HENV – Idaho State Legislature

2003 Environment, Energy, & Technology

Hazardous waste, sewage, recycling

Meetings
Archive

January 8, 2003
January 14, 2003
January 16, 2003
January 20, 2003
January 22, 2003
January 28, 2003
January 30, 2003

February 4, 2003
February 6, 2003
February 10, 2003
February 12, 2003
February 14, 2003
February 18, 2003
February 20, 2003
February 24, 2003
February 26, 2003

March 6, 2003
March 10, 2003

April 2, 2003
April 30, 2003

DATE:	January 8, 2003
TIME:	2:55 PM
PLACE:	Room 406
MEMBERS:	Chairman Barraclough, Vice Chairman Raybould, Representatives Meyer, Ellsworth, Campbell, Harwood, Edmunson, Snodgrass, Smith(30), Sayler
ABSENT/EXCUSED:	None
GUESTS:	See attached list
	The meeting was called to order at 2:55 PM. Chairman Barraclough spoke briefly about the mission of the committee: to strike a balance between pollution and environmental lockup, and between jobs and a cleaner environment. Each representative then gave his or her reasons and credentials for being on the committee. The secretary and page were introduced and guests at the meeting were invited to state their names and their interest in the committee. The Chairman turned the floor over to Steve Allred. Steve Allred, DEQ, gave the background of the department. DEQ was established in July, 2000 with a staff of 400 employees and a $40 million budget. The department emphasizes customer service and demands that decisions are made and answers are given if problems arise. Mr. Allred pointed out the progress that has been made by DEQ in the past few years. There has been considerable improvement in water quality, particularly the Cascade Reservoir and Middle Snake River. DEQ has encouraged new missions at the INEEL, and a settlement was finally reached concerning cleanup of Pit 9. A local entity was established to implement a EPA-supported state plan to clean up the Coeur d’Alene River Basin and that cleanup has been a success over the past four years. DEQ has also been successful in working with Monsanto and Amalgamated Sugar Co. to improve air quality. Mr. Allred then stated that there are a number of challenges that the department is facing currently. For instance, there have been disputes between DEQ and the EPA over several issues, and DEQ desires the ability to navigate its own destiny without so much input from EPA. Improving air quality in the Boise and Pocatello areas has been a problem; planning airsheds has been necessary to avoid federal sanctions. Smoke management has also been an important issue; complaints have been received from several other states and Canada. Fortunately, smoke can be successfully managed and over the past year, dramatic improvements have been made in conjunction with the Department of Agriculture, federal agencies, and private timber interests. The burdensome provisions of the Federal Safe Drinking Water Act have become onerous for smaller systems. Also, DEQ desires to soften the astronomical cost of arsenic regulation. Chairman Barraclough gave some closing remarks. There being no further business to discuss, meeting was adjourned at 4:15 PM.

DATE:	January 14, 2003
TIME:	1:34 PM
PLACE:	Room 406
MEMBERS:	Chairman Barraclough, Vice Chairman Raybould, Representatives Meyer, Ellsworth, Campbell, Edmunson, Snodgrass, Smith(30), Sayler
ABSENT/EXCUSED:	Representative Harwood
GUESTS:	See Attached List
	The meeting was called to order at 1:34 PM. Representative Meyer made a motion to accept the minutes with a correction. Motion was carried by a voice vote. Chairman Barraclough asked Representative Raybould to conduct the meeting. Rep. Raybould asked Kate Kelly, DEQ, to come forward to explain three sets of air quality rules. Ms. Kelly stated that there has been much public outreach concerning these rules dockets.
Docket # 58-0101-0201	The first rule discussed was the Air Quality Open Burning Rule. Open burning is defined as “any outdoor fire where the smoke does not pass through a stack, duct, or chimney.” The purpose of the Air Quality Open Burning Rule is “to protect public health and safety by placing controls on day to day open burning in Idaho.” This rule is being revised in order to remedy inconsistencies with other laws; remove outdated or redundant wording; add requirements to protect public health and safety; and provide more guidance to burners and regulators. The new rule advises people to use reasonable precautions when burning and gives a list of suggested precautions that should be taken. The new rule also limits weed control and residential burning to daytime. Furthermore, notice must be given to DEQ before a training fire is ignited. Rep. Raybould asked Ms. Kelly to go over each change that was being proposed. Ms. Kelly pointed out that many of the changes had to do with typographical changes, cross references to existing rules, updated language, or changes in section numbers. In reference to Section 602, Representative Ellsworth asked if there was a way that the committee could tell when DEQ’s rules were more stringent than federal rules. Ms. Kelly replied that there is a statutory mandate that will not allow DEQ to adopt rules more stringent than those of the EPA, but in this case, there is no comparable federal law anyway. Ms. Kelly stated that Section 605 sets the parameters for burning suggestions. Representative Edmunson asked what measures are taken if people do not choose to take these precautions when burning. Ms. Kelly said that it could result in enforcement actions, but whether any action is taken depends on the situation. While educating the public on these kinds of rules is a huge component of the DEQ, Ms. Kelly said that there is also a burden of responsibility on the burner. Representative Meyer pointed out that 605-04 is a very general and vague statement, as no one can control where smoke goes. Ms. Kelly said that there are always unpredictable issues and this statement merely serves as a caution to anyone before igniting a fire. Representative Raybould said that he is troubled by the vagueness of the phrase “may include, but are not limited to” in the preamble of Section 605. He also wondered what kind of penalty would be imposed upon failure to comply with the rules. Ms. Kelly stated that the word “should” could not be used instead because rules might not apply in every situation. She also said that the implications of unsafe burning are serious, but DEQ rarely has to exert its authority. In regards to Section 608, which prohibits weed control burning during the night, Ms. Kelly stated that there has been much interest and debate over this particular rule. She said that one of the main reasons for this addition is concern over safety of the responders if the fire were to get out of control.
Docket # 58-0101-0202	The Air Quality Permit Streamlining Rule was discussed next. Representative Raybould said that administrative changes did not need to be discussed. Ms. Kelly explained that Section 395 changes the time for filing an appeal from thirty to thirty-five days. Representative Ellsworth asked if there was any way to signify when DEQ rules were more stringent than the EPA rules. Ms. Kelly replied that although the analysis of stringency done by the Attorney General’s office was not available to the committee, members would be able to meet with the office to discuss this issue if they wished. Representative Raybould stated that Ms. Kelly and Representative Ellsworth should meet with the Attorney General’s office to discuss this matter. Paula Gradwohl, DEQ, added to what Ms. Kelly had said by stating that it will be possible in the future to add a section to the notice page that will indicate when rules are more stringent.
Docket # 58-0101-0201	Ms. Kelly stated that the purpose of this docket, concerning Title V fees, is to consolidate requirements for the annual registration of emissions of major facilities (meaning facilities that give off a certain amount of pollution) and payments of fees by these facilities into one operating permit. Representative Raybould said that he had been approached by industry representatives who felt that Title V was too excessive in scope. Ms. Kelly said that DEQ had met with the industry representatives and had compromised with them; the current rules proposal reflects that compromise. Chairman Barraclough asked whether fees would be increased or a way would be found to spend less if the fees were not sufficient. Ms. Kelly stated that the fees collected are the only source that can be used to pay for implementation and that DEQ looks at ways of decreasing costs. She mentioned that the fee structure barely meets DEQ’s comfort level and that EPA costs would be double what DEQ’s are. Representative Campbell asked what the program is set up to generate under the current fee structure. Ms. Kelly replied that it is supposed to generate $2 million. Steve Allred, DEQ, pointed out that the EPA evaluated the program and gave its minimum figure as $4.5 million. Representative Raybould asked whether a temporary rule could be enforced to increase fees. Mr. Allred replied that this could not be done without the consent of the Idaho Legislature.
Docket # 58-0105-0201	John Brueck, DEQ, was asked to present this docket on Standards for Hazardous Waste. Mr. Brueck stated that many of the changes in the final rules deal with units that do not even exist in Idaho but that they must be covered in DEQ rules anyway to comply with federal law. Adjustments were also made so that these rules would not be more stringent than those of the EPA. Representative Sayler asked Mr. Brueck to give the cross references. Representative Raybould asked if the committee had any questions. As there were none, the meeting was adjourned at 3:33 PM.

DATE:	January 16, 2003
TIME:	1:42 PM
PLACE:	Room 406
MEMBERS:	Chairman Barraclough, Vice Chairman Raybould, Representatives Meyer, Ellsworth, Campbell, Harwood, Edmunson, Snodgrass, Smith(30), Sayler
ABSENT/EXCUSED:	None
GUESTS:	See attached list
	Chairman Barraclough called the meeting to order at 1:42 PM. The Chairman announced that the minutes from the January 14 meeting would be approved in the next meeting. Vice Chairman Raybould was asked to conduct the meeting.
Docket # 58-0106-0201 58-0106-0202	Dean Ehlert, DEQ, was asked to discuss the Solid Waste Management Rules, which he said is a rewrite. The purpose of the rulemaking is to address the proper management of non-municipal solid waste. The commercial solid waste siting license fee covered in this rule was approved earlier and has been carried over into 58-0106-0201. Representative Ellsworth asked what the major changes here are, since the rest of the rule is a rewrite. Mr. Ehlert stated that it had been clarified since it had been very subjective and difficult to apply. Mr. Ehlert went over each changed section, including deletions and clarifications. In Section 012-10-d (Waste Tire Collection Site Requirements), Representative Raybould asked how much input industry has had in negotiating such requirements. Mr. Ehlert stated that industry had played an active role in negotiations over a two-year period.
Docket # 58-0107-0201 58-0102-0202	Rick Jarvis, DEQ, went over the Rules for Owners of Underground Storage Tanks and Leaking Petroleum Storage Tanks. He said that the rules are federal underground storage tank rules that are being adopted state wide. The proposed rule implements DEQ’s authority to regulate underground storage tank systems. It covers design, construction, installation, operation, release detection, closure, and financial assurance requirements for these systems. Mr. Jarvis stated that most of the changes are clarification issues. Representative Ellsworth asked if the portions that had been changed from federal to state rule had been delineated. Mr. Jarvis replied that they had. Representative Ellsworth then asked if the new rules went beyond federal regulations. Mr. Jarvis replied that they were essentially identical. He later said that the new rules could be interpreted as more stringent or less stringent than federal laws. Chairman Barraclough said that the committee had made it clear that they wanted specific identification when the rules were more stringent than federal. Mr. Jarvis yielded the floor to Paula Gradwohl, DEQ, stated that a more in depth summary had been prepared in response to the stringency statements. Mr. Jarvis proceeded to go over all additions, deletions, and changes within the rule dockets.
Docket # 58-0111-0201	Susan Burke, DEQ, explained the next docket which dealt with the Ground Water Quality Rule. She said that there were only three changes being proposed by DEQ. The first two were removals of obsolete language. The third was a statement of DEQ’s preferred method of cyanide analysis.
Docket # 58-0102-0201	Nancy Bowser, DEQ, went over the docket for Water Quality Standards and Wastewater Treatment Requirements, which deals with certification of wastewater system operators. This included a new addition to water quality standards which was negotiated with stakeholders, who are in consensus on these issues. There are no federal drivers for these rules. Ms. Bowser stated that the rules affect public, not private or residential, wastewater treatment operators. She also stated that there are fees associated with this rule docket which are not increasing at this time, though they may in the future. Ms. Bowser said that she thinks certifying all wastewater treatment operators (roughly half are already certified) can only lead to smoother operation and better maintenance of equipment.
Docket # 58-0104-0201 58-0112-0201 58-0120-0201 58-0122-0201	Bill Jerrel, DEQ, discussed Wastewater and Drinking Water Loans and Grants. Concurrent rulemaking had been conducted during formation of these rules. The proposed rules address review and approval of contracts for consulting engineers and determining eligible costs for grants. They state the types of contracts that will be allowed, what costs contained in the contracts and other costs will be eligible, and how the contracts and costs are reviewed. Changes were made to the rules to make them consistent with other DEQ loan and grant rules.
	There being no questions or further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 3:56 PM.

DATE:	January 20, 2003
TIME:	1:39 PM
PLACE:	Room 406
MEMBERS:	Chairman Barraclough, Vice Chairman Raybould, Representatives Meyer, Ellsworth, Campbell, Harwood, Edmunson, Snodgrass, Smith(30), Sayler
ABSENT/EXCUSED:	None
GUESTS:	Paula Gradwohl, DEQ; Barry Burnell, DEQ; David Mabe, DEQ; Don Munkers, IRWA; Jon Sandoval, DEQ; Maggie Mahoney, Idaho Association of Counties; Jack Lyman, Idaho Mining Association; Jeremy Pisca, Hopkins Roden; John Eaton, BCASWI
	Chairman Barraclough called the meeting to order at 1:39 PM. Representative Meyer made a motion to accept the minutes of January 14 with a grammatical correction. Motion was carried by a voice vote. Representative Meyer made a motion to accept the minutes of January 16. Motion was carried by a voice vote. Vice Chairman Raybould was asked to conduct the meeting.
Docket # 58-0102-0203	Chris Mebane, DEQ, presented the first docket, which is a pending and temporary rule. The purpose of this rulemaking is to adopt site-specific water quality criteria for portions of the Boise River for copper and lead. The rule was not negotiated and no public comment was given.
Docket # 58-0102-0204	Mr. Mebane presented the next docket on water quality standards and wastewater treatment. He stated that there are two parts to this rule. The first part is the annual designation of appropriate uses of rivers and streams in Idaho. The second part is the republication of existing criteria for chemical substances in surface water. Actual values are given, rather than an incorporation by reference of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). Representative Raybould asked Mr. Mebane to refresh the committee on acronyms within the rule, which he did. Representative Raybould asked a question concerning the similarity of the numbers given in these rules to federal standards. Mr. Mebane replied that the standards given in these rules are the same as the federal ones.
Docket # 58-0108-0102	Tom John, DEQ, presented the docket on engineering standards for design, construction, and operation of public drinking water systems. These rules had not been revisited since the 1980’s and were becoming increasingly dated and, in some cases, overly restrictive. The goals of DEQ in reviewing these rules were: 1) to update the rule to reflect current practices and to add flexibility; 2) to clarify where language was previously difficult to interpret; and 3) to clean up language, syntax, and readability. This rule was negotiated with the Idaho Rural Water Association, private engineering firms, hydrogeologists, the Idaho Department of Water Resources, and representatives from Blackfoot, American Falls, and Lewiston. There was consensus on the final rule from these participants. Mr. John stated that this rule is a set of standards for wells that are to provide water for the public; it is meant to provide clarification so that the public knows what is to be expected of them.
Docket # 58-0108-0201	Mr. John presented the next docket on the rules for public drinking water systems which is an incorporation by reference of two federal standards. The first standard is the “Filter Backwash Recycling Rule.” This requires public water systems to notify the State if they recycle and to provide a description of their recycling practices. The second is the “Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule.” This requires certain public water systems to meet tighter standards for turbidity. There was no public hearing.
Docket # 58-0103-0201	Barry Burnell, DEQ, presented this docket concerning individual/ subsurface sewage disposal. This rule regulates activities which are not already regulated by federal standards. The EPA was asked not to promulgate rules for on-site wastewater treatment systems but to leave that rulemaking to the states. The purpose of this rulemaking is to provide greater detail to DEQ and the health districts in making decisions as to when central wastewater treatment facilities are reasonably accessible for new development, and for issuing subsurface sewage disposal permits. The rule also establishes the conditions in which septic systems are an acceptable alternative to central wastewater treatment facilities. A public hearing was held in July to review this rule; no public testimony was given. Representative Ellsworth asked how notice of such a meeting is provided. Mr. Burnell replied that during February and March, the meeting was noticed in DEQ’s bulletin and webpage, letters were sent out, and an announcement was placed in the newspapers. Representative Ellsworth then asked if the people on the Rulemaking Negotiation Committee had been involved in the process from the beginning. Mr. Burnell replied that they had attended meetings in February and March but failed to arrive at a consensus. The most controversial portion of these rules is the distance element in 58.01.03.005.05.f. It is tied to economics, specifically the cost of constructing an off-site sewer. Mr. Burnell stated that the development community has not reached a consensus on point iv, the 200 foot distance requirement (that is, the requirement that a lot development connect to the central wastewater facility if the distance from the property line of the development to the collection line is 200 feet or less per lot or per single family). Mr. Burnell stated that parcels will gain benefit by having a sewer line built. Representative Ellsworth asked whether there would be room to negotiate if the community opposes this standard. Mr. Burnell referred to the last line in the distance section which states that “the director may consider different distances.” He also mentioned that other portions of the rule will be negotiated this year and the distance portion could possibly come up for negotiation at that time.
Docket # 58-0114-0201 16-0505-0201	These dockets (which are rules governing fees for environmental operating permits, licenses, and inspection services) are pending fee rules and are deleted sections from the Health and Welfare Rules. It is proposed that these rules be adopted verbatim to DEQ rules. The purpose of this rulemaking is to clarify that these are DEQ rules, as they were initially overlooked when DEQ rules were moved over from Health and Welfare. The relationship between DEQ and the health district will remain the same. The rules were adopted as temporary in June. They have not been negotiated and no public comment was received.
Docket # 58-0113-0201 58-0117-0201	This rulemaking changes the number of days to respond to a notice of intent to revoke a permit from 20 to 35 days for consistency with IDAPA rules.
	There being no further questions or business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 3:25 PM.

DATE:	January 22, 2003
TIME:	2:17 PM
PLACE:	Room 406
MEMBERS:	Chairman Barraclough, Vice Chairman Raybould, Representatives Meyer, Ellsworth, Campbell, Harwood, Edmunson, Snodgrass, Smith(30), Sayler
ABSENT/ EXCUSED:	None
GUESTS:	See attached list
	Chairman Barraclough called the meeting to order at 2:17 PM. Representative Raybould moved that the minutes of January 20, 2003, be approved as written. Motion was carried by a voice vote. Chairman Barraclough asked Representative Raybould to conduct the meeting. Representative Raybould asked for testimony on the rule dockets that had been presented in prior meetings.
Docket # 58-0103-0201	Gary Allen, Valley Advocates for Responsible Development, stood to give testimony in favor of DEQ’s proposed changes in docket 58-0103-0201, “Individual/ Subsurface Sewage Treatment and Distribution Rules.” He believes that it is a good policy because it encourages developments near cities to hook into the sewer line. Mr. Allen stated that his clients are concerned with two developments in Teton County and are feeling disenfranchised by the attempt to overturn this rulemaking after DEQ had already given plenty of opportunity for discussion of the definition of “reasonable access.” Mr. Allen stated that he believes that the rule is flexible, and since it does not have to be applied in every situation, it is a good compromise and should be accepted.
	John Eaton, Building Contractors Association of Southwest Idaho and Idaho Building Contractors Association, stated that several sections of the rule had been added after the negotiated rulemaking. He said the Building Contractors Association is displeased with the definition for “bedroom,” because with the proposed change, other rooms may constitute as a “bedroom” and the cost and size of the drainfield will increase significantly. Furthermore, there is concern about the “reasonable access” definition, as it does not put a limit on the director’s authority. There is also some concern about 004.05 because of the change from repairing a failing system to replacing it. Mr. Eaton stated that the DEQ should have worked together with builders, sewer districts, counties, and cities on this rule, but that kind of discussion never occurred. He also didn’t believe that there will be any incentive to negotiate this rule later on if it is accepted now. He asked that 58-0103-0201 be rejected. David Mabe, DEQ Administrator of State Water Quality Programs, was asked to speak to Mr. Eaton’s concerns. He said that the changes made after negotiation were added following the public comment period. He said that if rules did not reflect legislative intent, the committee should help DEQ know where it missed the mark. He also mentioned that the rulemaking process is very costly, and asked the committee members to keep this in mind. Mr. Mabe stated that without the “reasonable access” rule, DEQ would still have to implement “reasonable access” but without any guidance. He also stated that DEQ attempts to make sure that representatives from all industries are represented, but the bulletin and newspaper are the main methods of getting word out about rulemaking meetings. Committee discussion followed.
MOTION:	Representative Smith made a motion to reject Docket # 58-0103-0201. Motion was carried by a voice vote.
Docket # 58-0101-0201	Representative Raybould asked if anyone wished to testify on the Open Burning Rule. Dar Olberding, Idaho Grain Producers Association, stated that he disapproved of the rule, due to the use of the word “reasonable” in Section 605 and the restriction on night burning in Section 608. He stated that this restriction would not be a good idea in Southern Idaho due to the wind and heat. Kate Kelly, DEQ Administrator, Air Quality Division, said that DEQ could live with the removal of the word “reasonable” in Section 605 because it would not substantially change the rule. Committee discussion followed.
MOTION:	Representative Campbell made a motion to reject Docket # 58-0101-0201. Representative Raybould asked for discussion on the motion. Motion was carried by a voice vote.
Docket # 58-0101-0202	Dick Rush, Idaho Association of Commerce and Industry, spoke against the changes of this rule docket, concerning permit streamlining. He said that the streamlining portion of the rule makes sense, but additional rules have been added that change longstanding processes. He recommended that those changes be eliminated from the rule to return to the original streamlining rule.
MOTION:	Representative Smith made a motion to approve Docket # 58-0101-0202. Motion was carried by a voice vote. Representatives Campbell and Harwood would like to be recorded as voting no.
Docket # 58-0101-0203	Mr. Rush came forward to testify about the Title V fees rule. He said that IACI stood in support of these fees. Ms. Kelly stated that the cost for the EPA to run this program would be almost double what the cost is for DEQ to run it. She said that she does not foresee the fees increasing in the near future.
MOTION:	Representative Ellsworth made a motion to approve Docket # 58-0101-0203. Committee discussion followed. Motion was carried by a voice vote. Representatives Campbell and Harwood would like to be recorded as voting no. Representative Raybould wished to finish up business at the next meeting. Meeting was adjourned at 4:05 PM

DATE:	January 28, 2003
TIME:	1:40 PM
PLACE:	Room 406
MEMBERS:	Chairman Barraclough, Vice Chairman Raybould, Representatives Meyer, Ellsworth, Campbell, Harwood, Edmunson, Snodgrass, Smith(30), Sayler
ABSENT/ EXCUSED:	None
GUESTS:	See attached list
	Chairman Barraclough called the meeting to order at 1:40 PM. Representative Meyer moved that the minutes of January 22, 2003 be approved as written. Motion was carried by a voice vote. Chairman Barraclough asked Representative Raybould to conduct the meeting.
MOTION:	Representative Meyer made a motion to approve Docket # 58-0105-0201. Motion was carried by a voice vote.
Docket # 58-0106-0201 58-0106-0202	Dick Rush, Idaho Association of Commerce and Industry, testified in favor of this rulemaking. He said that the old rule is vague and that industry is comfortable with the changes.
MOTION:	Representative Sayler made a motion to approve Dockets # 58-0106-0201 and 58-0106-0202. Motion was carried by a voice vote.
MOTION:	Following committee discussion, Representative Meyer made a motion to reject Docket # 58-0107-0201, on the grounds that the language in some parts of the proposed rules differs from the language in comparable federal regulations and may be interpreted as more stringent than the federal regulation. Paula Gradwohl, DEQ, told the committee that the attorney who dealt with this rulemaking could come address these concerns. Representative Barraclough made a substitute motion to hold the rule until the next meeting. Motion was carried by a voice vote. Representative Smith made a motion to hold companion docket # 58-0107-0202 until the next meeting. Motion was carried by a voice vote.
MOTION:	Representative Snodgrass made a motion to approve Docket # 58-0111-0201. Motion was carried by a voice vote. Representative Smith made a motion to approve Docket # 58-0102-0201. Motion was carried by a voice vote. Representative Meyer made a motion to approve Docket # 58-0102-0203. Motion was carried by a voice vote.
Docket # 58-0102-0204	Representative Barraclough asked a question concerning the designation of Threemile Creek. David Mabe, DEQ Administrator of State Water Quality Programs, stated that no changes in designation have been proposed for Threemile Creek, but that changes will be proposed next year.
MOTION:	Representative Ellsworth made a motion to approve Docket # 58-0102-0204. Motion was carried by a voice vote. Representative Edmunson made a motion to approve Docket # 58-0108-0102. Motion was carried by a voice vote. Representative Ellsworth made a motion to approve Docket # 58-0108-0201. Motion was carried by a voice vote. Representative Meyer made a motion to approve Dockets # 58-0104-0201, 58-0112-0201, 58-0120-0201, 58-0122-0201. Motion was carried by a voice vote. Representative Meyer made a motion to approve Docket # 58-0114-0201. Motion was carried by a voice vote. Representative Meyer made a motion to approve Docket # 58-0113-0201. Motion was carried by a voice vote. Representative Smith made a motion to approve Docket # 58-0117-0201. Motion was carried by a voice vote.
	Chairman Barraclough and Representative Raybould thanked DEQ for explaining the rules. There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 2:50 PM.

DATE:	January 30, 2003
TIME:	1:59 PM
PLACE:	Room 406
MEMBERS:	Chairman Barraclough, Vice Chairman Raybould, Representatives Ellsworth, Campbell, Harwood, Edmunson, Snodgrass, Smith(30), Sayler
ABSENT/ EXCUSED:	Representative Meyer
GUESTS:	See attached list
	Chairman Barraclough called the meeting to order at 1:59 PM. Representative Raybould moved that the minutes of January 28, 2003 be approved as written. Motion was carried by a voice vote.
RS 12517	Senator Hal Bunderson presented this legislation to the committee. He stated that people from all sides of the issue had participated in drafting the legislation. He turned the floor over to Jon Sandoval, DEQ Chief of Staff. Mr. Sandoval pointed out that three modifications are being proposed to the RS. He stated that local governments have had to find ways to deal with the problem of waste tires for a number of years. Changes to the Idaho Waste Tire Act are proposed in this legislation to strengthen the ability of the State, Counties, and Cities to regulate storage and disposal sites. The desire is to keep the original intent of the Act intact, but to come up with long term solutions for the problem. Keith Donahue, DEQ attorney, went over each change being proposed.
MOTION:	Representative Raybould made a motion to introduce RS 12517 and have the modifications made by Legislative Services. Motion was carried by a voice vote.
Docket # 58-0107-0201 58-0102-0202	Representative Raybould asked Orville Green, DEQ Waste Management and Remediation Administrator, to enlighten the committee on stringency. He stated that if the DEQ wants to receive primacy from the federal government, its rules must be at least as stringent as the federal rules. He said that the DEQ may chose to simply cite federal rules by reference, or it may decide to do things in a different manner than the federal government. He said an advisory committee was created to develop ways for the DEQ to work cheaper and smarter than the federal government. Since they are different than federal rules, these new DEQ rules might be interpreted as being more stringent. Mr. Green was asked to go over the parts that could be interpreted as more stringent and explain the rationale behind creating these more stringent rules. Mr. Green explained that the changes that could be considered more stringent were made to improve efficiency and reduce costs, or to clarify DEQ expectations. Representative Harwood stated that he did not approve of Section 051.01, which requires leak detectors to be installed in underground storage tanks. Committee discussion followed.
MOTION:	Representative Harwood made a motion to approve Docket # 58-0107-0201, with the exception of Section 051.01. Motion was carried by a voice vote. Representatives Campbell and Edmunson would like to be recorded as voting no. Representative Smith made a motion to approve Docket # 58-0102-0202. Motion was carried by a voice vote. Representative Campbell would like to be recorded as voting no.
	There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 3:52 PM.

DATE:	February 4, 2003
TIME:	1:34 PM
PLACE:	Room 406
MEMBERS:	Chairman Barraclough, Vice Chairman Raybould, Representatives Meyer, Campbell, Harwood, Edmunson, Snodgrass, Smith(30), Sayler
ABSENT/ EXCUSED:	Representative Ellsworth
GUESTS:	See attached list
	Chairman Barraclough called the meeting to order at 1:34 PM. Representative Sayler moved that the minutes of January 30, 2003 be approved as written.
RS 12638	Representative Mary Lou Shepherd presented RS 12638 to the committee. She stated that this legislation will take care of flaws that were found in previously enacted Idaho Code concerning the Coeur d’Alene River Basin Project Commission. She turned the floor over to DEQ Director, Steve Allred, who explained the proposed changes. He also stated the entities that are involved with the Commission: representatives of the State of Idaho, the State of Washington, the Coeur d’Alene tribe, the EPA, and commissioners representing Shoshone, Kootenai, and Benewah counties.
MOTION:	Representative Meyer made a motion to send to print. Motion was carried by a voice vote.
RS 12599	Representative Campbell presented RS 12599. This legislation would make sure that DEQ utilizes the best available science and applies well established risk assessment methods when passing rules that are more stringent than federal rules
MOTION:	Representative Meyer made a motion to send to print. Motion was carried by a voice vote.
H 118	Representative Tom Trail presented H 118 to the committee. This bill would amend Idaho Code to allow a 5% purchasing preference for recycled oil products. It would support the state’s recycling industry and prevent accidental spills or leaks. He turned the floor over to Terri Ottens, Executive Director of the Association of Idaho Recyclers. She stated that there is already a similar law concerning recycled paper. There was a 20% increase in the use of recycled paper products after the enactment of that law; it is hoped that a similar situation will occur with the recycled oil bill. She said that there have not been any objections from state agencies.
MOTION:	Representative Campbell made a motion to send H 118 to the floor with a do pass. Motion was carried with a voice vote. Representative Meyer would like to be recorded as voting no.
	There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 2:09 PM.

DATE:	February 6, 2003
TIME:	1:34 PM
PLACE:	Room 406
MEMBERS:	Chairman Barraclough, Vice Chairman Raybould, Representatives Meyer, Campbell, Harwood, Edmunson, Snodgrass, Smith(30)
ABSENT/ EXCUSED:	Representatives Ellsworth, Sayler
GUESTS:	See attached list
	Chairman Barraclough called the meeting to order at 1:34 PM. Representative Meyer moved that the minutes of February 4, 2003, be approved as written.
RS 12517C1	Jon Sandoval, DEQ Chief of Staff, came forward in favor of sending this legislation to print.
MOTION:	Representative Campbell made a motion to send RS 12517C1 to print. Motion was carried by a voice vote.
	Representative Barraclough asked Representative Raybould to conduct the portion of the meeting dealing with the rejection of DEQ rules.
MOTION:	Representative Meyer made a motion to send RS 12893 to print. Motion was carried by a voice vote. Representative Raybould made a motion to send RS 12895 to print. Motion was carried by a voice vote.
RS 12899	Representative Harwood stated that he had received calls from citizens who were concerned about this particular rulemaking (DEQ Docket # 58-0107-0201). He asked to have the rule sent back to be re-drafted so that it could come before the committee next year.
MOTION:	Representative Harwood made a motion to reject Docket #58-0107-0201. Paula Gradwohl, DEQ, told the committee that its companion docket, #58-0102-0202, would also have to be rejected. Representative Harwood amended his motion to include Docket #58-0102-0202. He said that it would be helpful if DEQ could enumerate which portions of a rule were more stringent than the EPA’s rules. Representative Snodgrass commented that DEQ should also add a requirement to this rulemaking for owner/ operators to transfer their records to any subsequent owner/ operator. Motion was carried by a voice vote. Representative Smith would like to be recorded as voting no.
RS 12723	Representative Raybould turned the meeting back over to Representative Barraclough, who asked Representative Bill Deal to come forward to explain this legislation on the Idaho Beverage Container Act. Representative Deal gave the background of his involvement with this legislation. He then yielded the floor to Skyview High student, Nicole Riggs. Ms. Riggs gave some facts on recycling and told how the “bottle bill” would be implemented. She stated that this legislation would reduce litter, conserve resources, and add life to our landfills.
MOTION:	Representative Campbell made a motion to send RS 12723 to print. Motion was carried by a voice vote.
	Representative Barraclough then asked Mark Glines to come forward to testify. Mr. Glines stood in opposition to this legislation. He is formerly from California, one of eleven states with a “bottle bill.” He said that it has been amended 28 times and that there are numerous problems with its implementation.
	There being no further business to discuss, meeting was adjourned at 2:13 PM.

DATE:	February 10, 2003
TIME:	1:36 PM
PLACE:	Room 406
MEMBERS:	Chairman Barraclough, Vice Chairman Raybould, Representatives Meyer, Ellsworth, Campbell, Harwood, Edmunson, Snodgrass, Smith(30), Sayler
ABSENT/ EXCUSED:	None
GUESTS:	See attached list
	Chairman Barraclough called the meeting to order at 1:36 PM. Representative Raybould moved that the minutes of February 6, 2003, be approved as written.
H 149	Representative Mary Lou Shepherd presented H 149 to the committee. She stated that its purpose is to correct a flaw in an earlier piece of legislation. Under this legislation, the fiduciary duties of each commissioner shall be to their respective entities. It will also designate certain duties to the whole commission, rather than to individual commissioners. Representative Shepherd then deferred to Steve Allred, Director of DEQ.
MOTION:	Representative Ellsworth made a motion to send H 149 to the floor with a do pass. Motion was carried with a voice vote.
H 150	Representative John Campbell believes that this is a good bill which deals with an issue that needs to be addressed. He deferred to Dick Rush, Idaho Association of Commerce and Industry, who said that this legislation requires DEQ to use the same scientific methods as the EPA. This bill will amend legislation that was passed last year. Mr. Rush stated that there will be no fiscal impact to the general fund or to other state and local funds. The bill deals only with the Department of Environmental Quality; it will not effect any other state departments or the EPA. Mr. Allred stood and stated that DEQ does not oppose these requirements as they pertain to “rules that are more stringent” than EPA rules. However, there is some concern over applying this standard to rules that are “broader in scope.” DEQ feels that the term “broader” could potentially apply to any rule that is different from a federal counterpart, even those that are actually less stringent. Mr. Allred also stated that research methods that will have to be used could incur a greater cost. He also believes that this bill will increase the opportunities for organizations such as the Idaho Conservation League to challenge DEQ’s rulemaking. Representative Barraclough asked if there was any way to modify the bill to make it more workable. Mr. Allred replied that the bill would be more acceptable if it dealt only with standards that were deemed more stringent, but not broader, than EPA rules. Mr. Rush believes that this rule will not unduly impose any hardship upon DEQ.
MOTION:	Representative Campbell made a motion to send H 150 to the floor with a do pass. Committee discussion followed. Motion was carried with a voice vote. Representatives Sayler and Smith would like to be recorded as voting no.
	Representatives Campbell, Harwood, and Sayler will co-sponsor H 149 with Representative Shepherd. Representative Raybould will co-sponsor H 150 with Representative Campbell. There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 2:30 PM.

DATE:	February 12, 2003
TIME:	1:32 PM
PLACE:	Room 406
MEMBERS:	Chairman Barraclough, Vice Chairman Raybould, Representatives Meyer, Ellsworth, Campbell, Harwood, Edmunson, Snodgrass, Smith(30), Sayler
ABSENT/ EXCUSED:	None
GUESTS:	See attached list
	Chairman Barraclough called the meeting to order at 1:32 PM. Representative Meyer moved that the minutes of February 10, 2003, be approved as written. Motion carried by a voice vote.
H 198	Senator Hal Bunderson presented H 198 to the committee. The purpose of this legislation is to moderate differences and reach consensus on the issue of waste tire storage and disposal. The legislation was designed to encourage the beneficial use of waste tires and to create an environment in which waste tires will not be accumulated. Senator Bunderson yielded the floor to Jon Sandoval, DEQ, who gave the history of this legislation. He stated that the Idaho Waste Tire Act was created in 1991; this legislation will amend that law. The creation of this bill had been prompted by the problems of waste tire accumulation, particularly in Lincoln County. This legislation, Mr. Sandoval said, will emphasize county and city regulation of the problem. Keith Donahue, Deputy Attorney General for DEQ, then gave a line by line explanation of amendments. Mark Hope, Tire Disposal and Recycling Inc., stood in opposition to this legislation. He said that this bill does nothing to address what is done about waste tires at the local level. He stated that over 95% of waste tires are currently being managed responsibly. He also believes that reduction specifications will be harder to enforce than an outright ban on landfilling tires. Steve Hansen, Mountain West Tire Recovery (MWTR), also stood in opposition to this legislation. He stated that MWTR is one of the few tire recovery groups in the state and that it was not involved in negotiations for this legislation. He believes that this legislation will be detrimental because his company’s competition in other states will not have to comply with these requirements. Mr. Hansen thinks that this legislation will not favor beneficial use so much as it will favor disposal of the waste tires in landfills. Maggie Mahoney, Idaho Association of Counties, stood in favor of H 198. She said that the counties of Idaho had been very involved in the negotiation process. They agree that the financial bonding aspects and the ability to landfill tires are very important. Senator Bunderson stated that none of the parties involved in the process had voiced any objections when it was being negotiated. Mr. Sandoval reiterated that this had been an open process and discussion had been faciliated. He urged that H 198 be sent to the floor.
MOTION:	Representative Campbell made a motion to send H 198 to the floor with a do pass. Motion was carried with a voice vote.
HCR 15	Representative Meyer stated that additional information had been received pertaining to the open burning rules. He moved that HCR 15 be held in committee until the following Tuesday. Motion was carried by a voice vote.
MOTION:	Representative Raybould made a motion to send HCR 16 to the floor with a do pass. Motion was carried by a voice vote. Representative Harwood made a motion to send RS 12981 to the second reading callander. Motion was carried by a voice vote. Representative Smith would like to be recorded as voting no.
	There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 2:43 PM.

DATE:	February 14, 2003
TIME:	1:05 PM
PLACE:	Room 406
MEMBERS:	Chairman Barraclough, Vice Chairman Raybould, Representatives Ellsworth, Campbell, Harwood, Edmunson, Snodgrass, Smith(30), Sayler
ABSENT/ EXCUSED:	Representative Meyer
GUESTS:	See attached list
	Chairman Barraclough called the meeting to order at 1:05 PM. Representative Sayler moved that the minutes of February 12, 2003, be approved as written. Motion carried by a voice vote.
H 197	Representative Bill Deal stood to introduce H 197. He said that the Skyview High students have pinpointed a problem and have provided a viable solution with this bill. He then introduced Nicole Riggs, Skyview High student. She stated that this bill will provide a financial incentive for people to recycle their beverage containers. She also explained how the bottle bill would work. The purpose of this legislation, Ms. Riggs stated, is to reduce litter, conserve resources, and add life to our landfills. She asked the committee to support the bill. Ryan Schulz, Skyview High student, stood in favor of H 197. He gave many statistics about recycling. Janet Ward, Idaho AAUW, said that her organization supported the Bottle Bill because it will reduce litter and conserve energy. She also believes that there needs to be an incentive to make recycling worthwhile. Pam Eaton, Idaho Retailers Association, stood in opposition to H 197. She said that one of the biggest concerns grocery stores have is sanitation. Though money will be returned to the retailers, it will not be enough to cover the costs they must expend to administer the program and hire labor; ultimately, the stores will be forced to mark up items. Gary Prasil, Idaho Beverages, stood in opposition to the bill. He said that most people do not intentionally litter, and most litter that is found along the road has blown off of trucks. He said that the result of a bottle bill will be that the price of garbage collection will rise and many small recyclers will go out of business. Ray Stark, Boise Chamber of Commerce, stated that the consumer (not the producer) who purchases the products should be responsible for properly disposing of the empty containers. Stan Boyd, Idaho Wool Growers Association, stood in favor of the bill. He said that the majority of sheep in Idaho live on the open range. Litter has increased on the open range, and the IWGA is calling upon the state to address this problem. Bill Roden stated that he had met with the students to try to make this bill work. He said that the DEQ will have to refund the initial fees paid by distributors; once this happens, a fund will not be available to pay for the administration of the program. Mark Glines said that Idaho’s recycling industry would forever be hindered by a bottle bill. Mike Fitzgerald, Table Rock Brewing, expressed his concerns about having to collect, clean, and store beer bottles at his restaurants to be redeemed. Pete Skamser, NFIB, stood in opposition to the bill, which he called complex and burdensome. Mr. Skamser urged the committee to hold the bill. Dan McGee, Skyview High government teacher, stated that the silent majority would support this legislation. He urged the committee to support the bill and take our society back to the days before “no deposit, no return.” Committee discussion followed.
MOTION:	Representative Campbell made a motion to hold H 197 in committee. Motion was carried by a voice vote.
	There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 2:26 PM.

DATE:	February 18, 2003
TIME:	1:35 PM
PLACE:	Room 406
MEMBERS:	Chairman Barraclough, Vice Chairman Raybould, Representatives Meyer, Campbell, Harwood, Edmunson, Snodgrass, Smith(30), Sayler
ABSENT/ EXCUSED:	Representative Ellsworth
GUESTS:	See attached list
	Chairman Barraclough called the meeting to order at 1:35 PM. Representative Harwood moved that the minutes of February 14, 2003, be approved as written. Motion was carried by a voice vote.
MOTION:	Representative Campbell made a motion to hold H 228 until a date could be worked out with the Agricultural Affairs chairman for a joint meeting. Three other bills will be heard in conjunction with H 228. Motion was carried by a voice vote.
HCR 15:	Representative Meyer stated that after the committee decided to reject DEQ air pollution rule, Docket # 58-0101-0201, he received a letter from DEQ Director Steve Allred. The letter said that the rule would have to be updated or it would be inconsistent with federal law, and it could then be enforced through the federal courts by third parties. Representative Meyer asked the committee to hold the resolution until the members could determine which portions of the rule should be rejected.
MOTION:	Representative Snodgrass made a motion to hold HCR 15 in committee. Motion was carried by a voice vote. Chairman Barraclough asked Representative Meyer to conduct the meeting. Representative Meyer made a motion to reject Section 605 of Docket #58-0101-0201. Motion was carried by a voice vote. Representative Meyer made a motion to reject Section 611 of Docket #58-0101-0201. Motion was carried by a voice vote. Representative Meyer made a motion to reject Section 608 of Docket #58-0101-0201. Representatives Raybould and Snodgrass concurred that the language of this section would put an extreme hardship on residents who need to burn leaves in the evening. Motion was carried by a voice vote. Representative Meyer made a motion to reject Section 614 of Docket #58-0101-0201. Motion was carried by a voice vote. Representative Campbell explained the air pollution concerns in Northern Idaho.
	There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 2:04 PM.

DATE:	February 20, 2003
TIME:	2:45 PM
PLACE:	Room 406
MEMBERS:	Chairman Barraclough, Vice Chairman Raybould, Representatives Meyer, Ellsworth, Campbell, Harwood, Edmunson, Snodgrass, Smith(30), Sayler
ABSENT/ EXCUSED:	Representatives Ellsworth, Campbell
GUESTS:	Simon Bell, Brian Monson, Steve Romano, Roy Eiguren, Chad Hyslop
	Chairman Barraclough called the meeting to order at 2:45 PM. Representative Raybould moved that the minutes of February 18, 2003, be approved as written. Motion was carried by a voice vote.
MOTION:	Representative Harwood made a motion to send HCR 22 to the floor with a do pass. Motion was carried by a voice vote.
	Roy Eiguren stood to talk about US Ecology of Idaho. He stated that it is operated by a parent company, American Ecology. US Ecology operates hazardous waste facilities in Grand View, Idaho; Richland, Washington; Beatty, Nevada; and Corpus Christi, Texas. The site in Grand View is one of Owyhee County’s largest employers. Mr. Eiguren gave some legislative history, saying that the Idaho Hazardous Waste Management Act and the Idaho Hazardous Waste Facility Siting Act are the principle statutes governing hazardous waste. In 2001, HB 192 was proposed to amend the Idaho Hazardous Waste Management Act to include low activity radioactive material, which is not federally regulated. In 2002, HB 735 was introduced to deal with the fee structure of the Idaho Hazardous Waste Management Act. The change in fees was necessary in order to be competitive with other hazardous waste facilities around the country. Mr. Eiguren yielded the floor to Steve Romano, US Ecology. Mr. Romano stated that the relationship US Ecology has with DEQ is very appropriate. He showed a map of all hazardous waste sites in the US. He stated that DEQ has a contract with US Ecology that allows US Ecology to dispose of all orphaned hazardous waste. Also, the Richland, Washington, site can take materials that are not allowed at other sites. Representative Meyer asked if the sites ever take agricultural pesticides. Mr. Romano replied that in some cases, they do. Brian Monson, DEQ, added that the Department of Agriculture works with them on this issue. Mr. Romano referred to a pie chart which shows the disbursement of fees. Construction is currently underway to expand the facility. He stated that the existing facility covers 80 acres, but the entire property is 1700 acres; the expansion area of the property will last over the next decade. Simon Bell, US Ecology, told about the use of evaporating ponds at each corner of the facility and explained how the riser pipes work, referring to a diagram that was handed out to each committee member. Mr. Monson stated that he cannot say enough about the level of cooperation US Ecology has shown DEQ. Chairman Barraclough concurred; he said that he is pleased with the efforts of the state in this instance.
	There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 3:45 PM.

DATE:	February 24, 2003
TIME:	2:20 PM
PLACE:	Room 406
MEMBERS:	Chairman Barraclough, Vice Chairman Raybould, Representatives Meyer, Ellsworth, Campbell, Harwood, Edmunson, Snodgrass, Smith(30), Sayler
ABSENT/ EXCUSED:	Representatives Raybould, Ellsworth, Edmunson, Snodgrass
GUESTS:	Marty Peterson, Jack Lyman
	Chairman Barraclough called the meeting to order at 2:20 PM. Representative Sayler moved that the minutes of February 20, 2003, be approved as written. Motion was carried by a voice vote.
S 1106	Marty Peterson, University of Idaho, presented this legislation to the committee. He stated that S 1106 provides for the restructuring of the Idaho Geological Survey. The Idaho Geological Survey was established by law and is housed at the University of Idaho, with branches at Idaho State University and Boise State University. Because of the decline of the mining industry and because of budget problems, U of I is restructuring and eliminating various functions. For instance, the College of Mines has merged into the Colleges of Engineering and Science. This bill responds to those realities. Representative Campbell asked how the Idaho Geological Survey will interact now with the USGS. Mr. Peterson replied that the relationship will continue to be close.
MOTION:	Representative Campbell made a motion to send S 1106 to the floor with a do pass. Motion was carried by a voice vote. Representative Barraclough will sponsor the bill on the floor.
	There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 2:32 PM.

DATE:	February 26, 2003
TIME:	2:28 PM
PLACE:	Room 406
MEMBERS:	Chairman Barraclough, Vice Chairman Raybould, Representatives Meyer, Ellsworth, Campbell, Harwood, Edmunson, Snodgrass, Smith(30), Sayler
ABSENT/ EXCUSED:	Representative Ellsworth
GUESTS:	Robert Wilkosz, Mike Edwards, Louis Kins, Teri Ottens
	Chairman Barraclough called the meeting to order at 2:28 PM. Representative Sayler moved that the minutes of February 24, 2003, be approved as written. Motion was carried by a voice vote.
HCR 26:	Representative Tom Trail stated that this legislation is a recycled version of H 118, which did not pass the floor. He stated that the main problems with H 118 were the optional 5% purchasing preference and warranties. This resolution will encourage state agencies to consider using recycled oil, which will reduce our dependency on foreign oil. Recycled oil is often cheaper than virgin oil. Representative Trail yielded to his co-sponsor, Representative Elmer Martinez, who stated that it is correct to encourage recycling. He does not think that Idaho is caught up with other states in terms of recycling. Representative Trail pointed out that the use of recycled oil may even result in savings for the state. Teri Ottens, Association of Idaho Recyclers, stated that this resolution will promote good stewardship by the state and set an example for everyone. Representative Campbell asked how citizens can acquire recycled oil. Ms. Ottens replied that few retail outlets sell recycled oil; large industrial outlets will bid on recycled oil bids for the state. She also added that over thirty businesses deal in recycled oil, but only two actually recycle it.
MOTION:	Representative Sayler made a motion to send HCR 26 to the floor with a do pass. Representative Edmunson asked if warranties would be nullified if recycled oil was used. Representative Trail said that the American Petroleum Institute says that recycled oil will fulfill all warranties. Representative Snodgrass asked how the different viscosities of oil would be retained if many different types of oil were thrown into the same barrel to be recycled. Representative Trail’s intern stated that the viscosities could be changed by adding different things after purification. Motion was carried by a show of hands. Representatives Raybould, Harwood, Smith, and Meyer voted no.
	Steve West, DEQ Air Quality Administrator, introduced Mike Edwards, DEQ, to speak about regional haze. Mr. Edwards talked about two federal regulations, 308 and 309, which would protect five Class I areas in Idaho: Bitterroot, Craters of the Moon, Yellowstone, Sawtooth, and Hell’s Canyon. Both plans will culminate in a return to pristine air in 2064. The state of Idaho has a choice of whether to comply with the 308 or the 309. Mr. Edwards stated that we must look at the data and develop a plan to control emissions. We must also work with the neighboring states that affect us and vice versa. He went over the differences between the 308 and the 309. He said that the state would have more flexibility if it went with the 308. Chairman Barraclough mentioned that the 309 has more immediate concerns and the concerns with the 308 would come farther down the linebut both would even out in the end. Representative Raybould commented on a map of national parks and wilderness areas protected by the EPA’s Regional Haze Rule; he asked why the East has markedly fewer areas with this designation. Mr. Edwards stated that the East has the same requirements as the West. The West must have pristine air by 2064, but the East must too. Mr. West stated that there are problems and we must find ways to responsibly address these problems so we are not left open to having outsiders enforce restrictions
	There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 3:24 PM.

DATE:	March 6, 2003
TIME:	1:30 PM or upon adjournment
PLACE:	Gold Room
MEMBERS:	Chairman Barraclough, Vice Chairman Raybould, Representatives Meyer, Ellsworth, Campbell, Harwood, Edmunson, Snodgrass, Smith(30), Sayler Agricultural Affairs: Chairman Jones, Vice Chairman Trail, Representatives Field(23), Lake, Stevenson, Bolz, Langford, Rydalch, Shirley, Jaquet, Andersen, Naccarato Judiciary and Rules: Chairman Field and those members common to the other committees.
ABSENT/ EXCUSED:	Lake
GUESTS:	See attached
	Chairman Jones called the meeting to order at 1:36 PM. He stated that the purpose of holding the joint meeting was to allow as many people to participate as possible with a minimum of time and expense. The four bills before the committees, H 217, H 226, H 227, and H 228, are all related to field burning in Northern Idaho, though there are implications statewide. The Chairman explained that the meeting would be for testimony only and votes would be taken later in the respective committees. He asked Dr. Greg Nelson to come forward to present H 217, H 226, and H227.
	Dr. Nelson stated that there will be statewide implications for all three bills because of the wide variety of weeds and odors around the state. He went over a packet he had handed out to the members. One handout explained that the Washington state law banning grass burning is not working. He showed a chart that indicated that Spokane’s air is not necessarily cleaner because of the burn ban. He alluded to the Idaho statutes governing smoke management and crop residue disposal and pointed out a list of areas that must be complied with in order to burn. When these laws are complied with, he said, private action should not be taken against farmers. H 217 inserts the phrase “public or private” into Section 52-108, Idaho Code. The result of this would be that if an activity is authorized under law, it cannot be considered a nuisance. H 226 amends trespass law to exclude smoke and odor from being trespassers. Dr. Nelson said that it would be dangerous to say that smoke could be a trespasser because smoke from barbecues, ditch burning, or leaf burning could potentially be considered trespassers as well. He said that the law was never intended to include intangible objects as trespassers. H 227 adds a new section to Idaho Code. It will eliminate private lawsuits against farmers who engage in crop residue burning in accordance with accepted and common sense practices and rules. Private citizens should not be punished for following the law, Dr. Nelson said. The Idaho Farm Bureau maintains that the state cannot afford to get rid of any more economy; farmers need to be supported, not destroyed.
	Representative Wayne Meyer rose to speak about H 228. This bill deals with “visible emissions,” or “opacity.” It will amend Section 22-4803, Idaho Code, to include the phrasing, “Any rules promulgated by the DEQ relating to opacity standards shall not apply to crop residue burning.” He said that opacity was not intended to be applied to crop residue burning or any other kinds of agricultural burning, just to smokestacks and things of that nature. He said that the EPA itself has exempted agricultural burning from opacity on reservations.
	Michael Bogert, counsel to Governor Kempthorne, provided a letter to the committee members explaining the governor’s role in this issue. The governor maintains that the interests of the stakeholders in this issue need to be balanced. He said that the governor remains committed to the integrity of the smoke management program and will continue to work with the Bush Administration on this issue.
	At this time, Chairman Jones asked for public testimony. Bill Chisholm rose in opposition to H 217, H 226, and H 227. He said that these bills stand against the purpose of government, which is to protect the right of due process. He said that odor in Buhl is a huge issue and that it is dangerous to exclude smoke or odor from being a trespasser. Del Rust, Benewah County Farm Bureau, spoke in favor of all four bills. He said that these bills will promote the common welfare and protect farms and businesses. Frank Priestly, Idaho Farm Bureau, spoke in favor of all four bills. He said that farmers should be protected from lawsuits if they are only doing what is allowable by law. He doesn’t think it is fair to have an entity in another part of the state telling farmers when they can burn. Lauren McLean, Idaho Conservation League, stood in opposition to all four bills. She believes the bills will restrict citizens’ rights to protect their property. She said that select polluters will be favored. Mike Ricks, Idaho Grain Growers, stood in favor of all four bills. He said that farmers should not be held liable for acting in accordance with law. Production agriculture needs all the available tools to survive, and farmers cannot afford to lose the tool of burning. Kevin Beaton, attorney for Idaho Farm Bureau and Food Producers, spoke to the legal issues of the bills. He does not believe that there are any legal hurdles involved. These bills will simply codify existing laws. Fred Riggers, Nezperce farmer, asked the committees to vote for all four bills. He said that farmers need all the help they can get to get out from underneath this pressure. Ginny Gunn rose in opposition to H 217, H 226, and H 227. She said that she was guaranteed the right of enjoyment when she bought her property, but she has been unable to do that because of dairy odors. She said that the Idaho Farm Bureau wants to take away the right to file suit. Helen McCracken rose in opposition to all four bills. She stated that H 217 destroys victims’ rights of redress. V.C. Prudek said he does not want the Idaho Farm Bureau to speak for him. He does not want conflict and thinks both sides should unite together. Scott Burgstaller, Sandpoint physician, stood in opposition to all four bills. He said that the issue is health, not a nuisance problem. He stated that there have been fatalities caused by the smoke. Patti Gora, SAFE director, stood in opposition to all four bills. She said that there may be Constitutionality problems with H 217, H 226, and H 227. She said that there is plenty of economic harm on the other side of the issue, including people losing their jobs because of illness or having to flee from their homes. Permitting burning cannot remove the obligation to operate responsibly. Tony Park, a Boise Attorney representing the American Lung Association, spoke in opposition to H217, H226, and H228. Field burning has an adverse impact on individuals whose health is already impaired. Ralph Sleyager from Sandpoint, ID spoke in opposition to H217, H226, H227 and H228 because field smoke affects peoples lives. Pat Takasugi, Director Of ISDA, stated that for the state and the health of the state you have to look at the possible economic impact of this legislation or a lack of legislation. There have been problems implementing programs because of the litigation. The checks and balances in the legislature are the best forum to resolve these problems, not in the court. Preserving and protecting the environment is the right thing to do but there are two environments; air, water, and soil is one and the other is the business environment. Bob Stoltz from Castleford, ID spoke in opposition to H217 and H226 stating that in the long run they would harm agriculture. Phong Smith from Filer, ID spoke in opposition to H217 and H226 stating that they take away the rights of citizens to protect themselves and to seek remedy for nuisances thrust upon them. Jim Dekleinhans a professional engineer from Twin Falls, ID spoke in opposition to H217, H 226 and H227. He considers this legislation to be for special interests and against the good of the general public. Operators should be encouraged to eliminate odors. Allen Hagelthorn, executive director for the Bonner County Board of Realtors, spoke in opposition to all the proposed legislation. He stated that they benefit a few and impact many. They believe the burning has caused a $2M drop in tourist revenue in Sandpint. Ed Smith from Filer, ID spoke in opposition to all the proposed legislation stating that they were and assault on his quality of life and they are for special interest groups. Roger Batt, representing IEOSA and the Idaho Mint Growers Association, spoke in support of all the legislation. The mint industry generates $14.5M in revenue and the seed industry $250M in annual revenue to support Idaho. Victoria Paulson, from the Idaho Medical Association, stated that resolution of this issue will occur with the tools created by the legislature. She said that if you say grass growers should not be charged with nuisance, you assume that following the rules does not cause health problems. The state of Idaho is sanctioning something that causes people to become ill. Keith Damon from Benewah County spoke in favor of all the proposed legislation. He is one of 70 farmers that are currently being sued by SAFE. In their mediation attempts SAFE has made it clear that there is no settlement short of a complete ban. The “balance” plaintiffs are seeking will bankrupt the farmers. Kristy Reed Johnson from Post Falls, ID serves on the Kootenai County air quality advisory board and spoke in regard to H227. The farmers should not be sued as individuals if they are compliant with the smoke management programs. The PM_2.5 concentration that is of concern to health officials need to take into consideration all open burning. Bob Branson a farmer from Nezperce, ID spoke in support of H227 and any legislation that protects a rural farm family from lawsuits. Paul Damon and his son Timothy Damon from Benewah County spoke in favor of H217, H226, H227, and H228. Timothy would like to be able to become a fourth generation farmer. The environmentally beneficial crop helps to maintain the clean water and air of the area. They are currently involved in the lawsuit against bluegrass growers and they stand to lose their farm. These bills are needed to clarify the intent of the “Right to Farm Law”. Phil Lampert a farmer in Benewah County, spoke in favor of H217, H226, H227, and H228. He burns responsibly and has a good rapport with his neighbors. Lawrence Lampert spoke in favor of H217, H226, H227, and H228. The added cost to producers by not burning is about $40/acre and shortens the stand life and it’s yield potential. The burn ban in Washington left 90% of the pollutants in Spokane County unscathed. Jim Wenholf a farmer from Grangeville, ID spoke in favor of H217, H226, H227, and H228. He described his current situation as “when urban sprawl collides with agriculture”. He feels a Seattle law firm has been hired out to set Idaho Policy. They now have to lobby for protection from lawsuits after obeying every letter of the law. Nathan Riggers a farmer in Nezperce, ID spoke in favor of H217, H226, H227, and H228. There is a double standard for agriculture burning and proscribed forest burning. Simplot is closing a local plant because of the uncertainty in the grass seed industry. David and Peter Lampert farmers from Worley, ID spoke in favor of H217, H226, H227, and H228. They are involved in the lawsuit even though they have followed every rule in the books and have never violated any EPA standard. Continued insurance coverage is a concern if this legislation is not passed. Linda Clovis from the North Idaho Farmers Association spoke in favor of H217, H226, H227, and H228. Farmers have been bombarded by lawsuits and the nuisance and trespass lawsuits are just another way for the opposition to try to end field burning. The PM_2.5 concentration has been at it’s highest on the 4^th of July and during slash burning for the last three years. The farmers have not violated any EPA guidelines or laws. Kyle Holly a farmer from Moscow, ID spoke in favor of H217, H226, H227, and H228. Walt Meyer a farmer from the Rathdrum Prairie spoke in favor of H217, H226, H227, and H228. The farmers are being litigated out of business when no standards or rules have been broken. These lawsuits will affect the US’s ability to compete in the world agriculture markets. The majority of people in the area would like them to continue raising bluegrass because of the environmental benefits. Jeff Tee a farmer from North Idaho spoke in favor of H217, H226, H227, and H228. The land is not suitable for other commodities. The industry currently creates jobs, cash flow and taxes which will be lost. Richard Morrison a farmer from Benewah County spoke in favor of H217, H226, H227, and H228. He recently had his liability coverage cancelled because he has been named in the lawsuit. He was only able to obtain new insurance because he signed a no-burn clause. Bill Dole a farmer from Kootenai County spoke in favor of H217, H226, H227, and H228. Dave Tellessen from Seeds Inc. spoke in favor of H217, H226, H227, and H228. 80% of grass they process is grown in Idaho. Most of the grass growers from Washington have left the business due to the burn bans there. This legislation will protect Idaho farmers and jobs. Davis Mosman a farmer from North Idaho spoke in favor of H217, H226, H227, and H228. Katie Simmons from Buhl, ID spoke in opposition to H217, H226, H227 and H228.
	There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 4:00 PM.

DATE:	March 10, 2003
TIME:	2:33 PM
PLACE:	Room 406
MEMBERS:	Chairman Barraclough, Vice Chairman Raybould, Representatives Meyer, Ellsworth, Campbell, Harwood, Edmunson, Snodgrass, Smith(30), Sayler
ABSENT/ EXCUSED:	None
GUESTS:	See attached list
	Chairman Barraclough called the meeting to order at 2:33 PM. Representative Meyer moved that the minutes of February 26, 2003, be approved as written. Motion was carried by a voice vote.
H 228	Representative Meyer stood to introduce H 228. He said that what he was about to say would be a repeat of the March 6, 2003, joint hearing. This bill deals with visible emissions, or opacity. Opacity standards were never meant to deal with open burning or agricultural burning. The purpose of this bill is to explicitly state that “any rules promulgated by the DEQ relating to opacity standards shall not apply to crop residue burning.” Representative Meyer deferred to Robert Wilkosz, DEQ air quality manager, who reiterated that opacity was never meant to be applied to open burning. He said that to measure opacity, observers have to decide where moisture is no longer part of a smoke plume and then estimate opacity at a point beyond that; this cannot be used for a moving fire front. Representative Sayler asked what they are hoping this legislation will accomplish. Representative Meyer said that this will clarify before the courts that opacity standards shall not be applied to open burning. Fred Riggers, Nezperce farmer; Dr. Greg Nelson, Farm Bureau; and Dar Olberding, Idaho Grain Producers Association, rose in support of the bill.
MOTION:	Representative Raybould made a motion to send H 228 to the floor with a do pass. Committee discussion followed. Motion was carried by a voice vote. Representative Sayler would like to be recorded as voting no.
H 198 (Amendments)	Representative Edmunson stated that many people have invested time into this measure and there are minor problems that will be cleared up with these amendments. Chairman Barraclough reminded the committee that H 198 was passed out of committee and came back after complaints. Representative Campbell asked that his name be removed as co-sponsor of this bill. Jon Sandoval, DEQ, said that he thinks all concerns have been addressed and all stakeholders have had the opportunity to participate in negotiations. He stated that the exemption for farm tires was still in place. Suzanne Budge Schaefer said that the process had been good and the integrity of the bill had been kept intact through these amendments.
MOTION:	Representative Ellsworth made a motion to reconsider H 198 in committee. Motion was carried by a voice vote. Representative Campbell would like to be recorded as voting no. Representative Ellsworth made a motion to send H 198 to general orders with committee amendments attached. Representative Smith seconded the motion. Motion was carried by a voice vote.
	Chris Shoop, Office of Performance Evaluations (OPE), stood to speak about the recently released follow-up report concerning DEQ’s Air Quality Permitting Program. He said that the February 2003 follow-up found that DEQ had issued all Title V permits but one; DEQ analysis supporting the proposed fee structure has potential weakness; additional work is needed to improve management of permit programs; and DEQ has resolved certain Title V financial accounting issues. The follow-up also found that permit management data are still not complete or consistent, and a centralized database and complete list of sources are being developed. DEQ plans to develop guidance for certain complex issues as needed but does not plan to develop general permitting guidance. Further follow-up will be necessary in six to eight months. Mr. Shoop stated that administrative costs will double between 2003 and 2004. The report found that there were some discrepancies as to how much certain activities should cost; specifically, DEQ hourly rates for similar types of work were $35/hour, while others were $55/hour. OPE discovered that DEQ had dropped off the “leave” category from the budgeted expenses. As it was a significant item in years past, OPE asked why it was no longer on the budget and has received no reply from DEQ. Chairman Barraclough asked why it took so long to get the initial permits out. Mr. Shoop replied that the program was slow to develop and was forced to endure setbacks. Representative Ellsworth asked why administrative costs are doubling. Mr. Shoop replied that a reason could not be found for that during evaluations; OPE has requested additional information concerning this increase but has not heard back yet. Representative Ellsworth asked about weaknesses found in the program by OPE. Mr. Shoop said that the fee structure relied upon facility emissions, but according to DEQ’s data, some facilities did not show any emissions, leaving major holes in the data. The program is designed now to generate more fees than prior fee structures. Mr. Shoop suggested that the current fee structure may even generate too much money. Mr. Shoop introduced Rakesh Mohan, Director of Office of Performance Evaluations, who told about himself. Chairman Barraclough asked Joan Cloonan, NWFPA, to discuss her thoughts. She said that she is hoping they can find ways to do more with what they have. She also stated that there were difficulties in the program early on and that it took several years of the states having to respond to the EPA. Mr. Sandoval stated that he believes the report is fairly accurate, and he hopes that the program will soon be taken to a more positive outcome. Representative Harwood asked why one permit had not been issued and why eight permits were on repeal. Ms. Cloonan replied that at least four of the eight had to do with the way the permits are written and are under repeal for very specific reasons.
	There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 3:33 PM.

DATE:	April 2, 2003
TIME:	1:30 p.m. or Upon Adjournment
PLACE:	Room 406
MEMBERS:	Chairman Barraclough, Vice Chairman Raybould, Representatives Meyer, Ellsworth, Harwood, Edmunson, Snodgrass, Smith(30), Sayler
ABSENT/ EXCUSED:	Representative Campbell
	Chairman Barraclough called the meeting to order at 2:44 p.m.
H 394	Mr. Roy Eiguren, representing Amalgamated Sugar Company, said Amalgamated Sugar owns and operates three plants in Idaho and one in Nyssa, Oregon. He said in negotiating with the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality they concluded a need for this legislation in order to be able to enter into compliance agreements with the department. Mr. Eiguren said this legislation is patterned after the code dealing with local municipal units and adds a provision. Mr. Eiguren explained the reasons this legislation is good, saying it makes DEQ subject to an enforceable agreement with the company and the agreement is an enforceable contract, DEQ may prioritize the problems and DEQ may consider financial reasons for the company to enter into compliance. He said DEQ and Amalgamated Sugar have developed a multi-year work plan and entered into an agreement that will go into effect after this legislation is passed. Mr. Eiguren responded to questions from the committee.
	Mr. Steve Allred, Director, DEQ, said the problem with the current statute is it only allows DEQ to enforce compliance. He said they needed a mechanism to bring certainty to the company with an agreement. Mr. Allred said prioritization of problems is important and the legislation is patterned after the statute that is already in place. He said it is not designed to be unilateral and it gives the opportunity for both sides to win. Mr. Allred responded to questions from the committee.
MOTION:	Representative Raybould made a motion to send H 394 to the floor with a “do pass” recommendation. By a voice vote the motion carried. Representatives Snodgrass and Sayler will sponsor the bill on the floor.
ADJOURN:	There being no further business to come before the committee, the meeting adjourned at 3:20 p.m.

DATE:	April 30, 2003
TIME:	10:50 a.m.
PLACE:	Room 406
MEMBERS:	Vice Chairman Raybould, Representatives Ellsworth, Campbell, Edmunson, Snodgrass, Smith(30), Sayler, Schanz
ABSENT/ EXCUSED:	Representatives Meyer, Harwood
GUESTS:	See Attached
	Vice-Chairman Raybould called the meeting to order at 10:50 a.m.
H0458:	Mr. David Mabe, Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), provided his testimony in written form (see attached).
MOTION:	Rep. Campbell made a motion to send H0458 to the second reading calendar. Gayle Batt, Idaho Water Users Association, and Jane Gorsuch, Intermountain Forest Association, stated their organizations were in support of this legislation. Vice-Chairman Raybould advised the committee a letter was received from Dick Rush, Idaho Association of Commerce and Industry, voicing their support of this issue. In support of his motion, Rep. Campbell stated this legislation answers the problem created by the Supreme Court decision and the timing requires it be sent to the second reading calendar. Questions of constitutionality of this legislation were addressed by Darrell Early, Deputy Attorney General for Idaho DEQ, and Michael Bogert, Attorney for the Governor’s Office. Both felt the constitutionality of the bill was not in question. Vice-Chairman Raybould called for a vote of the motion to send H0458 to the second reading calendar. By voice vote, the motion passed. Rep. Ellsworth will be the sponsor.
ADJOURN:	There being no further business to come before the committee, the meeting was adjourned at 11:12 a.m.

DATE:	May 2, 2003
TIME:	10:15 a.m.
PLACE:	Room 406
MEMBERS:	Vice Chairman Raybould, Representatives Meyer, Campbell, Edmunson, Snodgrass, Smith(30), Sayler, Schanz
ABSENT/ EXCUSED:	Representatives Ellsworth, Harwood
GUESTS:
	Vice-Chairman Raybould called the meeting to order at 10:15 a.m. He advised the committee this meeting was called in order to approve the minutes of April 30, 2003. Rep. Campbell made a motion to accept the minutes of April 30, 2003. By voice vote, the motion passed.
ADJOURN:	There being no further business to come before the committee, the meeting was adjourned at 10:18 p.m.