Legislature(2009 - 2010)BUTROVICH 205
04/06/2009 03:30 PM Senate RESOURCES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB177 | |
| HB134 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HB 134 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 177 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE
April 6, 2009
3:41 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Lesil McGuire, Co-Chair
Senator Bill Wielechowski, Co-Chair
Senator Charlie Huggins, Vice Chair
Senator Hollis French
Senator Bert Stedman
Senator Gary Stevens
Senator Thomas Wagoner
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
OTHER LEGISLATORS PRESENT
Representative Craig Johnson
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE BILL NO. 177
"An Act repealing the termination of licensing and regulation of
sport fishing operators and sport fishing guides and licensing
and registration of sport fishing vessels; and providing for an
effective date."
HEARD AND HELD
COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 134(RES)
"An Act relating to the terms and conditions of commercial
passenger vessel permits for the discharge of graywater, treated
sewage, and other wastewater; establishing a science advisory
panel on wastewater treatment and effluent quality in the
Department of Environmental Conservation; and providing for an
effective date."
HEARD AND HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SB 177
SHORT TITLE: NO REPEAL OF SPORT FISH GUIDE LICENSING
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) MEYER
04/01/09 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/01/09 (S) RES, FIN
04/06/09 (S) RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
BILL: HB 134
SHORT TITLE: CRUISE SHIP WASTEWATER DISCHARGE PERMITS
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) HARRIS
02/13/09 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/13/09 (H) CRA, RES
02/17/09 (H) CRA AT 8:00 AM BARNES 124
02/17/09 (H) Moved CSHB 134(CRA) Out of Committee
02/17/09 (H) MINUTE(CRA)
02/18/09 (H) CRA RPT CS(CRA) NT 5DP
02/18/09 (H) DP: HARRIS, MILLETT, KELLER, HERRON,
MUNOZ
03/02/09 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
03/02/09 (H) Heard & Held
03/02/09 (H) MINUTE(RES)
03/16/09 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
03/16/09 (H) Heard & Held
03/16/09 (H) MINUTE(RES)
03/25/09 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
03/30/09 (H) DP: WILSON, JOHNSON, NEUMAN
03/30/09 (H) NR: OLSON, EDGMON, GUTTENBERG, TUCK
03/30/09 (H) RES RPT CS(RES) NT 3DP 1DNP 4NR 1AM
03/30/09 (H) AM: SEATON
03/30/09 (H) DNP: KAWASAKI
04/01/09 (H) CORRECTED RES RPT CS(RES) NT 3DP 4NR
2AM
04/01/09 (H) KAWASAKI SIGNED AM
04/02/09 (H) MOTION TO RETURN TO SECOND FOR AM 1
WITHDRAWN
04/02/09 (H) TRANSMITTED TO (S)
04/02/09 (H) VERSION: CSHB 134(RES)
04/03/09 (S) RES, FIN
04/03/09 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
WITNESS REGISTER
SENATOR KEVIN MEYER
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of SB 177.
CHARLES SWANTON, Director
Division of Sport Fish
Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G)
Juneau, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified that the administration supports
SB 177.
JACK CADIGAN, representing himself
Juneau, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to SB 177.
ROBERT L. JANES, representing himself
Valdez, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to SB 177.
MELVIN GROVE, representing himself
Mat-Su, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to SB 177.
ROD ARNO, Executive Director
Alaska Outdoor Council
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 177.
RON RAINEY
Kenai River Sportfishing Association
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 177.
PATRICK BOOKEY, Luck of the Irish
North Pole, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to SB 177.
GEORGE WIESE, Leisure Charters
Valdez, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to SB 177.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHN HARRIS
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of HB 134.
LARRY HARTIG, Commissioner
Department of Environment Conservation (DEC)
Juneau, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified that the current version of HB
134 addresses the administration's previous concerns.
LYNN KENT, Director
Division of Water
Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC)
Juneau, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided information related to HB 134.
CHIP THOMA
Responsible Cruising in Alaska (RCA)
Juneau, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Urged the committee to establish a sunset
for compliance in HB 134.
CHRISTOPHER KRENZ, Ph.D.
Oceana
Juneau, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Did not support the current version of HB
134
JOHN BINKLEY
Alaska Cruise Association
Fairbanks, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 134 and urged continued
compromise.
ACTION NARRATIVE
3:41:26 PM
CO-CHAIR LESIL MCGUIRE called the Senate Resources Standing
Committee meeting to order at 3:41 p.m. Senators Wagoner,
Huggins, French, Wielechowski, Stevens, and McGuire were present
at the call to order.
SB 177-NO REPEAL OF SPORT FISH GUIDE LICENSING
3:42:08 PM
CO-CO-CHAIR MCGUIREI announced the consideration of SB 177.
SENATOR KEVIN MEYER, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor of SB
177, said this legislation provides continued oversight of sport
fishing operators and guides. The licensing and reporting
program has proven beneficial to the sport fishing industry and
those who manage fishing resources. Legislation authorizing this
program started in 2004 for the following reasons: 1) Alaska
Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) sought more credible
information on guide numbers and activities; 2) to create basic
standards for sport fish business operators and guides including
liability insurance, first aid certification, and USGS vessel
licensing if applicable; and 3) to increase the level of
professionalism in the sport fish industry statewide. Many
former skeptics now acknowledge the role these measures have
played in advancing the guiding profession, which has helped
raise the standard of the sport fish industry statewide.
SENATOR MEYER concluded that SB 177 will permit ADF&G to
continue to foster the high standards in sport fishing and
guiding that everyone expects.
3:45:17 PM
CHARLES SWANTON, Director, Division of Sport Fish, Alaska
Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G), said the data that ADF&G
collects in its logbook program has allowed it to seek exemption
from the national saltwater registry, which tries to get that
same information. Other states do not have a similar logbook
program and the information is difficult to collect from
anglers.
He reported that ADF&G issues about 1,670 sport fishing business
licenses and 1,981 sport fishing guide licenses that are issued
annually. The logbook data comprises about 1.8 million clients
taken out over the course of the last three years. He noted that
ADF&G hopes to markedly reduce the amount of paper used in the
program over the next two years.
CO-CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI asked if the administration supports SB
177.
MR. SWANTON answered yes.
JACK CADIGAN, Juneau, said he is representing himself, but he
feels he can speak for many other saltwater charter operators
who are against SB 177. He is a retired Coast Guard captain and
a licensed charter fishing operator. He doesn't object to the
state requiring licensing and regulating of various industries
and occupations, but it seems that charter fishing in navigable
waters within Alaska is already heavily regulated. The
competency and integrity of the operators is therefore ensured
at a substantial cost in user fees and licenses. He submitted
that it doesn't cost the state anywhere near $100 to annually
provide a charter applicant with a license and sticker. Indeed,
in 2010 the annual fee for many Alaska business licenses will be
half that or less. In addition to an Alaska fishing guide
license, the charter operator and crew must purchase a sport
fishing license, even though prohibited from fishing while on a
charter. Charter operators must also purchase a state business
license. Depending on location, operators must also possess a
local sales tax license. The federal government requires a Coast
Guard license, a transportation worker identification
certificate (TWIC), enrollment in a drug testing program, and
current certificates in first aid and CPR. The aggregate cost to
the charter operator is $1,100 over a five-year period or $1,600
if SB 177 is enacted. This is exclusive of keeping first aid and
CPR certifications current. The charter industry is rigidly
controlled and receives random inspections by state and federal
authorities to ensure compliance.
3:50:02 PM
MR. CADIGAN said that in addition to money what the state gets
in return for its licensing program is a detailed log sheet for
analysis of every charter. The logs list rod hours and dates,
the name and license number of the fisher, the fish species and
where it was caught. If halibut are caught, the fisher must
certify that by signing on the back of the log sheet. Failure to
submit the log sheet on time results in a hefty fine to the
charter operator.
MR. CADIGAN suggested that rather than charging for licenses, it
would be more reasonable for the state to pay a modest stipend
to those who submit the logs. It takes considerable time and
effort for charter operators to deliver for analysis this
apparently important information. He submitted that it would be
most reasonable to allow this program to sunset by not passing
SB 177.
3:51:07 PM
SENATOR HUGGINS asked how these requirements have accumulated
over the years.
MR. CADIGAN said the Coast Guard has for some time required all
charter operators in the navigable waters of the U.S. to be
appropriately licensed. He first received his license in 1952.
The TWIC is a recent requirement by the Department of Homeland
Security to ensure that people working on the waterfront have
undergone background checks. He isn't sure when the requirements
for CPR and first aid were instituted. The random drug testing
program probably came in 15-20 years ago.
SENATOR WAGONER asked if drug tests are required more frequently
than when renewing a license.
MR. CADIGAN said charter operators [and their crew] must enroll
in an annual random drug testing program or have had a drug test
within six months of a random test. This is a Coast Guard
requirement. Responding to questions from Senator Wagoner he
added that this is a requirement for operators that carry
passengers.
3:54:06 PM
ROBERT L. JANES, representing himself, Valdez, said he is a
licensed charter captain and he opposes SB 177. His view is that
the program instituted in 2004 is discriminatory and was
justified by inherently erroneous testimony from Rob Bentz, [the
former Deputy Director, Division of Sport Fish, Alaska
Department of Fish & Game]. He pointed out that sport fishing
operators are required to pay a number of fees and acquire
certifications that the commercial longline fisherman isn't
required to pay.
3:58:14 PM
MELVIN GROVE, representing himself, Mat-Su, said he opposes SB
177. He provides a service transporting Alaskans from the dock
to a fishing boat so that people can harvest their own resource.
He understands that he must pay the government to operate his
business, but when the state instituted a new $100 sport fish
guide license it seemed to break with its past licensing policy,
which is that fees cover only the cost of issuance. He pointed
out that it only costs the commercial halibut fisherman $25 to
harvest a public resource yet the halibut charter guide must pay
$100 to provide a service so the public can harvest their own
resource. He questions how this can be justified.
In 2004 ADF&G testified that the reporting requirements would
provide comprehensive information on the impact of guided sport
fishing activities. This will lead to better regulations to
protect the states sport fishing resources. None of this
happened and nothing has improved. Even after the guides submit
detailed reports ADF&G contacts the fishers to verify their
success. He asked why guides should be put to the trouble if the
department is going to do that.
4:01:34 PM
ROD ARNO, Executive Director, Alaska Outdoor Council, said this
10,000 member statewide organization continues to support the
legislation originally passed in 2004. The only concern relates
to some of the intent of the legislation. In particular, the
data has not been used to legitimize the allocation process.
Also, AOC was told that information on the economic impacts and
contribution of sport fish in Alaska still can't be used when
looking at the economic importance of the resource. This
legislation won't change that, but in order for it to be
effective the Board of Fisheries needs to see this information
as being legitimate.
4:04:10 PM
RON RAINEY, Kenai River Sportfishing Association (KRSA), said he
is speaking in support of SB 177. The log book program has not
been successful because data compilation and reporting is
difficult. If the reports were in digital format the information
would be readily available for allocation decisions the next
day. He lives at mile 10 of the Kenai River and the fishing
pressure on the lower end of the river has increased tenfold in
the last 20 years. Clearly there is a need for daily reports on
fish catches so ADF&G can use that information in their decision
making. He won't argue with the assertion that the $100 fee is
probably too much, but digital reporting would be an invaluable
aid in managing the resource. KRSA hardily endorses passage of
SB 177, he said.
SENATOR WAGONER said he will support the bill.
4:06:29 PM
PATRICK BOOKEY, Luck of the Irish, North Pole, said this is
nothing but a big tax on charter operators. His documentation
fees for life rafts, drug testing, and various other fees cost
nearly $3,000 per year and the log book program consumes about
30 minutes of his time each day. For years ADF&G touted the best
creel surveys in the nation and he questions what happened to
that. This appears to be nothing more than a tax on the public
users of this resource and he would like the program to sunset.
SENATOR WAGONER pointed out that life rafts have nothing to do
with this fee.
MR. BOOKEY said it's just another requirement and fee by the
U.S. Coast Guard to maintain and operate a business. No other
water-based business is required to have them and have them
inspected yearly.
SENATOR WAGONER clarified that commercial fishermen that fish
past three miles are required to carry an inspected life raft.
Responding to an assertion that Prince William Sound fishermen
don't carry inspected life rafts, he pointed out that they are
not outside of state waters.
MR. BOOKEY said he sees them fishing outside the three-mile
limit all the time.
GEORGE WIESE, Leisure Charters, Valdez, said he too objects to
the sport fishing guide fee. It's excessive compared to what
commercial fishers pay. Acknowledging that it's not part of the
bill, he said he also objects to having to get a sportfishing
license only to be told he can't fish.
CO-CHAIR MCGUIRE closed public testimony.
4:10:02 PM
SENATOR WAGONER observed that the difference in requirements
between commercial and sportfishing doesn't have a lot to do
with this. However, just today he checked and found that in Cook
Inlet a commercial vessel license to fish for salmon costs $60
per year and a permit card costs $75. In Prince William Sound a
vessel license costs $375 per year and the permit card costs
$370. The point is that commercial fishers pay much more than
$25 to fish halibut or salmon, he said. He understands that the
guide fee is expensive, but he believes that there are good
reasons for that expense.
SENATOR HUGGINS said he is not familiar with the whole concept,
but he is surprised that this fee was excluded when the
administration pushed to lower licensing fees. He asked if
anyone knows why.
4:12:39 PM
MR. SWANTON said he believes that the difference stems from the
fact that the fees are not housed in the same area. Commercial
licensing is occupational while the sportfishing guide fee
resides within the codified regulations of ADF&G.
SENATOR HUGGINS asked if the department supports equal
opportunity to pay.
MR. SWANTON said he is not prepared to discuss the actual fees.
"Right now, they are what they are." The program isn't
completely solvent right now and to a certain extent ADF&G would
like to address that internally while the program is updated.
SENATOR HUGGINS said the administration owes it to the citizens
to coordinate among the departments.
CO-CHAIR MCGUIREI announced she would hold SB 177 in committee.
HB 134-CRUISE SHIP WASTEWATER DISCHARGE PERMITS
4:15:09 PM
CO-CHAIR MCGUIREI announced the consideration of HB 134. [Before
the committee was CSHB 134(RES).
REPRESENTATIVE JOHN HARRIS, Alaska State Legislature, said HB
134 pertains to the economic development of Southeast
communities and the regulation of discharges from cruise ships.
As per a citizen's initiative, levels of discharge from cruise
ships are collected measured at the point of discharge. He
compared this to exhaust coming from the tailpipe of an
automobile. The initiative further requires a particular
discharge level to be met by 2010, but technology is not
available to meet that requirement. The only option would be for
the ships to build larger holding tanks and discharge three
miles offshore in federal waters.
HB 134 seeks to create a waiver in law until the technology is
available to meet the 2010 standard. Up until now, DEC has been
doing this through regulation. We don't want the industry to
simply build larger holding tanks and then dump even worse water
in deeper federal waters. We want ships to be able to discharge
in Alaska's waters in a manner that lives up to the 2010
standard.
4:18:58 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS deferred technical questions to the DEC
representatives.
SENATOR STEVENS asked if the cost of the technology will be
considered.
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS said DEC will make that sort of
determination. The current problem is that the instrumentation
doesn't conform to the size of the ship. The technology is
available for much larger ships, but it is too cumbersome and
would require extensive rebuilding. Some would say that building
larger holding tanks is a technology, but that doesn't solve the
problem. DEC says it needs the ability to keep the industry's
feet to the fire until economically feasible technology is
available. Hopefully that will be sooner than later, he added.
SENATOR HUGGINS asked if the discharge standard is universal.
4:22:12 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS said no; the standard in the initiative is
higher. The effluent discharge standard for a sewage treatment
plant is much lower, but the public hasn't asked for that
standard to be changed. The public did ask for this discharge
standard for large cruise ships and that has to be respected. At
the heart of the matter is the fact that only cruise ships have
measurements taken at the point of discharge; mixing zones are
not allowed. The initial bill eliminated the phrase "at the
point of discharge." Under the mixing zone standard, every ship
today would have met the 2010 standard; all ships did not meet
the 2010 standard under the point of discharge measure. Ammonia
and copper are particularly problematic under the stricter
standard. The issue comes down to the amount of time that cruise
ships have to meet the standard and under what conditions. HB
134 doesn't eliminate the standard; it places a waiver in
statute and the time frame is determined by the Legislature.
SENATOR HUGGINS said this appears to be a compromise.
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS agreed; he was asked to carry the initial
bill and the administration is now on board. He added that DEC
had been issuing a waiver that was created by regulation, but
not necessarily allowed under the initiative.
4:26:17 PM
LARRY HARTIG, Commissioner, Department of Environment
Conservation (DEC), said DEC has been working with
Representative Harris and the co-chairs of the House Resources
Committee to address the concerns the administration had with
the original version of HB 134. He believes everyone was guided
by the common goal of protecting Alaska's clean water. The real
issue was how to coax a major industry to reach a standard that
it cannot reach today. Current Alaska statute leaves the cruise
ship companies in the difficult position of discharging in
federal waters or discharging in violation of the state
standard.
COMMISSIONER HARTIG explained that DEC has provided a compliance
schedule in a general permit it issues to cruise ships. He
clarified that this isn't a waiver. DEC has statutory and
regulatory authority to include compliance schedules in permits,
but there are severe restrictions. To develop a compliance
schedule DEC has to evaluate what technology can achieve for
water treatment on cruise ships, but EPA hasn't looked at water
treatment for the cruise ship industry. Because of this gap, DEC
had to use its judgment for the compliance schedules.
4:29:50 PM
In an effort to explore this further, DEC invited national and
international experts to participate in a conference that was
open to the public. They learned definitively that there is no
existing technology to allow cruise ships to consistently meet
the point of discharge water quality standards for ammonia,
copper, nickel, and zinc. HB 134 adds a section stating that as
long as cruise ships employ the most technologically effective
and economically feasible treatment, DEC is allowed to relax the
standard. That being said, it is intended to be temporary and
provisions in the bill provide technology forcing elements.
COMMISSIONER HARTIG said any permit that DEC issues or reissues
would require the cruise ship to meet the water treatment
achievable at the time. DEC would appoint an 11 member advisory
panel with at least four members coming from coastal
communities, the cruise industry, the commercial fishing
industry, and non-governmental organizations with an interest in
water quality issues. The advisory panel and DEC would evaluate
the reports from the cruise ship companies and the technology,
and convene additional technology conferences in 2011 and 2013,
and periodically report back to the Legislature. If you had to
step in you would be acting with knowledge not speculation. It
is DEC's perspective that it is extremely important to be able
to regulate things based on science, he said.
HB 134 includes an important anti-backsliding provision, which
means that permits for next cruise season will be rewritten to
include the achievable technology information learned from the
technology conference. Compliance schedules may still be used,
but whenever a permit is reissued the standards could not be
less than in the previous permit. This will continue to drive
the industry toward the goal.
4:34:14 PM
CO-CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI asked how many cruise ships come to
Alaska.
COMMISSIONER HARTIG deferred to Lynn Kent for an exact number.
LYNN KENT, Director, Division of Water, Department of
Environmental Conservation (DEC) about 30 different large cruise
ships come to Alaska each year.
CO-CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI asked how many people come to Alaska on
cruise ships every year.
COMMISSIONER HARTIG replied about 1 million come each year.
CO-CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI asked how many gallons of waste are being
discharged.
MS. KENT said she doesn't have the specific information, but DEC
does collect that information from all vessels that have permits
and choose to discharge in Alaska waters.
CO-CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI asked for an estimate.
MS. KENT said it would be in the millions of gallons. Responding
to additional questions, she explained that about 10 or 12
vessels were permitted to discharge in Alaska waters last year.
They meet Alaska water quality standards for everything except
ammonia, nickel, copper, and zinc.
CO-CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI asked if any ships currently have the
technology to meet the 2011 standard.
MS. KENT replied there are no vessels that are discharging that
can meet all of the water quality standards all of the time.
CO-CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI said he understands that some
organizations attending the technology conference indicated that
the technology is available.
MS. KENT said what they learned at the conference is that there
are technologies that can treat ammonia and technologies that
can treat metals. They have been tried and used in shore-based
facilities, but those systems are not readily available for
installation and testing on ships. There is a possibility that
certain things can be treated sooner than others and HB 134
allows DEC to stage the requirements. For example, when
technology is available to treat ammonia it can be installed
immediately.
CO-CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI asked if there could be a detrimental
impact on fish that are in areas where this waste is discharged.
4:38:23 PM
MS. KENT replied DEC has been involved in many studies including
a recent one that tested dilution in the Skagway harbor. That
study showed that under most conditions the water quality
standards would be met within 15 meters of the vessel.
COMMISSIONER HARTIG added that the Skagway study tested
stationary vessels and DEC could require that vessels could only
discharge while underway and away from sensitive fishing areas
and communities. A vessel traveling at six knots has a 60,000
dilution factor so it would be extremely unlikely that an
aquatic organism would encounter harmful concentrations of
waste.
CO-CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI asked what happens to the discharged
aluminum, copper zinc, and nickel.
COMMISSIONER HARTIG replied these elements and compounds already
exist in the water; the question is if they are concentrated to
the point of harming. HB 134 doesn't change existing
requirements for permits including disallowing discharge in
areas where a material could accumulate and concentrate to the
point that it is harmful to organisms.
4:41:20 PM
CO-CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI said he can't help but think that at some
point the accumulation would be dangerous to aquatic life.
COMMISSIONER HARTIG said if that rationale applies, there are
other sources of copper and ammonia that are larger than cruise
ship discharges. He reiterated that DEC would not allow anyone
to discharge material to the point of it being a toxic
situation.
CO-CHAIR MCGUIRE recognized that Senator Stedman joined the
committee some time ago and Representative Johnson is in the
audience.
SENATOR HUGGINS asked Commissioner Hartig to identify the larger
sources of ammonia and copper that he mentioned.
COMMISSIONER HARTIG named domestic wastewater treatment plants.
For example, this city's wastewater treatment plant has higher
levels of copper than DEC sees on cruise ships, he said.
SENATOR HUGGINS said he isn't familiar with Juneau's treatment
system, but he assumes that it goes into the same area every day
and doesn't have a moving dilution factor.
COMMISSIONER HARTIG said they do discharge into the marine
environment at a fixed location. The dilution is a result of
whatever current there may be.
SENATOR HUGGINS asked if there have been fish kills from the
discharges from Juneau's treatment plant.
MS. KENT replied she is not aware of any reports of fish kills
associated with domestic wastewater discharge from Juneau or any
other community.
4:44:34 PM
SENATOR STEDMAN asked if the point of discharge at the local
treatment plant would be comparable to the point of discharge on
a cruise ship.
MS. KENT said she does not have the data in front of her, but
she recalls that for the four parameters under discussion the
levels discharged from the community system are relatively
similar to the levels discharged by cruise ships.
SENATOR STEDMAN asked the effect 15-30 feet from the point of
discharge, if the ship is traveling at six knots, and if it is
traveling 25 knots.
MS. KENT replied she doesn't recall whether the mixing zone for
the Juneau Douglas plant is 90 feet or 90 meters. When a cruise
ship is underway at six knots the dilution factor is 50,000,
which means that contaminants would be undetectable in the water
behind the cruise ship.
4:47:03 PM
SENATOR FRENCH asked if there is a record of the number of
cruise ships that dump in federal waters.
COMMISSIONER HARTIG said DEC has general permits it issues to
cruise ships and if they choose to operate under the permit, DEC
receives monthly reports on what is in the discharged waste and
the volumes. They can also elect not to discharge under that
permit.
SENATOR FRENCH asked how many cruise ships elect not to have a
permit and instead dump in federal waters.
MS. KENT said last year 12 ships were covered under the general
permit.
SENATOR FRENCH summarized that 12 ships are operating under the
DEC permit and 19 dumping in federal waters. He asked if it's
irrational to deduce that the state's water standards are
chasing people off to dump in the ocean.
4:49:16 PM
COMMISSIONER HARTIG said the cruise companies are in that
predicament. They either have to comply with requirements for
which technology doesn't currently exist or they have to
discharge three miles offshore.
SENATOR FRENCH asked if anything prohibits the 12 cruise ships
from dumping three miles offshore.
COMMISSIONER HARTIG replied a ship that is three miles offshore
is under EPA's more relaxed jurisdiction. "We have very strict
standards in the state water."
SENATOR FRENCH asked if subsection (e) will at some point go
away or if there will be an ongoing effort to improve the
permits every year.
COMMISSIONER HARTIG said he's reluctant to speculate on when the
technology might be available, but he knows that the cruise
ships are pretty darn close.
4:52:07 PM
MS. KENT clarified that there were 31 cruise ships last year; 12
were not permitted and 19 were permitted. Some of the 19 ships
chose not to discharge under the DEC permit and instead
discharged in federal waters.
COMMISSIONER HARTIG said one issue is that some of these ships
didn't have the capacity to hold its waste.
SENATOR STEDMAN asked for an explanation of the donut holes and
their effect in Chatham, Frederick Sound, and Stephens Passage.
He noted that Glacier Bay also is under federal jurisdiction.
4:53:26 PM
MS. KENT said she believes that the donut holes have been closed
for purposes of wastewater discharge. She said she isn't sure
about Glacier Bay, but she would get an answer.
CO-CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI asked how many gallons of wastewater a
ship can typically hold and how much can be released at one
time.
MS. KENT said vessels vary, but some can hold thousands of
gallons. The discharge is generally dependent on the size of the
discharge port.
CO-CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI asked for specific information on how much
each ship can hold, if the entire tank can be released at one
time, and the definition of "economically feasible."
4:55:29 PM
COMMISSIONER HARTIG said that is standard terminology that is
applied to any discharger in the state. If anybody wants to
discharge pollutants into state waters that already have a
quality that exceeds what is necessary to protect aquatic life
and other uses, DEC does an anti-degradation analysis to
determine whether or not it is appropriate to allow degradation
of that clean water. Part of that is to look at whether the most
technologically effective methods for pollution reduction are
being used and if they are economically feasible. DEC has not
defined that in regulation, but relies on EPA standards. In this
case there are no EPA standards so they use the best
professional judgment of the engineers and scientists putting
the permit together.
CO-CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI asked if he has experienced that the
definition of economically feasible has a wide range.
COMMISSIONER HARTIG said he has been involved in trying to get
permits for 25 years and it hasn't been a problem. The treatment
technologies are known and are progressing.
SENATOR FRENCH asked if "economically feasible" takes into
account the underlying economics of the industry that is being
regulated.
COMMISSIONER HARTIG said he really hasn't seen that. What he has
seen is that when an onshore industry is using a technology and
the cruise ships are not, the differences and the economic
hurtles are examined and compared.
4:59:15 PM
MS. KENT added that the private sector is on notice that there
is a need for technology to meet the more strict requirements
for treatment of ammonia and metals. Companies that build
onshore facilities now are looking at their applicability for
vessels. DEC judges economic feasibility based in part on the
commercial availability of such facilities.
CO-CHAIR MCGUIRE asked Ms. Kent if she had any further testimony
or information to contribute.
MS. KENT said she has found information indicating that vessels
are voluntarily holding their waste when they are in Glacier
Bay. In response to Senator Wielechowski's earlier request for
information about rate of discharge, she said the general
wastewater discharge rate is 10,000-15,000 gallons per hour. She
will get information regarding the wastewater holding tank
capacity of each vessel to the committee later.
CHIP THOMA, Responsible Cruising in Alaska (RCA), Juneau, said
the Alaska voters approved this initiative in 2006, and HB 134
extends the time for cruise ships to comply with the water
quality standards. RCA supports a reasonable time within which
to comply, but would also like closure on the issue. The sunset
provision in subsection (e) perhaps should have a date of
January 1, 2014. Five seasons is an adequate length of time, he
said.
MR. THOMA said the DEC water division status report that is in
the bill packet clearly describes the improvements that each
cruise line is making. They all are doing amazingly well with
the exception of Princess Cruises and Holland America. HB 134
addresses these problem ships. Many of the ships are making
technological advances and many are already in compliance. As a
result, the term "economically feasible" may be moot. If cost is
the only impediment to install proper wastewater treatment for
ammonia and suspended metals, the state could establish a no
interest loan program for installing new cruise ship technology.
He noted that the City and Borough of Juneau has provided no
interest loans so that companies can install quieter engines in
their flight seeing planes. This could be adapted on the state
level if there really is a cost problem with installing these
technological advances, he said. $70 million per year in taxes
is coming in from the cruise ships so there's an adequate amount
to do that.
Responding to Senator Steven's question about weighing the cost
of installing the technology, he said some of the ships already
have adequate technology and the no interest loan is another
option. Larger holding tanks may not be the technology everyone
envisions, but they do solve the problem, he said. Clarence
Strait, Sumner Strait, Frederick Sound, Lynn Canal, and Icy
Straits are areas where fish migrate and whales feed. This is
also where one ship after another discharges millions of gallons
of wastewater as they transit these passages.
5:04:43 PM
MR. THOMA said the federal government prohibits cruise ships
from discharging while in Glacier Bay so all that discharging is
done right outside in Icy Strait near Point Adolphus. That area
was formerly a donut hole and is again being used by ships that
have to discharge because they don't have sufficient holding
capacity to wait and discharge in federal waters. He noted that
according to the DEC report, the major source of the copper and
zinc in wastewater is the shipboard piping that is leaching.
Princess and Holland America are the only lines that have
refused to replace their piping.
MR. THOMA again suggested the committee amend the bill to sunset
subsection (e) and look at the term "economically" because
that's not the question. It's whether the technology is
available in a size that can fit onboard the ship.
5:06:18 PM
SENATOR STEDMAN said he's curious to know how measurements can
be taken from a ship that is moving at 25 knots or more.
MR. THOMA said DEC established a science panel in 1999 and 2000
to look at mixing zones. They came up with the dispersing
formula, but it's based on engineering so none of it is
scientific.
SENATOR STEDMAN said he'd like to learn more because it would
seem that the dilution factor would be greater when traveling at
speed instead of tied to the dock.
SENATOR FRENCH asked Mr. Thoma if he believes that discharging
in federal waters is a good option for the cruise ships.
MR. THOMA replied he would much rather they discharge in federal
waters than in areas where fish migrate and whales feed.
5:09:06 PM
SENATOR STEVENS asked if some of the ships have actually
replaced all their copper piping.
MR. THOMA said yes. He paraphrased and commented on pages 3-5 of
the DEC report as follows:
On page 3 the Silver Shadow fine-tuned its existing
wastewater treatment system, replaced some of its
piping and bows. Norwegian Cruise Line - replacement
is being done primarily to address maintenance
problems, bursting pipes, but this also may reduce the
amount of metals in the ships' affluent. They're
replacing sections of the metal potable water.
Then on page 4 the Seven Seas Mariner met the long
term effluent limits for nickel, replaced corroded
metallic piping and valves. Celebrity Royal Caribbean
those ships consistently discharge outside of Alaska
waters and many of the ships have replaced many
portions of their potable water piping with non
metallic piping.
Then you go to Princess and Holland and you find that
has not been done. Princess is saying they produce
drinking water that is very soft and may corrode their
pipes and leach metals into their wastewater effluent.
However, Princess did not provide any details
regarding the actions that they would take to avoid
this such as bunkering water, increasing the ratio of
drinking water or changing out their pipes. Same thing
with Holland America - five of the HAL ships
consistently exceeded the long term effluent levels
for ammonia and metals. The Statendam met them for
copper. Sample data indicate bunkered water contains
elevated levels of metal. Drinking water produced by
the vessels also contains significant amounts of
metals. They're generating about 60 percent of their
water onboard the ships with their own evaporation
systems all made out of copper pipes. So the
combination of copper pipes in 2,000 staterooms,
kitchens and everyplace else plus the water making
facilities, you've got an incredible amount of copper
leaching and zinc leaching going on.
That is the source of the problem on Princess and
Holland America ships. The other ships are addressing
it. They realize it's the problem. They're trading out
their pipes for flex tubing. So this whole discussion
of bunkered water and high levels of copper in
Southeast, that's not the problem. It's onboard the
ships itself.
5:11:51 PM
CO-CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI asked if he agrees with Commissioner
Hartig's assertion that tremendous dilution occurs in the ocean.
MR. THOMA said he is not an expert, but he's always been told
that the DEC science panel developed the formula for the
dilution factor based on engineering. They released dye and
noted when it could no longer be seen.
5:13:08 PM
CHRISTOPHER KRENZ, Scientist, said he represents Oceana, which
is a nonprofit ocean conservation organization that has over 200
years of life experience and work in Alaska. He said that the
State of Alaska has been a world leader in responsibly managing
cruise ship pollution and Oceana would encourage continuation of
that leadership by maintaining the existing protections for
marine resources. The current version of HB 134 would increase
the amount of pollution dumped into coastal waters and eliminate
an important incentive to reduce the discharge of pollutants and
contravene the clearly stated will of Alaska voters. Alaska
coastal resources are vital and the vast quantities of waste
that cruise ships discharge into the marine environment threaten
the resources upon which Alaskans and the industry depend.
HB 134 would alter a key provision of the law that voters passed
by initiative requiring stringent regulation of cruise ship
pollution. Cruise ship would be allowed to discharge into mixing
zones, which are areas in which pollutant levels can exceed
applicable state water quality standards. The copper, zinc,
nickel and ammonia pollutants for which the cruise ship industry
might seek mixing zones are toxic to marine life. Copper and
ammonia are toxic at very low concentrations that are just above
the state's water quality standard. Science based limits for
these pollutants are contained in the state's water quality
standards. These standards represent the best scientific
determination of acceptable levels of pollutants based on an
agreed level of risk to human health and the health of the
environment. Under current law cruise ships are required to meet
these standards. Any statement that changing this requirement to
allow mixing zones would improve the scientific basis for
regulations is false. Science has determined the appropriate
limits and any policy choice to allow cruise ships to exceed
those limits would be a mistake.
5:15:44 PM
MR. KRENZ said the requirement that cruise ships meet discharge
limits at the point of emission is an important incentive to
implement existing technologies and keep the pollution out of
Alaska waters. Many vessels are already meeting this requirement
at least at times. Recent research indicates that promising
technology exists and simply must be implemented on other cruise
ships. The incentive to do so should not be eliminated. Alaska's
waterways are finite and we should minimize the pollution that
is dumped while striving to eliminate pollution all together. We
encourage the committee to maintain protections for Alaska
waters and incentives to improve those protections by opposing
altering the state cruise ship initiative or at the least
amending this bill to establish a deadline for any exemption.
CO-CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI asked if he is able to answer scientific
questions.
MR. KRENZ replied he has a Ph.D. in marine ecology.
CO-CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI noted the earlier testimony about the
dilution factor and asked if he believes that allowing cruise
ships to dump wastewater into Alaska waters is hazardous to
marine life.
MR. KRENZ said the written testimony he submitted addresses this
in greater detail, but a lot of aquatic life is impacted by very
low concentrations of copper. This includes organisms throughout
the food web from algae to zooplankton to shellfish fish and
fish. Animals in early life stages, such as mussels and clams in
the larval phase, may be particularly sensitive to copper
toxicity. Sub-lethal impacts to salmon occur at very low
concentrations and can impair the ability to smell, which is
critical for migration and finding natal stream. Copper is also
known to affect salmon's immune response, brain function, and
metabolism. Many species can bio-accumulate copper
concentrations hundreds of times higher than concentrations in
the surrounding water. He noted that his submitted testimony
references those statements with citations.
MR. KRENZ opined that dilution is never the solution. When a
cruise ship is dumping underway dilution is great, but fecal
coliform levels are a concern when multiple ships with many
passengers are transiting the same area day after day. Another
concern is that it basically allows mixing zones in any area in
Southeast Alaska that cruise ships are allowed to go. A
difference between a cruise ship and a municipal wastewater
treatment plant is that the municipal discharge is confined to a
particular area.
5:19:43 PM
MR. KRENZ said this would allow mixing zones. Juneau is one
place to have polluted water and is confined, and this it
throughout Southeast Alaska.
CO-CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI noted that he saw a presentation
indicating that concentrations of copper at a couple parts per
billion have a tremendous impact on the ability for salmon to
get around. He asked if copper, lead, zinc, and ammonia
evaporate or accumulate over time when they're dumped into the
ocean.
MR. KRENZ replied it differs depending on the particular
pollutant. Ammonia will be broken down and used by marine algae
and others as a nutrient. The heavy metals don't disappear so
they are of particular concern with respect to accumulation in
the environment.
CO-CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI asked if copper, zinc and nickel sink to
the bottom and get into shellfish and bottom feeders or continue
to circulate in the ocean.
5:21:46 PM
MR. KRENZ said that isn't his area of expertise, but he
understands that copper sinks into the sediments.
JOHN BINKLEY, Alaska Cruise Association, Fairbanks, said he
represents nine cruise lines and about 100 small businesses that
depend on cruise ship passengers. He said he certainly agrees
with Mr. Krenz's statement that Alaska has the highest standard
in the world for cruise ship wastewater discharge. Alaskans
should be proud of the standards and that they were set by DEC,
the independent scientists on the science panel and industry
working in cooperation. As a result, industry went out and
invested over $200 million in shipboard systems that achieve the
highest standards achievable. That is success, he said.
If the cruise line industry had been mandated to achieve an
unreasonable standard, it could have spent that $200 million to
reconfigure their ships to increase tankage so that they could
ignore the Alaska standards and discharge beyond three miles in
federal waters. "But we didn't." Alaska and the industry did it
right and now the Alaska standard is what everybody else looks
to. Now when these ships transit the world they discharge at an
extremely high standard. In fact, some companies have installed
the technology on all their ships.
5:24:54 PM
MR. BINKLEY said this shows that when industry works with
regulators it can improve the water quality of the ocean. He
urged the committee to continue the compromise by getting rid of
the five words. They set a standard that none of the other 1,000
or so Alaska discharge permits has to meet. In fact, he would
challenge the sponsors of the initiative to show even one permit
to discharge wastewater into U.S. waters that has to meet the
"at the point of discharge" standard. This standard is
unreasonable to achieve, and if the current compromise is
sunsetted, there will be no incentive for industry to invest
money to improve their existing systems. Instead it would be
inclined to look at reconfiguring their ships to have larger
holding tanks and Alaska's standards would become irrelevant
because no one would apply for permit. He urged the committee to
pass the House resources version of the bill. He added that he
has the answers to many of the questions that Senator
Wielechowski asked.
5:27:36 PM
CO-CHAIR MCGUIRE invited him back to a subsequent hearing
because the committee is under time constraints today. She asked
others who wanted to testify to contact her office.
SENATOR STEVENS asked if it's true that shipboard copper piping
is the source of most of the copper and zinc found in the
discharge, and if he believes that all cruise ships would
replace their copper piping if they were allowed more time.
MR. BINKLEY said he is surprised at the expertise of Mr. Thoma
with regard to shipboard piping. He knows that the Star
Princess, which had five of the eight violations, was
constructed in 2002 with stainless steel main piping and copper
feeder pipes to staterooms. It is not an old ship with corroded
copper pipes. He explained that anytime water runs through pipes
it will pick up small parts per billion of whatever material the
pipe is made of. If the pipe is galvanized the water will pick
up particles of zinc, if the pipe is stainless steel the water
will often pick up particles of nickel, if the pipe is copper
the water will pick up particles of copper. Unless the pipe is
made of glass or ceramics it will pick up minute amounts that
are small enough to be difficult to measure. He offered to get
the details of the piping on each of the 31 ships.
CO-CHAIR MCGUIRE announced she would hold HB 134 in committee.
5:30:15 PM
There being nothing further to come before the committee, Co-
Chair McGuire adjourned the Senate Resources Standing Committee
at 5:30 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB 177 - Bill Packet.pdf |
SRES 4/6/2009 3:30:00 PM |
SB 177 |
| HB 134 - Bill Packet.pdf |
SRES 4/6/2009 3:30:00 PM |
SB 134 |