Legislature(2019 - 2020)BARNES 124
05/10/2019 01:00 PM House RESOURCES
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB91 | |
| HB116 | |
| Presentation(s): Understanding the Effects of Pfas (per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances) Contamination in Alaskan Municipalities | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 91 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 116 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 116-AQUATIC FARM/HATCHERY SITE LEASES
1:28:24 PM
CO-CHAIR TARR announced that the next order of business would be
SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 116, "An Act relating to
the renewal or extension of site leases for aquatic farming and
aquatic plant and shellfish hatchery operations."
1:28:50 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ANDI STORY, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor of
SSHB 116, stated that the bill seeks to simplify the Department
of Natural Resources (DNR) lease renewal process for aquatic
farms. Enactment of the bill, she said, would help Alaska-based
aquaculture businesses succeed by expediting the renewal process
and reducing risk for businesses that make significant capital
investments. She further stated that the bill would reduce the
workload on an overstretched state agency, while still allowing
appropriate regulatory oversight, public engagement, and appeals
of DNR's decision.
1:29:51 PM
GREG SMITH, Staff, Representative Andi Story, Alaska State
Legislature, directed attention to a DNR document included in
the committee packet that answers the committee's questions from
the bill's previous hearing. Regarding the question about how
many aquatic farm lease renewals are approved by DNR each year,
he said the document states zero in 2014, seven in 2015, ten in
2016, one in 2017, and zero in 2018 with twelve applications
submitted. He offered his understanding that a number of lease
renewal applications were submitted in 2017 that have not yet
been approved due to the amount of work in the division.
Regarding the question about the range in sizes of aquatic farm
leases, Mr. Smith said the document states the range is from
less than one acre on up to 127 acres of state-owned tide and
submerged lands. Regarding the question of whether the director
would have the authority to deny a lease renewal given that that
authority appears to be removed in Section 3 of the bill, he
said the document states that a director "may" renew or "may
not renew a lease under AS 38.05.070(e). Regarding the
questions on salmon hatcheries that have DNR general leases, he
said the document states yes, there are some. Regarding the
length of salmon hatchery leases, he said the document states
that there is a 25-year lease and a 30-year lease.
MR. SMITH continued speaking from the DNR document and noted
there was a question about the length of aquatic farm leases and
said that under regulation those are 10-year leases. Regarding
questions about what DNR is able to do during the lease term, at
renewal, and if there are violations of the lease terms, he said
it appears from the document that DNR is able to deny, revoke,
or rescind a lease during the lease term; change terms of the
lease at renewal, both under the current renewal process and
under the optional expedited renewal process under AS
38.05.070(e); and DNR is able to take action on a lease if there
is a violation of the lease's terms. Regarding the question on
the types of changes that would trigger a new lease application,
Mr. Smith said the document states that changes to the lease's
footprint or size, or changes to the lease's use, would trigger
a new lease application.
1:33:47 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN drew attention to the number of aquatic
farm lease renewals each year. She surmised that the sponsor's
interest in the issue stems from there being 12 applications
submitted in 2018 with none of them renewed. She asked whether
the sponsor has heard from the applicants and if that is what
motivated the bill. She further asked whether an aquatic farm
must abandon work on the site if DNR does not renew the lease in
a timely manner.
1:34:29 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY deferred to DNR to answer the question.
1:34:59 PM
CHRISTY COLLES, Operations Manager, Central Office, Division of
Mining, Land and Water, Department of Natural Resources (DNR),
responded that the division is working through them, so they do
not have an authorization, but the division also knows that it
is due to the workload and is no fault of the applicants. She
said it is a situation that neither the division nor the
applicant likes, but the division must go through the process
before it can say whether the applicant can continue to operate.
The applications are being worked on, she continued, but are not
completed yet.
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN asked what staffing levels are needed for
this work to be completed in a timely fashion. She further
asked whether DNR's operating budget for 2020 meets that
operational need.
MS. COLLES answered she doesn't feel comfortable giving those
numbers. She said she doesn't know exactly what type of
staffing would be needed and she hasn't seen the numbers that
have been given for the operational budget in 2020.
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN asked what the staffing capacity was in
2016 as compared to 2018.
MS. COLLES replied [the division] supports the governor's budget
at this point. She said the 2018 staffing level is the same as
it was in 2016.
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN interpreted Ms. Colles' answer as being
that in 2016 the staffing level that could complete 12 renewal
applications is the same staffing level that in 2018 was unable
to complete any applications.
MS. COLLES responded yes, but explained that the reason it has
changed is because the division has more new applications coming
in. In 2016, she continued, the division did not have the level
of interest in the industry as there is now, and that is why it
is more difficult for staff to adjudicate these renewal
applications.
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN asked how many applications for new
mariculture and shellfish permits were received in 2018.
MS. COLLES offered her belief that there was 14-16 [new
applications] in 2018.
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN inquired whether most of the applications
were completed that year.
MS. COLLES answered that the division was unable to complete all
of the applications and get them to issuance. She said she
could not recall the exact number of how many were issued.
1:38:12 PM
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER asked what the fate of the applications
is now.
MS. COLLES replied the division is continuing to work through
them; they are not put aside. She said the division has one
dedicated staff member and approximately five other staff
members, who also work on general leases, that are assisting
with the applications that are coming in for aquatic farming.
She stated that there are competing interests and projects for
time and while she won't say that they are not a priority, the
division is balancing those priorities.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER inquired whether processing of the
applications will continue until they are finished, and that
time will not kill them.
MS. COLLES responded correct.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER related his understanding from speaking
with a former commissioner that sometimes the problem isn't lack
of funding, but rather the problem of filling [the position].
He allowed, however, that this has nothing to do with today's
discussions.
1:40:12 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LINCOLN asked whether the businesses that are
waiting for their leases to be renewed are able to continue
operating until the department addresses their renewal request.
MS. COLLES answered yes, [the applicants] are able to continue
their business.
1:41:02 PM
CO-CHAIR TARR opened invited testimony on SSHB 116.
1:41:13 PM
META MESDAG, Owner, Salty Lady Seafood Company, testified in
support of SSHB 116. She stated she is a board member of the
Alaska Shellfish Growers Association and that both she and the
association support the bill. She related that a year ago she
submitted documents for a lease transfer for a farm site in
Juneau, and it was just recently completed. She stated she
currently has oysters at her farm and is getting ready to seed
geoduck. Oysters take three years to become ready for market
and geoducks take up to seven, she specified. She pointed out
that her lease has five years left on it and she is not even
through all of the process for getting her site fully permitted.
During the next four years, she continued, [her renewal] will be
up for public comment three times and no revenue will be seen
from the geoduck before she has to start the leasing process all
over again.
MS. MESDAG said SSHB 116 would allow DNR to sign off one time on
the renewal of leases that are in good standing. She stated
this would improve efficiencies in the agencies regulating this
industry and would provide assurances for farmers wanting to
enter the industry. This easy solution, she continued, would
grant the director the authority to renew leases that are in the
state's best interest.
MS. MESDAG pointed out that making changes to her lease takes
years. She explained she has a parcel that is supposed to be
for a hardening beach, but that it needs to be moved because
it's not the right substrate. However, she continued, that move
is going to take years, which means she is paying for property
that she cannot actually utilize and the only reason is because
the state is so backlogged that it cannot process new leases or
transfers in a timely manner and in a way that makes it an
industry thas easy for people to invest in.
1:43:40 PM
CO-CHAIR TARR opened public testimony on SSHB 116.
1:43:51 PM
MARGO REVEIL, President, Alaska Shellfish Growers Association,
testified in support of SSHB 116. She said she owns a farm and
that both her farm and the association support the bill. She
stated the association successfully worked to develop the
industry, with sales doubling in the last five years. But the
industry is still in its nascent stages, she continued, with
only $1.53 million in aquatic farm sales with 41 farms
reporting. Mariculture has tremendous potential to diversify
Alaska's economy and build resiliency in the state's coastal
communities, she opined. She said SSHB 116 could alleviate the
permitting bottlenecks that are hampering growth and causing
lost revenue to the state. She stated that DNR currently
processes lease renewals every 10 years using the same
requirements as a new lease. She pointed out that this full
process is required even if the farm has been a responsible
steward of state water resources, has successfully met DNR's
commercial use requirements, and is not proposing major changes
to the lease.
MS. REVEIL stated that shellfish farming is a heavily regulated
industry with ample opportunity for agency and public input.
She said regulation of her own 24-acre farm in Kachemak Bay
includes the following: a DNR lease renewal every 10 years with
periodic inspections; an ADF&G 10-year operation permit with
periodic inspections and a development plan report that must be
filed annually; an ADF&G special area habitat permit that is
renewed annually; a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permit that is
renewed every five years and includes a review by the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA); Department of
Environmental Conservation (DEC) quarterly inspections at the
farm's processing plant; annual inspection by the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) for Vibrio vulnificus compliance [a
bacteria that can contaminate raw oysters]; and compliance with
all U.S. Coast Guard requirements. Ms. Reveil pointed out that
each of these agencies has its own mechanism for responding to
and processing public input. She further noted that a
significant part of her time is spent managing agency relations
for her small business.
MS. REVEIL stated that SSHB 116 is a modest bill that would
accomplish several positive changes: reduce workload for DNR
staff, make on-water leases more similar to land leases in terms
of process, prioritize DNR staff time in new farm lease
applications and managing DNR's program, and give more certainty
for existing farmers who have invested in site infrastructure
during the first 10-year lease; and slightly reduce [lease
renewal] application times. She acknowledged opposition has
been brought up regarding farm size and lack of public input,
but said new farm applications and second renewals retain the
extensive public input component where farm size and resource
sharing issues are addressed. She added that the bill would
just give DNR the ability to process a single lease renewal
faster if the lease is in good standing.
1:47:28 PM
NANCY HILLSTRAND, Pioneer Alaskan Fisheries Inc., noted her
company has been in business since 1964. She said her main
concern is the sponsor statement's [first line], which states:
"helping small, Alaska-based businesses." She asked whether
there is any way to define the meanings of "small" and "good
standing." She said her business helped the oyster growers
begin in Kachemak Bay in the early 1990s, but now problems are
being seen as some of the oyster growers want to expand and as
new oyster farmers come into the area because of the area's
residents and navigable waters. She recalled statements that
these leases should be aligned and standardized, but maintained
that there is a difference because these are navigable waters
belonging to the people of Alaska who are boating and fishing
the near-shore waters.
MS. HILLSTRAND stated that not all the scientific information is
on the table. For example, she said, there isn't a magnitude
included for salmon hatcheries, nor an on-off switch. She
maintained that the suspension and revocation statute hasn't
been utilized properly so some of the hatcheries continue even
though they aren't in compliance with their permits, which is
what makes her concerned about what "good standing" means. She
cautioned about the possibility of over capitalization and then
having to buy out the businesses. She said she is by no means
opposed to small farms being allowed to continue business, but
is concerned that as big industry starts to enter the people of
Alaska be allowed a good voice after 10 years for getting down
to any problems and finding solutions.
1:50:42 PM
VICKI JO KENNEDY told the story of her friends in Sterling who
invested $250,000 in a fisheries business that included smoked
salmon, processed fish, and shellfish. She said they were
controlled by four separate state entities and one federal
entity. She related that one agency would say it was okay to do
something and then the next one would say it wasn't, and after
almost three years her friends threw in the towel because it was
such a nightmare. She urged the committee to grow the state by
working with the people trying to have a business, to let them
get through their permitting in a timely manner, and to not let
so many entities be in charge such that people cannot figure out
what to do next.
1:52:38 PM
HERMAN MORGAN expressed his concern with salmon hatcheries. He
said the commercial fishermen in his area used to have a market
for their chum and red salmon, but the market was taken away
when the hatcheries came online and started overproducing. He
maintained the hatcheries are putting out too many fish and are
stressing the carrying capacity of the ocean. The hatcheries
are making it hard for people in his area to make a living, he
continued. He urged that salmon hatcheries be regulated.
CO-CHAIR TARR pointed out that SSHB 116 affects shellfish
hatcheries, not salmon hatcheries. She thanked Mr. Morgan for
his comments.
1:54:59 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN requested the legal definition of "good
standing" in the context of SSHB 116.
1:55:15 PM
ALPHEUS BULLARD, Attorney, Legislative Legal Counsel,
Legislative Legal Services, responded that when it applies to a
lease it means that there are no issues with the department, and
it would be up to the department to define what those could be
in this case.
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN asked whether, because this is about lease
renewals, it could be presumed to mean that the applicant must
be in compliance with all the terms of the original lease to be
considered in good standing for this expedited lease renewal.
MR. BULLARD replied, "That seems a reasonable interpretation."
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN noted the term "small" doesn't actually
appear in SSHB 116. She inquired about the current sizes of
shellfish farms and whether the agencies define all those sizes
as being "small" leases.
1:56:55 PM
MS. COLLES answered that for authorized leases the range is from
less than one acre on up to 127 acres. She said most of the
farms are less than 30 acres and only one is above 30 acres - a
new farm that is 127 acres. She stated that the division is
seeing some larger farms come online in applications.
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN inquired whether the 127-acre farm is a
corporate type structure, rather than a mom-and-pop structure,
for shellfish operation.
MS. COLLES replied it is hard to tell. She said a lot of these
companies come in with business licenses and sometimes they are
getting funding from an outside source, but the division doesn't
always know all the different factors of where their sourcing is
coming from. Therefore, she continued, she cannot say for sure
whether they are a mom-and-pop.
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN asked whether there is a difference in the
division's application oversight based on the size of the
acreage that is being sought for a lease; in other words,
whether a 30-acre application is treated differently than an
application for 127 acres.
MS. COLLES responded that some regulations give different
consideration for larger farms taking up more than one-third of
a bay or cove. It isn't always the size being so much larger,
she explained, it is the size taking up a large area that makes
the division look closer at the application to consider a few
criteria that are listed in regulation. But, she added, she
wouldn't say the division treats them differently. A lot more
comments are received when the farms are larger, she noted. For
example, she related, recently a farm wanted to expand a couple
acres in Kachemak Bay, and since that requires public notice the
division got a lot of comments because it is in a well-populated
area and [the public] was concerned about navigation issues.
So, she continued, it really depends on the location.
2:00:04 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TALERICO addressed Section 3 of the bill, page 2,
lines 7-9, which state: "The commissioner, for good cause, may
deny an application an application for issuance [OR RENEWAL] of
a lease under this section but shall provide the applicant with
written findings that explain the reasons for the denial." He
said this language seems to mean that the only person who has
access to the written denial is the applicant. He asked whether
this would create an issue.
MR. BULLARD answered that this language would impose a duty on
the commissioner to provide an applicant with the written
findings that explain the reasons for the denial. He said there
isn't anything [in the language] that would limit who else might
see such a denial or that would make it confidential in any way.
CO-CHAIR TARR noted this particular reference is under the
responsibilities of the commissioner. She interpreted Mr.
Bullard to be saying it doesn't otherwise limit the commissioner
to providing this information to people in a nearby community.
MR. BULLARD replied that that "is a reasonable interpretation of
that phrase." He pointed out that the word "only" doesn't
appear on line 8 or line 9 or page 2, "it's just requiring the
commissioner to provide the applicant with those reasons."
2:02:45 PM
CO-CHAIR LINCOLN moved to report SSHB 116, Version 31-LS0696\U,
out of committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection, SSHB 116
was reported out of the House Resources Standing Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB116 Sponsor Statement 4.15.19.pdf |
HFSH 4/16/2019 10:00:00 AM HFSH 4/25/2019 10:00:00 AM HRES 5/3/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM |
HB 116 |
| HB116 ver U 04.30.19.pdf |
HRES 5/3/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/6/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM |
HB 116 |
| HB116 DNR Fiscal Note 04.30.19.pdf |
HRES 5/3/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/6/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM |
HB 116 |
| HB116 ver U Sectional Analysis 04.30.19.pdf |
HRES 5/3/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/6/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM |
HB 116 |
| HB116 Explanation of Changes ver A to ver U 04.30.19.pdf |
HRES 5/3/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/6/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM |
HB 116 |
| HB116 Aquatic Farm Application Review Flow Chart 04.30.19.pdf |
HRES 5/3/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/6/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM |
HB 116 |
| HB 116 - AFDF Letter of Support 2019-04-15.pdf |
HFSH 4/23/2019 10:00:00 AM HFSH 4/25/2019 10:00:00 AM HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM |
HB 116 |
| HB116 ASGA Letter of Support 04.15.19.pdf |
HFSH 4/23/2019 10:00:00 AM HFSH 4/25/2019 10:00:00 AM HRES 5/6/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM |
HB 116 |
| HB116 Supporting Document- Mariculture Plan.pdf |
HFSH 4/16/2019 10:00:00 AM HFSH 4/25/2019 10:00:00 AM HRES 5/3/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/6/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM |
HB 116 |
| HB 116 Letter of Opposition-Hillstrand.pdf |
HFSH 4/25/2019 10:00:00 AM HRES 5/3/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM |
HB 116 |
| SB91 Sponsor Statement 3.21.19.pdf |
HRES 5/8/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM SRES 4/15/2019 3:30:00 PM |
SB 91 |
| SB91 Version A.pdf |
HRES 5/8/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM SRES 4/15/2019 3:30:00 PM |
SB 91 |
| SB91(FIN) Version S 5.6.19.PDF |
HRES 5/8/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM |
SB 91 |
| SB91 Fiscal Note DNR-PKS 3.29.19.pdf |
HRES 5/8/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM SRES 4/15/2019 3:30:00 PM |
SB 91 |
| SB 91 CS SB 91 (FIN) v. S Explanation.pdf |
HRES 5/8/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM SFIN 5/6/2019 9:00:00 AM |
SB 91 |
| SB91 BBNA Resolution 3.21.19.pdf |
HRES 5/8/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM SRES 4/15/2019 3:30:00 PM |
SB 91 |
| SB91 BBNC Letter 3.19.19.pdf |
HRES 5/8/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM SRES 4/15/2019 3:30:00 PM |
SB 91 |
| SB91 City of Dillingham Resolution 3.7.19.pdf |
HRES 5/8/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM SRES 4/15/2019 3:30:00 PM |
SB 91 |
| SB91 City of Aleknagik Resolution 3.19.19.pdf |
HRES 5/8/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM SRES 4/15/2019 3:30:00 PM |
SB 91 |
| SB91 CTC Resolution 3.12.19.pdf |
HRES 5/8/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM SRES 4/15/2019 3:30:00 PM |
SB 91 |
| SB91 NETC Resolution 11.15.17.pdf |
HRES 5/8/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM SRES 4/15/2019 3:30:00 PM |
SB 91 |
| SB91 Sectional Analysis 3.21.19.pdf |
HRES 5/8/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM SRES 4/15/2019 3:30:00 PM |
SB 91 |
| SB91 Nuyakuk Studies Cost Estimate.pdf |
HRES 5/8/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM SRES 4/15/2019 3:30:00 PM |
SB 91 |
| SB91 Nuyakuk Hydroelectric Update 2019.pdf |
HRES 5/8/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM SRES 4/15/2019 3:30:00 PM |
SB 91 |
| HB99_SB91_Nushagak Cooperative Presentation_Resources.pdf |
HRES 5/8/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM |
HB 99 SB 91 |
| City of Gustavus Supporting Documents.pdf |
HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM |
PFAS |
| HRES PFCs in the FNSB 5.10.19.pdf |
HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM |
SB 5 |
| SB91(FIN) Fiscal Note DNR-PKS 5.09.19.pdf |
HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM |
SB 91 |
| HRES DEC Presentation PFAS 5.10.19.pdf |
HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM |
PFAS |
| HB116 Supporting Document - DNR responses from 5.3.19 H RES meeting 5.10.19.pdf |
HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM |
HB 116 |
| City of Gustavus Supporting Documents - Rose Testimony 5.10.19.pdf |
HRES 5/10/2019 1:00:00 PM |
PFAS |