Legislature(2003 - 2004)
03/29/2004 03:30 PM Senate RES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 524am-WASTE MANAGEMENT/DISPOSAL
VICE CHAIR WAGONER announced HB 524 am to be up for
consideration.
COMMISSIONER ERNESTA BALLARD, Department of Environmental
Conservation (DEC), said she introduced this bill before, but it
had been amended.
VICE CHAIR WAGONER asked her to explain the amendments.
COMMISSIONER BALLARD said there were three amendments. The first
one had to do with publications guiding the department in
noticing action for public review. The department suggested
streamlining the process, but a House amendment restored
language to its current status, which provides for two
publications on the event of their noticing a permit.
I have reviewed with the Department of Law right now
as to what constitutes a publication of general
circulation, but it's my understanding that the
amended language which came down from the House will
provide the department with the flexibility in a
remote community, if there is a publication of
circulation in that community of specific interest....
If there is no publication, then we could use a more
centralized one such as the Anchorage Daily News. So,
I think that we have complete flexibility with this
amended language.
COMMISSIONER BALLARD explained that the second amendment
conformed her bill to the language of another bill that was
going through Resources so that references to the financial
instruments, which a permit applicant could use to verify that
they had the financial wherewithal to carry out, in the case of
Department of Natural Resources (DNR), their reclamation
responsibilities and, in the case of Department of Environmental
Conservation (DEC), their waste management responsibilities. The
same description of financial instruments would be in the two
bills. "The House, in its zeal to put this amendment in,
actually put it in an odd place and we need to move it to where
it actually belongs."
The third amendment was a bit of a conforming amendment in
another House bill. Language referring to the coalbed methane
exemption had already been removed and that removal was repeated
in the amendment on the House floor. The Legislature, over the
last several years, has put exemptions into AS 46.03.100. The
exemptions covered activities such as bilge pumping and water
drilling. One of those exemptions was in the event of
exploration drilling for coalbed methane. The department has
other authorities, particularly in the waste regulations, like
planning approval authority, which it has been using to address
those waters. The House amended AS 46.03.100 to remove any
reference to coalbed methane drilling and this issue has been
discussed widely with no objections to its removal.
SENATOR KIM ELTON moved to adopt HB 524 am for consideration.
There were no objections and it was so ordered.
SENATOR ELTON offered amendment 1 suggested by the department as
follows:
AMENDMENT 1
On page 4, line 31, through page 5, line 1:
Delete "after a financial review under regulations
adopted by the department; regulations adopted under
this paragraph"
Insert ". Regulations adopted under this subsection"
Page 5, line 10, following "demonstration":
Insert "after a financial review under regulations
adopted by the department".
He related that he had discussed the amendment with
Representative Heinze's staff who explained that the House floor
amendment was made to the wrong part of the bill. So, this
amendment that deals with regulations for financial review that
will be adopted by the department, is moved from page 4, line
31, to page 5, line 10. "The net effect of this is it doesn't
change the intent of the amendment; it just puts the amendment
in the appropriate section."
SENATOR BEN STEVENS said it looked like the amendment was
redundant.
MS. TERRY THURBAN, Assistant Attorney General, explained that
the lawyer who drafted the amendment chose that style
specifically to change "paragraph" to "subsection".
The simple answer is that the change would have the
effect of leaving this language in place: 'Proof of
financial responsibility may be demonstrated by self-
insurance, insurance, surety bond, corporate
guarantee, letter of credit, certificate of deposit or
other proof of financial responsibility approved by
the department under regulations adopted by the
department.'
SENATOR BEN STEVENS remarked that he didn't see that language
anywhere.
MS. THURBAN pointed out that the lead-in sentence started on
line 28 and the next sentence would pick up: "Regulations
adopted under this subsection". This is where the first insert
is needed. It goes on to conform this bill to the DNR mine
reclamation bill so that regulations for corporate guarantees
and other forms of financial responsibility would have to
prescribe a financial test. The second part of the change on
page 5, line 10, is simply to insert a phrase saying the
department will have to do a financial review for self-
insurance.
SENATOR SEEKINS pointed out that the amendment didn't make sense
without a period in it.
MS. THURBIN pointed out a period in front of "Regulations
adopted under this subsection".
SENATOR SEEKINS conceded.
VICE CHAIR WAGONER noted that there were no further objections
to amendment 1 and it was adopted. He stated that he would hold
the bill over until next Wednesday's meeting.
SENATOR ELTON asked Commissioner Ballard if the amendments that
were made on the House floor and amendment 1 would have an
impact on the fiscal note.
COMMISSIONER BALLARD answered that currently HB 524 am has a
zero fiscal note and there would be no changes to it.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|