Legislature(1993 - 1994)
10/25/1993 01:30 PM House RES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE
October 25, 1993
1:30 p.m.
Ketchikan, Alaska
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Bill Williams, Chairman
Representative Bill Hudson, Vice-Chairman
Representative Con Bunde (via teleconference)
Representative Pat Carney (via teleconference)
Representative John Davies (via teleconference)
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative David Finkelstein
Representative Joe Green
Representative Jeannette James
Representative Eldon Mulder
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
Department of Environmental Conservation Briefing On Water
Quality Standards and Solid Waste Regulations
WITNESS REGISTER
MEAD TREADWELL, Deputy Commissioner
Department of Environmental Conservation
410 Willoughby Ave., Ste. 301
Juneau, Alaska 99801-1795
Phone: 465-5050
Position Statement: Presented briefing on proposed water
quality standards and solid waste
regulations
HEATHER STOCKARD
Hazardous & Solid Waste Management Section
Department of Environmental Conservation
410 Willoughby Ave., Ste. 105
Juneau, Alaska 99801-1795
Phone: 465-5150
Position Statement: Presented briefing on proposed solid
waste regulations
DAVID STURDEVANT, Coordinator
Water Quality Standards
Department of Environmental Conservation
410 Willoughby Ave.
Juneau, Alaska 99801-1795
Phone: 465-5300
Position Statement: Presented briefing on proposed water
quality standards
FRED MONREAN, Director
Ketchikan Public Works
334 Front Street
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901
Phone: 228-5615
Position Statement: Supported Southeast Conference position
on proposed solid waste regulations and
water quality standards
RICHARD SMITH
City & Borough of Sitka
304 Lake Street
Sitka, Alaska 99835
Phone: 747-5500
Position Statement: Supported Southeast Conference position
proposed solid waste regulations and
water quality standards
GERSHON COHEN
Clean Water Alliance
P.O. Box 956
Haines, Alaska 99827
Phone: 766-2488
Position Statement: Encouraged more emphasis on recycling
in regard to proposed solid waste
regulations and opposed proposed water
quality standards
GINNY TIERNEY, City Administrator
City of Thorne Bay
Thorne Bay, Alaska 99919
Phone: 828-3992
Position Statement: Supported Southeast Conference position
on proposed solid waste regulations
ELI LUCAS
City Public Works
City of Petersburg
P.O. Box 329
Petersburg, Alaska 99833
Phone: 772-4520
Position Statement: Supported Southeast Conference position
on proposed solid waste regulations
CHUCK ACHBERGER, Director
Juneau Chamber of Commerce
124 W. Fifth Street
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Phone: 463-5604
Position Statement: Supported Southeast Conference position
on proposed solid waste regulations
ALAIRE STANTON, Mayor
City of Ketchikan
3817 Fairview
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901
Phone: 225-3406
Position Statement: Supported proposed water quality
standards
ERNESTA BALLARD
705 Main Street
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901
Phone: 247-0846
Position Statement: Supported proposed water quality
standards
RICHARD HOFFMAN, President
Alaska Trollers Association
Juneau, Alaska
Phone: 586-9400
Position Statement: Opposed proposed water quality
standards
BOB ELLIS
P.O. Box 2966
Sitka, Alaska 99835
Phone: 747-8950
Position Statement: Opposed proposed water quality
standards
DON MULLER
P.O. Box 1042
Sitka, Alaska 99835
Phone: 747-8808
Position Statement: Opposed proposed water quality
standards
TOM ELY
P.O. Box 1014
Haines, Alaska 99827
Phone: 766-2869
Position Statement: Opposed proposed water quality
standards
RIKI OTT, Chair
Habitat Committee
United Fishermen of Alaska
P.O. Box 1430
Cordova, Alaska 99574
Phone: 424-3915
Position Statement: Opposed proposed water quality
standards
DAVE LANKARD, Representative
Eyak Traditional Elders Council
P.O. Box 460
Cordova, Alaska 99574
Phone: 424-5790
Position Statement: Concerned with proposed water quality
standards and their effect on native
people
CHRIS NOROSZ
Petersburg Vessel Owners Association
P.O. Box 232
Petersburg, Alaska 99833
Phone: 772-9323
Position Statement: Opposed proposed water quality
standards
CHRIS TOAL, Legislative Assistant
Representative David Finkelstein
Alaska State Legislature
Alaska State Capitol, Room 424
Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182
Phone: 465-2435
Position Statement: Opposed proposed water quality
standards
GREG STREVELER
Gustavus, Alaska 99826
Phone: 697-2287
Position Statement: Opposed proposed water quality
standards
PATRICIA KING
P.O. Box 15012
Fritz Creek, Alaska 99603
Position Statement: Opposed proposed water quality
standards
CHRIS CHAVASSE
P.O. Box 15003
Fritz Creek, Alaska 99603
Position Statement: Opposed proposed water quality
standards
CLIFF TARO, President
Southeast Stevedoring Corporation
P.O. Box 8080
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901
Phone: 225-6157
Position Statement: Supported proposed water quality
standards
ALLIS MAY DAVIS
P.O. Box 1102
Ward Cove, Alaska 99928
Phone: 225-8771
Position Statement: Opposed proposed water quality
standards
ROLLO POOLE, Manager
Public Relations
Alaska Pulp Corporation
4600 Saw Mill Creek Road
Sitka, Alaska 99835
Phone: 747-2283
Position Statement: Supported Alaska Forest Association
position on proposed water quality
standards
HELEN DRURY
1011 Halibut Point Road
Sitka, Alaska 99835
Phone: 747-8019
Position Statement: Opposed proposed water quality
standards
ROBERT CHEVALIER
Sitka, Alaska 99835
Position Statement: Opposed proposed water quality
standards
ELDON DENNIS, Co-Chairman
Water Quality Committee
United Southeast Alaska Gillnetters
P.O. Box 20070
Juneau, Alaska 99802
Phone: 586-3544
Position Statement: Supported Alaska Clean Water Alliance
position on proposed water quality
standards
PAULA TERREL
Thane Neighborhood Association
5025 Thane Road
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Phone: 586-3451
Position Statement: Opposed proposed water quality
standards
STEVE HAGAN, Manager
Ketchikan Pulp Company
P.O. Box 6600
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901
Phone: 225-2151
Position Statement: Supported proposed water quality
standards
MARILYN LEE
P.O. Box 1081
Ward Cove, Alaska 99928
Phone: 247-8156
Position Statement: Supported the Alaska Trollers
Association position on proposed water
quality standards
KATY FRENCH
Ketchikan Pulp Company
P.O. Box 6600
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901
Phone: 225-2151
Position Statement: Supported proposed water quality
standards
MEREDITH MARSHALL
429 Edmond
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901
Phone: 225-3817
Position Statement: Supported proposed water quality
standards
ROLAND STANTON
3817 Fairview
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901
Phone: 225-3406
Position Statement: Supported proposed water quality
standards
ALLYN HAYES
P.O. Box 722
Ward Cove, Alaska 99928
Phone: 247-8369
Position Statement: Supported proposed water quality
standards
CONSTANCE GRIFFITH
2509 4th Avenue
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901
Phone: 225-5069
Position Statement: Opposed proposed water quality
standards
TROY REINHART, Executive Director
Alaska Forest Association
111 Stedman #200
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901
Phone: 225-6114
Position Statement: Supported proposed water quality
standards
DAVE KATZ
Southeast Alaska Conservation Council
320 Bawden Street
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901
Phone: 225-0750
Position Statement: Opposed proposed water quality
standards
JACK LEE, Chairman
Tongass Sportfishing Association
P.O. Box 1081
Ward Cove, Alaska 99928
Phone: 247-8156
Position Statement: Opposed proposed water quality
standards
JIM FOSTER
P.O. Box 9068
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901
Phone: 225-7607
Position Statement: Opposed proposed water quality
standards
JOHN PETERSON
661 S. Point Higgins
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901
Phone: 247-2686
Position Statement: Supported proposed water quality
standards
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 93-50, SIDE A
Number 000
The House Resources Committee was called to order by
Chairman Bill Williams at 1:55 p.m. Members present at the
call to order were Representatives Williams, Hudson, Bunde,
Carney and Davies. Members absent were Representatives
Finkelstein, Green, James and Mulder.
CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS mentioned there are eighteen sites on
teleconference and welcomed those participating.
CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS stated the Department of Environmental
Conservation (DEC) has been having numerous hearings across
the state on water quality standards. He said this would be
the first hearing on water quality standards and waste
management for the House Resources Committee.
CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS commented he hoped from the hearings a
consensus could be found on the issue.
Number 035
MEAD TREADWELL, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION (DEC), said DEC's briefing
concerned two sets of rules: water quality standards and
solid waste regulations. He noted that on one set of
proposals, the public's and municipal government's comments
suggest DEC is being too harsh, yet on another, it is
suggested DEC is not being harsh enough. He stressed DEC's
purpose is to protect the environment and public health and
a balance must be struck between people's needs and nature.
MR. TREADWELL continued when DEC is implementing state law,
two goals are followed: first, to find realistic standards
to fit Alaska's needs; with realistic meaning practical,
enforceable, attainable and understandable standards. DEC
tries to avoid standards which produce unreasonable costs
for little environmental benefit. He stated the second goal
is to look for flexibility in meeting Alaska's needs.
MR. TREADWELL stressed that risk level is a policy decision
not a scientific decision. He said the stress for
flexibility is one of the least understood reasons behind
the 1 in 100,000 cancer risk level proposal. He said once
risk level is set nationally or at the state level, permits
are granted and if standards later change, it is difficult
because of federal antibacksliding rules to allow loosening
of the standards for any given facility.
Number 076
MR. TREADWELL stated presently in regulation, there is a way
to classify streams and water bodies around the state to
have stronger or weaker standards apply, depending on type
of use, but most of Alaska's water bodies are classified for
the most stringent standards. He added a long, expensive
analysis is needed to reclassify a water body and the
government needs to prove a negative, that the water will
never be used or could never support a beneficial use such
as drinking water, whether or not history shows otherwise.
MR. TREADWELL said by adopting the human health risk level
proposed, the flexibility is retained to set tougher
standards for any individual compound in revisions planned
for future years. He stressed economics, as well as
sciences, are reviewed when individual standards are set.
He said DEC is cognizant that in arguing about standards
which may apply to particular projects around the state,
those projects must also comply with the requirements of
laws.
MR. TREADWELL stated in the solid waste rules, flexibility
was also sought and gained. He said the price of short-term
flexibility in solid waste rules is a long-term planning
process to reduce waste. He continued that DEC is also
exercising flexibility to set some standards which are not
called for in federal law but meet Alaska's needs. He
pointed out that Governor Hickel recently wrote President
Clinton on the issue of Alaska's wetlands and the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Corps of
Engineers has begun wetlands hearings. In Governor Hickel's
correspondence, flexibility and broader public comments were
being sought.
Number 120
MR. TREADWELL remarked in recent public hearings on the
state water quality standards and the solid waste
requirements, the debate did not seem to focus on the
flexibility issue but rather focused on Alaska's needs where
there is a consensus. He said as a new set of standards for
water and solid waste are proposed, the intent is to meet
the needs and better preserve what is valued in the state
such as clean water and fish.
MR. TREADWELL stated there must be an effort to ensure that
mining, fishing, timber development, tourism and community
growth can be compatible with the standards. He said
attainable development can be achieved if more is done than
just setting standards and gave examples of current programs
which do that. He stressed the efforts underway currently
represent glimmers of hope in the way government and
citizens work together to protect their environment and
added that rules and standards are only a start.
Number 144
MR. TREADWELL commented there has been a large opposition to
DEC's proposed water quality regulations in recent public
hearings, with 170 public members testifying and not one
individual supported DEC's proposal. He stressed that DEC
is listening and taking the public's concerns seriously.
MR. TREADWELL said public criticism was principally aimed at
the proposed human health risk level of 1 in 100,000. He
stressed the overwhelming feeling is that little or no
increase cancer risk is acceptable and no mixing zones for
carcinogens should be allowed. He remarked the public often
noted that two-thirds of the states and all western states
except Nevada have selected the 1 in 1 million risk level.
MR. TREADWELL stated there was also widespread opposition to
proposals for mixing zones, treatment works and natural
conditions criteria and to the perceived lowering of
standards for sediment, fecal coliform bacteria, color and
hydrocarbons. He stressed there was little opposition to
the control of whole effluents toxicity or to the
prohibition on mixing zones in fish spawning areas.
Number 160
MR. TREADWELL said those testifying made a strong case for
the uniqueness and value of Alaska's clean waters and the
need to keep them as clean as possible, guaranteeing the
continued help of the fishing and tourism industries. He
relayed those testifying repeatedly indicated they do not
oppose extractive industries but that industries must pay
the cost for pollution control and not pass the cost of
pollution to other sectors. He said testifiers repeatedly
noted the stiff regulations applying to oil and sewage
discharge from fishing boats and other regulation of
individuals. Testifiers reported lower 48 experiences of
having to pay large costs to clean up past pollution
problems.
Number 177
MR. TREADWELL stressed DEC is cognizant of all of the
concerns and urged everyone to think of real risks, not
emotion, and offered to work with everyone to incorporate
the record of the present hearing and any comments the
committee makes to DEC's administrative rule making record.
He said the controversy is being brought to the committee
because the committee has the power to demand the course be
changed if it is not appropriate. He hoped that together,
the public can be reassured the standards adopted will
protect them, their environment and their future.
MR. TREADWELL stated while it is easy to cry for no
pollution and no cancer risk, reality must be faced. For
example, implementing a no increase limit to total suspended
solids would be extremely costly for municipal sewage
treatment plants with little environmental benefit. He
continued with other examples.
MR. TREADWELL said DEC believes many of the proposals are
misunderstood by the public and most of the technical
proposals are not being fairly examined. He further stated
that issues have persistently been misrepresented to the
public by activist groups opposing the revisions.
Number 215
HEATHER STOCKARD, HAZARDOUS & SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
SECTION, DEC, reviewed background information leading to the
proposed solid waste regulations. She said in subtitle Z of
the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), Congress
banned open dumping of solid waste and directed the EPA to
establish national minimum standards for sanitary landfills.
On October 9, 1991, in response to that direction, EPA
established the solid waste disposal facility criteria for
all municipal solid waste landfills.
MS. STOCKARD stated EPA expects all states to implement the
standards and to ensure that they do, incentives are built
into the federal regulations, including additional
flexibility with states who have an approved solid waste
program, as well as protection from third party suits for
operators of landfills with a permit from an approved state
program. She remarked there are about 750 landfills in
Alaska, with the majority of sites considered open dumps
under the definition in the RCRA. She said it would be
difficult, perhaps impossible, for many of these facilities
to meet the full requirements of the federal regulations.
For that reason, DEC feels it is important for Alaska to
gain solid waste program approval from EPA in order to take
advantage of every possible area of state flexibility.
MS. STOCKARD continued that the proposed solid waste
regulations are designed to be stringent enough to allow
Alaska to qualify for program approval yet have the
flexibility allowed in federal regulations. She said
federal regulations include two exclusions from requirements
for small landfills. The first is for small landfills in
arid regions (the west Texas exclusion) and the other is for
small landfills in communities cut off from surface
transportation at least three months out of the year (the
Alaskan exemption).
Number 250
MS. STOCKARD said DEC's proposed regulations take advantage
of both exclusions in order to set more attainable standards
for small landfills. She stated program approval and use of
the small landfill exemption will not go far enough to allow
some Alaska communities to comply with the federal standards
and gave examples of such. She advised it is important the
legislature, the Governor's Office and Alaska's
Congressional delegation continue to work with EPA and
Congress to seek further relief for small landfills in the
state. DEC staff will continue to work with national
associations of state solid waste officials in order to gain
support of other states for further Alaska exemptions.
MS. STOCKARD pointed out that adopting solid waste
regulations and seeking state program approval will allow
more time to pursue a more permanent solution, one which DEC
would like to see as full exemption from federal solid waste
requirements for very small or remote communities in the
state. She said DEC will be soliciting comments on the
regulations through November 30 and holding public hearings
around the state. She mentioned that between the end of the
close of the comment period and late January, changes to the
proposed regulations will be made based on the comments
received as well as the results of preliminary review by
EPA.
MS. STOCKARD stated DEC plans to adopt regulations in early
February with an estimated effective date of July 1, 1994
and if the final regulations are acceptable to EPA, Alaska
expects to receive state program approval on the effective
date of the regulation. She further stated in the next few
months, EPA will be seeking public comments on alternative
approaches to ground water monitoring and small landfills.
She urged representatives of affected communities to attend
the hearings and provide testimony on practical monitoring
alternatives for Alaska.
MS. STOCKARD explained DEC's classification scheme in the
regulations for municipal solid waste landfills and said
three classes of land are proposed: Class I the largest
landfills in the state, those accepting over 20 tons of
solid waste per day, would be expected to meet all of the
federal criteria in the federal regulations; Class II
landfills, those accepting less than 20 tons per day, DEC
has proposed relaxed design and corrective action
requirements and a much later deadline for implementing
financial assurance requirements.
MS. STOCKARD continued Class III landfills are designed for
small villages with subsistence economies and proposed
regulations state Class III landfills be those which accept
less than 3 tons of waste per day (equating to approximately
1,000 in population) and accepts less than 50 percent of its
waste from industrial or government sources. She said Class
III landfills have both relaxed design, operating and
corrective action requirements and are essentially open
dumps by the federal definition, not requiring financial
assurance mechanisms and DEC does not propose collecting any
fees.
MS. STOCKARD said Class III landfills go beyond what federal
statute allows EPA to (inaudible) in a state program;
therefore, DEC has included in the proposed regulations the
upgrade rule, meaning Class III landfills must agree to
upgrade to Class II within 10-15 years. She stated DEC
recognizes there are many villages who will not be able to
upgrade to Class II; however, DEC feels the upgrade rule
will give additional time to continue working on a full
exemption for the small communities.
Number 334
MS. STOCKARD mentioned there have been concerns regarding
areas in DEC's regulations not required by the federal
regulations. She said the federal regulations deal solely
with municipal solid waste landfills and as this was a
complete rewrite of DEC's chapter in the state regulations
on solid waste, DEC has also included provisions for other
types of landfills. She further stated there are a few
requirements for municipal solid waste landfills which have
been added due to special circumstances in Alaska.
MS. STOCKARD continued that DEC has tried to provide
additional flexibility for Alaska's unique situation
including a section on permafrost landfills allowing for an
exemption for certain requirements. She said a waiver
provision has been included and added that EPA could not
approve a general waiver of requirements for Class I
landfills but would consider approving a program having that
available for other types of landfills.
MS. STOCKARD stated DEC has included a section on solid
waste management planning which was added to incorporate the
provisions of Alaska Statute 46.06.021 and 46.03.11E which
says DEC cannot issue disposal permits unless the waste
management hierarchy has been adequately considered in terms
of recycling, source reduction, etc. She said there are
also sections for non-municipal solid waste including those
which have parallels with the federal regulations and some
that have no parallels with the federal regulations. She
said DEC feels that without regulatory standards, industry
cannot be sure what requirements are needed to be met and
differences between permit conditions can lead to
competitive disadvantages for the stringently regulated
parties.
Number 400
DAVID STURDEVANT, COORDINATOR, WATER QUALITY STANDARDS, DEC,
read a background statement explaining how the current
status of the proposed water quality standards was reached.
He said DEC is conducting the triennial review and revision
of water quality standards as required under the federal
Clean Water Act. He stated the original focus of revisions
was to adopt water quality criteria for toxic pollutants,
particularly the human health criteria for carcinogens,
which has been deferred until 1994. He added that in the
current phase, DEC is addressing human health risk level
criteria for certain conventional pollutants and narrative
provisions concerning mixing zones, treatment works, site
specific criteria and whole effluent toxicity.
MR. STURDEVANT stated DEC first proposed revisions and held
public review pertaining to the topics in the summer 1992
and the public comment period ran for 4 1/2 months. He
noted the proposals generated public controversy producing
approximately 2,000 written comments which led DEC to not
adopt the 1992 proposals into regulation. He said valid
concerns expressed led DEC to reconsider many of the issues.
MR. STURDEVANT stated DEC evaluated public comments and
prepared a formal comment and response summary. He added
that at Governor Hickel's direction, DEC formed a water
quality standards citizens advisory group to assist in
reexamining and modifying the proposals. He said members of
the group, representing a balance of industry, environmental
and public interests met and submitted written comments to
DEC.
MR. STURDEVANT advised that based on public and advisory
group comments and discussions with EPA, DEC developed
modified regulatory proposals which were then distributed to
the advisory group for final review. He said the final
package was approved for public review and comments. He
added most of the topics in the 1993 proposals are similar
to the 1992 proposals including technical issues and public
policy matters.
MR. STURDEVANT stated the major differences in the 1993
proposals are DEC dropped a proposal for human health
criteria for dioxin, chloroform and arsenic and added a
proposal for a human health risk level of l in 100,000 for
carcinogenic pollutants. He said the risk level ultimately
adopted will become the basis for later developing human
health criteria for carcinogens. Therefore, DEC wished to
foster public consideration and response as an initial step
toward the development of human health criteria.
MR. STURDEVANT reviewed handouts (available from the House
Resources Committee) used in the public workshops and
hearings. He said there is a summary of the advisory group
comments on each of the proposals and a sheet which compares
the 1992 and 1993 proposals with current regulations.
Number 492
MR. STURDEVANT referred to a wall chart on water quality
standards topics listing items included in the proposal. He
said another chart shows the risk formula which answers the
question of what is the criteria to be established and
stated there are six factors which go into the formula,
adding that at the present time, DEC is not dealing with the
matter of fish consumption. He stated the factors include
risk level, body weight, water consumption, cancer potency
factor and bioaccumulation.
MR. STURDEVANT said the cancer potency factor and
bioaccumulation are specific to each pollutant and EPA,
through its science, provides a number to plug in; body
weight is established; water consumption is a set value;
therefore risk level and fish consumption are the real
variables to deal with. He said there is a formula,
involving multiplication and division when plugging in the
values, and the resulting answer is the criterion for each
pollutant.
MR. STURDEVANT stated DEC recognizes there is discharge of
pollutants and people are exposed to them, so there is a
need to control them. DEC's mission is to set a human
health criterion for each pollutant which will govern the
allowable level in the water. He said separate and
independent criterion exists for protecting both aquatic
life and human health.
MR. STURDEVANT said there is no change proposed for the
protection of aquatic life criteria. He stated the human
health criteria will only be applied when they are stricter
than the aquatic life protection criteria and that is the
reason why DEC has a problem with lowering the water quality
standards.
Number 567
MR. STURDEVANT, referring to a wall chart, reviewed an
illustrated water body showing a discharge pipe with a
pollutant discharge into the water and then described what
happens to the pollutants after they hit the water. First,
the pollutants mix with the water; then the pollutants are
consumed by small organisms; next the pollutants move up the
food chain; finally consumed by fish. He said DEC's
objective is to set allowable pollutant levels in the water
and to do that, they first review human risk dose.
MR. STURDEVANT stated the first requirement is to establish
what the acceptable dose is and recognize it is determined
on a lifetime basis (70 years). He advised that the
information establishing the safe dose comes from laboratory
animal studies and once a lifetime safe dose for people is
established, then the task becomes determining what level of
pollution in the water will not exceed that dose when the
pollutants are transferred into fish and people.
MR. STURDEVANT summarized that DEC is responsible for
setting criteria ensuring that a person who eats a set
amount of contaminated fish and drinks a certain amount of
contaminated water will not exceed the specified risk of
cancer over a lifetime. He stated the situation in Alaska
is quite different in that most of the fish are migratory
which means they have limited exposure to contaminated
areas.
TAPE 93-50, SIDE B
Number 000
REPRESENTATIVE BILL HUDSON asked if the major risk areas had
been identified.
MR. STURDEVANT replied the risk areas are where there are
contaminated sources and fish are being taken from those
areas. He said the only people exposed are those consuming
contaminated fish.
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON inquired about major community out
falls.
MR. STURDEVANT said municipal discharges are a concern
because of bacteria, sediment and other pollutants.
NUMBER 043
CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS asked for comments on public's fear and
distrust of DEC as well as accusations that DEC is giving in
to industry.
MR. TREADWELL replied that public trust results from a
dialogue and DEC has tried to have a dialogue with the
public including the Governor asking DEC to determine if the
science could be improved because it was difficult to
understand and explain. He said in terms of looking for
better science on various carcinogens which were being
studied, that project has been delayed so it can be
continued through next year. He continued that a water
quality standards working group, which includes people from
various industries and sectors, was established.
MR. TREADWELL said if there is a disagreement on the
question of risk and the argument is not scientific, it is
very difficult to cope with because DEC feels the l in
100,000 risk level is a good solid level, given the other
environmental risks faced in the state and given the costs
of meeting those hazards. He said the reason DEC is
conducting the briefing is to ensure that the committee is
aware that there is a disagreement with the public regarding
the risk level decision. He reminded everyone the reason
DEC set the risk level at l in 100,000 is to maintain
flexibility.
Number 091
REPRESENTATIVE JOHN DAVIES asked if policy is to be set at 1
in 100,000 and go from that for each individual toxin or is
there going to be an attempt, in cases where the
interactions are understood, to attain an effective risk
level of 1 in 100,000 for the interaction of the toxins.
MR. STURDEVANT replied the risk level only applies to the
individual pollutants; criteria is set for each pollutant
to meet that level and the cumulative effect would depend on
the situation. He further stated the 1 in 100,000 risk
level for a particular pollutant is the maximum projected
risk which could occur.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES wondered why DEC, in those particular
cases where they could do the science, had not tried to set
the resultant level at 1 in 100,000.
MR. STURDEVANT replied the approach being used is what EPA
recommended and is used by all states to derive the health
criteria (formula). He added it would be difficult to
accurately determine what the cumulative risk would be and
could only be done on a site specific basis.
Number 138
MR. TREADWELL said on a more immediate basis, DEC is
requiring whole effluent toxicity testing where in the
short-term, outside the mixing zone, the mixture of several
different compounds might result in toxicity. He added
during the time of permitting of a facility, if there is
evidence of a long-term effect of a couple of compounds, the
issue would be addressed.
MR. STURDEVANT added the matter of whole effluent toxicity
pertains to the aquatic life protection criteria. He noted
once again, there are individual pollutant standards and a
new provision is being added that says in a cumulative sense
there can be no toxicity outside of a mixing zone.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES commented he does have concerns.
First, in Alaska, cancer is the leading cause of death and
great attention needs to be given to that issue; second,
when all other western states are setting their standards
ten times higher than what is proposed, there will be a
perception risk that our fish are not as safe.
Number 181
REPRESENTATIVE CON BUNDE asked where DEC got the mythical
five pounds of fish consumed per year and if perhaps there
is a standard more appropriate to represent the Alaskan
lifestyle.
MR. TREADWELL responded that proposal in the equation was
used last year and is not proposed this year.
MR. STURDEVANT added that DEC never stated Alaskans consume
five pounds of fish per year and stated that figure was used
because it was a national average. However, DEC felt it was
a reasonable projection for the purpose of setting criteria
for contaminated fish.
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON asked if the 1991 RAP Act standards
were currently being met.
MS. STOCKARD replied DEC has not revised solid waste
regulations since 1987, so this is the first attempt to
include the provisions of the RAP Act into solid waste
regulations.
Number 223
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON wondered if once a standard has been
set, does the federal law preclude relaxing those standards.
MR. TREADWELL said once a permit for a facility is granted
based on a certain value, a permit cannot be issued for
something which is looser than the original request.
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON asked if in ongoing discussions with
those at the federal level, they are aware of the uniqueness
of Alaska such as the issue of migratory fish species.
MR. TREADWELL said EPA and the Food and Drug Administration
(FDA) recognize the ocean situation is different but the
formula used assumes a uniformly contaminated water body.
Number 288
FRED MONREAN, DIRECTOR, KETCHIKAN PUBLIC WORKS, stated he
supports the Southeast Conference's position on solid waste
regulations. He asked that regulations be Alaskanized
including an exemption on cover requirements for landfills
in extreme weather conditions. He stated he did not feel an
intermediate cover is needed on inert waste landfills. Mr.
Monrean stated in the (inaudible) section, wording should be
changed to "minimize to the extent practical".
Number 330
MR. MONREAN would also like to see an exemption allowing
single line facilities. He said there should be an
allowance to allow for (inaudible) back into the landfill.
He felt that existing asbestos regulations should remain
with no changes. He stated in regard to biosolids on
treatment works, the proposed regulations are a problem.
Mr. Monrean stated a more stringent criteria on water
quality standards would be a mistake.
Number 366
RICHARD SMITH, CITY & BOROUGH OF SITKA, stated he was
speaking on behalf of the Southeast Conference, and said
there is a 70 page document, currently with John Sandor,
jointly prepared by Southeast Conference and the solid waste
committee, addressing the changes needed to the regulations.
He said Southeast Conference endorses the regulations
prepared by the EPA.
Number 390
GERSHON COHEN, CLEAN WATER ALLIANCE, HAINES, said in regard
to the solid waste regulations, he would like a greater
emphasis placed on recycling of waste materials and felt if
there was more encouragement in the regulations, many
problems with disposal would be eliminated.
Number 405
GINNY TIERNEY, CITY ADMINISTRATOR, THORNE BAY, stated Thorne
Bay supports the solid waste regulations proposed by
Southeast Conference.
Number 416
ELI LUCAS, CITY PUBLIC WORKS, CITY OF PETERSBURG, gave his
support to the Southeast Conference position on solid waste
regulations and commented he would like to see the amount of
recycled materials subtracted from the total billed to each
community.
Number 436
CHUCK ACHBERGER, DIRECTOR, JUNEAU CHAMBER OF COMMERCE,
stated he is in support of the Southeast Conference's
position on solid waste regulations and clarified that the
Southeast Conference had proposed a resolution supporting
the 1 in 100,000 water quality standards.
Number 450
ALAIRE STANTON, MAYOR, KETCHIKAN, said the City of Ketchikan
and the Southeast Conference have been on record supporting
the less stringent 1 in 100,000 risk factor and presented
resolutions from both parties. She felt those who are not
scientists do not necessarily understand the differences and
many people are not speaking up. However, many people do
speak up in favor of common sense for an Alaskan way of
doing things and for the flexibility which DEC is trying to
promote. She voiced her concerns regarding possible
excessive costs to municipalities and jobs lost if
industries in the area have to perform excessively to
comply.
Number 503
ERNESTA BALLARD, KETCHIKAN, stated her remarks are based on
her experience as Regional Administrator, Region X for EPA
and service on the National Academy of Sciences Committee on
risk perception. She stated thousands of cases were studied
where the public was asked to comment on a proposed rule or
regulation entailing risk and learned that the public's fear
of risks they are unfamiliar with is way out of proportion
to their actual safety.
MS. BALLARD remarked that much has been said about the
proposed risk level to which carcinogens will be regulated
by the state. She said it is helpful to look at the history
of environmental law and regulation in the United States.
In the early years, there was technology based permitting
and in the last decade and with recent revisions to the
Clean Water Act, there has been a trend toward pollutant
specific requirements and the use of human health criteria.
She relayed that in her experience, risk based regulation is
not a precise science and has resulted in an ineffective use
of national resources.
Number 550
MS. BALLARD advised the past, present and future costs of
achieving compliance with the stringent criteria derived
from risk based regulation are incalculable and benefits
have not been shown to outweigh the costs of obtaining the
goals of risk management. She further stated the
designation of a human health risk target is a form of risk
based regulation and such analyses extrapolate from high
doses to low doses and attempt to correlate human and animal
reaction. She continued that life time exposures are
assumed and safety decisions are made from a tool which was
originally intended to be a screening device.
MS. BALLARD stressed the process must come to closure as the
only people benefitting from the lengthy process are the
lawyers who will eventually have adequate cause to represent
plaintiffs against the state who say no regulation is worse
than some regulation.
Number 587
MR. ACHBERGER noted for the record that he agrees with Ms.
Ballard's comments. He said it is difficult to get people
to voice their opinion and felt there was an inherent bias
in the public hearings. He stated the 1 in 100,000 level
has been taken out of context of a very complex formula and
used as a banner to strike fear in people's minds.
Number 613
RICHARD HOFFMAN, PRESIDENT, ALASKA TROLLERS ASSOCIATION
(ATA), JUNEAU, presented a resolution stating, "Whereas high
quality standards are essential to the health of the people
and the quality for life and whereas Alaska's pristine
waters are world renowned treasures and whereas Alaska
trollers depend on these pristine waters and uncontaminated
salmon for their livelihood and whereas the perception of
tainted products hurts high quality marketing and whereas
Governor Hickel's administration has moved to establish the
lowest water quality standards permissible and whereas this
move by the administration was initiated to benefit a few
special interests subverts the people of Alaskans interest
in clean water and whereas this proposal understates the
health risk to consumers due to the unrealistic estimate of
per capita consumption of seafood; therefore be it resolved
that the Alaska Trollers Association moves that the 1 in 1
million risk factor should be adopted as the minimum
standard. Water quality of this standard will help in
preserving Alaska's pristine waters and untainted seafood."
Number 640
MR. HOFFMAN stated the proposed water quality standards will
increase economic viability of some industries, particularly
pulp mills and large mines as well as benefit municipalities
looking for an escape to the problem of treating their
wastes. He advised 34 other states have decided the 1 in 1
million risk factor is not an excessive economic hardship
for their industries and municipalities. He reminded
everyone that ATA represents 450 members, each of whom is a
small business that will be economically disadvantaged by
the changes.
MR. HOFFMAN said as commercial fishermen, they are required
to post on their vessels a waste management plan, a copy of
the marine pollution regulations and an oil spill factor to
help prevent pollution problems and can be fined for various
reasons. He stated if the proposed water quality standards
are adopted, those who consume large amounts of fish will
have to lower their consumption to the per capita norm or
face an increased chance of cancer.
CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS asked Mr. Hoffman to send his written
testimony to DEC and the House Resources Committee.
TAPE 93-51, SIDE A
Number 000
BOB ELLIS, SITKA, stated he is fearful when flexibility is
discussed in regard to state regulations. He said the State
Forest Practices Act provided for streamside protection for
buffer zones, yet flexibility written into the act for DNR
has resulted in serious degradation of the buffer zones. He
remarked the outcome of flexibility depends on the
administration in power.
MR. ELLIS added that outrage is what many people in Sitka
have felt when watching what has gone on between DEC and the
polluters. He said the public should be outraged upon
hearing industry has met with DEC officials beforehand, have
agreed upon what the regulations are going to be and then
DEC attempts to justify the proposed regulations and permit
provisions to the public, rather than engaging with the
public to determine what the regulations and permits should
be.
Number 030
DON MULLER, SITKA, stated the proposed revisions to the
state water quality standards convinced him that DEC is
nothing more than a pawn for the pulp, oil and mining
industries. He said the proposed risk level offers the
least protection from cancer allowed by the federal
government and allows ten times the risk of cancer that 36
other states have chosen. He further stated the proposed
risk level was chosen to protect industry, not the
environment or the living things within the environment and
felt the proposed risk level is bureaucratic premeditated
murder.
MR. MULLER pointed out that common sense would dictate DEC
to propose the most protective risk level, at least 10 to
the minus 6 as recommended by EPA. He stated DEC's job is
to protect the environment yet DEC has taken on the job of
protecting industry. Mr. Muller asked DEC to leave that job
to the Department of Economic Development.
MR. MULLER stated he can no longer trust DEC in regard to
water quality standards especially when it puts the entire
state fishing industry at risk in order to protect a few
select industries. He requested the following: Adopt at
least a ten to the minus seven risk level; prohibit mixing
zones for carcinogens; and maintain the current color limit
of five color units.
Number 082
TOM ELY, HAINES, stated DEC is politically motivated by
holding hands with industrial polluters and trying to
accommodate them at the expense of the public. He said
treatment works, especially mine tailings ponds should not
be exempt from water quality standards. He pointed out that
current state standards do not allow pollutants to
concentrate or persist in the environment, yet DEC is
proposing to allow accumulation of pollutants and sediments
under mixing zones which would eventually cause dead zones.
MR. ELY asserted that hydrocarbons should not be exempt from
state water quality standards and pointed out that the
Alyeska Pipeline Terminal has been out of compliance for
many years and should be forced into compliance. He said in
regard to the cancer risk level, he supports the no risk
alternative as the original intent of the Clean Water Act
was no discharge of toxic pollutants into the waters.
Number 115
MR. COHEN stated the proposed water quality standards have
proven to be problematic for several reasons. He said the
standards were originally conceived as a method by which the
administration could lessen the regulatory burden on a
select group of industrial polluters and gave several
examples of proof. He felt DEC is attempting to solve local
problems for industry with statewide regulatory changes.
MR. COHEN stated the outrage of the public relating to the
revised regulations and the negative evaluation by EPA have
not yet altered DEC's course and gave evidence of DEC's
attempt to undermine the environmental security of the state
to protect the interests of a select group of water
pollutant dischargers. He stated the most serious omission
from the standards is the continued absence of the legally
required antidegradation policy required by the Clean Water
Act and reviewed and submitted the policy. He added the
inclusion of the policy is critical because it provides the
side boards for other regulations, many which are designed
to provide for specific exemptions from the intent of the
Clean Water Act. Mr. Cohen felt the omission of the policy
alone necessitates modifications to the proposed standards.
MR. COHEN stated the water quality standards advisory group
could not play a significant role in preventing problems in
the proposed standards as the group's participation was
limited to internal debating rather than truly becoming an
advisory body, addressing specific language issues as the
proposal progressed. He added that the proposed water
quality standards were never reviewed by the advisory group
prior to the proposal being forwarded up the chain of
command and pointed out the treatment works and cancer risk
level language was never presented to the group.
MR. COHEN said at this point there should be an interest in
what the EPA, the Fish and Wildlife Service, and the
National Fisheries Services have to say about the proposals.
Number 200
RIKI OTT, CHAIR, HABITAT COMMITTEE, UNITED FISHERMEN OF
ALASKA, (UFA), CORDOVA, stated her group is concerned and
disappointed with the revisions of the water quality
standards, which would lead to degradation of fish habitat,
reductions in fish populations and erosion in consumer
confidence in Alaska's seafood. She said because clean
water is essential to the success of the seafood industry,
UFA worked to develop revisions which would adequately
protect fish habitat, aquaculture, seafood processing,
markets, and health yet most of the concerns have been
ignored.
Number 235
MS. OTT remarked UFA is concerned with DEC's failure to
adopt an antidegradation policy and arbitrary authorization
of treatment works in any water body which will result in
abuse of the state standards. She stated UFA is concerned
with actions taken by DEC, reflecting an underlying
intention to weaken the standards and allowing polluters to
pollute and gave examples of such.
Number 258
MS. OTT stated UFA recommends the state adopt a human health
criteria for cancer risk level of 1 in 1 million; change
the language to reflect the fact that granting a mixing zone
is the exception and not the rule; and immediately initiate
research to see what the Great Lakes region is doing in
regard to zero risk alternatives.
Number 274
DAVE LANKARD, REPRESENTATIVE, EYAK TRADITIONAL ELDERS
COUNCIL (ETEC), CORDOVA, stated ETEC is currently drafting
their own water quality standards for their traditional
lands and waters. He said concerns include the situation of
Eyak Lake which is polluted because of sewage, oil, chemical
run off, etc. resulting in the incapability of sustaining
the number of returning sockeye which it has historically
reproduced. He observed that someone needs to visit
villages and educate the native population on what the
consequences of the revised water quality standards are.
MR. LANKARD concluded if the state cannot protect the Native
people in their health standards, they will protect
themselves through federal laws which allow their sovereign
governments to protect them from the changes.
Number 325
CHRIS NOROSZ, PETERSBURG VESSEL OWNERS ASSOCIATION,
PETERSBURG, said that as representatives of seafood
harvesters, her organization is concerned with proposed
water quality standards and increases in consumer and public
health risks. She stressed DEC's proposed cancer risk level
of 1 in 100,000 is for each chemical released at every site
of discharge and the problem is most toxic effluents contain
chemicals which are not only toxic individually but have a
synergistic effect creating an even higher rate of disease.
MS. NOROSZ stated that as an industry dependent on selling
healthy seafood to the consuming public, they request DEC
not adopt the least stringent cancer risk level but rather
follow the other 34 states who have a cancer risk level of 1
in 1 million. She said in regard to mixing zones, her
organization was glad to hear DEC's plan to propose the
banning of mixing zones in areas of fish spawning and to
limit the downstream length. However, there is a fear of
proliferation of mixing zones and she stressed proposed
language must be changed to prevent that.
Number 345
MS. NOROSZ remarked DEC must ban the discharge of toxic
substances and toxic amounts in state waters, and mixing
zones in Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) index
streams and other special areas. She said there is a
concern regarding the accumulation of pollutants and
sediments under mixing zones, which can act as a sink and
source of pollution which is not allowed under the Clean
Water Act.
Number 360
MS. NOROSZ said her organization opposes DEC's proposal to
eliminate the standard for total suspended solids and
stressed the standards for turbidity and color are not
adequate to protect aquatic life in marine waters. She
stated the association agrees with ADF&G on the importance
that standards for total suspended solids remain in the
state's water quality standards. She added her organization
opposes DEC's proposal to eliminate particulate hydrocarbons
from the standards, allowing the discharge of hydrocarbons,
which are then picked up by filter feeders and become a
major part of the food web.
Number 370
CHRIS TOAL, LEGISLATIVE ASSISTANT, REPRESENTATIVE DAVID
FINKELSTEIN'S OFFICE, JUNEAU, stated if Representative
Finkelstein could be in attendance, he would oppose DEC's
proposal to lower water quality standards in Alaska. He
said if the standards are adopted, they will be one of the
lowest standards in the country and reiterated that adoption
of the standards will affect fishermen and consumers of
fish, particularly those who maintain a subsistence
lifestyle.
MR. TOAL stressed DEC has yet to produce a study on what the
effects of the lower standards will be. He said the
assumption that a cancer risk level of 1 in 100,000 is
acceptable would probably be rejected by the majority of
Alaskans if they had the opportunity to vote on it. He
added the adoption of the standards is a function of the
combined exposure to each of the 126 toxic chemicals found
in drinking water and the fish eaten, so the real risk is
not 1 in 100,000 but potentially much greater.
MR. TOAL recommended DEC adopt a cancer risk level of at
least 1 in 1 million which is warranted by health and
environmental considerations and is affordable. He stressed
the chemicals being discussed are among the most dangerous
and even small amounts of dioxin have been shown to produce
harmful effects on human reproductive, immune and nervous
systems. He concluded that DEC is asking Alaskans to be at
increased risks of cancer and for birth defects to enable a
few polluting industries to save money.
MR. TOAL stated DEC should continue to prohibit the
discharge of toxic chemicals in toxic amounts in state
waters. He stressed the proposed revisions would amount to
a wholesale advocation of the department's responsibilities
and mission and the people of Alaska deserve more than that.
Number 422
GREG STREVELER, GUSTAVUS, stated cancer is a cumulative sort
of issue and with not being scientific enough to accumulate
all the information into one number and approach, it is
important to be conservative when possible. He stressed EPA
has provided the opportunity to be conservative by adopting
the 1 in 1 million standard.
Number 446
PATRICIA KING, FRITZ CREEK, said she just returned from a
conference where 179 scientists from 13 countries shared
their findings about contaminates in northern latitudes and
they have discovered many chemical contaminates are
traveling through the atmosphere from areas further south
and being deposited into Arctic regions. She said as
contaminates travel north and are deposited in northern
latitudes, their half-lives are longer.
MS. KING stated there is a concern amongst the scientific
community as to the potential health effects on the Native
people who subsist on a diet of fish and marine mammals.
She felt DEC should be taking a more active role in
researching what is present already instead of relaxing
standards to allow more contaminates.
Number 506
CHRIS CHAVASSE, FRITZ CREEK, stressed his dissatisfaction
with any relaxation of water quality and discharge standards
and felt it was incongruous for DEC to continue pressing the
issue, given the fact that over 160 nations signed on to
Principle 15 of the Rio Declaration which came from Earth
Summit, to which Governor Hickel was a participant. He
advised the Principle emphasizes a precautionary approach in
regards to discharge of toxic materials and pollutants into
the atmosphere, water bodies or any environment on the
planet.
MR. CHAVASSE said as noted previously, the problems with
bioaccumulation and biomagnification are issues which remain
unaddressed by DEC. He felt people in the north are already
subject to increased amounts of contaminates coming in by
oceanic and atmospheric transport. He stressed more is
deserved from DEC.
Number 551
CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS stated for the record 22 members have
testified and two were pro.
Number 558
CLIFF TARO, PRESIDENT, SOUTHEAST STEVEDORING CORPORATION,
KETCHIKAN, stated he endorsed the comments made by Ernesta
Ballard and Alaire Stanton. He said his companies (9)
employ over 500 workers and the subject of regulatory
revisions is important to the continued operation of his
companies and the prosperity of the people he employs. He
stressed most everyone supports environmental regulations
which maintain the health of the state's citizens directly
and through the natural existing food chains.
Number 575
MR. TARO continued that equally important is the maintenance
of the state's economy and stressed the proposed regulations
directly impact the economic health of his operations as
well as the physical health of people. He said there is a
problem that existing regulations are being applied in new
ways resulting in requirements that may not make sense in
the overall balance of environmental and economic
protection.
Number 590
MR. TARO stated he can understand why present toxic control
limits applied need to be amended to reflect today's
realities but cannot understand the new limits proposed
which would make even seawater fail to meet the standards.
He expressed his support of common sense revisions to
present water quality regulations and endorse and support
the provisions to be made for all types of activities.
MR. TARO said natural background conditions must be
considered in the revisions. In summary, he stated he
trusts DEC will consider his comments as support of the wise
use of the state's natural and economic resources, and
regulations be implemented which do not overly protect the
environment to the detriment of the citizens who want to
continue to live and work in Alaska.
Number 625
ALLIS MAY DAVIS, WARD COVE, stated she is a hand troller and
spends a lot of time sport fishing. She said she is very
respectful of the beauty and bounty of Alaska and it is very
important to her the state continue with the present water
quality standards. She requested DEC to adopt the most
protective cancer risk level possible, at least the l in 1
million. Ms. Davis stated she does not want treatment works
to be exempt from the standards and would like DEC to keep
current laws prohibiting mixing zones.
Number 660
ROLLO POOL, MANAGER, PUBLIC RELATIONS, ALASKA PULP
CORPORATION, SITKA, stated his corporation owns two large
manufacturing facilities in Southeast Alaska, and employs
500 people. He said during the past month, the largest
facility was closed, with 300 people being laid off. He
stated his company supports the Alaska Forest Association
position on the proposed standards.
MR. POOL noted the critics overwhelming opposition to the
water quality regulations and stated the logical presumption
is the people of Alaska have spoken. However, he stressed,
realistically only 1/2 of one percent of the population has
spoken, hardly a mandate. He stated DEC has done a horrible
job of communicating risks, and of putting into perspective
various pollution risks. He further stated, DEC has
produced fear for the group of people that advocates zero
risk, not low risk and actual risk has been confused with
acceptable risk with no risk at all.
Number 700
MR. POOL said industry has also done a horrible job of
communicating its ideas during public hearings. He stressed
what has been learned through the process is that there is
nothing more precious than water, the purity and
availability of it. He stated the public hearing process is
flawed when used to interpret public opinion and sentiment,
and there are ways in which DEC can deal with issues in a
less confrontational environment.
MR. POOL felt that if DEC really wanted to educate and also
learn from the public, it should use mediation techniques
such as communicators, not technicians to express its ideas;
it should hold workshops over several months not a few days;
it should use focus groups and public opinion surveys. He
stated DEC should learn that public hearings are not a good
way to gauge public concern.
MR. POOL noted the Alaska Forest Association has done
statewide public opinion surveys of voters and has found
overwhelming support of logging. In addition, public
opinion surveys in Juneau also show high approval for
mining. He mentioned a survey done last year by the
Institute for Regulatory Policy found that 8l percent of
1300 health professionals in the U.S. felt public health
dollars for reduction of environmental health risks are
improperly targeted and 87 percent said it is impossible to
accurately calculate human cancer deaths based solely on
animal studies. He said their findings were to make risk
assessments as scientifically objective as possible; make
the results of risk assessments more accurate and
understandable.
TAPE 93-51, SIDE A
Number 000
MR. POOL stated when choosing an acceptable risk level,
regulators should also consider the public health risks
caused by regulation. He said if regulatory costs are
excessive, the regulator may inadvertently cause more harm
to the health status of families. He stressed before
companies are bankrupted and thousands of workers are sent
scrambling for food lines and unemployment, there should be
a better understanding of what will be achieved and know the
costs in terms of companies, jobs and communities.
Number 007
HELEN DRURY, SITKA, stated she is a nutritionist and
understands the importance of clean and proper nutrients in
people's bodies. She said the proposed water quality
standards seem to have been established solely to
accommodate industry, political and economic pressures. She
stressed a plan should be adopted which accommodates the
fishing industry and it is time to give that industry top
priority because it's needs also meet the needs of human
health in the state.
MS. DRURY felt Alaska is lucky to have a major industry
which is compatible with human health and the environment
and everything possible should be done to protect it. She
said the regulations should stick to the original intent of
the Clean Water Act, that there be no discharge of toxic
pollutants into Alaska's waters.
Number 030
ROBERT CHEVALIER, SITKA, stated he had the opportunity to
spend time during the past summer fishing for "poisoned"
fish and wondered how he can take pride in his work, feed
his family or sell the fish to anyone else. He asked how
large the mixing zone really is in Sitka Sound and stated
pollution is bad management. He felt DEC and Governor
Hickel are trying to use the regulatory process to allocate
away from community-based industry in favor of poorly
managed, exploitative, multinational industry and poison
fish, birds, animals, plants and people in order to do it.
Number 064
ELDON DENNIS, CO-CHAIRMAN, WATER QUALITY COMMITTEE, UNITED
SOUTHEAST ALASKA GILLNETTERS (USAG), JUNEAU, stated it is
not USAG's position to impede or regress industrial
development in the state but believes industries must not be
allowed to impose negative impacts on the fishing industry
for their benefit. He said the proposed water quality
standards would cost the fishing industry while benefitting
other industries and therefore, USAG opposes the standards.
Number 086
MR. DENNIS stressed the fishing industry is dependent on the
continued availability of clean water and noted there is a
valuable market perception of safe, clean seafood which many
producers envy. He stated damaging that image could cause a
negative economic impact on the fishing industry in Alaska.
He said regulations which have the potential to diminish
this valuable image must not be allowed to go into effect.
MR. DENNIS said the states of Washington and Oregon each has
substantial salmon, timber, pulp and mining industries and
pointed out those states have adopted a cancer risk level of
1 in 1 million. He stressed it is unacceptable for the
state to adopt a 1 in 100,000 cancer risk level and force
the negative market comparison that Alaska's seafood comes
from water which is ten times more polluted than the seafood
from those states.
MR. DENNIS remarked one of the most obvious problems with
the proposed regulations is the fact they will almost be
impossible to enforce, as in many places the criteria for
compliance is vague, imprecise or left to the discretion of
DEC. He stressed something as important as clean water must
be regulated with clear, concise and measurable parameters.
He said USAG supports the recommendations of the Alaska
Clean Water Alliance.
Number 127
PAULA TERREL, THANE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, JUNEAU, stated
she is representing a homeowners association, which has 130
property owners, interested in the water quality standards
because they will be most impacted by the proposed A-J Mine.
She said water quality is the biggest issue involved and the
association is totally opposed to the water quality
standards.
MS. TERREL stressed the association initially trusted the
administration to protect public health and have found the
proposed standards were written to facilitate industry and
specifically, to facilitate the permitting of the A-J Mine
and gave examples. She asked what role the legislature
plays in regard to the regulations.
Number 174
CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS said it was the first hearing and their
plan is to review testimony and advise DEC.
Number 183
STEVE HAGAN, MANAGER, KETCHIKAN PULP COMPANY (KPC),
KETCHIKAN, stated in adopting the proposed water quality
standards, DEC must consider the impact they will have on
the state's citizens, municipalities, and industries. He
stressed the regulations must be reasonable, and
environmentally and economically sound in assuring the
protection of the environment, yet not jeopardizing the
present economic base for the future growth of the state.
MR. HAGAN said KPC supports DEC's choice of the ten to the
minus five human health risk level and supports the decision
to allow mixing zones where they can safely be used. He
added KPC supports DEC's decision to allow consideration of
natural background conditions when setting discharge levels.
He stated KPC rejects the need for any color restrictions
and pointed out most of Alaska's waters are colored due to
the presence of naturally occurring substances.
Number 220
MARILYN LEE, KETCHIKAN, stated her family sport fishes, she
has a hand troll permit, and her husband has a charter boat
license, so tourism and fishing are important to their
family. She gave her support to the Alaska Trollers
Association position on the proposed water quality
standards. She asked DEC to consider, when figuring an
acceptable cancer risk level, that rural Alaskans eat, on an
average, 256 pounds of fish annually.
MS. LEE stressed relaxing risk levels most affect the
village populations and follows an alarming trend in the
country that minorities bear the brunt of risk for
pollution. She reiterated 34 states have established the 1
in 1 million risk level.
Number 245
KATY FRENCH, KETCHIKAN PULP COMPANY, testifying for the
ENVIRONMENTAL (inaudible) OF ALASKA, said the site specific
criteria regulatory issue paper states the differences
between the natural background levels and the criterion to
consider the waters (inaudible) capacity. She said
background color in Southeast Alaska is higher than the
present and proposed color limits, suggesting water quality
body is not healthy and has no simulative capacity. She
stressed DEC needs to realize Southeast Alaska waters have
high background color, which is OK and therefore, criteria
is too low. Ms. French stated her support of the 1 in
100,000 policy.
Number 264
MEREDITH MARSHALL, KETCHIKAN, stated in 1992 she submitted
extensive, technical written testimony and a person from DEC
attending the meeting said he would look it up and put it in
the committee's record. She gave her support of the 1 in
100,000 human health risk criteria and asked for a level of
fairness on the color issue. She said the state's water is
naturally 30 to 180 units and to ask for the bleaching of
discharge water to 15 is ludicrous. Ms. Marshall said there
is no need to overregulate.
Number 290
ROLAND STANTON, KETCHIKAN, stated he found it ironic that a
society will spend three years discussing regulation which
may or may not kill one person, while the same level of risk
by cigarettes kills 22,000 people in the same time period.
He felt there is no reality to the 100,000 safety standard
and there is no reality to drinking water standards in the
sea and gave examples. He said the new standards require
you to live l00,000 lifetimes and more to build up to a
harmful level and gave examples.
Number 348
ALLYN HAYES, KETCHIKAN, stated his support of the 1 in
100,000 risk level, and to reasonable mixing zones. He
voiced his concerns that certain people testifying on the
issues would like the public to believe that by DEC's
relaxing the standards, water quality is going to
degenerate, which is not true. He pointed out that over the
years, as science and technology achieved new levels,
small concentrations of compounds have been able to be
measured.
MR. HAYES said drinking water standards have generally been
applied to all discharges upon implementing the rules. He
said the levels have never been achieved and at this point,
an attempt for implementation is being made by having more
reasonable but still stringent guidelines such as the 1 in
100,000 method. He stressed communities, government and
industries have a chance to work together to improve the
water quality in Alaska.
MR. HAYES felt the l in 100,000 risk level does not put
anyone at risk for cancer since fully contaminated fish is
what is being talked about, not just any fish eaten and most
of the bioaccumulation in fish is in their internal organs,
not in their flesh.
Number 380
CONSTANCE GRIFFITH, KETCHIKAN, stated she does not
understand why more arsenic should be added to already high
background levels and pointed out the arsenic bioaccumulates
in fish and humans. She said the cost to municipalities and
jobs loss is a cost of doing business in order to maintain
the environment as it was. She said the Alaskan people have
fished and depended on fish in their diets, will continue to
do so and their concerns need to be taken seriously.
Number 425
TROY REINHART, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ALASKA FOREST ASSOCIATION
(AFA), KETCHIKAN, reemphasized that many people have
testified and their remarks should be seriously considered.
He said AFA supports the human health risk standard of 1 in
100,000 and feels it is acceptable for meeting water quality
standards and the safety of Alaskans. He noted he can
sympathize with those who have dealt with cancer on a
personal level and have expressed their concerns, but having
a human health risk level over 1 in 100,000 is excessive.
MR. REINHART said AFA supports the use of mixing zones; AFA
supports treatment works and continued exemption of
discharge; AFA supports the finding of specific levels of
natural background levels.
Number 465
DAVE KATZ, SOUTHEAST ALASKA CONSERVATION COUNCIL (SEACC),
KETCHIKAN, stressed lowering Alaska's water quality
standards is bad for Alaska. He said it is perceived that
the lowering of the standards is being done primarily to aid
certain industries at the expense of other industries,
hurting Alaskans from all walks of life. He stressed the
proposals will hurt fisherman and the public by raising
their risk of cancer and hurting their quality of life.
MR. KATZ said his belief is that Ketchikan Pulp Company has
never been in complete compliance with its water quality
permit and the Ketchikan Pulp Mill is the worst toxic water
polluter in the entire Pacific Northwest, based on EPA
reports. He said the problem is not the standards as they
are but the polluters who should be looking for ways to
clean up.
MR. KATZ stated SEACC is concerned about the economic
welfare of Southeast Alaska and believes the state should
move forward to find an economy that protects and maintains
resources. He stated SEACC believes the cancer risk level
should be at least ten to the minus six and there should be
no mixing zones for carcinogens. He concluded it is time to
clean up, not make Alaska dirtier.
Number 543
JACK LEE, CHAIRMAN, TONGASS SPORTFISHING ASSOCIATION, WARD
COVE, stated his association agrees with what the Alaska
Trollers Association and the United Fishermen of Alaska
said. He said his association opposes any relaxation of the
clean water standards and stressed 34 other states with
similar economic bases successfully have the 1 in 1 million
risk factor.
MR. LEE felt Alaskans deserve the highest level of
protection from cancer risk. He said his association does
not want bodies of water turned into mixing zones for
pollutants. He stated it is better and cheaper in the long
run to keep Alaska's water clean.
Number 615
JIM FOSTER, KETCHIKAN, said revised water quality standards
are designed to make it easy for industry to pollute. He
stated his opposition to the proposals. He stressed the
most apparent risk to health is the proposal to adopt a 1 in
100,000 cancer risk level and wondered why people should
suffer an increased cancer risk, so a small group of
individuals can make millions in profit. He voiced his
support of a no risk level.
MR. FOSTER stated the risk level applies to each of the 126
toxic chemicals listed, so the actual risk is the
combination of each individual risk level people are exposed
to. He said DEC should consider the facts and enter them
into the regulations. He stated in regard to mixing zones,
he would like proof that there will be no negative effects.
He added there are many instances of ambiguous language
within the proposed revision which makes it easier to
pollute.
MR. FOSTER said suggested new language has already been put
into public record by the Alaska Clean Water Alliance and
felt DEC should study the suggested language and incorporate
it into the revisions. He stressed DEC has the
responsibility to take into account that public testimony.
MR. FOSTER remarked DEC should not allow accumulation of
sediments in mixing zones as they can be disturbed. He
wondered who will buy fish from a state polluting its
waters; who will tour a state touted as a pristine
wilderness when they find out the state is willing to
destroy that wilderness with cumulative toxins?
MR. FOSTER relayed information regarding employees fired
from Ketchikan Pulp Company and said he would submit the
testimony in writing, as he felt the testimony should be
looked at in order to make industrial compliance more
realistic. He stressed DEC needs to implement a program for
ensuring that testing by industry is done properly.
Number 701
JOHN PETERSON, KETCHIKAN, voiced his support of DEC's
proposed water quality standards. He stated it is
distressing to see public policy being made pursuant to
public outcry, and felt policy should be rationally based on
a reasonable analysis of the various circumstances present.
He noted the 1 in 100,000 risk level is one third more
cautious than the chance of being struck by lightening (3 in
100,000). Mr. Peterson said regulations need to be
reasonable and rational.
TAPE 93-52, SIDE A
Number 000
MR. PETERSEN stated there is a need to be more realistic
about balancing the economy, making a livelihood and
regulating water quality. He said he would be interested in
knowing what the fish processing industry says about the
proposed water quality standards. He stressed there is a
trade-off between dollars and risk and the trade-off should
be sensible to ensure everyone can survive and make a
living.
Number 016
CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS asked the committee members which
direction they would like to go.
Number 020
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON stated a lot of testimony on both
sides of the issue had been heard and suggested the hearing
be concluded. He asked those still left on the line to
present their written testimony to the committee and DEC.
He suggested the committee then examine what has been heard
and determine whether an additional hearing is needed.
Number 037
CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS suggested the public comment period be
extended for two weeks.
Number 049
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON stated the committee could use more
information from DEC in regard to cost factors, on whether
there is a middle ground on the risk level and perhaps look
at the entire picture. He felt the public also needs more
information.
Number 066
CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS said there have been comments regarding
the administration not being sensitive to the proposals at
hand and stressed it is a difficult issue for everyone to
understand. He felt correct, factual information, not
heresay, needs to come before the committee.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the House
Resources Committee, Chairman Williams adjourned the meeting
at 5:10 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|