Legislature(2013 - 2014)HOUSE FINANCE 519
04/10/2014 08:30 AM House FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB121 | |
| SB56 | |
| HB160 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 56 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 64 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 173 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 160 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| = | HB 121 | ||
HOUSE BILL NO. 160
"An Act relating to the licensing and regulation of
athletic trainers."
10:06:15 AM
Representative Thompson read his sponsor statement to the
committee (copy on file):
House Bill (HB) 160 would amend current statutes to
establish licensing and regulation of athletic
trainers in the State of Alaska.
Athletic Trainers are health care professionals who
collaborate with physicians to enhance the practice of
sports medicine for patients and clients. This
profession plays a significant role in the management,
prevention, recognition and rehabilitation of injured
athletes under the supervision of a licensed physician
Athletic trainers are a vital resource in
administering injury prevention and treatment
programs, as well as immediate emergency care for the
sport and athletic community.
Alaska is one of the final two states that doesn't
currently license athletic trainers. HB 160 will
require athletic trainers to have a license to
practice in the State of Alaska. HB 160 will hold
athletic trainers accountable to the rigorous
standards of the Board of Certification, INC; a
national agency created to certify healthcare
professions and assure the protection of the public.
As Alaskans become increasingly more active the need
for properly trained and licensed athletic trainers
becomes imperative. Please support the passage of HB
160.
Representative Thompson asked his staff to explain the bill
in more detail.
BRODIE ANDERSON, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE THOMPSON, reviewed
the sectional analysis. He reported that Section 1 added a
new chapter for athletic trainers. Section AS 08.07.010
outlined the license requirements and Section AS 08.07.020
identified the qualifications, fee, and renewal. The scope
of practice of an athletic trainer was referenced in
Section AS 08.07.030. A new section was added Section AS
08.07.040 which defined the regulations and how they would
be drafted as well as definitions. Athletic trainer was
added to the list of "health care provider" in Section 3 AS
09.65.300 in which immunity was given for providing free
health care services. Section 4 AS 47.17.290 was amended to
add athletic trainer to the list of "practitioner of the
healing arts." Finally, in Section 5 Uncodified Law, the
applicability of the bill, was added.
10:10:22 AM
Representative Holmes wanted to have a discussion on the
record with the sponsor regarding concerns she heard from
people that were not athletic trainers but coaches, fitness
consultants, or personal trainers. They were concerned that
the bill would somehow make their jobs illegal. She asked
the representative to clarify that it was not the case and
to address the concerns that were brought up.
10:11:15 AM
Representative Thompson referenced a memo in the committee
packet dated April 9, 2014 from Sara Chambers of Business
and Professional Licensing, the director of the Division of
Corporations. The memo explained that there were
professions not currently licensed in the title that
performed functions that were defined as athletic training
and were in the scope of the professional training duties
(i.e. physical trainers and coaches). He asked if the
committee wanted him to read the letter.
Co-Chair Stoltze verified with Representative Holmes that
she wanted Representative Thompson to place the information
on record. Representative Holmes responded affirmatively.
Co-Chair Stoltze also wanted to make sure a letter from
Peak Fitness in Palmer expressing similar concerns was
included in the committee packet. He had received it the
previous evening.
10:12:14 AM
Mr. Anderson stated that Sara Chambers was in the audience.
He identified the items that most significantly defined the
differences between coaches and fitness trainers and the
responsibilities of athletic trainers in the answers
provided in questions two and three. He informed the
committee that a person had to be acting under the
direction of a physician or had to be using the title of
"Athletic Trainer." If either criteria was applicable a
person fell under the classification of "Athletic Trainer,"
and would be required by law to be licensed.
10:13:22 AM
Representative Holmes expressed satisfaction with the
answers. She stated that personal trainers and team coaches
obviously tried to help prevent injury, to help encourage
safety, and to refer people to healthcare providers when
necessary. She wanted to clarify, that by doing the things
she described, coaches and personal trainers would not be
placed in a vulnerable position as a result of the
legislation before the committee.
10:14:09 AM
SARA CHAMBERS, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF CORPORATIONS, BUSINESS
AND PROFESSIONAL LICENSING, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE,
COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT testified that the
department's interpretation of the bill was that if one of
the two criteria was met, licensure would be required. If a
person worked under the scope of athletic training as
defined, acted under the direction of a physician, or
referred to themselves as an "athletic trainer," then they
would be required to be licensed; referred to as title
protection. Only people licensed would be able to use the
title. A coach using the title "coach" or a personal
trainer using the title "personal trainer" who did not work
in a medical capacity under a physician who simply rendered
first responder type of first aid, would not be required to
have an athletic trainer license.
10:15:27 AM
Representative Wilson asked about an injury treated in
Fairbanks.
Ms. Chambers replied that if a person that held a medical
license acted within the scope of their license to treat a
patient, then they would not be required to hold an
additional license.
Representative Wilson gave the example of a basketball
coach helping to administer care to a player under the
direction of a physician. She asked whether or not a coach
would be required to have a license.
Ms. Chambers replied that if the coach worked under the
supervision of a medical doctor, they would be required to
have an athletic trainer license. However, if the patient
received care and the coach was not working under medical
supervision, then seeking proper medical care was the
responsibility of the patient rather than the coach.
Representative Holmes asked what it meant to be working
under the supervision of a medical physician. Mr. Anderson
replied that testifiers were available.
10:19:49 AM
Representative Gara pointed out that an "and" or an "or"
needed to be included in the following section of the bill
starting on page 1, line 10 through page 2 line 4:
(1) is a student in an accredited athletic trainer
program who is practicing athletic training under the
supervision of an athletic trainer or a person
licensed to practice medicine or osteopathy under AS
08.64;12
(2) is licensed, certified, or registered as an
athletic trainer in another state and is present in
the state for not more than 90 days in a calendar year
for a specific athletic event or series of athletic
events with an individual or group not based in the
state;
(3) is in the military service of the United States or
as an employee of the federal government performing
athletic training services within the scope of the
individual's official duties.
Representative Gara wanted clarification whether all three
or only one of the conditions needed to be met.
Mr. Anderson suggested that the word "or" needed to be
inserted. However, he would get back to the committee with
a definite answer.
10:20:43 AM
Co-Chair Austerman discussed the fiscal note. He surmised
that the $48 thousand was to establish the program. He
wanted to know the cost for an ongoing program and the cost
of the licensing fee.
Ms. Chambers replied that the department was working on
clarifying costs. She suggested that based on 60 licensees
and another $26 thousand in costs to the state, licensing
fees were estimated between $110 and $180. The higher end
of licensing fees would be used to cover larger initial
set-up costs. As the costs decreased and the expenses
lowered the licensing fees would be adjusted downward. The
figures were estimates. The actual activity of the program
would dictate the fee. The estimate was based on the
naturopath licensing program which had a similar amount of
licensees.
10:23:17 AM
LYNNE YOUNG, SECRETARY/TREASURER, ALASKA ATHLETIC TRAINERS
ASSOCIATION (AATA), spoke in favor of HB 160. She informed
the committee that athletic trainers were highly qualified
healthcare professionals who collaborated and worked under
the direction of physicians. She described some of the care
provided by athletic trainers including prevention,
emergency care, clinical assessment, therapeutic
intervention, and rehabilitation of injuries and medical
conditions. She clarified that simply working under the
direction of a physician and using the title of athletic
trainer did not require a license. She furthered that to
become an athletic trainer a person had to attend an
accredited athletic training curriculum and pass a board of
certification national exam. Athletic trainers had one
nationally recognized board of certification called BOC,
Inc. She asserted that the state did not need a separate
board; BOC, Inc. governed practical standards, professional
requirements, and continuing education for athletic
trainers. She conveyed that athletic trainers were required
to maintain continuing education units; a minimum of 50
hours every two years, 10 hours of which had to be evidence
based. In addition, trainers had to maintain currency in
emergency cardiac care at the professional medical rescuer
level or above.
Ms. Young reported that Alaska was one of two states that
did not regulate athletic training. She stressed that AATA
was proactive in ensuring that individuals taking care of
the public were athletic trainers that met the minimum
standards set forth by its board of certification. She
pointed out that HB 160 did not prevent a person from
working in the capacity that they were trained. She cited
the example of a physician assistant working under the
direction and supervision of a physician. She reported that
they did not attend a four-year athletic training
curriculum even though they provided similar services as
delivered by athletic trainers. However, they did not call
themselves athletic trainers. She referenced other
examples. The Alaska State Activities Association required
coaches to take a fundamental coaching class, a sports
injury course, and a free 20-minute concussion course. She
reiterated that HB 160 regulated individuals in the state
that called themselves as athletic trainers. She closed by
urging the committee to support HB 160.
Co-Chair Stoltze commented that he planned to hear HB 160
again on the same day at 6:00 PM.
10:29:07 AM
DR. JILL VALERIUS, PHYSICIAN, WASILLA (via teleconference),
testified as an athletic trainer and physician. She stated
her support for the legislation. She asserted that HB 160
protected the public by ensuring that those who called
themselves athletic trainers were trained, certified and
worked under a collaborative agreement with a physician.
She relayed her concern for people getting the quality of
care they deserved. She attested that certified athletic
trainers worked diligently to become certified. She stated
the importance of practicing within the scope of a person's
training and how that applies to all of the many different
types of providers. She reiterated her support of HB 160.