Legislature(2013 - 2014)BARNES 124
04/15/2014 03:15 PM House LABOR & COMMERCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB156 | |
| SB166 | |
| SB167 | |
| SB183 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | SB 156 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 166 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 167 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 183 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE LABOR AND COMMERCE STANDING COMMITTEE
April 15, 2014
3:25 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Kurt Olson, Chair
Representative Mike Chenault
Representative Bob Herron
Representative Dan Saddler
Representative Andy Josephson
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Lora Reinbold, Vice Chair
Representative Charisse Millett
Representative Craig Johnson
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE BILL NO. 156
"An Act relating to direct-entry midwives."
- MOVED SB 156 OUT OF COMMITTEE
COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR SENATE BILL NO. 166(FIN)
"An Act relating to nursing and to the Board of Nursing."
- MOVED CSSB 166(FIN) OUT OF COMMITTEE
SENATE BILL NO. 167
"An Act relating to the maximum amount of uninsured and
underinsured coverage payable under multiple motor vehicle
insurance policies issued by the same insurer in the same
household."
- MOVED SB 167 OUT OF COMMITTEE
SENATE BILL NO. 183
"An Act extending the termination date of the emerging energy
technology fund and grant program."
- MOVED SB 183 OUT OF COMMITTEE
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SB 156
SHORT TITLE: DIRECT-ENTRY MIDWIVES
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) KELLY
02/05/14 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/05/14 (S) L&C
03/11/14 (S) L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
03/11/14 (S) -- MEETING CANCELED --
03/13/14 (S) L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
03/13/14 (S) Heard & Held
03/13/14 (S) MINUTE(L&C)
03/18/14 (S) L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
03/18/14 (S) -- MEETING CANCELED --
03/20/14 (S) L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
03/20/14 (S) Moved SB 156 Out of Committee
03/20/14 (S) MINUTE(L&C)
03/21/14 (S) L&C RPT 2DP 1NR
03/21/14 (S) DP: MICCICHE, STEDMAN
03/21/14 (S) NR: OLSON
03/31/14 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
03/31/14 (S) VERSION: SB 156
04/01/14 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/01/14 (H) L&C
04/15/14 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM BARNES 124
BILL: SB 166
SHORT TITLE: BOARD OF NURSING; NURSES
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) GIESSEL BY REQUEST
02/07/14 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/07/14 (S) L&C
03/04/14 (S) L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
03/04/14 (S) Heard & Held
03/04/14 (S) MINUTE(L&C)
03/13/14 (S) L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
03/13/14 (S) Moved CSSB 166(L&C) Out of Committee
03/13/14 (S) MINUTE(L&C)
03/14/14 (S) L&C RPT CS 2DP 3NR SAME TITLE
03/14/14 (S) DP: DUNLEAVY, MICCICHE
03/14/14 (S) NR: ELLIS, STEDMAN, OLSON
03/14/14 (S) FIN REFERRAL ADDED AFTER L&C
03/27/14 (S) FIN AT 9:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532
03/27/14 (S) Moved CSSB 166(FIN) Out of Committee
03/27/14 (S) MINUTE(FIN)
03/28/14 (S) FIN RPT CS 4DP 1NR SAME TITLE
03/28/14 (S) DP: KELLY, MEYER, BISHOP, FAIRCLOUGH
03/28/14 (S) NR: OLSON
04/02/14 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
04/02/14 (S) VERSION: CSSB 166(FIN)
04/03/14 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/03/14 (H) L&C
04/15/14 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM BARNES 124
BILL: SB 167
SHORT TITLE: MULTIPLE VEHICLE INSURANCE POLICIES
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) HUGGINS BY REQUEST
02/10/14 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/10/14 (S) L&C
03/04/14 (S) L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
03/04/14 (S) Heard & Held
03/04/14 (S) MINUTE(L&C)
03/13/14 (S) L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
03/13/14 (S) Moved SB 167 Out of Committee
03/13/14 (S) MINUTE(L&C)
03/14/14 (S) L&C RPT 3DP 2NR
03/14/14 (S) DP: DUNLEAVY, STEDMAN, MICCICHE
03/14/14 (S) NR: ELLIS, OLSON
03/26/14 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
03/26/14 (S) VERSION: SB 167
03/27/14 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/27/14 (H) L&C
04/15/14 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM BARNES 124
BILL: SB 183
SHORT TITLE: EXTEND EMERGING ENERGY TECHNOLOGY FUND
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) MCGUIRE
02/19/14 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/19/14 (S) L&C
03/20/14 (S) L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
03/20/14 (S) Heard & Held
03/20/14 (S) MINUTE(L&C)
03/27/14 (S) L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
03/27/14 (S) Moved SB 183 Out of Committee
03/27/14 (S) MINUTE(L&C)
03/28/14 (S) L&C RPT 2DP 2NR
03/28/14 (S) DP: DUNLEAVY, ELLIS
03/28/14 (S) NR: STEDMAN, OLSON
03/28/14 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
03/28/14 (S) VERSION: SB 183
03/31/14 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/31/14 (H) L&C
04/15/14 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM BARNES 124
WITNESS REGISTER
HEATHER SHATTUCK, Staff
Senator Pete Kelly
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the discussion of SB 156.
CHERYL CORRICK, Certified Direct-Entry Midwife (CDM)
Chair, Board of Certified Direct-Entry Midwives (BCDM)
Department of Commerce, Community & Economic Development
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the discussion of SB 156.
SUSAN TERWILLIGER, Certified Direct-Entry Midwife and President,
Midwives Association of Alaska (MAA)
Eagle River, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the discussion of SB 156.
SENATOR CATHY GIESSEL
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as prime sponsor of SB 166.
NANCY SANDERS, Ph.D., RN;
Executive Administrator, Board of Nursing
Department of Commerce, Community & Economic Development (DCCED)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the discussion of SB 166.
JANA SHOCKMAN, Registered Nurse;
President, Alaska Nurses Association
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 166.
BETH FARNSTROM, Registered Nurse
Board of Nursing, Chair
Department of Commerce, Community & Economic Development
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 166.
PATRICIA SENNER, Advanced Nurse Practitioner (ANP)
Alaska Nurses Association (ANA)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 166.
KAREN PURDUE, President and CEO
Alaska State Hospital Nursing Home Association (ASHNHA)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 166.
BEVERLY SMITH, Media and Legislative
Christian Science Church
Douglas, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the discussion of SB 166.
ASHTON COMPTON, Staff
Senator Charlie Huggins
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on behalf of the prime sponsor,
Senator Huggins, during the discussion of SB 167.
SHELDON E. WINTERS, Attorney
Lessmeier & Winters, LLC
Lobbyist, State Farm Insurance
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the discussion of SB 167.
JESSE LOGAN, Staff
Senator Lesil McGuire
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the discussion of SB 183.
EMILY FORD
Public Outreach Liaison
Alaska Energy Authority
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the discussion of SB 183.
ACTION NARRATIVE
3:25:32 PM
CHAIR KURT OLSON called the House Labor and Commerce Standing
Committee meeting to order at 3:25 p.m. Representatives
Chenault, Herron, Josephson, and Olson were present at the call
to order. Representative Saddler arrived as the meeting was in
progress.
SB 156-DIRECT-ENTRY MIDWIVES
3:26:01 PM
CHAIR OLSON announced that the first order of business would be
SENATE BILL NO. 156, "An Act relating to direct-entry midwives."
3:26:06 PM
HEATHER SHATTUCK, Staff, Senator Pete Kelly, Alaska State
Legislature, stated the concept for SB 156 was brought to the
sponsor by the Midwives Association of Alaska. The statutes
pertaining to the practice of midwifery were put into place in
1992 but have not been updated since. Placing specific
practices of a profession in statute stymies growth and
management of the profession. These initial required practices
were placed into statute prior to a functioning board of
certified direct-entry midwives
MS. SHATTUCK said the Board of Certified Direct-Entry Midwives
(BCDM) has tried to establish and develop a comprehensive
regulatory framework through practice regulations and guidelines
crafted to ensure public safety and professional discipline.
However, the outdated statute cements certain obsolete practice
requirements in place and can only be updated by an act of the
legislature. This bill will update the statutes and place the
certified direct-entry midwives into regulation rather than
statute. The proposed changes in the bill will also ensure
greater public safety in the field of midwifery. This enables
the Board to oversee the profession more effectively and
incorporate current nationally-recognized best practices. This
type of authority is granted to most professional boards in
order to develop and maintain professional practice standards.
The public safety provisions are addressed in a few ways. The
midwives association requested a higher threshold of training in
order for a licensed certified direct-entry midwife (CDM) to act
as a supervisor to an apprentice midwife. In addition to the
requirement to be licensed and practicing for two years, the
bill further requires a licensed CDM to attend 50 or more births
as a primary or assistant midwife in order to supervise an
apprentice direct-entry midwife. The proposed changes to the
threshold will ensure a greater level of expertise prior to
providing supervision. The also would help ensure greater
public safety in the field of midwifery.
3:28:28 PM
MS. SHATTUCK related that under SB 156 well-baby care will also
be covered under the scope of CDM practice for up to four weeks
after birth. This helps to ensure that the delivering midwife
can properly follow up with both mother and baby, and it helps
ensure the baby will thrive while midwives can maintain an
ongoing relationship with the patient. Additionally, some
required tests for newborns are performed after the current
seven-day set-off in statute. This has put midwives in the
situation of providing services without being reimbursed, where
applicable, by Medicaid.
MS. SHATTUCK said that SB 156 also repeals the cultural midwives
exemption, requiring all CDMs in the state to be licensed and
under the disciplinary regulation of the BCDM. Currently, an
individual whose cultural traditions have included, for at least
two generations, the attendance of midwives at birth, and has
assisted in at least 10 births does not fall under regulation of
the board. As noted in a letter in members' packets from the
Division of Corporations, Business, and Professional Licensing
(DCBPL), state licensing exemptions exist for employees of
tribal health programs. She discussed the exemption with the
Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium (ANTHC) and the
organization agreed with the provision being removed.
3:29:44 PM
MS. SHATTUCK offered her belief that midwives provide a good
option for women with low-risk pregnancy in Alaska. She pointed
out that these services represent a lower financial impact on
Medicaid eligible patients under Denali Kid Care. She
emphasized the sponsor's intent to make the BCDM as effective
and efficient as possible in the oversight of this field.
3:30:14 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON asked whether the expansion of the
practice for the first four weeks after birth is the period in
which babies would receive inoculations.
MS. SHATTUCK acknowledged that is her understanding. She
referred to last year's bill [SB 87] by Senator Micciche that
required newborn testing. Currently, midwives can only receive
reimbursement from Medicaid for services provided up to seven
days for newborns, but some testing is provided after two weeks.
She deferred to midwives available to testify.
3:31:08 PM
MS. SHATTUCK provided a section-by-section analysis of the bill.
Section 1 would provide conforming language to remove an
exemption that Section 6 repeals relating to cultural traditions
exclusions. Section 2 would clarify the board's authority to
adopt regulations necessary for establishing practice
requirements and guidelines. Section 3 would add the
requirement for a licensed CDM to attend 50 or more births as a
primary or assistant midwife in order to supervise an apprentice
midwife. Section 4 would update the required practices and
directs the board to adopt regulations regarding the practice of
direct-entry midwifery. Section 5 would update the definition
of the "practice of midwifery" and includes well baby care
through the age of four weeks and preventative measures for the
infant. Section 6 would repeal the cultural traditions
exclusion allowing a person to practice midwifery for
compensation without meeting the education and practice
requirements for practicing midwifery.
3:32:18 PM
CHERYL CORRICK, Certified Direct-Entry Midwife and Chair of
BCDM, stated that she is a certified direct-entry midwife (CDM)
in Alaska and a certified professional midwife with the National
Association of Registered Midwives. She has over 20 years of
experience in the field of midwifery and has worked at a birth
center in a group practice in Fairbanks. Additionally, she
currently serves as the chair of the Board of Certified Direct-
Entry Midwives (BCDM). She explained that SB 156 would increase
the requirements for CDMs by requiring the experience of 50
births as the primary or assisting midwife in addition to the
current requirement of two years of experience. This would
require preceptors with experience closer to the national
standards. This bill would also remove the cultural midwife
exemption that allows an individual who meets the definition to
practice as a midwife and receive compensation with the only
required training to have assisted another cultural midwife with
10 births. This level of training is extremely inadequate and
is simply not safe for our mothers and babies. The practices
have been in statute for over 20 years during which time health
care practices have greatly changed. She said she has served on
the BCDM for six years, during which time the board's goal has
been to support legislation to remove the required practices
from statute and allow the board to update and revise
regulations to maintain current state and national standards of
care. On February 21, 2014 the BCDM unanimously voted to
support SB 156 and the companion bill, HB 311, and sent a letter
of support [in members' packets]. She urged members to support
SB 156.
3:34:28 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON wondered how CDM's would ensure that
newborns receive vaccinations if they cannot administer them.
MS. CORRICK responded that the initial vaccine would be for
Hepatitis B, which is given at the hospital or by their
pediatrician at one month visit. Other vaccines are given at
two months, and midwives do not administer the vaccinations;
however, they are required by regulation to recommend that
parents and newborns see a physician within the first seven days
of life.
3:35:48 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON asked whether any historic problems
have arisen since 1992 in terms of the certified direct-midwife
practice or if things have gone relatively smoothly in the past
22 years.
MS. CORRICK offered her belief that they have gone relatively
smoothly, although midwifery has had occasional problems as all
professions experience. She reported that the latest data set
from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
actually shows that Alaska has the highest rate of "out of
hospital" births and the lowest rate of [Caesarean sections].
3:36:47 PM
SUSAN TERWILLIGER, Certified Direct-Entry Midwife (CDM);
President, Midwives Association of Alaska (MAA), stated she is
also a certified professional midwife with the national registry
of midwives and the president of Midwives Association of Alaska
(MAA). She reported that she has been in practice for 17 years
in Texas and for the past 9 years in Alaska with a small home
birth practice. She related that the MAA supports SB 156. She
urged members to support the bill so the standards for midwives
can be updated. Initially, the CDMs did not have a board, but
the BCDM has been in place for a number of years, and doctors,
CDMs, public members serve on the board.
3:38:39 PM
CHAIR OLSON, after first determining no one else wished to
testify, closed public testimony on SB 156.
3:38:52 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CHENAULT referred to page [4], lines 3-4, Section
5, to the well-baby care of infant and preventative measures.
He asked who pays for this.
MS. SHATTUCK answered that infant care up to four weeks is
covered by Denali Kid Care. She related her understanding that
it would move the scope from the pediatrician to the midwives.
Otherwise, private insurance would cover it, she said.
3:40:53 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CHENAULT asked whether [CDMs] currently provide
this service or would it be an increased workload for the
midwives.
MS. SHATTUCK suggested that this provision was requested with
respect to children covered by Denali Kid Care. She explained
that the midwives are currently providing the care but are not
eligible for reimbursement.
REPRESENTATIVE CHENAULT related his understanding that this
language would allow [CDMs] to be reimbursed. He asked what
happens if the child cannot qualify for Denali Kid Care.
3:41:30 PM
MS. CORRICK answered that Denali Kid Care and Medicare have
typically covered midwifery services through six or eight weeks
but last year after conducting a massive audit decided not to
cover CDMS since the care was not in their scope of practice.
The CDMs argued for coverage, which was extended until January
2014; however, currently the Denali Kid Care doesn't cover CDM
care beyond seven days [after birth]. Part of the problem
results because CDMs are required to provide services by
regulation for the [phenylketonuria] PKU screening. The second
screening is traditionally done between two and three weeks.
Thus, midwives must provide the care per regulation but are not
reimbursed. This language would allow the midwives to be
reimbursed. In response to an earlier question, she said if
Medicaid or Denali Kid Care did not cover the care, it would be
covered by the parents through private insurance, just as they
receive coverage for their pediatricians.
3:42:55 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CHENAULT understood this language would extend
coverage that has not been allowed since January 2014 for
services beyond seven days.
MS. CORRICK answered that is correct. She added that prior to
January 2014, midwives did receive reimbursement for providing
these services.
REPRESENTATIVE CHENAULT noted a lack of a fiscal note, and
although this is not a new charge since Denali Kid Care
previously picked up the costs, but he anticipated an increase.
3:44:04 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON moved to report SB 156 out of committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal
note. There being no objection, SB 156 was reported from the
House Labor and Commerce Standing Committee.
3:44:31 PM
The committee took a brief at-ease from 3:44 p.m. to 3:46 p.m.
SB 166-BOARD OF NURSING; NURSES
3:46:31 PM
CHAIR OLSON announced that the next order of business would be
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 166(FIN), "An Act relating to nursing and
to the Board of Nursing."
3:46:35 PM
SENATOR CATHY GIESSEL, Alaska State Legislature, stated that she
holds two licenses under the jurisdictions of the Board of
Nursing (BON), as a registered nurse (RN) and as an advanced
nurse practitioner (ANP). She has served two terms on the BON,
serving five years as chair. She said SB 166 is a "clean-up" or
"revisor's" bill. The Legislative Legal Services doesn't do
revisor's bills for professional boards due to the technical
nature.
3:47:38 PM
SENATOR GIESSEL stated that this bill revises the board member
qualifications, requiring that licensed practical nurses have at
least two years of clinical practice before being appointed to
the BON. The registered nurse or nurse educator on the BON can
also be working in a program that provides graduate, bachelor's,
or associate degrees, noting that, previously, the requirement
was for a minimum of a bachelor's degree. The advanced nurse
practitioner must have at a minimum of four years of advanced
practice prior to being appointed to the board. Additionally,
the bill establishes a retired nurse status and "cleans up" some
practical nurse education program criteria. She noted that the
qualifications and duties of the executive administrator have
been revised. The term has changed from executive secretary to
administrator and requires the person to have a minimum
education of a Masters' degree in Nursing.
3:48:55 PM
SENATOR GIESSEL said that this has been raised in other
committees so she elaborated that holding an advance degree is
rather common, and there are over 900 advanced nurse
practitioners (ANPs) in Alaska. She commented that this
represents the minimal level of entry for an ANP. She related
that for the past 25 years, the executive administrator has had
either a masters' degree or a doctorate. In fact, the current
administrator holds a Ph.D., she said. She explained the
changes made for testing, such that SB 166 removes the
requirement for written exams since electronic exams are
administered. The bill would repeal language that allows
licensing through the Canadian Nurses Association testing
examination, which is no longer considered valid for licensure
in the U.S. The bill removes an obsolete term, licensed
vocational nurse. Under the bill, the board would continue to
do background checks and competency requirements to reinstate
lapsed licenses. The board allows a physician's assistant to be
authorized to supervise a licensed practical nurse and would add
a new section that requires an employer to report to the BON
when a nurse or nurse aide is fired or suspended. She explained
the reporting is no longer required to be done under oath. It
would also provide protection for nurses that may refuse to
delegate a task if the person delegated to lacks sufficient
training. The reporting was deemed important since it may
require disciplinary action be taken by the BON.
3:50:56 PM
SENATOR GIESSEL related the committee hearings raised some
issues. One concern related to the criminal background checks,
noting that the BON has performed criminal background checks for
a number of years. Health care professionals have very intimate
contact with their patients and Alaska is an "end of the road"
jurisdiction so criminal background checks have been very
important to ensure public safety. In fact, the BON's mission
is to ensure safety through the regulation of safe nursing
practices. In 2009, someone asked the executive director why
barrier crimes were being imposed on nurses practicing in their
facilities. It turns out that the federal government had placed
a restriction on any health care facility receiving federal
funds. The BON does not have any barrier crimes to licensure.
It has conducted background checks; however, any questionable
criminal background is reviewed individually by the BON. She
acknowledged that for the most part, the BON continues to
license the individual unless the crime is egregious, such as a
murder conviction. Since the federal government created barrier
crimes and required a second background check, some duplication
exists. The BON has contacted the Federal Executive Institute
(FEI) on numerous occasions and has been advised that the
federal administrative procedure restricts the sharing of a
criminal background check by one entity with another.
3:52:53 PM
SENATOR GIESSEL referred to an audit performed by the Division
of Legislative Audit. She pointed out that the BON was in
compliance for the authorized use of criminal background checks,
but were found out of compliance since the board stores its
records for license applications in the Alaska archives. She
characterized this as being a "ding" by the FBI, which shows how
stringent the agency is in terms of sharing the document. She
referred to page 3 of the audit that showed the BON was in
compliance in having a reason to request the information. She
said these audits are "very real," and the FBI takes its
jurisdiction and prevention of sharing background checks
seriously. Some health care providers finish their education,
seek licensure, and must submit to a criminal background check
for the BON for licensure. She related a scenario in which a
nurse then applies for work at a hospital in Bethel. The nurse
must submit to a second background check. On March 21, 2014,
the BON formulated a subcommittee that plans to meet this summer
with Alaska State Hospital and Nursing Home Association (ASHNA)
and the FBI to discuss and find solutions for the duplicate
requirements and associated costs to new employees.
3:54:56 PM
SENATOR GIESSEL next referred to an issue raised by the
Christian Science Committee on Publication for Alaska. She
stated that as a religious community, the Christian Science
community has religious ministers that the community refers to
as "nurses." She explained that these ministers go into homes
and provide services such as cooking, bathing, housekeeping,
encouragement, and spiritual guidance. These services are all
non-medical. She noted that the Christian Science Community has
come to the BON on numerous occasions requesting an exemption to
use the protected term "nurse" for their church members who are
preforming these services. The board has repeatedly denied this
exemption since "nurse" is a protected term. She referred to a
letter [dated September 3, 2013] from the Department of Law that
limits the term of "nurse" since AS 08.68.340 (a)(4) identifies
a nurse as a medical health care provider and it would be
inappropriate to make an exemption. Also, the BON recognizes
that the public assigns a certain identity to the term "nurse."
3:56:17 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON asked about notice to the board of a
termination of a nurse. He asked whether that is done in other
professions.
SENATOR GIESSEL answered yes, that the BON provisions are
modeled after the state medical profession statutes.
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON surmised that the BON would make a
distinction for personality conflicts and not much more would
happen.
SENATOR GIESSEL answered that would raise other questions about
fair employment practices. She clarified that these are related
to professional conduct and competency.
3:57:17 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON referred to the Christian Science
Committee on Publication letter in members' packets that read,
"Notably, the Alaska Medical Practice Act already has a
religious exception in place." He asked whether any analogy
exists.
SENATOR GIESSEL said she has reviewed the medical statutes and
the statement exists; however, she recalled the next section of
statutes relates to the definitions and it is very clear that
the term "physician" and "doctor" are protected terms under the
medical statutes. The medial board does not allow other people
to use the terms, "physician" or "medical doctor" unless they
are scientifically and medically trained physicians.
CHAIR OLSON remarked that the committee has seen naturopath
issues that have arisen in terms of the title "doctor."
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON recalled that naturopaths advertise
themselves in that manner.
CHAIR OLSON responded that the naturopaths advertise themselves
as being "naturopathic doctors" or "NDs." He asked the sponsor
if the BON has had that experience.
SENATOR GIESSEL agreed he is correct.
3:58:58 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON asked whether some compromise could be
reached in which the Christian Science community could use a
term other than "nurse" or term that said "pastoral nurse." He
further asked whether that has been discussed.
SENATOR GIESSEL said it has and the Christian Science community
wants to use the term "nurse." She explained that the BON does
not have any opposition to the services provided by the
spiritual guides but the term "nurse" is protected. She offered
her belief that Alaska's citizens believe that a "nurse"
represents a medically trained individual.
3:59:59 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked for the reason that the Christian
Science community has for using the term "nurse" and if it is
motivated by respect, professional standing, or additional
billing status.
SENATOR GIESSEL answered that using the term would enable them
to advertise and to be reimbursed by insurance for services.
4:00:38 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER referred to page 4, line 2, to paragraph
(3), to the required education for a practical nurse. He
related his understanding that if a registered nurse fails the
exam, the individual could be licensed as a practical nurse.
SENATOR GIESSEL agreed. This is something the board would
review before licensure. She deferred to the executive
administrator to provide more details.
4:01:24 PM
CHAIR OLSON suggested that the Christian Science community may
wish to seek a separate bill to address their issue since it
would raise several other concerns.
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON referred to page 3, paragraph (10) of
Section 2. He commended Dr. Nancy Sanders, who was helpful with
respect to nurse aide classes in rural Alaska. He said that she
helped foster a solution for the Bethel Health Center. He said
he was considering an amendment. He asked whether the existing
AS 08.68.101 could be amended to allow, but not require, a
criminal background check previously ordered by the department.
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON appreciated hearing that the
administrator, Dr. Nancy Sanders, will convene a workgroup to
work with all the parties with respect to the FBI ruling on
criminal background checks. He suggested that this would give
the board an opportunity to use the background check working
group in anticipation that the legislature could address the law
next session. In this way the working group could work on a
solution, totally within their purview, but come to the
legislature next session.
4:04:31 PM
SENATOR GIESSEL acknowledged this is the reason the board has
convened the subcommittee; however, she expressed concern about
inserting permissive language in the event a potential licensee
contests the board saying it could have used another criminal
background check. [Referring to the 2/11/14 letter from the
executive administrator, Nancy Sanders, that under AS 08.68.344]
the Board of Nursing may deny a certification or impose a
disciplinary sanction. She hoped the FBI will be helpful in
finding a solution, although she did find letters dating back to
2007 denying the double use. Thus, she was unsure of the FBI's
outcome and how quickly it might act. She offered her belief
that it is possible to more quickly address the issue next
session based on the interim work. At that point the BON will
know if it has permission to use the background check for two
different facilities; however, currently it may just add
confusion to the administration of the licensing procedures.
She deferred to the executive administrator.
4:06:10 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON asked whether the FBI's initial concern
was about a Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS)
requested background check.
SENATOR GIESSEL answered yes. She read [from a U.S. Department
of Justice] letter dated July 5, 2005, which read, in part,
"Criminal history information obtained under this authority may
be used solely for the purpose requested and cannot be
disseminated outside the receiving departments, related
agencies, or other authorized entities."
4:07:18 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON looked forward to the outcome of the
working group. He referred to proposed language [in members'
packets, not yet offered] that would amend AS 08.68.101 to
allow, but not require, use of a background check previously
ordered by the department. He asked whether his proposed
language would help, in advance of the working group's solution.
NANCY SANDERS, Ph.D., RN; Executive Administrator, Board of
Nursing, Department of Commerce, Community & Economic
Development answered that she thought it would be premature to
do so. She suggested some decisions need to be made. The BON
asked for background checks to make a decision about licensing.
The DHSS asked for an employment background check, which are two
very separate purposes. In terms of putting in proposed
language changes, the BON does not currently have a process
since the FBI will not allow sharing the criminal background
information. She understood the DHSS could not share with the
Board of Nursing and hoped more information would be forthcoming
via the work group to figure out how to streamline this.
4:10:34 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON asked what talent and skill sets Dr.
Sanders will bring to the work group.
DR. SANDERS envisioned a representative from DHSS would serve on
the work group. She also hoped she would serve, as well as a
member from the Alaska State Hospital and Nursing Home
Association. She suggested that someone from the FBI should
provide consultation and added that the full complement of
people to serve has not yet been identified.
4:11:30 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON asked whether she would consider adding
someone from the Kuskokwim Health Corporation to participate in
the work group.
MS. SANDERS answered she would entertain that idea; however, she
said that the proposed language would not just affect nurse
aides but would affect everyone licensed by the BON, including
registered nurses, licensed practical nurses, and certified
nurse assistants. She suggested she would like a broad
representation, including someone from a rural setting such as
the Yukon Kuskokwim Delta.
4:12:43 PM
CHAIR OLSON suggested the language could affect 16,000 people.
DR. SANDERS acknowledged that's the current number, but it also
would affect those applying to be licensed or certified as well
as those seeking reinstatement. It might be 1,000 to 1,300 more
per year, she said.
CHAIR OLSON noted that was a significant number.
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON asked to put on record that he would like
the FBI involved in the work group.
SENATOR GIESSEL answered that she believed that was the intent.
She also appreciated the suggestion to have a rural facility
represented. She acknowledged that the board seeks geographic
distribution in its composition, too.
CHAIR OLSON asked whether she would work with Representative
Herron on a letter of intent to SB 166.
SENATOR GIESSEL answered that she would be happy to do so
4:14:38 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER referred to page 2, line 16, which adds
retired nurse status. He asked what activities a retired nurse
would be allowed.
DR. SANDERS answered that this category of licensure is one the
BON is continually asked to issue. This does not allow nurses
to continue to work, even in a voluntary capacity. She
characterized it as keeping an honorarium since nurses worked
hard for their licenses and would like to be recognized as
nurses.
4:15:41 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER clarified that it doesn't allow them to
practice. He asked whether there is any legal status given to
retired nurses.
DR. SANDERS answered no; it just provides an honorary title.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER related that he is married to a
registered nurse.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER said the sponsor statement states that
this is the first improvement to nursing statutes in 10 years.
He asked for any trends in nursing.
DR. SANDERS offered her belief that a bill would likely be
introduced next year to introduce the advanced practice
registered nurses (APRNs) consensus model for advanced practice
nurses. Currently a subgroup, the APRN alliance, has been
working on the national movement. She envisioned that if nurse
practitioners or certified nurse midwives move out of state that
their practice would be similar to their practice in Alaska.
4:17:37 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER referred to page 2, line 17, to
subparagraph (D), which read, "establishing criteria for
approval of practical nurse education programs that are not
accredited by a national nursing accrediting body;" He asked
whether the programs are educational programs in Alaska.
DR. SANDERS said that many practical nurse programs throughout
the U.S. are not nationally accredited nursing programs through
the national nursing accreditation. This would allow the board
to consider an applicant's transcript to determine whether the
applicant has met the same educational standard as programs in
the state. She explained that the regulations in Alaska require
the practical nurse program "will" achieve national
accreditation, but many programs in the Lower 48 are not
nationally accredited.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked whether the BON expects many
applicants to come from non-accredited programs.
4:18:57 PM
DR. SANDERS said there are a significant number of people who
have graduated from these programs that might apply for
licensure in Alaska. She was unsure of the percentage, but they
may be accredited through a regional accreditation, but not
specifically a nursing accreditation. There is one advanced
practice nurse program (APN) in Alaska, which is moving towards
becoming nationally nursing accredited.
4:19:40 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked for an assessment of the quality of
education for consumers.
DR. SANDERS answered that the BON currently licenses APNs;
however, the BON is tightening its regulations about nursing
education, regarding the minimum level of education. This would
allow the BON to scrutinize their education. Currently, as the
administrator, she will go the applicant's home jurisdiction and
board site and compare the minimum qualifications for that
jurisdiction and compare it to Alaska's requirements to
determine equivalency.
4:21:02 PM
JANA SHOCKMAN, Registered Nurse, President, Alaska Nurses
Association, related that the ANA supports the requirement in
this bill for the executive administrator to hold a Master's
degree in Nursing as a minimum. This position requires broad
knowledge of nursing issues that range from the certified nurse
assistant (CNA) level to the advanced practice nurse.
Historically, this position has been filled for the past two
decades with that background. She reported that there are
currently more than 1,000 nurses who meet that qualification in
Alaska. The ANA believes that any background check amendment is
premature. The plans underway for the work group meeting are
also supported by the ANA. She stated that the ANA does not
support the Christian Science nurses use of the title "nurse"
although it recognizes the value of the services they provide.
She pointed out that the Christian Science spiritual guides are
not educated as nurses. The use of the title could be confusing
to the public. She concluded that the ANA supports SB 166,
without any amendments.
4:23:07 PM
BETH FARNSTROM, Registered Nurse; Chair, Board of Nursing,
Department of Commerce, Community & Economic Development, stated
that the BON supports SB 166, without any amendments for the
various reasons previously stated.
PATRICIA SENNER, Advanced Nurse Practitioner (ANP), asked to
speak in support of SB 166 as has been brought to the committee.
4:24:26 PM
KAREN PURDUE, President & CEO, Alaska State Hospital Nursing
Home Association (ASHNHA), stated that the association supports
this bill and is interested in having the background issue
addressed. She emphasized that the ASHNHA employs numerous
nurses and nursing assistants in their facilities. She said
that ASHNHA depends on the BON to maintain a qualified work
force. She offered support for rigorous licensing, background
checks, and the type of work that the board conducts. She
clarified that the complexity of the background check has been
added to because the legislature passed another bill in 2008.
She recalled that Representative Herron referred to the DHSS
background check. Part of the issue arises from the FBI, but
also part of it is that the state has a duplicate background
check system. Basically, each individual who is working in a
facility licensed by the DHSS or paid by the department must
submit to a background check conducted by the DHSS.
MS. PURDUE offered her belief that this has added thousands of
background checks to the process, even though it uses the same
seminal information that the licensing board and FBI
fingerprinting uses. The ASHNHA questions whether this can be
more efficient but not lower the standards or impact the BON's
ability to regulate licensees. She further asked if expenses
and complexity will be cut. She looked forward to the work
group process and to participating vigorously. She closed by
saying that the recent focus has been on the CNA, so those
individuals have a very short training time and make about $16
per hour. These jobs provide the backbone of the care industry.
She emphasized that she is very focused on jobs being available
in rural Alaska. Anything that the ASHNHA can do to ensure that
those individuals obtain employment is important, which includes
background checks, taking timely tests, and ensuring that
classes are available. She thanked members and assured them
that the ASHNHA is ready to participate in the process.
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON noted that she raised a good point that
the issue might not rest with the FBI and may rest with [the
legislature and the state].
4:27:36 PM
BEVERLY SMITH, Media and Legislative, Christian Science Church,
stated that she has no desire to hold up the bill. She has held
discussions with the Chair of the Board of Nursing and is
willing to work with the board during the interim. First, the
Christian Science Nurses refer to themselves only as "Christian
Science Nurses" and would never hold themselves out as a
"nurse." She explained that they have been in operation for 106
years and there has never been any confusion anywhere in the
world with this term. The "Christian Science Nurses" do not
advertise in the yellow pages, but do advertise in a religious
publication so someone seeking the services of a "Christian
Science Nurse" would know where to look for the service. She
thinks it is a little strange that a person could live in
Michigan and practice this religious practice and use the
services of "Christian Science Nurses" but cannot do so in
Alaska and thought that there should be some accommodation. She
referred to a letter in members' packets from the Christian
Science - Committee on Publication for Alaska [dated 4/15/2014].
She pointed out the first amendment issue for practicing one's
religion. She mentioned the model nurse practices act, which
has a suggested accommodation for caring for the sick in
accordance with tenets and practices related to religious
denomination that teaches reliance on spiritual means for
healing. She reported that most other states in the U.S. and
other countries do permit "Christian Science nurses" to practice
in their jurisdiction through regulation, statute, or advisory
opinion. Again, the Christian Science church is looking for
such an accommodation in Alaska so its citizens who are
Christian Scientists can practice their religion fully.
CHAIR OLSON said that working with the BON is a good start.
4:31:37 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked how many Christian Science
practitioners are in Alaska.
MS. SMITH answered that the practitioners are different than the
"Christian Science nurses." She estimated that perhaps five or
six practitioners are in the state and fewer "Christian Science
nurses" since they currently cannot practice in Alaska.
4:32:06 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked how many practice the faith in
Alaska.
MS. SMITH suggested it is a small group, in the hundreds. She
related Christian Science nursing facilities exist in the Lower
48, similar to a hospital, and the services are reimbursed by
Medicare and other insurance companies. She anticipated that
the potential "Christian Science nurse" would provide home care
in Alaska.
CHAIR OLSON, after first determining no one else wished to
testify, closed public testimony on SB 166.
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON remarked that this is an interesting
issue and is something he taught about the constitution. He
said if a law has general application then everyone is subject
to it. The other theory is that one has to be sensitive to free
exercise issues and accommodate those issues in the least
restrictive way possible. He said two strains of jurisprudence
exist and he has previously represented nurses [as a lawyer], so
he understands the need to keep the "nurse" title as privileged.
He also recalled that naturopaths called themselves doctors and
sometimes the terms are a little confusing. He acknowledged his
comments just represent a discussion point.
4:34:57 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON moved to report CSSB 166(FIN) out of
committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying
fiscal notes. There being no objection, CSSB 166(FIN) was
reported from the House Labor and Commerce Standing Committee.
The committee took a brief at-ease.
SB 167-MULTIPLE VEHICLE INSURANCE POLICIES
4:36:29 PM
CHAIR OLSON announced that the next order of business would be
SENATE BILL NO. 167, "An Act relating to the maximum amount of
uninsured and underinsured coverage payable under multiple motor
vehicle insurance policies issued by the same insurer in the
same household."
4:36:38 PM
ASHTON COMPTON, Staff, Senator Charlie Huggins, Alaska State
Legislature, stated that SB 167 corrects a drafting oversight in
Alaska law that creates an unintended loophole harmful to
consumers of Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist (U/UIM) insurance.
In 1984, when the legislature created U/UIM insurance coverage,
it precluded restricting the combining or "stacking" of multiple
U/UIM coverage. In 1990, the legislature revised the statutes
to provide for expanded coverage in consumer choice. This made
it easier for consumers to choose predictable levels of coverage
and reaffirm that "stackable" coverage is not permitted.
Unfortunately, language adopted in 1990 created an unintended
loophole that does not consistently accomplish the stated
purpose. Under the language, if the consumer insures the
vehicles under separate policies from the same insurer, stacking
is precluded only for the "named insured" - ironically allowing
all the other coverage to be stacked for all other persons.
There is no logical reason for this discrepancy. It needlessly
forces the consumer to pay for "stackable" coverage that is not
desired and their choices are limited.
MS. COMPTON referred to a graph in members' packets that should
help illustrate situations in which "stacking" is mandated and
illustrates the additional coverage imposed. She stated that
there isn't any legislative history or rationale to treat the
named insured differently based on whether the multiple vehicles
owned by policyholders are listed in one or multiple policies.
MS. COMPTON explained that with a simple change by removing
"named insured" and clarifying that multiple auto insurance
policies are to be issued to the same policy holder in the same
household, SB 167 will help protect insurance rates, consumer
choice, and predictability. It would resolve an inconsistency
that unfairly and unnecessarily forces consumers to purchase
insurance coverage they don't desire or need and protect
insurance rates, consumer choice, and predictability under all
policy forms as original intended.
4:38:47 PM
SHELDON E. WINTERS, Attorney, Lessmeier & Winters, LLC;
Lobbyist, State Farm Insurance, stated that he is legal counsel
for State Farm Insurance Companies. He thanked the committee
and the sponsor. He offered to address three things: uninsured
motorists, the statutory language, and to offer his view on what
this bill accomplishes and does not do.
4:39:50 PM
MR. WINTERS pointed out that when mandatory liability insurance
was enacted, the legislature received some "push back" from
insurance companies. The insurance companies did not want the
misperception that with mandatory insurance that everyone would
be insured. The reality is that has never been the case. He
noted that about 13-15 percent of drivers are uninsured.
CHAIR OLSON recalled that when the bill went into effect, the
uninsured motorist rate was about 50 percent.
4:40:42 PM
MR. WINTERS related his understanding that mandatory liability
insurance came into place the same time as the uninsured
motorist coverage. He recalled the plan was to mandate
liability insurance, but the insurance companies believed it
wouldn't resolve the whole problem and suggested also enacting
uninsured motorist coverage. In 1984, the legislature mandated
uninsured/underinsured motorist insurance ("U/UIM") coverage as
a means to protect motorists against an accident caused by an
uninsured or underinsured driver. The major challenge was to
keep it affordable and that still remains the challenge. One of
the prime ways of keeping U/UIM insurance coverage affordable is
to prohibit "stacking" of insurance coverage. He offered his
belief that members understand the term. He referred to a
letter in members' packets [dated February 27, 2014 from
Lessmeier & Winters] that provides the legislative history. It
was clear in 1984 that the legislature intended to limit or
preclude "stacking." He read the statute, in part, which read:
If an insured is entitled to uninsured or underinsured
motorists coverage under more than one policy of motor
vehicle insurance, or under more than one coverage if
two or more vehicles are insured under one policy, the
maximum amount an insured may recover may not exceed
the highest limit of any one policy or coverage.
MR. WINTERS explained that consumers can purchase insurance one
of two ways depending on the way the insurance company does it.
For example, one model is that the policyholder will buy all
their cars under one single policy. The second model, the one
State Farm Insurance uses, is that the policyholder will buy a
separate policy for each vehicle. The 1984 statute allowed
either, but did not allow "stacking" under either model. In
1990, the legislature expanded uninsured motorist coverage with
the stated intent of providing consumers more choice and to make
the insurance coverage more predictable. One provision expanded
the range available, and insurers were mandated to offer $50,000
to $1 million. He recalled the options were $50,000, $100,000,
$300,000, $500,000 or $1 million. Therefore, there was even
more reason not to allow "stacking" since the consumer could
select the level of coverage. Unfortunately, the language that
was adopted didn't accomplish it entirely. In certain
situations the language actually requires "stacking."
MR. WINTERS provided legislative history, such that the bill
version that went to the Senate floor precluded "stacking" for
multi-vehicle policies, but omitted language that precluded
"stacking" for the single vehicle policies. An amendment was
offered and a letter explained it. The second important note is
that the memo explained the intent of the proposed amendment,
which was to make single vehicle policies equivalent to multi-
vehicle policies and prevent "stacking." However, that isn't
what occurred. He referred to SB 167, AS 28.20.445 (c), noting
the first sentence precludes "stacking" for the multi-vehicle
policy, but it does not address single-vehicle policies. Thus,
the 1990 language read, in part, "If a person is entitled as a
named insured ...." He interpreted the language as meaning that
"stacking" is precluded for the named insured, bit everyone else
is not precluded. He said that is the problem that currently
exists, which is explained in the letter in members' packets.
4:45:50 PM
MR. WINTERS offered his belief that SB 167 will fix this problem
and render the statute consistent with the 1984 and 1990
legislative intent. This bill isn't about whether "stacking"
should or should not be allowed since the legislature addressed
it. This bill makes the language consistent with the
legislative intent.
4:46:18 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON asked whether he was aware of any people
who took advantage of this.
MR. WINTERS acknowledged that there were lots of claims that
were allowed to "stack" due to the statute, which is part of the
problem. The effect is that the claims are put right back into
the rates, and insurance companies that are selling policies
under this scenario have notably higher rates. He said that
eight states allow "stacking" in some fashion and their
uninsured motorist rates are about twice that of other states.
4:47:20 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON asked whether more dollars would be kept
in Alaskans' pockets under the bill.
MR. WINTERS cautioned that so many things go into rates;
however, he knows that insurance rates in states that allow
"stacking" have rates about twice the cost. Second, in State
Farm's insurance experience, and it is the largest auto insurer
in the state, literally millions have paid out in "stackable"
claims that wouldn't be paid out under the bill and those costs
are built into the rates. Thus, he offered his belief that it
should impact rates, but he was unsure of the amount.
4:48:19 PM
CHAIR OLSON suggested it could be the lawyers and not the
insured that have "stumbled" on to this.
MR. WINTERS argued that "stacking" is not only allowed but is
required under the existing law. He suggested the lawyers are
representing their clients and the insurance companies are
paying them.
CHAIR OLSON acknowledged it was legal.
MR. WINTERS agreed.
4:48:54 PM
CHAIR OLSON, after first determining no one else wished to
testify, closed public testimony on SB 167.
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON moved to report SB 167 out of committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal
note. There being no objection, SB 167 was reported from the
House Labor and Commerce Standing Committee.
4:49:46 PM
The committee took a brief at-ease from 4:49 p.m. to 4:50 p.m.
SB 183-EXTEND EMERGING ENERGY TECHNOLOGY FUND
4:50:47 PM
CHAIR OLSON announced that the final order of business would be
SENATE BILL NO. 183, "An Act extending the termination date of
the emerging energy technology fund and grant program."
4:51:04 PM
JESSE LOGAN, Staff, Senator Lesil McGuire, Alaska State
Legislature, stated that SB 183 would extend the sunset date of
the Emerging Energy Technology Fund (EETF) from January 1, 2015
to January 1, 2020. The EETF grant program was established in
AS 42.45.375 in the Alaska Sustainable Energy Act of 2010. The
grants available, including the matching grant from the Denali
Commission, totaled $8.9 million. Round one of the grant awards
has commenced and was awarded in 2012 and round two is currently
underway. He pointed out that the EETF is not an "angel fund"
but is designed specifically for technologies that have a
reasonable expectation of being commercially viable within five
years. Without the extension of this sunset date, the Alaska
Energy Authority will still need to manage these grants but will
lack the statutory authority to do so.
4:52:20 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON asked for the future of these grants if
the Denali Commission is moribund.
MR. LOGAN indicated about $2 million is available for the second
round for projects that must be commercially viable in five
years.
4:52:51 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CHENAULT referred to round one of $8.9 million
but only a small amount has been committed consisting of 10-12
projects. He recalled round two consists of $2 million. He
asked when those projects were due to be awarded.
MR. LOGAN agreed. He indicated that the second round of
projects has been selected. He reported that five projects have
been selected for the remaining $2 million in the grant fund.
REPRESENTATIVE CHENAULT asked him to identify the five projects.
MR. LOGAN indicated that he was aware of four projects from the
Alaska Energy Authority.
4:53:41 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked him to also identify the EETF's
best successes. He further asked him to identify the projects
he was most proud of thus far.
MR. LOGAN cautioned he was not at liberty to say since the
projects have not been deployed for the full five-year
timeframe. He could say that in the first round the projects
included increasing energy efficiency for diesel generators to
enhanced wind turbines. Prior to his employment at the
legislature, he was a recipient of EETF funds for several
projects from the Denali Commission, which this program is
modeled after, and he was about to deploy technologies in Alaska
that had only been used in the Lower 48.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked for further clarification on which
technologies.
MR. LOGAN answered that he deployed the first solar thermal
heating projects above the Arctic Circle in Alaska.
REPRESENTATIVE CHENAULT asked how much was available for loans.
MR. LOGAN responded that a matching grant from the Denali
Commission and a total of $8.9 million was available.
4:55:18 PM
EMILY FORD, Public Outreach Liaison, Alaska Energy Authority,
stated that in round one, $8.9 million was available for a 50
percent matching grant via the Denali Commission. She reported
that $8,127,568 was awarded to projects, which left
approximately $416,000 carried over to "round two." Last year's
capital budget also included a $2 million appropriation, which
was combined with the $416,000. Additionally, about $345,000 of
the Denali Commission funds were used for data collection,
leaving nearly $11,000 remaining from the Denali Commission
funds. These funds were specifically allocated for the "round
one" projects, so the AEA has been working with the Denali
Commission to reappropriate that funding to new projects.
4:56:25 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CHENAULT said it appears that $2.4 million is
remaining. He asked whether anything is in the current capital
budget to use for matching funds.
MS. FORD answered there aren't any funds in the FY 15 capital
budget.
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON said it didn't sound like much money
remains.
CHAIR OLSON, after first determining no one wished to testify,
closed public testimony on SB 183.
4:57:42 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER stated he learned a great deal about this
program when he previously served on the House Special Committee
on Energy. He said he is looking forward to the technologies
that the EETF incubates and the wider application of utility for
Alaskans, and he supports it.
CHAIR OLSON said he supports the bill since it could be used for
some small projects.
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON said he thinks the projects have been
worthy, the sunset date should be extended, and he hoped the
legislature could recapitalize the fund.
4:58:41 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON moved to report SB 183 out of committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal
note. There being no objection, SB 183 was reported from the
House Labor and Commerce Standing Committee.
4:59:03 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Labor and Commerce Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at
4:59 p.m.