JUNEAU — The Alaska House on Monday passed legislation that critics say would roll back requirements that cruise ships meet state water quality standards when dumping wastewater.
The 27-9 vote followed unsuccessful efforts, led by minority Democrats, to amend HB80, including requiring the location, date and volume of discharged wastewater be posted online.
Rep. Craig Johnson, R-Anchorage, served notice of reconsideration, meaning the bill could be voted on again before being sent to the Senate. A spokesman for the House Democrats said Johnson agreed to do this on behalf of Minority Leader Beth Kerttula, who had an excused absence.
Rep. Paul Seaton, R-Homer, was the only Republican who voted against the bill.
HB80, from Gov. Sean Parnell, would change how the state regulates wastewater from cruise ships.
Parnell’s Environmental Conservation commissioner, Larry Hartig, has said the measure would align rules for cruise ships with those for others that get discharge permits from the agency. Critics say it would reduce protections set out in a 2006 citizen initiative that required cruise ships to meet state water quality standards when dumping wastewater.
The bill would require that cruise ships discharge wastewater in a manner consistent with applicable state or federal law. It would strike the more stringent requirement that discharges meet state water quality standards at the point of discharge. It also would allow authorization of mixing zones if ships meet certain standards for treatment of discharge.
Hartig testified that his department can set restrictions for mixing zones, a point reinforced by supporters Monday. Michelle Bonnet Hale, director of the department’s Division of Water, has said the department doesn’t currently plan to monitor at the edge of mixing zones but has the authority and funding to do so.
HB80 stems from a preliminary report by a science advisory panel charged with looking at pollution from cruise ships. The panel found none of the advanced systems on ships operating in Alaska waters could consistently meet water quality standards at the point of discharge for “constituents of concern,” ammonia, copper, nickel and zinc.
It also identified “little additional environmental benefit” to be gained by lowering the current permitted effluent limits to water quality standards at the point of discharge. It said a dilution model, developed by an earlier panel, and other studies show concentrations lower than the water quality standards within seconds following discharge of the treated wastewater.
Supporters of Parnell’s plan, including the Alaska Cruise Association, have touted these findings as proof a change is needed.
One of the panelists, marine ecologist Michelle Ridgway, testified against the bill, saying she disagreed with several of the findings, including that fish and marine mammals would be protected under a general permit.
Ridgway said an environmental benefit would be derived and the dilution model and studies were done under “very specific and narrow” assumptions and didn’t adequately consider features of coastal Alaska’s oceanographic conditions. She said she thought the report would undergo further review before being finalized.
Rep. Andy Josephson, D-Anchorage, called the measure a “retreat” from voters’ wishes.
Rep. Les Gara, D-Anchorage, said voters wanted a bill “that protected the world’s greatest fisheries from pollution, from sewage, from copper ....”
He said if this change is made, there will be less pressure on the cruise industry toward new technologies to protect Alaska’s fisheries.
Rep. Charisse Millett, R-Anchorage, said it is hypocritical of the state to hold the cruise ship industry to a higher standard than it requires for Alaska’s ferry system.
Rep. Chris Tuck, D-Anchorage, said maybe the ferry system should be looked at, but he said it pales in size to the “floating cities” that are cruise ships.
Johnson said the report was based on science and expressed frustration that the issue had become politicized.
“Mr. Speaker, either we base it on science, or we don’t,” he said.
Comments (27)
Add commentI vote for
Science. Seems like a reasonable solution. Have a science panel. Listen to their input. Ensure it is objective. Enact it.
Good to see legislature getting things done.
Next issue.
That's good, concerned
So if this 'preliminary report' changes its recommendations after undergoing the full scientific review process, you'll be the first in line to endorse its revised recommendations. Good to know.
I'm not sure what the republicans have against publishing the sampling location and data online. Is there something top secret about those cruise ships' [filtered word]?
Parnell's Bill Unnecessary
Most of the Alaska fleet can meet high water quality standards, (AWQS's) or can hold and dump all waste in offshore, federal waters where it is legal and does not affect salmon or subsistence values. The rest of the Princess "copper ships" and others with eroding metal pipes can also discharge into the JNU treatment plant with new dock hookups.
There are many better choices than exempting ships from Alaska water quality standards, but the Parnell bill returns this scrutiny & control to the cruise lines. Ten years ago these same ships were dumping raw sewage and chemicals into federal 'donut holes' in Frederick Sound and Icy Strait. Thanks to the initiative, those practices have ceased. When the 'copper ships' are finally replaced by Princess, dissolved copper & salmon problems will reduce dramatically. Extend the DEC permits, don't exempt the fleet from compliance with Alaska WQS's.
Citizen Initiative on Cruise
Citizen Initiative on Cruise Ship Wastewater Threatened.
House Bill 80 (HB 80) and Senate Bill 29 (SB 29) were introduced by the governor to roll back the citizens’ 2006 initiative to set standards for effluent (or outflow) at the point of discharge. Ships have until 2015 to meet these standards. While cruise companies argue that they can’t meet the standards with available technology, I feel that getting rid of the point-of-discharge standard is extreme.
The governor’s bills propose mixing zones for cruise ships. This basically allows dilution of the effluent before it is tested. While Alaska allows mixing zones for sewage treatment plants and some mining operations, the cruise mixing zones would be mobile. This makes it difficult to determine how large the zone is and almost impossible to monitor. Cruise ships travel set routes, so each ship’s mixing zone would be overlapping with other ships’ mixing zones.
One of the biggest threats from cruise ship waste is copper. Copper is also one of the standards cruise ships routinely have difficulty meeting. Copper in the marine environment can be harmful to salmon and is toxic to plankton, which is the base of the aquatic food chain. For this reason, some states have even banned copper brake pads in cars.
HB 80 made it through the House quickly with only one committee of referral and passed the House floor today. Democrats introduced a number of amendments in an attempt to reduce the detrimental effects of the bill. Amendment #1 would have provided for a public record of cruise ship wastewater discharges in Alaskan waters. Amendment #2 would have added a two-mile buffer zone for discharges to protect our vital fish species. Amendment #3 would have allowed ships more time to meet point-of-discharge standards. All three amendments were voted down. The bill passed with a vote of 27-9.
There is still an opportunity to provide input in the Senate. On Tuesday, February 6, the Senate Finance Committee will hear from the Commissioner of the Department of Environmental Conservation. On Wednesday, February 7 at 9:00 a.m., the committee will take public testimony in the Senate Finance Committee Room (532 in the Capitol Building). If you aren’t able to testify in person, you can send an email to the Senate Finance Committee expressing your views (see below for a list of members).
We must not compromise in protecting our waters. To do so would be against the will of the people.
Senate Finance Committee Members’ Email Addresses
Sen.Pete.Kelly@akleg.gov – Co-Chair
Sen.Kevin.Meyer@akleg.gov – Co-Chair
Sen.Anna.Fairclough@akleg.gov – Vice-Chair
Sen.Mike.Dunleavy@akleg.gov
Sen.Click.Bishop@akleg.gov
Sen.Donny.Olson@akleg.gov
Sen.Lyman.Hoffman@akleg.gov
our real treasure
Alaska's clean water and healthy, abundant seafood are our greatest treasures. We cannot eat money. Some companies complain that the standards in the citizen's initiative cannot be met, but some ships are already meeting them. Replacing copper pipes with plastic is a good first step. And no mixing zones! I am beyond disappointed that the House has chosen to flout the will of the people.
Rolling our regs back to the
Rolling our regs back to the stone age...
Chip
Question: Do our onshore waste water plants do a better job of removing metals like copper from the effluent? Or are they able to be compliant because they utilize mixing zones?
Not baiting you - I honestly don't know.
Because if they don't then we're basically concentrating those metals into our local watersheds, and I don't see how that becomes an improvement.
Here we go again
Is this going to be another year where the house is rubber stamping the Governor's cronies wishes? Thanks to Rep. Paul Seaton and the others who voted "no" to this bill.
Lets track members voting
Lets track members voting against public will and give them the boot 2016
Mixing zones
More on mixing zones. From the governor's transmittal letter: "Even without incremental improvements to cruise ship wastewater quality, aquatic life and human health are protected through provisions in the current cruise ship General Permit that restrict the location of discharge and when ships must be under way before they discharge."
Mixing zones
Here's what DEC Commissioner Hartig said on the issue of mixing zones" "The department can set restrictions for mixing zones and decide where, when and how ships can discharge to protect for other uses."
907 - discharge is discharge
907 - discharge is discharge . There are no walls or boundaries to contain the discharge in the ocean. Lets put the costs on the cruise industry; not our state or the public, or future generations etc.
907 Think. If you have to protect "other uses" from the discharge then it is more cost effective for our state to prevent the source of the problem to begin with.
This is our opportunity to "contain" costs to our state.
Alaskan tax payer pays OR the cruise line pay the costs. Costs to cruise line are recoupable (tax write off) but the cost to us for the discharge is not.
Yep lets see who listens to
Yep lets see who listens to Alaskans.
Mr. Speaker ?
I didn't vote for the coastal zone management reinstatement (voter initiative). I thought it was poorly done. I saw you stating very publicly the other day that "the people had spoken on the issue" (i.e. voted it down).
I don't understand the disconnect here? The people have also "spoken on this issue". Why are we revisiting and trying to destroy something that the people have voted on?
Cruise Discharge
These discharges have been studied for years and the best science around agrees that they have no environmental harm
The bill
Let's fully understand what this bill does and doesn't do. It repeals the point-of-discharge requirements hidden in the 2006 initiative which sponsors repeatedly said held cruise ships to the SAME STANDARDS as every other discharger. But every other discharger gets a mixing zone so the playing field really isn't even. But it doesn't lessen the standards. That's the important part .
Hmm..
Re: 907News
People can read. I understand what you're saying, but I'm not really moved by your observation.
Cruise Discharge
Not sure why all the hysteria. Like every other state, Alaska’s water quality standards contemplate the use of dilution factors, such as mixing zones or short-term variances. They are not applied “at the end of the pipe,” which is the exact point of release.
Mass Confusion
Alaska has the highest water quality standards in the World. The cruise ships will still be held to a HIGHER standard. The two bills - HB 80 and SB 29 only require the testing to be done immediately behind the vessel, instead of at the end of the pipe. DEC still has full control over where/when/how etc the ships discharge. And this is NOT reversing or gutting the 2006 initiative. The backers of the initiative said they wanted the cruise ships to be treated like everyone else. Well, that is exactly what these bills intend to do - every other entity that discharges in the state of Alaska is allowed a mixing zone. I urge you all to read the Science Advisory panel study - which is a result of 3 years of study by an independent 3rd party.
ballot measure that made bad law with massive consequences
The voter initiative was about a big head tax and folks didn't read the other pages of stuff that were added in addition to the tax. The waste water stuff was clearly an attempt to bring harm and limit the industry by the anti-cruise ship folks who wrote the initiative - Chip Thoma (commenting above), Gershon Cohen (environmental and anti-cruise industry activist from Haines) and Joe Geldhof (attorney for Marine Engineers Benefit Association - ocean rangers have to be marine engineers, surprise!). They knew that the ability to reach the environmental measures in the initiative were unobtainable. Alaska already had the highest and if the current bill passes will still have the highest water quality standards in the world for cruise ship discharges. Science speaks for itself that there is no environmental benefit to testing in the pipe vs the mixing zone. This stuff is already cleaned up and some ships have near drinking water quality at the point of discharge - look up the article where the Haines mayor drank a glass of the stuff! I commend the legislature and the governor for dealing with our states unmerited extreme regulatory positions that are harmful to an industry and Alaskans in the name of "saving the environment" when what is on the books doesnt do squat for the environment.
sea2sea
The Science Advisory preliminary report studies the effects of one ship discharging in open ocean conditions. The realities of the cruise ship traffic in Southeast Alaska are up to twenty ships per day in Inside Passage conditions, discharging into the same donut holes on the same routes, day after day after day. This bill is based on a preliminary report that does not accurately study the realities of cruise ship traffic in the Inside Passage. If this bill advocated for looser discharge regulations for one ship per day in the Gulf, that'd be a different story.
Seems appropriate
From what I understand the treated discharge water is cleaner than most cities tap water. If the Science advisory board said it is ok to use mixing zones and that there are no better waste water technologies on the 5 year horizon then I don't see what the problem is. The cruise ships waste water is far cleaner than our cities affluent and the waste water discharged by our state ferries. The commissioner of the DEC stated that the cruise ships would still be monitored, no lessening of the current standard would be permissible and they have the capability to address any situation in the future. All of these issues are reviewed by the DEC every time a ship needs to renew its permit.
Water Quality Standard
Point of order. Water Quality Standard is the measure applied to the entire water body, to classify that eater body. Discharge is evaluated for its affect on the receiving water and dispersion is always considered.
@CaptNoah
I do wish to make a small correction. You and I and the rest of the 'unwashed' should use care to always refer to Gershon Cohen as DOCTOR COHEN. After all he does claim to have a degree... no matter it's authenticity or provenance.
Hey
cruise ship lovers, let me craap in your Mcfish sandwich and then tell me how you like it. Are you lovin it?
Y' know, I remember the
Y' know, I remember the cruise ship industry spending a whole lot of money trying to convince me to vote against the initiative with scary stuff about fewer ships coming and the loss of jobs, but not a word about the 'bad' science involved in waste water discharge. Guys, you had millions of dollars of chances to make your case and Alaskans still voted for it. It's just sour grapes to go back now and try to have your lapdogs chip away it. You want to make your case now? Fine, let's have another vote, but keep those bought and paid for legislators on a leash...
Public gets what it wants
Don't know if anyone remembers the initiative but it was sold to Alaska as a way to treat cruise ships the same way as every other discharger. This was an outright misrepresentation on the part of the initiative's sponsors. Every other discharger gets a mixing zone, which is exactly what this legislation does. So seven years after the initiative passes, the author's statements may finally come true. Finally the public gets what it voted for.
For more information....
If anyone is interested in the facts, there’s a lot of good information available on the state website at http://dec.alaska.gov/water/cruise_ships/index.htm