SB 3-SMALL VESSEL WASTEWATER EXEMPTION; 1% ART  4:34:23 PM CHAIR GIESSEL announced consideration of SB 3 [labeled 30- LS0046\J] sponsored by Senator Stedman. She noted that the committee submitted questions to DEC and the responses are in their packets. She said SB 3 proposes to extend the exemption and alternative management programs for certain classes of marine vessels as it relates to discharge requirements. It also exempts the new Alaska-class ferries from the 1-percent for art requirement. She invite Michelle Hale, signatory on the letter, to come forward for follow-up questions. There were none, so she opened public testimony. 4:36:28 PM At ease 4:36:33 PM CHAIR GIESSEL called the meeting back to order and noted a letter of support for SB 3 from the Alaska State Council on the Arts as a one-time targeted exemption from the Alaska 1 percent for arts program. 4:37:24 PM Finding no comments, she closed public testimony on SB 3. SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked the Department of Law (DOL) if SB 3 has any issue with the single subject rule of the Constitution. 4:37:45 PM CHRIS PELOSO, Assistant Attorney General, Department of Law (DOL), Anchorage, stated that he believes there may be a single subject rule issue with SB 3. The Alaska Constitution, Article II, Section 13, says that all bills have to have a single subject. While the courts tend to view that very broadly, this bill seems to have two different subjects: one is the waste water treatment from ships and the other is this 1-percent for art exemption. MR. PELOSO said he believes two of the three ships that are covered by the 1-percent sections of this bill are not even covered by the waste water sections of the bill, because they don't fit under the standards for getting that exemption. The best he could say is that the two sides of this bill are related to boats, which in his opinion is "a pretty tenuous connection." 4:39:11 PM SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked what the consequence is if the court decides this is a violation of the single subject rule. Would it strike down both aspects of it? MR. PELOSO replied yes, it would strike down the whole bill. SENATOR STEDMAN said the operative terms from Mr. Peloso's opinion were of possibilities rather than certainties; there are different legal opinions on whether it would be challenged or not, and he thought the matter should go forward and get sorted out. 4:40:30 PM SENATOR COGHILL moved to report SB 3, version J, from committee with individual recommendations and attached fiscal note. SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI objected to state that the single subject question is a real issue, and a challenge is likely. The whole bill could be struck down and expose a lot of small vessels to litigation. It might be better to break it down into two different bills. He then withdrew his objection. CHAIR GIESSEL thanked Senator Wielechowski for his comments and announced that with no further objections, SB 3 moved from committee.