska State Firefighters
Association (ASFA) from "firefighter administrative officer" to
"a member of" the association.
MS. SHINE stated that the mission of AFSC is to establish
professional standards for fire service personnel and curriculum
requirements for the certification of training programs. She
said AKPFFA, an affiliate of the International Association of
Fire Fighters, represents roughly 500 career fire fighters
throughout the state. She relayed that the mission of AFCA is
to serve the people of the state of Alaska by influencing fire
and emergency services programs in legislation, advancing fire
and emergency services professionals, and providing for the
safety and well-being of fire fighters and their communities.
She said the mission of ASFA is to serve its members through
professionalism and leadership, thereby enhancing the fire
rescue services of Alaska.
MS. SHINE said under HB 304, the Governor would appoint one
member of AKPFFA, one member of ASFA, and one member of AFCA to
the council from a list of at least three nominees submitted by
each association. She said the intent of the bill is to ensure
that AKPFFA, ASFA, and AFCA are represented on the Alaska Fire
Standards Council and to guarantee their designees can "speak
with the full confidence of their respective associations."
8:10:54 AM
MS. SHINE, in response to a question from Chair Lynn, offered
her understanding that the need for HB 304 was voiced by AFCA
and AKPFFA, as well as through letters of support from AFSC.
8:12:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE PETERSEN asked, "So, instead of having an
administrator, we're having a professional fire fighter - an
experienced fire fighter - on the council instead? Is that ...
why that was switched?"
MS. SHINE answered yes.
8:12:36 AM
MS. SHINE, in response to Representative P. Wilson, said after
asking all three associations and the council, she could not
find any opposition to the proposed bill. In response to
Representative Seaton, she offered her understanding that HB 304
includes all fire fighter associations of Alaska; however, she
deferred to upcoming witnesses for verification.
8:14:04 AM
JEFF TUCKER, Fire Chief, North Star Volunteer Fire Department
(NSVFD); Past President, Alaska Fire Chiefs Association (AFCA),
testifying in support of HB 304, confirmed Ms. Shine's answer to
Representative Seaton that [HB 304] would represent the three
statewide organizations that represent fire fighters throughout
Alaska. He said AFCA, along with AKPFFA, has worked with the
council to give those two organizations representation on the
council; ASFA already had a seat on the council. He said the
decisions of the council have a direct influence on fire service
provisions and fire fighter training. He emphasized the
importance of having direct representation on the council.
8:15:19 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG cited AS 18.70.360, which read as
follows:
Sec. 18.70.360. Alaska fire services personnel fund.
The Alaska fire services personnel fund is created in
the general fund. The fund consists of appropriations
made by the legislature to the fund. The council may
use the money in the fund to carry out its powers and
duties.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG noted that AS 18.70.350 does not
reference the Alaska fire services personnel fund. He said he
thinks the last sentence in AS 18.70.360 would normally appear
in AS 18.70 350. He said he would like to know more about the
fund.
8:17:10 AM
MS. SHINE said she would have to get back to Representative
Gruenberg with an answer.
8:17:38 AM
CHAIR LYNN asked what Representative Gruenberg's question has to
do with the number people on the council.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG answered nothing, but indicated that it
is related.
8:18:06 AM
MR. TUCKER deferred to Gordon Descutner to answer Representative
Gruenberg's question.
8:18:49 AM
TOM WESCOTT, President, testified in support of HB 304. He
stated that AKPFFA represents fire fighters from Kotzebue to
Ketchikan. He said both the fire chief and AKPFFA have worked
with the council to be represented on the council and to get the
support of the council for the proposed legislation. He said,
"Speaking for both, it's basically our goal to bring our
experience, our expertise, and our resources to the board in an
effort to help the board fulfill its mission."
8:20:13 AM
MR. WESCOTT, in response to Representative P. Wilson, said there
are criteria for a fire fighter from a town with a population of
less than 2,500, as well as one from a town that has a
population greater than that. In response to a follow-up
question, he said there was no major event that brought about
the realization that the proposed changes were needed; there
were a couple meetings, where the idea was generated that the
people who make up AKPFFA and AFCA have something to offer to
the council. He confirmed that there are seven communities
represented by AKPFFA. In response to Representative P.
Wilson's query as to whether AKPFFA would "try to get more," he
said, "Well, certainly."
8:22:51 AM
MS. SHINE, in response to Representative Petersen, said
currently there are 11 members serving on the council and, under
HB 304, there would be 12.
8:24:36 AM
GORDON DESCUTNER, Executive Director, Alaska Fire Standards
Council (AFSC), Department of Public Safety (DPS), in response
to Representative Gruenberg's previous question, said the
original intent of the council was to collect a fee from home
insurance premiums that would be put into a dedicated fund to
support the council; however, that never materialized. He said
that language is still in statute, but technically there is no
money in a fire services personnel fund. He said the council
does have the authority to collect receipts, which are tied most
directly to testing and certification, but are not tied to
council travel, which has, to date, been covered with the
council's general funds. In response to Representative
Gruenberg, he said he does not know why the provision in statute
for the fund has never been implemented. He said there was a
lot of work done about 10 years ago regarding this issue, but no
agreement was reached with the insurance agencies and "the other
personnel that were involved with the early formation of the
council." He stated his belief that because of the difficulty
reaching an agreement, [the council] chose an alternative
solution, part of which was to at least have the administrative
services and travel costs for council members covered under the
general fund.
CHAIR LYNN requested that the bill sponsor check into this issue
and report his findings to the next committee of referral - the
House Finance Committee.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he would like a copy of those
findings.
8:27:45 AM
CHAIR LYNN, after ascertaining that there was no one else who
wished to testify, closed public testimony.
8:28:13 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER moved to report HB 304 out of committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal
notes. There being no objection, HB 304 was reported out of the
House State Affairs Standing Committee.
8:28:24 AM
The committee took an at-ease from 8:28 a.m. to 8:30 a.m.
HB 254-ALASKA NATIVE LANGUAGE COUNCIL
8:30:16 AM
CHAIR LYNN announced that the next order of business was HOUSE
BILL NO. 254, "An Act establishing the Alaska Native Language
Preservation and Advisory Council and relating to the
preservation, restoration, and revitalization of Alaska Native
languages."
8:30:28 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER moved to adopt the proposed committee
substitute (CS) for HB 254, Version 27-LS1145\M, Mischel,
2/20/12, as a work draft.
8:30:40 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG objected for the purpose of discussion.
He offered his understanding that the only changes made under
Version M would be to subsection (c), on page 2, lines 13-22.
8:31:14 AM
ANNETTE KREITZER, Staff, Representative Alan Dick, Alaska State
Legislature, answered questions on behalf of Representative
Dick, joint prime sponsor of HB 254. She confirmed that
Representative Gruenberg was correct about where the changes
would be made. In response to Chair Lynn, she explained that in
the original bill version, subsection (c) proposed that the five
voting members appointed to [the Alaska Native Language
Preservation and Advisory Council] by the governor would be
"professional language experts"; however, after consultation
with Rosita Worl, Ph.D., President of the Sealaska Heritage
Institute, the decision was made that "professional language
experts" was too broad, because that term could include
linguists who have no experience in Alaska Native language. The
language that was decided upon was: "three of whom are
professional Alaska Native language revitalization experts and
two of whom are fluent in an Alaska Native language and engaged
in revitalization efforts." Ms. Kreitzer said Dr. Worl is an
example of the former and Representative Dick's wife is an
example of the latter.
8:32:55 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG suggested that there could be someone
who is well qualified, who is fluent in an Alaska Native
language but has not been previously engaged in revitalization
efforts, and who would be useful on the council. He said he
wonders whether a person must have been previously engaged in
revitalization efforts or whether it could be someone who is an
expert in the language and interested in revitalization efforts.
He opined that there are so few people who meet the proposed
criteria, and the governor should have as much leeway as
possible, particularly with some of the more remote languages
and dialects.
8:34:42 AM
MS. KREITZER responded that those who are interested in the
proposed legislation will put forward names of people they
believe to be qualified. She said she does not think the
language, as written [in Version M], would restrict the ability
of the governor to select someone who is fluent in an Alaska
Native language and is interested and has attempted to engage in
revitalization efforts.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked, "So, it could be ... either
previously or currently engaged?"
MS. KREITZER offered her understanding that that is correct.
8:35:53 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG removed his objection to the motion to
adopt the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HB 254, Version
27-LS1145\M, Mischel, 2/20/12, as a work draft. [There being no
further objection, Version M was before the committee.]
8:36:14 AM
MS. KREITZER, in response to a question from Representative P.
Wilson, offered her understanding that the fiscal note for HB
254 is approximately $240,000.
8:36:51 AM
MS. KREITZER, in response to Representative Johansen, said the
normal, open board application process would be used, and the
only restriction on the governor's authority is that the five
voting members represent diverse regions of the state.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN asked if the joint prime sponsor would
object to an amendment stating that the Sealaska Corporation
would submit names for the Southeast Alaska council seat, from
which the governor would then choose.
MS. KREITZER ventured that Representative Dick would respond
that he does not want to restrict the opportunity for someone
not affiliated with Sealaska to apply for a seat on the council.
8:40:28 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG noted that there was an unoffered
amendment in the committee packet, the language of which was
subsumed into Version M, with one exception: the words "who are
engaged in revitalization efforts" are in the amendment, whereas
the words "and engaged in revitalization efforts" are in Version
M. He noted that that underscores Ms. Kreitzer's prior
acknowledgement that the person could be either previously or
currently engaged. He observed that language on page 3, line 1,
gives the governor a date by which he/she must make the
appointments, and he asked Ms. Kreitzer if it is the intent of
the joint primer sponsor that the legislative appointments also
would be made by that date.
8:42:08 AM
MS. KREITZER answered yes. She said there was a point in time
when governors were not making timely appointments; however, in
general, if the House and Senate pass legislation, those bodies
will make the appointments required by the piece of legislation.
8:43:10 AM
CHAIR LYNN closed public testimony.
8:43:31 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN moved to adopt Amendment 1, as follows:
Page 2, line 19:
Following "members."
Delete "In appointing the nonvoting members of
the council, the president of the senate and the
speaker of the house of representatives shall appoint
a member of the bush caucus, if a bush caucus exists.
In this subsection, "bush caucus" means a group of
legislators that represents rural areas of the
states."
8:44:03 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON objected for the purpose of discussion.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN stated that deleting that language would
allow the Senate President and the Speaker of the House to
determine who would be best to serve on the council, without
necessarily having to find someone who is a member of the bush
caucus. He said he, Representative P. Wilson, and
Representative Kerttula are members of the bush caucus; however,
Representative Kerttula, for example, does not necessarily
represent a rural area of the state. He opined that [requiring
the appointment of a member of the bush caucus] would disqualify
people who were born and raised [in rural Alaska] and speak a
Native Alaska language, but have moved to an urban area of the
state where they are not part of the bush caucus. He questioned
that someone who grew up in an urban area and subsequently moved
to a rural area would be more qualified.
8:46:32 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG stated his support of Amendment 1. He
echoed Representative Johansen's point that someone living in an
urban area may have come from rural Alaska and speak a Native
Alaska language fluently.
8:47:39 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON said she would like to hear what the
joint prime sponsor thinks of Amendment 1.
8:48:15 AM
MS. KREITZER said [the joint prime sponsor] opposes Amendment 1.
She said she understands Representative Johansen's concern;
however, with the language as is, there would be many members of
the bush caucus that would be qualified.
8:48:50 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER stated opposition to Amendment 1. He said
he cannot imagine a scenario in which there would be no
qualifying names for the Senate President and Speaker of the
House to put forward.
8:49:56 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON maintained her objection.
8:49:59 AM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Gruenberg and
Johansen voted in favor of Amendment 1. Representatives Seaton,
Keller, P. Wilson, and Lynn voted against it. Therefore, the
motion to adopt Amendment 1 failed by a vote of 2-4.
8:50:33 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER moved to report CSHB 254, Version 27-
LS1145\M, Mischel, 2/20/12 out of committee with individual
recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. There being
no objection, CSHB 254(STA) moved out of the House State Affairs
Standing Committee.
8:50:57 AM
The committee took an at-ease from 8:51 a.m. to 8:53 a.m.
HJR 34-COAST GUARD ICEBREAKERS & ARCTIC BASE
8:53:05 AM
CHAIR LYNN announced that the final order of business was HOUSE
JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 34, Urging the United States Congress to
fund all the facilities and vessels necessary for the United
States Coast Guard to fulfill its Arctic missions, including
icebreakers and an Arctic Coast Guard base.
[Before the committee was CSHJR 34(MLV).]
8:53:21 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER moved to adopt Amendment 1, which read as
follows:
Page 4, lines 26 - 28:
Delete "icebreakers, including charging for
icebreaker escorts, the option to lease rather than
own the icebreakers needed in the Arctic, and selling
our aging icebreakers to the private sector for
refurbishment"
Insert "the refurbishment of our current polar
class icebreakers, the acquisition of new icebreakers,
and the long-term maintenance funding of the United
States Coast Guard icebreaker fleet and Arctic
facilities"
8:53:47 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON objected [for the purpose of
discussion].
8:53:56 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BOB HERRON, Alaska State Legislature, presented
HJR 34 as sponsor. He stated his support of Amendment 1, which
he said is a result of testimony heard in the previous committee
of referral. He explained that "when you lease, you don't have
full control over icebreakers at all times," which he said could
be important in emergency situations. He said charging for
icebreaker escorts is illegal in international waters, where
freedom of navigation is guaranteed under international law. He
said "this" makes sense in regard to the northern sea route -
the Russian side; it does not make so much sense in regard to
the Bering Strait. He relayed that although selling icebreakers
may make sense on rare occasion, refurbishing them is probably
the best plan.
8:56:51 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON removed her objection. [There being no
further objection, Amendment 1 was adopted.]
8:57:09 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON stated that [CSHJR 34(MLV), as amended,]
asks U.S. Congress to fund all facilities and vessels necessary
for the U.S. Coast Guard to fulfill its mission, including a
forward Arctic base, icebreakers, and ice capable vessels. He
said the genesis of the proposed resolution came from a study
done by the Northern Waters Task Force, in particular from
conversations and testimony heard during that process regarding
national and state securities, for which the USCG is
responsible. He explained that during the testimony, the
opinion was voiced that the State of Alaska should urge the
federal government to strengthen and broaden USCG capabilities
with more icebreakers.
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON said currently the only operational ice
breaker is the Healy, and its life expectancy is to 2029; the
Polar Star is due back in 2013, after its refurbishment, but is
only expected to last until 2023. In response to Chair Lynn, he
said all three icebreakers are in the Pacific Northwest
currently. He relayed that the Polar Sea is slated to be
decommissioned. He indicated that President Barack Obama has
put $8 million toward studies and a new icebreaker. He said a
new icebreaker costs up to $1 billion and can take 7-10 years
from the time it is funded to the time it is launched. He
further indicated that the rationale of the proposed legislation
is contained within its language.
8:59:44 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON said the ideas inserted in the proposed
joint resolution were from Lt. Governor Mead Treadwell, whose
history with the Arctic is well chronicled. He noted that the
last committee of referral amended HJR 34 so that all foreign
ministers of "the appropriate Arctic jurisdictions" would
receive a copy.
9:00:23 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG stated his support of the proposed
joint resolution. He asked if there is a need to purchase
additional aircraft.
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON replied that under the proposed
legislation, the legislature is asking the U.S. Coast Guard to
work with its federal funders for an icebreaker with helicopters
that would be stationed on the icebreaker. He suggested a
shorter term goal would be the establishment of a forward base
somewhere between Nome and Barrow that would house a C 1-30. He
offered his understanding that in the recent past, a C 1-30 had
to overnight in Barrow in freezing weather and, because there
was no housing for it, parts froze, and the C 1-30 was grounded
to wait for new parts to be brought in.
9:02:29 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN pointed to the reference to "the United
States Arctic Region Policy" on page 1, line 13, and asked for
information about that policy.
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON relayed that on January 9, 2009, there was
a Presidential directive to the U.S. Department of Homeland
Security regarding the security of the Arctic region. He said
he would make copies available to the committee.
9:04:17 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN said he thinks it is logical that "we
have a presence and move towards this," but explained that he is
trying to clarify language within the proposed joint resolution.
He directed attention to language on page 2, line 1, which
states that "ice cover in the Arctic is at historic lows", and
he questioned the scientific accuracy of that statement.
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON responded that he thinks that brief
statement could be "further and better explained."
9:05:40 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN directed attention to language on page
4, lines 8-10, which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
WHEREAS having a sufficient number of ice-capable
vessels, including shallow-draft vessels with
icebreaking capability, is vital for the United States
Coast Guard to fulfill its expanding mission in the
Arctic; and
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN asked the sponsor if he is familiar with
the U.S. Coast Guard's plans for the future.
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON deferred to Admiral Garrett.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN directed attention to the term, "Bering
Strait chokepoint", on page 4, line 12, and asked for the
sponsor's definition of "chokepoint".
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON answered that "chokepoint" is a common
phrase heard during visits to the Nome area, Wales, and Little
Diomede, but he deferred to Admiral Garret for further
explanation.
9:07:57 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked the bill sponsor if he would
consider adding another "whereas" and another "be it resolved"
to HJR 34, to ask U.S. Congress to ratify the Law of the Sea
Treaty "for reasons expressed in here."
9:09:03 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON said the legislature has passed a
resolution related to the Law of the Sea Treaty, which is in
court.
9:10:49 AM
ADMIRAL JEFFREY GARRETT (Retired) related that he spent much of
his career with the U.S. Coast Guard serving in the icebreaker
fleet both in the Arctic and the Antarctic. He continued as
follows:
I think, as the Arctic has transformed in the past few
years, these assets have become increasingly critical
to the Coast Guard's ability to perform all its
mission responsibility in the Arctic, and I think
right now we're starting to see the consequences of
the nation's long-term disinvestment in our icebreaker
fleet.
ADMIRAL GARRETT said the U.S. Coast Guard has been unable to
deploy an icebreaker for Arctic multi-mission purposes for over
two years, and planned missions for the Polar Sea have had to be
cancelled. He said, "The nation's had no icebreaker available
to provide the critical annual resupply of U.S. bases in
Antarctica this year, forcing reliance on the expensive, short-
term charter of a Russian vessel." Furthermore, he relayed, the
icebreaker Healy was used to supply Nome with its fuel supply
last month, and, while the mission to Nome was successful, it
was accomplished only at the cost of extending Healy's lengthy
Arctic deployment and disrupting planned maintenance and future
operations.
ADMIRAL GARRETT said he thinks Alaskans clearly understand what
is happening in the Arctic today. He said he is glad to see the
need for adequate Arctic resources summarized in HJR 34, as well
as the resolution's strong call for the federal government to
provide the U.S. Coast Guard with the means to "meet our
national needs in the Arctic" - particularly in regard to
icebreakers. He said the fact that the President's 2013 budget
includes funding to begin icebreaker requisition is encouraging;
however, he opined that "this important action must move forward
quickly, and we have to ensure that the Polar Star and Polar Sea
remain fully operational in the interim." He said, "There's
really no substitute for having the right tool to meet the
challenges of a transforming Arctic."
ADMIRAL GARRETT echoed Representative Herron's mention of a
Presidential directive to the U.S. Department of Homeland
Security regarding the security of the Arctic region, and said
it is a "high-level document." He noted that the U.S. Coast
Guard has a high-level document called, "A Strategic Arctic
Approach." He said, "Really what's missing, I think, is the
actual tool to do these things."
9:14:50 AM
ADMIRAL GARRETT, in response to a previous question from
Representative Johansen asking for a definition of "chokepoint",
explained that any entrance to or from the Western Arctic
requires travel through the Bering Strait, which forces
international traffic "through U.S. waters in Nome." He said
the U.S. Coast Guard is concerned about having the ability to
monitor that traffic. He said icebreakers are the key to
situations related to defense, security, search and rescue, and
pollution.
9:15:49 AM
ADMIRAL GARRETT, regarding previous mention of the Law of the
Sea Treaty, stated:
This has been on the table for many years: multiple
chiefs of naval operations, multiple commandants of
the Coast Guard, joint chiefs of staff have all
(indisc.) incentive to pass the Law of the Sea
[Treaty], which will enable the United States to make
Continental Shelf claims and will preserve U.S. rights
and give us (indisc. -- coughing) standing, basically
to participate in future Law of the Sea items. And
this is particularly germane to the Arctic, where, for
the past 6 years, the icebreaker Healy has been doing
survey work to justify and defend this against foreign
claims of the outer Continental Shelf.
9:16:48 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG recollected that in history, there were
seven or eight vital straits named, and he questioned if the
Bering Strait was one.
ADMIRAL GARRETT said he does not believe "in those days" that
the Bering Strait "figured much into the worldwide strategic
construct," but he opined that it should today.
9:18:12 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG referred to a book entitled, The
Influence of Sea Power on History, and indicated that updating
related to straits would be necessary.
ADMIRAL GARRETT concurred. He mentioned the effect of climate
change on naval operations. He said he thinks the Bering Strait
has to be considered a critical waterway.
9:19:06 AM
CHAIR LYNN said this issue is interesting, but questioned
whether it is germane to the proposed joint resolution.
9:19:23 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON asked that the committee not include
language regarding the Law of Sea Treaty in HJR 34.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said The Study of Sea Power shows that
battles and wars are won by who controls the straits. He
referenced the word "chokepoint", on page 4, line 12, and
emphasized the importance of controlling the entire Bering
Strait, which he said will "have a lot of importance as we have
more global warming."
9:21:19 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON mentioned the National Academy of
Sciences' 50-year U.S. Navy research project, and indicated that
the proposed legislation could be amended on the House floor.
9:22:09 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG offered his office's service in that
effort. He reemphasized, "It's more than a chokepoint; it's a
strategic strait."
CHAIR LYNN suggested that the word "strategic" may be better
than the word "chokepoint".
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN remarked that "perhaps another Arctic
resolution ... might be your answer."
9:22:49 AM
CHAIR LYNN closed public testimony.
9:22:57 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN moved to adopt Amendment 2, as follows:
Page 1, lines 6-7:
Delete "on equal footing with the previously
admitted states"
9:23:26 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG objected for the purpose of discussion.
He asked why Representative Johansen thinks Alaska was not
admitted on equal footing.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN opined that since the original thirteen
colonies, no state has been admitted on equal footing,
especially Alaska, where most of the land is owned by the
federal government and the state is controlled by the federal
government like no other state in the Union.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said the effect of Amendment 1 would be
to imply that Alaska was admitted on less than equal footing.
He said he thinks it is important to establish that Alaska has
the rights of all other states, even if it is not always
accorded those rights.
CHAIR LYNN questioned whether Amendment 1 would have an effect
on the heart of the proposed joint resolution, which is that
Alaska needs more icebreakers.
9:25:34 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN, in response to Chair Lynn, asked why
the language is in HJR 34 if it does not make a difference. In
response to Representative Gruenberg, he said the language
directly before that which would be deleted under Amendment 1
shows that "Alaska was admitted to statehood in 1959". He
reiterated that stating Alaska is on equal footing is admitting
that Alaska is treated equally, which he does not believe is
true.
9:26:09 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG maintained his objection.
9:26:16 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON ventured there is a legal question wherein
there may be debate as to whether Alaska was the only state
admitted having subsurface rights to gas, oil, and other
minerals, and he remarked that almost all of Alaska's budget is
based upon the particularity of receiving oil and all the
subsurface rights. He said the legislature has had discussions
regarding the amount of land "given to education" and "whether
some of them were resolved by money and trust instead of actual
land." He said he thinks the intent of the first four or five
"WHEREAS" statements in HJR 34 is to say that Alaska was
purchased and admitted on equal footing, and in recognition of
that, Alaska deserves the same protection and preferences as any
other state. He stated, "I think that the sequence in hear is
to make a continuity between the second whereas and the fifth
whereas following in conjunction." In response to the chair, he
clarified that he was speaking in objection to Amendment 2.
9:28:28 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER stated his support for Amendment 2.
9:28:39 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked that the proposed Amendment 2 be
read again for clarification.
9:28:55 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN clarified Amendment 2. He said he would
like the bill sponsor's response to Amendment 2.
9:29:11 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON said he thinks Amendment 2 is in the
possession of the committee, and he said, "I have no opinion
either way."
9:29:40 AM
REPRESENTATIVE PETERSEN asked for confirmation that Amendment 2
would not delete the word "and" [on page 1, line 7].
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN answered that is correct.
9:30:03 AM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives P. Wilson, Keller,
Petersen, Johansen, and Lynn voted in favor of Amendment 2.
Representatives Seaton and Gruenberg voted against it.
Therefore, Amendment 2 was adopted by a vote of 5-2.
9:30:46 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN moved to adopt Amendment 3, as follows:
Page 1, line 8:
Delete "deserves"
Insert "expects"
Delete "and assistance"
9:31:46 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON objected. She said she would like to
split [Amendment 3] in two. She explained that she likes
"expects" but does not like "and assistance".
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN said he would like to speak to Amendment
3 before any motions are made to change it. Regarding the
proposed change from "deserves" to "expects", he said, "I don't
want to sit around and think that I deserve anything."
Likewise, he said he does not want anyone to think he is waiting
around for assistance.
9:32:57 AM
REPRESENTATIVE PETERSEN said he understands where
[Representative Johansen] is coming from, but does not believe
that the State of Alaska wants to be in the icebreaker buying
business and, thus, needs the assistance of the federal
government to procure icebreakers.
CHAIR LYNN reiterated that obtaining icebreakers is the key
element of HJR 34. He said he supports Amendment 3; however, he
indicated Alaska's involvement with the federal government in
terms of acquiring icebreakers.
9:34:10 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON offered his understanding that a motion
had been made to divide the question, and he said he supports
doing so.
9:34:16 AM
CHAIR LYNN announced that the committee would divide the
question to Amendment 3, such that there would be an Amendment
3a and 3b.
9:34:32 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON moved to adopt Amendment 3a, as
follows:
Page 1, line 8:
Delete "deserves"
Insert "expects"
9:34:49 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG objected. He explained that it is
possible to expect something but not deserve it. He opined that
it is more important that Alaska deserve [full recognition], and
he said he thinks the state deserves it. Furthermore, he said
he thinks the state deserves the assistance in this particular
case. He warned, "The effect of this amendment, whether it's
divided or not, will weaken the 'WHEREAS' clause." He said,
"This is not just semantics; this is the heart of the policy
behind the resolution." He concurred with Representative
Petersen regarding Alaska not being in the business of buying
icebreakers. He said this is a national issue of strategic
importance. He emphasized that without the assistance of the
federal government, Alaska will not have the icebreakers it
needs. He opined that the proposed language would weaken HJR
34.
9:36:13 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON said, "I'll withdraw my amendment to
divide."
CHAIR LYNN stated, "So, we're back to the original amendment."
He asked Representative Johansen to restate [Amendment 3].
9:36:33 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN renewed his motion to adopt Amendment 3
[language previously provided].
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG restated his opposition to Amendment 3.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN explained that he thinks using the term
"deserves" makes Alaska sound like a spoiled little child, while
he thinks using the word "expects" means that high expectations
will be met. Regarding the previous remark that the amendment
is not germane to the issue, he said, the language addressed by
Amendment 3 is a part of the proposed joint resolution. He said
the current language states that Alaska deserves federal
assistance like any other state. He said, "I'm pretty sure
they're not building icebreakers in Kansas; they get other ways
of assistance."
9:38:18 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER offered his understanding that "expects"
presumes "the deserved part" and is, therefore, a much stronger
word.
9:38:28 AM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Johansen, Keller,
and Lynn voted in favor of the motion to adopt Amendment 3.
Representatives Seaton, Gruenberg, Petersen, and P. Wilson voted
against it. Therefore, Amendment 3 failed by a vote of 3-4.
9:39:15 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN moved to adopt Amendment 4, as follows:
Page 2, lines 4-5, following "activity":
Delete "related to shipping, oil and gas
development, commercial fishing, and tourism"
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN said the intent of Amendment 4 is to
broaden the language. He explained that there could be other
types of human activity in the Arctic region, including sail
boats and vessels related to science.
9:40:29 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG objected. He said the phrase, "related
to shipping, oil and gas development, commercial fishing, and
tourism" is meant to be illustrative, not exclusive. He said
the text focuses the attention of the reader on "things that are
involved and ... are essential to the icebreaker issue." He
said he does not think anyone would argue that the state needs
to purchase an icebreaker to enable a sail boat to travel in the
Arctic. He reiterated that the proposed change would weaken the
"WHEREAS" clause.
9:41:28 AM
CHAIR LYNN moved to amend Amendment 4, to add "including"
[instead of "related to"].
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he would support that.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN objected. He said if an amendment is
made to Amendment 4, he would like the language to say
"including but not limited to".
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG called a point of order, and related
that [AS 01.10.040(b)] specifies that the meaning of "including"
in legislation is "including but not limited to".
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN maintained his objection to the
amendment to Amendment 4.
9:42:49 AM
CHAIR LYNN, in response to Representative Seaton, clarified that
under the amendment to Amendment 4, [page 2, lines 3-5 would
read as follows]:
WHEREAS the entire Arctic region, including the
Arctic region of the United States, is experiencing
increased human activity, including activity related
to shipping, oil and gas development, commercial
fishing, and tourism; and
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG returned to AS 01.10.040(b), which read
as follows:
(b) When the words "includes" or "including" are
used in a law, they shall be construed as though
followed by the phrase "but not limited to."
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG acknowledged that the language being
considered is part of a joint resolution, but said he thinks the
term "including" would be read in accordance with AS
01.10.040(b).
9:44:38 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN removed his objection to the proposed
amendment to Amendment 4.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON objected to the amendment to Amendment
4 to point out that AS 01.10.040(b) is Alaska law, and HJR 34
would be read by the federal government. She supported
Representative Johansen's suggestion to use the phrase
"including but not limited to".
CHAIR LYNN said, "That's fine with me; I'll amend the amendment
to the amendment, to include Representative Wilson's
modification."
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN questioned whether it is in order for
the committee to amend an amendment to the amendment.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said, "No, but ... we got the gist."
CHAIR LYNN emphasized the conceptual nature of the amendment.
9:46:09 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN said he would like to hear feedback from
the sponsor.
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON responded, "The list could have been
exhaustive, but I support the amendment."
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON removed her objection. [The amendment,
as amended, to Amendment 4 was treated as adopted.]
9:46:42 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG removed his objection to Amendment 4,
as amended.
9:47:14 AM
CHAIR LYNN confirmed that Amendment 4, as amended, was adopted.
9:47:18 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN moved to adopt Amendment 5, as follows:
Page 2, line 7, following "United States":
Delete "to enable the responsible development of
resources, foster maritime commerce, safeguard the
well-being of Arctic residents and ecosystems,
facilitate emergency and disaster preparedness and
response, and protect United States sovereignty"
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG objected. He said the existing
language focuses attention on specific problems. Under
Amendment 5, the language becomes general and does not give the
reason for the need for investment.
9:49:09 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON suggested that the committee not support
Amendment 5, because the findings of the Northern Waters Task
Force specifically outline governance, oil and gas exploration
and development, marine transportation, planning and
infrastructure investment, and fisheries.
9:49:41 AM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Johansen and Keller
voted in favor of Amendment 5. Representatives Petersen, P.
Wilson, Seaton, Gruenberg, and Lynn voted against it.
Therefore, Amendment 5 failed by a vote of 2-5.
9:50:18 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN moved to adopt Amendment 6, as follows:
Page 2, line 16:
Delete "oil and gas and other potentially
hazardous"
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN, in response to the chair, clarified
that under Amendment 6, the "WHEREAS" clause [on page 2, lines
15-17], would read as follows:
WHEREAS, as Northern sea routes open and foreign
shippers set their sights on Asian markets,
international shipping of cargo through the Bering
Strait is rapidly increasing; and
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN argued that any ship going through the
Bering Strait has oil, gas, or other potentially hazardous cargo
on board, and he said he does not think it is appropriate to be
"pointing out a particular section of shippers."
9:51:53 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG objected for the purpose of discussion.
9:52:04 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON said he understands the intent of the
amendment. However, he said this "WHEREAS" would share with the
federal government the specific concern expressed by the U.S.
Coast Guard and others regarding the Northern Sea route - the
Russian side of the Arctic - and shippers that go through the
eastern side of the strategic strait or chokepoint. He said,
"We're not calling out ourselves on any oil and gas or hazardous
cargo on ships that are going through on our side of the
strait."
9:53:22 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON said he thinks this "WHEREAS" clause
specifically addresses hazards that are different from those
contained in the other "WHEREAS" clauses, such as the language
on [page 2], line 21, which addresses "marine safety, ports,
waterways, and coastal security". He said for those reasons he
opposes Amendment 6.
9:54:19 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN offered his understanding that there are
two choke points: one between Big Diomede and Little Diomede
and Alaska, and the other between the two islands and Russia.
He asked if the U.S. has any control over "what happens ... on
the ... Russian side of the chokepoint." He further asked how
the countries involved make decisions.
9:55:36 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON indicated that [the language of the
"WHEREAS" clause on page 2, lines 15-17] is "calling on the
potential" for an unfortunate incident wherein oil and gas and
any other hazardous cargo comes across international boundaries
into U.S. territory, at which point the U.S. would "have to deal
with it whether we like it or not."
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN asked if there is a definite boundary
line drawn in that area, or if there is still "a triangle that
we're arguing over in that area."
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON answered that he is confident that the
line within the chokepoint is defined. He said there is a
triangle farther south in the Bering Sea. In response to a
follow-up question, he said the Northern Sea route in the Polar
Region is on the Russian side and follows along the Russian
Border over to Europe. In response to the chair, he said he
does not know the specific routes on the Russian side, but
clarified that the Northern Sea route is considered the Russian
route.
9:57:56 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON, in response to Representative Johansen,
opined that the "WHEREAS" clause recognizes that "on that side
of the strategic strait there is international [of] shipping oil
and gas and other cargos, and it's just increasing." He
expressed his hope that "that will assist the federal government
in its wisdom to realize that maybe icebreakers are necessary
for us on this side of the strait."
9:58:58 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER stated support for Amendment 6. He said
he thinks the "WHEREAS" clause could be better written.
9:59:29 AM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Johansen and Keller
voted in favor of Amendment 6. Representatives Gruenberg,
Petersen, P. Wilson, Seaton, and Lynn voted against it.
Therefore, Amendment 6 failed by a vote of 2-5.
10:00:08 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN moved to adopt Amendment 7, as follows:
Page 3, lines 19-21:
Delete all language
10:00:29 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER and REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG objected.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN said he has nothing against Nome or what
the [Russian] fuel tanker did [escorted by the U.S. Coast
Guard's icebreaker], although he offered his understanding that
necessity for such action was because someone forgot to get the
community's fuel order in on time. He explained that he does
not want to set the precedent that it is okay that "we're going
to run around with an icebreaker and plow a hole to whatever
community needs to get oil at the time." He opined that the
state needs to solve the bigger problem - "the energy issue" -
first. For example, he said if a road is built to Nome, then an
icebreaker would not have to provide fuel to that community. He
mentioned the Power Cost Equalization (PCE) Program and said,
"In a perfect world, PCE goes away."
10:03:08 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER removed his objection.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON said it is important to include this
"WHEREAS" clause, because people's lives are affected when fuel
cannot be delivered.
10:04:31 AM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Keller and Johansen
voted in favor of Amendment 7. Representatives Gruenberg,
Petersen, P. Wilson, Seaton, and Lynn voted against it.
Therefore, Amendment 7 failed by a vote of 2-5.
10:04:54 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER moved to report CSHJR 34(MLV), as amended,
out of committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal notes.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN objected. He said he believes "this" is
a valid effort. However, he expressed concern that if passed,
every word in [CSHJR 34(MLV), as amended,] would be sent to the
federal government as representing the position of the Alaska
State Legislature. He asked committee members to think about
that, and said chances are they would have another chance to
vote on the previously considered amendments on the House floor.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN removed his objection to the motion to
report CSHJR 34(MLV), as amended, out of committee with
individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes.
There being no further objection, CSHJR 34(STA) was reported out
of the House State Affairs Standing Committee.
10:07:20 AM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
State Affairs Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 10:07
a.m.