CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 77(FIN) "An Act relating to the Joint Armed Services Committee, a permanent interim committee of the Alaska State Legislature; and providing for an effective date." SENATE BILL NO. 55 "An Act relating to the Joint Armed Services Committee, a permanent interim committee of the Alaska State Legislature; and providing for an effective date." Co-Chair John Torgerson noted the committee had an earlier hearing on SB 55. Since that meeting, the house bill was referred to the committee and would be the focus of this hearing. CASEY SULLIVAN, aide to Representative Lisa Murkowski, testified to the House bill. He said Alaska was being considered for the site of a National Missile Ballistic Defense System. The Pentagon and the Secretary of Defense recently stated that another round of Base Realignments and Closures were forthcoming. Because of those challenges, Representative Lisa Murkowski introduced HB 77. HB 77 would replace the existing Joint Committee on Military Bases in Alaska with the Joint Armed Services Committee and would have a longer existence than called for in the Uniform Rules, thus requiring a change in statute. The committee would be activated on July 1, 1999 and the Legislative Council would provide administrative and other services to the committee. He continued saying that this committee would provide a unified front by the House, Senate, Military and Civilian members to monitor timely military topics relative to Alaska. Alaska was in the crux of two swaying forces with regard to its military - the potential creation of new sites for a National Ballistic Missile Defense System and possible consolidation of existing military operations. These events would require considerable and constant attention. With the military accounting for approximately $1.7 billion of Alaska's economy, it was imperative that the Legislature take a leading role to monitor the economic impact of future military related events. The Joint Armed Services Committee would provide that focus, summarized Casey Sullivan. Senator Loren Leman noticed a couple differences between the House and Senate bills. One was the transition clause contained in Section 3 of SB 55 but not included in HB 77. The other was the first listed power and duty, which was to review and encourage state policy regarding the National Guard. Casey Sullivan addressed the second difference. Page 4 lines 19 and 20 of the Senate bill discussed the reviewing policy. This was removed in the House because it was felt it would be a duplication of services. He then explained the reason for change in the transition language in Section 3. [Inaudible] He noted that a sunset was also added to both versions. CHRIS NELSON, staff to Senator Tim Kelly, sponsor of SB 55, testified that they had reviewed the House version of the bill and concurred with its content. He felt the sunset clause was not necessary but that future Legislators would chose to extend it. Regarding the transition there was considerable discussion in the House. He concurred with the language in the House bill because it was important to have the historical knowledge. Co-Chair John Torgerson brought the committee's attention to the Legislative Council's zero fiscal note. Senator Lyda Green had a problem with the source of funding on this bill and felt that it should stand on its own rather than contained in the council's operating budget. Co-Chair John Torgerson did not disagree but said that the Legislature had the request before them in the legislative operating budget. There would be two opportunities for discussion on the funding. Senator Al Adams noted that the $18,000 would be debated in subcommittee as part of the Legislative operating budget. Co-Chair John Torgerson agreed and said that if it fell out during the budget debates there would be no funding for the program. Senator Gary Wilken offered a motion to move CS HB 77 (FIN) from committee. Without objection it was so ordered.