03/27/1998 01:50 PM House FIN

HOUSE BILL NO. 28                                                              
                                                                               
"An Act repealing the Alaska Coastal Management Program                        
and the Alaska Coastal Policy Council, and making                              
conforming amendments because of those repeals."                               
                                                                               
Co-Chair Therriault provided members with a proposed                           
committee substitute. work draft 0-LS0189\T, dated 3/26/98                     
(copy on file).                                                                
                                                                               
SARA FISHER, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE THERRIAULT reviewed the                     
proposed committee substitute.  The provision prohibiting a                    
coastal resource district from incorporating statues and                       
regulations into their statements of policies and                              
regulations was not changed.  A new provision was added that                   
would require the Council to adopt regulations to provide                      
for periodic review of approved district programs.  This                       
would ensure consistency with the guidelines and standards                     
of the Alaska Coastal Management Program (ACMP), to ensure                     
that the approved programs are implemented and enforced and                    
to ensure that the program does not restrict uses of state                     
concern.  Procedures would be established to revoke a                          
program if the district does not address the deficiencies.                     
The provision that agencies could not stipulate onto a                         
consistency provision was removed.  The proposed committee                     
substitute defines where the consistency determination can                     
be made.  Consistency determination could not be required                      
outside and inland of the area subject to the ACMP.  The                       
proposed committee substitute prohibits a requirement for a                    
consistency determination with the area that is subject to                     
the ACMP but beyond the interim coastal zone boundary                          
adopted in 1979.  A standard 10-mile mark was used in the                      
previous version, work draft 0-LS0189\L.  Under the new                        
version, a consistency determination would only be required                    
when the user activity has a direct and significant impact                     
on coastal waters.  "Coastal waters" are defined as those                      
waters adjacent to the tidal shorelines, which contain a                       
measurable quantity or percentage of seawater.  This would                     
allow the program to continue where the boundaries will not                    
have to be changed.  A trapping cabin well into the interior                   
would not have a significant impact on the coast waters and                    
would therefore not require a consistency determination.                       
The petition process is eliminated.  A municipality or                         
Coastal Resource Service Area would have one year to amend                     
their programs.                                                                
                                                                               
Co-Chair Therriault explained that offshore areas would be                     
covered.  An area would have to be outside and inland for a                    
consistency determination to not be required.  He                              
acknowledged the problem of not allowing state agencies to                     
comment on federal projects.  The state program would have                     
more control over local district programs.                                     
                                                                               
Co-Chair Therriault clarified that the prohibition against                     
agencies stipulating beyond their statute requirements has                     
been deleted.  Representative Davies agreed with the                           
deletion and emphasized that a major benefit of the program                    
is the coordination function.  He added that this function                     
encourages development.                                                        
                                                                               
HB 28 was HELD in Committee for further consideration.