Legislature(1993 - 1994)
02/03/1994 09:40 AM Senate FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
MINUTES
SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE
February 3, 1994
9:40 a.m.
TAPES
SFC-94, #15, Side 1 (250-end)
SFC-94, #15, Side 2 (end-000)
SFC-94, #17, Side 1 (000-405)
CALL TO ORDER
Senator Drue Pearce, Co-chair, convened the meeting at
approximately 9:40 a.m.
PRESENT
In addition to Co-chairs Pearce and Frank, Senators Sharp,
and Jacko were present. Senator Rieger joined committee
after the meeting was in progress. Senators Kerttula and
Kelly were absent.
ALSO ATTENDING: Annette Kreitzer, aide to Senator Loren
Leman, Sponsor of SB 33; Ervin Martin, Director, Alaska
Division of Emergency Services (ADES), Department of
Veterans & Military Affairs; Mike Conway, Director, Division
of Spill Prevention & Response, Department of Environmental
Conservation; Kathryn Daughhetee, fiscal analyst, and Mike
Greany, Director, Legislative Finance Division; and aides to
committee members and other members of the legislature.
VIA TELECONFERENCE: Dr. Ernie Meloche, Chairman, Ketchikan
Local Emergency Planning Commission; Rocky Ansell, Copper
River Local Emergency Planning Commission, Glennallen; Bob
Spencer, Coordinator Local Emergency Planning Commission,
Fairbanks; Bob Stewart, Emergency Municipality Director,
Anchorage; Steve O'Connor, Vice Chairman, Local Emergency
Planning Commission, Kenai-Soldotna; Joe Banta, Prince
William Sound Citizens Regional Advisory Council, Anchorage;
and Nancy Lethcoe, Alaska Wilderness, Recreation & Tourism
Assoc. and citizen of Valdez; testified via teleconference.
Petersburg and Kodiak were listen only.
SUMMARY INFORMATION
CSSB 33(STA): An Act relating to emergency planning and
response; transferring the Hazardous
Substance Spill Technology Review Council to
the Department of Environmental Conservation;
transferring the Alaska State Emergency
Response Commission, including its duty to
designate local emergency planning districts
and appoint local emergency planning
committees, to the Department of Military and
Veterans' Affairs; and eliminating a
requirement that the state and regional oil
discharge prevention and contingency plans be
revised annually.
Testimony in support of SB 33 was heard by
Annette Kreitzer, aide to Senator Loren
Leman, Sponsor of SB 33; Ervin Martin,
Director, Alaska Division of Emergency
Services (ADES), Department of Veterans &
Military Affairs; and Mike Conway, Director,
Division of Spill Prevention & Response,
Department of Environmental Conservation. A
teleconference was held, individuals
testified on the bill, and some gave
recommendations for amendments. Amendment 1
from Senator Leman was presented to the
committee. No action was taken. SB 33 was
HELD in committee.
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 33(STA):
An Act relating to emergency planning and response;
transferring the Hazardous Substance Spill Technology
Review Council to the Department of Environmental
Conservation; transferring the Alaska State Emergency
Response Commission, including its duty to designate
local emergency planning districts and appoint local
emergency planning committees, to the Department of
Military and Veterans' Affairs; and eliminating a
requirement that the state and regional oil discharge
prevention and contingency plans be revised annually.
Co-chair Pearce announced that SB 33 was before the
committee. Since there were many people wanting to
testify in person and via teleconference, she asked that
testimony be kept to five minutes or less. She said it was
not her intention to move the bill because there needed to
be more time taken to look at the fiscal notes. She invited
Annette Kreitzer, aide to Senator Loren Leman, Sponsor of SB
33, and Mike Conway, Director, Division of Spill Prevention
& Response, Department of Environmental Conservation, to
join the members at the table.
ANNETTE KREITZER said that SB 33 began as a funding
mechanism for the Department of Environmental Conservation
and Military & Veterans' Affairs to extend grants to local
emergency planning committees. As the departments, the
State Emergency Response Commission, and the local emergency
planning committees, reviewed their responsibilities with
respect to planning, a very different bill emerged. The
committee substitute was the result of months of work by the
state emergency response Commission task force, input from
local governments, mayors, assemblymen and women, emergency
planners, local emergency planning committees, and from the
departments. At one point, a statewide teleconference was
held and recently, in a Senate State Affairs Committee
hearing, the CS was adopted.
Ms. Kreitzer then went through each section of the bill.
She said she would speak to a proposed amendment from DM&VA
after she gave the overview of the bill.
In answer to Co-chair Pearce, Ms. Kreitzer said that, under
the Community Right To Know Act, states were required to set
up a state emergency response commission by 1986. In
Alaska, the Governor not wanting to be liable for the
planning, set up a task force. Under the state commission
there were local emergency planning committees throughout
the state set up to do planning relating to oil and
hazardous materials.
End SFC-94 #15, Side 1
Begin SFC-94 #15, Side 2
Ms. Kreitzer outlined amendment 1 proposed by the Department
of Military & Veterans Affairs.
ERVIN MARTIN, Director, Alaska Division of Emergency
Services (ADES), Department of Veterans & Military Affairs,
said he would prefer to hear the local community testimony
first. Co-chair Pearce assured him they would be heard. He
believed that the state emergency response commission should
be "all hazards" because it was prudent and cost effective
rather than creating additional boards, councils and
commissions for earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, wildland
fires, etc. especially in view of what had transpired in the
lower 48 in the last year. He said he would be happy to
address any questions.
MIKE CONWAY said he did not want to diminish the importance
of preparedness and prevention for oil and hazardous
substance releases. Rather he wanted to elevate the
importance of prevention of events leading to disaster
emergencies. DEC had existing authorities and one entire
division dedicated to oil and hazardous prevention and
response which would continue to deal with day to day
responsibilities and prepare for oil and hazardous substance
disasters. The state's disaster preparedness would continue
to be coordinated through DM&VA. State laws passed after
the Exxon Valdez oil spill in 1989 focused the state's
attention on local, regional, and state preparedness for
potential oil and hazardous substance releases. The state
Emergency Response Commission was established to ensure that
government plans for oil and hazardous substance responses
were coordinated and integrated. Oil and hazardous
substance releases do happen in the state. DEC was the lead
agency for oil and hazardous substance pollution control and
response. During FY93 approximately 2,200 oil spills and
400 hazardous substance releases were reported to the
department. The vast majority of releases were not
disastrous emergencies as defined in Alaska statutes. The
department's response actions usually consisted of
overseeing the responsible party to insure that adequate
clean-up was completed or hiring a contractor to conduct the
clean-up. Natural disasters pose a much greater threat to
communities in Alaska than do oil and hazardous substance
releases. Alaska faces a broad spectrum of disaster
emergencies, including earthquakes, fire, flood, storms,
electrical power outages, water and sewer failures,
tsunamis, etc. Overall, potential oil and hazardous
substance releases pose less threat to Alaskans then do
other potential emergencies. Since 1977, two of the 166
declared disasters resulted solely from oil and hazardous
substance releases, the Exxon Valdez spill and the Crown
Point formaldehyde release.
Mr. Conway gave five specific recommendations. He said SB
33's intention was to improve the state's preparedness for
disaster response in that all state agencies would be
prepared individually and collectively. The bill language
needed to explicitly require state agencies to develop
agency specific plans that coordinate with the state
emergency plan and insure that staff were designated and
trained for carrying out those emergencies. As detailed in
the state emergency plan, each state agency was responsible
for certain aspects of the state's response to declare
disasters. One of the limitations cited in the plan was the
failure of state agencies to prepare for carrying out their
assigned duties. DEC and probably most other agencies were
not fully prepared to carry out their responsibilities in
the event of a disaster. He pointed out that all the
planning for oil and hazardous substance responses that had
gone on since the Exxon spill were focused on oil and
hazardous substances but in many of these disasters, other
issues must be faced such as water and sewer. He felt DEC
was not ready to meet those needs in case of an emergency.
Mr. Conway recommended language that would consolidate local
disaster planning and local planning under SARA Title III.
He said federal law did not need to be restated. Additional
sections or subsections could be added to define or clarify
requirements for specific types of disasters. He
recommended that a clear and specific definition be made of
emergency, emergency response organizations, and then
specify which emergency plan was subject to the provisions
of the law. Non-disaster oil and hazardous substance
response was managed on a day to day routine basis by DEC by
overseeing the responsible parties clean up of a spill or
employing contractors, or local governments to clean up a
spill if the responsible party refused to or could not be
found. Most responses did not involve other state agencies
or local responders. Without specific definition in the
bill, the term emergency suggested that, for example, the
SERC would be required to facilitate the preparation and
implementation of state agency response plan such as DEC's
oil and hazardous substance responses plans or DNR's fire
suppression plans. He recommended that the bill include
specific language that authorized direct appropriation and
response funds to DM&VA. And finally, he recommended
inclusion of additional provisions that gave appropriate
emphasis to all types of disasters. The current working
draft language placed most emphasis on oil and hazardous
substance planning preparedness. Many other potential
disasters pose a greater threat to Alaskans, and planning
and preparedness for these events should be balanced.
Mr. Conway said he had been following the earthquake
disaster in California. In order of the presentations made
by the press, he listed the key issues: communications,
hospitals and emergency medical care, problems with the road
system, drinking water supplies, utility services such as
water, sewer, natural gas, and safe buildings and homes.
There was only a minor mention of leaking gas and there was
one derailed train containing a hazardous substances. He
reiterated that oil and hazardous substances were a part of
the disaster emergency planning but in the biggest disasters
they may have a low priority and the agencies must be ready
to deal with other issues. He said he had prepared a
sectional for the members information.
Discussion was had by Senators Rieger, Jacko, Co-chair
Pearce, Mr. Martin, and Mr. Conway regarding a definition
for emergency, authority, responsibility, and planning in
regard to local emergency planning.
Co-chair Pearce announced that the teleconference portion of
the meeting would begin.
DR. ERNIE MELOCHE, chairman for the greater Ketchikan area
local emergency planning committee, and one of the
individuals that helped create the statewide local emergency
planning committee association which would be finalized on
February 15, 1994, testified via teleconference from
Ketchikan regarding the critical importance of the bill and
necessity of the funding. He disagreed with the comment
that plans would be written to sit on the shelf. This
process was designed and operational to enable the local
communities to write their own plans, to take the
responsibility that the plans were consistent with their
community needs, and to make it an "all hazards" plan. It
was also critical for any plan that was written, that that
plan not only come from the community, mesh with the state
and federal plan, but that the local community knew what the
plan was. The bill provided for money for the training and
testing of the local plans. Part of the planning process
included the state's responsibility to make sure the
community has access to knowledge about what hazardous
materials were in their community and to plan for them ("the
community right to know"). He said that was a federal
requirement that the state must insure that this happened.
In the 80s, Ketchikan was able to use state planners to help
write the community plan and effectively came up with a
completed plan that would be presented to the State
Emergency Response Commission on February 16, 1994. It took
4-1/2 years to write the plan. The state provided money for
a secretary to keep minutes of the meetings and that was how
the plan was completed. He said it was essential for
planners to come to the community, emphasized the importance
of funding and why it was so critical to the plan. Money
was also needed for training once the plan was written and
published.
Dr. Meloche said during this process of writing the plan,
the community learned of many things that needed to be
changed, or created to take care of emergencies and
disasters. He said that these kinds of funds were also
needed in the planning process. He said it cost money to
publish the plan. He reiterated that the state must provide
the money for this essential process.
End SFC-94 #15, Side 2
Begin SFC-94 #17, Side 1
Co-chair Pearce asked if under SARA Title III, when the
federal government passed the law, was there any provision
for federal monies to help fund local commissions and other
costs. Mr. Martin said that the federal government did not
provide any money for the execution of the plan. However,
it did provide funds for orientation and training. Mr.
Martin said that if the state was aware of any hazards,
failed to address them, and there were fatalities or other
losses, the state was responsible to the victims.
ROCKY ANSELL, Copper River Local Emergency Planning
Commission, in the interest of time, testified also for Mr.
Phillips and Mr. Roberson, via teleconference from
Glenallen. He said that in 1986 the federal government
passed SARA Title III legislation and in 1994 the state was
still trying to implement those laws. SB 33 would give the
local communities a mechanism to get this job done. He
asked the committee to pass this bill.
BOB SPENCER, coordinator of the Fairbanks local emergency
planning committee, testified via teleconference from
Fairbanks, and encouraged funding and passage of SB 33 both
for support of the LEPCs and for the depots. He said
consensus had been, with all 26 LEPCs, to support SB 33. He
wanted to remind the committee that thousands of hours of
volunteer time had been invested in this process and had not
cost the state anything. In Fairbanks, the response depots
response time could be improved. He said training was
inconsistent and not available to all volunteers because of
time and money constraints. On a personal level, he said
the training he received would go directly back into the
community. The basic planning for the community cannot
happen without funding. This bill would also enable all the
plans that were developed in the state to talk to each
other. He went on to speak to how the plan was created in
Fairbanks and its importance to the community. He also
spoke to the word "emergency."
BOB STEWART, emergency management director for the city of
Anchorage, testified via teleconference from Anchorage, and
thanked Senator Leman and his staff for all the work they
had done. He had one main question, on page 4, line 8, and
page 6, line 2, and line 15, regarding the phrase "governing
body." He wanted to know if it meant the mayor or his
designees in large cities or incorporated boroughs like
Anchorage.
Ms. Kreitzer said that when this bill was drafted,
"governing body" referred to an assembly or city council.
Co-chair Pearce said that SB 33 would be held in committee
and that when a CS was brought back that would be clarified.
Mr. Stewart offered his ideas to the committee for an
amendment regarding this phrase.
STEVE O'CONNOR, Vice Chair of the local emergency planning
commission, Kenai-Soldotna, testified via teleconference
from Kenai-Soldotna, in support of SB 33 and the planning
process. He urged the committee to approve funding for all
LEPCs and depots. He also spoke in support of the "all
hazards" planning process. He wanted the committee to take
extra care in defining the word "emergency" but agreed that
it did need to be defined. He also thanked Senator Leman
and his staff for all their work.
JOE BANTA, Prince William Sound regional citizens advisory
council, testified via teleconference from Anchorage. He
also spoke for Michelle O'Leary who had tried to connect
from Cordova. He noted that written comments and a report
on depots and corps had been submitted to the committee. A
few points he would like to emphasis was that DEC should
remain the lead agency on the development, review and
revision of the statewide master and regional oil and
hazardous substance plans. While DM&VA might be the lead
agency on disaster planning, DEC clearly had the expertise
on oil and hazardous substances. It might be more
appropriate to leave changes to master and regional planning
efforts in SB 215 since it referred to a number of DEC
programs and was in work at this time. However, if the
changes were left in SB 33, revisions should be at the
Commissioner's discretion or every three years. This would
insure that plans would not become obsolete as state
revenues decline. In regard to depots and corps, there
should be some provision in the master plan for DEC to at
least make recommendations to DM&VA. He said his RCAC was
concerned so little progress had been made by DM&VA on the
development of response depots and corps and whether
additional changes would further delay implementation of
this important program. He questioned moving another
program that dealt with hazardous substances into DM&VA. He
also questioned the appropriateness of funding an "all
hazards" plan with 470 funds.
Co-chair Pearce requested DEC and DES to look at the
recommendations of RCAC and return comments to the
committee.
NANCY LETHCOE, Alaska Wilderness Recreation & Tourism
Association, and a citizen of Valdez, testified via
teleconference from Valdez her concern over the adequacy of
the state's spill prevention and response plan. She said
the Exxon spill had a large impact on tourism and recreation
in the spill area. She said the Robbins Drydock ruling, an
arcane bit of legal doctrine, had made it impossible for the
tourism businesses that sustained losses to sue for those
damages. There was nothing to protect, once a spill
occurred, against tourism losses. It was extremely
important that there be strong prevention, planning,
training and prestaging of materials for response. She
pointed out that there had been several other instances that
had adverse effects on tourism. She strongly supported the
local response planning groups, and DEC in its review,
development, and revision of contingency plans. She also
supported the comments that RCAC had submitted to the
committee and planned to submit some additional ones. As a
citizen of Valdez, she wanted to continue her testimony.
Twice the city of Valdez had met to decide whether to form
an LEPC and had turned it down. The argument was that if
they had an LEPC in Valdez, they would know about their
hazardous substances and the city would be liable. As a
citizen she found it very difficult since she believed the
city should protect its citizens. She was not sure if SB 33
would address that type of problem.
Co-chair Pearce offered copies of DEC comments and proposed
changes, RCAC comments, and the five year plan by DES to
anyone that was interested. She gave the Senate Finance
phone number.
Co-chair Pearce announced that SB 33 would be HELD in
committee. She said work would continue on a committee
substitute.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at approximately 10:50 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|