Legislature(2011 - 2012)SENATE FINANCE 532
04/10/2012 09:00 AM Senate FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB131 | |
| HB246 | |
| HB258 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HB 131 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 246 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 258 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 258(FIN)
"An Act directing the Department of Transportation and
Public Facilities to develop and implement standards
and operating procedures, to evaluate site-specific
use plans, and to designate project areas concerning
gravel or other aggregate material containing
naturally occurring asbestos; authorizing use on an
interim basis of gravel or other aggregate material
containing naturally occurring asbestos for certain
transportation projects and public facilities;
providing immunity for the state and for landowners,
extractors, suppliers, transporters, and contractors
for certain actions or claims arising in connection
with the use of gravel or aggregate material
containing naturally occurring asbestos in certain
areas; requiring contractors to report certain
asbestos- related data to the Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities; and providing
for an effective date."
9:25:47 AM
REPRESENTATIVE REGGIE JOULE, introduced HB 258. He referred
to the Sponsor Statement (copy on file).
HB 258 authorizes and regulates the use of gravel or
aggregate material that contains naturally occurring
asbestos (NOA). There are documented cases of NOA
being found in several areas of the state, including
Juneau, along the Dalton Highway and Ambler. Discovery
of NOA in local gravel pits has delayed and, in
Ambler's case, halted construction projects. The use
of NOA in construction projects may be regulated by
states. Virginia and California have been regulating
NOA for many years. With the passage of HB 258, the
discovery of NOA in local gravel sources and the cost
of transporting non-NOA gravel and material will not
impact the success and completion of construction
projects and important future state infrastructure in
Rural Alaska.
Several large projects are on the state's horizon that
will require the use of large amounts of gravel. These
large projects are in mineral rich areas of the state
critical to the future development of Alaska. Most
notably, it is estimated that the gas pipeline alone
may use 50 to 60 million cubic yards of new gravel.
Many miles of the Dalton Highway will be reconstructed
in support of the project, requiring additional
gravel. In Rural Alaska, almost all airport
construction and upgrades require material from local
gravel sources; a new small airport can use up to
25,000 cubic yards of gravel. The use of NOA gravel
and materials should be resolved before it becomes an
issue during the actual construction process of any of
these large future projects.
HB 258 directs the Department of Transportation and
Public Facilities to develop and implement statewide
regulations and standard operating procedures (SOP) to
allow for the use of NOA for both State and private
construction projects. HB 258 will balance the needs
of moving Alaska forward; building critical
infrastructure, completing construction projects while
protecting the health of Alaskan workers and
communities.
Senator Olson wondered if there would be similar immunity
clauses to California's legislation.
BRODIE ANDERSON, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE REGGIE JOULE,
replied that the program was voluntary, so the immunity
went further than California's program.
ELIZABETH HENSLEY, NANANA REGIONAL CORPORATION, ANCHORAGE
(via teleconference), testified in support of HB 258.
9:32:25 AM
MORGAN JOHNSON, MAYOR, CITY OF AMBLER, AMBLER (via
teleconference), testified in support of HB 258. He
remarked that the dust problem had inhibited many projects
since 1998.
Co-Chair Hoffman noted the three previously published zero
fiscal notes and three previously published fiscal impact
notes.
Representative Joule thanked the committee for hearing the
bill. He remarked that there were many communities that
deal with dust particles, because the cost of dust-
abatement in rural Alaska was very expensive. He felt that
the dust without the naturally occurring asbestos was more
of a hazard to an individual's health, than what was
intended with HB 258.
HB 258 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.