HB 81-PROHIBIT PLASTIC RETAIL BAGS  5:10:10 PM CHAIR WOOL announced that the final order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 81, "An Act prohibiting disposable plastic shopping bags; and providing for an effective date." 5:11:11 PM REPRESENTATIVE ANDY JOSEPHSON, Alaska State Legislature, prime sponsor, introduced HB 81. He paraphrased parts of the sponsor statement [included in the committee packet], which read in its entirety as follows [original punctuation provided]: Single-use plastic bags are harmful to our environment, our wildlife, and our economy. Researchers have shown that wildlife, such as caribou and moose, will eat plastic bags, which cannot be digested and will ultimately kill the animal typically through starvation. There have been countless cases of birds dying from ingesting plastic fragments found on beaches, including single-use plastic bags. Plastics in the ocean get broken down into microplastics, which are finding their way into our seafood, which then finds its way onto our plates along with whatever chemicals are leaching out of the plastic. For a subsistence state, this is unacceptable. Our resources should not be succumbing to plastic pollution and our residents should not have to worry about their health after enjoying a subsistence harvest. Health and well-being aside, plastic bag pollution is detrimental to the aesthetic of our beautiful state. It is up to us as a state to stop needless pollution and change wasteful behavior. Alaskan communities are already stepping up and taking control; it's time the state follows suit. HB 81 is an effort to reduce waste and pollution and protect our renewable resources. HB 81 is also a first step Alaska can take to be a responsible global environmental stakeholder and to protect already overstressed marine ecosystem of the North Pacific. I encourage you to support this legislation and urge you to reach out to my office with any questions. 5:13:45 PM ELISE SORUM-BIRK, Staff, Representative Andy Josephson, Alaska State Legislature, on behalf of Representative Josephson, prime sponsor, provided a presentation entitled, "HB 81 Plastic Bag Ban." Ms. Sorum-Birk reminded the committee that plastic pollution is detrimental to the environment and wildlife. She informed the committee there is at least one recorded death of a northern fur seal in Alaska due to entanglement in the loop of a plastic bag handle (slide 2). She said plastic bags are overuse-free and readily accessible; light and easily carrier by the wind and water; and the prevalent type of litter, both on land and in the water. Furthermore, they are easy to substitute with a sturdy, reusable bag (slide 3). REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON noted that the picture on slide 3, taken at Lake Aleknagik, illustrates that plastic can end up in the most remote places. MS. SORUM-BIRK turned attention to plastic bags in the environment. She stated that polyethylene does not biodegrade. Instead, it photodegrades breaking into ever smaller pieces. Many organisms are at risk for entanglement and ingestion and fat-soluble toxins are linked to ingested plastic particles. These POPs, she said, accumulate in animal tissues and toxins increase in concentration up the food chain (slide 4). She addressed international policy trends regarding plastic bags. More than 40 countries have a plastic bag ban; Bangladesh was the first in 2002 and Kenya has the strictest ban with a punishment of up to 4 years in prison and hefty fines (slide 6). 5:18:39 PM CHAIR WOOL asked why Europe hasn't been as progressive in banning plastic bags. MS. SORUM-BIRK replied many European countries have enacted a plastic bag ban or fee. Additionally, the European Union has passed a resolution to ban all single-use plastics. 5:19:47 PM REPRESENTATIVE FIELDS recalled reading that a large percentage of plastic bag pollution came from several global watersheds - of one which is in China. He asked if that is accurate and how recently China banned plastic bags. MS. SORUM-BIRK stated that China and India have both enacted bag bans, as well as many pacific countries. She noted that enforcement has been an issue in both countries. REPRESENTATIVE FIELDS asked for the percentage of plastic bag waste in the Gulf of Alaska that is from local sources versus from China. MS. SORUM-BIRK said it can be hard to track the waste stream in the Pacific. She then turned attention to policy trends in the "lower 49" (slide 7). In Alaska, 17 communities no longer allow plastic bags. Denali Borough and Homer are also considering a plastic bag ban. She further described ways in which people around the state are attacking this problem (slides 8-9). One motivation behind the Matsu ban was ruminant ingestion of plastics. Plastic bags were being found in the digestive tracks of caribou and moose and were even the cause of death in several cases (slide 10). MS. SORUM-BIRK summarized the sectional analysis for HB 81 [included in the committee packet] and read the following: Section 1: Adds a new section AS 46.06 AS 46.06.145(a) establishes a ban on retailers providing "disposable plastic shopping bag" to customers. AS 46.06.145(b) clarifies exceptions to the bag ban. AS 46.06.145(c) establishes fines for retailers who violate this section. AS 46.06.145(d) provides definitions for "disposable plastic shopping bag", "retail seller" and "reusable bag." 5:27:28 PM REPRESENTATIVE FIELDS asked how much we know on the effects of digesting the photodegraded plastic particles in salmon and the prospective impacts on Alaska salmon fisheries. MS. SORUM-BIRK replied that the corresponding research is ongoing. She stated that there is a high rate of ingestion in fish populations and bird populations. More than 50 percent of seabirds are found with plastic in their digestive track. REPRESENTATIVE FIELDS questioned whether significant plastic pollution makes it difficult for the endangered Cook Inlet beluga population to recover. 5:29:40 PM MS. SORUM-BIRK said other harmful chemicals adhere to the pieces of photodegraded plastic in the ocean, which is what causes the toxicity in the food stream. MS. SORUM-BIRK returned attention to the sectional analysis and related that section 2 adds an effective date of January 1, 2021. This way retailers would have enough time to use up the plastic bags they have already purchased. REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON offered his belief that Alaskan cities can no longer tolerate the visual impact of plastic bags and their impact on wildlife and fish. He added that thinking of the ban creates some inconvenience; however, people would adjust. CHAIR WOOL asked if communities like Anchorage had thought of Hawaii's approach, in which every "significant" municipality has a ban. REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON suggested doing something similar to the smoke-free workplace ban so communities could a have conversation and the option to opt-out. 5:33:06 PM CHAIR WOOL suggested that a ban on plastic bags would increase the use of paper bags leading to a "carbon dioxide situation" due to cutting trees for the paper. MS. SORUM-BIRK acknowledged that there have been European studies that found the production of a paper bag takes more energy and a higher carbon footprint. Plastic bags are prevalent because of those reasons - they are cheap, easy to produce, and ubiquitous. However, the studies failed to consider how wildlife in the marine environment is affected and, ultimately, it is the impact on the environment caused by the plastic bag pollution that is the reason behind this bill. She pointed out that the committee could consider an acting fee on paper bags. CHAIR WOOL surmised that the impetus for a fee would be to motivate people to buy a permanent cotton bag instead of continually being charged for paper [bags]. MS. SORUM-BIRK answered yes. 5:36:22 PM REPRESENTATIVE FIELDS expressed appreciation for hearing this bill. He said given the amount of money in Alaska's fishing and guiding industry, he didn't realize this was an issue for "terrestrial creatures." He opined that taking the precautionary principal is a wise approach and offered his support for the passage of HB 81. He added that there are currently multiple stresses on Alaska's fisheries, including temperature and rising levels of acidity, which makes it harder for species to reproduce. He said he would hate to see the cessation of the Bristol Bay fishery given how much money is at stake. 5:37:12 PM REPRESENTATIVE REVAK expressed concern about poly-reusable bags, which contain more plastic, becoming litter and suggested the use of biodegradable plastic. MS. SORUM-BIRK said the problem with compostable plastic is that it takes a certain heat level to biodegrade; therefore, an industrial composting facility is necessary. REPRESENTATIVE REVAK contended that plastic bags are suggested to be a more environmentally friendly solution to paper bags. He indicated that the impact could be litter that is more durable from the reusable bags. MS. SORUM-BIRK explained that they defined "reusable bags" as sturdy enough to be reused at a minimum of 75 times. She directed attention to page 2, lines 23-30, emphasizing that they must be made with plastic that is at least four mils thick. She noted that such a bag would not degrade quickly. REPRESENTATIVE REVAK reaffirmed that it would take even longer for the reusable bags to biodegrade and could potentially cause even more of a hazard and have counter effective results. REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON argued that the current plastic bags travel whereas the thicker mil bags won't. He explained that the thicker mil will accumulate like normal garbage, which is a secondary concern. He offered his belief that plastic bags are the poster child because they get stuck in trees, for example, for years. He said its depressing and invokes the feeling that the state is disrespected. 5:43:03 PM REPRESENTATIVE TALERICO noted that he has heard a very aggressive stance that this is a local issue from people in his district. 5:44:49 PM REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN pointed out that much of Alaska remains an unorganized borough which the legislature is the governing body for; therefore, if the legislature does not act there is no ban. REPRESENTATIVE TALERICO replied that tribal governments have been recognized as being sovereign. He offered his understanding that they would have the ability to apply the ban in many locations. CHAIR WOOL asked if switching to thicker [plastic] bags would sufficiently solve the problem. MS. SORUM-BIRK said 4 mils thick is substantial. CHAIR WOOL asked if the bill has requirements on the types that businesses can use. 5:48:23 PM REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON said it would restrict the use of plastic bags for them as well. MS. SORUM-BIRK said in the bill, a retail seller includes market, grocery store, convenience store, drug store, or similar establishment; it must be located in a permanent building; it must be selling consumer household supplies. 5:49:13 PM REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN asked if the bill sponsor envisioned HB 24 incorporating restaurants. REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON said yes, contingent on how "similar establishment" is defined. CHAIR WOOL questioned how Anchorage deals with smaller businesses regarding their bag ban. 5:51:51 PM CHAIR WOOL announced HB 81 was held over.