Legislature(2015 - 2016)BUTROVICH 205

04/01/2016 03:30 PM Senate RESOURCES

Note: the audio and video recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.

Download Mp3. <- Right click and save file as

Audio Topic
03:30:04 PM Start
03:30:41 PM SB163
04:21:21 PM Presentation: Food Security
05:45:42 PM Adjourn
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
-- Please Note Hearing May Go Until 5:30 p.m. --
+ Overview: State of Food Security in Alaska TELECONFERENCED
-- Testimony <Invitation Only> --
+ Bills Previously Heard/Scheduled: TELECONFERENCED
Heard & Held
         SB 163-NATL. RES. WATER NOMINATION/DESIGNATION                                                                     
3:30:41 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR GIESSEL  announced consideration  of SB  163. She  said this                                                              
is  the fifth  hearing;  the  last hearing  was  on  March 16  and                                                              
public testimony had been heard and closed.                                                                                     
3:30:46 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI joined the committee.                                                                                      
SENATOR  COSTELLO  moved  to  adopt  CSSB 163  (  ),  labeled  29-                                                              
GS2916\I, as the working document.                                                                                              
CHAIR GIESSEL objected for purposes of explanation.                                                                             
3:31:25 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR MICCICHE joined the committee.                                                                                          
3:31:31 PM                                                                                                                    
MICHELLE  HALE,   Director,  Division  of  Water,   Department  of                                                              
Environmental  Conservation  (DEC), Anchorage,  Alaska,  explained                                                              
the changes in version I of SB 163 as follows:                                                                                  
     1. Page  1, line 7:  changes the name  of Tier  3 waters                                                                   
     to  outstanding   state  resource   waters  instead   of                                                                 
     national waters.                                                                                                           
     2. Page  1, lines  9-10: adds  that the Legislature  may                                                                   
     remove a designation.                                                                                                      
     3. Page  1, line 12 - page  3, line 7: rather  than have                                                                   
     the  process  for submittal  of  nomination  information                                                                   
     and    public   notice    established   in    regulation                                                                   
     (AS46.03.085(c)   in   the   original  bill),   the   CS                                                                   
     establishes an  eleven point criteria a  nomination must                                                                   
     include,  and   adds  a  fee  (Section   46.03.135(b)(1)                                                                   
     through    (11)).   The   fee    for   a    completeness                                                                   
     determination of the nomination information.                                                                               
CHAIR GIESSEL asked for a discussion of the fee.                                                                                
MS. HALE  replied the fee  language is on  page 3, line 7,  and it                                                              
is $1,000. It is  to provide the agency with  resources for making                                                              
the  completeness  determination.  That's  not the  analysis,  but                                                              
just  in-taking the  information,  reviewing it,  and making  sure                                                              
that it adheres to the previous 10 criteria in that section.                                                                    
3:33:57 PM                                                                                                                    
     4. Page  3, line 9:  Adds a six  month timeline  for the                                                                   
     department  to determine that  a nomination is  complete                                                                   
     in AS 46.03.145                                                                                                            
     5. Page  3, lines  10-25: Allows  for the department  to                                                                   
     enter  into  an  agreement  with  a  nominator  for  the                                                                   
     nominator  to reimburse  the  department  for the  costs                                                                   
     related   to   the   analyses  (not   related   to   the                                                                   
     completeness  determination) of  the nomination  process                                                                   
     including  public notice, preparation  of the  findings,                                                                   
     analyses  and determinations  related to the  nomination                                                                   
     to the  legislature. The  agreement that the  department                                                                   
     would enter  into would also include money  to reimburse                                                                   
     the other resource  agencies for the work  that they do.                                                                   
     So ADF&G  and DNR  would be  included in that  agreement                                                                   
     and  DEC  would   basically  RSA  the  money   to  them.                                                                   
     Alternatively,  the   department  can  prepare   a  cost                                                                   
     estimate  for processing a  nomination and forward  that                                                                   
     to  the  legislature  for  consideration  as  a  capital                                                                   
3:35:18 PM                                                                                                                    
     6. Page  3, line 31 -  through page 4, line  2: outlines                                                                   
     that  the  department  shall  establish  a  process  for                                                                   
     providing  public  notice, including  individual  notice                                                                   
     to land owners,  and for prioritizing nominations  in AS                                                                   
     46.03.155.  And  provides   a  process  of  prioritizing                                                                   
     7.  Page  4,   line  10  -  page  5,  line   16:  Before                                                                   
     transmitting nominations  to the legislature,  adds that                                                                   
     the department  must certify  a nomination complete;  in                                                                   
     consultation  with  DNR  and DF&G,  determine  that  the                                                                   
     water has  exceptional characteristics;  in consultation                                                                   
     with  DNR and  DF&G create  a  report analyzing  certain                                                                   
     factors  related to  the nomination  including  analysis                                                                   
     of risk  that the water will  be degraded, and  the pros                                                                   
     and  cons  of alternatives  available  to  preserve  the                                                                   
     water in AS 46.03.165.                                                                                                     
3:36:38 PM                                                                                                                    
     8.  Page  5,  lines  17-23: Clarifies  that  a  list  of                                                                   
     nominations  from the preceding  four calendar  years is                                                                   
     submitted  to  the  legislature  in  the  first  regular                                                                   
     session of  each legislature  after January 2018,  while                                                                   
     entire  nomination  packets  for  nominations  certified                                                                   
     complete  in  the  preceding   two  calendar  years  are                                                                   
     submitted in AS 46.03.175.                                                                                                 
     9.  Page 5,  lines 24-29:  Requires  the state  resource                                                                   
     agencies  (DNR  and  DEC)  to submit  a  report  to  the                                                                   
     legislature  every ten  years beginning  in 2020 on  the                                                                   
     status  of  designated  waters  and  recommendations  on                                                                   
     continuation of the designations.                                                                                          
     10.  Page  5,  line  30  -  page  6,  line  4:  Provides                                                                   
     language  describing how the  department shall  manage a                                                                   
     designated   water  to  maintain   its  existing   water                                                                   
     quality  and  only  allow   discharges  that  result  in                                                                   
     temporary lowering of water quality in AS 46.03.185.                                                                       
     11. Page  6, lines  5-7: clarifies  that a water  cannot                                                                   
     be  managed  as  an  outstanding  state  resource  water                                                                   
     until it has been designated as such.                                                                                      
     12.  Page  6,  line  10-14:  provides  a  definition  of                                                                   
     "resident"  and  "waters of  the  United States"  in  AS                                                                   
     13. Page 6, lines 15-19: adds uncodified law that the                                                                      
       department's first submittal of nominations to the                                                                       
     legislature be after 2018.                                                                                                 
3:38:51 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR  STOLTZE said  Commissioner  Hartig  talked about  finding                                                              
the middle ground  and asked if she would describe  this as middle                                                              
MS.  HALE answered  yes, adding  that  they had  worked very  hard                                                              
listening to comments  and from the Senate Resources  Committee to                                                              
find that middle ground.                                                                                                        
CHAIR GIESSEL asked  her to explained the error in  citing the CFR                                                              
on page 6, line 14.                                                                                                             
MS. HALE  said the  citation on  line 14  is 40  CFR 230.3  and it                                                              
should be  40 CFR  122.2. Both  are definitions  of waters  of the                                                              
U.S.; they just  refer to different parts of the  CFR and 122.2 is                                                              
more appropriate to point source discharges.                                                                                    
CHAIR GIESSEL  said they would correct  that after they  adopt the                                                              
SENATOR  WIELECHOWSKI   asked  if   a  tribe   can  apply   for  a                                                              
designation under this bill.                                                                                                    
MS. HALE said the  definition of resident of the  state is defined                                                              
in AS  01.10.055 and  it is quite  broad. It doesn't  specifically                                                              
call  out tribes,  but  it does  call  out organizations  and  any                                                              
person. For  example, the chief  of a tribe  would be a  person or                                                              
resident of the state.                                                                                                          
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI  asked if the CS requires  the legislature to                                                              
formally  consider  a  nomination  after  a person  has  paid  the                                                              
$1,000 fee.                                                                                                                     
MS.  HALE   answered  that   nothing  in   the  CS  requires   the                                                              
legislature  to   formally  consider  that  nomination.   It  just                                                              
outlines  the  process  the  departments   go  through  for  their                                                              
analyses  and for  getting that  information  to the  legislature,                                                              
and then it's  up to the legislature  to decide what they  want to                                                              
do with it.                                                                                                                     
CHAIR GIESSEL  said the $1000  fee is to  pay for staff  time used                                                              
to make sure the application is complete.                                                                                       
SENATOR   WIELECHOWSKI   asked  how   DEC   will  prioritize   the                                                              
3:41:50 PM                                                                                                                    
MS. HALE  said that DEC would  write regulations to  clarify that,                                                              
but one  example of  prioritizing those  nominations would  be the                                                              
completeness of  it. So, a  large report with  a lot of  detail in                                                              
it might have a higher priority than a simple letter.                                                                           
SENATOR  WIELECHOWSKI  asked  if   the  DEC  believes  any  waters                                                              
deserve protection right now.                                                                                                   
MS. HALE said she wouldn't know how to answer that question.                                                                    
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI  asked if  DEC has  evaluated any  waters and                                                              
come to  the conclusion that they  should be protected  as natural                                                              
resource waters.                                                                                                                
MS. HALE answered no.                                                                                                           
3:43:09 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR MICCICHE  asked why the  administration brought  this bill                                                              
forward at this time.                                                                                                           
ED FOGELS,  Deputy Commissioner,  Department of Natural  Resources                                                              
(DNR),  Juneau, Alaska,  answered  that the  DEC is  lead on  this                                                              
issue,  but  from DNR's  perspective  the  Clean Water  Act  (CWA)                                                              
requires  the state  to have this  program. If  the state  doesn't                                                              
develop  its own  program the  concern is  that the  Environmental                                                              
Protection Agency (EPA) could impose its own program.                                                                           
SENATOR MICCICHE said  he wanted to pose that question  to DEC, as                                                              
3:44:43 PM                                                                                                                    
MS.  HALE said  DEC has  been through  the process  over the  last                                                              
several   years   of   actually   putting   its   anti-degradation                                                              
implementation  procedures  in  regulation.  It has  been  a  very                                                              
public   process.  The   requirement   to  have   a  process   for                                                              
designating Tier  3 waters is in the  CFR in the CWA  and they are                                                              
committed to  finalizing it.  This bill arose  at this time  as an                                                              
"outgrowth of  the work  on those anti-degradation  implementation                                                              
SENATOR  MICCICHE asked  if it  is  related to  the three  current                                                              
requests that are on the list for Tier 3 waters.                                                                                
MS. HALE  answered the  fact that they  have those three  requests                                                              
is  separate from  the  proposed  legislation, although  they  are                                                              
related. That is not what drove the legislation.                                                                                
SENATOR  MICCICHE asked  if Alaska  had  a choice  in adopting  an                                                              
anti-degradation policy in 1997 under the CWA.                                                                                  
MS. HALE replied that it is a requirement.                                                                                      
SENATOR  WIELECHOWSKI asked  if language  on page  3, lines  8-16:                                                              
"Within six  months after  receiving a  nomination the  department                                                              
shall  determine whether  the nomination  meets the  requirements.                                                              
If  after  six  months no  determination  is  made...."  means  it                                                              
automatically   is  concluded  that   the  nomination   meets  the                                                              
requirements and  asked if  there is some  sort of penalty  if the                                                              
work isn't done within six months.                                                                                              
MS.  HALE  replied  that  she  didn't  know  the  answer  to  that                                                              
SENATOR  WIELECHOWSKI  said if  the  public nominates  a  waterway                                                              
could they  reasonably conclude  that if six  months passes  and a                                                              
determination  hasn't been  made, that  it's automatically  deemed                                                              
to be a complete application.                                                                                                   
3:47:48 PM                                                                                                                    
MS. HALE  replied that it  would certainly  be her intent  to meet                                                              
that six month  deadline, but their attorney could  better address                                                              
3:47:51 PM                                                                                                                    
CHRIS  PELOSO,   Assistant  Attorney   General,  Civil   Division,                                                              
Commercial  and Fair Business  Section, Department  of Law  (DOL),                                                              
Juneau, Alaska,  said he believed  under state law,  the nominator                                                              
would be able to  bring a suit or a complaint  against the DEC for                                                              
failure to  meet its  deadlines and  a judge  could order  them to                                                              
make a determination.                                                                                                           
SENATOR  WIELECHOWSKI supposed  that a  judge did  that and  added                                                              
that then it would  still have to go to the  legislature. He asked                                                              
if  a remedy  is available  if the  legislature  doesn't take  any                                                              
MR. PELOSO answered  no; neither the DEC nor the  courts can force                                                              
the legislature to consider or take action on a bill.                                                                           
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI  asked if this legislation passes,  could the                                                              
citizens of Alaska designate a water body by ballot initiative.                                                                 
MR. PELOSO answered  that a person could decide to  go through the                                                              
ballot initiative process.                                                                                                      
CHAIR  GIESSEL added  that the  initiative would  be submitted  to                                                              
the lieutenant governor  who would then ask the  Department of Law                                                              
(DOL) if it was legal.                                                                                                          
MR. PELOSO said that was correct.                                                                                               
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI  asked if he has an opinion  about whether or                                                              
not  - if  this passes  and the  determination  process is  turned                                                              
over to  the legislature  - if it  fails to act  if the  people of                                                              
Alaska  could  legally  designate  a  waterway  through  a  ballot                                                              
MR.  PELOSO   replied  from   his  understanding   of  the   state                                                              
constitution,  the  legislature is  a  body that  would  designate                                                              
this type of water  body through a number of processes.  If a bill                                                              
came  forward  for a  water  body  that  clearly didn't  meet  the                                                              
qualifications,  it would  be incumbent  upon the  Senate, or  the                                                              
voters  in a  ballot initiative,  to make  the determination  that                                                              
that waterway didn't deserve protection.                                                                                        
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI  asked if it was his opinion  that the people                                                              
of  Alaska  could  through  a  ballot  initiative  to  nominate  a                                                              
waterway if this bill passes.                                                                                                   
MR. PELOSO said  he believed that is the case whether  or not they                                                              
pass the bill.                                                                                                                  
3:51:31 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR   MICCICHE  said   that   issue  is   worthy  of   further                                                              
discussion.  "Doesn't Kelso  v. Rivichek  in '96  define the  fact                                                              
that  the state  has the  discretion in  developing water  quality                                                              
MR. PELOSO said he would have to look at that case law.                                                                         
SENATOR  MICCICHE  said  Mr.  Peloso  made  a  statement  that  he                                                              
believes  the people  have the  right to  designate water  quality                                                              
regulations and  he wasn't sure  that is the  case. It is  a valid                                                              
and important  question to  which he  wanted more information  on.                                                              
He added  that the  DEC currently has  the authority  to designate                                                              
an NROW.                                                                                                                        
MS. HALE  answered that there is  some real ambiguity in  terms of                                                              
who  has that  authority;  either it's  authority  granted to  the                                                              
legislature  by the constitution  or the  authority is  granted to                                                              
the DEC through the Water Quality statute.                                                                                      
SENATOR  MICCICHE said  the  governor made  the  policy choice  to                                                              
have the designation  authority rest with the legislature  and not                                                              
with the DEC.                                                                                                                   
3:53:21 PM                                                                                                                    
MS. HALE said  the governor did  make the choice to put  this bill                                                              
forward,  but it is  also the  DEC's belief  that the decision  to                                                              
designate   a  waterway   more   appropriately   rests  with   the                                                              
SENATOR  COSTELLO  said she  wanted  to  clarify her  response  to                                                              
Senator  Wielechowski's  question.  She understands  the  way  the                                                              
bill  is  written  that nominations  that  are  forwarded  to  the                                                              
legislature  by the  department would  be in  the form  of just  a                                                              
report, not in the form of a bill.                                                                                              
MS.  HALE said  that is  correct; it  would be  in the  form  of a                                                              
nomination with the backup information.                                                                                         
SENATOR  COSTELLO asked  if  an administration  would  be able  to                                                              
both  forward a  nomination in  the form  of a report  and a  bill                                                              
that is introduced on behalf of the administration.                                                                             
MR.  PELOSO answered  yes.  He thought  a  bill  for nominating  a                                                              
water  body would be  simple: amending  the statute  by adding  or                                                              
subtracting waters off the list.                                                                                                
3:55:13 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR  COSTELLO said  if this  were to pass,  statute would  say                                                              
that only  the legislature  could designate  an Outstanding  State                                                              
Natural Resource  Water (OSNRW)  and asked if  it was  his opinion                                                              
that a citizens' initiative could trump that state statute.                                                                     
MR. PELOSO replied  that he would have to do more  research on how                                                              
ballot initiatives work.                                                                                                        
CHAIR GIESSEL said  they would get an opinion  from the Department                                                              
of Law on that.                                                                                                                 
SENATOR  WIELECHOWSKI said  one of  the requirements  is that  the                                                              
entirety of  the water nominated is  a water of the  United States                                                              
(page  4, line  13)  and asked  if  that means  if  a river  flows                                                              
through  Canada  and  comes  into  Alaska that  it  could  not  be                                                              
MS. HALE answered  that it is the  "entirety of the water  that is                                                              
nominated"  that   needs  to  be   part  of  the   United  States.                                                              
Frequently  one  will  see  segments  nominated  in  other  states                                                              
rather than the entire reach of the river.                                                                                      
SENATOR  WIELECHOWSKI  asked  when   DEC  submits  its  packet  of                                                              
information to  the legislature  can they expect  a recommendation                                                              
to accompany it to make the nomination or not.                                                                                  
MS.  HALE answered  that  it isn't  called  a recommendation,  but                                                              
rather a thorough analysis.                                                                                                     
3:57:49 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR STOLTZE  asked how the  $1000 completeness review  fee was                                                              
determined and if it actually covers the cost of the review.                                                                    
MS.  HALE answered  that  the department  has  a lot  of fees  for                                                              
services  and is  accustomed to  the extent  of work  that can  be                                                              
done  with  a fee.  The  fee is  a  rough  estimate based  on  how                                                              
similar to other work it is.                                                                                                    
SENATOR  STOLTZE  said  it's  easy to  get  waiver  variances  for                                                              
things like  septic or discharge systems  and asked if  the fee is                                                              
to  discourage frivolous  applications  or does  it come  anywhere                                                              
near covering staff cost for the review.                                                                                        
MS.  HALE said  she is  familiar  with the  kind  of analysis  the                                                              
engineers  do for those  types of  waivers and  this work  is very                                                              
different  in nature  - a  completeness determination  and not  an                                                              
engineering analysis. The workload is similar, though.                                                                          
SENATOR  STOLTZE asked  if it  is  a similar  staff commitment  to                                                              
review a septic  system for a small  lot as to analyze  and review                                                              
a  river application  that  is permanent.  Would  $1000 cover  all                                                              
staff time  and public process required  or was it just  a nominal                                                              
fee to  have some skin  in the game? He  was trying to  develop an                                                              
MS. HALE  pointed to Section AS  46.03.145 on page 3,  lines 8-25,                                                              
that says  the analysis and public  notice costs he  is describing                                                              
would  not  be covered  by  the  $1000  fee.  The purpose  of  the                                                              
$1,000-fee  is simply  to  determine  if the  11  criteria in  the                                                              
original section  are met. Other  costs for public notice  and in-                                                              
depth analysis  would be  covered in  a negotiated agreement  that                                                              
the department would negotiate with the nominator.                                                                              
CHAIR  GIESSEL said  that was  helpful  and added  that the  final                                                              
sentence says  a capital  appropriation would  be needed  and that                                                              
would be the fiscal note.                                                                                                       
MS. HALE  added that the  fiscal note does  not contain  a capital                                                              
appropriation.  It is  a  multi-year operating  appropriation  for                                                              
statutorily designated  program receipts. So, it's  essentially an                                                              
empty  appropriation  until  the  negotiation  is  agreed  to  and                                                              
signed. The  program receipts would then  be used to fund  the DEC                                                              
work or to RSA to DNR and ADF&G.                                                                                                
CHAIR GIESSEL  said although that  is true, this  certainly leaves                                                              
a  potential for  future  fiscal  notes related  to  this kind  of                                                              
legislation. It  appears that one  can negotiate, because  line 13                                                              
says the  "resident shall reimburse  the department for  the costs                                                              
or a portion  of the costs  incurred by the department  or another                                                              
state agency related to the nomination process."                                                                                
MS.  HALE said  further on  they  will talk  about this  potential                                                              
capital appropriation,  but right  now they  are in the  situation                                                              
of not  knowing  what the budget  is going  to be  forever or  how                                                              
each  negotiation  will work  out.  So,  there  is an  attempt  to                                                              
provide some flexibility.                                                                                                       
4:04:38 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI  said it appears that the  bill's whole focus                                                              
is on nominations  from residents and asked if it  is possible for                                                              
the governor,  the legislature,  a legislator,  or a committee  to                                                              
nominate a  waterway. Could a community  such as Juneau  or Haines                                                              
nominate a water way?                                                                                                           
MS.  HALE answered  that she  didn't  have the  definitions in  AS                                                              
01.10.060 with  her, but  "resident" is  defined quite  broadly in                                                              
that section.  "Resident of the  state" in the definition  section                                                              
means   "an  individual   who  establishes   residency  under   AS                                                              

01.10.055," and .060 has the actual definition of resident that includes, for example, organizations. SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if the governor or a legislator has to write a check for $1,000 if they want to nominate a waterway. He said the whole bill seems geared towards private citizens as opposed to "sort of the normal legislative process." MS. HALE answered that it has been DEC's understanding that if the legislature wanted to designate a water body as a Tier 3 or an ONRW water, they could do that themselves without this process. The governor could probably introduce a bill. 4:06:28 PM SENATOR MICCICHE asked DNR Deputy Commissioner Fogels if he could recall a 2014 ballot initiative on Bristol Bay watershed and what it asked about that watershed. MR. FOGELS answered that he remembered it requiring legislative approval of any large mining development in the Bristol Bay watershed after all the permits are issued. SENATOR MICCICHE said a similar effort is sort of going on here. MR. FOGELS responded that it is similar in that a significant decision is being deferred to the legislature, but he didn't know the thinking of the folks who put that initiative forward. SENATOR MICCICHE said he would try to contact them and find out. SENATOR COSTELLO said language on page 1, lines 7-10, say that only the legislature can designate, but page 11 talks about a nomination and its requirements and asked if the legislature were to designate a water body would the requirements apply to a bill. Common sense says that it would, but the language of the bill doesn't really cover that. 4:09:40 PM MS. HALE answered the requirements for the nomination are just that; the purpose is to make sure there is sufficient analysis and that information gets presented to the legislature. Then it is up to the legislature to do what they want; they could include the information in the designation or they might do something else. For example, Commissioner Hartig has spoken of the fact that the legislature has broad powers, so they may designate something that is slightly less protected than a Tier 3 water but very protected still. SENATOR COSTELLO thanked her, but said it didn't get to the point of her question which is if the designation were entirely generated from the legislative branch absent a nomination with all of the information, could the legislature designate a Tier 3 without meeting the requirements set out, for example, on page 2, line 14, that it has exceptional ecological, economic, or recreational significance. MS. HALE replied that it is her understanding that the legislature can do whatever it wants to. The Tier 3 definition is very broad and talks about these exceptional characteristics, but they have also talked about a very high level of water quality or something that is unique, for example, Mono Lake in California. SENATOR STOLTZE said given ADF&G's constitutional and legal responsibilities of sustainability and habitat protection and DNR's constitutional responsibility under Article 8, he wanted to know if either department has any concerns about this legislation compromising their mission. 4:12:39 PM MR. FOGELS answered that the department supports SB 163 and it will be able to continue fulfilling its mission of managing Alaska's water and other natural resources for the good of the people if it passes. They want to make sure if they are going to designate Tier 3 waters that the legislature and the people understand what that means and what restrictions might be placed on that water, so that that decision can be made very carefully, because it could have implications down the road. KEVIN BROOKS, Deputy Commissioner, Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G), said he also supported SB 163 and Mr. Fogels' comments. They feel the bill provides the department an opportunity to bring its valuable expertise on water bodies to the table. SENATOR STOLTZE asked if any provisions of this legislation would be deleterious or harmful to their ability to manage fish resources. MR. BROOKS replied that although a compromised water body would certainly affect fish, this bill provides a process for dealing with that. 4:15:11 PM CHAIR GIESSEL noted an incorrect CFR citation on page 6, line 14 that was a drafting error brought to their attention by DEC. SENATOR STEDMAN moved conceptual Amendment 1 on page 6, line 14, of CSSB 168, version I, to delete "230.3" and inserting "122.2". So it would read "2. Waters of the United States has the meaning given in 40 CFR 122.2, as that section read on the effective date of this act". 4:16:44 PM CHAIR GIESSEL said they needed to adopt the CS first and asked if there was objection to adopting CSSB 168, version \I. There were no objections and it was so ordered. SENATOR STEDMAN moved to conceptually amend the previous amendment. There were no objections and it was so ordered. SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if there is a different definition of waters of the United States that 40 CFR 230.3 didn't cover. CHAIR GIESSEL objected for discussion and invited Ms. Hale to clarify. MS. HALE said the waters of the US rule, which is currently stayed because of litigation, has a definition of "waters of the US" at 230.3, but there are numerous other definitions of "waters of the US" throughout the CFR. The definition at 122.2 is the more appropriate definition of the purposes here: point source discharges, for example, and discharges under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Program. SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked what 40 CFR 230 deals with. MS. HALE answered that 40 CFR 230.3 deals with the Dredge and Fill Program. 4:19:00 PM SENATOR COSTELLO asked if the committee could get both definitions in 40 CFR 122.2 and 230.3 just to see them side by side at some point. CHAIR GIESSEL said absolutely and asked Ms. Hale to get them. She removed her objection and asked if there was further objection to adopting the amendment. SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if it would be possible to wait until they get the two definitions side-by-side. CHAIR GIESSEL replied that she was planning to set the bill aside as soon as they determine what to do with the amendment and tomorrow Ms. Hale can get the definitions for them. SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI reiterated it seems that the committee should wait to make the decision on the amendment until they had the definitions. CHAIR GIESSEL said the committee could amend it tomorrow if he found the definition is incorrect. Finding no further objections and said the amendment was adopted. She held SB 163 in committee awaiting the definitions from Ms. Hale.

Document Name Date/Time Subjects
SB 163-Version I.pdf SRES 4/1/2016 3:30:00 PM
SB 163
SB 163-Explanation of Changes-Version I-3-31-2016.pdf SRES 4/1/2016 3:30:00 PM
SB 163
SB 163-Comments-Tyler Rental.pdf SRES 4/1/2016 3:30:00 PM
SB 163
SB 163-Comments-Sean Brownell.pdf SRES 4/1/2016 3:30:00 PM
SB 163
SB 163-Comments-George Campbell.pdf SRES 4/1/2016 3:30:00 PM
SB 163
SB 163-Comments-Alaska Forest Association.pdf SRES 4/1/2016 3:30:00 PM
SB 163
Exec Summary-Building Food Security in Alaska-Ken Meter.pdf SRES 4/1/2016 3:30:00 PM
Food Security
Bryce Wrigley Presentation-Food Security-4-1-2016.pdf SRES 4/1/2016 3:30:00 PM
Food Security
ADFG-Div Subsistence-Lauren Sill-Food Security-4-1-2016.pdf SRES 4/1/2016 3:30:00 PM
Food Security
SB 163-Assorted Comments-4-1-2016.PDF SRES 4/1/2016 3:30:00 PM
SB 163
Sarra Khlifi-Food Coalition Presentation-4-1-2016.pdf SRES 4/1/2016 3:30:00 PM
Food Security
SB 163-Supporting Document-Alaska Dispatch News Commentary-Comms. Hartig, Rutherford, Cotten.pdf SRES 4/1/2016 3:30:00 PM
SB 163