Legislature(1995 - 1996)
02/27/1995 08:05 AM House RES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HRES - 02/27/95 HB 169 - DNR IS LEAD AGENCY FOR MINING REPRESENTATIVE PETE KOTT, PRIME SPONSOR, stated HB 169 is a measure that will place the coordination of mineral resources and development within the Department of Natural Resources (DNR). He said HB 169 was extracted from the Alaska Minerals Commission Report. He told committee members there is no intent of removing any regulatory authority from any of the existing departments. He noted if there is an issue related to mining, DNR will coordinate the efforts and will serve as the chief and lead agency. REPRESENTATIVE KOTT noted there is a proposed committee substitute which will clarify the intent of HB 169. He stated there had been some misunderstandings that some of the regulatory functions, currently within various departments, would be withdrawn and placed within DNR. He stressed that is not the intent of HB 169. REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN noted in the committee substitute the word "regulation" was changed to "management" which he felt was a good change. Number 076 NEIL MACKINNON, REPRESENTATIVE, ALASKA MINERALS COMMISSION (AMC), stated HB 169 is a recommendation of the AMC. He said the recommendation comes as a result of the Fort Knox project which involved an expeditious permitting process and from other experiences. AMC feels HB 169 will work well for all mining operations in the state. He noted instead of going to 40 different agencies, they would have to go to one. CO-CHAIRMAN GREEN wondered if having a lead agency, as opposed to having the lead applicant going to each of the various agencies, is bypassing any requirements. MR. MACKINNON replied no. He added the lead agency would say here is the process, here is the application and the process is all funnelled together. He noted it might help in that two agencies could hold a hearing at the same time, generally for the same subject matter. Number 112 BOB STILES, REPRESENTATIVE, DRVEN CORPORATION, expressed support for HB 169. He stated he does foresee a potential for a problem limited to the coastal zone. He said one project he is working on is in the coastal zone and the Division of Governmental Coordination (DGC) functions as a coordinating entity when multiple permits from various agencies are involved. He noted there is a potential for a conflict, in terms of who is in charge of the coordination function, when working within the coastal zone and when subject to the Alaska Coastal Management Program (ACMP). He felt HB 169 would help streamline the process. CO-CHAIRMAN GREEN said he is familiar with the role DGC has taken in the past in the coastal zone management area. He wondered if the conflicts are just there or are they irreconcilable. MR. STILES responded he does not feel the conflicts are irreconcilable. He said one additional coordination loop would be needed when working in the mining area in the coastal zone. He stated on his project, they worked extensively with DGC and it worked extremely well. He noted what DGC lacked was a clear designation as lead agency. He stressed there is a difference between coordination and lead. In the mining area, if there is a defined lead agency, where multiple permits from multiple agencies are going to be involved, the process can work more effectively and more smoothly. However, something would have to be worked out early on in the process when working in the coastal zone. He felt it was doable. CO-CHAIRMAN GREEN asked the sponsor if he envisions in those arenas where they would be dealing with DGC for the coastal zone, that the DNR as the lead agency would act in conjunction with or instead of the applicant. REPRESENTATIVE KOTT replied yes. Number 195 CHARLIE GREEN, ASSISTANT VICE PRESIDENT, MARKETING, USIBELLI COAL MINE, MEMBER, AMC, said he would speak on behalf of the small miner. He stated in the AMC Report, the commission cited the example of permitting for Fort Knox and how the concept of a lead agency worked well on that large project. He stated there is also a process which works well for small miners and that is the Alaska Placer Mining Application process or as it is known, the Tri-Agency process, whereby the small placer miner completes a consolidated application form, submits it to DNR, and DNR then passes it around to the various agencies for review. He noted it is a single point for filing paperwork and for part of the permitting reporting, and is very useful for the small miner who does not have a staff. He stressed the process works very well and speaks to the benefits of formalizing that process. MR. GREEN said as new issues come up where there may be agencies contemplating new permits or new reporting processes, these things can be funneled into a consolidated process which will save time for everyone. He felt the concept of a lead agency will be a benefit to the miners and the state as well. REPRESENTATIVE KOTT asked Mr. Green to estimate the reduction in time for the permitting process if HB 169 was implemented. MR. GREEN replied it depends on how many permits are required. He said for a small miner, who has five or six employees, having to take a person off the job to have a special meeting with a couple of agencies and there is only 100 days to work--any additional time spent working is important. Number 262 CHARLIE BODDY, VICE PRESIDENT, GOVERNMENT RELATIONS, USIBELLI COAL MINE, expressed support for HB 169. He said after 36 years of mineral land management the state has been involved in, there has been a tug and a pull to have a settling out of who is in charge as the lead agency. He concurred with Mr. Green that codification of the position that DNR is the lead agency is overdue. He felt DNR as the lead agency would deter some of the in-fightings and power struggles ongoing in the agencies. He stated DNR has evolved from 25 years ago being in an advocacy role to somewhat of a dual role currently as regulator, policeman, and advocate. MR. BODDY felt it was timely that this change occur and DNR take the lead in mining matters. He said as a proliferation of programs occurs, some emanating from the federal level coming down as state mandates and some being generated from within the state, the complexities of bringing any sort of mine on line involve the same problems--a large amount of permits and other requirements. He stressed by identifying a lead agency and having other agencies with any bearing on the property development required to bring needs to the table in a cohesive manner can only be good for the state and the person trying to bring the property on line. He noted that HB 169 looks like a small piece of legislation. However, he felt it is a very needed piece of legislation from a resource developers standpoint. CO-CHAIRMAN GREEN felt in order to be effective, the DNR would have to be proactive. He wondered if that will create a conflict of interest because they would be a proponent but also would be a regulator. MR. BODDY stated the DNR can have the advocacy role jointly shared with the Department of Commerce and Economic Development. He stressed within the department, there is the ability to have divisions. He noted the conflict has always been there in a small way in the past but each year it gets increasingly more police-like and regulatory in nature. He felt it was more focused on the divisional level. CO-CHAIRMAN GREEN noted for the record that Representative WILLIAMS had joined the committee at 8:13 a.m. REPRESENTATIVE BARNES made a MOTION to ADOPT CSHB 169(RES). CO-CHAIRMAN GREEN asked if there were any objections. Hearing none, the MOTION PASSED. REPRESENTATIVE BARNES made a MOTION to MOVE CSHB 169(RES) with accompanying zero fiscal notes out of committee with individual recommendations. CO-CHAIRMAN GREEN asked if there were any objections. Hearing none, the MOTION PASSED.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|