ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE
April 6, 2015
3:30 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Cathy Giessel, Chair
Senator Mia Costello, Vice Chair
Senator John Coghill
Senator Peter Micciche
Senator Bill Stoltze
Senator Bill Wielechowski
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Bert Stedman
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
CONFIRMATION HEARING
Alaska Gasline Development Corporation (AGDC)
Rick Halford
- CONFIRMATION ADVANCED
COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 70(RES)
"An Act adding land and water to the Creamer's Field Migratory
Waterfowl Refuge."
- MOVED SCS CSHB 70(RES) OUT OF COMMITTEE
SENATE BILL NO. 48
"An Act relating to a reduced fee for a nonresident hunting or
sport fishing license and a big game tag for qualifying former
state residents; and relating to the requirements for a
nonresident hunting or sport fishing license."
- HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 70
SHORT TITLE: CREAMER'S FIELD REFUGE
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) WOOL
01/21/15 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/21/15 (H) RES
02/11/15 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
02/11/15 (H) Moved CSHB 70(RES) Out of Committee
02/11/15 (H) MINUTE(RES)
02/13/15 (H) RES RPT CS(RES) 8DP
02/13/15 (H) DP: JOHNSON, JOSEPHSON, HERRON, HAWKER,
SEATON, OLSON, TARR, TALERICO
02/23/15 (H) TRANSMITTED TO (S)
02/23/15 (H) VERSION: CSHB 70(RES)
02/25/15 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/25/15 (S) CRA, RES
03/17/15 (S) CRA AT 3:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
03/17/15 (S) Heard & Held
03/17/15 (S) MINUTE(CRA)
03/19/15 (S) CRA AT 3:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
03/19/15 (S) Moved CSHB 70(RES) Out of Committee
03/19/15 (S) MINUTE(CRA)
03/20/15 (S) CRA RPT 1DP 3NR
03/20/15 (S) DP: BISHOP
03/20/15 (S) NR: STEDMAN, EGAN, MACKINNON
04/03/15 (S) RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
04/03/15 (S) -- MEETING CANCELED --
BILL: SB 48
SHORT TITLE: FORMER RESIDENT HUNTING LICENSE
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) STEDMAN
02/11/15 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/11/15 (S) RES, FIN
03/25/15 (S) RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
03/25/15 (S) Scheduled but Not Heard
04/03/15 (S) RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
04/03/15 (S) -- MEETING CANCELED --
WITNESS REGISTER
RICK HALFORD, Appointee
Board of Directors
Alaska Gasline Development Corporation
Eagle River, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as an appointee to the Alaska
Gasline Development Corporation Board of Directors.
REPRESENTATIVE ADAM WOOL
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of HB 70.
ED FOGELS, Deputy Commissioner
Department of Natural Resources (DNR)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Explained changes in HB 70, version P
compared to the original version.
GERALD JENNINGS, Chief Surveyor
Department of Natural Resources (DNR)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on HB 70.
DAVID DUNSMORE, staff to Representative Wool
Alaska State Legislature*
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on HB 70 for the sponsor.
RANDY RUARO, staff to Senator Stedman
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on SB 48 for the sponsor.
ACTION NARRATIVE
3:30:26 PM
CHAIR CATHY GIESSEL called the Senate Resources Standing
Committee meeting to order at 3:30 p.m. Present at the call to
order were Senators Costello, Stoltze, Coghill and Chair
Giessel.
^Confirmation Hearing: AGDC Board of Directors
Confirmation Hearing
AGDC Board of Directors
3:30:40 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL invited Mr. Rick Halford to the table to tell the
committee about his interest in serving on the AGDC Board of
Directors. She reviewed AS 31.25.020, the statute that governs
his appointment to the Alaska Gasline Development Corporation
(AGDC), Board of Directors, as a public member. She said his
term began on February 19, 2015 and will expire in September
2016.
3:32:34 PM
RICK HALFORD, Appointee, Board of Directors, Alaska Gasline
Development Corporation (AGDC), Eagle River, Alaska, reviewed
his resume including education and 24 years of legislative
service. He said his positions on the legislature were the best
place to learn things, because you can basically get the best
education from advocates of one point of view or the other. The
first huge issue he dealt with in the House Resources Committee
in 1979 was the interim tariff on the Trans Alaska Pipeline
System (TAPS). It was a great part of what kept him in the
legislature for 24 years. The first time he was on a direct
gasline issue was a governor's task force on gasline financing
in the mid-90s.
He said legislators had been trying to get a pipeline going for
a very long time and there are better options now than ever
before, but it requires everyone to be on the same side. The
chances of getting it are low, but they are much, much better if
the legislative branch and the executive branch were going in
the same direction, something he hoped they can figure out. He
believes in the governor and the legislative branch and there
may be a window where it has become in the self-interest of at
least one of the majors to do something they hadn't been willing
to do before.
3:35:31 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL noted that Mr. Halford had been an advocate in the
past for the Gasline Port Authority and asked if he was
skeptical as other Port Authority folks are about the AKLNG
Project.
MR. HALFORD replied no, but they are trying to push a very
difficult huge project. Skepticism isn't the right word, but
this project has eluded legislators and executives for the last
40 years. His view is that generally as much as they try through
the political process to make things move it's kind of like
pushing on a rope. Unless something pulls on the other end, we
don't get anywhere. It may be because of economic determinations
about Pt. Thomson and ExxonMobil's interest, but this could be a
chance to do everything possible to push it as much as possible.
3:36:51 PM
SENATOR MICCICHE joined the committee.
CHAIR GIESSEL noted that former Senate President, Drue Pearce,
was in the audience.
CHAIR GIESSEL asked how his appointment came about.
MR. HALFORD responded that he was asked if he would serve and
replied, "Yeah, sure." He had been serving on the Salary
Commission that prohibits being on any other commissions, so he
resigned from that in January. Nothing happened until a month
later when the governor made the appointment.
SENATOR COGHILL thanked him for accepting the appointment. He
asked how the Alaska Stand Alone Pipeline (ASAP) Project would
work with the AKLNG Project's structure.
3:39:10 PM
MR. HALFORD replied that he hadn't done anything with the Port
Authority for the last decade, but instead of looking at a
pipeline through Canada they are now looking at an LNG market
that can move by seaborne transportation to a lot of potential
destinations, a much more flexible business proposition.
SENATOR COGHILL agreed that the economics are pretty thin and
said that legislators are concerned that the state is starting
to compete with itself.
MR. HALFORD responded that the economics are so big that all the
political pressure they can create will not make or break what
the multi-billion dollar economic decisions are. If the AKLNG
Project can go forward, then the amount of money spent on the
backup should be minimized while still trying to be in the
information realm of having something so that we're not totally
unarmed. Obviously, the project with the sponsors with the money
to build it is the best chance.
3:41:42 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL said the AGDC Board voted unanimously to pass a
resolution to conduct further studies and cost analyses for a
cost of $180 million on enlarging the smaller ASAP that is 100
percent state-owned and asked what prompted him to vote yes.
MR. HALFORD replied that as the transcript shows, he made it
very clear that he was voting on pipe strength. They had already
decided it was 36 inch pipe and they were talking about changing
from schedule 600 pipe to schedule 900 pipe. He thought it was a
very simple, cheap option in terms of having more information.
The big questions were pump stations and the gas conditioning
plant (GCP). A huge amount of money was spent on the GCP and
there were questions about whether the process would have to
change; questions were also raised about the composition of the
gas. The questions kept getting bigger and bigger, but his
interest was to ask the simplest question as cheap as possible -
what to do with the pipe size - because it provides the most
options to change in the future.
3:43:47 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI joined the committee.
MR. HALFORD agreed that spending money to study things the state
won't do is an outcome that he didn't like, but keeping the
Alaska Project as a reserve at minimal cost was worthwhile. A
subsequent motion kind of added those things back in.
CHAIR GIESSEL asked if he or others on the board asked what
would be done with the additional gas and the cost of an export
component.
MR. HALFORD replied there was recognition of all those things
but not a lot of discussion about them. The problem with some of
the questions was based on their complexity that they became
hugely expensive to answer.
CHAIR GIESSEL said she read the transcript and her concern was
that they were newly appointed board members deciding to spend
more money. She asked who made the motion on that resolution.
MR. HALFORD answered that he didn't, but it was in the
transcript.
3:46:42 PM
SENATOR MICCICHE said one project is an integrated system, well
head to foreign point of delivery, and the other project
obviously isn't. Alaskans are excited about a project that
exposes only 25 percent of the investment total to the state. He
is fairly comfortable with the ultimate cost of the AKLNG
Project, because he knows how "tight" the involved companies are
on risk. They don't like risk and are well equipped to deal with
it. But perhaps the state isn't as experienced in that level of
risk and why would it consider a project that wouldn't have
those partners? Why would take that level of risk at this time
and why would other Alaskans assume it is an appropriate thing
to do?
3:49:09 PM
MR. HALFORD replied that he always wanted to see the private
sector investment in front of the state's investment and risk,
because they are better at it than the state is. The state
decides things politically and the private sector decide things
based on the downstream economics. Yes, they want their share,
but the state tends to change its mind way too often and isn't
as good at business as they are.
SENATOR MICCICHE followed up saying everyone backs mistakes, but
those companies have a way of making up mistakes. But the state
doesn't have a way of making up mistakes, especially now. We are
challenged on revenue and have a limited amount of savings. The
state can't tap into another project or another product line.
"We sort of have a one shot at this." How do you feel about
that?"
MR. HALFORD agreed that it's true. He said whenever the state
deals with multinational corporations with fantastic careers and
huge rewards, the state has relatively short term players and
the people it hires are short term, also. A lot the consultants
the state hires are going to get their next job from the other
side of the table. The only advantage the state has is the
ability of the sovereign to change some of the rules after the
fact if it does too poorly. Just in general, the state has not
done very well on some of the ownership decisions, and it has
been criticized for changing some of the tax decisions after the
fact. It's an ongoing relationship. Alaska is a lot safer and
better than it was before the TAPS was built, it's just not as
friendly as it used to be.
3:52:07 PM
SENATOR MICCICHE asked him to talk about the top level of
spending he considered for expanding the ASAP. Someone said $180
million isn't enough to build a pipeline, but he was convinced
it's enough to cancel one.
MR. HALFORD replied that hoped they wouldn't spend even 10
percent. It shouldn't be spent in this short timeframe until
they find out what other players are going to do with the
primary project.
SENATOR COSTELLO asked if he thought the market can be
predicted.
MR. HALFORD said he certainly can't; and he wasn't sure the
state or industry could either.
3:55:00 PM
SENATOR COSTELLO agreed, but he said earlier that AKLNG chances
are low and we have to not put all our eggs in one basket. So,
ASAP gets resurrected. She didn't understand why we would
confuse the markets if we are going to get to the FEED stage
fairly soon. The priority should be clarity for the market. Why
the rush on ASAP?
3:57:13 PM
MR. HALFORD replied that the state's best chance is the big
producer project. That doesn't mean low cost reasonable backup
information shouldn't be available. It's not to supplant the
AKLNG in a very short timeframe.
CHAIR GIESSEL asked if the AGDC set a spending cap for the new
studies or was it left ill-defined.
MR. HALFORD replied that it is left ill defined, but if he could
do it again he would go back and say he thought the pipe
question was going to be the only question. He thought it could
be easily done without a lot of cost. The question of going back
and reengineering the gas conditioning plant to make it four or
five times bigger, when it cost a fortune to engineer as it is,
was one that he wasn't interested in.
3:59:26 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL said she was glad he was asking the question, but
unfortunately it's in retrospect. She said the governor talked
about wanting majority ownership in whatever pipeline goes
forward and she asked if the board had had discussions or read
transcripts about the state being an owner builder or owner
builder operator.
MR. HALFORD responded that he hadn't been in that level of
discussion. It's nice to think about how big a percentage the
state should own, but in looking at a $60-70 billion project and
the state's assets and concentrating something that is now very
broadly based and bringing money into the state - the Permanent
Fund - and concentrating it into all your eggs in one basket, he
worries. That's the balance he would take if he were in that
discussion. The numbers just to get estimates are astronomical.
The state does this periodically on major projects and ends up
with nothing but studies.
4:01:33 PM
SENATOR MICCICHE said this seems more like an exercise in
increasing state ownership versus having a backup plan, and he
couldn't find a single situation where lowering the economy of
scale had made a project more economic. He asked Mr. Halford why
he voted yes and if he thought there was any chance for a
smaller scale project to be more economic than the AKLNG
Project.
MR. HALFORD replied that he was interested in looking at the
cost difference of upsizing the pipe was and then it was brought
back with a further motion to look at pump stations and gas
conditioning. There was discussion about not letting the
engineering team go, but the simple resolution before them was
just pipe size - and he thought it could be done "pretty cheap"
to get into a better economic situation, if the price were low
enough. That is still an open question. He explained that his
vote was on pipe size and why, because he didn't want to spend a
lot of money finding out things that may not be used.
4:04:28 PM
SENATOR MICCICHE asked why he thinks he is the right guy for
this job and what limitations he sees about what he might
potentially have to learn before he becomes the right guy for
the job.
MR. HALFORD answered that there is no "right person." Different
people learn different things. The biggest obstacle he sees
right now is the trust between appropriators and the
administrators. The legislature is the checkbook without the
arms and legs of administration; it's intended that way. If they
are going to be successful in getting this project, he would be
interested in being a part of rebuilding the trust between the
two branches, so that the state can go forward "on the same
sheet of music." The state has had 40 years of failure and that
could go on "if we're divided."
SENATOR MICCICHE asked what some of the gaps he would want to
fill in to be a better guy for the job.
MR. HALFORD answered that there is lots of information he
doesn't have, so he would have to do a lot of homework. There is
the question of confidentiality agreements and what one needs to
know. He didn't know if he was the best person, and it's not
always the best person; it's the best person they can get at the
time. He always needs more education.
4:08:24 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL went back to the trust issue and said SB 138 was
extensively discussed last year: 51 committee hearings and
countless testimony and consultants with expertise. The
legislature is concerned that the law it passed after that
extensive work continues to be followed. They will be at the
FEED decision in about a year and then have some idea whether
this project is economic and if not, why. A tremendous amount of
information will be gained by waiting and just letting the law
proceed.
The legislature found itself in having to pass HB 132, which
underscores what was passed last year, and the governor is
saying it is binding his hands. Mr. Halford is saying that
actually all AGDC passed was a minor expanded backup and she
asked him what he thought.
MR. HALFORD answered that when read the underlying legislation
he felt it was the broadest grant of authority he had ever seen
to an executive branch. The desire to get something done passed
a huge amount of authority to the executive branch, which he
would have had to get comfortable with. But the second part of
it is that he believes that the principle negotiators need to
keep negotiating however long it takes to get everyone on the
same side of the equation. He didn't like the fact that the
bigger the project is the harder it is and the more all have
negative power. Unless they are together they won't get
anything.
4:11:30 PM
He didn't distrust the legislative branch or the governor; the
governor's intentions are right. The conflict has got to be
worked out between the players. The corporation is a small
player, because it is viewed as the instrument of the executive
branch to accomplish whatever. Negotiations need to continue
between the legislative branch and executive branch at the
governor's level until they get to a solution.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI agreed with Senator Micciche that a smaller
gasline is never more economical than a bigger line. The reason
AGDC was constrained to a smaller gasline was because the Alaska
Gasline Inducement Act (AGIA) was in place. It was the law; they
couldn't build a 500 mmcf gasline. When SB 138 passed, the
differences with TransCanada were resolved, the difference was
being able to build a bigger gasline. The legislature never
wanted a 500 mmcf limit on the backup plan. So, SB 138 freed
them up to build a backup plan that is economical. Is the reason
you go to a bigger line is to try to get a gasline that is more
economical for the state in case for some reason SB 138 doesn't
work out?
MR. HALFORD answered if you're losing per unit, you can't make
it up in volume. But someplace they have 90 percent of the
economy of scale and maybe a size, but the numbers of all the
projects are so far beyond our capacity that he would have to be
convinced the state has the capacity to build something that was
economic - and he hadn't go there yet. He is still listening,
though.
CHAIR GIESSEL asked how he felt about confidentiality
agreements.
4:14:55 PM
MR. HALFORD replied that he hadn't signed one yet, but he had
signed them in the past. He signed one when he chaired the
committee that went against the state's position on the BP ARCO
merger, which resulted in ConocoPhillips. Anyone in a public
review position has to sign a confidentiality agreement and end
up with information they can't explain to their constituents;
that is always hard and should always be taken seriously. It is
important to know information that companies don't want to share
with each other. He would take the advice of the attorneys and
if a confidentiality agreement were necessary he would try to
sign the minimum necessary for the information he was trying to
get.
4:16:53 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL said she was glad to hear that as the AGDC has
significant fiduciary responsibility and many in the room have
served on boards of directors and understand that is the primary
responsibility of a board member.
She asked who Sterling Gallagher is and what role he has played
in this pipeline.
MR. HALFORD answered that he was Governor Hammond's Department
of Revenue commissioner. He was around during the transition,
but he didn't know what his role was.
4:18:40 PM
SENATOR MICCICHE clarified that he was not talking about the
economy of scale of pipelines earlier; it was the economy of
scale of the entire project. If an integrated model from
wellhead to import terminal is not economic, a relatively
piecemeal project where the state owns the pipeline and others
presumably come in and save the day with the other models of
liquefaction and gas treatment - three different projects -
that's the part that doesn't take advantage of the economy of
scale. The beauty of AKLNG is the integrated model with four
partners. He asked him why there seems to be a lack of value for
that integrated aligned model.
MR. HALFORD replied that the pipeline is the cheapest of the
three pieces of the AKLNG Project. The gas conditioning plant
and the liquefaction plant are the biggest numbers and the
question of steel strength is easily calculated compared to the
others. Every component combined has to be economic to every
participant or the project won't come together.
He said it's easy to separate the pipeline and to wish someone
would build it and then get somebody else to do everything else.
The ability to be able to do that and get something that works
is very limited. Part of his education in this is to learn a lot
of things that may make his preconceived notions not work.
Whenever one doesn't have the responsibility to actually decide
something, there are all kinds of opinions. He said:
We're in the profession where we decided without
information on a lot of stuff. And, we do our best and
we go on. Once you actually have the ability to
influence something, then you've got the
responsibility to know what the choices really are.
And I'm not satisfied that I know all the choices, but
asking a question on pipe strength didn't seem like a
problem to me. But there are a lot of other things
that are involved in making something - you can't turn
a $10 billion project into a $60 billion project
without an awful lot of difference.
CHAIR GIESSEL acknowledged and expressed sincere respect for the
decades of experience he has in this body, the knowledge he
gained from it and the expertise. Just for the record, there
were three people in the three seats that had more than 100
years of hands-on experience in building pipelines and planning
large projects like this around the world. The difficulty they
have is knowing that had that resolution come forward to that
group, they would have said "Wait a minute; just increasing the
strength of a pipeline means X, Y, Z, as well." So that is why
they have concerns.
MR. HALFORD said he appreciated their role in the process, but
the bottom line is that it is going to take agreement.
"Together, maybe, we can get a gasline; divided, I don't think
there's a chance."
CHAIR GIESSEL said in accordance with AS 39.05.080, the
Resources Committee reviewed the following and recommends the
appointment be forwarded to a joint session for consideration:
Richard Halford to the AGDC Board of Directors. This does not
reflect an intent by any of the members to vote for or against
the confirmation of the individuals during any further sessions.
4:25:50 PM
At ease
HB 70-CREAMER'S FIELD REFUGE
4:26:55 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL announced the consideration of HB 70 [CSHB 70(RES)
was before the committee].
SENATOR COSTELLO moved to adopt SCS CSHB 70 ( ), version 29-
LS0372\P, as the working document.
CHAIR GIESSEL objected for discussion purposes.
4:27:51 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ADAM WOOL, sponsor of HB 70, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, introduced himself.
4:28:08 PM
ED FOGELS, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Natural Resources
(DNR), Anchorage, Alaska, explained the changes in version P. He
said he had the survey staff do one more top-to-bottom scrub for
accuracy of the legal locations and they made three corrections.
The first is on page 2, line 1, where "instruction" was deleted
and replaced with "instrument". That was primarily due to the
fact that the original documents for this tract were very hard
to read. The survey staff realized that they had been misread in
the original bill.
The second change on page 3, line 2, was for the same reason:
the year "1976" was deleted and replaced with "1978". A third
change was on page 3, lines 13-14, where the word "and" was
deleted; and Mr. Jennings would explain why.
4:30:16 PM
GERALD JENNINGS, Chief Surveyor, Department of Natural Resources
(DNR), Anchorage, Alaska, explained that the changes on lines 13
and 14 related to protecting the state's right-of-way for
Farmer's Loop Road in the event that a future survey reveals a
couple of the aliquant parts actually encroach slightly into the
right-of-way. Originally the description listed two of the four
aliquant parts as lines south of the right-of-way and two did
not address the right-of-way. This version now addresses all
four aliquant parcels lying south of the Farmer's Loop Road
right-of-way.
CHAIR GIESSEL removed her objection and finding no further
objections said that the Senate CS for HB 70, version P, was
adopted.
SENATOR STOLTZE asked if this would change the odds in the Crane
Classic.
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL answered no.
DAVID DUNSMORE, staff to Representative Wool, added that this
wouldn't change any land uses in these parcels, because they are
already managed consistent with the management plan.
SENATOR MICCICHE asked if anyone has a problem with this bill or
is worried about land in that area going into permanent
conservation.
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL answered no; they have had a few hearings
and the only comments have been about support.
CHAIR GIESSEL said that Senator Micciche asked why they were
passing this again (it was passed last year), and she had
appreciated Deputy Commissioner Fogels quadruple checking of the
property descriptions, because last year's bill had to be vetoed
because of errors in the property descriptions.
CHAIR GIESSEL said she had walked many of these trails; the
Creamer's Field was a dairy where her family used to get milk.
Finding no further discussion, she closed public testimony.
SENATOR COSTELLO moved to report SCS CSHB 70, version P, from
committee with individual recommendations and attached fiscal
note. There were no objections and SCS CSHB 70(RES) was reported
from the Senate Resources Standing Committee.
4:34:42 PM
At ease
SB 48-FORMER RESIDENT HUNTING LICENSE
4:36:10 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL announced the consideration of SB 48.
4:36:14 PM
RANDY RUARO, staff to Senator Stedman, sponsor of SB 48, Alaska
State Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, explained that it encourages
former Alaskans to return to Alaska to hunt or fish with family
members. The qualifying former Alaskan would be allowed to pay
the reduced resident rate for their hunting or fishing license.
This former Alaskan must be U.S. citizen, have been an Alaska
resident in the past, have held a resident license for that
activity, have paid the fee for the resident license, and be
sponsored by an Alaskan resident family member whom they will
hunt or fish with when they return. The number of these
licenses is capped at 1,000. Fish and Game officials from
Montana, which has a similar program, said it took a while to
build up in popularity, so they are not anticipating reaching
the cap in the first year.
SENATOR STOLTZE asked if this makes any other substantive
changes to non-resident requirements.
MR. RUARO answered that a provision in the bill exempts these
non-residents from being required to hunt with a registered
guide.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if this would allow non-residents to
dip net.
MR. RUARO replied that it reduces the rate paid for their
licenses. The bill does not distinguish by type of fishing
activity.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if they would gain other rights that
residents have, for instance, access to personal use fisheries.
4:39:17 PM
MR. RUARO answered if a right exists for a resident and a person
qualifies under this bill for that resident license, they would
have the right a resident has now. So, it could expand that
universe.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said that he wouldn't support that. He
asked if this would apply to king stamps.
MR. RUARO answered that he didn't know if there was a difference
for non-residents and residents for king stamps, but it would if
that individual qualified under the expanded term.
CHAIR GIESSEL remarked that there is no fee for personal use and
it automatically goes with the resident fishing license, so it
would go with that as well for the non-resident.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked on page 2, line 3, how to define "may
not hunt or fish unless personally accompanied by non-resident
sponsor."
MR. RUARO answered that it is not a defined term; the intent is
that the family member that is the sponsor would be on the same
trip in the vicinity with the family member that has qualified
for the reduced fee license. But there is no definition for
physical presence proximity.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked what "exempt from AS 16.05.407(a)(1)"
on page 2, line 4, means.
MR. RUARO answered that it goes to Senator Stoltze's previous
question about non-residents being required to have a
professional guide.
4:41:52 PM
SENATOR MICCICHE said a person could come to Alaska for a
temporary project for a year, become a resident, and then move
outside and just happen to have a relative by blood or marriage
and forever have resident access to the state's hunting and
fishing resource at the cost of a resident and asked if the
sponsor would consider a minimum time for being in the state.
MR. RUARO answered they had looked at various options and agreed
that the timeframe for becoming a resident can be fairly short.
They would continue to look for a good definition.
SENATOR MICCICHE said he agreed with Senator Wielechowski that
personal use is for survival of Alaskans and not necessarily to
load on a plane and take somewhere else. He would like to see
that amended.
SENATOR STOLTZE asked the justification for determining the non-
resident had to previously hold a license.
MR. RUARO replied that they were trying to create some ties to
actual participation in a fishery or hunting activity along with
being a former resident.
SENATOR STOLTZE said that two months might be semi-palatable. He
remembered needing to be the age of 16 to get a license and
therefore would not be able to qualify if he had left the state
before then.
MR. RUARO couldn't recall an age requirement for licensure.
4:45:39 PM
SENATOR COSTELLO asked if creating two classes of people - the
first 1,000 and the second 1,000 - was fair.
MR. RUARO replied that it creates a first in the door dynamic,
but it is important to cap the licenses in case they turned out
to be overly popular in drawing in large numbers of folks who
would be coming here anyway.
SENATOR COSTELLO assumed that he wouldn't want the state to lose
the revenue, which would be about a half million dollars.
MR. RUARO answered that it was a revenue issue and at the same
time they wanted a program in place for a few years to see how
popular it was.
4:47:31 PM
SENATOR COSTELLO asked for the difference in license fees.
MR. RUARO answered that the previous fiscal note assumed 1,000
people that otherwise would not have come to Alaska and the new
fiscal note was revised downward significantly to reflect the
fact that the program wasn't expected to max out in the first
year.
SENATOR COSTELLO asked what the license fees are now and what
they would be if this bill passes.
MR. RUARO said there are different tag fees and he would have to
get that information for her.
SENATOR COSTELLO asked what the department uses the proceeds
from fishing and hunting licenses for.
MR. RUARO answered that he didn't know if the funds can be
traced to exact functions in the department.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said there are often lotteries for hunting
and asked if this potentially crowds Alaskan residents out of
those lotteries.
MR. RUARO answered that they hadn't thought about the lottery
hunts in drafting the bill. But as written a non-resident could
apply for and receive a resident license if they met these
requirements. They hadn't taken it the additional step to sort
out whether that would also give them standing to apply for the
lottery hunts.
4:50:14 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL asked how many vendors sell licenses in Alaska.
MR. RUARO answered in the thousands.
CHAIR GIESSEL asked if you can get a fishing license on line.
MR. RUARO answered yes.
CHAIR GIESSEL said conceivably these licenses could be gone in
one hour.
MR. RUARO responded that this is an exception to getting a
license on line. It will require a paper affidavit swearing that
one meets the requirements.
CHAIR GIESSEL asked how many fishing licenses are issued each
year.
MR. RUARO answered several hundred thousand.
CHAIR GIESSEL said that could mean that 1,000 licenses could be
reached rather quickly.
MR. RUARO agreed that was a possibility.
4:51:57 PM
SENATOR STOLTZE mentioned that one of the more contentious
issues for the Board of Game's last cycle was Dall sheep hunts
and he couldn't imagine telling one of his constituents why he
let somebody's cousin jump ahead of them. Had the sponsor
thought about the mess this would create?
MR. RUARO replied that was an important issue and they hadn't
chased down every potential hunt that a non-resident could be
allowed into, so several could be of such importance to industry
and Alaskans that the bill might not apply to that particular
hunt. The intent behind the bill was more general: sport fish
for king salmon and deer hunting.
CHAIR GIESSEL opened public testimony and finding no testimony
said she would keep it open and held SB 48 in committee.
4:55:06 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL adjourned the Senate Resources Committee meeting
at 4:55 p.m.