SB 281-GENETICALLY MODIFIED FISH  VICE CHAIR WAGONER announced SB 281 to be up for consideration. 4:55 - 4:57 - at ease SENATOR KIM ELTON, sponsor, said that SB 281 is a proactive bill that provides that labeling identify genetically modified (GM) fish and fish products, which are defined as "foods in which genetic structure has been altered at the molecular level by means that are not possible under natural conditions or processes." This bill addresses concerns raised by consumers, people in the environmental community, people in the health community and Alaska fish marketing groups. It requires Alaska retailers to identify and label food containing fish and shellfish products that have been genetically modified. The bill is similar to and based upon legislation introduced in other states, like Oregon and California, and it comes to this committee and to the Legislature with the unanimous support of the Joint Legislative Salmon Industry Task Force. SENATOR ELTON noted that genetically modified fish are not allowed in the marketplace currently. However, SB 281 anticipates future entry into the consumer markets as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has a pending proposal to allow the production of a genetically modified salmon. He noted that country of origin labeling legislation is now being considered in Washington, D.C. SENATOR DYSON said he appreciated Senator Elton bringing this issue forward. He asked what labeling SB 281 would require of frozen or fresh salmon, not in a container. SENATOR ELTON replied that most retail outlets identify fresh fish on a placard. My intention would be that it be identified on the placard.... I do think Alaska consumers are relatively sophisticated and any retail outlets... caught selling genetically modified fish, I would think that's almost a self-policing kind of a thing. The difficulty that Alaska consumers have is mostly [with] packaged fish and shellfish that are coming from... other foreign countries. The intent would be to label it on a placard. That's probably the least likely place for this to enter the marketplace in Alaska. SENATOR DYSON respectfully disagreed, because he has seen farmed fish being sold as fresh fish in both restaurants and meat markets. I see genetically modified fish coming out of the farms as one of the first assaults we'll have.... I'm not sure your bill makes it really clear that if it's not packaged, it should be placarded. I won't hold the bill up for that.... He asked what Senator Elton intended for fish that is sold in restaurants. SENATOR ELTON agreed that if Alaska gets genetically modified fish, it would probably be through the farm system. He may be too optimistic, but in coastal communities he is familiar with, when a retailer is selling unpackaged farmed fish, there's a lot of pressure and he thought that pressure would double or triple if it were GM. He said the bill just covers retail fish, but he would double check on that. SENATOR RALPH SEEKINS asked what the state's remedy was for misbranding. SENATOR ELTON replied that is a problem. Current law has a labeling provision for retail fish. "It is a problem of enforcement." He expected that people would notice mislabeling and report it to the department and hoped that retailers would choose to follow the law. CHAIR OGAN arrived at 5:10 p.m. SENATOR SEEKINS said it seems that intentionally or even unintentionally mislabeling food is an unfair trade practice. For instance, it would be an unfair trade practice if he sold a used car as a new car. When it comes to the health of individuals, we rely on DEC and a few other things like that. But having come from the retail sector myself, I wonder why if we're really serious.... why we don't do treble damages, cease and desist orders and a few things like that.... What would really compel me not to comply? SENATOR ELTON agreed with him completely. The existing situation is that it would not be an attempt to deceive if the law doesn't require you to identify it. So the issue is being raised to that level. TAPE 04-20, SIDE A  SENATOR SEEKINS asked if a statement could be inserted stating that violation of this bill constitutes an unfair trade practice under AS 45.50. SENATOR ELTON responded that he would consider that, but the problem is that this is a fairly large area. Section 1 is existing law. The only thing that is being added is the genetically modified component. If we did decide to do that, I would think it would require a great deal of discussion with all of the other elements that are covered already in existing statute and that's a pretty big bite to chew off right now. MS. KRISTIN RYAN, Director, Division of Environmental Health, Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC), said SB 281 has a zero fiscal note because the FDA has not allowed genetically modified fish to be sold in the country, yet. However, a fiscal note would be associated with enforcement if the FDA does approve it in the future. She informed them that HB 378 puts many stipulations on misbranding in this chapter as a violation of the Fair Trade Practices Act. SENATOR LINCOLN moved to pass SB 281 out of committee with individual recommendations and accompanying fiscal notes. There were no objections and it was so ordered. There being no further business to come before the committee, VICE CHAIR WAGONER adjourned the meeting at 5:15 p.m.