HOUSE RULES STANDING COMMITTEE March 19, 1997 5:13 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT Representative Pete Kott, Chairman Representative Al Vezey Representative Gail Phillips Representative Bill Williams Representative Kim Elton MEMBERS ABSENT Representative Irene Nicholia Representative Brian Porter COMMITTEE CALENDAR HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 14 Relating to supporting the "American Land Sovereignty Protection Act." - MOVED CSHJR 14(RLS) FORWARD FOR CALENDARING HOUSE BILL NO. 51 "An Act relating to the Department of Environmental Conservation." - MOVED CSHB 51(RLS) FORWARD FOR CALENDARING PREVIOUS ACTION BILL: HJR 14 SHORT TITLE: SUPPORT AMERICAN LAND SOVEREIGNTY ACT SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) JAMES, Barnes, Hodgins, Sanders, Masek, Martin, Kemplen, Phillips, Cowdery, Vezey, Ryan, Porter, Ogan JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION 01/21/97 111 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S) 01/21/97 111 (H) WTR, STATE AFFAIRS 01/22/97 125 (H) COSPONSOR(S): PORTER, OGAN 02/13/97 (H) WTR AT 5:00 PM CAPITOL 124 02/13/97 (H) MINUTE(WTR) 02/17/97 (H) WTR AT 5:00 PM CAPITOL 124 02/17/97 (H) MINUTE(WTR) 02/18/97 (H) WTR AT 5:00 PM FAHRENKAMP RM 203 02/18/97 (H) MINUTE(WTR) 02/19/97 397 (H) WTR RPT 5DP 1NR 02/19/97 397 (H) DP: PHILLIPS, COWDERY, KOTT, BARNES 02/19/97 397 (H) AUSTERMAN 02/19/97 397 (H) NR: KUBINA 02/19/97 398 (H) ZERO FISCAL NOTE (H. WTR) 03/13/97 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 102 03/13/97 (H) MINUTE(STA) 03/14/97 661 (H) STA RPT CS(STA) 4DP 1NR 03/14/97 662 (H) DP: JAMES, HODGINS, DYSON, VEZEY 03/14/97 662 (H) NR: IVAN 03/14/97 662 (H) ZERO FISCAL NOTE (H.WTR) 2/19/97 03/14/97 662 (H) REFERRED TO RULES 03/19/97 (H) RLS AT 5:00 PM CAPITOL 120 BILL: HB 51 SHORT TITLE: REGULATIONS OF DEPT OF ENV. CONSERVATION SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) ROKEBERG, KELLY, Foster, Hodgins, Vezey, Bunde Cowdery, Mulder, Kohring, Williams JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION 01/13/97 41 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/10/97 01/13/97 41 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S) 01/13/97 41 (H) OIL & GAS, FINANCE 01/22/97 125 (H) COSPONSOR(S): FOSTER 01/23/97 (H) O&G AT 10:00 AM CAPITOL 124 01/23/97 (H) MINUTE(O&G) 01/30/97 (H) O&G AT 10:00 AM CAPITOL 124 01/30/97 (H) MINUTE(O&G) 01/31/97 188 (H) O&G RPT CS(O&G) 3DP 1DNP 2NR 01/31/97 189 (H) DP: BUNDE, HODGINS, ROKEBERG 01/31/97 189 (H) DNP: KEMPLEN 01/31/97 189 (H) NR: OGAN, RYAN 01/31/97 189 (H) 2 FISCAL NOTES (DEC, F&G) 01/31/97 205 (H) ADD RESOURCES REF FLD Y12 N25 E2 A1 02/13/97 348 (H) COSPONSOR(S): HODGINS, VEZEY, BUNDE 02/13/97 348 (H) COWDERY, MULDER, KOHRING 02/17/97 376 (H) COSPONSOR(S): WILLIAMS 02/18/97 (H) FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519 02/18/97 (H) MINUTE(FIN) 02/20/97 (H) FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519 02/20/97 (H) MINUTE(FIN) 02/26/97 (H) FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519 02/26/97 (H) MINUTE(FIN) 02/27/97 (H) FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519 02/27/97 (H) MINUTE(FIN) 03/05/97 536 (H) FIN RPT CS(FIN) 7DP 1NR 2AM 03/05/97 537 (H) DP: THERRIAULT, FOSTER, MULDER, MARTIN 03/05/97 537 (H) KOHRING, KELLY, DAVIS 03/05/97 537 (H) NR: MOSES 03/05/97 537 (H) AM: DAVIES, GRUSSENDORF 03/05/97 537 (H) FISCAL NOTES (F&G, DEC) 03/05/97 537 (H) REFERRED TO RLS 03/12/97 647 (H) RULES FOR CALENDARING ADDED 03/17/97 (H) RLS AT 5:00 PM CAPITOL 102 03/17/97 (H) MINUTE(RLS) 03/19/97 (H) RLS AT 5:00 PM CAPITOL 120 WITNESS REGISTER MYRNA MCGHIE, Legislative Administrative Assistant to Representative Jeannette James Alaska State Legislature Capitol Building, Room 102 Juneau, Alaska 99801 POSITION STATEMENT: Gave sponsor statement for HJR 14. PAUL WEIR Box 455 Glennallen, Alaska 99588 Telephone: (907) 822-3902 POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HJR 14. JON BREIVOGEL HC 60, Box 106 Glennallen, Alaska 99588 Telephone: (907) 822-5870 POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HJR 14. DENNY WEATHERS Box 1791 Cordova, Alaska 99574 Telephone: (907) 424-3745 POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HJR 14. ERIC WEATHERS Box 1791 Cordova, Alaska 99574 Telephone: (907) 424-3745 POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HJR 14. PATRICK DALTON P.O. Box 1413 Delta Junction, Alaska 99737 Telephone: Not provided POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HJR 14. LEONARD EFTA P.O. Box 353 Kenai, Alaska 99611 Telephone: (907) 283-1670 POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HJR 14. SUSAN ROSS Box 198 Kasilof, Alaska 99610 Telephone: (907) 262-5479 POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HJR 14. REPRESENTATIVE NORMAN ROKEBERG Alaska State Legislature Capitol Building, Room 24 Juneau, Alaska 99801 Telephone: (907) 465-2040 POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of HB 51. JANICE ADAIR, Director Division of Environmental Health Department of Environmental Conservation 555 Cordova Street Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Telephone: (907) 269-7644 POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against CSHB 51(RLS). DENNIS RANDA, Chairman Alaska Council of Trout, Unlimited Box 3055 Soldotna, Alaska 99669 Telephone: (907) 262-9494 POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 51. SUSAN SCHRADER, Executive Director Alaska Environmental Lobby, Incorporated P.O. Box 22151 Juneau, Alaska 99802 Telephone: (907) 463-3366 POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in against CSHB 51(RLS). KATHY HANSEN, Executive Director United Southeast Alaska Gillnetters Association 5875 Glacier Highway, Lot 21 Juneau, Alaska 99801 Telephone: (907) 586-5860 POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HB 51. NANCY HILLSTRAND Pioneer Alaskan Fisheries P.O. Box 170 Homer, Alaska 99603 Telephone: (907) 235-3877 POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 51. IRENE ALEXICOS Alaska Clean Water Alliance Address and telephone number was not provided POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HB 51. SHIRLEY ARMSTRONG, Legislative Assistant to Representative Rokeberg Capitol Building, Room 24 Juneau, Alaska 99801 Telephone: (907) 465-4954 POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions on HB 51. ACTION NARRATIVE TAPE 97-9, SIDE A Number 001 CHAIRMAN PETE KOTT called the House Rules Standing Committee to order at 5:13 p.m.. Members present at the call to order were Representatives Kott, Phillips, Williams and Elton. Representative Vezey arrived at 5:19 p.m. Representatives Nicholia and Porter were absent. HJR 14 - SUPPORT AMERICAN LAND SOVEREIGNTY ACT Number 010 CHAIRMAN KOTT announced the first order of business would be HJR 14, Relating to supporting the "American Land Sovereignty Protection Act." He noted there was a proposed committee substitute. REPRESENTATIVE GAIL PHILLIPS made a motion to adopt CSHJR 14(RLS). Hearing no objection, CSHJR 14(RLS) was adopted. MYRNA MCGHIE, Legislative Administrative Assistant to Representative Jeannette James, Alaska State Legislature, came forward to explain the committee substitute. She informed the committee there was a constituent who had concern that there would be the perception that this resolution would give the federal government control over lands in Alaska. She said they wanted to make a change on page 3, line 3, to read "elected representatives of the people over federally owned land of the United States." The word "land" would be deleted and "federally owned lands" would be inserted. CHAIRMAN KOTT asked if the change is from "land" to "lands." MS. MCGHIE said somebody inserted "the land." That should be deleted and "federally owned lands" should be inserted and not "federally owned land." She said she doesn't really think it matters whether it is "lands" or "land." Number 174 CHAIRMAN KOTT said as he understands the change from the previous version of the bill the term "federally" was included. It wasn't in the State Affairs Committee version. He also noted it was not in the B Version of the bill. Chairman Kott said he doesn't have a problem with making the word land plural. He asked if somebody wanted to make a motion to amend. REPRESENTATIVE KIM ELTON said he wasn't going to make a motion. He noted as a former editor, he believes the word "land" is correct. CHAIRMAN KOTT said he tends to agree with Representative Elton. He asked Ms. McGhie what the resolution does. MS. MCGHIE explained the resolution is to support HR 901, which Congressman Young introduced in the 105th Congress, to protect the sovereignty of American lands, the American Land Sovereignty Protection Act. There had been a concern that there would be international interference in making decisions on domestic lands. Number 397 PAUL WEIR testified via teleconference from Glennallen. He told the committee he supported Representative James' bill. Number 435 JON BREIVOGEL testified via teleconference from Glennallen. He said even though he agrees with the initiative and the idea, we need to be careful that we don't admit that we don't have sovereignty by this bill and imply that we need something else besides our constitution to own our own land. Mr. Breivogel said he would like people to consider that because basically what were saying is we don't currently have the protection in existence to maintain sovereignty over our own land. Number 515 DENNY WEATHERS testified via teleconference from Cordova. She said she appreciates the committee hearing, but she finds that HJR 14 is unnecessary and unconstitutional according to the United States Constitution. Ms. Weathers referred to Article 1, Section 8, "The Congress shall have the power 1 through 18." In subsection 17, it defines what areas the United States has power over. She said, "To exercise exclusive legislation over districts, such as the District of Columbia or territories, and the lands ceded to the United States by particular states such as the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, our dockyards and other needful buildings, please note that nowhere in Article 1 does it give the President of (indisc.), the President has power." MS. WEATHERS continued, "Article 2, Executive powers. Section 1, subsection 7, `Before entering into office, the President had to take an oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.' This he has not done and the Alaska state legislature should be asking for his impeachment." MS. WEATHERS said, "Article 2, Executive powers, Section 2, subsection 2, `The President shall have the power, by and with the advice and consent of Senate, to make treaties, provided two-thirds of the senators present concur.'" She said the President, to the best of her knowledge, did not have the Senate's consent. She said it is the legislature's duty to request his impeachment. MS. WEATHERS informed the committee the President's powers for Congress are limited to vetoing laws, he may call special sessions, send Congress messages through the Union Address or a party leader, and he may suggest legislation. His judiciary powers are also limited to nominating judges and he is also allowed to pardon and give reprieves for federal offenses only. That is why Article 4, section 4, was included in the Constitution guaranteeing every state in the union a Republican form of government. She said this is the check and balance system, we do not have a dictatorship. MS. WEATHERS explained Amendment 10 reinforces the above stated articles. The powers not delegated to the United States by the constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states, respectively, or to the people. The state's rights are protected and the state legislature is charged with a duty to uphold our rights. MS. WEATHERS said some findings have been found. Other than these specifically delegated powers, the Congress has absolutely no power of the citizens of the 50 states. It may not assume powers not specifically granted to it by the people. She said these powers were delegated only to Congress and not to the Executive Branch of the United States. Number 718 MS. WEATHERS said Title 18 is the United States Code. Section 7 specifies that the territory jurisdiction of the United States extends only outside the boundaries of lands belonging to the United States. MS. WEATHERS said she would like the committee to check into U.S. v. Spelar, 338 U.S. 217 at 222, which reads, "There is a canon of legislation construction which teaches Congress that unless a contrary intent appears, legislation is meant to apply only within the territory jurisdiction of the United States." She asked Chairman Kott to please provide her with the document granting federal jurisdiction inside the boundaries of the state of Alaska. She said the documents can be sent through the Cordova Legislative Information Office. MS. WEATHERS asked the committee to remember that any laws, statutes, regulations or (indisc.) that is not granted by the Constitution is null and void. She said, "As stated in 1992 by the supreme court decision New York v. United States, Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor stated, `Congress exercises its confirmed powers subject to the limitation contained in the Constitution. If a state ratifies or gives consent to any authority which is not specifically granted by the Constitution of the United States, it is null and void.' State officials cannot consent to enlargement of the power that Congress (indisc.) enumerated in the Constitution, and this was based on a supreme court decision." She thanked the committee for being concerned about the issues. Number 881 ERIC WEATHERS was next to testify via teleconference. He said he doesn't believe a resolution is needed. Under the Constitution, not even Congress has the right to make treaties with foreign nations or the United Nations pertaining to the land within the United States. If they do, they must be impeached or removed from the country. Mr. Weathers said the people have no reason or obligation to recognize any foreign agreements or treaties made within the United States. He thanked the committee for listening to him. Number 924 PATRICK DALTON testified via teleconference from Delta Junction. He asked what is going on in our country today if we have to make laws that guarantee us rights which are already guaranteed within the Constitution. World government seems to be gobbling up state land through (indisc.) agreements and environmental legislation. Mr. Dalton said these things are clearly unconstitutional. He stated the legislature needs to be adamant about this and not only on HJR 14, but also other areas where we're losing our constitutional rights. Number 1011 LEONARD EFTA was next to testify, via teleconference, from Kenai in opposition to HJR 14. Mr. Efta said the American Land Sovereignty Protection Act is not necessary. If the U.S. Senate ratified a treaty that has given foreign power control over any part of this country, then that treaty should be null and void. The legislature should see that it is cancelled. He thanked the committee for listening to his testimony. Number 1050 SUSAN ROSS testified via teleconference. She said she agrees with Mr. Efta's testimony. The Constitution stands on its own. She said she doesn't see where HJR 14 is going to add or detract from that. All it needs to do is be enforced, be acknowledged and people need to stand firm behind their (indisc.) through the Constitution, whether they're a federal, state or local elected officials. She said the resolution does add credibility to the discussion that in fact we are pressured sometimes by the federal documents that does (indisc.) our sovereignty. She thanked the committee for allowing her to testify. Number 1107 CHAIRMAN KOTT closed the public hearing. Number 1121 REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS said she believes there is a great need for HJR 14 and said she would urge the members of the House to support it. Part of her concern on the issue stems from the national meetings that she has attended with the Western States Coalition, the Energy Council and several other national groups of legislative bodies that are very very concerned over the action taken at the Rio Conference on this biosphere reserve issue, whereby the Rio Conference adopted a policy that would supersede the constitutions of every nation where these biosphere lands would be set aside. She said she is pleased that Congressman Young introduced the resolution. It is very important for us, as the state of Alaska, to back up his position on this and say that at no point in time can any nation be subject to an international treaty without the explicit agreement and permission of Congress and the legislative body of that nation. Number 1211 CHAIRMAN KOTT said he agrees with Representative Phillips. He said he believes Congressman Young's HR 901 goes a long ways to facilitate discussion as to whether or not the chief executive can enter into a treaty without the Senate ratifying it. There seems to be some appearance that oftentimes he is able to circumvent the entire congressional senatorial process by virtual use of executive agreements. Chairman Kott said what is being done with HJR 14 is supporting Congressman Young and his efforts to ensure that that particular right remains with Congress. Number 1260 REPRESENTATIVE BILL WILLIAMS moved and asked unanimous consent to move CSHJR 14(RLS) forward for calendaring, with individual recommendations and a zero fiscal note. CHAIRMAN KOTT asked if there was an objection. REPRESENTATIVE ELTON objected. A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Vezey, Phillips, Williams and Kott voted in favor of the motion. Representative Elton voted against the motion. CHAIRMAN KOTT announced CSHJR 14(RLS) moved forward for calendaring. HB 51 - REGULATIONS OF DEPT OF ENV. CONSERVATION Number 1316 CHAIRMAN KOTT announced the committee would address HB 51, "An Act relating to the Department of Environmental Conservation." Number 1326 REPRESENTATIVE NORMAN ROKEBERG, sponsor of HB 51, came before the committee. He explained HB 51 was introduced because there needs to be a different way of proposing regulations in the state, particularly as they relate to the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC). He said he believes we need some different points of view represented. Regulations should be based on sound science and they need to be technologically feasible. He stated he believes that all department should start out with a cost benefit analysis of the regulations they promulgate in Alaska. Representative Rokeberg said he is concerned that sometimes when the DEC provides regulations that are more strict than required by the federal government that they are not really cost effective and really don't provide significant risk reductions when they're implemented. The idea of zero tolerance, as a policy in this state, is an ideal and merely an ideal. Many times the department is endeavoring to do that. Number 1394 REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said the bill requires the department to look at their existing regulations inside a federally mandated period of time, come up with any revisions that make it more strict and then justify those regulations based on sound science and technology. He said we need to review the whole regulatory scheme because of unreasonable delays in permitting for all types of industries that use the waters of our state. Representative Rokeberg said the Red Dog Mine recently received a permit for half of a request that was made in 1983. It was a request for a mixing zone. They were granted relief for a partial mixing zone on March 28, 1997. He pointed out it took 14 years to receive a partial permit. Representative Rokeberg said things can be done better in terms of the government reacting to the needs of the people of the state of Alaska. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG indicated that there are a lot of technical things and it is also symbolic in terms of the message that it would send to the industry and the people who created jobs in this state that Alaska is open for business. He said he would point out that there is nothing in the bill that is intended to or will negatively impact the environment. This merely asks that the DEC review some standards that may exist that are more stringent than federal requirements and then asks them to justify those in terms of consideration of economic factors as well as a scientific and technological feasibility of those particular regulations. It does something that is basically common sense. Representative Rokeberg said, "Any accusations that this bill is going to spoil the environment are just complete poppycock." REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG explained the bill and the proposed committee substitute does make an addition by joining together HB 51 and HB 71, which is an act relating to drinking water, introduced by the Administration. He said we need to expedite the passage of the bill as it will save time, money and the effort of staff. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said the committee members' bill files includes CSHB 51, Version C, dated 3/13/97. He said he now would like to present Version J, dated 3/19/97. Representative Rokeberg urged the committee to adopt Version J. Number 1573 REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY made a motion to adopt CSHB 51, Version J. CHAIRMAN KOTT asked if there was an objection. Hearing none, CSHB 51, Version J, was before the committee. Number 1645 REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG explained the reason there is Version J is because after a very lengthy period of time, he was pleased that the Alaska Miners Association was able to provide some recommended amendments to the bill after a long and lengthy review by that group. He noted the bill has been heard many times. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG informed the committee that on page 1 there is a title change. There was some concern about the specificity, so he requested that the original title be included which is, "An Act relating to the Department of Environmental Conservation." REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG referred to page 2 of Version C and page 3, line 1, of Version J and said there is a new definition of "natural conditions," presented by the Alaska Miners Association. He referred to line 1 of the J Version and read, "In this section, `natural condition' means the baseline water quality when the baseline data is obtainable unless the baseline water quality has been altered by historical or upslope activity. If the baseline date is not obtainable or if the baseline water quality has been altered by historical or upslope activity, then `natural condition' has the meaning given to `background condition' in AS 46.03.088." Number 1743 REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG referred to page 3, line 10 of the J Version after the word "the" added was the words "minimum standards" for clarification and consistency. He also referred to page 3, line 13 and said after "or" the word "natural" was added. On line 18 "background or natural condition" has been added. He read from line 24, "standards or other regulations or regulations." He said, "`standards, criteria or regulations' down on 29 and then 30, `criteria and regulations'." Representative said those are suggestions that were reviewed and made by Representative Davies in the House Finance Committee. Number 1822 CHAIRMAN KOTT asked for clarification regarding lines 28 to 30. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said, "Right, there are various words there, `criteria and other regulations' were added on lines 28, 29..." CHAIRMAN KOTT said that was in the previous C Version. REPRESENTATIVE ELTON asked that copies of Version J be made available to the public as the committee members may be the only people in the room who have that version. CHAIRMAN KOTT indicated Version J would be made available right away. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said he has misinformation as to the wording that was included in Versions C and J. He noted that the bill was received just before the meeting began and apologized that it hadn't been circulated. Number 1889 REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG referred to page 4, line 22, after "water quality standard or" the words "permit limit" were added, and the words "discharge standard" were deleted. He said on line 23, the words "standard criteria or regulation" were added and the words "discharge standard" were removed. Representative Rokeberg referred to line 25 and said the words "standard, criteria or regulation" were added. On line 26 of Version J and line 25 of Version C, before the word "substantially" the word "not" was deleted. Number 2135 REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG referred to page 5 of Version C and Version J and said in subparagraph (3)(A) on line 6 of Version J and line 5 of Version C, the word "or" was changed back to "and." On line 11 of Version J, "or" was changed back to "and." He referred to Version J, line 24, and said subsection (2) was added which reads, "`natural condition' means a physical , chemical, biological, or radiological condition existing in a waterbody before human, industrial, or commercial use caused an influence on, a discharge to, or addition of material to the water known at the time of enactment of federal law known as the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972." Representative Rokeberg said the this was reviewed by the Miners Association and the Resource Development Council (RDC). He said they need to have a baseline date as to where this particular provision started for implementation. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said when reviewing the Miner Association's recommended amendments, he wanted to talk to other groups of people that were involved in developing the bill. He indicated he wasn't able to talk to them before the CS was developed, so there are some proposed amendments. Number 2043 REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said he would like to offer Amendment C.3, dated 3/19/97. He noted the amendment was drafted to Version C. In Version J, it would be inserted following line 20. It adopts a mixing zone standard regulation in the statutes of the state of Alaska. The amendment read as follows: Page 3, following line 20: Insert a new subsection to read: "(b) In adopting mixing zone regulations under (a)(5) of this section and to ensure that a mixing zone is as small as practicable, the department shall limit the maximum size of a mixing zone, unless available evidence reasonably demonstrates that a larger mixing zone will adequately protect human health and the environment outside the mixing zone, as follows: (1) for estuarine and marine waters, measured at mean lower low water, (A) the cumulative lineal length of all mixing zones intersected on any given cross section of an estuary, inlet, cove, channel, or other marine waterway may not exceed 10 percent of the total length of that cross section; and (B) the horizontal area allocated to mixing zones may not exceed 10 percent of the surface area; (2) for lakes, the total horizontal area allocated to all mixing zones may not exceed 10 percent of the lake's surface area and; (3) for streams, rivers, or other flowing fresh waters, the length of a mixing zone may not extend beyond the location describe in (A) or (B) of this paragraph, whichever is close to the point of discharge: (A) the location that is two time s the distance of the computed point of complete mixing, as determined using a standard river flow mixing model accepted by the department; or (B) the location where available evidence reasonably demonstrates that a public health hazard would occur." Renumber the following subsections accordingly. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG referred to Amendment C.2, dated 3/19/97, Lauterbach, and said it is some housekeeping. He stated it starts on line 9 through 15. REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS said it should be place on page 5, after line 23 and not line 21. Number 2258 CHAIRMAN KOTT called for a brief at-ease at 5:55 p.m. The meeting was called back to order at 5:57. Number 2263 REPRESENTATIVE ELTON explained that the spokesperson for the DEC needs to catch an airplane in ten minutes. He asked if the committee could hear from her before she has to leave. Number 2288 JANICE ADAIR, Director, Division of Environmental Health, Department of Environmental Conservation, came before the committee to give her testimony. She stated the department hasn't reviewed either the C Version or the J Version as she had just received them. Ms. Adair stated the department does maintain its objection to the legislation even with the administrative penalty section. She said she appreciates the acknowledgement of the importance of the bill. She said "The administrative penalty section, the need to have that to retain drinking water primacy and the federal construction funds that are associated with that, but that doesn't remove our concerns and our objections to the other parts of the root of House Bill 51. And until we have an opportunity to look at the J Version, or however that may be amended further by this committee, I can't give you specifics, but we will certainly follow up with those." Number 2341 CHAIRMAN KOTT said it is his understanding that a major segment of Version J includes what would be construed as a major portion of HB 71. He said it is his understanding that all that does is establish primacy in the state, perspective by virtue of establishing some penalties and procedures to remedy any question area. MS. ADAIR explained when Congress amended the Safe Drinking Water Act last year, it was signed in August, 1996, they amended the requirements for primacy of the drinking water program to include administrative penalty authority. They set the administrative penalty authority at $1,000 a day for systems that serve 10,000 or more a day. They then left to the states the ability to establish the amount for systems that serve below that number as long as it is sufficient to assure compliance. She explained this is an additional activity the department has to undertake and they have to have additional authority to retain primacy for drinking water. She noted it is a program for which they already do enjoy primacy. In addition, in the Safe Drinking Water Act reauthorization, Congress tied together primacy in the drinking water program to access federal construction funds from a newly created fund made last year called the state revolving loan fund. Ms. Adair explained Alaska's share of that state revolving loan fund for FY 98 is just under $27 million. She noted that amount shows up in capital budget, front section appropriation, federal funds. Number 2408 CHAIRMAN KOTT said it is his understanding that Congress establishes the administrative penalty for those systems that service a population of 10,000 or more and leaves up to the state the penalty for those populations of under 10,000. MS. ADAIR noted the department sets the dollar amount and proposes to cap that. She said, "What we've done in here is we've adopted the federal minimum, their $1,000 a day is actually minimum, but we've adopted that as our maximum. And then we've proposed for systems that serve less than 10,000 people that we have a penalty no more than $750. And what we envision is having a regulatory process that would create a scale, either by system or by perhaps type of penalty. I'm not really sure. It's something we want to work with the system operators to figure out the best way to both meet the requirement of Congress and EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) and their concerns as well." Number 2449 CHAIRMAN KOTT asked Ms. Adair if she knows how many systems are in the state that service less than 10,000. MS. ADAIR said we only have six systems that serve more than 10,000, so it's the bulk of the systems that would have the lower penalty. Number 2459 REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said, "One thing when we were reviewing the legislation, I'm curious to get your opinion on whether or not any funds in this state fiscal year would be in jeopardy or the enactment of this as it relates to the federal fiscal year. Could you explain that?" TAPE 97-9, SIDE B Number 001 MS. ADAIR responded, "...effective date on House Bill 71. It says basically that the bill doesn't take effect until EPA tells us we have to have the authority because they haven't told us yet when we have to have that administrative penalty authority." Number 025 CHAIRMAN KOTT asked Representative Rokeberg to review the last amendment. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG referred to Amendment C.2, Lauterbach, 3/19/97, and said it would delete lines 1 through 8 entirely. On line 9, add page 5 line 29. He said, "Amending little (3), drinking water means a body of water, et cetera, and little (4) industrial use." REPRESENTATIVE ELTON asked if he meant 23 and not line 29. CHAIRMAN KOTT pointed out the committee is on definitonal sections. REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS said it is line 23. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said, "It should be 3 and 4 under that, so I think should be 28, not 29." REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG repeated the amendment, "Page 5, line 28, following `1972' then little (3) and little (4)." CHAIRMAN KOTT said the amendment should be labeled Amendment 2. The previous amendment should be labeled Amendment 1 for tracking purposes. Number 128 REPRESENTATIVE ELTON referred to Amendment 1 and said it defines "mixing zone" and it is being defined by horizontal areas, lakes and cumulative lengths. He asked where the definitions came from. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said in the body of regulations, in law, revolving around water quality standards there are a number of different definitions of what a mixing zone is. The mixing zone definition in the amendment is a compilation of an agreement put together by the Alaska Miners Association and has been reviewed by the RDC. Representative Rokeberg said he hasn't had a chance to compare it to a bill that was formally known, before a sponsor substitute, as HB 128, which had a similar provision in terms of defining "mixing zone." He said the necessity of having mixing zones in the state of Alaska is because they already exist. Representative Rokeberg said it took 14 years for the department to try and figure out what a partial mixing zone was for a project that has been underway for a longer period of time than that. Number 249 DENNIS RANDA, Chairman, Alaska Council of Trout, Unlimited, testified via teleconference on HB 51. He informed the committee that water quality is their number one priority nationwide. He indicated he doesn't have a copy of either Version C or Version J, but does have a copy of the Finance Committee version. Mr. Randa said the council recognizes the need for (indisc.), but not unreasonable conditions such as turbidity. He said we have all heard about turbidity standards interfering with business practices and the ability to conduct operations within the limits. Those should be approached in a reasonable manner and he doesn't believe that HB 51 does that. Mr. Randa said we need to work with the agency to develop a cooperative attitude, regardless of disagreements between the permit applicant and the agency when trying to work through, at times, very difficult standards. Mr. Randa said he believes that Alaskans should set our own water standards and not just move to the lowest acceptable standards by the EPA. He said he would like to maintain public involvement and not diminish it. The bill attempts to diminish it. Alaskans should set our own water standards and not at the lowest acceptable standards. He said Alaskans like to think that we are a little different up here and maybe a little better sometimes. Mr. Randa said he has worked with mixing zones and he doesn't believe that there is "the end all to be all." He referred to putting mixing zones in statute and said they are already there, we already use them. If we put them in statute, what happens if a better method comes along. Mr. Randa said he has personally gone out and done work on the Kenai River and is currently involved in that to try to understand water quality issues and impacts. He stated he doesn't get paid to do this work and to have Representative Rokeberg, who appears to insult his involvement at every opportunity, bothers him. Mr. Randa said, "And I would really like to address that. It just doesn't seem to be in the spirit of trying to develop the best possible Alaska for our children that these types of statements such as `poppycock,' referring to my involvement and demeaning my involvement, is at all necessary." Business decisions are economically driven by definition and resource protection must be afforded priority to public process. The public's trust is paramount and he believes that HB 51 violates that trust. Mr. Randa thanked the committee for listening to him. Number 440 CHAIRMAN KOTT said he thinks everyone in attendance believes that water and air quality are of the utmost importance and that we do hold higher standards than the rest of the U.S., in many regards. Many of us not only believe that we a little bit better, but a lot better in more than one way. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said he would like to point out to Mr. Randa that anything he said was not directed to him personally. He said he appreciates his interest. CHAIRMAN KOTT asked Susan Schrader to come forward and present her testimony. He noted all committee members have a copy of a letter from Ms. Schrader of the Alaska Environmental Lobby. Number 643 SUSAN SCHRADER, Executive Director, Alaska Environmental Lobby, Incorporated, explained the lobby is a coalition of 22 different conservation groups throughout the state of Alaska with a combined membership of over 10,000 Alaskans. She said she would like to echo Mr. Randa's comments. Many of his comments are complimentary to the Alaska Environmental Lobby's comments. Ms. Schrader said the only exception she would take with his comments is she thought Representative Rokeberg's comments, regarding poppycock, were directed towards the lobby and not towards Mr. Randa. Ms. Schrader informed the committee she has concerns regarding the public process. She said people were not afforded the opportunity to see either Version C, Version J, or any of the amendments until they had to ask for them. This has been an ongoing concern with the bill, this year, and there was a similar problem with last year's. Ms. Schrader said because of that and because there have been some very significant changes created in the bill by the amendments and new versions, she would respectfully request that the Rules Committee hold the bill over so that the department can review the bill and provide their testimony and so that members of the public can also review the bill. Number 660 CHAIRMAN KOTT referred to Ms. Schrader's letter and said it indicates that there needs to be an introduction of a definition of "background condition." That definition is embodied in the working draft. He asked Ms. Schrader if she has had an opportunity to analyze that particular definition. MS. SCHRADER said, "The addition of the version of the bill that we were referencing, and I don't have it right up here with me, was an earlier version. But yes, it was the version that had the definition of `background condition' in it. Number 670 KATHY HANSEN, Executive Director, United Southeast Alaska Gillnetters Association, came before the committee. She said her association is in opposition to HB 51. Ms. Hansen said she realizes she is speaking to the older versions. She said she found the current conversation very confusing. She would like the DEC to have a chance to review the new version and comment on it at a later time. Ms. Hansen said water quality is very critical. She indicated she moved to Alaska from Washington because she watched the habitat and water quality degrade to a point where they were having trouble with their fish runs. To see the legislature tamper with water quality and habitat issues makes her very nervous. It is something that once you degrade it to a certain point, you can't gain it back. It takes so long that by the time headway is made in cleaning it up, we will have lost our natural resources such as fishing and things people totally enjoy. Ms. Hansen said the groups need to work together. She noted Kensington has been working with the fishing industry. Anything that slows down the public process or cuts out involvement is detrimental. Ms. Hansen said her organization opposes HB 51. Number 768 CHAIRMAN KOTT said if Ms. Hansen opposes the original version, nothing has been done in the new CS that will change her mind. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said he thinks the bill has been improved, from an overall standpoint, in certain areas and perhaps in other areas. The mixing zone may generate some controversy, but he believes that most of the amendments that have been made, in a large part, will be (indisc.) to the bill. He noted a lot of amendments have been incorporated in to the bill that were introduced by the minority members in the House Finance Committee. Number 804 CHAIRMAN KOTT said Ms. Schrader made the comment that she thought Representative Rokeberg's comment regarding poppycock was directed toward the Alaska Environmental Lobby. He said he is sure that wasn't the case. It is probably something Representative Rokeberg said in general. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said it more generic and people shouldn't take things personally, particularly in the political realm. Number 824 NANCY HILLSTRAND, Pioneer Alaskan Fisheries, testified via teleconference from Homer. She informed the committee that Pioneer Alaskan Fisheries is a 35-year old all Alaskan corporation. She said she agrees, with Mr. Randa's comments and believes there needs to be more public review. She said her business employees 43 people and their children and grandchildren all rely on the high quality of water standards that we enjoy in Alaska. All living organisms are made of over 80 percent water, we are water. Bills pertaining to water quality are crucial and critical to the quality of life for all into the future. Ms. Hillstrand said this bill is a really important bill and she feels that sometimes the legislature doesn't take it seriously when people ask for clean water for her industry of fishing and to uphold high quality standards. Water quality problems are common around the world and Alaska is deeply gifted with relatively clean water resources. She asked the heritage not be jeopardized for a nonrenewable extracted industry. To place these industries above renewable resource industries which provide jobs well into the future is shortsighted and have proved to be very very expensive in the long run for our state. It will cost us more money in the long term to clean up problems than to have prevented them. Ms. Hillstrand asked the committee members to remember that the fisheries industry is the number one employer in the state. It is imperative that we uphold strict water quality standards for the state of Alaska so as not to undercut the many industries which rely so deeply on clean clear water. She thanked the committee for listening to her. Number 951 CHAIRMAN KOTT said she can assure Ms. Hillstrand that all of us are intimately involved and are concerned about protecting the pristine beauty of our state to include not having garbage floating around in our waters. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said he wants to remind people about the fact that the House Rules Committee is meeting at all is very unusual. It is not the tradition of the House of Representative of the State of Alaska to schedule Rules Committee hearings. He said the meeting was held at his request. Representative Rokeberg said he was waiting for some amendments to the bill which were received two days ago and there was no intention of not getting the various versions and the amendments out for public review. He indicated he received the new versions of the bill earlier that day. Number 1042 CHAIRMAN KOTT referred to what Representative Rokeberg said about the committee meeting and said the House Rules Committee seldom ever has meetings, but it was important to meet on this issue and take further public input. He said there was no intent, on his part, not to allow the public complete scrutiny of any of the versions of the bill. Number 1145 IRENE ALEXICOS, Alaska Clean Water Alliance, came before the committee to testify. She said she would like to specifically address some of Representative Rokeberg's comments in his sponsor statement. He said the first sentence says, "It's an important piece of economic development legislation." She said that contradicts his point that accusations about this bill about spoiling the environment are complete poppycock. Ms. Alexicos asked how mixing zones cannot be thought of as spoiling the environment. Mixing zones are places where pollution is allowed to occur. You could call them dead zones because anything happening within that zone in a waterbody may not live. The debate over water quality often raises the issue of cost versus economic benefits and the needs versus budgetary reality. Ms. Alexicos said we can try to identify the economic value of our existing aquatic resources or get a sense of how much the economy has suffered from past destruction of these resources. Either way, past investments in clean water programs have considerable benefits and future investments are more than justified on economic grounds. She said not all the values provided by clean water and healthy aquatic ecosystems can be translated into dollars and cents. Nonetheless, water resources support tremendously valued parts of our economy. The elements of any equation designed to calculate the economic value of water would also have to include the value for drinking, for irrigation, for industrial use, hydroelectric production, transportation and enhanced property values. MS. ALEXICOS said Representative Rokeberg said in his statement that HB 51 is supported by the 18 member Alaska Oil and Gas Association, the Resource Development Council, small independent placer miners, certainly those with some economic benefit to lowering water quality standards, and multinational corporations. Ms. Alexicos said she thinks it is key to point out who is opposed to this, the EPA, the DEC, the Environmental Lobby, the Alaska Clean Water Alliance and the various fishing groups. Representative Rokeberg said the basis for this bill is to be sound science. She said she must point out that few, if any, epidemiological studies have (indisc.) human populations for the 30 or more years, commonly needed to observe fully effects of exposure to chemical substances in the environment. The failure to detect hidden long term effects, stemming from chemical exposure, reflects a bias that seeks short term answers to complex problems. This tenancy has particularly severe consequences in the area of public health regulation where governmental agencies have not studied blatant effects generated by toxic substances. Ms. Alexicos continued to discuss how chemicals hurt the environment. She said the Alliance still strongly opposes the bill and urged that it not become law. Number 1427 CHAIRMAN KOTT indicated there were no further witnesses to testify and closed the public hearing. He noted there are two pending amendments before the committee Number 1472 REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS made a motion to adopt Amendment 1. REPRESENTATIVE ELTON objected. He stated he has seen the definition of what a mixing zone should look like defined a couple of different ways. He said he would like to see how it compares to the existing methodology that is being used by the department as they apply it on project-specific sites. Representative Elton said his concern is that we're adopting a definition of mixing zone that may not give the department the flexibility that they're now using, for example, as they work with the Kensington project in Juneau. He said without that kind of information, he is very uncomfortable in adopting Amendment 1. There being no further discussion on Amendment 1, a roll call vote was taken. Representatives Phillips, Williams and Kott voted in favor of Amendment 1. Representative Elton voted against Amendment 1. Amendment 1 was adopted. Number 1568 REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS made a motion to adopt Amendment 2, 3/19/97, Lauterbach, C.2. REPRESENTATIVE ELTON objected. He asked where the definition for "drinking water" and "industrial use" comes from. Number 1609 SHIRLEY ARMSTRONG, Legislative Assistant to Representative Rokeberg, said the drinking water definition is from a DEC regulation that speaks to water supply and drinking water. She explained the regulation says that even though it includes drinking water, that does not mean that the water is safe to drink in its natural state. Ms. Armstrong said the people she has spoke with said that if it's going to be drinking water, you ought to be able to drink it. She explained the term "industrial use" comes from another DEC regulation. The only thing that is new is the fish processing. It goes back to a situation when Echo Bay was trying to get a permit, they were drilling and apparently they used water on the drills to keep the drill from getting hot rather than using oil or something similar. Water spilled out on the ground and some one sued them in that they didn't have a permit to dump that water. Echo Bay then filed suit to stop everybody else who didn't have a permit for water. Number 1747 REPRESENTATIVE ELTON asked if there was a reason that logging isn't mentioned. MS. ARMSTRONG said the word development is included. She noted the definition is the department's definition except for fish processing. A roll call vote was taken on the adoption of Amendment 2. Representative Williams, Phillips and Kott voted in favor of the adoption of Amendment 2. Representative Elton voted against the adoption of Amendment 2. Amendment 2 was adopted. Number 1810 REPRESENTATIVE ELTON requested that the bill, as amended, be held in the Rules Committee before it is scheduled for the floor to allow a thorough review of the bill. He said he doesn't think HB 71 ever had a hearing. He said he is concerned that if CSHB 51 is moved out Rules, there is not going to be the kind of scrutiny that he feels comfortable with. He asked that the bill be held in Rules for four or five days. CHAIRMAN KOTT said he concurs with Representative Elton that the major portion of the bill that was amended to include HB 71, which is the Governor's bill, needs a good thorough review. He indicated he will wait until the following week before scheduling the bill for the floor. REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS made a motion to move CSHB 51(RLS), as amended, out of committee with individual recommendations. REPRESENTATIVE ELTON objected. A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Phillips, Williams and Kott voted in favor of the motion. Representative Elton voted against the motion. CHAIRMAN KOTT said CSHB 51(RLS), as amended, was moved forward for calendaring with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal note. ADJOURNMENT CHAIRMAN KOTT adjourned the House Rules Committee meeting at 6:57 p.m.