HOUSE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE March 19, 1993 8:00 a.m. MEMBERS PRESENT Representative Bill Williams, Chairman Representative Bill Hudson, Vice Chairman Representative Con Bunde Representative Pat Carney Representative John Davies Representative Joe Green Representative Jeannette James Representative Eldon Mulder Representative David Finkelstein MEMBERS ABSENT None COMMITTEE CALENDAR Briefing by the Department of Environmental Conservation on Project Chariot and other radiation issues. HB 201 "An Act amending provisions of ch. 66, SLA 1991, that relate to reconstitution of the corpus of the mental health trust, the management of trust assets, and to the manner of enforcement of the obligation to compensate the trust; and providing for an effective date." HEARD AND HELD IN COMMITTEE FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION WITNESS REGISTER Mead Treadwell Deputy Commissioner Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation 410 W. Willoughby Ave., Suite 105 Juneau, Alaska 99801 Phone: 465-5050 Position Statement: Presented briefing on Project Chariot and other radiation issues Douglas Dasher Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation 1001 Noble Street, #350 Fairbanks, Alaska 99701 Phone: 451-2172 Position Statement: Presented briefing on Project Chariot and other radiation issues Rick Johanssen, Attorney Representing Usibelli Mines 1029 W. 3rd Ave,. Suite 300 Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Phone: 279-8561 Position Statement: Explained amendments to HB 201 Brian Bjorkquist, Assistant Attorney General Department of Law 1031 W. 4th St., Suite 200 Anchorage, Alaska 99501-1994 Phone: 269-5100 Position Statement: Testified on state's position regarding amendments to HB 201 Roger Burggraf 830 Sheep Creek Rd. Fairbanks, Alaska 99709 Phone: 479-2596 Position Statement: Supported amendments to HB 201 Charlie Boddy Usibelli Coal Co. 122 1st Ave., #302 Fairbanks, Alaska 99701 Phone: 452-2625 Position Statement: Agreed with Mr. Johanssen's comments on HB 201 Harold Gillam 104 2nd Ave. Fairbanks, Alaska 99701 Phone: 452-2534 Position Statement: Urged resolution of mental health lands dispute PREVIOUS ACTION BILL: HB 201 SHORT TITLE: MENTAL HEALTH TRUST AMENDMENTS BILL VERSION: SPONSOR(S): RESOURCES TITLE: "An Act amending provisions of ch. 66, SLA 1991, that relate to reconstitution of the corpus of the mental health trust, the management of trust assets, and to the manner of enforcement of the obligation to compensate the trust; and providing for an effective date." JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION 03/05/93 552 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S) 03/05/93 552 (H) RESOURCES, JUDICIARY, FINANCE 03/12/93 (H) RES AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 124 03/12/93 (H) MINUTE(RES) 03/12/93 (H) MINUTE(RES) 03/19/93 (H) RES AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 124 ACTION NARRATIVE TAPE 93-32, SIDE A Number 000 The House Resources Committee was called to order by Chairman Bill Williams at 8:09 a.m. Members present at the call to order were Representatives Williams, Hudson, Bunde, Carney, Davies, Green, James, and Mulder. Representative Finkelstein was absent at the call to order. CHAIRMAN BILL WILLIAMS announced the committee would first hear from the Department of Environmental Conservation on Project Chariot and other radiation issues. This would be followed, he said, with consideration of HB 201. Number 049 MEAD TREADWELL, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION, distributed for committee members' information two reports. The first was produced by the U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Field Office, titled Project Chariot: Cape Thompson, Alaska, dated December, 1992. The second report, prepared by the Alaska State Emergency Response Commission, Emergency Response Committee, was titled Radiological Threats and Release Response Preparedness in the State of Alaska, dated March, 1993. (A copy of these reports may be found in the House Resources Committee Room, Capitol Room 124, and after the adjournment of the second session of the 18th Alaska State Legislature, in the Legislative Reference Library.) MR. TREADWELL told the committee several radiation issues had arisen recently, including the presence of radioisotopes, generators, the presence of Project Chariot debris at Point Hope, and questions about the former nuclear power plant at Fort Greely. He mentioned that there are four state agencies that oversee radiation in one form or another. Those were the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC), the Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS), the Department of Labor, and the Department of Military and Veterans' Affairs. Number 074 MR. TREADWELL identified contact persons in some of those agencies, including Mike Conway, Director of Spill Prevention and Response (DEC); Jim Powell, Deputy Director of Environmental Quality (DEC); Linda Himmelbauer, state toxicologist; Doug Dasher, DEC; and Peter Nakamura, Director of the Division of Public Health (DHSS). MR. TREADWELL referred to the recommendations contained in the Radiological Threats report, and directed members' attention to page 7, where five key recommendations were listed; as well as to page 10, where 15 general initiatives were listed, addressing radiological issues. MR. TREADWELL briefly described the recommendations. He said the most important one was related to health, based on a review done by an outside radiological research group. He said that research team visited the state in the fall of 1992 and found that Alaska's coverage of X-Ray facilities was not good. He called it the largest radiological threat facing Alaska. The second recommendation, he said, was to consolidate into one agency the major radiation protection and response planning activities. MR. TREADWELL described another recommendation to consolidate and update state regulations and statutes pertaining to radiological hazards. He said this recommendation would be developed over the interim. A fourth recommendation was to increase the effort in communicating the risk from radiological sources to Alaskans, particularly rural residents. He noted the perceived incidence of increasing cancer rates in Northern Alaska, and the perception that the U.S. government had not been telling the truth regarding radiological materials left behind. MR. TREADWELL also mentioned the need to get a better hold of what radiological materials might have entered the waters and food chain from Russian practices. The final recommendation he noted was to ask Governor Hickel to work to have the U.S. government consult with the government of the Russian federation on construction of new nuclear facilities. MR. TREADWELL described an incident where an Alaska DEC official travelling in Russia on his own attended a conference at which he was the only one who did not sign a resolution endorsing a plan for large expansion of nuclear facilities. He noted that a number of countries are spending $50 million dollars to help upgrade Russian nuclear power plants. He cautioned that the results of a nuclear accident in Russia could be devastating to Alaska, depending on the location of an accident and the wind conditions at the time. Number 218 DOUG DASHER, DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION'S LEAD CONTACT ON PROJECT CHARIOT, told the committee that there were three primary issues on which the DEC is working with the federal Department of Energy. The first issue was how and when clean-up of the Project Chariot site would take place. Second was a push for broader health studies and radiation monitors to give real-time warning of radiological air emissions. The third issue, he said, was reimbursement to Alaska for activities surrounding the clean-up of Project Chariot. The state, he explained, had spent $60,000 so far on the project. MR. DASHER presented slides that showed the site near Point Hope where Project Chariot began as a program that would have blasted a harbor at Point Hope, and became an experimental large-scale biological study. He said the project became controversial and was discontinued in 1962. The U.S. Geological Survey had conducted research at the site to test the effects of radiation on drinking water, and nuclear fall-out material was brought to the Snowbank Creek site. He told the committee that the experiments were conducted with minimum safeguards, and when the project was discontinued, the radioactive soil was dumped and mixed with other materials, and covered in mounds that were only temporarily marked. The identifying markers are no longer visible, he explained. MR. DASHER said that in August of 1992, a researcher from the University of Alaska found the materials, and since that time, Senator Frank Murkowski had held hearings, and the U.S. Department of Energy took responsibility, and has prepared a clean-up plan, which he said was currently in the public review and comment phase. Number 490 MR. DASHER explained that after the clean-up, long-term monitoring would be conducted, and the land would finally be turned over to the Native Corporation. Of approximately 1,500 pounds of material that had been buried, he said 43.5 pounds have been hauled up. He estimated that the actual radioactive isotopes remaining in the materials are about equal to the size of a penny. He said that studies of the material that had been recovered showed very low levels of radiation. One major concern related to the project, he said, had to do with classified data, and suspicions that some other activities may have occurred besides those that are known. REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN asked Mr. Dasher what the half-life of the radioactive materials was, and whether the materials would still be strongly radioactive. Number 512 MR. DASHER answered that the type of radioactive material found at the site was CCM-137, with a half-life of 30-years. Another substance, iodine-131, has a half-life of 8.7 days. Strontium-85, he added, was around 60 days. After seven half-lives, he explained, the radioactivity of those materials is not detectable. Mr. Dasher told the committee that the materials could have all been hauled out of the area on a barge when the project was completed, and they were cited by the Atomic Energy Commission, and ended up getting permission to leave the materials at the site from the Atomic Energy Commission. At the time, the commission did not cite a significant health risk, Mr. Dasher commented, but a future public relations problem was predicted. Number 535 REPRESENTATIVE CON BUNDE raised concerns that the clean-up might disturb materials and actually cause more problems than if the site was left alone. He suggested the clean-up program should be driven by sound scientific principles and not be P.R.-driven. Regarding the declassification of information, he asked whether that process was happening rapidly so any additional activities not now known would be made public. MR. DASHER addressed Representative Bunde's concern about disturbing and moving radioactive materials, and stated that the risk would primarily be the possibility of accidents in the transportation of the material. He noted that nothing found to date indicated a health risk posed by the mounds, and that the perception of a threat was creating stress more than any actual threat. In particular, he noted the concerns held by the owner of land downstream on Snowbank Creek, Mr. Wilbur Lane, as well as concerns that the lands would eventually be turned over to the Native Corporation for allotments in the area. At a meeting of the Science Advisory Committee, Mr. Dasher commented, the possibility was raised that it could be better to leave the mounds. He explained that there was no consensus on that question, but more would be known after the closing of the public comment phase on the Department of Energy plan, on March 24, 1993. Number 559 MR. DASHER addressed the question regarding the classified data, and said that 24 or 26 documents have been released. The two remaining documents, he said, pertain to a bomb and will not be released. He also referred to other data in storage in Germantown, Maryland which was in the process of being declassified and would then be released. Boxes of other unclassified information have already been sent to Point Hope, he added. Number 570 CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS noted for the record that Representative Finkelstein had joined the meeting at 8:40 a.m. VICE CHAIRMAN BILL HUDSON brought up the question of reimbursement to the state of expenses incurred in the project. He asked Mr. Treadwell the status of that issue. Number 585 MR. TREADWELL replied that there are a number of federal contaminated sites in Alaska, and with various federal agencies, the state has cost-reimbursable agreements, including the Corps of Engineers and the Department of Defense. The two sites overseen by the Department of Energy include the Point Hope site and the bomb blast site at Amchitka. Mr. Treadwell said the state was negotiating an agreement to reimburse costs forward and back. He noted that Senator Ted Stevens got a million dollar appropriation in 1992, and that it was anticipated full reimbursement would be received. Number 598 VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON raised concerns about radioactive materials being dumped by Russia and the former Soviet Union, and asked Mr. Treadwell to comment on the threats posed in the Arctic. MR. TREADWELL apprised the committee on the existence of the Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy, which he said was an agreement among eight nations concerned about Russian radiation. The group, he said, had a delegation meeting in late March, 1993, in Copenhagen to review the work being done by the eight nations to bring information forward. Governor Hickel had written to the Secretary of State Warren Christopher urging a better emergency notification network from Russian nuclear power plants. He also referred to a federal appropriation of $30 million and two pending University of Alaska research proposals that hope to have funding. Number 624 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked Mr. Treadwell to comment on the plans for the two sites previously mentioned, at Fort Greely and Amchitka. MR. TREADWELL said the Amchitka site had been a deep underground blast, which might have caused some contamination of ground water in a period of years. He said the DEC was working with the federal Department of Energy to ensure there would be monitoring of the site. The Fort Greely project, he said, had been one of the first small nuclear reactors developed, and it was shut down in the 1970's. Decommissioning nuclear power plants has been a problem, he explained, and he said the contaminated soil was being moved to a long-term disposal site in Hanford, Washington. Number 650 MR. TREADWELL continued by describing efforts to encourage Russia to deal with potential nuclear facility accidents which, because of the proximity to Alaska, could pose health threats in Alaska. He noted that there are sites within a day's air movement of Alaska. Number 660 REPRESENTATIVE JOHN DAVIES asked Mr. Treadwell to comment on the DEC's current ideas relating to seeking primacy on nuclear regulation in Alaska, and plans for improving the state's own monitoring capabilities. Number 668 MR. TREADWELL responded that currently, for nuclear materials that are used in Alaska, licensing is done by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Some is done under general permits, he explained, and some of those are difficult to track exactly what nuclear devices are being used in the state. The U.S. Army, he said, is given world-wide license to use their Radioactive Thermal Generators (RTG) anywhere. He said some licenses are classified, but that the DEC had received information on the RTG at Fairway Rock in the Bering Sea. He explained that if the state of Alaska were to ask for primacy from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for licensing of nuclear materials, the DEC believes the current fees charged by the NRC could pay for the program. MR. TREADWELL noted that the state has asked for a stronger partnership with the NRC. Revenues from the fees charged if the state had primacy, he said, could help pay for more up- to-date inspection of X-Ray facilities in the state. He suggested the committee take on the matter as an interim project. REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked whether the state would incur any liability if it assumed primacy. Number 698 MR. TREADWELL replied that he did not believe the state would incur any greater liability if it were the sovereign than it incurs for any other regulations. The problem with the NRC, he said, has to do with the inspections based in Walnut Creek, California, and the fact that Alaska has no central record-keeping. TAPE 93-32, SIDE B Number 000 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN returned to the concerns raised over airborne radiation threats from Russia, and asked whether precipitation in the form of rainfall and snow tends to clear the air somewhat of radioactive contaminants. MR. TREADWELL replied that one of the things being addressed through the Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy, as well as the Northern Forum, is an attempt to get a better handle on information regarding materials deposited in Alaskan streams and lakes from airborne precipitation. Airborne fall-out from Russian testing does settle out in precipitation over time, he explained. A major concern now, he said, is the fact that there have been many nuclear explosions in Russia with poor monitoring and safety precautions. Isotopes and heavy metals, he said, are showing up in the food chain, and the basic effort with the international community is to find out where it's coming from. Number 079 MR. TREADWELL referred to the U.S. approval of a $13 billion aid package to Russia, and at the request of Alaska's DEC, Senator Murkowski included a request that part of that aid package be used to work on environmental problems that have a potential threat in the United States. Given Alaska's proximity to Russia, he said it was a high priority to respond to the fall-out threat. Number 099 CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS thanked the representatives of the DEC for their presentation, and said that in the interest of time, the committee would proceed with its agenda. REPRESENTATIVE JEANNETTE JAMES distributed for members' attention a draft position statement on the Mental Health Lands Trust issue. (A copy of this draft may be found in the House Resources Committee Room, Capitol Room 124, and after the adjournment of the second session of the 18th Alaska State Legislature, in the Legislative Reference Library.) Number 104 CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS announced that the remainder of the meeting would be held by teleconference with sites in Anchorage, Kodiak, Mat-Su and Fairbanks, to hear testimony on the next item for the committee's consideration, HB 201. HB 201: MENTAL HEALTH TRUST AMENDMENTS CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS noted that since the bill's hearing on March 12, a coalition of parties had been working with the Resources committee staff on developing amendments to the HB 201. Number 135 RICK JOHANSSEN, AN ATTORNEY REPRESENTING USIBELLI MINES, spoke by teleconference from Anchorage to explain the amendments to HB 201 developed by the coalition. (A copy of the proposed amendments may be found in the House Resources Committee Room, Capitol Room 124, and after the adjournment of the second session of the 18th Alaska State Legislature, in the Legislative Reference Library.) He said the coalition was comprised of two of the four plaintiff groups in the Weiss litigation; representatives of development interests, including the Alaska Coal Association, the Alaska Miners Association, and the Resource Development Council; the oil company interveners in the Weiss litigation, including Marathon and Unocal; and, all the public interest interveners in the Weiss litigation. Of those eight public interest intervening groups, MR. JOHANSSEN said some are environmental organizations, and others include the Alaska Sportfishing Association, and the Susitna Valley Association. Number 168 MR. JOHANSSEN explained that because of the complicated legal aspects of the issues, the coalition groups were represented by attorneys in developing the amendments to HB 201. He referred specifically to amendments E.1 and E.5, and said they were products of the coalition's work. With those amendments, he added, the coalition believes HB 201 addressed most of the legal problems associated with Chapter 66. The amendment's were also intended to address the legal concerns of the Department of Law, he said. Number 197 MR. JOHANSSEN addressed amendment E.1, and said the first change it makes is to eliminate Section 3 of HB 201, leaving AS 37.14.031 in place in Chapter 66. He said the plaintiff's representatives in the coalition had wanted the income and proceeds of original mental health trust lands to go into the trust corpus, but the Department of Law felt this would violate the terms of the original 1956 Enabling Act. To eliminate that potential problem, he explained, the coalition had agreed it was best to have all income and proceeds go to the trust income account as established in Chapter 66. MR. JOHANSSEN explained the second change amendment E.1 proposed for HB 201, which would amend the collateral provision of the bill by clarifying that the pledged Legislatively Designated Areas (LDA) could continue to be developed by the state to the extent the law governing any particular LDA allows. The Department of Law, he said, expressed concerns that the pledge of those lands as security could prevent the state from doing anything that could diminish or impair the value of the collateral. Number 217 MR. JOHANSSEN addressed amendment E.5, and referred to a document in members' packets which he said contained a detailed explanation of that amendment. Amendment E.5, he explained, contained three substantive provisions: The first of these, he said, was a land management provision; second was a public interest safeguard provision; and third, a definition of unrestricted general fund revenues. The land management provision, he said, was the "meat" of the amendment. It requires, he explained, the trust to take original mental health trust lands back subject to existing third party interests, such as leases, contracts, and land use permits. MR. JOHANSSEN said amendment E.5 also requires that the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) manage the lands under the rules and regulations that the third parties bargained for. He likened that provision to a grandfather clause that protects third party interest holders' contract rights. MR. JOHANSSEN continued his explanation by saying that in exchange for allowing their properties to go back to the reconstituted trust, the third party interest holders, such as the owners of coal leases and mining claims, would be guaranteed the rules of the game would not change as long as the third party interests remained in effect. Alaska Statutes 38.04 and 38.05, he said, and the corresponding DNR regulations, would continue to apply to those lands. All other original mental health trust lands, he added, being returned to the reconstituted trust, which are vacant, unappropriated and unreserved, and not subject to any third party interest, would be managed under whatever land management standard the trust authority might adopt. Number 275 MR. JOHANSSEN addressed the second of the three substantive provisions of amendment E.5, the public interest safeguards provision. Reconstituted trust lands not grandfathered because there were no existing third party rights, he explained, could be managed by the trust authority or by the DNR as the trust authority's contractor, without compliance to AS 38.04 and 38.05, including the public interest safeguards in those statutes. To protect HB 201 from constitutional challenges because the constitution prohibits land disposal without prior public notice, amendment E.5 would require multiple purpose use of trust lands, while recognizing that with respect to non-grandfathered land, trust principles must take priority if they conflict with the objectives of multiple purpose use. MR. JOHANSSEN added that the amendment also requires public notice of land disposals. He then addressed the third substantive provision of amendment E.5 to HB 201. This provision, he explained, defined unrestricted general fund revenues. The definition ties the meaning of the phrase to the current manner in which money is categorized under the statewide accounting system. No limitation, he said, is placed on the power of the people or the legislature to restrict general fund revenues. Any such future restrictions, he said, would be disregarded for purposes of calculating the amount that is paid to the trust income account. MR. JOHANSSEN noted that the three percent provided in HB 201 would be calculated based on the way state funds are categorized today, even though the state accounting categorizations might change for other purposes in the future. He commented that the coalition had done its best to keep the other plaintiffs and the Department of Law informed of its positions and activities. He said the coalition fully recognizes that any dispute as complicated as this would generate differences of opinion and misunderstanding. He said the coalition would welcome the comments of the other plaintiff's attorneys and of the Department of Law. Number 342 MR. JOHANSSEN addressed a third amendment to HB 201, referred to as amendment E.6, and described it as making no substantive alteration to the provisions of the bill or the E.1 or E.5 amendments. CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS asked Mr. Johanssen to comment on a reference in a press release from the governor's office that set a 60-day deadline to reach agreement on releasing third parties from the case. Specifically, he asked how that deadline would affect HB 201. Number 359 MR. JOHANSSEN replied that HB 201 also relieves third parties. The press release, he explained, pertains to the "moms and pops" and under HB 201, the land they owned would not be reconstituted to the trust. As to whether or not the attorney general's actions with respect to those parties, obviates the need for legislation, the answer, he said, was no. Legislation, he said, was necessary to protect the other parties tied up in the litigation in the Superior Court. Without legislation, he predicted litigation would go on and on. REPRESENTATIVE PAT CARNEY commented that in order to solve the problem of the mental health trust, a bilateral agreement by both parties would be needed. He asked Mr. Johanssen whether he had talked with members of the mental health group about the proposed amendments to HB 201. MR. JOHANSSEN responded that two of those plaintiffs's representatives were in the coalition, and other parties were kept informed. Regarding the other representatives, David Walker and Jim Gottstein, Mr. Johanssen said the coalition had done its best to keep them informed, and hoped to have substantive comments from them soon. He said the coalition would like to work with those other parties to resolve the dispute. Number 383 VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON referred to amendment E.5, page 2, and the definition of unrestricted revenues. He asked Mr. Johanssen to explain the effect in terms of allocated funds and whether they were excluded from the unrestricted general funds. Number 397 MR. JOHANSSEN believed that was the intent, especially with the budget reserve fund. He viewed that as a restricted fund, and said the percentage calculation was based only on unrestricted general funds. It would not include money deposited into the budget reserve fund, he said. Regarding the state's recent oil company settlement receipt, and the question of whether that money would by law be required to be deposited into the budget reserve fund, he said the percentage would not be calculated using those numbers if the money did go into the budget reserve fund. Number 410 VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON asked about the earnings reserve account of the permanent fund and whether that would figure into calculations of the percentage called for in HB 201. MR. JOHANSSEN replied that it would not. BRIAN BJORKQUIST, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, testified from Anchorage by teleconference. He said the state had received the amendments submitted by the coalition and was in the process of reviewing them. He noted that the DNR was reviewing the amendments to look for any technical problems that could hinder the coalition accomplishing its goals, and would prepare a memorandum in response by Tuesday, March 23, 1993. Number 430 MR. BJORKQUIST remarked that the memorandum would address ambiguities in the amendments as to who would be responsible for different types of management authority and decision- making authority. He said the amendments to HB 201 left some overlapping management and decision-making amendments which would require some technical amendments to alleviate those concerns. CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS announced the committee would next take testimony from Fairbanks. ROGER BURGGRAF testified by teleconference from Fairbanks. He spoke in support of the proposed amendments to HB 201, and stated that Chapter 66 was dead if left as it was. He cautioned that without fast action, resolution of the mental health lands trust issue could be dragged out for years. Number 495 CHARLIE BODDY, USIBELLI COAL CO., testified by teleconference from Fairbanks. He said he was in agreement with the comments of Mr. Johanssen, and supported the efforts for resolution of the issue. Number 502 HAROLD GILLAM, testified from Fairbanks, and suggested that the committee seek resolution of the mental health lands trust issue. He felt the state had come to the best decision that was in keeping with the dictates of the Supreme Court. He expressed distress over the activities of lawyers and the failure to reach an agreement. Number 539 CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS, hearing that no others wished to testify by teleconference, announced that HB 201 would be taken up again on Wednesday, March 24, 1993. VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON noted that there were still parties to the issue who had not yet been heard, including David Walker and Jim Gottstein. Number 561 REPRESENTATIVE JEANNETTE JAMES echoed Representative Hudson's remarks and stressed the need for everyone to agree to a solution. REPRESENTATIVE CARNEY suggested that as follow-up to the comments made during the meeting, committee staff should contact Mr. Walker and Mr. Gottstein to get their comments on HB 201 and the proposed amendments. CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS agreed that this would be done for the March 24th meeting. Number 580 ANNOUNCEMENTS CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS announced that on Monday, March 22nd, the committee would meet to hear HB 213 and HB 238. He also announced that he was waiving HB 191, having to do with cost recovery by contract operators of state-owned hatcheries. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the House Resources Committee, Chairman Williams adjourned the meeting at 9:35 a.m.