MINUTES OF THE
SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES
Sixty-seventh Session
April 16, 1993
The Senate Committee on Natural Resources was called to order by Chairman R. Hal Smith, at 8:37 a.m., on Friday, April 16, 1993, in Room 224 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Meeting Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:
Senator R. Hal Smith, Chairman
Senator Dean A. Rhoads, Vice Chairman
Senator Ernest E. Adler
Senator Thomas J. Hickey
Senator Mark A. James
Senator Joseph M. Neal, Jr.
Senator Dina Titus
GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT:
Assemblyman John C. Carpenter
Assemblyman P.M. Neighbors
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Caren Jenkins, Senior Research Analyst
Rayanne Francis, Senate Committee Secretary
OTHERS PRESENT:
Alan List, Farmer, Lovelock, Nevada
Allen Brinkerhoff, Owner/Operator, Brinkerhoff Ranch Inc.
Larry Hawke, Director, Legislative and Public Affairs, Nevada
Mining Association
John P. Barta, Chairman of Air Quality Task Force, Nevada Mining
Association, and Environmental Manager, FirstMiss Gold Inc.
Doug Busselman, Executive Vice President, Nevada Farm Bureau
Robert Gronowski, Director, Division of Plant Industry, Nevada
Department of Agriculture
Lew Dodgion, Administrator, Division of Environmental
Protection, Department of Conservation and Natural Resources
Jolaine Johnson, Chief, Bureau of Chemical Hazards Management,
Division of Environmental Protection, Department of
Conservation and Natural Resources
Dan Stevenson, Safety Superintendent, Independence Mining
Company
Chairman Smith convened the hearing and opened with Assembly Bill (A.B.) 189.
ASSEMBLY BILL 189: Exempts from regulation certain uses of hazardous substances.
SENATE BILL (S.B.) 641
OF THE SIXTH-SIXTH SESSION: Regulates handling of hazardous chemicals.
Chairman Smith pointed out, in 1991, several members of the legislature had been involved with the passage of S.B. 641 of the Sixty-sixth Session. He explained A.B. 189 was a refinement of the 1991 legislation, and voiced his appreciation to all parties involved for their cooperation in producing an amendment which would meet the needs of the public. Specifically, he thanked the mining industry, chemical companies (from Henderson, Nevada), railroad industry, transportation concerns, agricul-tural community and the Division of Environmental Protection (DEP), Department of Conservation and Natural Resources.
Assemblyman John C. Carpenter introduced himself to members of the committee and said he supported passage of A.B. 189. He remarked this bill was supported by the mining industry, agricultural community, labor representatives from the Las Vegas area, the Nevada Farm Bureau and the Nevada Cattlemen's Association.
Assemblyman Carpenter explained A.B. 189 had already been amended and unanimously passed out of the Assembly Committee on Natural Resources, Agriculture and Mining. He also noted the bill had received only one dissenting vote when passed out of the Nevada State Assembly.
Assemblyman Carpenter explained the main thrust of A.B. 189 was to remove anhydrous ammonia from the state-imposed fee process when the chemical was being used for agricultural purposes. He explained S.B. 641 of the Sixty-sixth Session attached a state-imposed fee to anhydrous ammonia, making it more expensive for farmers to obtain. He explained the agricultural community in the Lovelock and Winnemucca areas had been successfully utilizing anhydrous ammonia as a fertilizer for many, many years.
Assemblyman Carpenter stated anhydrous ammonia was regulated by the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) and the Occupational Safety and Health Agency (OSHA). He continued by pointing out the use of this chemical at the state's mines was regulated by the federal Mine Safety and Health Act (MSHA), as well as the Mine Inspection Division, Nevada Department of Industrial Relations.
Assemblyman Carpenter summarized by stating the agricultural community's use of anhydrous ammonia was more than adequately regulated and there was no evidence that safety problems exist to warrant further regulation by the state. He stressed there was absolutely no reason to charge a fee when the state was not regulating that industry.
Senator Neal said he was not familiar with the use of anhydrous ammonia in the mining industry. Assemblyman Carpenter explained this chemical was not being used in any of the mines in the State of Nevada. He stated the two chemicals utilized at the state's mines were chlorine and hydrogen sulfide. He stressed this was the justification for specifically targeting the agricultural communities use of anhydrous ammonia. Assemblyman Carpenter concluded his testimony by requesting that the Senate Committee on Natural Resources enact A.B. 189.
Assemblyman P.M. Neighbors commented that he represented five counties: Mineral, Esmeralda, Lincoln, White Pine and Nye. He pointed out these counties were very involved in ranching, mining and agricultural activities. He concluded his testimony by encouraging members of the Senate Committee on Natural Resources to support passage of A.B. 189.
Alan List, Farmer, Lovelock, Nevada, introduced himself to members of the Senate Committee on Natural Resources. His testimony is contained in Exhibit C.
Allen Brinkerhoff, Owner/Operator, Brinkerhoff Ranch Inc., introduced himself to members of the committee. He pointed out he operates a 6,000 acre ranch in the Lovelock, Nevada area, of which 2,000 acres was planted with small grain crops fertilized with anhydrous ammonia.
Mr. Brinkerhoff stated he stored anhydrous ammonia on his ranch in a 25,000 ton storage tank. He testified this chemical was not used for any other purpose than to fertilize his crops. He encouraged members of the committee to pass A.B. 189 due to the fact this legislation will reduce the cost of purchasing anhydrous ammonia by at least 50 percent. Mr. Brinkerhoff emphasized if A.B. 189 was not enacted, he could be forced to retool and utilize another chemical.
Senator Neal asked Mr. List what it was about the current regulation that created so many problems for the agricultural community. Mr. List replied the excessive cost of being regulated by the state prohibited the use of anhydrous ammonia by the state's farmers. Senator Neal asked what fees the state was requiring farmers (utilizing anhydrous ammonia) to pay. Mr. List said each farmer was required to pay a $100 per year registration fee and a $3,100 per year/per site fee dealing with the storage of the chemical. He continued by saying, every 5 years, each applicant was required to conduct a hazardous material study of the area surrounding the chemical storage site. Mr. List stressed this study was a very complex and expensive process.
Chairman Smith explained the DEP had presented testimony at an earlier Senate Committee on Natural Resources hearing. He continued by saying the DEP had indicated the purpose of S.B. 641 of the Sixty-sixth Session was to ensure monies were available to them to enforce associated safety regulations when transporting hazardous substances in Nevada. Chairman Smith emphasized the industry was in agreement with A.B. 189, which would eliminate the use of anhydrous ammonia for agricultural purposes from provisions of S.B. 641 of the Sixty-sixth Session.
Larry Hawke, Director, Legislative and Public Affairs, Nevada Mining Association, introduced himself to members of the committee. He stressed the chemical which was utilized most often by the mining industry was chlorine. Mr. Hawke indicated that S.B. 641 of the Sixty-sixth Session specified the threshold quantity for chlorine was 1,500 lbs. In other words, a mine site would be regulated if they stored more than 1,500 lbs. of chlorine. He stressed not all mines utilized chlorine in their operations and mentioned he knew of only five regulated mines in the State of Nevada.
John P. Barta, Chairman of Air Quality Task Force, Nevada Mining Association, and Environmental Manager, FirstMiss Gold Inc. introduced himself to members of the committee. He testified his duty as Environmental Manager at FirstMiss Gold Inc. was to maintain compliance with all government environ-mental laws and regulations. As Chairman of the Air Quality Task Force, he said he worked closely with the DEP in an effort to keep up with current and anticipated state and federal regulations. Mr. Barta said he supported passage of A.B. 189 and encouraged members of the committee to enact this bill.
Senator Neal said he was not familiar with either 30 U.S.C. 801 or 42 U.S.C. 7401, listed in section 1 of A.B. 189. Mr. Barta explained 30 U.S.C. 801 et seq. was the federal statutory citation for the Mine Safety and Health Act. He continued by stating 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. was the federal statutory citation for the Clean Air Act. Mr. Barta explained the reason these two citations were mentioned in the bill had to do with a question which had been brought up in the Assembly Committee on Natural Resources, Agriculture and Mining. He continued by saying the inclusion of these citations would clarify what activities would be outside the scope of S.B. 641 of the Sixty-sixth Session. Without inclusion of the federal citations, Mr. Barta explained the use of the word "purpose" (contained in the original bill, as well as section 1, subsection 2 of A.B. 189) could be construed to include manufacturing or processing entities which produce certain substances for use in the mining industry.
Senator Neal made the observation that passage of A.B. 189 would still require that applicable industries be regulated by the federal acts and not the State of Nevada. Mr. Barta replied this was correct. He continued by explaining language contained in A.B. 189 clarified some of the interpretation problems with original langauge contained in S.B. 641 of the Sixty-sixth Session. He concluded his testimony by saying A.B. 189 clearly stated if an industry was currently regulated by the federal MSHA and the Clean Air Act, this same industry would be outside of the scope of S.B. 641 of the Sixty-sixth Session.
Mr. Barta mentioned another mine company representative (Dan Stevenson, Safety Superintendent, Independence Mining Company), was prepared to provide testimony if deemed necessary by members of the committee. Chairman Smith thanked Mr. Stevenson for his interest, but advised committee members they should move forward with the hearing.
Doug Busselman, Executive Vice President, Nevada Farm Bureau (NFB), introduced himself to members of the committee. He explained the NFB supported passage of A.B. 189 and hoped the Senate Committee on Natural Resources would move the bill along as quickly as possible.
Mr. Busselman stated there were quite a few farmers and ranchers who were interested in utilizing anhydrous ammonia. He commented if A.B. 189 were to be quickly passed out of committee, the agricultural community would be able to use this chemical to fertilize their crops this upcoming irrigation season.
Mr. Busselman pointed out C. Joseph Guild, III, Lobbyist, Nevada Cattlemen's Association, had been unable to attend the hearing. Mr. Busselman concluded his testimony by stating Mr. Guild had requested that he declare that the Nevada Cattlemen's Association also supported passage of A.B. 189.
Robert Gronowski, Director, Divison of Plant Industry, Nevada Department of Agriculture, introduced himself to members of the committee. He explained he had worked in the agricultural field for 23 years and had seen the benefits of using anhydrous ammonia as a fertilizer in Nevada, as well as in many other states. He stated he was not aware of any kind of serious hazard or problem with this chemical's use by the agricultural community.
Mr. Gronowski stressed anhydrous ammonia was an inexpensive and extremely effective fertilizer. He emphasized many of alternate chemicals are mined in foreign countries and are being depleted. For this very reason, he declared these alternate chemicals were expensive and would only increase in cost. As a matter of interest, Mr. Gronowski commented the mining sources of nitrogen are completely depleted.
Senator Neal asked how the transportation of anhydrous ammonia would be regulated. For example, he asked how a law enforcement officer would be able to determine whether the anhydrous ammonia was being transported for agricultural uses. Mr. Gronowski explained the transportation of all chemicals upon roadways in the State of Nevada was handled by the Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT). He continued by explaining the vehicle's manifest would indicate the type of chemical being transported, as well as the final destination. Additionally, vehicles transporting hazardous substances were required to display hazard placards on the sides and back of the container.
Chairman Smith pointed out he had recently received information from Dan Thompson, Lobbyist, American Federation of Labor - Con-gress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) of Nevada State. He continued by explaining the AFL-CIO of Nevada State supported passage of A.B. 189.
Lew Dodgion, Administrator, Division of Environmental Protection, Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, introduced himself to members of the committee. He stressed the DEP was philosophically opposed to passage of A.B. 189, because it was inappropriate to exempt any particular chemical or industry from the program set forth by S.B. 641 of the Sixty-sixth Session. He declared exemptions should be based upon the quantity of material, the distance a particular material was being removed from any populated area and a finding that the material was being handled in a safe and satisfactory manner.
Mr. Dodgion called attention to the fact the amendments contained in A.B. 189 improved the bill, but the DEP did have concerns relating to section 1, subsection 1. He concluded his comments by introducing Jolaine Johnson, Chief, Bureau of Chemical Hazards Management, Division of Environmental Protection, Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, to committee members.
Ms. Johnson said the DEP had reviewed section 1, subsection 1 of A.B. 189, which exempted hazardous substances transported in the State of Nevada. She continued by explaining the DEP objected to present language due to the fact it was open to interpre-tation. Ms. Johnson testified that some facilities have indicated that, because their product had been transported at some point, these substances are exempt from regulation by the state or federal government. She was confident this was not the intended purpose of the amended language and suggested the wording be changed to indicate that the exemption would only apply in the case of the transportation of highly hazardous substances. Ms. Johnson felt this would differentiate that the exemption only applied when the hazardous substance was being transported and subject to USDOT regulation. She continued by explaining once a hazardous substance reached its destination (a fixed facility), and was handled, used or stored, the substance would fall under the regulations set forth by S.B. 641 of the Sixty-sixth Session.
Ms. Johnson encouraged the Senate Committee on Natural Resources to amend A.B. 189 with the DEP's suggested amendment. She concluded her testimony by stressing this amendment would allow the DEP to implement the program more effectively.
Senator Neal asked what types of controls would the anhydrous ammonia be required to meet once it arrived at its destination and was stored. He wondered if each storage site would be exempted from filing a form with the local fire department listing the type and location of chemical on the site. Mr. Dodgion explained A.B. 189 would not exempt the mining industry or agricultural community from requirements to report to the local fire department in the event of spills or releases of hazardous chemicals.
Mr. Dodgion testified A.B. 189 only exempted the use of anhydrous ammonia on a farm or ranch and only the chemicals used by the mining industry on the mine site. He said the agricultural use of anhydrous ammonia would still be regulated with regard to the safety management aspects of the Occupational Safety and Health Agency (OSHA). Mr. Dodgion stated it was also his understanding that the agricultural use of anhydrous ammonia would be exempted from the federal Clean Air Act. He stressed the mining industry would not be exempted from the Clean Air Act.
Senator Hickey asked if anhydrous ammonia was a caustic chemical. Mr. Dodgion asked Ms. Johnson to answer this question, and stressed she was a chemical engineer. Ms. Johnson said an individual will experience burns if their skin comes into contact with anhydrous ammonia and will burn their lungs if anhydrous ammonia is inhaled. She continued by stressing the hazard or danger of any chemical was directly related to the concentration and length of time of exposure. Ms. Johnson explained death could occur from overexposure to anhydrous ammonia.
Senator Hickey asked what restrictions currently applied to the storage of anhydrous ammonia. Mr. Dodgion said the DEP does not regulate the storage of this chemical. Senator Hickey asked what type of chemical emergency response would be required at the site of an anhydrous ammonia spill. Mr. Dodgion said chemical spills involving anhydrous ammonia at agricultural sites, would still be subject to the reporting requirements of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA), Title 3. Senator Hickey asked if A.B. 189 changed any of the current requirements of SARA Title 3. Mr. Dodgion replied that he did not believe A.B. 189 would change any federal laws.
Senator Hickey asked what chemicals, located at mine sites, would be regulated by S.B. 641 of the Sixty-sixth Session. Ms. Johnson said she knew of five mining facilities which fell under the regulations established by S.B. 641 of the Sixty-sixth Session. She said the following chemicals had been reported by these mines: chlorine, sulfur dioxide and nitric acid.
Senator Hickey said he understood the USDOT preempted any regulations dealing with this issue and set forth by the State of Nevada. Mr. Dodgion said the USDOT only preempts the state laws while a hazardous substance was being transported. He continued by saying earlier testimony provided by Ms. Johnson, indicated that some facilities feel that a particular substance should be exempt from S.B. 641 of the Sixty-sixth Session if it had been transported. He stressed an amendment to existing language contained in section 1, subsection 1 of A.B. 189 should clarify the fact that a substance was only exempted from the program established by S.B. 641 of the Sixty-sixth Session while it was being transported.
Chairman Smith mentioned he had brought A.B. 189 before the full committee with the intent of passing this bill so agricultural interests could proceed with their planning for the upcoming irrigation season. He recognized the concerns voiced by the DEP with regard to transporting hazardous substances, but suggested the committee address these concerns by drafting another bill in the very near future. Mr. Dodgion volunteered the services of the DEP in developing appropriate language for another bill.
Senator Hickey said he understood why it was imperative to be responsive to the needs of the agricultural community, but admitted he still had some concerns. He continued by saying A.B. 189 would affect both the mining industry and the agricultural community. Until he had a chance to look more closely at the USDOT and mining industry issues, he suggested this language be amended out of the bill. Senator Hickey apologized and assured those in attendance that he did not wish to hold up the bill. However, he said he did not feel comfor-table with taking action on the bill until his questions had been answered.
Senator Hickey commented that A.B. 189 should have been drafted to exempt the use of anhydrous ammonia across the board. He did not feel it was appropriate to single out and exempt just a portion of the community utilizing the chemical. Senator Hickey offered to make a motion of amend and do pass as amended if other members of the committee would agree to his suggested amendments.
Chairman Smith admitted he was not exactly sure how to proceed. Assemblyman Carpenter offered to provide further testimony in an attempt to satisfy Senator Hickey's concerns.
Assemblyman Carpenter stated the language regarding the transportation issue, contained in A.B. 189, was identical to language contained in S.B. 641 of the Sixty-sixth Session. He assured Senator Hickey the transportation of hazardous substances was still regulated by the state and the USDOT. He stressed A.B. 189 would not change these regulations in any way.
Senator Hickey asked Assemblyman Carpenter to address the subject of the intrastate delivery of anhydrous ammonia to the three locations in the State of Nevada where it is being stored. Assemblyman Carpenter said these three agricultural concerns are required, by federal law (SARA Title 3), to report the quantity of anhydrous ammonia stored on the site and the location of the tank(s). He said this would give local emergency response teams the appropriate information needed to deal with an accidental spill or fire.
Assemblyman Carpenter explained the transportation of this chemical would be regulated by the USDOT. He continued by saying the vehicle's manifest would list the type, quantity and destination point of the chemical being transported.
Senator Hickey explained he already understood what Assemblyman Carpenter was describing. However, he had concerns about the delivery service of this chemical on the state's highways. He asked who would be responsible for the intrastate transportation of this chemical while it was on Nevada's roadways. Assemblyman Carpenter stated the Nevada Highway Patrol (NHP) would regulate this chemical while it was being transported on the state's highways.
Senator Hickey said they were now getting to the heart of what was troubling him. He explained he was concerned about the issue of transporting hazardous substances without regulation. Assemblyman Carpenter said he did not believe this was the case. He continued by explaining the regulation of transporting hazardous substances within the State of Nevada was enforced by the NHP, the Public Service Commission (PSC) and the USDOT.
Chairman Smith interrupted by saying he thought A.B. 189 was attempting to maintain all of the features of S.B. 641 of the Sixty-sixth Session, with the exception of anhydrous ammonia. He continued by explaining this chemical was being exempted from the original legislation to reduce the cost of its utilization as a fertilizer by the agricultural community. Chairman Smith assured Senator Hickey nothing else contained within S.B. 641 of the Sixty-sixth Session was being altered.
Chairman Smith advised members of the Senate Committee on Natural Resources that he was interested in expediting the passage of A.B. 189 in its present form. He reiterated that a separate bill be drafted to address concerns voiced by members of the committee.
Senator Neal commented he agreed with earlier comments voiced by representatives of the DEP, Mr. Dodgion and Ms. Johnson. He mentioned an amendment to existing language contained in section 1, subsection 1 of A.B. 189 would clarify the fact that a hazardous substance was only exempted from the program, established by S.B. 641 of the Sixty-sixth Session, while it was in the process of being transported.
Assemblyman Carpenter said he understood what Senator Neal was referring to, but insisted S.B. 641 of the Sixty-sixth Session originally exempted the transportation of hazardous substances based upon the fact the state and the USDOT enforced that aspect. He assured those in attendance that if A.B. 189 was enacted, a vehicle transporting anhydrous ammonia would still be inspected before coming into the state, at a port of entry by the NHP.
Dan Stevenson, Safety Superintendent, Independence Mining Company, introduced himself to members of the committee. He stressed the NHP inspects and certifies the vehicles which transport hazardous substances. He continued by saying these inspections include the physical attributes of the vehicle and any safety equipment on board. Senator Neal inquired if Mr. Stevenson felt the existing language contained in A.B. 189 was adequate. Mr. Stevenson said A.B. 189 still allowed the NHP and USDOT to regulate the transportation of hazardous substances.
Chairman Smith explained Senator Hickey's concerns centered on the language contained on line 2 of section 1. He continued by stating this language had been taken from the original version of S.B. 641 of the Sixty-sixth Session. He stressed his understanding of A.B. 189 was that the word "any" was being deleted (line 3, section 1), and subsections 1, 2 and 3 had been added in an effort to exempt only anhydrous ammonia from the original bill. Assemblyman Carpenter agreed with Chairman Smith's observations on A.B. 189. He continued by stating the deletion of the word "any" had been a change recommended by the bill drafter.
Chairman Smith explained Senator Hickey's concerns would more appropriately be resolved by working with Mr. Dodgion. Assemblyman Carpenter said he did not object to any effort to clarify the transportation language contained in A.B. 189.
Chairman Smith informed Senator Hickey that it was not his intent to hold A.B. 189, but to pass this legislation out of the Senate Committee on Natural Resources. He assured Senator Hickey that his concerns would be addressed within another bill which would be drafted at the request of the committee. Senator Hickey said he did not have any problem with clarifying this transportation issue by drafting another bill. However, he said he still had concerns regarding A.B. 189's effect on the mining industry.
In an attempt to alleviate Senator Hickey's concerns, Mr. Stevenson testified his function as Safety Superintendent for the Independence Mining Company was to ensure the well-being of over 700 employees at the mine. He said he was also responsible for the safety aspects of supervising the mine's impact on the surrounding environment.
Senator Hickey asked what chemicals were currently utilized at the Independence Mining Company. Mr. Stevenson said the chemical used at the mine, which was also governed by S.B. 641 of the Sixty-sixth Session, was chlorine. He explained other mines in the state also utilize nitric acid and sulfur dioxide. Mr. Stevenson explained these are the three primary chemicals utilized at mines across the state which are governed by S.B. 641 of the Sixty-sixth Session.
Senator Hickey asked if the chlorine was a liquid or in a solid form. Mr. Stevenson explained the Independence Mine Company used liquid chlorine in order to rapidly oxidize the ore removed from the ground. He continued by explaining the chlorine assisted in removing gold from the ore.
Senator Hickey inquired how much liquid chlorine was stored at the mine site. Mr. Stevenson said the mine stored chlorine in 38,000 pound tanks and used approximately six tanks of chlorine per day. Senator Hickey asked if the Independence mine utilized nitric acid. Mr. Stevenson said the mine only utilized small laboratory size quantities of that chemical. Senator Hickey inquired if this also applied to the use of sulfur dioxide. Mr. Stevenson agreed and replied the mine does not utilize sulfur dioxide.
Senator Hickey asked if the Independence Mining Company had ever had an accident with chlorine. Mr. Stevenson admitted the mine had experienced one minor incident since 1989. He continued by explaining this accident had required that the employee involved submit to a complete physical by a physician. He explained this was a precautionary move on the part of the mine, due to the fact the accident involved a small release of chemical, but no damage to the environment.
Senator Hickey asked Mr. Stevenson who regulated the mine's activities. Mr. Stevenson replied by saying a full facility inspection was performed by one or two inspectors from the federal Mine Safety and Health Administration who visit the mine 2 to 4 times per year (covering a 3-week period each inspection). He stated the Nevada Department of Industrial Relations Mine Inspection Division inspects the facility twice a year. Mr. Stevenson concluded by saying the federal government was required by law to conduct two annual inspections and the state was required to conduct one annual inspection.
Senator Hickey asked if A.B. 189 would eliminate the mine inspection process. Mr. Stevenson assured Senator Hickey this was not the case. He stressed A.B. 189 would relieve the mining industry from having to fill out more paperwork. He explained the existing mine inspections conducted by the federal and state governments were addressing the safety issue.
Assemblyman Carpenter stated it was not the intent of A.B. 189 to relieve any industry from having to comply with S.B. 641 of the Sixty-sixth Session, unless they were specifically regulated by the MSHA and the Clean Air Act. Additionally, he stressed the mining industry within the state was further regulated by the Nevada Department of Industrial Relations Mine Inspection Division.
Senator Rhoads asked Chairman Smith if he would entertain a motion to do pass A.B. 189, as written, and to request a bill be drafted to address Senator Hickey's concerns.
Senator Adler expressed his concerns about passing A.B. 189 as written. He explained there was a gramatical error contained in section 1, subsection 1. He stated this language could literally be interpreted to mean that a hazardous substance was exempt once it had been transported.
Chairman Smith said Senator Hickey's concerns were well founded and emphasized the importance of dealing with this issue by introducing a bill draft request in the near future.
Senator Adler admitted he had real reservations about passing A.B. 189 in its present form. In an attempt to resolve this issue, Chairman Smith offered to call another meeting of the Senate Committee on Natural Resources immediately after the present hearing. Senator Adler said he would approve passage of A.B. 189 if committee members made a firm commitment to draft another bill resolving the problem. Senator Hickey said he was satisfied with the proposition of drafting a another bill.
Chairman Smith called for action on A.B. 189.
SENATOR RHOADS MOVED TO DO PASS A.B. 189 AND REQUEST A BILL DRAFT REQUEST (RESOLVING THE TRANSPORTATION ISSUE).
SENATOR JAMES SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
* * * * *
SENATE BILL 131: Defines phrase "to take" for purposes of certain statutory provisions relating to wildlife.
Chairman Smith drew attention to an amendment to S.B. 131 provided to members of the committee. He asked committee members to review the amendment as he intended to call for a "concur" or "not concur" vote.
Chairman Smith explained this amendment would allow individuals to "hunt" with a camera, instead of a gun. Senator Adler asked Chairman Smith to describe the amendment in more detail. Chair-man Smith responded by saying the amendment deleted from statute the words "hunt", "pursue" and "to stalk."
Senator Rhoads asked what was the reasoning behind amending S.B. 131 in such a fashion. Chairman Smith explained he was an avid wildlife amateur photographer and did not wish to be arrested for stalking a wild animal with a camera.
Chairman Smith called for action on the amendment to S.B. 131.
SENATOR TITUS MOVED TO CONCUR IN THE AMENDMENT TO S.B. 131.
SENATOR JAMES SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
* * * * *
Chairman Smith called attention to a 2-page handout provided to members of the committee (Exhibit D). He explained he had received a request that the committee approve to draft a bill draft request (BDR) dealing with the minimum length of time between visiting animal traps.
Chairman Smith called for action on such a request.
SENATOR TITUS MOVED TO DRAFT A BILL DRAFT REQUEST ON TRAP VISITATION (Exhibit D).
SENATOR JAMES SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
* * * * *
Chairman Smith referred to a memorandum from Caren Jenkins, Senior Research Analyst, listing recommendations from the Subcommittee on Recycling Issues.
Chairman Smith called for action on the subcommittee's recommendations.
SENATOR ADLER MOVED TO DRAFT TWO BILL DRAFT REQUESTS. ONE TO PUT AN ADDITIONAL $1 FEE ON TIRES AND ONE TO DEFINE A RECYCLING FACILITY (Exhibit E).
SENATOR HICKEY SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
SENATOR ADLER MOVED TO DRAFT A RESOLUTION ENCOURAGING THE SEPARATION AT THE SOURCE, RE-USE AND RECYCLING OF ANY REASONABLE PRODUCTS FROM THE WASTE STREAM. (Exhibit E).
SENATOR HICKEY SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
* * * * *
BILL DRAFT REQUEST 33-1483: Revise penalties for violation of provisions governing protection of Indian Burial sites.
Chairman Smith explained BDR 33-1483 could be individually introduced or could receive a committee introduction.
SENATOR ADLER MOVED FOR COMMITTEE INTRODUCTION OF BDR 33-1483.
SENATOR HICKEY SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
* * * * *
Chairman Smith apologized for a recent change he had made in the hearing schedule for the Senate Committee on Natural Resources.
SENATE BILL 378: Increases penalty for killing wild horse.
Chairman Smith explained this wild horse and burro bill had been rescheduled to a future hearing. He stressed that his duty as chairman of the committee demanded that he respond to the needs of every committee member. Unfortunately, there was a conflict concerning the initial hearing schedule, so he had instructed staff to rearrange the agendas.
Chairman Smith commented that he and committee staff meet in his office at 2:30 p.m. every Tuesday. He emphasized that, at this meeting, he worked from a Nevada Legislative Information System (NELIS) list of bills assigned to the Senate Committee on Natural Resources. He called attention to the fact that the hearing agendas were scheduled at least 7 days in advance.
Chairman Smith encouraged committee members to approach him before inviting outside participation for a specific bill. In such instances, he promised to be as responsive as possible to requests from the committee.
Senator Titus explained she had invited an individual to provide testimony to the Senate Committee on Natural Resources concerning S.B. 378. Unfortunately, a scheduling change had been made and she was forced to get in touch with all of the participants and rearrange their calendars. She continued by pointing out one of the interested parties was from Tucson, Arizona and had been involved in the filming of the movie "Dances With Wolves."
Considerable discussion ensued with respect to possible scheduling recommendations. Chairman Smith encouraged committee members to approach him with their scheduling requests to allow him to best meet their needs.
There being no further business before the Senate Committee on Natural Resources, Chairman Smith adjourned the hearing at 9:41 a.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
Rayanne J. Francis,
Committee Secretary
APPROVED BY:
Senator R. Hal Smith, Chairman
DATE:
??
Senate Committee on Natural Resources
April 16, 1993
Page 1