Legislature(2017 - 2018)SENATE FINANCE 532
05/11/2017 09:00 AM Senate FINANCE
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 | |
| SB79 | |
| HB111 | |
| SB34 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | SB 79 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 111 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | SB 34 | TELECONFERENCED | |
SENATE BILL NO. 34
"An Act relating to the implementation of the federal
REAL ID Act of 2005; and relating to issuance of
identification cards and driver's licenses; and
providing for an effective date."
2:48:34 PM
Co-Chair MacKinnon announced the history of the bill in the
committee.
Vice-Chair Bishop MOVED to ADOPT the committee substitute
for SB 34, Work Draft 30-GS1781\T (Martin, 5/11/17).
Co-Chair MacKinnon OBJECTED for discussion.
2:49:42 PM
JULI LUCKY, STAFF, SENATOR ANNA MACKINNON, remarked that
the CS was drafted because of various discussions.
Ms. Lucky addressed the Sectional/Explanation of Changes
(copy on file):
Section 1: NEW: Intent language added by the
legislature should continue efforts to amend the REAL
ID Act to protect the privacy of Alaskans.
Section 2: AMENDED: Amends 18.65.310(a) to set the fee
for REAL ID compliant identification cards at $20 -
increased from $10 in the previous bill.
Section 3: NEW: Amends 18.65.310(b) to require an
application for an identification card to include a
provision that the applicant understands the options
between the identification card types and what type of
card is being selected.
2:53:23 PM
AT EASE
2:53:30 PM
RECONVENED
Ms. Lucky continued to discuss the changes:
Section 4: AMENDED: Adds new sections to 18.65.310 as
follows: (m) Requires the department to adopt
regulations to issue federally compliant cards and
requires an applicant to specifically choose one. New
language in CS limits the documents that can be
copied/scanned and retained to the minimum of what is
required by REAL ID and codifies the retention period
of 15 years, which matches what is currently in
regulation.
(n) Requires the state to continue to offer non-
compliant cards. Requires an applicant to specifically
choose a federally compliant identification card. The
CS keeps the prohibition against the state or
municipality requiring a person to get a federally
compliant identification card, but allows an exception
when the state or municipality is acting as an
employer and the job duties require use of a compliant
identification card.
New language regarding non-compliant identification
cards limits retention of facial images to 15 years,
prohibits retention if a card is not issued, and
limits retention of verification documents to a year
after the expiration date of the license.
(o) The previous bill allowed the department to issue
a card with a validity of less than eight years if it
matches the amount of time that a person is legally
authorized to be in the country. The CS contains that
language, but amends a provision regarding a card
issued to a person that is legally allowed to stay in
the country for an "indefinite period." The CS allows
the department more discretion to renew for a period
of "up to eight years" - the previous bill limited the
card to one year.
The CS also includes language regarding when an
identification card can be renewed and guidelines for
renewal by mail or via the department's website. The
CS also allows the department more discretion with the
expiration date for a card when the authorized stay of
an individual is indeterminate - the previous bill
required a one year expiration date; the CS allows a
card to be valid "up to eight years."
(p) Requires the department to provide the public with
information about the differences between current
cards (non-compliant) and federally compliant cards,
including what a federally compliant identification
card is required for and what alternatives are
available.
REMOVED: Requirement that a non-compliant card be
created in-state.
(q) Definition of "identification card that is
federally compliant" - reworded.
Section 5: AMENDED: Adds new sections to 28.05.068 as
follows:
(a) If data is being shared with other entities to
comply with the REAL ID Act, limits that data to what
is required. This is similar to the intent of the
language in the previous bill, but has been reworded.
(b) - (e) - Add new language relating to the sending
of social security numbers to other entities for
verification that a person who is applying for a
driver's license is not already licensed in other
states. The language requires the department to take
"all steps necessary" to eliminate the use of social
security numbers, otherwise to limit the number of
digits of a social security number being used. Allows
up to five digits, which is the current number
required by the S2S verification system, to be used as
long as efforts have been made to reduce the number.
(f) Requires an annual report of the efforts made in
(b) - (e); this section is repealed in 2021 by section
15 of this bill.
Section 6: AMENDED: Adds new sections to 28.15.041,
relating to driver's licenses, to mirror the
provisions in section 4 of the bill for identification
cards. Specifically:
(d) Requires the department to adopt regulations to
issue federally compliant driver's licenses. New
language in CS limits the documents that can be
copied/scanned and retained to the minimum of what is
required by REAL ID and codifies the retention period
of 15 years, which matches what is currently in
regulation.
(e) Requires the state to continue to offer non-
compliant licenses. Requires an applicant to
specifically choose a federally compliant license. The
CS keeps the prohibition against the state or
municipality requiring a person to get a federally
compliant driver's license, but allows an exception
when the state or municipality is acting as an
employer and the job duties require use of a compliant
license.
New language regarding non-compliant driver's licenses
limits retention of facial images to 15 years,
prohibits retention if a license is not issued, and
limits retention of verification documents to one year
after the expiration date of the license.
(f) Requires the department to provide the public with
information about the differences between current
driver's licenses (non-compliant) and federally
compliant licenses, including what a federally
compliant identification card is required for and what
alternatives are available.
Section 7: AMENDED: Adds a new subsection to
28.15.061(b) that mirrors the language for
identification cards in section 3. Requires an
application for a driver's license to include a
provision that the applicant understands the options
between the driver's license types and what type of
license is being selected.
Section 8: Amends 28.15.101 (a) to extend the validity
of a driver's license to eight years (from five). Same
as previous bill.
Section 9: AMENDED: Amends 28.15.101 (d), similar to
the provisions in section 4, subsection (o) of this
bill, to allow the department to issue a driver's
license with a validity of less than eight years if it
matches the amount of time that a person is legally
authorized to be in the country and also repeals
language allowing a person to renew their license for
free if the license was valid for less than the
maximum.
The CS contains that language, but amends a provision
that limits the validity of a driver's license issued
to a person that is legally allowed to stay in the
country for an "indefinite period." The CS allows the
department more discretion to renew for a period of
"up to eight years" - the previous bill limited the
card to one year.
3:01:23 PM
Ms. Lucky continued to highlight the changes:
Section 10: AMENDED: Amends 28.15.111(a) to update the
security requirements of cards to the highest security
standards available.
Section 11: AMENDED: Adds new subsections to 28.15.111
that (d) prohibit bulk sharing of facial images
captured during the application process for driver's
licenses, other than commercial driver's licenses,
with entities outside the state; and (e) require a
commercial driver's license to be federally compliant.
REMOVED: Limitations on copying and retention of
application documents and facial images - see new
language on same topic in section 6. Also removed was
the requirement that a non-compliant driver's license
be created in-state.
Section 12: Amends 28.15.271(b) to charge a $20 fee
for a driver's license that is federal compliant. Same
as previous bill.
Section 13: AMENDED: Adds a new subsection to
28.90.990(a) to define "driver's license that is
federally compliant" - this was reworded in the CS.
Section 14: NEW: Repeals AS 44.99.040(a)(2), the
statute that prohibits use of assets to implement the
REAL ID Act. The previous bill amended this section
instead of repealing it.
Section 15: NEW: Repeals 28.05.068(f) - the reporting
requirement added by section 5 of this bill - on June
30, 2021.
Section 16: Transitional Provisions: Allows the
Department of Administration to adopt regulations to
implement this Act.
Section 17: Immediate effective dates for section 14
(repeal) and section 16 (authority for regulations).
Section 18: Effective date of January 1, 2019 for the
remainder of the bill.
Co-Chair MacKinnon WITHDREW her OBJECTION. There being NO
further OBJECTION, the proposed committee substitute was
adopted.
Senator von Imhof noted that the bill stated that non-
compliant identification cards would limit retention of
facial images to 15 years. She wondered what changed from
the previous presentation about not retaining facial
recognition.
3:05:55 PM
MARLA THOMPSON, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF MOTOR VEHICLES (DMV),
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION (via teleconference),
understood the that Senator von Imhof was concerned about
the retaining of an image for one year after expiration.
Senator von Imhof noted that initially the bill did not
allow any retention of documents or facial recognition. She
noted that the new bill allowed for significant retention.
She queried the circumstances that contributed to the
change in the bill.
Co-Chair MacKinnon queried the DMV's current practice. Ms.
Thompson replied that the DMV currently retained documents
for 15 years, which was the minimum. She stated that the
change in the legislation was from a request from
Department of Public Safety (DPS).
Co-Chair MacKinnon noted that the initial bill presentation
from the Senate State Affairs committee had document
disposal. She stressed that it was never state law to
destroy the documents. Ms. Thompson agreed.
Senator von Imhof wondered whether the DMV retained copies
of a person's passport and/or birth certificate. Ms.
Thompson responded in the affirmative.
Senator von Imhof understood that DMV did not take copies
of those documents. She requested confirmation that the DMV
retained copies of the documents. Ms. Thompson replied that
the DMV retained copies of the documents.
3:10:24 PM
Senator Hughes felt that the bill had stronger
confidentiality provisions than the federal provisions. She
wondered whether the photos were shared with any other
state agencies. Ms. Thompson replied that the photos were
only shared with DPS.
Senator Hughes wondered whether personal information was
shared with a national database. Ms. Thompson responded
that the DMV shared information with other states to
produce the most valid identification possible. She
stressed that documents and photos were not shared, but
only validation.
Senator Hughes wondered whether personal information was
downloaded into the database, or was there only a search of
the database for a match. Ms. Thompson replied that the
search was only conducted based on the provided information
to determine matches.
Senator Hughes surmised that the information would not be
shared on federally noncompliant licenses. Ms. Thompson
replied that the compliant licenses required a validation
was secure.
Senator Hughes wondered whether there was an issue with
identity theft. Ms. Thompson replied in the negative.
Senator Hughes wondered whether the five to eight years
related to both the compliant and noncompliant licenses.
Ms. Thompson replied in the affirmative.
3:17:07 PM
DAN LOWDEN, CAPTAIN, ALASKA STATE TROOPERS (via
teleconference), announced that he was available for
questions. He remarked that he was slightly confused with
the conversation related to the databases.
3:18:05 PM
SHELDON FISHER, COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION
(via teleconference), remarked that the bill was designed
to give a person a choice between a compliant and
noncompliant license. He stated that the database shared
minimal information to allow confirmation of license
information across states to ensure that individuals had an
appropriate record in another state. He stressed that the
other information was kept in the state, and the Real ID
database only confirmed the validity of the documents.
Senator Hughes queried what was shared in the database.
Commissioner Fisher replied that the five digits of social
security information was in the database, but would work to
reduce or eliminate that number. He stated that the number
was shared to determine whether an individual had a license
in another state. The primary documents, such as a passport
or birth certificate, was not shared in the database.
Senator Hughes wondered whether there was a concern about a
breach in the database. Commissioner Fisher replied that we
should be concerned about identity theft. He felt that the
nature and amount of information was relatively modest.
Senator Hughes asked whether the commander of the military
bases in Alaska decided whether a federal compliant license
was required, or could a noncompliant license be chosen.
Commissioner Fisher understood that the commander had a
certain amount of latitude in implementation.
Vice-Chair Bishop remarked that the Department of Military
and Veterans Affairs (DMVA) had announced that a compliant
ID would be required for base access.
3:23:58 PM
BRIAN DUFFY, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES,
DEPARTMENT OF MILITARY AND VETERANS AFFAIRS (via
teleconference), announced that that the commanders were
currently complying with federal law, and did not have
waiver authority.
Senator Hughes felt that there was misinformation. She
surmised that the commanders did not have leeway. Mr. Duffy
replied in the affirmative.
Co-Chair MacKinnon shared a document from a commander that
stated that the bases must comply with the federal law.
Senator Micciche wondered whether the noncompliant Alaska
IDs would present additional risks. Commissioner Fisher
replied in the negative.
Senator Micciche surmised that the database was managed by
a private company. Commissioner Fisher stated that the DMV
would validate a passport through a database that was
managed by Homeland Security. The DMV validated a birth
certificate that was managed by a nonprofit managed
database.
3:29:52 PM
Senator Micciche wondered whether there were additional
requirements for a compliant ID beyond what was required to
receive a passport. Commissioner Fisher replied in the
negative.
Co-Chair MacKinnon wondered whether the data on the facial
image would be shared with anyone. Commissioner Fisher
replied that the facial image data would not be shared.
Co-Chair MacKinnon asked whether law officers outside of
the state could subpoena that information. Commissioner
Fisher replied that the data would be shared with DPS, and
the DMV would comply with a subpoena.
Co-Chair MacKinnon wondered whether the facial image data
was shared on an individual basis. Commissioner Fisher
replied that the state would share the facial images with
DPS, but there was no bulk sharing.
Co-Chair MacKinnon queried a regulation that required the
scanning and storage of the documents. Commissioner Fisher
deferred to Ms. Thompson.
Ms. Thompson replied in the affirmative, and deferred to
Mr. Stanker.
3:34:52 PM
MICHAEL STANKER, ATTORNEY, DEPARTMENT OF LAW (via
teleconference), stated the statute did not explicitly
mention the storage or retention of the source documents,
but the source documents were considered as part of the
application.
Senator von Imhof wondered whether the noncompliant and
compliant requirements would retain a social security
document in storage. Mr. Stanker replied that the
regulations under Real ID would take a copy of the social
security card, but Alaska regulation did not allow for
scanning of the card-only verification.
Co-Chair MacKinnon asked for confirmation of those
comments. Ms. Thompson stated that social security card
would not be scanned, and only validated.
Co-Chair MacKinnon wondered if there would be a change. Ms.
Thompson replied in the negative.
Co-Chair MacKinnon surmised that there would be no copy of
the social security card. Ms. Thompson agreed.
Vice-Chair Bishop wondered whether a hazardous endorsement
on a commercial driver's license (CDL) require
fingerprints. Ms. Thompson agreed to provide that
information.
Co-Chair MacKinnon announced that the bill was
controversial, and Alaskans expected their privacy to be
honored.
Co-Chair MacKinnon announced that amendments were due
following day at 8am.
SB 34 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 111 Work Draft version B.pdf |
SFIN 5/11/2017 9:00:00 AM |
HB 111 |
| HB 111 v B Sectional Analysis.pdf |
SFIN 5/11/2017 9:00:00 AM |
HB 111 |
| CS SB 34 v.T Explanation.pdf |
SFIN 5/11/2017 9:00:00 AM |
SB 34 |
| SB 34 CS SB 34 v.T.pdf |
SFIN 5/11/2017 9:00:00 AM |
SB 34 |
| SB 34 Air Force Letter - Real ID.pdf |
SFIN 5/11/2017 9:00:00 AM |
SB 34 |
| HB 111 Public Testimony Letters 4.pdf |
SFIN 5/11/2017 9:00:00 AM |
HB 111 |