Legislature(2013 - 2014)CAPITOL 106
03/25/2014 03:00 PM House HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB376 | |
| HCR21 | |
| HB360 | |
| SB169 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 374 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 169 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 376 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 360 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HCR 21 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 360-REGULATION OF SMOKING
3:42:22 PM
CHAIR HIGGINS announced that the next order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 360, "An Act prohibiting smoking in certain
locations; and providing for an effective date."
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER moved to adopt the proposed committee
substitute (CS) CSHB 360, labeled 28-LS1336\U, Strasbaugh,
3/21/14, as the working draft. There being no objection, it was
so ordered.
3:42:39 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LINDSEY HOLMES, Alaska State Legislature,
declared that the proposed bill was also called "the take it
outside bill." She explained that it was designed to protect
people in their own workplaces from having to breathe second
hand smoke. She stated that there was now more knowledge about
the effects from second hand smoke and she offered anecdotes
about past experiences with second hand smoke. She reported
that second hand smoke killed an estimated 50,000 Americans
every year from lung cancer and heart disease, and the Surgeon
General had reported that even brief exposure to second hand
smoke could have immediate adverse effects on the cardio-
vascular system. This same report estimated that second hand
smoke caused about $5.6 billion in loss productivity annually.
An analysis from the Institute of Medicine in 2009 concluded
that smoke free workplace laws helped reduce heart attacks from
6 - 47 percent. She noted that stroke had also been added to
the list as caused by exposure to second hand smoke. She said
that approximately half of the jobs in Alaska were covered by
smoke free workplace laws. She reported that more than 400
businesses in Alaska had signed resolutions supporting a state
wide smoke free indoor workplace law [Included in members'
packets], noting that the Alaska Supreme Court had recently
recognized that the government did have a legitimate interest in
protecting citizens from "the well-established dangers of second
hand tobacco smoke." She reported that more than 30 other
states already had similar laws.
CHAIR HIGGINS asked if the decision by work places to be smoke
free was voluntary.
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES replied that some were voluntary, although
many were in areas of the state that had local, smoke free work
place laws. She pointed out that, in many unincorporated areas,
local government did not have the power to impose these
ordinances.
CHAIR HIGGINS asked how the proposed bill would be enforced.
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES replied that "it's fairly well self-
policing" and there had been very little need for enforcement.
3:47:37 PM
ROBERT ERVINE, Staff, Representative Lindsey Holmes, Alaska
State Legislature, explained that smoking laws in Alaska were
under the purview of Department of Environmental Conservation
(DEC) although a goal of the proposed bill was to shift this to
Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS). This would
allow an employee to make a complaint if there was a violation.
He referred to the Sectional Summary [Included in members'
packets]. He explained that Section 1, paragraph (1), created
new smoking laws to prohibit smoking in, among others, enclosed
areas within places of employment, public places, schools, and
transportation facilities. Describing paragraph (2), he stated
that it applied to, among others, outdoor arenas, stadiums, and
areas of public schools. Moving on to subsection (b), he listed
the three exemptions to include private clubs, private
residences except hotels or motels, and vessels engaged in
commercial or sport fishing activities. The next section, AS
18.35.331, required employers, owners, and operators to post no
smoking signs within places or vehicles where smoking was
prohibited.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked for identification of the referenced
page and line.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER stated that this was on page 3, line 3.
MR. ERVINE directed attention to page 3, line 23, which required
the commissioner of DHSS to develop and maintain procedures for
processing reports of violations. He observed that it would be
necessary for further clarification that this was not "a gotcha
task force as enforcement." He moved on to page 3, line 31
through page 4, line 13, which established the fine amounts for
violations. He noted that, although these regulations did not
fall under the purview of DHSS, DEC did not have enforcement
capabilities for the current smoking law either. This would
shift the enforcement to DHSS, and "hopefully give them some
measure of teeth to enforce this."
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON directed attention to page 3, line 6, and
asked about a task force.
MR. ERVINE stated that a task force was not being established.
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES said that the goal was for clarification
that the intent for the proposed bill was not to be "a sting
operation," or a "big enforcement effort." She offered that her
intent was for this to be "complaint driven only, and fairly
limited in scope," and not for "a big enforcement effort."
CHAIR HIGGINS said that the proposed bill would be held over.
MR. ERVINE directed attention back to AS 18.35.344(c) through
(e), page 3, line 31 through page 4, line 13, which allowed
peace officers, or an employee designated by the commissioner,
to issue citations for violations of the new law. These
violations could be reported by a person observing the
violation. He stated that it went on to discuss ticketing and
bail for violations.
3:54:47 PM
MR. ERVINE directed attention to AS 18.35.351, page 5, lines 30
- 31, and page 6, lines 1 - 9, which required the Commissioner
of DHSS "to administer and enforce the provisions of the new law
and adopt regulations as needed." He referred to AS 18.35.356,
page 6, lines 10 - 19, which required the [DHSS] commissioner to
provide ongoing access to the public about the law, including an
electronically published brochure explaining the new
requirements for employers, property owners, property operators,
and the public. He said this was an important component of the
proposed bill, as it focused on public education and not
enforcement.
MR. ERVINE moved on to AS 18.35.357, page 6, lines 20 - 27,
noting that this was an important protection for employees from
retaliation by an employer. He said that AS 18.35.359, page 6,
lines 28 - 31, and page 7, line 1, established that a
municipality may adopt and enforce local laws that were more
stringent that the proposed bill. He explained that AS
18.35.366, page 7, lines 3 - 31 and page 8, lines 1 - 14, were
the definitions provided for business, commissioner, department,
e-cigarette, employee, employer, enclosed area, health care
facility, private club, place of employment, public place, and
smoking.
MR. ERVINE referred to page 8, lines 15 - 16, which repealed the
listed existing statutes.
CHAIR HIGGINS asked about the authority to issue citations.
MR. ERVINE replied that the proposed bill would designate that
authority.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER asked for clarification that the person
issuing the citation had to see the offense committed.
MR. ERVINE referred to page 4, lines 21 - 23.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER asked if the criteria for a citation were
for the complainant to witness the offense.
MR. ERVINE replied that either a peace officer or the designated
department person could issue the citation.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER asked for more clarification.
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES offered her understanding that the peace
officer must witness the offense, but that the designated
department person did not have to witness it.
3:59:14 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT, asking for clarification that a person
designated by the commissioner could issue a citation without
having to see the offense, announced that this "could be opening
ourselves up" and declared "that's a slippery slope."
MR. ERVINE explained that the intention was for the
commissioner, or the designated person, to follow up on a report
with a letter, instead of an actual citation. He offered to
provide clarification in the proposed bill.
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT stated his recognition for an
indeterminate fiscal note, as it "could be huge if you're
talking about having enough people out there for all the little
situations."
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES said that this was not the intent for the
proposed bill, and they would continue to work for
clarification.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON referred to page 4, lines 16 - 17, and
stated that a violation of AS 18.35.301 had to be committed in
the presence of the officer, although a citation could be issued
for a violation of AS 18.35.331 or AS 18.35.357 that did not
occur in the presence of the officer.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON, referring to page 5, line 27, asked for
clarification and the intent that a commissioner may bring civil
action to enjoin a violation of these statutes.
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES replied that this would be a result of
non-compliance with the law.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked if this could result from a $100
violation in Superior Court.
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES explained that enjoining the action was
similar to a temporary restraining order after non-compliance to
repeated complaints.
MR. ERVINE pointed out that the fines and the injunction
sections were modeled from existing law. He discussed Section
3, page 8, lines 17 - 20, which was uncodified law and clarified
that the new provisions of the bill applied to violations or
failure to comply that occur on or after the effective date.
Section 4, page 8, lines 21 - 26, was uncodified law and
permitted Department of Health and Social Services to adopt
regulations to implement Section 1 of the proposed bill. He
noted that any regulations could not take effect before the
effective date. He concluded with Sections 5 and 6, page 8,
lines 27 and 28, which set the effective date of October 1, 2014
for the bill, although Section 4 would take effect immediately.
4:05:32 PM
MR. ERVINE paraphrased from the Summary of Changes [Included in
members' packets] and stated that there was a slight
modification of the bill title. He directed attention to page
1, line 8, and said that the proposed areas for prohibiting
smoking had been split to just include enclosed areas, with page
2, line 15, now including enclosed areas and the grounds. On
page 2, line 1, "health care facility" was deleted from the list
in subsection (a)(1)(D). On page 2, lines 11 - 12, a new
subparagraph (H) specified that smoking was only allowed in
vehicles driven by an owner/operator, and not in any vehicle
used as a place of employment. On page 3, line 1, "or adult"
was inserted after "children" to clarify that the exemption was
for private residences, and did not include a location where
adult care was provided on a fee for service basis. Moving on
to page 3, lines 13 - 17, he described that subsections (b) and
(c) were combined and rewritten to place responsibility for
posting signage that smoking was prohibited on the person in
charge of the building. On page 3, lines 21 - 22, subsection
(d) was rewritten to require the Department of Health and Social
Services to provide the required signs in this section. On page
3, AS 18.35.331, subsection (f) was deleted, and on page 6, line
29, "or a political subdivision of the state" was deleted.
Finally, on page 7, lines 9 - 12, the definition of "e-
cigarette" was amended to include a broader range of e-cigarette
products that produce a vapor for inhalation, even though this
vapor may not be nicotine, but could contain other harmful
toxins.
4:08:47 PM
The committee took an at-ease from 4:08 p.m. to 4:10 p.m.
4:10:23 PM
CHAIR HIGGINS said that the proposed bill would be held over,
and he opened public testimony.
4:11:22 PM
JANET KINCAID, Business Owner, reported that there was a no
smoking ordinance in Palmer with almost universal support and
that it had been very good for business and health.
CARMEN LUNDE, Kodiak Cabaret, Hotel, Restaurant, & Retailers
Association (CHARR), stated that government intervention needed
to stop. She declared that the proposed bill was targeted at
bars, as there was no longer smoking in the other places
described in the proposed bill. She said that Kodiak used
common sense for its smoking issues and allowed a free choice
for individuals. She opined that no government at any level
should have the right to dictate how a business owner chooses to
run their business. She declared that citizens should have the
right to make their own choices.
LARRY HACKENMILLER, member, Alaska Cabaret, Hotel, Restaurant, &
Retailers Association, stated that the Fairbanks City Council
had decided that there was sufficient choice and had decided not
to implement any widespread ban. He declared that the
statistics for death from second hand smoke had not changed
since initial testimonies, and he opined that this would have
declined as there were now fewer smokers. He questioned the
hazards included with smoking. He said that there was not any
science to support harm from e-cigarettes. He compared the
toxins, chemicals, and carcinogens emitted from e-cigarettes
with those from candles, declaring them to be similar. He
pointed out that candles were not included in the proposed bill.
He stated that, as 95 percent of restaurants in Fairbanks were
non-smoking by choice, the proposed bill was not necessary and
only "makes criminals out of people" and "beefs up the
government payroll beyond what's necessary and it doesn't
address [the] real issue." He referenced the building code
requirement for air exchanges, which did not mention second hand
smoke, and he said "well, this bull about, well, the employee's
safety, it's a matter of preference and an employee may not like
the smell of smoke or whatever, but it's still.. again, when
they keep telling you that we have a right to smoke free air,
well, that's true, but you also have a right to smoke filled
air. Those rights exist for everybody." He declared that, as
the discussion was for second hand smoke, he had not found any
research that "shows a miniscule exposure" was a health issue.
4:17:09 PM
MARK MILITELLO, owner, Sumo Vapor, said that, although he was a
non-smoker, he did not agree with a comparison of cigarettes to
e-cigarettes. He said he had not yet been shown that anyone had
died from exposure to e-cigarettes. He offered his belief that
e-cigarettes should be compared to the nicotine patch or
nicotine gum. He stated that he was the owner of an electronic
cigarette store, and he opined that e-cigarettes should not be
included in the proposed bill.
DANIEL LYNCH said that he had been a smoker for forty years,
although he recognized that it was "a bad habit." He stated
that "a few do-gooders want to make me a criminal for having a
bad legal habit." He pointed out that he voluntarily paid
substantial taxes on his cigarette purchases. He stated that
cigarette smoke was healthier than tailpipe exhaust. He relayed
that all of his previous employers had the freedom to make and
enforce their own policies on work place activities, including
smoking, and that these policies worked well.
ANGELA CARROLL, Owner, Glacier Vapors, said that she was an
owner of a vapor e-cigarette shop, and that she was opposed to
the language including electronic cigarettes in the proposed
bill. She offered her belief that a business owner should make
the decision to allow vaping or smoking in their establishment.
She stated that e-cigarettes should not be included with
cigarettes. She reported that she had been a smoker for 37
years, and that e-cigarettes had dramatically lowered her
nicotine intake. She offered her belief that the proposed bill
would close down most e-cigarette stores. She pointed to
studies which indicated that vaping was far less harmful than
cigarettes, and she asked for an educated vote on the proposed
bill, and an exclusion of e-cigarettes in the language of the
proposed bill.
4:24:41 PM
DALE FOX, President & CEO, Alaska Cabaret, Hotel, Restaurant, &
Retailers Association (CHARR), declared that the "ban on smoking
is a ban on bars." He said that almost every place on the list
was already excluded from smoking, and that most communities
offered a number of choices for bars and businesses to visit.
He said that CHARR members were really frightened, as
significant losses of revenue were reported after a smoking ban.
His observations were that smoking bans had led to a 30 percent
decrease in revenue. He stated that there should be a freedom
of choice for smoking or non-smoking. He said that many CHARR
members were angry, as local votes had allowed the maintenance
of both smoking and non-smoking establishments. He stated that,
if legislators believed in smaller government and the right of
self-determination by local government, there would not be
support of the proposed bill.
BETTY MACTAVISH commended the committee for considering the
proposed bill. She reported that only half of Alaskan workers
were protected by smoke free workplace laws, and that one non-
smoker died from second hand smoke for every nine smokers "who
died from their addiction." Her extended exposure to second
hand smoke had resulted in her diagnosis as "having the lungs of
a smoker." She stated that the science was clear that exposure
to tobacco smoke kills. She addressed e-cigarettes and second
hand aerosol, and stated that this was not harmless water vapor,
as stated by the tobacco industry. She noted that research had
just begun for the health effects of e-cigarettes. She reported
that second hand e-cigarette aerosol contained nicotine and
ultra-fine particles, concentrated at levels higher than in
conventional tobacco cigarette smoke, which exacerbated
respiratory ailments. She listed some of the compounds and
metals known to be in second hand e-cigarette aerosol, including
chromium, nickel, tin, benzene, acetone, and glycerol. She
shared that three other states had already protected their
workers from second hand aerosol exposure from e-cigarettes in
the work place by passing strong work place laws.
4:29:13 PM
CHAIR HIGGINS stated that public testimony would be kept open.
4:29:32 PM
The committee took a brief at-ease.
4:30:47 PM
MATT WAGNER, Bad Boy Vapors Alaska, LLC, stated his opposition
to the proposed bill. He expressed his agreement for consistent
regulation of smoking in Alaska and the detrimental health
effects to both users and those in proximity to second hand
smoke. He stated, however, that inclusion of e-cigarettes in
the proposed bill was a mistake. He declared "smoking is not
vaping and vaping is not smoking." He explained that there was
not any combustion from use of e-cigarettes, and therefore,
there were no dangerous by-products. He directed attention to
studies which indicated that the second hand effects of vaping
were extremely negligible. He shared his excitement for the
success of people who had "quit smoking paper cigarettes with
the help of electronic cigarettes." He declared that these e-
cigarettes were an effective alternative, and that they did not
put anyone at risk for inhaling the toxic by-products of
smoking. He declared opposition to the proposed bill, as it
would no longer be possible to demonstrate the benefits of
vaping.
SEAN DASILVA, Bad Boy Vapors Alaska, LLC, shared that the
aforementioned technical research had been from a study
conducted almost six years prior, when the industry was still
extremely primitive. He acknowledged that the e-cigarettes and
the "e-juice" were then coming from China, and that there had
not been any regulation. He stated expectations for the FDA to
regulate and certify the "e-juice." He pointed to two studies
that reported no meaningful risk from second hand vapor. He
asked that the committee gather all the facts to better
understand that policy in HB 360 for e-cigarettes was mis-
guided.
[HB 360 was held over]
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB169 Sponsor Statement FIN.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
SB 169 |
| SB0169-1-2-022414-DHS-Y.PDF |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
SB 169 |
| SB0169-2-2-022414-DHS-Y.PDF |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
SB 169 |
| SB0169-3-3-022414-DHS-Y.PDF |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
SB 169 |
| SB0169-4-2-022414-CED-N.PDF |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
SB 169 |
| SB0169-5-2-022414-ADM-Y.PDF |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
SB 169 |
| SB0169-6-2-030714-DHS-Y.PDF |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
SB 169 |
| SB0169-7-3-030714-DHS-Y.PDF |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
SB 169 |
| SB0169-8-2-030714-DHS-Y.PDF |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
SB 169 |
| SB169 Vaccines In AK short vsn (2).pptx |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
SB 169 |
| SB169FlowChart_7Mar2014.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
SB 169 |
| SB169PayerPyramid_7Mar2014.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
SB 169 |
| SB 169 Support Letters.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
SB 169 |
| SB 169 Support Emails.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
SB 169 |
| SB 169 Support Dr. Harvey.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
SB 169 |
| SB 169 Support Dr Lamm NH.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
SB 169 |
| SB 169 Sectional Analsis vsn I.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
SB 169 |
| SB 169 Historic vaccine photo.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
SB 169 |
| SB 169 FN Vaccine Assmt Acct.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
SB 169 |
| SB 169 FN Medicaid Svs.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
SB 169 |
| SB 169 FN Fund Capitalization.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
SB 169 |
| SB 169 FN Epidemiology.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
SB 169 |
| SB 169 FN DCCED Insurance.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
SB 169 |
| SB 169 FN Admin.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
SB 169 |
| 2014_03_19 WA Letter from Dr. Harvey in support of AK S B _169_FINAL.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
|
| SB 169 FAQs vsn I.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
SB 169 |
| SB0169 Version I.PDF |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
SB 169 |
| HB0374A.PDF |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 374 |
| HB0376A.PDF |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 376 |
| HB 376 Sponsors Statement.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 376 |
| HB 360 Version A.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB 360 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB 360-CA A Cancer Journal for Clinicians.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB 360 Smoke-Free Indoor Workplaces Supporters as of 3-5-14.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB 360- Borough Smoke Free Law.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB 360- Alaska Smoke-Free Indoor Workplaces Summary from Coalition.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB 360- acscan-smoke-free-laws-report-summary.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HCR21 ver U.PDF |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
|
| HCR21 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
|
| HCR21 Supporting Documents-Safehorizon stats.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
|
| HCR21 Supporting Documents-US DHHS Webpage.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
|
| HB 360 Opposed 2.PDF |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB Opposed 3.PDF |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
|
| HB 360 Opposed 4.PDF |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB 360 Opposed 5.PDF |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB 360 Opposed 6.PDF |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB 360 Opposed 7.PDF |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB 360 Opposed 8.PDF |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB 360 Opposed 9.PDF |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB 360 Opposed 10.PDF |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB 360 Opposed 11.PDF |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB 360 Opposed 12.PDF |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB 360 Opposed 13.PDF |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB 360 Opposed 14.PDF |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB374-DCCED-DOI-03-21-14.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 374 |
| HB374-DHSS-EPI-03-21-14.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 374 |
| HB374-DHSS-HCMS-03-21-14.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 374 |
| HB374-DHSS-VAA-03-21-14.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 374 |
| HB374-DOA-HPA-03-21-14.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 374 |
| HB376-DHSS-CO-03-20-14.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 376 |
| HB 360 Opposed 10.PDF |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB360-DEC-FSS-03-21-14.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB360-DHSS-CO-03-21-14.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB360-DOT-IASO-3-21-14.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB360-DOT-MVO-3-21-14.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB360-DOT-SEF-3-21-14.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB360-DOT-TMS-3-21-14.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB360-DOA-PUR-03-21-14.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB 360 Draft CS.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB 360-Electronic Cigarette and Secondhand Aerosol (FS-39) 2014-02-181.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB 360- NYT Article.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB 360-Electronic Cigarette and Secondhand Aerosol (FS-39) 2014-02-181.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HCR21 Supporting Document-National Timeline.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
|
| HCR21 Supporting Document-Maltreatment Data Website.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
|
| HCR21 Supporting Document-Dec2013 Foster Placement.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
|
| HCR21 Supporting Document-Dec2013 Allegations Substantiated.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
|
| HCR21 Supporting Document-Dec2013 Allegations Received.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
|
| HB 360 Sectional Summary.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB 360 Summary of Changes 3.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB 376 2013AnnualReportFINAL.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 376 |
| HB 360 Support.PDF |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB 360- ATCA E-Cigarette Statement for Committee Hearing 3-25-14.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB 360 Letter of Support 1.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB 360 Letter of Support 2.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB 360 Letter of Support 3.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB 360 Letter of Support 4.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB 360 E-cig Or. Ct CA edit.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB 360 17 sug gen.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB 360 AMA E-Cig v tobacco.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB 360 comment to CA similar bill.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB 360 e- cig NY Times edit.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB 360 E-Cig Juneau emp.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB 360 fm pres Am Lung Assoc.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB 360 Wash Times edit.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB 360 Letter of Support 5.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB 376 Resolutions 3 25 2014.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 376 |
| SB 169 Support Premera.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
SB 169 |
| HB 376 AHCC audit rpt-2013.pdf |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 376 |
| HB 360 Technical report 3 25 2014.PDF |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |
| HB 360 Research article informa healthcare 302502014.PDF |
HHSS 3/25/2014 3:00:00 PM |
HB 360 |