Legislature(2017 - 2018)BUTROVICH 205
02/08/2018 03:30 PM Senate STATE AFFAIRS
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 | |
| SB164 | |
| SB148 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | SB 164 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 148 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SB 164-CONFIDENTIALITY OF ANIMAL & CROP RECORDS
3:30:35 PM
CHAIR MEYER announced the consideration of SB 164.
3:30:59 PM
CHRISTINA CARPENTER, Director, Division of Environmental Health,
Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, Anchorage,
Alaska, explained that SB 164 will make certain records held by
the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) and
the Alaska Department of Natural Resources (DNR) confidential.
MS. CARPENTER addressed slide 2: SB 164: Confidentiality of
Records, and referenced as follows:
• To keep the Alaska agricultural sector healthy, to
encourage its growth, and to prevent unfair competitive
practices requires a change to the Alaska Statutes (AS),
specifically to keep certain information about agricultural
imports, animal identification, premise, and test results
confidential.
• Amends AS 03.05 to add a new section that would make
certain records held by DEC and DNR confidential.
• SB 164 would provide agriculture producers with similar
confidentiality protection already afforded to other
commercial industries; examples, commercial fisheries or
big-game hunters.
• Coordinated effort with DEC and DNR.
3:32:43 PM
She addressed slide 3: SB 164: Need Overview, and referenced as
follows:
• Farmers are reluctant to subject their animals and crops to
voluntary testing for disease because the results of those
tests are not proprietary as they are in other states.
• Public disclosure of this information can have potentially
negative impacts on their business, and since they are not
mandated tests, they opt not to test at all.
• An outbreak of disease could cause significant threats to
animal health, both wild and domestic, public health, the
environment or the food supply.
• Holding animal import health records, import permit
information and voluntary disease testing or product
quality testing as proprietary allows farmers to keep this
business information confidential.
MS. CARPENTER opined that reluctance to engage in optional
testing means farmers do not work with DEC early in the process
to contain a disease outbreak or a morbidity event. She added
that there is also concern from some animal owners that their
information could be released and accessed by animal rights
activists for harassment purposes.
3:34:32 PM
DR. ROBERT GERLACH, State Veterinarian, Office of the State
Veterinarian (OSV), Division of Environmental Health (EH),
Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, Anchorage,
Alaska, addressed slide 4: Office of the State Veterinarian, and
referenced as follows:
The Office of the State Veterinarian is responsible
for the prevention, control and eradication of animal
diseases in all animals in the state including
livestock and pets, safeguarding the health and food
production capacity of the state's livestock,
reindeer, and poultry and preventing the transmission
of animal diseases to humans.
He said for OSV to carry out its responsibilities requires
access to certain information:
• Identification of where animals are located.
• How many animals are at a location.
• Contact information for animal owners.
• Animal movement information to identify if animals are
moving from one place to another if an outbreak occurs.
• Background information surveillance on diseases in the
state for certification.
He addressed slide 5: Program Functions and Record Examples, and
referenced as follows:
• "One Health" animal disease and traceability:
o Import regulations for animals.
o Disease surveillance and investigation.
o Movi Study: wild and domestic sheep and goats.
• Dairy:
o Sanitation at dairy farms and milk facilities.
o Dairy products safe for human consumption.
o New recipes.
• Reindeer slaughter.
• FSMA produce safety rule.
• Fish tissue monitoring.
DR. GERLACH explained that OSV's records on disease
certification as well as programs to provide proof-of-animal
quality are important for the producers to have a successful
business.
3:37:04 PM
SENATOR GIESSEL addressed Alaska's cross-border trade with
Canada. She pointed out that Canada has some prohibitions on
animals crossing the border to come to Alaska. She asked Dr.
Gerlach to provide details.
DR. GERLACH answered that there are some prohibitions on
movement of certain species like sheep and goats from the Lower
48 that require special permits to travel through Canada. The
other diseases that Canada has surveillance for, like Alaska's
concern regarding certain diseases that are in wildlife, are
parasites in ticks or Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD). He revealed
that Canada currently has a CWD outbreak in Alberta.
SENATOR GIESSEL noted that Alaska has the Porcupine caribou herd
that moves back and forth across the border and asked if the
caribou herd is monitored for disease.
DR. GERLACH replied the Alaska Department of Fish and Game
(ADF&G) monitors the Porcupine caribou herd and shares the data
with the EH.
SENATOR GIESSEL asked him to confirm that ADF&G has a
veterinarian on staff, like Dr. Gerlach's position.
DR. GERLACH answered correct. He detailed that EH has a
veterinarian as well.
3:40:20 PM
SENATOR GIESSEL asked Dr. Gerlach to verify that the state has
three veterinarians in three different departments.
DR. GERLACH detailed that the responsibilities of the
veterinarians in each of the departments varies. He emphasized
that there is only one "state" veterinarian. He noted that only
a state veterinarian can act on an outbreak to contain diseases.
SENATOR GIESSEL asked that Dr. Gerlach provide additional detail
on the MOVI Study.
DR. GERLACH explained that the Mycoplasma ovipneumoniae (MOVI)
is a disease of concern that was responsible for some sporadic
die-off of bighorn sheep in the Lower 48. He said the MOVI Study
is collecting data from domestic sheep and goats to see if there
is potential risk to Alaska's wildlife.
3:42:50 PM
He addressed slide 6: Alaska Animal Imports: OSV Records:
• FY2014:
o Number of permits:
square4 Cattle: 6
square4 Sheep/goats: 26
square4 Equine: 77
square4 Swine: 19
square4 Poultry: 220
o Number of animals:
square4 Cattle: 37
square4 Sheep/goats: 92
square4 Equine: 203
square4 Swine: 2,050
square4 Poultry: 14,000
• FY2015:
o Number of permits:
square4 Cattle: 5
square4 Sheep/goats: 21
square4 Equine: 63
square4 Swine: 13
square4 Poultry: 490
o Number of animals:
square4 Cattle: 22
square4 Sheep/goats: 38
square4 Equine: 118
square4 Swine: 668
square4 Poultry: 30,623
• FY2016:
o Number of permits:
square4 Cattle: 14
square4 Sheep/goats: 22
square4 Equine: 203
square4 Swine: 31
square4 Poultry: 1,645
o Number of animals:
square4 Cattle: 169
square4 Sheep/goats: 298
square4 Equine: 352
square4 Swine: 2668
square4 Poultry: 128,372
• FY2017:
o Number of permits:
square4 Cattle: 22
square4 Sheep/goats: 17
square4 Equine: 192
square4 Swine: 37
square4 Poultry: 1,230
o Number of animals:
square4 Cattle: 401
square4 Sheep/goats: 85
square4 Equine: 366
square4 Swine: 2,319
square4 Poultry: 91,929
DR. GERLACH noted that the animal import data shows that permits
and animals continue to increase.
3:43:32 PM
He addressed slide 7: Disease Outbreaks in Alaska, and
referenced as follows:
• Brucellosis:
o 20 percent of cases are associated with recreational
and subsistence hunting.
• Domestic Animals:
o Pet foods (brucellosis canis, leptospirosis, rabies,
avian, swine, and canine influenza).
o Poultry (Marek's Disease, fowl cholera, avian
influenza).
o Baby chicks (salmonella).
o Outbreaks at the Fair (Streptococcus suis, Malignant
Catharral Fever).
o Domestic rabbits (herpes virus).
• Treats & Raw Foods:
o Poultry deaths (Southcentral; toxin).
o Horses (Kodiak; aflatoxin).
o Domestic pets (salmonella, chemical contaminants).
• Records can still be disclosed if there is a threat to the
health or safety of an animal, crop, or the public.
DR. GERLACH explained that disease outbreaks are reported to
certain state and federal agencies. He added that data is
released to inform farmers so that action can be taken. He
emphasized that released information is "generalized" without
personal or business information. He summarized that the intent
is to protect animal health and contain or eradicate diseases
without impacting a commercial entity.
3:45:46 PM
He addressed slide 8: SB 164: Sectional Analysis, and detailed
as follows:
• Section 1:
o Makes certain animal and crop records maintained by
DEC and DNR exempt from the Alaska Public Records Act
if they:
1. Are importation records that identify an animal,
crop, business, or individual;
2. Contain animal or crop test results if certain
conditions are met;
3. Are trade secrets or proprietary business or
financial information.
o 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.
o Provides the definition of "varietal.
• Section 2:
o Allows the DEC and DNR to adopt regulations to
implement the act.
• Section 3:
o Provides for an immediate effective date for Section
2.
MS. CARPENTER addressed slide 9: SB 164: Benefits, and
referenced as follows:
• 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.
3:47:36 PM
SENATOR WILSON asked if the division had an indication as to how
many people will go ahead and comply with testing. He noted that
the bill has a zero fiscal note and asked who pays for the
testing.
MS. CARPENTER addressed testing payment and explained that
producers have their private veterinarian test and the two
entities have a client-patient confidentiality; however, as soon
as the private veterinarian turns records over to the state, the
information is subject to public record. She specified that the
bill's intent is for records protection rather than an increase
in testing at EH's laboratory.
DR. GERLACH added that some of the testing EH does is paid from
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) grants to meet certain
certifications. He noted that farmers are seeing the overall
benefit from obtaining certifications, especially for moving
animals out of state.
3:50:20 PM
SENATOR WILSON asked if there is a standard number of testing
days for cattle that come into the state from the Lower 48 or
Canada before the animal can go to market.
DR. GERLACH replied import requirements require testing 30 days
in advance of cattle coming into the state.
SENATOR WILSON asked Dr. Gerlach to confirm that someone could
bring an animal in and slaughter within 15 days and not go
through testing.
DR. GERLACH answered correct. He detailed that an animal brought
into the state for direct slaughter would still have to meet
USDA standards for importation into the country. He noted that
state law requires that direct slaughter must occur within 10
days, federal law requires 14 days. He added that an exemption
for added time to slaughter may be requested.
3:52:20 PM
SENATOR WILSON asked if an animal could be imported into the
state, used for breeding, and then be sent for slaughter.
DR. GERLACH answered no. He specified that an animal must go
directly to slaughter. He pointed out that Washington state has
experienced issues where animals brought in for immediate
slaughter have been used for breeding. He emphasized that record
accountability and traceability is vital in verifying that
animals brought in for immediate slaughter are not used for
breeding.
SENATOR COGHILL noted that he is concerned with, "Pulling the
shade down over private industry." He asked what information
will be publicly available if SB 164 is adopted.
DR. GERLACH answered that information of animal imports coming
into the state would be available. He reiterated that
information is generalized and specific information for a
business or person will not be disclosed.
3:55:26 PM
SENATOR COGHILL asked what specific information will be
available from the state. He inquired if the information from
the state will show volume and category.
DR. GERLACH answered correct.
SENATOR COGHILL pointed out that accessing the USDA may be a way
to circumvent restricted information. He noted that the
information provided by the USDA does not provide the name.
DR. GERLACH replied that he did not know what information the
USDA would release. He surmised that the USDA would redact
certain information.
SENATOR COGHILL shared a constituent concern that some people
are bringing animals into the state and calling them "Alaskan
grown" and then marketing them.
DR. GERLACH replied that Senator Coghill poses a very good
question and noted that specific information is available when a
concern is voiced.
SENATOR COGHILL asked him to verify that information on volumes
and species will be available without specific identification.
DR. GERLACH answered correct. He emphasized that information
will not being hidden, but information for a specific business
or person will not be disclosed. He noted that the Health
Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPPA) on health
information privacy runs the same way.
3:58:59 PM
SENATOR COGHILL pointed out that the information that the USDA
releases does show an address.
SENATOR WILSON addressed "Alaskan grown" and asked how livestock
is verified to be "Alaskan grown" if there is a complaint.
MS. CARPENTER explained that information and records would
continue to be shared with "fellow departments" for managing the
"Alaskan grown" program.
SENATOR WILSON asked if only "general" information would be
available to the public and only the state would have access to
the specific information.
DR. GERLACH answered thats true and noted that access is also
available to an "authority" that has the regulation to go ahead
with a program like the "Alaskan grown". He reiterated that any
time there is a question, the Division of Agriculture has access
to specific information. He noted that the confidentiality issue
has been a very big issue in the Lower 48 where states have
strengthened access to information because of several different
issues associated with data misuse by other public entities that
are industry damaging.
4:02:39 PM
CHAIR MEYER opened public testimony.
4:03:06 PM
AMY SEITZ, Executive Director, Alaska Farm Bureau, Soldotna,
Alaska, testified in support of SB 164. She explained that
compliance with state and federal laws requires farmers to
provide certain information to DEC and DNR as well as compliance
for voluntary testing programs or importation laws. She said
currently there is no confidentiality over testing records as
well as pertinent information on individuals, businesses,
animals, and crops.
MS. SEITZ said the passage of SB 164 will provide information
security for farmers which is the same security already provided
to other businesses in the state. She emphasized that the
passage of SB 164 would not endanger public health and private
information would be released if there was a problem.
4:06:04 PM
BRYCE WRIGLEY, President, Alaska Farm Bureau, Delta Junction,
Alaska, testified in support of SB 164. He said building a
strong and resilient local-food system requires a commitment
from farmers as well as statutes and regulations that encourage
local food production and processes. He said SB 164 will build
trust between the state's food producers and government without
fear that businesses can be impacted because of a sick animal or
crop disease. He explained that the possibility of a serious
problem and the potential food-market impact makes farmers
reluctant to ask for help from agencies because that information
is currently considered public. He asserted that knowing certain
test results are subject to public record requests under the
current law makes animal owners reluctant to voluntarily have
their animals tested for what could be contagious diseases and
viruses.
He summarized that continued distrust can be expected without
the protections that SB 164 offers. He emphasized that SB 164
will build trust between food producers and their government. He
asserted that working together will transform Alaska's food
security.
4:10:40 PM
CHAIR MEYER closed public testimony.
4:11:27 PM
SENATOR GIESSEL moved to report SB 164, version 30-GS2584\A from
committee with individual recommendations and attached zero
fiscal note.
4:11:42 PM
CHAIR MEYER announced that seeing no objection, the motion
carried.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB164 Transmittal Letter.pdf |
SSTA 2/8/2018 3:30:00 PM |
SB 164 |
| SB164 Ver A.PDF |
SSTA 2/8/2018 3:30:00 PM |
SB 164 |
| SB164 DEC Fiscal Note.PDF |
SSTA 2/8/2018 3:30:00 PM |
SB 164 |
| SB 148 Hearing Request-signed.pdf |
SSTA 2/8/2018 3:30:00 PM |
SB 148 |
| SB0148A.PDF |
SSTA 2/8/2018 3:30:00 PM |
SB 148 |
| SB 148 Sectional Analysis version A.pdf |
SSTA 2/8/2018 3:30:00 PM |
SB 148 |
| SB148-DPS-APSC-01-18-18.pdf |
SSTA 2/8/2018 3:30:00 PM |
SB 148 |
| SB148 Additional Information Letter 2.6.2018.pdf |
SSTA 2/8/2018 3:30:00 PM |
SB 148 |
| SB164 and OSV Overview 02.08.2018.pdf |
SSTA 2/8/2018 3:30:00 PM |
SB 164 |