HB 262 - PASSENGER SECURITY: TRANSPORT. FACILITY 2:39:58 PM CHAIR GATTO announced that the final order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 262, "An Act relating to the offense of interference with access to public buildings or transportation facilities, when a person conditions access to a public building or transportation facility on consent to certain physical contact or to an electronic process that produces a picture of the private exposure of the person." 2:40:10 PM REPRESENTATIVE THOMPSON moved to adopt the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HB 262, Version 27-LS1016\I, Gardner, 2/17/12, as the working document. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG objected for the purpose of discussion. 2:40:30 PM MARK SABEL, Staff, Representative Sharon Cissna, Alaska State Legislature, on behalf of the sponsor of HB 262, Representative Cissna, in response to a request, indicated that Version I of HB 262 addresses airports, and offered his understanding that an amendment to Version I in members' packets could not be offered at this time because the legislation it mirrors is not yet properly before the House Judiciary Standing Committee; that amendment, labeled 27-LS1016\I.1, Gardner, 2/18/12, read: Page 1, line 4, following "person": Insert "; requiring certain airports in the state  to apply for the federal security screening opt-out  program; providing reimbursement to a municipality  that applies for the federal security screening opt- out program; and providing for an effective date" Page 2, following line 5: Insert new bill sections to read:  "* Sec. 2. The uncodified law of the State of Alaska is amended by adding a new section to read: APPLICATION FOR FEDERAL SECURITY SCREENING OPT- OUT PROGRAM. (a) The Department of Transportation and Public Facilities shall, by December 31, 2013, apply for the federal security screening opt-out program under 49 U.S.C. 44920 for those airports under the control of the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities that are subject to federal security screening requirements. (b) A municipality that operates an airport in the state that is subject to federal security screening requirements shall, by December 31, 2013, apply for the federal security screening opt-out program under 49 U.S.C. 44920.  * Sec. 3. The uncodified law of the State of Alaska is amended by adding a new section to read: REIMBURSEMENT. Subject to appropriation, the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities shall reimburse a municipality that is required to submit an application under sec. 2(b) of this Act for the reasonable costs, as determined by the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, of applying for the federal security screening opt-out program under 49 U.S.C. 44920. If appropriations are not sufficient fully to fund reimbursements under this section, the amount available shall be distributed pro rata among eligible municipalities. * Sec. 4. Sections 2 and 3 of this Act take effect immediately under AS 01.10.070(c)." CHAIR GATTO observed that under Version I, the references to public buildings have been removed, and thus HB 262 no longer addresses behavior occurring in public buildings, but rather only behavior occurring in transportation facilities. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG [removed his] objection. CHAIR GATTO, after ascertaining that there were no further objections, announced that Version I was before the committee. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG opined that the bill should define the term, "transportation facilities". He then noted that Version I's proposed AS 11.76.118(a)(2) no longer contains the phrase, "the genitals, anus, or female breast or otherwise creates an electronic image of", and asked why that language was removed. 2:47:37 PM REPRESENTATIVE CHRIS TUCK, Alaska State Legislature, offered his understanding that that language was removed as being redundant, and acknowledged that the term, "transportation facilities", still needs to be defined in the bill. CHAIR GATTO observed that a violation under Version I would still be a class A misdemeanor. MR. SABEL, in response to comments, proffered that a possible solution to the problem of inappropriately-invasive searches by Transportation Security Administration (TSA) personnel lies within the aforementioned amendment, which, he reiterated, could not be offered at this time. [Chair Gatto turned the gavel over to Vice Chair Thompson.] REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT pointed out, though, that the aforementioned amendment would not provide a solution to the problem because the same security screening techniques would still have to be employed, just not by TSA employees. VICE CHAIR THOMPSON concurred. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG offered his understanding that when Texas attempted to institute legislation similar to HB 262, the federal government threatened to close down the airport in Dallas, and said he didn't want something similar to occur in Alaska. VICE CHAIR THOMPSON said he, too, had heard about Texas's experience. REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT expressed concern that if legislation such as HB 262 passes, the unintended consequence could be that planes originating in Alaska would not be allowed to land at other U.S. airports. 2:55:26 PM REPRESENTATIVE TUCK relayed that his research regarding what other countries are doing indicates that using dogs and interviewing travelers has proven to be the most effective way of securing everyone's safety at airports. Characterizing the TSA's current screening procedures as questionable with regard to actually securing the safety of air travelers, he ventured that the goal with HB 262 is to come up with a more effective but less invasive way of screening such travelers. In conclusion, he pointed out that air travelers flying into the United States from other countries are not subjected to current TSA screening procedures - only air travelers boarding a plane in the U.S. are. [Vice Chair Thompson returned the gavel to Chair Gatto.] REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG suggested that perhaps a task force could be formed to research the issues raised as a result of current TSA screening procedures. REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT agreed, venturing that perhaps any such task force could work with other states to address those issues at the federal level. 3:01:23 PM DIANE SCHENKER, Co-director, Alaskans' Freedom to Travel USA, offered her understanding that HB 262 is more limited than the aforementioned Texas legislation - and thus might not elicit the same type of response - and that there are plenty of alternative ways to screen air travelers without resorting to touching their genitals or relying on untested whole-body scanners, as the TSA currently does. Current TSA security-screening procedures fit the definition of sexual assault under Alaskan's statutes, she noted, and are causing Alaskans great fear. In conclusion, she opined that prohibiting TSA personnel from touching air travelers' genitals - as HB 262 is proposing - shouldn't preclude the TSA from conducting reasonable searches. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG again suggested that a task force be formed. MR. SABEL mentioned that the sponsor is pursuing that approach; has formed a group called, "United States for Travel Freedom"; and feels that passage of HB 262 would be a good step towards fulfilling Alaska's constitutional responsibility [to protect its citizens]. Remarking on the non-responsiveness of the federal government thus far to pleas for help, he opined that more needs to be done to correct the problem, particularly in Alaska because, according to statistics, Alaskans travel by air, and suffer trauma and abuse, more often than the residents of other states. CHAIR GATTO expressed interest in coming up with an alternative to current TSA security-screening procedures that could work for everyone, surmising that [so-called] "trusted traveler" programs don't constitute such an alternative. CHAIR GATTO relayed that HB 262 [Version I] would therefore be held over.