HB 106-COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM  2:08:44 PM CO-CHAIR SEATON announced that the final order of business is HOUSE BILL NO. 106, "An Act extending the termination date of the Alaska coastal management program and relating to the extension; relating to the review of activities of the Alaska coastal management program; providing for an effective date by amending the effective date of sec. 22, ch. 31, SLA 2005; and providing for an effective date." 2:08:54 PM CO-CHAIR SEATON made a motion to adopt Amendment 6, labeled 27- GH1965\A.16, Bullard, 3/30/11, which read as follows: Page 2, line 11, of the amendment: Delete "are" Page 2, lines 12 - 17, of the amendment: Delete all material and insert: "(1) are clear and concise as to the  activities and persons affected by the policies;  (2) use prescriptive or performance-based  standards that are written in precise and enforceable  language; and  (3) address a coastal use or resource of  concern to the residents of the coastal resource  district as demonstrated by local knowledge or  supported by scientific evidence" Page 4, line 6, of the amendment: Delete "board's" Insert "department's" Page 4, line 21, of the amendment: Delete the quotation mark. Page 4, following line 21, of the amendment: Insert new material to read: "* Sec. 6. AS 46.40.210(1) is repealed."" CO-CHAIR SEATON explained that Amendment 6 would amend the language in a previous amendment, Amendment 2, labeled A.2, which was previously adopted by the committee at an earlier meeting. REPRESENTATIVE HERRON objected for the purpose of discussion. 2:09:59 PM CO-CHAIR SEATON explained the purpose of Amendment 6. He referred to page 2, lines 12-17, the department wished to modify the three criteria laid out. Additionally, Amendment 6 would change the definition previously adopted by deleting the word, "board's" on page 4, lines 6, and substituting "department's" since the policy board has not yet been adopted. He characterized this as a technical change. Section 6 repeals the definition that is adopted in Section 5. 2:11:31 PM JOE BALASH, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Natural Resources (DNR), introduced himself. CO-CHAIR SEATON asked Mr. Balash whether the department was comfortable with the amendment offered. MR. BALASH asked for whether adopting Amendment 6 would effectively amend the previous amendment that was adopted, labeled A.2. CO-CHAIR SEATON answered yes. MR. BALASH answered yes the department was comfortable with Amendment 6. 2:11:54 PM REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ asked to speak to the language previously adopted. She referred to page 2, line 18 of the previous Amendment 2, labeled A.2. She noted that Amendment 6 appears to have deleted language which would have required no duplication or restatement of effort could be taken. She inquired as to whether that language has been preserved in other portions of the statute. MR. BALASH agreed that she was correct. However, he indicated the department has been willing to take a leap of faith that a subsequent amendment would subsequently be adopted which would insert this language in another section of the bill. REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ asked for a specific reference. MR. BALASH answered that a proposed amendment would be in the form of an amendment labeled A.4. CO-CHAIR SEATON clarified that an amendment labeled A.4 would not be offered because the language would be modified. He assured members the language Representative Munoz referred to would be offered under a new amendment. REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ emphasized that the deleted language is very important language. CO-CHAIR SEATON signaled his intention to maintain that language. REPRESENTATIVE HERRON removed his objection. 2:14:50 PM REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI objected to comment. He noted the awkward mechanics involved to amend an amendment. He deferred to the committee for its preference. He then withdrew his objection. REPRESENTATIVE HERRON clarified that Amendment 6 was labeled A.16. CO-CHAIR SEATON explained that Amendment 6, which is labeled A.16, would amend language the committee previously adopted when it passed Amendment 2 at a prior meeting. There being no further objection, Amendment 6 was adopted. 2:15:44 PM [HB 106 was held over.]