Legislature(2011 - 2012)BARNES 124
03/18/2011 01:00 PM House RESOURCES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Confirmation Hearing(s):|| Commissioner, Alaska Department of Fish & Game | |
| Confirmation Hearing(s):|| Alaska Board of Fisheries | |
| Confirmation Hearing(s):|| Alaska Oil & Gas Conservation Commission | |
| HB185 | |
| HB106 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| *+ | HB 185 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 106 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 185-EXEMPT DISCHARGES FROM USE OF MUNITIONS
2:15:14 PM
CO-CHAIR SEATON announced that the next order of business is
HOUSE BILL NO. 185, "An Act relating to an exemption from
authorizations that may be required by the Department of
Environmental Conservation for the firing or other use of
munitions on active ranges."
2:16:03 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TAMMIE WILSON, Alaska State Legislature, noted
that she would like to address a proposed amended version of HB
185.
CO-CHAIR FEIGE moved to adopt the proposed committee substitute
(CS) for HB 185, Version 27-LS0506\E, Bullard, 3/14/11, as the
work draft.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON objected for discussion purposes.
CO-CHAIR SEATON requested an explanation of the differences
between the original bill and Version E.
REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON replied that the change is necessary
because a long federal vetting process was accomplished and
Version E is the version that they agreed to.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON removed her objection. There being no
further objection Version E was before the committee.
2:17:30 PM
REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON spoke as follows:
In 2008 the state sought EPA approval of its Clean
Water Act program. From this, the statutory exclusion
for active military ranges under Title 46 was amended
so that now it excludes the firing or other use of
munitions in training activities conducted on active
ranges, including active ranges operated by the
Department of Defense or military agencies, unless it
results in the discharge into waters of the United
States. ... HB 185 clarifies section (e)(7) such that
it cannot be misinterpreted to restrict military
exercises on ranges other than instances where the
federal Clean Water Act [Federal Water Pollution
Control Act] would apply.
REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON added that HB 185 is a collaboration
between the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) and
the Department of Military & Veterans' Affairs (DMVA). She
deferred to DMVA and other military experts to provide further
technical information.
2:19:29 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER understood that the purpose of the bill
is to ensure that military exercises are not restricted except
when it would result in discharge of waste into federal waters.
REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON said her understanding is that right
now when training exercises take place and munitions end up in
the waterway there is a potential for a lawsuit to happen, and
HB 185 would prevent such lawsuits.
2:20:26 PM
MAJOR GENERAL THOMAS KATKUS, Commissioner, Department of
Military & Veterans' Affairs (DMVA), noted that he also serves
as the Adjutant General for the Alaska National Guard and that
today he is representing the State of Alaska. He said the
military is well supported by Alaska's communities and the state
is a good place for military operations and training. He was
approached some time ago about a potential problem in the
training, in the development of areas like the Joint Pacific
Alaska Range Complex. The statutes covering clean water
constraints in Alaska are more restrictive and/or vague, and can
be interpreted more restrictively, than the federal
requirements. The bill would not reduce the constraints or make
it weaker than the federal requirements; HB 185 would make the
Alaska statute clear so that someone taking the military to task
in a training area does not have the advantage of playing in
those vague areas. The bill would clarify that the constraints
of military development in training areas are to be held to the
federal standards. The insertion specifies exactly what those
standards are going to be.
2:22:08 PM
CO-CHAIR SEATON asked whether the problem has been with white
phosphorus shells, lead, or another issue.
MAJOR GENERAL KATKUS replied that the issues would be almost any
by-product that comes off of the ordinance used in the training
for military; so, those military ordinances could be covered
that affects the water. It would clarify what the constraints
are on the environment.
2:22:53 PM
CO-CHAIR SEATON recalled a court order requiring the cleanup of
white phosphorous due to its impact on migratory waterfowl. He
inquired whether there would not have been an order for white
phosphorus clean up had the provisions of HB 185 been in place.
MAJOR GENERAL KATKUS responded that the U.S. military is a very
good steward of the environment and would have cleaned up the
environment whether this bill had been in effect or not. As the
military looks at developing areas, it cannot predict exactly
what areas will be challenged in court for constraining the
training. The bill would clarify exactly what in the clean
water laws can be used and narrows the scope of different groups
that may not support training range development. He said it
would not be a lesser standard.
2:24:19 PM
MCHUGH PIERRE, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Military &
Veterans' Affairs (DMVA), said HB 185 would not at all take away
from the cleanup or the responsibility of the military, any
agency or department thereof, of taking care of the lands in
Alaska. The white phosphorus in the Eagle River drainage is
absolutely going to be cleaned up and was cleaned up. The
specific language that would be replaced is "of the United
States" which is very vague because there is a lot of water of
the United States. He said DMVA worked with the lawyers at the
Department of Law who work on DEC issues, as well as with the
environmental section of the Department of Defense, to narrow it
down specifically to the waters mentioned in 33 U.S.C. 1251 -
1376. He said there is currently discharge into water in
certain training areas and that all will be cleaned up, is
cleaned up, and will be cleaned up in the future; it is just a
matter of defining what water is in each training area.
2:26:32 PM
CO-CHAIR SEATON informed committee members and the public that
HB 185 will be held over to give people a chance to review it.
He then continued with agency testimony.
2:27:18 PM
MAJOR JUSTIN TRUMBO, Regional Environmental Coordinator, U.S.
Air Force, Region X, U.S. Department of Defense (DOD), said he
is the chief environmental legal counsel for state law matters
that affect the Department of Defense. He offered support for
HB 185 on behalf of the military services in Alaska. He thanked
Representative T. Wilson for her efforts to promote Alaska's
continued partnership with the Department of Defense. The
Department of Defense has a long and proud history of
cooperation. Alaska's military installations are vital to DOD's
worldwide mission. In the spirit of cooperation DOD has worked
with the Department of Environmental Conservation, the Office of
the Attorney General, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
and General Katkus's staff and other stakeholders to develop
this amendment.
MAJOR TRUMBO noted that the statute that would be amended
prohibits the disposal of solid or liquid waste into waters or
onto lands of the State of Alaska without authorization by the
Department of Environmental Conservation. This statute was
amended in 2008 when Alaska sought the U.S. Environmental
Agency's approval of its clean water program. As a result, the
statutory exclusion for military ranges was modified so that it
now excludes the firing or other use of munitions unless it
results into a discharge into water of the United States. It is
the phrase "discharge into waters of the United States" that has
created some confusion and HB 185 would eliminate that. The
bill would not repeal any protections under federal law and will
help ensure that military ranges can be used and will be used in
accordance with federal law. Additionally, it would benefit the
State of Alaska in that federal and Alaska state agencies agree
that this amendment would not jeopardize continued U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency approval of Alaska's Clean Water
Act program.
2:30:15 PM
MAJOR TRUMBO said the benefit of the proposed amendment
specifically to the Department of Defense will ensure that
questions regarding the application of Alaska law to military
ranges are determined in accordance with the federal Clean Water
Act. While there may be uncertainty as to how that federal
Clean Water Act program might apply to military ranges, the
proposed amendment will not preclude agencies, the military, the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, or private parties from
making appropriate arguments under the federal statute. But
unless amended, the application of the "Alaska Clean Water Act"
to military ranges might be inconsistent with the application of
clean water programs to the military in other states.
MAJOR TRUMBO pointed out that because DEC plans to apply its
clean water program to munitions starting October 2011, the
Department of Defense strongly supports passage of HB 185 this
legislative session. The amendment provided by HB 185 will help
ensure that Alaska's continuing capacity to host sustainable
military readiness training for outstanding airman, soldiers,
and sailors is not jeopardized.
2:31:24 PM
CO-CHAIR SEATON related that he was told HB 185 would not apply
to civilian or other ranges. However, page 2, line 17, of the
bill, states that the exemption is for "the firing or other use
of munitions in training activities conducted on active ranges,
including active ranges operated by the United States Department
of Defense...." This language appears to mean any range,
whether it is local, state, or sport, if it is an active
training range because the language says including DOD ranges
rather than limited to DOD ranges. He requested that this be
investigated and the committee be informed as to what the
military needs and wants to ensure that the bill addresses only
the areas that are intended to be addressed.
MR. PIERRE suggested this question be posed to the Department of
Law to explain why the wording is as it is. He said his
understanding is that this part of the statute for including
other ranges has not changed, but where the new language was put
in and why it was put in was to impact ranges operated by the
Department of Defense or a U.S. military agency.
2:33:37 PM
CO-CHAIR SEATON maintained that it is all the ranges that would
be modified, because it has been left in that same statute, and
not just a DOD range. He reiterated his question to the
Department of Law.
LINDSAY WOLTER, Assistant Attorney General, Environmental
Section, Civil Division (Anchorage), Department of Law, replied
she has the same understanding as Co-Chair Seaton that it would
apply to both military active ranges and other active ranges.
CO-CHAIR SEATON said that since this is not the intention
related to him by the sponsor, he would like to request that the
sponsor get it clarified.
2:34:53 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER understood that HB 185 would effectively
give primacy to federal regulations for discharge to water for
munitions and active training ranges.
MR. PIERRE replied no, the goal is to "specify very clearly in
our approving process what waters of the United States we are
referring to." Thus, it enables reference to a specific section
when there is discussion about development of future military
ranges in the state of Alaska. This way there is not a wide
swath of questioning that would or would not allow active
military use of future ranges - not existing ranges - to be
permitted.
2:35:58 PM
CO-CHAIR SEATON directed Representative Gardner's question to
the Department of Environmental Conservation.
LYNN KENT, Director, Division of Water, Department of
Environmental Conservation, regarding what ranges are included,
explained that long before the Department of Environmental
Conservation (DEC) sought primacy for the permitting program
from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), there was
already legislatively mandated state policy to exempt training
ranges, including military ranges, from the requirements to get
a state discharge permit. When DEC took on primacy for the
federal program, the state statute was revised to include the
phrase "unless it results in a discharge into waters of the
United States" because in certain circumstances ranges may
require a permit under the Clean Water Act. However, DEC has
learned that that language could have the effect of requiring a
state permit under state law even if it was not required under
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (Clean Water Act). The
new language being proposed today would very clearly exempt
training ranges and military ranges from the permitting
requirement that was similar to what was under state law unless
it is required by the Clean Water Act. This proposed language
is consistent with the Clean Water Act and consistent with the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's approval of DEC's program
and would not result in any adverse impact on the program that
DEC is operating right now under the EPA primacy.
CO-CHAIR SEATON requested Ms. Kent to send definitions and
descriptions of the waters being talked about and what would and
would not be exempt.
2:38:51 PM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON asked for the definitions of an active
range and an inactive range. In response to Co-Chair Seaton,
she confirmed that she is asking about any active range and
whether it is different for a DOD range versus private range.
MR. PIERRE replied that as the military looks to expand its role
in Alaska for training and to provide a more unique joint force
opportunity in the state, the Department of Military & Veterans'
Affairs is looking at the state's laws to determine how to
develop new ranges and what are the causes for concern. An
active range is one that is currently being used and will be
used in the future. There are ranges that have been abandoned
and the DMVA has received funding from the National Guard Bureau
to clean up abandoned National Guard ranges. Clean up includes
removing the lead bullets and contaminated dirt and DEC makes
sure that this takes place. The bill is not for abandoned
ranges or ranges that will be re-used because that is a whole
new permitting process; it is for active ranges that are
currently being used and will be used in the future.
2:41:04 PM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON inquired whether all the ranges being
talked about are military.
MR. PIERRE responded that DMVA's concern is for military ranges.
However, as pointed out by Co-Chair Seaton, the language looks
to read that civilian ranges could be impacted as well. The
department will work with the co-chair and DEC to make sure it
does everything right and meets the intent of the language.
CO-CHAIR SEATON stated that the Department of Law will be
requested to send the committee a written definition of an
active range and whether a permit is needed before using a
civilian range.
CO-CHAIR SEATON held over HB 185.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| Cora Campbell ADF&G Commissioner Resume.pdf |
HRES 3/18/2011 1:00:00 PM |
|
| HRES 3.7.11 HB 106 Coastal Management Program.PDF |
HRES 3/7/2011 1:00:00 PM HRES 3/16/2011 1:00:00 PM HRES 3/18/2011 1:00:00 PM HRES 3/28/2011 1:00:00 PM HRES 3/30/2011 1:00:00 PM |
HB 106 |
| CS HB 106 Workdraft Version B.pdf |
HRES 3/16/2011 1:00:00 PM HRES 3/18/2011 1:00:00 PM HRES 3/30/2011 1:00:00 PM |
HB 106 |
| Cora Campbell correspondence.pdf |
HRES 3/18/2011 1:00:00 PM |
|
| Michael Smith Alaska Board of Fisheries Resume.pdf |
HRES 3/18/2011 1:00:00 PM |
|
| Dan Seamount AOGCC Commissioner Bio and Resume.pdf |
HRES 3/18/2011 1:00:00 PM |
|
| HB0185A.PDF |
HRES 3/18/2011 1:00:00 PM |
|
| Blank_CS_HB185.pdf |
HRES 3/18/2011 1:00:00 PM |
|
| HB185 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HRES 3/18/2011 1:00:00 PM |
|
| HB185-DEC-WQ-03-11-11.pdf |
HRES 3/18/2011 1:00:00 PM |
|
| FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ACT Summary.pdf |
HRES 3/18/2011 1:00:00 PM |
|
| AK_CWA_Support_Letter_Mar_2011.pdf |
HRES 3/18/2011 1:00:00 PM |
|
| DMVA Letter to Support CWA Amendment.pdf |
HRES 3/18/2011 1:00:00 PM |
|
| AMCP_Powerpoint_3-11 (2).pdf |
HRES 3/18/2011 1:00:00 PM |
|
| Cora Campbell support letters.pdf |
HRES 3/18/2011 1:00:00 PM |
|
| AMCP_Powerpoint_3-11 (2).pdf |
HRES 3/18/2011 1:00:00 PM HRES 3/28/2011 1:00:00 PM HRES 3/30/2011 1:00:00 PM |
HB 106 |
| ACMP Work draft Sectional (2).docx |
HRES 3/18/2011 1:00:00 PM HRES 3/30/2011 1:00:00 PM |
HB 106 |
| HB 106 Workdraft Version B bullet points (2).docx |
HRES 3/18/2011 1:00:00 PM |
HB 106 |
| ACMP Coastal District Comments I.pdf |
HRES 3/18/2011 1:00:00 PM HRES 3/28/2011 1:00:00 PM HRES 3/30/2011 1:00:00 PM |
HB 106 |
| ACMP Coastal District Comment II.pdf |
HRES 3/18/2011 1:00:00 PM HRES 3/28/2011 1:00:00 PM HRES 3/30/2011 1:00:00 PM |
HB 106 |
| ACMP Approved Coastal District Enforceable Policies.pdf |
HRES 3/18/2011 1:00:00 PM HRES 3/28/2011 1:00:00 PM HRES 3/30/2011 1:00:00 PM |
HB 106 |