Legislature(2001 - 2002)
02/13/2001 03:35 PM Senate STA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE STATE AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
February 13,2001
3:35 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Gene Therriault, Chair
Senator Randy Phillips, Vice Chair
Senator Rick Halford
Senator Drue Pearce
Senator Bettye Davis
MEMBERS ABSENT
All Members Present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 10
Urging the United States Congress to fully fund the operational
readiness and recapitalization requirements of the United States
Coast Guard.
MOVED SJR 10 OUT OF COMMITTEE
SENATE BILL NO. 65
"An Act requiring a study to determine if gender is a determinant
in state employee compensation."
MOVED SB 65 OUT OF COMMITTEE
SENATE BILL NO. 24
"An Act giving notice of and approving the entry into, and the
issuance of certificates of participation for, a lease-purchase
agreement for a seafood and food safety laboratory facility; and
providing for an effective date."
MOVED SB 24 OUT OF COMMITTEE
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
SJR 10 - No previous action recorded.
SB 65 - No previous action recorded.
SB 24 - No previous action recorded.
WITNESS REGISTER
Rear Admiral Tom Barrett
Coast Guard District 17
709 W. 9th Street
Juneau, AK 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Gave power point presentation on Coast Guard
operations in Alaska.
Senator Alan Austerman
State Capitol
Juneau, AK 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of SJR 10
Janice Adair
Director of Environmental Health
Department of Environmental Conservation
555 Cordova Street
Anchorage, AK 99501
POSITION STATEMENT: Supports SB 24.
Tom Livingston
Livingston Slone Inc.
3900 Arctic Blvd.
Anchorage, AK 99518
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions about study conducted
relating to SB 24.
Caren Robinson
Alaska Women's Lobby
Tenass Pass Shellfish Company
211 4th Suite 108
Juneau, AK 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Supports SB 65.
Supports SB 24.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 01-5, SIDE A
Number 001
CHAIRMAN GENE THERRIAULT called the Senate State Affairs Committee
meeting to order at 3:35 p.m. Members present were Senators
Phillips, Davis and Chairman Therriault.
There were three items on the agenda: SJR 10, SB 65 and SB 24.
SJR 10-US COAST GUARD FUNDING
Rear Admiral Barrett gave a power point presentation that provided
an overview of the Coast Guard's role and activities in Alaska. A
copy of the presentation is in the bill file.
Seventeenth
Coast Guard District
Serving Alaskans
Alaska State Legislature
13 February 2001
Alaska
The Maritime State
· 33,000 miles of coastline
· 25,000 commercial vessels
· 200,000 non-commercial/recreational vessels
· Over 95% of all cargo shipped via vessels
· CG's Bottom Line…Protection of Life and the Alaskan
Marine Environment
CHALLENGES
Infrastructure
· 27 Remote VHF and HF Hi Sites in remote location
· Limited Satellite and VHF coverage
· Loran Stations located in remote areas (Attu, Port
Clarence, Saint Paul, Shoal Cove)
Harsh Operating Environment
Long Distances
Coast Guard Budget in Alaska
· $200 million annual infusion into Alaska economies in
salaries and purchases
Coast Guard Personnel in Alaska
· 1,800 Active Duty & Civilian personnel
· Reserve and Auxiliary
COAST GUARD STRATEGIC GOALS
Maritime Safety
· 42 Coast Guard Units in Alaska
· Fisheries Search and Rescue (SAR)
Long range helicopters forward deployed during crab
fisheries
· Cold Bay
· Saint Paul Island
Bering Sea cutter deployed with helicopter
· YR 2000 Rescues
SAR Cases: 920
Lives Saved: 255
Lives Assisted: 1255
Southeast AK Medevacs: 53
· Prevention and Response
Seek non-regulatory solutions
· Commercial Vessel Safety
Inspection of Vessels
Licensing of Mariners
Investigation of Marine Casualties
· Fishing Vessel Safety
Most dangerous occupation in U.S.
Coast Guard safety program:
1. Dockside Exams
2. At Sea Boardings
3. "Ready for Sea" Safety Program
1980's Alaska fishing deaths averaged 40/yr
7 lives lost in 2000
· Passenger Vessel Safety
Over 2 million passengers annually embark vessels in
Alaska
Four "abandon ships" in 1999
1. Alaska Small Passenger Vessel Task Force
2. 5 Star Safety Program for Charter Boats
· Recreational and Non-Commercial Boating Safety
AK boating safety law increased visibility & saved
lives
Prevention through outreach and education
"Kids Don't Float"-Free loaner life jackets on docks
Establishing CG Auxiliary detachment in Whittier
PROTECTION OF NATURAL RESOURCES
Oil Spill Prevention and Response
· Major oil ports in Valdez and Cook Inlet
· Working Both Ends of the Trans Alaska Pipeline
· Statewide "risk assessments" and implementation of risk
reduction measures
1. Inspect foreign vessels calling on Alaska ports to
ensure compliance with U.S. and international
safety and environmental laws
2. Periodic Oil Spill Response Exercises
3. Respond to approx 600 oil spill and chemical
responses annually
· Valdez
1. Most closely regulated port in U.S.
· All tanker transits supervised by radar and
Automated Identification System (AIS)
· Frequent exercises to ensure prepared to
respond
· Recent scrutiny of Alyeska terminal safety
· CF Federal On Scene Coordinator
1. Bouytenders configured to recover oil
2. Pre-positioned CF spill response equipment
3. State "non tank vessel" legislation complements CG
efforts
· Cruise Ships
1. Safety of Alaska cruise ships that carry over
600,000 passengers each year
2. Addressing public concerns over environmental laws
through boardings, over-flights and sampling
· Coast Guard Enforcement
1. Increased over-flights to detect discharges
2. Expanded environmental inspections
3. Expanded environmental inspections
4. Sampling of overboard discharges
5. Implementing Murkowski's federal legislation
· Fisheries Law Enforcement
1. Largest allocation of CG resources
2. High seas driftnet
3. US/Russian maritime boundary line
4. Dixon Entrance
5. Domestic fisheries
· Domestic Fisheries Law Enforcement
1. Over 200 time/area/species openers
2. Largest individual fishing quota fishery in world
3. At sea boardings check fisheries and safety laws
4. Surveillance of Stellar Sea Lion rookeries
· High seas drift net (HSDN) operating area & operations
1. $300 million of Alaska salmon grazing on high seas
2. 9 May, foreign fishing vessel Arctic Wind located
by aircraft fishing with high seas drift net,
boarded and seized
3. Honduras flag, South Korean owner, Russian master
and crew
4. Approximately one ton of salmon on board (Chum,
Sockeye & Chinook)
MARITIME MOBILITY
· Deployment, maintenance and operation of over 1,300 aids to
navigation
1. Buoys
2. Fixed aids to navigation (shore lights)
3. LORAN stations Vessel traffic service (VTS Valdez)
· Mission to ensure safe, efficient and environmentally sound
maritime operations
· Marine transportation system
1. Alaskan waterways are the major "highway"
2. 1,300+ buoys & lights maintained and LORAN
MARITIME SECURITY
· US/Russian maritime boundary
1. Multi-national fleet targeting Pollock
2. Poor catch rates on Russian side
· Push boundary line for higher catch rates
3. Largest use of CG cutters and C-130 a/c patrol effort
4. Focus of D17/RS federal border service engagement
· Maritime boundary line activity 1999 2000
1. Incursions detected 90 26
2. Vessels identified 24 22
3. Joint US/RS boardings 0 4
4. Vessels seized 0 6
5. Vessels given verbal warnings 4 9
· Enforcement cooperation
· Summary of major cases
NATIONAL SECURITY
· Support of DOD missions
· Naval activity Alaska
· Northern Edge 2001 in Ketchikan, March
· Port security
1. Authority to establish and enforce maritime safety and
security zones to protect commercial and national
interests
· Future Challenges
1. Readiness and recapitalization
· Annual operating funds
· Spare parts
· C-130 availability 80%-60%
· Aging fleet
· Retaining trained personnel
· Replacement of aging infrastructure of ships and
planes
OPERATIONAL EXCELLENCE
· Saving lives
· Protecting the environment
· Ensuring the mobility of waterways
Number 1160
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT asked if there were any questions for the
Admiral about either the presentation or Coast Guard operations in
the state.
SENATOR PHILLIPS asked if the Coast Guard has difficulties getting
air parts to Attu.
REAR ADMIRAL BARRETT said there are difficulties in both Attu and
St. Paul. Recently they had to fly parts from Wisconsin to replace
a motor on a hanger door at St. Paul, which was no great problem,
but if an aircraft or a cutter is out of commission, the situation
could become urgent very quickly. Lead time is two days in good
weather and five under poor conditions.
SENATOR PHILLIPS asked about difficulties in clearing the runway.
REAR ADMIRAL BARRETT said that there is no back up equipment at
Attu for clearing the runway. This is critical if a medical
evacuation is necessary.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT thanked Rear Admiral Barrett for the
presentation and then called Senator Austerman forward to give his
sponsor's statement for SJR 10.
SENATOR AUSTERMAN said he introduced SJR 10 to help maintain the
presence of the Coast Guard in Alaska. The original idea for the
resolution came from the Pacific Fisheries Legislative Task Force.
States involved acknowledged the need for Coast Guard funding along
the entire Pacific Coast.
Looking at a map of the state of Alaska laid over a map of the
Lower 48, it is easy to see why there are difficulties associated
with patrolling the vast area under Coast Guard jurisdiction here
in Alaska.
He thought Admiral Barrett's presentation provided enough
information to make a determination on SJR 10.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT observed that the resolution was directed to
the congressional delegation and leading members of both the U.S.
House and U.S. Senate. He said there was a zero fiscal note
attached. He then asked for any questions or if there was anyone
that wanted to testify. There was no one. He asked for amendments
and there were none. He asked for the will of the committee.
SENATOR PEARCE made a motion to move SJR 10 with the zero fiscal
note from committee with individual recommendations.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT asked for any objections. There were none so
SJR 10 was moved from committee.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT noted for the record that Senator Pearce had
arrived shortly after the meeting was called to order.
The next order of business was SB 65. Senator Donley came forward
to give the sponsor's statement.
SB 65-PAY EQUITY FOR STATE EMPLOYEES
SENATOR DONLEY said that SB 65 would require the State of Alaska to
conduct a gender equity study regarding state employee
compensation. Although compensation studies have been done, there
has never been an analysis of whether women or men are being
discriminated against because of gender. Female state employees are
generally paid less than male state employees but it isn't known
whether this is due to discrimination or whether the jobs they
perform are valued less in the work market.
In looking at the experiences of other states on this issue there
are two basic scenarios. In the first, the states are proactive in
performing gender equity studies. If discrimination is found the
state corrects the problem. In the second situation, the state does
nothing until a discrimination lawsuit is filed. The proactive
approach is economical in the long term because litigation is so
costly.
Number 1588
The legislature will work with the Department of Administration to
try to keep the study costs to a minimum but it is important, from
a government management point of view, that the study go forward.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT asked for questions for Senator Donley.
SENATOR PHILLIPS said he thought that a study was done five to
seven years ago and he wanted to know why it would differ from this
one.
SENATOR DONLEY said that past compensation studies haven't been
true gender equity studies. They haven't done an analysis of
whether the particular job classification is paid less because it
is dominated by a particular gender. Gender equity studies look at
job classifications that are dominated by one gender and then
determine whether or not that is how the compensation for that job
was established as opposed to the true value of the work performed.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT asked for questions.
SENATOR DAVIS asked for a list of the states that already conducted
gender equity studies. She also wanted to know if there are many
states that had made corrections.
SENATOR DONLEY said he would provide the list to the committee.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT said there was information in the packet
stating that the National Committee on Pay Equity had identified 20
states as having fair pay/pay equity for state employees.
SENATOR DAVIS said she had read that and wondered if SB 65 would do
anything differently. She too thought there had been a study done
some years ago.
SENATOR PHILLIPS said he had been trying to get a copy of the
previous study and would share the information once it was in his
possession.
Number 1809
SENATOR DAVIS agreed with the need for such a study but wondered
about the timeline.
SENATOR DONLEY said they were trying to give the Department of
Administration time to develop a system for doing the study so that
was why the study results wouldn't be presented to the legislature
until 2003.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT noted the arrival of Senator Halford.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT felt that the $750,000 fiscal note was
speculative at this point. He wondered whether the department would
locate computer programs that could be used and examine programs
developed by other states and then return to the legislature with a
more complete cost estimate for the study.
SENATOR DONLEY said progress was being made to reduce costs from
the original estimate and he wanted to continue to work with the
Department of Administration to find the most economical approach
possible.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT asked for questions and there were none.
Number 1978
MR. STEWART, personnel manager for the Department of
Administration, Division of Personnel, said that although the state
has conducted many market evaluation salary studies, a gender
equity study has not been done. The Pete Marwick study, dealing
with job classifications, was done about three years ago.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT said he thought Senator Phillips might have
been referring to a salary study and although that provides
information about job categories it doesn't answer the question
about whether similar job categories might have different pay
scales because one of those jobs is dominated by one gender while
the other is not.
MR. STEWART said that the department is supportive of the effort to
develop a study.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT asked if there is concern about litigation.
MR. STEWART said he doesn't share that concern. There are checks
and balances in the system and there hasn't been a large increase
in grievance complaints indicating problems that haven't been
identified. While there isn't a pressing problem, the system can
always benefit from a reevaluation.
SENATOR PHILLIPS asked what became of the Pete Marwick
classification study and how much it cost.
MR. STEWART didn't believe anything was done with it; the cost was
about $225,000.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT said he believes the cost was $250,000 for that
study and the beginning of the Education Study. It could provide
useful information but it didn't answer the questions addressed by
SB 65.
SENATOR PHILLIPS asked if that study pointed to certain trends,
such as a gender gap.
MR. STEWART said the Pete Marwick study didn't discuss gender gap.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT wondered whether it might be advantageous to
reexamine the data to look for trends that weren't the focus of
that study.
MR. STEWART didn't think so.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT said that when software use is a possibility
and other states' programs are considered, the fiscal note figures
seem speculative.
MR. STEWART said the FY02 $50,000 figure was the amount anticipated
for commissioning an independent review of possible bias problems.
The $750,000 is an estimate of what a full study would cost. This
was put in FY03 in case something was found during the review
period.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT said according to Senator Donley, the
anticipated costs have been adjusted down but he wanted to know
what the starting figures were.
MR. STEWART said they started with seven zeros. Senator Donley's
office was helpful in directing them to existing models such as the
one from Minnesota. They have developed a software system to
repeatedly test job classes but their classification system is very
different from Alaska's so it's not useable unless all state
positions are reclassified.
The fiscal note is an average of rough estimates that ranged from
$1.5 million to $500,000 to do a complete "job class by job
classing position-by-position study".
SENATOR PHILLIPS asked whether the Department of Administration
(DOA) was better able to do this type of study than the Department
of Labor (DOL) and is "the study just for the classification of
state government or employment period."
MR. STEWART said that DOL has labor economists and can talk about
trends and analysis while DOA has the experts on the state's
classification system for state employment.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT said that although DOA would be contracting the
study out, it deals with job classifications and would therefore
manage the contract.
TAPE 01-5, Side B
Number 2356
SENATOR THERRIAULT said that he was somewhat concerned about the
second year of funding because although they aren't making an
appropriation with the fiscal note, the legislature is giving an
indication of what the agency can expect for funding.
He asked if there were any questions. There were none so he asked
Caren Robinson forward to testify on behalf of the Alaska Women's
Lobby.
MS. KAREN ROBINSON, Alaska Women's Lobby, said she agreed with
Senator Donley, that this study is "the right, fair and smart thing
to do." The Alaska Women's Lobby is hopeful that this legislation
will pass and pleased that the Administration is willing to work
with the legislature.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT asked for questions and other testimony and
there was no response.
He said there were no amendments and no committee substitutes. He
turned his attention to the fiscal note and asked Senator Donley if
he would prefer dealing with DOA for the second funding year.
SENATOR DONLEY said that his understanding of the fiscal note was
that $50,000 was allocated for the preliminary assessment. If the
assessment indicated problems, then funding would have to be found
for a full study. He thinks the assessment figure is reasonable.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT said that if the full study is needed, it will
need to be worked into the next operating budget.
SENATOR DONLEY said that's true. If there are indications that a
full study is needed, an assessment will need to be done to
determine the size of the problem.
SENATOR HALFORD said that although the amount in the fiscal note is
not binding, he would be more comfortable if it was $500,000 rather
than $750,000.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT agreed and said it is his preference to change
the amount from $750,000 to $500,000 since the estimate was in that
range.
SENATOR PEARCE said that if the initial assessment indicated that a
full study is necessary she thought the data would ultimately be
more useful if a market study was done at the same time as the
gender study.
SENATOR DONLEY said he would continue to work with DOA to identify
the correct parameters of the initial study because he agrees with
Senator Pearce; the marketplace situation also needs to be
examined.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT asked for the will of the committee.
SENATOR PEARCE made a motion to move SB 65 and the $500,000 fiscal
note move from committee with individual recommendations. There
were no objections.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT said SB 65 with the modified fiscal note would
be moved.
Number 2092
SB 24-LEGIS APPROVAL OF SEAFOOD/FOOD SAFETY LAB
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT asked Janice Adair if she was ready to testify
via teleconference.
MS JANICE ADAIR, Director of Environmental Health for the
Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC), said that SB 24
allows for the sale of bonds or certificates of participation to
replace the seafood and food safety lab in Palmer. The lease for
the current facility expired in December 2000 and there are two
one-year extensions. State law prohibits long-term extensions
without a substantial reduction in the lease payments. The
reductions were given during a previous extension and the owner
isn't willing to give another substantial reduction and has the
building on the market. The current lease amount is $1.03 per
square foot and has been that since December 1998. Her letter had
given an incorrect figure per square foot.
She said that the lab is the only one in the state testing for
paralytic shellfish poisoning (PSP) so that shellfish and crab can
be sold in interstate and international commerce. DEC tests
shellfish growing waters to ensure that they comply with the
National Shellfish Sanitation Program. DEC also evaluates dairy
products that are processed in Alaska and sold elsewhere. The lab
also certifies private labs that runs drinking water analyses for
public water systems and works with commercial food industries to
develop safe food products, such as smoked fish and other shelf
stable products.
In FY99 and FY01 the legislature appropriated capital funds to the
department to do planning for the replacement of the lab. DEC
hired an independent contractor, Livingston Sloan, and was told
that the most cost effective replacement would be a state-owned
laboratory. Building the lab on state-owned land would provide
additional savings. A state-owned site near the airport in
Anchorage was selected to facilitate transportation to the lab of
statewide test samples. Approximately 80 percent of the work done
in the lab is seafood related, some of which is time sensitive.
Testing must be completed before any of the food may be sold.
Number 1937
The economic analysis confirms that owning is more economical than
leasing. Since labs are highly individual and specialized, any
lease space would require extensive remodeling prior to use.
The new lab would result in an overall decrease in operating costs
for shellfish growers. There are 11 approved shellfish farms in
Southeast, 22 in Southcentral and nine geoduck growing areas in
southeast. Since growers must ship their water and fish samples to
the lab at their own expense, locating the lab near the airport
would save courier costs from the Anchorage airport to the lab in
Palmer.
There will be no increased cost to the dairy industry because
inspectors pick up samples when they visit the dairies.
The lab performs most of the tests for free but there are charges
for tests for foods for export and tests made at the request of
food manufacturers.
If the bill isn't passed this session, the lab will have no
alternative but to look for lease facilities this summer or fall to
ensure a place of business when the current lease extension comes
to term in two years. Lease costs are expected to be high.
Number 1839
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT asked whether the Governor's capital budget
submittal included a $310,000 appropriation to finance the lease
along with the sale of bonds.
MS. ADAIR said yes, the whole project has $13.6 million from bond
sale proceeds and $310,000 from the general fund.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT asked what was on the proposed site.
MS. ADAIR said there was a gravel pad with a Department of Motor
Vehicles/Department of Transportation building next door.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT asked Julie Decker to testify next.
JULIE DECKER, executive director of the Southeast Alaska Regional
Dive Fisheries Association, supports SB 24. She represents divers,
processors and communities of Southeast Alaska, all of whom use the
seafood and food safety laboratory in Palmer. They pay for many of
its services.
Relocating the lab next to the airport in Anchorage would be
beneficial to users in Southeast in particular due to the 30 hour
time limit on water samples. The trip from the airport to Palmer
has made the difference between getting the sample to the lab on
time and going over the 30 hour limit.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT called for questions.
SENATOR PHILLIPS asked what percent the fisheries' industry would
contribute toward the project since 80 percent of the business is
seafood related.
MS. ADAIR said that users pay for a portion of the maintenance and
operation of the facility.
SENATOR PHILLIPS said he'd like users to pay for more of the
facility itself.
MS. ADAIR said she wasn't sure "the way the fee statutes are
structured we could even include that in a fee."
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT asked for size of the proposed lab noting that
the current lab is 9,000 square feet.
MS. ADAIR said the new lab would be 20,500 square feet.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT said that was more than double the size. He
then said that current costs are $115,000 per year and are
anticipated to go to $1.2 million per year with the new facility.
In addition, Department of Environmental Conservation will pay
operational costs of $178,000 to $180,000 per year.
MS. ADAIR said that was correct but it must be understood that the
$115,000 figure would rise regardless of whether the new facility
is built or not. Also, laboratories are highly specialized and it
will be expensive to build one or to remodel a building to house a
modern lab. There are specific and specialized requirements for
things such as ventilation and the keeping and care of live mice
used in testing.
SENATOR PEARCE asked whether a survey was done of available
buildings in Anchorage that would meet code and could be used as
laboratories.
MS. ADAIR said that was part of the analysis done by contractors
Livingston/Sloan and they determined there were not any suitable
buildings in the Anchorage area.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT asked about the time gap between the two years
in extensions left on the current lab and the FY2005 projected
opening date of the new lab.
MS ADAIR said there is a one year gap and it is a great concern.
Number 1392
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT referred to notes from a power point
presentation outlining the pros and cons of owning versus leasing.
He asked how flexible the interior of a lab is in terms of
reconfiguration since this was listed as a reason to own rather
than lease.
MS. ADAIR said she would like Tom Livingston to answer the
question.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT asked for other questions for Ms Adair before
Mr. Livingston answered.
SENATOR PEARCE asked whether the lab might be asked to vacate the
premises before the end of the lease term if the building is sold.
MS. ADAIR said she didn't believe so.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT called upon Mr. Livingston.
MR. TOM LIVINGSTON with Livingston/Slone Inc. said that his firm
had just designed the new public health lab in Anchorage so he is
familiar with the issues discussed. It is critical that labs are
design flexible because technology, equipment and safety features
change fairly frequently. Things such as walk in freezers;
ventilation hoods, bio-safety cabinets and equipment hoods may all
have to be repositioned because of procedural changes that occur
over time. Needs for water, power, steam and ventilation are all
variable and this is one of the reasons labs are so specialized. A
building that is able to support this kind of flexibility is
complex.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT asked Mr. Livingston to talk about the search
for available buildings that would support the facility.
Number 1266
MR. LIVINGSTON said his firm did a survey of buildings in South
Central Alaska to determine their suitability for this type of
activity. The conclusion was that there are building shells that
would need extensive interior finishing but that there is nothing
on the market now that could be readily used. The design criteria
and bid specifications that would go out to potential landlords for
such a remodel are specific and extensive enough that there would
be considerable upfront cost to the state. Preparing such a package
would require an extension of the lease term in order to recoup
those costs.
After weighing the factors, it was decided that building a custom
designed facility that is state owned is the most cost effective
over time.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT asked if he took part in the decision to make
the new building 20,500 square feet, which is more than twice the
size of the current building.
MR. LIVINGSTON said that he prepared the analysis. The current
space is very inadequate and there really isn't enough space there
to conduct the procedures that are being performed there now. Good
science isn't being compromised but the staff has to work far
harder than necessary to maintain the standards expected by
industry.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT said he knew that they were under pressure in
the lab but wanted to know if the increased size comes from
industry standards for specific lab space or something else.
MR. LIVINGSTON said yes, they did a detailed analysis of the
current lab procedures and then looked at the new labs such as the
Anchorage Public Health Lab, the Seward Sea Life Center and the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric (NOAA) fisheries lab in Juneau.
With that data base, they came up with a figure for the square
footage needed for each of the labs activities and the utilities
needed to support those activities. Catering to the needs for
personal safety and conducting quality science were of primary
concern.
Number 1035
SENATOR PHILLIPS has a problem adding between 13 and 14 million
dollars to the state budget when he has a constituency that thinks
more should be cut from the budget. He asked for a response to
that.
MR. LIVINGSTON said that the cost of the state owned facility
compared to a leased facility over a twenty year term makes sense.
SENATOR PHILLIPS asked how other states pay for this type of
facility.
MS. ADAIR said that Washington and Oregon labs are general funded.
There are no fees paid by the users, it all comes from state
revenue.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT asked if there was a tax on the industry in
either of those states to add money to the general fund.
MS. ADAIR said she hasn't done a complete analysis. She knows that
Washington has a fairly heavy processors fee but she doesn't know
whether that applies to shellfish or not.
SENATOR PHILLIPS said his constituency wants budget cuts and that
80 percent of the business the lab conducts involve fisheries. He
thinks most of his constituents would say, "Let the users pay for
the services that they're asking for." He said he'd be interested
in knowing how other states pay for the structure and operation and
maintenance of the facilities.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT said that the industry pays for the tests but
questioned whether they should they have to pay for the facility as
well. Public health labs require payment for services but the cost
of the facility itself isn't factored in.
SENATOR PHILLIPS said, "public health is different. This is for one
industry. Why don't we do this for the oil industry or tourism? Who
is going to pay for all these things?"
Number 797
SENATOR PEARCE said that we all face those questions. However, to
expand and diversify the economy of Alaska, the State is going to
have to provide service and it is already doing so. One death from
PSP will kill the industry in the state and the state could well
end up being the "deep pocket" and spend much more in legal and
liability fees than the building costs. She believes that
laboratories for the public health are the responsibility of the
state. She has no problem asking users to pay for the tests they
have run but they shouldn't be expected to pay for the costs of the
building itself. To her knowledge, no other industry is asked to
pay for state building costs as an add-on to the fees, licenses,
permits and services they pay for. She used the oil industry as an
example.
SENATOR PHILLIPS said that the oil industry pays it's own way in
the state. He's concerned about adding more to the budget with no
plan for 10 to 15 years from now.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT said he agrees that costs must be considered.
However, this agency has been before the legislature and the
finance committee in two previous years and appropriations have
been made because it is known that the lab needs replacing. He does
have questions of his own about the total cost and the financing
mechanism.
SENATOR PEARCE said this is a renewable industry and efforts should
be made to "maintain it and grow it as we look to that 10 to 15
year period when Prudhoe Bay really is gone."
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT asked for questions and there were none. He
asked Devin Mitchel to come forward.
MR. DEVIN MITCHEL, State Debt Manager for the Department of Revenue
(DOR), said that DEC would coordinate with DOT to build the
facility using private contractors. "It would be the State of
Alaska's credit that would be utilized directly to access the
capital market. So rather than relying on the private developer to
use our lease payments as a revenue stream to obtain capital, we
would do that directly. So the state bond committee of the State of
Alaska would issue that debt."
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT asked whom we would be making our payments to
or if we would be paying the bond directly.
MR. MITCHEL said that the bill gives authorization for DEC to enter
into a lease with DOA. That lease would be secured to the state
rather than to a private developer. DOt is involved with the design
and construction of the facilities. The Department of Public
Services' new public health lab was constructed using the same
model.
The fiscal note anticipates lease payments of $1.2 million per year
but that is variable depending on the current interest rate.
Number 272
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT called Caren Robinson forward to testify.
MS. CAREN ROBINSON, owner and partner in Tenass Pass Shellfish
Company of Prince of Wales and owner of a shellfish distribution
company in Juneau, testified in favor of SB 24. She stressed the
importance of quick and accurate product testing for this growing
industry. She referenced a letter in committee packets from her
partner, Roger Painter, outlining the difficulties involved in
getting samples from Prince of Wales to the Palmer Lab within the
30 hour time requirement. Having the lab closer to the airport in
Anchorage rather than in Palmer would eliminate one leg of the
journey and therefore save time. She emphasized the importance of
timely tests and said that anything that could be done to help the
industry would be appreciated. A lab in Anchorage is preferable to
the Palmer location.
Number 152
MS. ROBINSON said that they pay for the testing and the state
fisheries tax even though they pay for the spat and the shipping
costs and put the spat into the water themselves. They're willing
to pay their way but the industry is young and struggling.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT thanked Ms. Robinson for her testimony. There
were no questions. He then asked Ms. Adair about the statement that
the federal government wouldn't allow a private lab to perform
testing functions.
Tape 01-6, Side A
MS. ADAIR said that the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) has to
certify labs doing PSP and dairy testing. They certify state
laboratories but there is no private lab certification process or
program.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT asked if that meant that no state has a private
lab certified to do this type of testing and without testing the
shellfish couldn't be sold.
MS. ADAIR said that was correct, no state has private labs that are
certified and Alaska statute requires following National Shellfish
Sanitation Program Standards adopted by the federal government.
This requires a marine toxin monitoring program.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT said that changing the state law wouldn't
change the federal requirement. You must have the testing facility
or you can't have the industry.
MS. ADAIR agreed.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT asked for questions. He said there is no
committee substitute and there are three fiscal notes. The shift of
expense for operating would go to DEC; DOR makes the lease payments
and DOA shows the savings when the current lease isn't paid any
longer.
SENATOR PEARCE asked whether the department had considered putting
an addition of the public health lab in Anchorage rather than
building a new facility.
MS ADAIR said they had but funding for the public health lab was
set before there were plans for the seafood/food safety lab and the
property selected wasn't large enough for both facilities without
resorting to a second story. Because of ventilation requirements, a
second story lab is prohibited.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT asked for questions and there were none. He
said that they had discussed wording of the bill and an overview of
the fiscal notes. There were no amendments.
He asked for the will of the committee.
SENATOR PEARCE made a motion to move SB 24 from committee with
fiscal notes and individual recommendations.
SENATOR PHILLIPS objected and said he wants to find out how East
and West Coast states finances labs of this type before this amount
of money is committed.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT suggested that Senator Phillips indicate his
objection on the committee report. He went on to advise Ms. Adair
to gather that information for the finance committee. He told
Senator Phillips it was his preference to move the bill and asked
him whether he wanted to maintain his objection.
SENATOR PHILLIPS said he would maintain his objection due to the
lack of information.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT called for a roll call. Senator Phillips voted
nay and Senators Davis, Pearce and Chairman Therriault voted yea.
The motion passed 3:1.
The bill moved from committee.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT adjourned the meeting at 5:20 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|