Legislature(2017 - 2018)BUTROVICH 205
02/19/2018 03:30 PM Senate RESOURCES
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 | |
| Confirmation Hearing(s): State Assessment Review Board, Regulatory Commission of Alaska | |
| SB164 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | SB 164 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SB 164-CONFIDENTIALITY OF ANIMAL & CROP RECORDS
3:59:01 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL announced consideration of SB 164, sponsored by
the Rules Committee at the request of the Governor. She said
Alita Bus was at the table and would manipulate the slides for
those speaking on line, Arthur Keys, Director, Division of
Agriculture, Department of Natural Resources (DNR), Christina
Carpenter, Director* Division of Public Health, Department of
Environmental Conservation (DEC), and Robert Gerlach, State
Veterinarian, Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC).
CHRISTINA CARPENTER, Director, Division of Environmental Health,
Department of Environmental Conservation, Anchorage, Alaska,
said SB 164 amends AS 03.05 to add a new section to make certain
animal health and crop records held by the DEC and DNR are
confidential. This has been a coordinated effort across both
departments, but the request is coming from industry.
Agricultural producers have contacted them repeatedly over the
last 10 years or so requesting a change in statute that would
provide Alaskan agricultural producers with similar
confidentiality that is already afforded to many other
commercial industries in Alaska. For example, the Alaska
Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) has a statute that
specifically makes commercial fishing records held by them
confidential. That was used as an example in working with their
attorney to develop this bill.
4:02:14 PM
MS. CARPENTER said she calls this the Health Insurance
Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) for hogs and hay. She
opined that it would allow the department to engage with Alaskan
producers earlier in the event of a suspected disease outbreak,
morbidity, or mortality circumstance, to identify a threat early
on and try to limit any sort of disease outbreak so that it
wouldn't spread to neighboring facilities or be a public health
risk.
CHAIR GIESSEL asked her to justify why having these records
confidential protects the public, because that is the role of
these kinds of animal and crop testing procedures.
4:04:04 PM
MS. CARPENTER replied in the event there was a suspected
zoonotic disease outbreak on a farm, but it wasn't a reportable
disease, the department would hope that producers and their
private veterinarians would engage with them very early before
the outbreak grew and got off premise and maybe started
impacting some of their neighbors or members of the public.
The department believes that engaging with farmers early would
encourage better animal and public health, because they would no
longer be reluctant to submit their animals or crops to
voluntary testing, and the department could respond faster in
the event of a disease outbreak.
4:05:32 PM
ROBERT GERLACH, State Veterinarian, Department of Environmental
Conservation (DEC), Anchorage, Alaska, said his office is
responsible for the prevention, control, and eradication of
animal diseases for livestock and pets, as well as diseases
livestock and pets may carry that may be transmitted to people,
as well as food safety. To do these jobs they need to collect
quite a bit of data and information from animal owners - where
they obtained their animals, where the animals are located, what
disease test records they may have, and what animals are being
processed to other farms or locations, so if there is an
outbreak, they would have access to that information to do their
job.
4:06:59 PM
Every year they are collecting more and more data from people,
because of animal disease certification programs and other
marketing programs that require this data collection which
includes import data on permits and health records of animals
coming into the state and disease surveillance records that are
kept to ensure that state and international partners that the
state is free of diseases (such as TB or rabies).
MR. GERLACH explained that a lot of these programs are required
for access to certain markets; some are required for importation
of animals to the state and some are just for proof of animal
health. Others are validation programs that are used for farmers
to gain access to markets and to be able to promote and declare
the quality of their product as a marketing tool. As the
department collects this data, they would like to be able share
it with their partners who would be involved with mitigating or
controlling the spread of disease and keeping animals healthy
and food safe, and not necessarily releasing confidential
business data, proprietary, or personal data that may leave the
producer vulnerable. It would allow the department to collect
more data and have more people participate in these programs
while protecting the proprietary information from the
participants.
4:09:04 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL remarked that the header on slide 4 says "Office
of the State Veterinarian" but he is not the only veterinarian
in state government.
MR. GERLACH said that is true; several veterinarians work for
the state, but he is the only veterinarian in statute classified
as the State Veterinarian with the authority for regulating
animal health, collecting this data, and being responsible for
the control and mitigation to prevent the spread of diseases.
CHAIR GIESSEL asked him to clarify that the Department of Health
and Social Services (DHSS) has at least one veterinarian and the
Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has a wildlife
veterinarian and to describe his interaction with the other
state veterinarians.
MR. GERLACH replied that his interaction with those other
veterinarians is on a continual basis regarding disease issues
that would be important to their particular function. Dr. Louisa
Castrodale in the Division of Public Health in the Department of
Health and Social Services (DHSS) is involved with food safety
and zoonotic disease issues as well as the epidemiology of other
human diseases when it comes down to identifying or determining
an outbreak or a contaminated product. His responsibility is
limited to control of the animals and Dr. Castrodale would work
with public health officials to control and prevent further
spread in the case of a zoonotic disease among human beings.
In regard to the functions of Dr. Kimberly Beckman, ADF&G is
looking at hiring a second veterinarian and the same type of
cooperation would be used to control a disease outbreak in
domestic animals from spreading to wildlife resources. It
applies to a disease that could impact the food safety of the
meat or animals that are harvested for subsistence,
recreational, or commercial use.
4:12:33 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL asked how many staff are in the dairy program
(slide 5) and how many dairy farms are in Alaska.
MR. GERLACH replied that there is one dairy farm in production
of Grade A milk and a second is gearing up for production. A
third dairy is considering participating in grade A milk
production of pasteurized milk for commercial sale. The
department is working with those two dairies to get them up to
speed to meet the facility requirements for the care and feeding
of animals, sanitation and disinfection, transport, and
processing at a pasteurization plant to make sure that the end
product meets the state requirements for Grade A milk.
4:13:55 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL asked how many people are in the dairy section.
MR. GERLACH replied that two other people work in the dairy
program: Dr. Sarah Coburn, Assistant State Veterinarian, and a
dairy sanitarian who does the farm inspections and tests
equipment. Dr. Coburn does many of the inspections and
certification inspects and acts as the communicator with the FDA
to assure that the state program is meeting the federal
requirements for production of Grade A milk.
CHAIR GIESSEL said she assumed that the dairies must pay fees
that cover this program.
MR. GERLACH replied there is a permit fee to initially become a
part of the program, but the equipment test, sanitation, and
farm inspection do not have a charge, neither does the testing
of raw milk as well as the processed products that is done at
the Environmental Health Laboratory in Anchorage
4:15:39 PM
MR. GERLACH said slide 6 showed the increased number of imported
animals in the last four fiscal years which resulted in an
increase in import permits, demonstrating the growing amount of
information being collected from a larger number of people
throughout the state. Keeping that information confidential, it
protects or business data. Because of taking primacy of the
Produce Food Safety Program under the Federal Drug
Administration's (FDA) Food Safety Modernization Act, the state
is also collecting data from an increased number of agricultural
farms. It requires farms to disclose financial information as
well as product and inspection information on their farms, which
is the business and proprietary data that he wants to protect.
4:17:11 PM
He said slide 7 lists some of the disease outbreaks in Alaska.
The point is to show that they collect a lot of surveillance
data to maintain a large list of reportable diseases that
producers and veterinarians are required to report to them. This
data is used to investigate morbidity and mortality events in
both wild and domestic animals across the state to get an idea
of disease issues and try to maintain animal health and prevent
spread of these diseases. The number of reports they get each
year for this type of disease outbreak is increasing, as well.
MR. GERLACH said they want people to feel comfortable in sharing
their data with the department. With this bill they want to
collect and maintain data while protecting business and
proprietary data that can often be misused or put that producer
in a vulnerable state.
4:19:25 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL asked if the information gets disclosed if there
is an outbreak.
MR. GERLACH answered yes, it would be shared with their
partners. Zoonotic or food borne disease information would be
shared with the Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS),
the Food Safety Sanitation Division in DEC, the Centers for
Disease Control (CDC) and the FDA. Data from an outbreak
associated with a disease that might impact the health of
livestock or domestic pets, as well as wildlife, would be shared
with the DNR, the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G),
and with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) so their
resources could be used to help his division do a better job in
containing the disease and preventing the spread.
4:20:42 PM
SENATOR MEYER asked what prevents people from importing animals
and then selling them as Alaska-grown.
MR. GERLACH replied as long as animal meet both federal and
state requirements for importation into the state, they can be
used by the importer for whatever purpose they intend them for.
If it's for commercial sale, the labelling and marketing are
regulated by other entities. If the owner is going to make a
claim that it meets the standards for Alaska-grown products, the
Division of Agriculture is responsible for validation of that
program and would approach that producer to get information that
would assure that the product they are selling does meet the
Alaska-grown program requirements.
CHAIR GIESSEL said, so you must regulate animals as they are
imported and asked if he would share that information with the
Division of Agriculture.
MR. GERLACH replied not necessarily. The import information is
maintained to keep track of animals that come into the state to
make sure they are not threatening the health of other animals
whether domestic or wild. That data is not shared with other
entities. As slide 6 indicates they give reports to the Farm
Bureau and producers as well as the Alaska Veterinary Medical
Association and the USDA to inform them of the animals that are
being imported and the work the department is doing.
4:23:26 PM
SENATOR BISHOP asked if most of the imports come via truck
through Canada and what the impound timeline is.
MR. GERLACH answered in the past, most animals came up through
the land port at the Alaska-Canada Highway or down into Haines.
Recently that changed with the animal transport restrictions in
Canada for sheep and goats. Now many of the sheep and goat
producers are shipping animals up by airline. He said they have
been working with the Canadians and the USDA to resolve those
issues to provide better service for the producers who want to
bring up new animals for increasing the efficiency of their
production and broadening genetic stock. Probably a minority of
animals are moved up through the ferry system.
SENATOR BISHOP asked if the animals are impounded when they get
here.
MR. GERLACH replied no. The ports don't have a person that would
have the authority to do that. State import regulations are set
so that people are assured animals are healthy and safe when
they come through the border and to the final destination. One
of the reasons they want to provide this confidentiality to the
producers is if the animals do have a problem, they will do a
follow-up report to his office. Some animals imported from
Canada directly are impounded at the destination until the USDA
veterinarian can inspect them. Often his office sends a
representative with him.
4:26:38 PM
MS. CARPENTER said slide 8 was a brief sectional analysis as
follows:
Section 1: Makes certain animal and crop records
maintained by the Departments of Environmental
Conservation and Natural Resources exempt from the
Alaska Public Records Act if they
1) are importation records that identify a particular
animal, crop, business, or individual;
2) contain animal or crop test results if certain
conditions are met; or
3) are trade secrets or proprietary business or
financial information.
Allows the Departments to disclose the above described
records in the case that the Departments determine
that there is a threat to the health or safety of an
animal, crop, or the public.
Provides the definition of "varietal".
Section 2: Allows the Departments of Environmental
Conservation and Natural Resources to adopt
regulations to implement the Act. She said at this
time, DEC does not see a need to adopt any
regulations.
Section 3: Provides for an immediate effective date
for Section 2.
Slide 9 recapped the benefits captured with passage of SB 164:
Routine surveillance testing may encourage better
animal husbandry and crop management, resulting in a
higher quality product for sale and increased
production efficiency.
Early identification and testing of sick or dead
animals and crops decreases the potential for more
serious outbreaks and spread of disease to other
farms, plants or wildlife.
[Confidentiality of proprietary data prevents unfair
advantage to a competitor regarding product
development, marketing strategy, and source of animal
inventory.]
SENATOR COGHILL asked what has to be done immediately, because
the confidentiality issue could impact business practices. Is it
a welcome relief or a yank in the system?
MR. GERLACH replied that it is a welcome relief for producers
knowing that the personal and business data from the animal
owners and the agricultural farms that are participating in the
Produce Food Safety Program will be kept confidential.
4:30:03 PM
SENATOR COGHILL said once that happens, he would need some kind
of alert that is not in place now and asked what practice he
would have to institute.
MR. GERLACH replied that they already have a communication plan
for response to disease outbreaks as part of an emergency
response plan. It is very important for just the daily function
of doing their job.
4:31:10 PM
SENATOR COGHILL said he anticipated usage would go up and would
that involve a fiscal note.
MR. GERLACH replied there wouldn't be any increase in the number
of reports as just part of the department's normal functions;
there would be no fiscal note. For a disease outbreak they would
normally release only the appropriate data pertinent to the
threat at hand. A good example may be a disease outbreak of
Tuberculosis on a farm. They would contact their other animal
health participants about it and the DHSS because Tuberculosis
from animals can be transmitted to people. Then they would
contact the farms adjacent to the outbreak farm to see if any of
their animals had been exposed. Then they would go back and
determine from the animal records where those animals originated
to determine where the disease may have been introduced, whether
from a new import of animals or the possibility that a worker
came to the farm who actually had tuberculosis and infected the
animals (which has happened in other states). Then they would
look at the animal movement records to see if any animals were
moved from that farm to another farm, and then contact those
individuals, test and do surveillance on their farms to see if
the disease may have spread.
4:33:20 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said he was trying to determine the meaning
of "varietal" on page 1. The definition on the next page says it
means "characteristic of or forming a distinct variety of
organism," which seemed odd.
MS. CARPENTER said she would defer that question to the DNR,
because that definition was added at their request.
ARTHUR KEYES, Director, Division of Agriculture, Department of
Natural Resources (DNR), Palmer, Alaska, explained that the
Plant Material Center has over 230 varieties of potatoes. So,
variety is broad definition of different varieties of crops.
CHAIR GIESSEL summarized that Mr. Keyes was saying "varietal" is
a term of art for various varieties of particular vegetables or
other plants.
MR. KEYES said that was a good way to put it. For instance,
everyone knows what a red delicious apple is, but there are over
50 different varieties of red delicious apple. That holds true
for a lot of crops.
4:36:34 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said he just wanted to bring it to their
attention and if everyone is fine with it, he is, too. He had
another question on page 2, lines 7-11, where it says:
(b) Notwithstanding (a) of this section, DEC and DNR
may disclose any records that are subject to this
section if they find there is a threat to health or
safety of an animal, crop, or the public.
He asked how that works in reality, because this is a Freedom of
Information Act provision. Is there a right of appeal? He noted
that language says "may" not "shall" disclose....
MR. GERLACH replied information that would be released would be
at the discretion of the Office of State Veterinarian in
consultation with the director and commissioner. Not all
information would be released. For instance, for an outbreak of
a disease at a farm, only the information that was pertinent to
the threat either to other animals or the public, or an issue of
food safety would be released. They would not necessarily
release the total number of animals that are on the farm or the
fact that the farmer owned chickens (if it was a disease
outbreak in cattle) unless that disease would affect those other
animals and raise concern about those other species being a
source of spreading it.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI pointed out they are making DEC and DNR
complete gatekeepers of these records, and that is a lot of
power. It's a policy call that makes him a bit uncomfortable.
MR. GERLACH said they are bound by professional and interaction
requirements of the USDA and other public health officials to
disclose that information. So, if there is a threat, it must be
disclosed.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked for a copy of any statutes,
regulations, or ethical requirements that would bind somebody in
DNR and DEC to disclose that information.
CHAIR GIESSEL asked the Department of Law if any other
information might be helpful.
4:40:56 PM
JENNIFER CURRIE, Alaska Department of Law, Anchorage, Alaska,
said that Dr. Gerlach had addressed when he would be required to
disclose information and she imagined circumstances might
require some of this information remain undisclosed, but she
wasn't 100 percent sure.
CHAIR GIESSEL asked if she heard the concern about the term "may
disclose" and wondered if this particular section was patterned
after other confidential information and disclosure language.
Why does it say "may?"
MS. CURRIE answered that she didn't draft this language based on
any other disclosure statutes, adding that she would review
them.
CHAIR GIESSEL said that would be helpful. She opened public
testimony.
4:42:51 PM
AMY SEITZ, Executive Director, Alaska Farm Bureau, Kenai,
Alaska, supported SB 164. Allowing confidentiality of certain
personal and business records for farmers will afford them some
security in their business and keeping animals healthy, she
said:
In order to comply with state and federal laws,
farmers have to provide certain information to DEC or
DNR. There are also situations where a farmer may be
required to submit test results or want to participate
in voluntary disease testing. Records that DEC and DNR
maintain can be very specific to particular animals or
crops, information on our farmers' businesses and
results from testing, and under current law these
records are not protected.
We want our farmers to feel comfortable working with
state agencies in maintaining the health of our
animals and crops, and also the public health. Knowing
that someone could access specifics on these test
results - who tested, where they are located, and what
the test results were - does not afford farmers the
security necessary for them to participate in these
testing for diseases. Having more farmers
participating in testing could help us produce higher
quality products and increase efficiencies in
production. It could also help as an early detection
of a possible outbreak of diseases, and our state
agencies having this information could help them be
ready in the event of a health concern.
Our farmers should also have the security of knowing
that certain import and business records are
confidential. These records that identify a particular
animal, crop, business, or individual shouldn't be
public information, especially when we are looking at
new rules like the Federal Produce Safety Rule coming
on line. If our farmers are going to be required to
submit financial records to state agencies, they
should be afforded the protections that those records
are going to be confidential. Other commercial
industries are already afforded those securities.
For recent examples: right now, some of our farmers
are dealing with the sheep and goat issue where
Mycoplasma ovipneumoniae is of concern and they opened
up a voluntary testing program to find out what the
prevalence is here in the state. Once the producers
learned that there was not confidentiality within the
Office of the State Veterinarian, there was a lot of
concern to participate. We did work around it, but it
made a little more of a hassle not being able to have
it go through one office.
Also, we have discussed the option of a Disease-free
Certification Program for people who want to do goat
packing, but again, once producers learned there was
not confidentiality of these records within the Office
of the State Veterinarian, there was a lot of
reluctance to participate in something like that.
SB 164 would add a lot protection for our farmers'
businesses, but it would still allow, if there was a
health or safety threat, that information could be
released so the appropriate agencies could protect the
public.
CHAIR GIESSEL asked her if she could better explain the term
"varietal."
MS. SEITZ answered that Mr. Keyes did a good job of talking
about what it means. Even within one crop there are a lot of
different sub-varieties.
CHAIR GIESSEL asked why that would have to be kept confidential.
MS. SEITZ replied that a lot of decisions about what to grow are
business decisions. For instance, one farmer may discover they
are really good at growing a specific variety of potato and they
may not want to share where they get the seed start for it. An
animal farmer could find out where a particular breed is
purchased and beat out the original farmer.
4:50:07 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL said she would leave public testimony open and
hold SB 164 in committee awaiting further information.