HF 2409

as introduced - 89th Legislature (2015 - 2016) Posted on 03/15/2016 08:46am

A bill for an act
relating to waters; requiring reporting of fish kills and development of protocol
for state response; appropriating money; proposing coding for new law in
Minnesota Statutes, chapter 103G.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA:

Section 1.

new text begin [103G.216] REPORTING FISH KILLS IN PUBLIC WATERS.
new text end

new text begin Subdivision 1. new text end

new text begin Definition. new text end

new text begin For the purposes of this section, "fish kill" means an
incident resulting in the death of 100 or more fish within an area one-half square mile
or less in public waters.
new text end

new text begin Subd. 2. new text end

new text begin Reporting requirement. new text end

new text begin A person who observes a fish kill in public
waters must report the location of the fish kill to the Office of Emergency Response in
the Department of Public Safety within four hours of first observing the fish kill. The
Office of Emergency Response must alert the Departments of Natural Resources and
Health and the Pollution Control Agency of the location of the fish kill within one hour
of being notified of the fish kill.
new text end

Sec. 2. new text begin DEVELOPMENT OF FISH KILL RESPONSE PROTOCOL.
new text end

new text begin Subdivision 1. new text end

new text begin Development of protocol. new text end

new text begin The commissioner of health, in
consultation with the commissioners of the Pollution Control Agency, natural resources,
and agriculture and the head of the University of Minnesota's Department of Fisheries,
Wildlife, and Conservation Biology Department, shall, by October 1, 2016, develop a
protocol consisting of steps that state agencies responding to notification of a fish kill,
as defined in Minnesota Statutes, section 103G.216, must take to ascertain on the basis
of sound scientific evidence the factors contributing to the fish kill. The protocol must
address the following factors:
new text end

new text begin (1) the number and species of fish and other aquatic creatures sampled from the body
of water in which the fish kill occurred;
new text end

new text begin (2) the locations from which samples described in clause (1) should be taken;
new text end

new text begin (3) the number and location of water samples taken from the body of water in which
the fish kill occurred;
new text end

new text begin (4) the number and location of soil samples taken to ascertain whether contaminants
traveled overland to reach the body of water in which the fish kill occurred;
new text end

new text begin (5) sampling other materials located near the area of the fish kill, including, but not
limited to, vegetation and manure, that may indicate the presence of contaminants that
may have contributed to the fish kill;
new text end

new text begin (6) developing a comprehensive list of contaminants, including degradation
products, for which the materials sampled in clauses (3) to (5) should be tested;
new text end

new text begin (7) the appropriate concentration limits to be used in testing samples for the presence
of contaminants, allowing for the possibility that the fish kill may have resulted from
the interaction of two or more contaminants present at concentrations below the level
associated with toxic effects resulting from exposure to each individual chemical;
new text end

new text begin (8) proper handling, storage, and treatment necessary to preserve the integrity of the
samples described in this subdivision in order to maximize the information the samples
can yield regarding the cause of the fish kill;
new text end

new text begin (9) the organs and other parts of the fish and other aquatic creatures that should be
analyzed to maximize the information the samples can yield regarding the cause of the
fish kill;
new text end

new text begin (10) the need to take the samples described in this subdivision as soon as possible
after the fish kill occurs; and
new text end

new text begin (11) any other factors the parties deem relevant in determining the cause of the
fish kill.
new text end

new text begin Subd. 2. new text end

new text begin Review of protocol. new text end

new text begin (a) The commissioner shall submit the protocol
developed under subdivision 1 to an administrative law judge for review upon its
completion. The parties that developed the protocol shall also separately submit comments
to the administrative law judge addressing the reasonableness of the protocol, the level
and certainty of the scientific support underlying the elements of the protocol, and any
portions of the protocol with which the parties disagree or would prefer to see modified.
new text end

new text begin (b) The administrative law judge shall review the protocol and the accompanying
comments and shall determine whether the protocol adequately provides a scientifically
sound basis for ascertaining the cause of a fish kill. The administrative law judge shall,
within 90 days of receiving the protocol for review, issue a report stating findings of
fact, conclusions, and recommendations. The administrative law judge may reject all or
portions of the protocol and must submit the reasons for the rejection in writing to the
parties who developed the protocol. The parties must, within 45 days of receipt of the
administrative law judge's rejection of all or part of the protocol, submit a revised protocol
to the administrative law judge for review and approval.
new text end

new text begin Subd. 3. new text end

new text begin Implementation. new text end

new text begin Once the protocol has been approved by an administrative
law judge, state agencies must follow the protocol when responding to a fish kill.
new text end

new text begin Subd. 4. new text end

new text begin Updating protocol. new text end

new text begin The parties named in subdivision 1 shall review
and update the protocol every five years. The updated protocol must be reviewed and
approved by an administrative law judge according to the procedures in this section.
new text end

Sec. 3. new text begin APPROPRIATION.
new text end

new text begin $....... in fiscal year 2017 is appropriated from the clean water fund to the Board of
Regents of the University of Minnesota for the Department of Fisheries, Wildlife, and
Conservation Biology to develop a protocol for the state response to fish kills according to
section 2.
new text end