Legislature(2013 - 2014)HOUSE FINANCE 519
04/10/2013 01:30 PM House FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB37 | |
| SB16 | |
| SB38 | |
| SB88 | |
| SB38 | |
| SB24 | |
| SB2 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 21 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 18 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | SB 37 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 16 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 38 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 88 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 2 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 24 | TELECONFERENCED | |
SENATE BILL NO. 2
"An Act enacting the Interstate Mining Compact and
relating to the compact; relating to the Interstate
Mining Commission; and providing for an effective
date."
8:01:15 PM
SENATOR CATHY GIESSEL introduced her bill which would
elevate Alaska from an associate member to full membership
in the Interstate Mining Compact and Commission (IMCC). The
change would allow Alaska's governor be an active voting
member giving Alaska a voice on the national level. The
compact was established in April 1971 and consisted of 20
member states and five associate member states. The powers
of the commission were found on page four of the bill. The
estimated cost included $40 thousand in dues, which was
partially based on resource production. She mentioned a
chart in the bill materials that illustrated the dues
calculation.
8:05:01 PM
ED FOGELS, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL
RESOURCES, testified on the bill. He stated that Alaska now
had seven operating mines that did well environmentally. He
noted that the permitting and regulatory processes were
improving. The bill's initiative was to strengthen the
collaborative relationship with the federal agencies
because permitting relied heavily on federal rules and
regulations. He stated that IMCC brought together the
environmental and mining programs from 26 states in the
nation. In this forum, the states exchanged information
about potential areas of improvement.
Mr. Fogels explained that IMCC was instrumental in helping
Alaska with the number of initiatives where the federal
government was "over-reaching." He provided an example. He
was the governor's designee for IMCC and he had seen the
benefits of the collaboration first hand.
8:07:46 PM
Representative Holmes asked about page 4 and the powers of
the commission. She noted that the commission might make
recommendations, which could be broadly read. Mr. Fogels
replied that frequent IMCC actions included resolutions
directed at federal agencies.
Representative Costello appreciated the bill and she was
disappointed that the previous version of the bill did not
elevate Alaska to full membership. She asked if there were
tangible benefits to full members.
8:09:08 PM
Mr. Fogels replied that the most significant benefit was
the ability for Alaska to take a leadership role and better
guide the policy chosen by the commission. Initially the
commission was an east-coast coal-centric organization.
8:10:10 PM
Representative Costello asked about the committee structure
of the meetings. She asked about his participation in the
meetings. Mr. Fogels replied that the commission hosted
multiple committees and he had participated in meetings,
but was not allowed to vote as an associate member.
Vice-Chair Neuman asked if IMCC had addressed Alaska's
mining permits. He asked how the commission was able to
help miners. Mr. Fogels replied that IMCC recently entered
into a memorandum of understanding with the Mine Safety
Health Administration. He commented that smaller rural
mines were unable to abide by the strict federal guidelines
set forth by the Mine Safety Health Administration. He was
able to bring the concerns of the smaller Alaskan miners to
the attention of IMCC.
8:12:41 PM
Vice-Chair Neuman reviewed the travel costs on page 1
showing $20 thousand for two trips. Mr. Fogels replied that
he traveled frugally. He explained that there were two IMCC
meetings per year and the department sent two people to the
meetings. Additional meetings were organized depending on
the issues. He stated that mining symposiums for regulators
were also hosted in western states. He hoped to incorporate
staff from Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC)
and Department of Fish and Game (DF&G).
8:14:55 PM
Representative Munoz asked about the 404 permitting
legislation and how the IMCC could help. Mr. Fogels replied
that the quest for Alaska state primacy was part of a
broader effort to acquire more control over wetlands
permitting in Alaska. Each piece of the issue involved
negotiation with the federal government. He noticed that
every mining state in the nation who participated in the
meetings signaled a higher level of anxiety with federal
overreach.
8:17:12 PM
Senator Giessel added that the IMCC participated with other
western states on issues related to mining royalties.
Alaska did not participate in much mineral resource royalty
sharing.
8:18:12 PM
Mr. Fogels added that the federal government held back on
royalties. The IMCC effort would also aid the broader
resource development spectrum in Alaska.
8:18:48 PM
Co-Chair Stoltze CLOSED public testimony.
Representative Costello discussed the fiscal notes. She
began with fiscal note 1, which showed a fiscal impact of
$60 thousand for FY 14 through FY 19, while fiscal note 2
was a zero note.
Representative Wilson asked about the second page of fiscal
note 1. She stated that the fiscal note stated that Alaska
would be the 20th state to join the compact as a full
member. She understood that Alaska would be the second
state to join as a full member. Mr. Fogels replied that
Utah was the only western state that had joined as a full
member.
8:21:40 PM
Co-Chair Stoltze had an issue with travel for DNR. He asked
Representative Costello if she was comfortable with the
fiscal note.
Representative Costello wondered about reducing the travel
component by half. Mr. Fogels replied that the meeting
opportunities would be fewer. He stated that the symposiums
would not be attended.
Representative Costello repeated the question to Senator
Giessel. Senator Giessel stated that the attendance would
be reduced for Alaska as a result. She hoped that the
department would find other means. She preferred face-to-
face attendance to teleconference.
Co-Chair Stoltze stated that associated travel was
introduced.
8:24:18 PM
Co-Chair Stoltze MOVED that the travel portion of fiscal
note 1 was reduced to $15 thousand. Representative Costello
OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Costello understood that travel costs were
great, but she had faith that the department would seek
efficiencies. Representative Costello WITHDREW her
OBJECTION.
Co-Chair Stoltze AMENDED the fiscal note to show a $5
thousand reduction.
Co-Chair Stoltze asked if the dues were structured on
production or state revenues.
8:25:53 PM
Mr. Fogels replied that the IMCC structured the dues
calculation by developing a two-year budget, which was then
projected out and divided in half. Half of the final number
was prorated and divided evenly among member states. The
other half was made up as a percentage of production.
Co-Chair Stoltze understood that there was a cap to the
dues.
8:27:12 PM
Senator Giessel commented that when new stated join the
compact as full members, the price of dues decreases.
Representative Costello MOVED to REPORT SB 2 as amended out
of committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal notes. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
SB 2 was REPORTED out of committee with a "do pass"
recommendation and with one new amended fiscal note from
Department of Natural Resources and one previously
published zero fiscal note: FN 2(ADM).
8:29:25 PM
Representative Gara asked about Department of Revenue and
the offer to answer questions regarding the modeling of HCS
CSSB 21(RES). Co-Chair Stoltze concurred.
8:31:03 PM
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|